Internal Corporate Social Responsibility as a Microfoundation of Employee Well-Being and Job Performance

Round 1

Reviewer 1 Report

The abstract

The abstract should be better organized. The purpose of the study, a short description of methodology (sample, period and methods),  results in summary and short policy implications should be draw.

Introduction

There is a large description of CSR in the Introduction. 1-2 sentences would be enough to introduce the reader in the context of the paper.

At the row 70 it is stated: „The present study attempts to fill the gap regarding the relationship between internal CSR and performance.” Actually, the aim of the paper is not this, it should be related to the purpose presented even from the title.

The definition of CSR presented at  the rows 78-83 is redundant while in the previous part, the definition of CSR was also attacked and finished.

I suggest to separately present a section of Literature review.

Materials and Methods

It is required to clearly highlight section referring to sample, variables, methods.  A presentation of the questionnaire should be found in Appendix.

Results

It is required a better explanations of the figures presented in table 1 and 2. Actually, table 1 is not mentioned and explained at all in the text.

I suggest  to separately reflect the Descriptive statistics and the Empirical results (including main results and robustness checks).

The study is conducted for Indonesia. Which is the international dimension of this findings? How they should be aligned with other findings made for the developing and developed countries.

The references are well chosen.

 

Author Response

Dear Reviewer

We are very grateful for your time and constructive comments on our manuscript. We have tried to revise the manuscript according to your comments.  We have given a yellow highlight colour for the part that we revised.

Hopefully, our revision is by what you mean.

Best regards.

Authors

Author Response File: Author Response.pdf

Reviewer 2 Report

Dear authors, 

Your topic of investigation of the role internal CSR in business for employees is a very important topic. I find that you are going the right direction. Nevertheless, I think that you need to improve the paper a lot. 

1. First of all I find that you do have a well-developed literature-review. There is a lot of literature in the field of CSR and internal CSR that you need to discuss. Can you please improve the literature review and go much more into the recent developments of the literature.
2. Secondly, I am not convinced by your empirical investigation. With the hypothesis that you develop you predict important things, but how can this be specified with relation to the specific dimensions of the role of internal CSR for improving employee performance and avoiding burnout. We know that there is a positive relation, so what is your new contribution of your research. I need you to be more clear on this, especially how you contribute to the development of the literature, in for example fulfilling a research gap in the research.  
3. You could do this by explaining more clearly the specific contribution of this paper to the research in the field, both in the beginning of the paper, but also towards the end of the paper in the conclusion. 
4. Good luck with your work!

Author Response

Dear Reviewer

 

We are very grateful for your time and constructive comments on our manuscript. We have tried to revise the manuscript according to your comments.  We have given a green highlight colour for the part that we revised.

Hopefully, our revision is by what you mean.

 

Best regards.

Authors

Author Response File: Author Response.pdf

Reviewer 3 Report

• The paper deals with a topic of great interest: the relationship between internal CSR and job performance.
• Generally speaking, the article is well written, well organized and characterized by a very good readability. The literature review is adequate.
• I have just some concerns regarding the following points.
  • As already mentioned, the theoretical background is well described throughout the paper, but I think that you should improve the study, by better linking the existing theory to your conclusions: More in details, in paragraph 5 no references are presented in order to confirm or deny the existing literature.
  • At the end I have a suggestion for future research: it could be interesting to compare the results obtained by the analysis of the four state-owned enterprises object of this paper with the results of the same test on non stated-owned firms in order to test the relevance of ownership item on the relationship between internal CSR and performance.

Author Response

Dear Reviewer

 

We are very grateful for your time and constructive comments on our manuscript. We have tried to revise the manuscript according to your comments.  We have given a green highlight colour for the part that we revised.

Hopefully, our revision is by what you mean.

 

Best regards.

Authors

Author Response File: Author Response.pdf

Round 2

Reviewer 2 Report

Dear authors, 

Thank you for the revisions. I think that you have done a good job in addressing my suggestions for improvements. I have now other comments. I can congratulate you for your good work.