Next Article in Journal
Livelihood Benefits from Post-Earthquake Nature-Based Tourism Development: A Survey of Local Residents in Rural China
Next Article in Special Issue
A Concession Period and Price Determination Model for PPP Projects: Based on Real Options and Risk Allocation
Previous Article in Journal
The US Shale Gas Revolution and Its Externality on Crude Oil Prices: A Counterfactual Analysis
Previous Article in Special Issue
Principles of Islamic Finance and Principles of Corporate Social Responsibility: What Convergence?
 
 
Search for Articles:
Title / Keyword
Author / Affiliation / Email
Journal
Article Type
 
 
Advanced Search
 
Section
Special Issue
Volume
Issue
Number
Page
 
Journals
Sustainability
Volume 10
Issue 3
10.3390/su10030698
sustainability-logo
Submit to this Journal Review for this Journal Propose a Special Issue
► Article Menu

Article Menu

share Share announcement Help format_quote Cite question_answer Discuss in SciProfiles thumb_up
...
Endorse textsms
...
Comment
first_page
settings
Order Article Reprints
Font Type:
Arial Georgia Verdana
Font Size:
Aa Aa Aa
Line Spacing:
Column Width:
Background:
Article

The Outcomes of Corporate Social Responsibility to Employees: Empirical Evidence from a Developing Country

by
Behrooz Gharleghi
1,2,†,
Asghar Afshar Jahanshahi
3,*,† and
Khaled Nawaser
1
1
Faculty of Business and Management, Asia Pacific University of Technology and Innovation, Kuala Lumpur 57000, Malaysia
2
Centre of Entrepreneurship and Leadership, Asia Pacific University of Technology and Innovation, Kuala Lumpur 57000, Malaysia
3
CENTRUM Católica Graduate Business School, Pontificia Universidad Católica del Perú, Lima 15023, Peru
*
Author to whom correspondence should be addressed.
†
These authors contributed equally to this study.
Sustainability 2018, 10(3), 698; https://doi.org/10.3390/su10030698
Submission received: 12 January 2018 / Revised: 18 February 2018 / Accepted: 19 February 2018 / Published: 5 March 2018
(This article belongs to the Special Issue Corporate Social Responsibility (CSR) in Developing Countries: Current Trends and Development)
Browse Figure
Versions Notes

Abstract

:
Employees creativity has been recognized as a crucial part of an organization’s ability to be innovative. To know which factors contribute to employee involvement in creative work, in this paper, we first examine the effects of corporate social responsibility (CSR) to employees. Moreover, we study the employees’ positive work attitudes and their intention to leave as a mediating mechanism to explain the effect of CSR to employees on the involvement of employees in creative work. Survey data from 209 employees in 45 small-sized enterprises in Iran were used to test the hypotheses of the study. The hypotheses were tested with hierarchical regression analyses using SPSS software. The results support the direct impact of CSR to employees on employees’ creative work involvement. In addition, the findings indicate that the indirect effect of CSR to employees on the involvement of employees in creative work through positive work attitudes and their intention to leave are significant. Consequently, small-sized enterprises should reinforce CSR to employees to elevate their involvement in creative work.

1. Introduction

The involvement of employees in creative work is a crucial competency for small-sized firms’ survival [1,2]. In recent years, business scholars are increasingly interested in the concept of employee involvement in creative work [3,4,5,6,7]. Creative work involvement refers to the ability of employees to realize valuable opportunities and to apply creative skills on the job [1]. Employee involvement in creative work thrives in dynamic environments [8] which is essential for long-term organizational success [9,10]. It is presented as a critical factor for facilitating organizational innovation [9,11].
Scholars have searched for different personal and contextual characteristics that can contribute to the level of employee involvement in creative work [7,12]. Personal characteristics received a high level of attention, e.g., employees motivation and cognition styles [4], norms [3] and personalities [13]. The characteristics of the organizational context play an important role in the involvement of employees in creative work, e.g., supervisor’s close monitoring [14] and support [8], leadership style [15] and job design [12].
Given the dominant role of corporate social responsibility (CSR) in shaping the employees’ behavior, emotion and attitudes [16], one key organizational factor that may have a substantial impact on the employee involvement in creative work [17,18] shall be identified. This paper aims to answer the following research question: Does CSR to employees promote employee involvement in creative work? To answer this question, we examined the role of CSR for employees by collecting data from 209 employees who work in 45 small-sized enterprises in a developing country.
Most research studies on CSR and sustainability focused on developed countries [19,20] and external stakeholders, i.e., customers [21,22]. This may limit our understanding about the antecedents and outcomes of the firms’ socially responsible activities to the internal stakeholders (employees). Recent research in the CSR and sustainability context pay more attention to the developed countries [23,24,25,26,27]. Our paper theoretically and empirically contributes to the emerging literature of CSR to employees in developing countries. It is important to know the outcomes of CSR to employees because the social performance of the organization can shape their perceived image, attitudes, and intended behaviors of the employees [28].

2. Literature Review

2.1. CSR to Employees

CSR in general refers to the firms’ social responsibility [29] with regard to various stakeholders [30]. The stakeholders can be classified into four major groups: (1) organizational stakeholders such as customers, employees, suppliers and shareholders; (2) community stakeholders such as local residents; (3) regulatory and governmental stakeholders such as municipalities; and finally (4) media stakeholders [31,32]. In this paper, we examined the outcomes of CSR to employees in the workplace. According to [33], CSR to employees includes the corporate activities that involve the employees’ welfare and business ethics, such as non-discrimination policies in the workplace, equal education opportunities to develop the employees’ skills, vocational training, and human rights protection within the organization.

2.2. Employee Involvement in Creative Work

Employee involvement in creative work is one of the main components of organizational creativity [34]. It refers to “the extent to which an employee engages his or her time and effort resources in creative processes associated with work” ([3] p. 36). The involvement in creative work explains the employees’ subjective assessment of their involvement in creative tasks in the workplace [6] and its difference from a well-established construct, such as “creative performance” which focuses more on the supervisors’ evaluation of the employees’ creative problem in the workplace [5,12]. Involvement in creative work is one of the critical factors for fostering creative performance at the organization [6,35].

