Effect of Corporate Social Responsibility on Consumer Satisfaction and Consumer Loyalty of Private Banking Companies in Peru

Round 1

Reviewer 1 Report

the paper is examining the impact of Customer Satisfaction (CS) on Customer loyalty (CL), CSR on CL as well as the mediating effect of Customer Trust (CT). the introduction needs to be focused on the CL and why is it important in the banking sector in Peru. this is because banks are homogenous in terms of the services they provide globally. studying Peru's banking sector just because few studies have done so is not a strong justification. please revise the introduction to show studies on CL, the factor affecting it then the problem of the study, the objectives, and contribution. the lines from 66 to 75 on page 2 seem out of the place.

Methodology

the paper mentions "The original items were translated and adapted linguistically." please elaborate.

please mention the original sample too.

please support this statement "When a PLS model is used, the indicators’ reliability is assessed by examining each indicator’s loads and their dimension, accepting as reliable those loads that were higher than 0.50."

I'm not sure you can call it "Compound reliability"

please add HTMT results. 

please add a demographic table.

there are parts of the article that are difficult to read. please proofread.

please cite Customer loyalty towards Islamic banks: The mediating role of trust and attitude by albaity and Rahman.

thank you

Author Response

Please see the attachment

Author Response File: Author Response.pdf

Reviewer 2 Report

Dear authors,

 It is my pleasure to assess your essay. Below, please find my comments and recommendations:

 Abstract:

 - It is essential to mention the scale for CSR; is this a specific scale for banking?

- You stated that results suggest that CSR and customer satisfaction, through customer trust, positively influences customer loyalty, and I have some questions:

1. Why did you decide to work with an open model?
2. It would be very beneficial for your research to evaluate the direct effect of CSR on Customer Loyalty. 
3. How is this research linked to sustainability?
4. What do you mean by this? “The study's novelty uses the partial least square structural equation modeling technique”. What is the novelty? Is the study or SEM-PLS? Please, review this statement. 

 Introduction

 - In line 33: “customers’ needs and improve sustainability” 

1.     how will the banks improve sustainability? 

 - Lines 38 and 39: “Banks’ goals should be focused on increasing customer satisfaction and building enduring relationships with clients to generate profitability”.

2.     How about reliability, trust, etc.?

 - Line 50: following the journal style, authors are not supposed to be mentioned in the paper’s body.

- Lines 51-52: CSR for Corporate Social Responsibility. I'm afraid I disagree with your statement, “One of those elements is Corporate Social Responsibility, a marketing strategy that develops effective communication between the company and clients". 

CSR is not a marketing strategy. According to McWilliams, Siegel & Wright (2006), CSR is when corporations go beyond making money and engage in actions that result in social good, beyond the corporation's interests, which is required by law. Similarly, Carroll (1979) defined CSR as “The social responsibility of business encompasses the economic, legal, ethical, and discretionary expectations that society has of organizations at a given point in time (p. 500). Please, review this concept and rethink what CSR is.

- Line 60: the authors say, “The aim of this study is to understand how corporate social responsibility influences customer satisfaction and loyalty”. 

3.     How can you explain the relationship between CSR and Customer Satisfaction if you did not measure directly that relationship in your model?

 - Lines 68 to 71: the model is divided into three parts: customer satisfaction and customer loyalty, trust as a mediating factor between customer satisfaction and customer loyalty, and last, trust as a mediating actor between corporate social responsibility and customer loyalty. You cannot divide a model; a model must run with all components simultaneously. Please, can you explain your framework so I can understand it?

- Line 72: you do not have to explain the study’s sample in this section; you inform the reader how the paper is structured. 

- Line 72: “quantity”; it could be an empirical or quantitative study. 

- Lines 74 -75: "The novelty of this study lies in the application of the PLS-SEM method to analyze the impact of CSR on consumers in the Peruvian financial sector". You cannot say this is a novelty. Is this the first time a research team has used PLS in Peru? Maybe analyzing CSR in the financial sector.

- The paragraphs included in lines 68-76 and 77-83 are the same. So please, condense them into one. 

 General comments to the introduction: 

1. I could not clearly see “the state of the Art” in this introduction. 

2. What is the research gap and questions?

 Theoretical framework and hypothesis

 Line 88: please, remove author names.

Line 92: please, remove author names.

Line 96: please, remove author names.

Line 105: please, remove author names.

Line 111: please, remove author names.

Line 113: please, remove author names.

Line 117: please, remove author names.

Line 125: the construct title is Customer Trust; please complete the title. 

Line 131: the authors support customer trust as a mediator between customer satisfaction and customer loyalty, then I would move "A way to strengthen trust is through CSR tactics [59]" to customer trust.

Lines 131-132: these two sentences are incomplete. A way to strengthen trust is through CSR tactics [59]. When talking about the banking sector.  

Line 135: please, remove author names.

Line 150: please reformulate your hypothesis 2.

1.     Are you predicting the mediation effect will be positive or negative?

 Lines 158-159: this sentence is incomplete "Prior research demonstrated the direct influence of CSR initiatives in the development of loyalty [70,71]".