2.3. Employees’ Positive Work Attitude

The positive work attitudes of employees describe their high tendency and desire to have a positive attitude toward the organizational objectives and values [36]. Positive work attitudes decrease the employees’ resistance to changes and their intention to leave [37]. It enhances employees engagement [38] and acts as an essential factor for diminishing counterproductive workplace behaviors [37]. On the other hand, several factors can lead to have positive work attitudes toward the achievement of organizational goals, e.g., workplace friendship [36] and job climate [39].

2.4. Employees’ Intention to Leave

Intention to leave refers to the subjective estimation of an individual in regard to the probability of leaving an organization in the near future [40], and the behavioral preferences that ultimately lead to leave the organization [41]. Intention to leave has been considered as a major predictor of actual turnover [42,43] and employee performance [44]. One of the effective ways to decrease actual turnover rate is to identify the motivational factors that would lower the employees’ intention to leave the workplace [45,46]. Since the intention to leave is an undesirable outcome for organizational effectiveness [47], it is valuable to understand its predictors in order to minimize it among employees [48].

3. Hypothesis Development

3.1. CSR to Employees and Creative Work Involvement

In the first hypothesis, we predict that the higher level of CSR to employees leads to more involvement in creative work. CSR to employees describe the employees self-evaluation and personal interpretations of the CSR activities performed in the organization [49]. This evaluation and perception shaped the employees attitudinal and behavioral reactions in the workplace [50]. CSR to employees means that the organization encourages the employees to participate in the voluntary activities and set different policies to develop their skills and careers. In such organizations, the top level management pays high attention to the employees’ needs and wants and tries to implement flexible policies to provide a good work and life balance for the employees [51,52]. Based on earlier research, employees in a supportive work environment are much more inclined toward creative tasks in the workplace [53,54].
Providing equal training opportunities for all employees is one of the main aspects of CSR to employees [55,56]. Previous studies highlighted the importance of training programs for employees to generate creative and new ideas [57,58]. These types of training programs enhance the employees’ understanding about the organizational activities and environment [59]. Promoting the employees’ knowledge and information about the workplace facilitates generating novel responses that are useful when dealing with their work tasks [57].
Making work conditions healthy and safe is another aspect of CSR to employees [55,56]. By collecting data from 128 employees [60], we found that the feeling of psychological safety in the workplace lead to more involvement in creative work. From the above literature, the following hypothesis is formulated:
Hypothesis 1 (H1).
CSR to employees has a positive impact on the employee involvement in creative work.

3.2. Mediating Effects of the Employees’ Intention to Leave

In the second hypothesis, we predicted that CSR to employees decreases the employees’ intention to leave; in turn, employees with less intention to leave show more creative work involvement. Previous studies showed that organizational CSR activities, in general, improved the firms’ reputation [20] and image [61]. Employees may feel proud of their organization once they find out that their company has a good social reputation and prestige [62,63]. When the employees realize that they are working for a well-respected company, they like to associate themselves with it [64], which in turn may reduce their intention to leave [28]. Emphasizing CSR to employees enhances the importance attached to the employees’ work performance and the feeling that their work within the organization is very important and has a social meaning [65]. Employees will have less intention to leave the company once they believe the organization values their contributions and cares about their well-being and employability [66,67].
On the other hand, employees with less intention to leave engage more in organizational activities [68,69]. More commitment to the job and several organization activities raise their awareness about the company and business environment as well. Furthermore, employees engaged in the organization have a sense of energetic and effective connection with their work activities [69], which enables them to go beyond their minimal job responsibilities [70]. They are engaged and proactively shape their work environment [71] by generating novel ideas and alternatives [72]. Combining the arguments above, we expect that the employees’ intention to leave mediate the relationship between the firms’ CSR to employees and creative work involvement.
Hypothesis 2 (H2).
Employees’ intention to leave mediates the relationship between CSR to employees and the employees’ involvement in creative work.

3.3. Mediating Effects of Positive Work Attitudes

In the last hypothesis, we expected that CSR to employees promotes positive work attitudes towards the organizational objectives, which in turn enhances their creative work involvement. Organizational CSR activities, in general, increases the employees’ commitment, because these kind of activities let employees feel that they are positively contributing to the broader social system [73]. In other words, employees seek membership in the organizations that are socially responsible because such institutions can enhance the way employees feel about themselves [51]. By collecting data from employees of six large companies from different sectors in Thailand [52], it was found that CSR to employees increase their satisfaction with work life. It seems that the firms which are highly involved in CSR activities treat the employees more fairly [25]. If employees see an organization as fair, they may view the organization more positively [74] and exhibit a more positive attitude towards the organizational objectives.
On the other hand, employees positive work attitudes led to higher levels of employees engagement within organization which eventually facilitates positive organizational changes [38]. Employees with more positive work attitudes may engage in fewer deviant behaviors within organization [75]. In contrast with less happy people in the workplace, more happy and positive employees tend to be more creative and resourceful at work [76]. Those employees who experience positive feelings in the workplace generate more innovative and novel ideas within the organization [77]. From the above literature, the following hypothesis can be formulated:
Hypothesis 3 (H3).
Positive work attitudes mediate the relationship between CSR to employees and the employee involvement in creative work.
The quoted literature above and the developed hypotheses form Figure 1, which depicts the conceptual research framework of the study.

4. Methodology

4.1. Sample

We randomly selected 150 small-sized companies from the directory of the Association of SMEs in the Southeast of Iran [78]. After contacting the CEOs, only 45 companies verbally agreed to be surveyed. The sample of the study was drawn from employees of 45 small sized companies. In total, these 45 companies had 1008 employees. We randomly selected 300 employees from these companies. We collected our data in two rounds. In the first stage of data collection, a questionnaire with independent, control and mediating variables was distributed in mid-2016. In this stage, 233 usable questionnaires were received. Approximately six months later, we distributed our second questionnaire to the same employees with only the dependent variable. Finally, we received 209 completed questionnaires resulting in a response rate of 0.697.
Following the Back Translation Method, we took different steps to translate our measurement items into Persian [79]. In doing so, we asked two business and management professors to translate the original questionnaire to Persian first. Then, we asked one bilingual expert to translate the documents back to English. In the final step, we had a meeting with all the three translators to compare the original version of the questionnaire with the back translated one. Any confusing words were modified [80,81]. However, to ensure that the criteria of the questionnaire construction and pre-testing were met, we dedicated time and effort to the design, layout, and wording of the used questionnaire. Before sending the questionnaires, we pre-tested them with ten employees, who were not included in the final sample. We asked them to review the questionnaire for readability, ambiguity, completeness, and to evaluate whether individual items appeared to be appropriate measures of their respective constructs [82].
To know if there was any significant common variance, the Harman one-factor test was conducted. The first factor explained 21.02 percent. Thus, no single factor emerged, nor did single factor account for the majority of variance [83]. We also randomized the order of items to reduce the common-method variance [84]. When comparing early respondents (first 25%) with late respondents (last 25%) on the respondents’ age and education, we did not find any significant difference. Therefore, our result does not suffer from non-response bias.

4.2. Measurement

4.2.1. CSR to employees

To measure this specific dimension of corporate social responsibility, we relied on the scale recently developed by Turker [51]. For measuring CSR to employees, we adopted five items from [51] on a seven-point Likert scale (1 = strongly disagree and 7 = strongly agree). Cronbach’s alpha coefficient was 0.955.

4.2.2. Intention to Leave

Intention to leave is defined as the employee’s plan or intention to leave the current job and to look for another job in the near future [85]. For measuring this construct, we adopted the four-item scale developed by Rosin and Korabik [86]. The Cronbach’s alpha coefficient was 0.88.

4.2.3. Employees’ Positive Work Attitudes

Positive work attitudes refer to a high tendency and desire to have a positive attitude toward the organizational objectives [36]. In our study, the employees’ positive work attitudes were measured using five items from Lehman and Simpson [39] on a seven-point Likert scale ranging from “never” to “very often”. The Cronbach’s alpha coefficient for the employees’ positive work attitudes was 0.88.

4.2.4. Employee Involvement in Creative Work

We measured the employee involvement in creative work using the nine items by Tierney et al. [4]. Respondents were asked to indicate the extent to which they regularly exhibit various behaviors that indicate the involvement in creative work. Responses were made on a seven-point Likert scale ranging from 1 = strongly disagree to 7 = strongly agree. The involvement in creative work scale has a Cronbach’s alpha coefficient of 0.90. Appendix A provides the wording of the items for all the main study variables.

4.2.5. Control Variables

Based on the literature, we added some relevant control variables to our analyses including the respondents’ age, education, gender, organizational tenure (years of employment), management experience, marketing experience, and technology experience. Previous studies showed that the employees’ age [87], educational level [88], gender [89], organizational tenure [4] and experience [90] influence their creativity level. We measured the employees’ educational level on a five-point scale (1 = “high school”, 5 = “doctorate”). Employees may bear different levels of work experience and, accordingly, we controlled three types of experiences in management, marketing and technology [91,92].

5. Results

Demographic Profile of Respondents

A SPSS 24 software package was used to carry out all the data analyses. Table 1 provides information about gender frequency distribution, percentage, and cumulative percentage of participants in the study. As we can see, 28.2 percent of the respondents were female and the majority were male (71.8 percent).
By checking the age distribution of the study participants, we found that 18.2 percent of respondents are between 20 and 30 years old, 35.9 percent of participants are between 31 and 40 years old, 28.2 percent of participants are between 41 and 50 years old, and 17.7 percent of participants were more than 51 years old. Accordingly, the majority of respondents were 31–40 years old. Table 2 provides information about the education level of the participants. As we can see, 23.9 percent of the respondents hold a high school diploma and the majority of respondents have an academic degree (76.1 percent).
We also checked the distribution of the respondents according to their organizational tenure (number of years working for the current company). We found that 11.5 percent of the respondents have 1–5 years of work experience, 39.7 percent of respondents have 6–10 years of work experience, 30.6 percent of respondents have 11–15 years of work experience and only 22.2 percent have ≥16 years of work experience in the current company. Table 3 illustrates the mean, standard deviation, and correlation of the variables used in this research. The table shows significant correlations among CSR to employees, positive work behavior, and intention to leave with creative work involvement (p < 0.05 or 0.01). Among the control variables, employees’ age and tenure negatively correlated and the employees’ management, marketing and technology experiences positively correlated to their involvement in creative work.
Before testing the study hypotheses, we computed several regression diagnostics and checked the variance inflation factors (VIF) to exclude multicollinearity. The results of VIFs test for all models of study were below 5 (the highest VIF was 2.196), thus multicollinearity was not an important issue in our study [93]. To test the convergent validity of our construct measures, we have performed confirmatory factor analysis (CFA) with Varimax Rotation. We identified four factors with eigenvalues greater than one, accounting for 73.46% of the total variance. All the items loaded significantly on the individual measures on their a priori defined factors. We found a KMO value of 0.860 (chi-square 7838.71) and significant Bartlett’s test results (p < 0.001).
In the first hypothesis, we expected that CSR to employees enhance their involvement in creative work. We conducted hierarchical regression analyses to assess the hypothesized effects. As shown in Table 4, control variables were entered first. In the second step, we entered control variables and independent variable to the equation. As shown in Table 4, there is a positive and significant relationship between CSR to employees and the employees’ involvement in creative work (β = 0.118, p < 0.01). Therefore, our first hypothesis is supported.
For testing the second hypothesis, we used the regression procedures suggested by [94]. These have been extensively used by business and managements scholars [95]. The mediated regression has to meet three requirements. First, independent variables (CSR to employees) should relate significantly to dependent variable (involvement in creative work). Second, the independent variable should relate significantly to the mediator (positive work attitude). Third, when positive work attitude is entered before the CSR to employees, the significance of the independent variable (CSR to employees) relationship with the dependent variable (creativity work involvement) should decrease if positive work attitude is the mediator.
In the second hypothesis, we predicted that positive work attitudes by employees mediate the relationship between CSR to employees and the involvement in creative work. As we can see in Table 5, Model 2, there is a positive and significant relationship between CSR to employees and positive work attitude (β = 0.307, p < 0.001). In Table 5, Model 3, the relationship between CSR to employees and involvement in creative work is positive and significant (β = 0.118, p < 0.01). Lastly, in Table 5, Model 4, when positive work attitude is entered before CSR to employees, the significance of the relationship of the independent variables (internal marketing) with the dependent variable (creativity work involvement) decreased and becomes non-significant (β = 0.083, n.s.). Therefore, our result supports the mediation role of positive work attitude on the relationship between CSR to employees and involvement in creative work.
In the last hypothesis, we expected that the employees’ intention to leave would mediate the relationship between CSR to employees and employee involvement in creative work. As shown in Table 6, Model 2, there is a negative and significant relationship between CSR to employees and the employees’ intention to leave (β = −0.235, p < 0.01). In Table 6, Model 3, the relationship between CSR to employees and involvement in creative work is positive and significant (β = 0.118, p < 0.01). Lastly, in Table 6, Model 4, when the employees’ intention to leave is entered before the CSR to employees, the significance of the relationship of the independent variable (CSR to employees) to the dependent variable (creativity work involvement) decreased (β = 0.084, p < 0.05). Therefore, our result supports the mediating role of the employees’ intention to leave on the relationship between CSR to employees and the involvement in creative work.