Line 159: please, remove author names.

Line 172: please, remove author names.

Line 180: please reformulate your hypothesis 3.

1.     Are you predicting the mediation effect will be positive or negative?

 General comments on the Theoretical framework and hypothesis:

1. I could not find a literature review for CSR. This is the central construct in this research. 
2. A third hypothesis should be included. It is necessary to evaluate the direct effect of CSR on Customer Loyalty. 

 Methodology

 Line 196: can you explain this? "A quantitative method was used to obtain online surveys in bank consumers with corporate social responsibility (CSR) activities".

Line 206: it is necessary to add the questionnaire to confirm the scales you have used. Perez et al. developed a measurement scale for CSR image, which integrated 23 questions. Can you explain why you took 17 questions out? Also, you used the same scale for customer satisfaction, and I do not see anything related to that construct in that scale. 

Line 207: you used Morgan and Hunt’s scale for customer trust with three items only, but those authors used the Dyadic Trust Scale of Larzelere and Houston (1980), a nine-item scale adapted to measure inter-organizational trust (p.28).

Line 212: I have the following questions,

1.     how was the questionnaire distributed?

2.     What platform did the authors use to collect the information?

3.     How was the sample structured?

4.     Did the authors use any segmentation information from the baking sector to structure the sample?

5.     What is the meaning of purposive online sampling?

6.     Do the authors believe that 390 people represent a population of more than 33 million people?

7.     What is the population that has access to the banking system in Peru?

8.     If the authors implemented an online survey, what regions of Peru were reached out to?

9.     Who was responsible for sending the online questionnaire?

10.  What database do the authors use to send the survey to the bank’s customers?

11.  Can you explain the 95% reliability and 5% margin error in this sampling process?

12.  Did the authors conduct a pilot to assure semantic equivalence of translation of the scales from English to Spanish?

13.  In general, how many emails were sent?

14.  What is the response rate?

 The authors must exhibit a table with the demographics.

1.     How was age structured?

2.     What demographic questions were included in the questionnaire?

 Line 228: Please, review this statement: "variance-based SEM (PLS) is used in the current study as it is an exploratory analysis, a theory just under development".

1.     Is still PLS-SEM under development?

 General comments on the methodology:

1. This section is too weak. If the methodology is not well structured, the whole project can be affected, especially the results. 
2. The authors MUST work intensively responding to the questions and improving the understanding of this section.

 Results

The goodness of fit model is expected, and I did not see it. 

The cross-loading is expected, and I did not see it.

 General comments on the results:

1.              In order to have a better understating of the results, I need to verify the information that is missing. After that information is provided, I will be able to give precise comments.

2.              Explanations and writing MUST be improved. For example, the essential variables are explained in one sentence, and it cannot be.

 Implications

Line 363: you could say, “it is the first of evaluate the effect of CSR in banking…" In Latin America, we have lots of studies related to CSR. The same when you mention SEM PLS. 

Line 366: you cannot say that you evaluated the direct and indirect effect of CSR on customer loyalty; you did not include it in the model, and I have to repeat it, It must be.

Line 370: can you support why the satisfaction-loyalty relationship has been evaluated as vital?

Line 377: Are you proposing this? "In particular, it is proposed that CSR has a significant impact on the economic reactivation of companies". If so, can you support your proposal?

Lines 366 and 388: are you relating your research to COVID-19? If not, I do not see why you are using it in your implications (by the way, is the implications section the discussion and conclusion?).

Line 399: The impact of CSR, not CSE. Authors continue to use COVID-19. If you are using this, you must consider including it formally in your research. If not, please focus on your study. 

Line 403: the same COVID-19

 General comments on implications:

1. The authors have the space to revisit this section, improve it and offer specific details about the discussion and conclusion of the study.
2. Explanations and writing MUST be improved

 Managerial implications

Line 420: COVID-19 again.

Line 429: questions about crowdsourcing

1.     Is crowdsourcing part of your research?

2.     Why is it essential to impulse CSR initiatives?

3.     If it is "essential", why did the authors not include it in this research? 

 Line 437: Because I could not see a table with demographics, I have the following question.

1.     Why are you integrating this cohort in the managerial implications section? I cannot assimilate the relationship because I do not know the impact of millennials and centennials in your study. 

 General comments on managerial implications:

1. The authors have the space to revisit this section, improve it and answer the questions to clarify the concepts.

 Limitations and future research directions

 Line 445: The entire section must be rewritten. Future research is no limitations. The authors must specify what the limitations are in more detail. First, the authors cannot generalize the results of this research. 

 Final recommendations:

 1. In-depth English editing is required.

2. You MUST improve your writing across the paper. Adding many references will not improve your paper; the content is essential. You have 7 1/2 page references (118 in total), and some parts need a lot of improvements, such as methodology and results. 

 References

 Carroll, A. B. A three-dimensional conceptual model of corporate social performance. Academy of Management Review 1979, 4, 497-505.