6. Discussion and Conclusions

Almost all small-sized enterprises nowadays face a highly dynamic environment characterized by rapid technological changes, varying customer taste, and a growing number of competitors [96]. Employees are one of the most important stakeholders of any organization [51]. There is a newly emerged stream of research regarding the effects of CSR activities on the employee attitudes and behaviors in the workplace [17,65,97]. Our paper contributes to this literature by exploring the effect of CSR to employees on the employee involvement in creative work by considering two mediator variables, namely intention to leave and positive work attitudes. It is worth knowing which personal and contextual characteristics predict the employees creative work involvement because this factor has been proven to be critical to the overall job effectiveness [98] and the success, growth and survival of organizations [4,99].
Using the original survey data from 209 employees working in 45 small sized firms, we found a direct and positive relationship between CSR to employees on the employee involvement in creative work in our first hypothesis. This result highlighted the importance of the context in which employee fosters creativity. In the same line of research, Nooteboom [100] found that internal CSR enhance their engagement and Abdulllah, Ashraf and Sarfraz [17] found that the employees who value CSR practice show more creativity in their work performance.
Furthermore, we found that CSR to employees can affect the involvement in creative work through the decrease of the employees’ intention to leave. In other words, CSR to employees reduce the future planning of employees to leave their current organization and search for new job in other company. Less intention to quit, in turn, helps to stimulate the employees’ mind and thoughts to creatively contribute in the organizational activities. In the same vein, previous studies found that CSR activities enhance employees commitment [101,102,103,104].
Lastly, we found that positive work attitudes mediate the relationship between CSR to employees and their involvement in creative work. Emphasizing CSR leads to a positive attitude towards their jobs. Once the employees have a positive attitude towards their job they tend to be more involved in creativity and develop new ideas. If employees feel happy when they are working, they are likely to support their organization as a mutual exchange.

7. Limitation and Opportunities for Future Research

Our study suffers from several limitations. Since we have collected our data at two specific points in time, our results may not shed light on the variation in the involvement of the employees in creative work over long time. A follow-up survey or interviews conducted over almost three years would be able to capture whether these factors contribute to employee involvement in creative work. Furthermore, our survey was limited to only small-sized firms in Iran. It is a bit challenging to generalize our findings to medium- or large-sized companies and those operating internationally. Therefore, more research is needed in this area. Another limitation of this research is that it considered only one independent variable (i.e., CSR to employees) to predict the involvement of employees in creative work. It would be useful for further work to consider other types of CSR activities (customer, government and environment) which are important to organizational creativity. We have used the self-report method to measure the involvement of employees in creative work. Future research can approach the managers or leaders to measure this construct. Finally, the position held by an employee may affect his/her creativeness within organization. Some works are more challenging and may need more creative ideas, but some other job positions would not allow using new ideas to complete duties. This may affect the employee involvement in creative work. Future studies might evaluate the impact of the employees’ job title on their involvement in creative work.

Author Contributions

Asghar Afshar Jahanshahi coordinated the project and drafted this paper; Behrooz Gharleghi provided conceptual comments and contributed to revising the article; Khaled Nawaser contributed to data collection and data analysis.

Conflicts of Interest

The authors declare no conflict of interest.

Appendix A. Measurement Items

Creative work involvement [4].
“Please indicate how often the following statements characterize your behavior in work place.”
  • I demonstrate originality in my work.
  • I take risks in terms of producing new ideas in doing job.
  • I find new uses for existing methods or equipment.
  • I solve problems that had caused other difficulty.
  • I try out new ideas and approached to problems.
  • I identify opportunities for new products/processes.
  • I generate novel, but operable work-related ideas.
  • I serve as a good role model for creativity.
  • I generate ideas revolutionary to our field.
CSR to employees [51].
  • Our company encourages its employees to participate to the voluntarily activities.
  • Our company policies encourage the employees to develop their skills and careers.
  • The management of our company primarily concerns with employees’ needs and wants.
  • Our company implements flexible policies to provide a good work and life balance for its employees.
  • The managerial decisions related with the employees are usually fair.
  • Our company supports employees who want to acquire additional education.
Positive work attitude [39]
In the last 12 months, how often have you.
  • Did more work than required.
  • Volunteered to work overtime.
  • Made attempts to change work conditions.
  • Negotiated with supervisors to improve job.
  • Tried to think of ways to do job better.
Intention to Leave [86]
  • I often think about quitting.
  • It is likely that I will actively look for a new job next year.
  • I will probably look for a new job in the next year.
  • I often think of changing my job.

References

  1. DiLiello, T.C.; Houghton, J.D. Creative Potential and Practised Creativity: Identifying Untapped Creativity in Organizations. Creat. Innov. Manag. 2008, 17, 37–46. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  2. Amabile, T.M. The social psychology of creativity: A componential conceptualization. J. Pers. Soc. Psychol. 1983, 45, 357–376. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  3. Carmeli, A.; Schaubroeck, J. The influence of leaders’ and other referents’ normative expectations on individual involvement in creative work. Leadersh. Q. 2007, 18, 35–48. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  4. Tierney, P.; Farmer, S.M.; Graen, G.B. An examination of leadership and employee creativity: The relevance of traits and relationships. Pers. Psychol. 1999, 52, 591–620. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  5. Tierney, P.; Farmer, S.M. Creative Self-Efficacy Development and Creative Performance over Time. J. Appl. Psychol. 2011, 96, 277–293. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  6. Volmer, J.; Spurk, D.; Niessen, C. Leader–member exchange (LMX), job autonomy, and creative work involvement. Leadersh. Q. 2012, 23, 456–465. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  7. Shalley, C.E.; Zhou, J.; Oldham, G.R. The Effects of Personal and Contextual Characteristics on Creativity: Where Should We Go from Here? J. Manag. 2004, 30, 933–958. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  8. Baer, M.; Oldham, G.R. The curvilinear relation between experienced creative time pressure and creativity: Moderating effects of openness to experience and support for creativity. J. Appl. Psychol. 2006, 91, 963–970. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  9. Amabile, T.M.; Conti, R.; Coon, H.; Lazenby, J.; Herron, M. Assessing the work environment for creativity. Acad. Manag. J. 1996, 39, 1154–1184. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  10. Gong, Y.; Zhou, J.; Chang, S. Core Knowledge Employee Creativity and Firm Performance: The Moderating Role of Riskiness Orientation, Firm Size, and Realized Absorptive Capacity. Pers. Psychol. 2013, 66, 443–482. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  11. Amabile, T.M.; Barsade, S.G.; Mueller, J.S.; Staw, B.M. Affect and Creativity at Work. Adm. Sci. Q. 2005, 50, 367–403. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  12. Oldham, G.R.; Cummings, A. Employee Creativity: Personal and Contextual Factors at Work. Acad. Manag. J. 1996, 39, 607–634. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  13. Kim, T.-Y.; Hon, A.H.Y.; Lee, D.-R. Proactive Personality and Employee Creativity: The Effects of Job Creativity Requirement and Supervisor Support for Creativity. Creat. Res. J. 2010, 22, 37–45. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  14. Zhou, J. When the Presence of Creative Coworkers Is Related to Creativity: Role of Supervisor Close Monitoring, Developmental Feedback, and Creative Personality. J. Appl. Psychol. 2003, 88, 413–422. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  15. Shin, S.J.; Zhou, J. Transformational Leadership, Conservation, and Creativity: Evidence from Korea. Acad. Manag. J. 2003, 46, 703–714. [Google Scholar]
  16. Rupp, D.E.; Ganapathi, J.; Aguilera, R.V.; Williams, C.A. Employee reactions to corporate social responsibility: An organizational justice framework. J. Organ. Behav. 2006, 27, 537–543. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  17. Abdullah, M.; Ashraf, S.; Sarfraz, M. The Organizational Identification Perspective of CSR on Creative Performance: The Moderating Role of Creative Self-Efficacy. Sustainability 2017, 9, 2125. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  18. Brammer, S.; He, H.; Mellahi, K. Corporate Social Responsibility, Employee Organizational Identification, and Creative Effort: The Moderating Impact of Corporate Ability. Gr. Organ. Manag. 2015, 40, 323–352. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  19. Petrenko, O.V.; Aime, F.; Ridge, J.; Hill, A. Corporate social responsibility or CEO narcissism? CSR motivations and organizational performance. Strateg. Manag. J. 2016, 37, 262–279. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  20. Yoon, Y.; Gürhan-Canli, Z.; Schwarz, N. The Effect of Corporate Social Responsibility (CSR) Activities on Companies With Bad Reputations. J. Consum. Psychol. 2006, 16, 377–390. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  21. Marquina Feldman, P.; Vasquez-Parraga, A.Z. Consumer social responses to CSR initiatives versus corporate abilities. J. Consum. Mark. 2013, 30, 100–111. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  22. Öberseder, M.; Schlegelmilch, B.B.; Murphy, P.E. CSR practices and consumer perceptions. J. Bus. Res. 2013, 66, 1839–1851. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  23. Nurunnabi, M. Who cares about climate change reporting in developing countries? The market response to, and corporate accountability for, climate change in Bangladesh. Environ. Dev. Sustain. 2016, 18, 157–186. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  24. Afshar Jahanshahi, A.; Brem, A.; Bhattacharjee, A. Who Takes More Sustainability-Oriented Entrepreneurial Actions? The Role of Entrepreneurs’ Values, Beliefs and Orientations. Sustainability 2017, 9, 1636. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  25. Cherian, J.; Pech, R. The Impact of Corporate Social Responsibility on the Workforce of Selected Business Firms in the United Arab Emirates: A Nascent Economy. Sustainability 2017, 9, 2077. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  26. Jamali, D.; Neville, B. Convergence Versus Divergence of CSR in Developing Countries: An Embedded Multi-Layered Institutional Lens. J. Bus. Ethics 2011, 102, 599–621. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  27. Jamali, D. The CSR of MNC Subsidiaries in Developing Countries: Global, Local, Substantive or Diluted? J. Bus. Ethics 2010, 93, 181–200. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  28. Riordan, C.M.; Gatewood, R.D.; Bill, J.B. Corporate Image: Employee Reactions and Implications for Managing Corporate Social Performance. J. Bus. Ethics 1997, 16, 401–412. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  29. Mcguire, J.B.; Sundgren, A.; Schneeweis, T. Corporate Social Responsibility and Firm Financial Performance. Acad. Manag. J. 1988, 31, 854–872. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  30. Maignan, I.; Ferrell, O.C. Corporate Social Responsibility and Marketing: An Integrative Framework. J. Acad. Mark. Sci. 2004, 32, 3–19. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  31. Clarkson, M.B.E. A Stakeholder Framework for Analyzing and Evaluating Corporate Social Performance. Acad. Manag. Rev. 1995, 20, 92–117. [Google Scholar]