 Larzelere, R.E.; Huston, T.L. The Dyadic Trust Scale: Toward Understanding Interpersonal Trust in Close Relationships. Journal of Marriage and Family, 1980, 42, 3, 595-604.

 McWilliams, A.; Siegel, D. S.; Wright, P. M. Corporate social responsibility: Strategic implications. Journal of management studies, 2006, 43(1), 1-18.

 Finally, I wish you the best in this peer-review process,

 Regards,

Author Response

Please see the attachment

Author Response File: Author Response.pdf

Reviewer 3 Report

The aim of this paper is to determine the influence of corporate social responsibility (CSR) in consumer satisfaction and loyalty on the Peruvian private banking sector. Overall, the concept of this paper is promising although there are minor areas that are suggested to be cleared out.

The main strengths of this paper are the following:

·         The title accurately reflects the content of this study.

·         The tables and figures are presented clearly and analyzed appropriately.

The Introduction is focused. Authors used the traditional structure in order to justify the research gap and the motivation as well as the value of this paper. Authors presented the motivation of the paper and discussed about the main findings.

The paper demonstrates an adequate understanding of the relevant literature in the field and an appropriate range of literature sources are used. Authors provided an overview of the results of the existing literature.

Please add hypotheses in Figure 1.

Authors are encouraged to strengthen references about CSR and satisfaction and add the following:

·         Kitsios, F., Kamariotou, M., & Talias, M. A. (2020). Corporate sustainability strategies and decision support methods: A bibliometric analysis. Sustainability, 12(2), 521.

·         Kitsios, F., Stefanakakis, S., Kamariotou, M., & Dermentzoglou, L. (2019). E-service Evaluation: User satisfaction measurement and implications in health sector. Computer Standards & Interfaces, 63, 16-26.

·         Paulík, J., Kombo, F., & Ključnikov, A. (2015). CSR as a driver of satisfaction and loyalty in commercial banks in the Czech Republic. Journal of International Studies, 8(3), 112-127.

The research on which the paper is based is well designed and the methods that have been employed are appropriate.

Authors presented clearly the results of the analysis and clearly clarified limitations and suggestions for future research. The findings are a good basis for discussion.

Author Response

Please see the attachment

Author Response File: Author Response.pdf

Reviewer 4 Report

Dear Authors, 

Thank you for your research paper. Before proceeding, I believe that some considerations are needed. Please, address the following elements. 

Title, abstract and keywords

All interesting and relevant. 

Introduction

This section is well-written and interesting. However, more elements should be given to describe the central GAP that this paper aims to address. Then, in the final part of this section, I can encourage you to add brief sentences on this paper's theoretical and practical implications. 

Theoretical framework and hypothesis

This section is well-organised. For the trust side, I can suggest also considering the following elements: 

https://www.emerald.com/insight/content/doi/10.1108/13632540410807691/full/html

https://www.inderscienceonline.com/doi/abs/10.1504/IJMP.2021.113824#

Methodology

I find this section interesting. However, I suggest adding a small paragraph that identifies the methodology (quantitative) used in this paper. You can find some examples here: 

https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/abs/10.1002/csr.2161

https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/abs/pii/S0148296319305764

Then, I suggest adding the online questionnaire as an appendix to your paper. I could be helpful for future comparative studies around the world. 

Discussion and conclusion

Interesting and relevant

Author Response

Please see the attachment

Author Response File: Author Response.pdf

Round 2

Reviewer 1 Report

i command the authors on the work they have done to improve the paper further. i do not have any further comments. good luck.

Author Response

Please see the attachment

Author Response File: Author Response.pdf

Reviewer 2 Report

Dear authors, Greetings!

Thank you for all the work done. I still have some questions regarding your paper. Please, read my comments below:

1.     The questionnaire:

a.     I did not see in your questionnaire an informed consent, and the three initial questions cannot constitute informed consent. So, please, can you let us know how the authors proceeded with this vital aspect of research?

b.     Question 3 asks about the country where the participant lives.

                                               i.     Is this a filter question? If you were using Survey Monkey, how many participants were rejected based on the filter question?

                                             ii.     If the study was conducted in Peru, a vital question in this questionnaire was: Where do you live?

                                           iii.     Did the authors accept Peruvians living abroad?

                                            iv.     Another vital question was: What is the bank of preference? Why did the authors not include this question?

                                             v.     The type of bank account was not part of this study? Why?  

2.      Limitations must be improved. My questions above must be part of your limitations.

3.     The relationship between banks and sustainability should be improved. Sustainable banking is a strategy that refers to banking and investment practices that pursue profit while prioritizing social responsibility and environmental sustainability. Can you amplify this in your paper? Please review the following paper:

Zimmermann, M. Same but Different: How and Why Banks Approach Sustainability. Sustainability 2019, 11, 2267; doi:10.3390/su11082267.

Final comments:

-       Please, review the limitations again.

-       Thank you for modifying the original model.

Again, I wish you the best in this peer-review process

Author Response

Please see the attachment

Author Response File: Author Response.pdf