  32. Henriques, I.; Sadorsky, P. The Relationship between Environmental Commitment and Managerial Perceptions of Stakeholder Importance. Acad. Manag. J. 1999, 42, 87–99. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  33. Welford, R. Corporate Social Responsibility in Europe and Asia Critical Elements and Best Practice. J. Corp. Citizsh. 2004, 13, 31–47. [Google Scholar]
  34. Ohly, S.; Sonnentag, S.; Pluntke, F. Routinization, work characteristics and their relationships with creative and proactive behaviors. J. Organ. Behav. 2006, 27, 257–279. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  35. Atwater, L.; Carmeli, A. Leader–member exchange, feelings of energy, and involvement in creative work. Leadersh. Q. 2009, 20, 264–275. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  36. Song, S.-H. Workplace Friendship and Employees’ Productivity: LMX Theory and the Case of the Seoul City Government. Int. Rev. Public Adm. 2006, 11, 47–58. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  37. Avey, J.B.; Luthans, F.; Youssef, C.M. The Additive Value of Positive Psychological Capital in Predicting Work Attitudes and Behaviors. J. Manag. 2010, 36, 430–452. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  38. Avey, J.B.; Wernsing, T.S.; Luthans, F. Can Positive Employees Help Positive Organizational Change? Impact of Psychological Capital and Emotions on Relevant Attitudes and Behaviors. J. Appl. Behav. Sci. 1999, 44, 48–70. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  39. Lehman, W.E.K.; Simpson, D.D. Employee Substance Use and On-the Job Behaviors. J. Appl. Psychol. 1992, 77, 309–321. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  40. Mowday, R.T.; Porter, L.W.; Steers, R.M. Employee-Organization Linkages: The Psychology of Commitment, Absenteeism, and Turnover; Academic Press: Cambridge, MA, USA, 1982; ISBN 9780125093705. [Google Scholar]
  41. Mobley, W.H.; Griffeth, R.W.; Hand, H.H.; Meglino, B.M. Review and conceptual analysis of the employee turnover process. Psychol. Bull. 1979, 86, 493–522. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  42. Arnold, H.J.; Feldman, D.C. A multivariate analysis of the determinants of job turnover. J. Appl. Psychol. 1982, 67, 350–360. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  43. Lambert, E.G.; Lynne Hogan, N.; Barton, S.M. The impact of job satisfaction on turnover intent: A test of a structural measurement model using a national sample of workers. Soc. Sci. J. 2001, 38, 233–250. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  44. Halbesleben, J.R.B.; Wheeler, A.R. The relative roles of engagement and embeddedness in predicting job performance and intention to leave. Work Stress 2008, 22, 242–256. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  45. Carmeli, A.; Weisberg, J. Exploring turnover intentions among three professional groups of employees. Hum. Resour. Dev. Int. 2006, 9, 191–206. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  46. Bigliardi, B.; Petroni, A.; Ivo Dormio, A. Organizational socialization, career aspirations and turnover intentions among design engineers. Leadersh. Organ. Dev. J. 2005, 26, 424–441. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  47. Low, G.S.; Cravens, D.W.; Grant, K.; Moncrief, W.C. Antecedents and consequences of salesperson burnout. Eur. J. Mark. 2001, 35, 587–611. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  48. Elangovan, A.R. Causal ordering of stress, satisfaction and commitment, and intention to quit: A structural equations analysis. Leadersh. Organ. Dev. J. 2001, 22, 159–165. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  49. Brasileira, R.; Gestão, D.; Negócios, D.; Azim, M.T. Corporate Social Responsibility and employee behavior: Mediating role of organizational commitment. Rev. Bus. Manag. 2016, 18, 207–225. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  50. Lee, S.-Y.; Seo, Y. Corporate Social Responsibility Motive Attribution by Service Employees in the Parcel Logistics Industry as a Moderator between CSR Perception and Organizational Effectiveness. Sustainability 2017, 9, 355. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  51. Turker, D. How Corporate Social Responsibility Influences Organizational Commitment. J. Bus. Ethics 2009, 89, 189–204. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  52. Singhapakdi, A.; Lee, D.-J.; Sirgy, M.J.; Senasu, K. The impact of incongruity between an organization’s CSR orientation and its employees’ CSR orientation on employees’ quality of work life. J. Bus. Res. 2015, 68, 60–66. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  53. Amabile, T.M.; Conti, R. Changes in the Work Environment for Creativity During Downsizing. Acad. Manag. J. 1999, 42, 630–640. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  54. Tesluk, P.E.; Farr, J.L.; Klein, S.R. Influences of Organizational Culture and Climate on Individual Creativity. J. Creat. Behav. 1997, 31, 27–41. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  55. Author, P.; Yang, X.; Rivers, C. Antecedents of CSR Practices in MNCs’ Subsidiaries: A Stakeholder and Institutional. J. Bus. Ethics CSR MNCs 2009, 86, 155–169. [Google Scholar]
  56. Mcwilliams, A.; Siegel, D. Corporate Social Responsibility: A Theory of the Firm Perspective. Acad. Manag. Rev. 2001, 26, 117–127. [Google Scholar]
  57. Gist, M.E. The Influence of Training Method on Self-Efficacy and Idea Generation among Managers. Pers. Psychol. 1989, 42, 787–805. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  58. Fontenot, N.A. Effects of Training in Creativity and Creative Problem Finding upon Business People. J. Soc. Psychol. 1993, 133, 11–22. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  59. Barrett, A.; O’Connell, P.J. Does Training Generally Work? The Returns to in-Company Training. ILR Rev. 2001, 54, 647–662. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  60. Kark, R.; Carmeli, A. Alive and creating: The mediating role of vitality and aliveness in the relationship between psychological safety and creative work involvement. J. Organ. Behav. 2009, 30, 785–804. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  61. Arendt, S.; Brettel, M. Understanding the influence of corporate social responsibility on corporate identity, image, and firm performance. Manag. Decis. 2010, 48, 1469–1492. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  62. Smidts, A.; Pruyn, A.T.H.; Van Riel, C.B.M. The Impact of Employee Communication and Perceived External Prestige on Organizational Identification. Acad. Manag. J. 2001, 44, 1051–1062. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  63. Ghosh, D.; Gurunathan, L. Linking Perceived Corporate Social Responsibility and Intention to Quit: The Mediating Role of Job Embeddedness. Vis. J. Bus. Perspect. 2014, 18, 175–183. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  64. Men, L.R. CEO credibility, perceived organizational reputation, and employee engagement. Public Relat. Rev. 2012, 38, 171–173. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  65. Rodrigo, P.; Arenas, D. Do Employees Care about CSR Programs? A Typology of Employees According to Their Attitudes. J. Bus. Ethics 2008, 83, 265–283. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  66. Djurkovic, N.; McCormack, D.; Casimir, G. Workplace bullying and intention to leave: The moderating effect of perceived organisational support. Hum. Resour. Manag. J. 2008, 18, 405–422. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  67. Hoon Lee, C.; Bruvold, N.T. Creating value for employees: Investment in employee development. Int. J. Hum. Resour. Manag. 2003, 14, 981–1000. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  68. Saks, A.M. Antecedents and consequences of employee engagement. J. Manag. Psychol. 2006, 21, 600–619. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  69. Schaufeli, W.B.; Bakker, A.B. Job demands, job resources, and their relationship with burnout and engagement: A multi-sample study. J. Organ. Behav. 2004, 25, 293–315. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  70. Shuck, B.; Reio, T.G.; Rocco, T.S. Employee engagement: An examination of antecedent and outcome variables. Hum. Resour. Dev. Int. 2011, 14, 427–445. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  71. Bakker, A.B.; Albrecht, S.L.; Leiter, M.P. Key questions regarding work engagement. Eur. J. Work Organ. Psychol. 2011, 20, 4–28. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  72. Bhatnagar, J. Management of innovation: Role of psychological empowerment, work engagement and turnover intention in the Indian context. Int. J. Hum. Resour. Manag. 2012, 23, 928–951. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  73. O’Donohue, W.; Lindsay, N. The role of ethical values in an expanded psychological contract. J. Bus. Ethics 2009, 90, 251–263. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  74. Mcfarlin, D.B.; Sweeney, P.D. Distributive and Procedural Justice as Predictors of Satisfaction with Personal and Organizational Outcomes. Acad. Manag. J. Acad. Manag. J. 1992, 35, 626–637. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  75. Hayward, M.L.; Forster, W.R.; Sarasvathy, S.D.; Fredrickson, B.L. Beyond hubris: How highly confident entrepreneurs rebound to venture again. J. Bus. Ventur. 2010, 25, 569–578. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  76. Rego, A.; Machado, F.; Leal, S.; Cunha, M.P.E. Are Hopeful Employees More Creative? An Empirical Study. Creat. Res. J. 2009, 21, 223–231. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  77. Madjar, N.; Oldham, G.R.; Pratt, M.G. There’s No Place like Home? The Contributions of Work and Nonwork Creativity Support to Employees’ Creative Performance. Acad. Manag. J. 2002, 45, 757–767. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  78. Jahanshahi, A.A.; Zhang, S.X.; Brem, A. E-Commerce for SMEs: Empirical insights from Three Countries. J. Small Bus. Enterp. Dev. 2013, 20, 9. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  79. Brislin, R.W. Back-translation for cross-cultural research. J. Cross. Cult. Psychol. 1970, 1, 185–216. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  80. Jahanshahi, A.A.; Brem, A. Sustainability in SMEs: Top Management Teams Behavioral Integration as Source of Innovativeness. Sustainability 2017, 9, 1899. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  81. Zhang, S.X.; Jahanshahi, A.A. How CEOs’ Personality Shape Their Interpretation—A Study of CEOs in Iran Facing UN-Led Sanction. Acad. Manag. Proc. 2016, 2016, 12632. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  82. Dillman, D.A. The Design and Administration of Mail Surveys. Annu. Rev. Sociol. 1991, 17, 225–249. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  83. Podsakoff, P.M. Self-reports in organizational research: Problems and prospects. J. Manag. 1986, 12, 531–544. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  84. Chang, S.-J.; van Witteloostuijn, A.; Eden, L. From the Editors: Common method variance in international business research. J. Int. Bus. Stud. 2010, 41, 178–184. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  85. Weisberg, J. Measuring Workers′ Burnout and Intention to Leave. Int. J. Manpow. 1994, 15, 4–14. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  86. Rosin, H.M.; Korabik, K. Workplace variables, affective responses, and intention to leave among women managers. J. Occup. Psychol. 1991, 64, 317–330. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  87. Binnewies, C.; Ohly, S.; Niessen, C. Age and creativity at work: The interplay between job resources, age and idea creativity. J. Manag. Psychol. 2008, 23, 438–457. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  88. Farmer, S.M.; Tierney, P.; Kung-McIntyre, K. Employee Creativity in Taiwan: An Application of Role Identity Theory. Acad. Manag. J. 2003, 46, 618–630. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  89. Kwasniewska, J.; Necka, E. Perception of the Climate for Creativity in the Workplace: The Role of the Level in the Organization and Gender. Creat. Innov. Manag. 2004, 13, 187–196. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  90. Leung, A.K.; Maddux, W.W.; Galinsky, A.D.; Chiu, C. Multicultural experience enhances creativity: The when and how. Am. Psychol. 2008, 63, 169–181. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  91. Gruber, M.; MacMillan, I.C.; Thompson, J.D. Look before you leap: Market opportunity identification in emerging technology firms. Manag. Sci. 2008, 54, 1652–1665. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  92. Wiersema, M.F.; Bantel, K.A. Top management team demography and corporate strategic change. Acad. Manag. J. 1992, 35, 91–121. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  93. Cohen, J.; Cohen, P.; West, S.G.; Aiken, L.S. Applied Multiple Regression/Correlation Analysis for the Behavioral Sciences, 3rd ed.; Routledge: Mahwah, NJ, USA, 2013; ISBN 1134800940. [Google Scholar]
  94. Baron, R.M.; Kenny, D.A. The moderator-mediator variable distinction in social psychological research: Conceptual, strategic, and statistical considerations. J. Pers. Soc. Psychol. 1986, 51, 1173–1182. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  95. Nadkarni, S.; Perez, P.D. Prior Conditions and Early International Commitment: The Mediating Role of Domestic Mindset. J. Int. Bus. Stud. 2007, 38, 160–176. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  96. Gumusluoglu, L.; Ilsev, A. Transformational leadership, creativity, and organizational innovation. J. Bus. Res. 2009, 62, 461–473. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  97. Lee, E.M.; Park, S.-Y.; Lee, H.J. Employee perception of CSR activities: Its antecedents and consequences. J. Bus. Res. 2013, 66, 1716–1724. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  98. Zhang, X.; Bartol, K.M. The Influence of Creative Process Engagement on Employee Creative Performance and Overall Job Performance: A Curvilinear Assessment. J. Appl. Psychol. 2010, 95, 862–873. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  99. Nooteboom, B. Innovation and diffusion in small firms: Theory and evidence. Small Bus. Econ. 1994, 6, 327–347. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  100. Ferreira, P.; Real de Oliveira, E. Does corporate social responsibility impact on employee engagement? J. Workplace Learn. 2014, 26, 232–247. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  101. Hansen, S.D.; Dunford, B.B.; Boss, A.D.; Boss, R.W.; Angermeier, I. Corporate Social Responsibility and the Benefits of Employee Trust: A Cross-Disciplinary Perspective. J. Bus. Ethics 2011, 102, 29–45. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  102. Farooq, O.; Payaud, M.; Merunka, D.; Valette-Florence, P. The Impact of Corporate Social Responsibility on Organizational Commitment: Exploring Multiple Mediation Mechanisms. J. Bus. Ethics 2014, 125, 563–580. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  103. Farooq, O.; Rupp, D.; Farooq, M. The Multiple Pathways through which Internal and External Corporate Social Responsibility Influence Organizational Identification and Multifoci Outcomes: The Moderating Role of Cultural and Social Orientations. Acad. Manag. J. 2016, 60, 954–985. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  104. Valentine, S.; Godkin, L. Banking Employees’ Perceptions of Corporate Social Responsibility, Value-Fit Commitment, and Turnover Intentions: Ethics as Social Glue and Attachment. Empl. Responsib. Rights J. 2017, 29, 51–71. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
Sustainability 10 00698 g001 550
Figure 1. Conceptual model of study.
Figure 1. Conceptual model of study.
Sustainability 10 00698 g001
Table
Table 1. Distribution of the respondents according to the gender (N = 209).
Table 1. Distribution of the respondents according to the gender (N = 209).
CategoryFrequencyPercentCumulative Percent
Female5928.228.2
Male15071.8100.0
Total209100.0100.0
Table
Table 2. Distribution of the respondents according to the educational level (N = 209).
Table 2. Distribution of the respondents according to the educational level (N = 209).
CategoryFrequencyPercentCumulative Percent
High school diploma5023.923.9
Associate/technical degree3215.339.2
Bachelor’s degree9545.584.7
Master’s degree3114.999.5
Doctorate10.5100.0
Total209100.0100.0
Table
Table 3. Correlation and Descriptive Statistics.
Table 3. Correlation and Descriptive Statistics.
MeanS.D12345678910
1. Age40.3169.2141.000
2. Education2.5261.029−0.0081.000
3. Gender1.7180.4510.0530.0981.000
4. Tenure11.1105.2650.663 **−0.0610.1221.000
5. Manag. Experience3.5170.861−0.179 **−0.056−0.068−0.1211.000
6. Mark. Experience3.3441.081−0.079−0.093−0.085−0.1000.407 **1.000
7. Tech. Experience3.3651.064−0.216 **−0.125−0.035−0.151 *0.331 **0.399 **1.000
8. CSR to Employees4.1061.294−0.392 **0.033−0.001−0.250 **0.223 **0.1030.334 **1.000
9. Intention to Leave4.0341.4150.458 **−0.007−0.0650.304 **−0.067−0.080−0.188 **−0.366 **1.000
10. Positive Attitude3.7861.282−0.367 **0.083−0.002−0.256 **0.0360.0440.0510.372 **−0.513 **1.000
11. Creativity3.0570.744−0.345 **−0.065−0.052−0.206 **0.163 *0.194 **0.200 **0.319 **−0.475 **0.345 **
**. Correlation is significant at the 0.01 level (2-tailed).
*. Correlation is significant at the 0.05 level (2-tailed).
Table
Table 4. Hierarchical Regression Analysis Results (direct effect of CSR to employees on the involvement of employees in creative work).
Table 4. Hierarchical Regression Analysis Results (direct effect of CSR to employees on the involvement of employees in creative work).
Creative Work Involvement
Control VariablesMain Effects
1. Age−0.029 ***−0.022 **
2. Education−0.024−0.030
3. Gender −0.030−0.012
4. Organizational Tenure0.0080.006
4. Management Experience0.0300.005
5. Marketing Experience0.089 †0.102 *
6. Technology Experience0.0420.000
7. CSR to employees 0.118 **
R20.1560.183
Adj. R20.1260.149
F5.221 ***5.379 ***
* p < 0.05, ** p < 0.01, *** p < 0.001, † p < 0.10.
Table
Table 5. Indirect effect of CSR to employees on the involvement in creative work through positive work attitude.
Table 5. Indirect effect of CSR to employees on the involvement in creative work through positive work attitude.
Positive Work AttitudeCreative Work Involvement
Model 1Model 2Model 3Model 4
1. Age−0.051 ***−0.034 **−0.022 **−0.015 *
2. Education0.0790.063−0.030−0.031
3. Gender 0.0350.027−0.012−0.013
4. Organizational Tenure−0.004−0.0060.0060.005
5. Management Experience−0.044−0.1020.0050.000
6. Marketing Experience0.0560.0600.102 *0.093 †
7. Technology Experience−0.037−0.126 †0.0000.025
8. CSR to employees 0.307 ***0.118 **0.083 †
9. Positive work attitude 0.134 **
R20.1420.2070.1830.215
Adj. R20.1120.1740.1490.177
F4.627 ***6.180 ***5.379 ***5.655 ***
* p < 0.05, ** p < 0.01, *** p < 0.001, † p < 0.10.
Table
Table 6. Indirect effect of CSR to employees on creative work involvement through the intention to leave.
Table 6. Indirect effect of CSR to employees on creative work involvement through the intention to leave.
Intention to LeaveCreative Work Involvement
Model 1Model 2Model 3Model 4
1. Age0.068 ***0.054 ***−0.022 **−0.010
2. Education−0.0010.010−0.030−0.025
3. Gender −0.283 †−0.303 †−0.012−0.077
4. Organizational Tenure0.0040.0070.0060.007
5. Management Experience0.0840.1310.0050.005
6. Marketing Experience−0.032−0.0570.102*0.090 †
7. Technology Experience−0.133 †−0.0650.0000.005
8. CSR to employees −0.235 **0.118 **0.084 *
9. Intention to leave −0.190 ***
R20.2270.2560.1830.280
Adj. R20.1990.2250.1490.245
F8.183 ***8.097 ***5.379 ***7.980 ***
* p < 0.05, ** p < 0.01, *** p < 0.001, † p < 0.10.

Share and Cite

MDPI and ACS Style

Gharleghi, B.; Afshar Jahanshahi, A.; Nawaser, K. The Outcomes of Corporate Social Responsibility to Employees: Empirical Evidence from a Developing Country. Sustainability 2018, 10, 698. https://doi.org/10.3390/su10030698

AMA Style

Gharleghi B, Afshar Jahanshahi A, Nawaser K. The Outcomes of Corporate Social Responsibility to Employees: Empirical Evidence from a Developing Country. Sustainability. 2018; 10(3):698. https://doi.org/10.3390/su10030698

Chicago/Turabian Style

Gharleghi, Behrooz, Asghar Afshar Jahanshahi, and Khaled Nawaser. 2018. "The Outcomes of Corporate Social Responsibility to Employees: Empirical Evidence from a Developing Country" Sustainability 10, no. 3: 698. https://doi.org/10.3390/su10030698

Note that from the first issue of 2016, this journal uses article numbers instead of page numbers. See further details here.

Article Metrics

Back to TopTop