Next Article in Journal
Digital Transformation Strategies, Practices, and Trends: A Large-Scale Retrospective Study Based on Machine Learning
Next Article in Special Issue
Research on the Sustainable Development Strategy of Online Learning: A Case Study of YouTube Users
Previous Article in Journal
Reuse of Treated Wastewater: Drivers, Regulations, Technologies, Case Studies, and Greater Chicago Area Experiences
Previous Article in Special Issue
The Impact of VR/AR-Based Consumers’ Brand Experience on Consumer–Brand Relationships
 
 
Search for Articles:
Title / Keyword
Author / Affiliation / Email
Journal
Article Type
 
 
Advanced Search
 
Section
Special Issue
Volume
Issue
Number
Page
 
Journals
Sustainability
Volume 15
Issue 9
10.3390/su15097497
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 Effect of Perceived Corporate Social Responsibility (PCSR) on Subjective Well-Being

by
Teng Yue Liang
and
Sung Joon Yoon
*
Department of Business Administration, Kyonggi University, Suwon 16227, Republic of Korea
*
Author to whom correspondence should be addressed.
Sustainability 2023, 15(9), 7497; https://doi.org/10.3390/su15097497
Submission received: 20 March 2023 / Revised: 27 April 2023 / Accepted: 1 May 2023 / Published: 3 May 2023
(This article belongs to the Special Issue Marketing Innovation and Consumer Values in Sustainable Business Strategy)
Browse Figures
Versions Notes

Abstract

:
With the improvement of the material level, the employees of companies do not only pay attention to the level of wages, but rather focus on the happiness that the work induces, the quality of life, and the psychological well-being. Current research on corporate social responsibility has mostly concerned both macroscopic and institutional aspects, and empirical studies that address microscopic aspects of the organization employees are relatively scant. Therefore, it is the aim of this study to investigate whether corporate social responsibility perceived by employees affects subjective well-being, as well as to examine the intermediary mechanism through which employees perceive subjective well-being. Based on the social identity theory, this study establishes a research model that sets corporate social responsibility, organizational identification, and moral identity perceived by employees as antecedent variables of subjective well-being, and uses organizational support as a moderating variable. The survey data used in this study were collected from social media in the form of a questionnaire. The survey used a total of 508 questionnaires for employees of “Haier”, a Chinese home appliance manufacturing company, for one month in September 2022. The conclusions drawn through this study are that, first, corporate social responsibility has a significant positive (+) effect on subjective well-being, and, second, organizational identification mediates the relationship between perceived corporate social responsibility and subjective well-being. Third, moral identity plays a partial mediating role between perceived corporate social responsibility and subjective well-being. Finally, organizational support moderates the relationship between employees’ perceived corporate social responsibility and organizational identification. It is expected that the research result will contribute to better understanding of the mechanism in which perceived corporate social responsibility boosts employees’ subjective well-being, which has huge implications for companies in ways that affect organizational performance as well as corporate loyalty.

1. Introduction

In recent years, a lot of academic and practical attention has been paid to corporate social responsibility. Corporate social responsibility has been defined as “the voluntary return of profits and the public interest use of resources for social return and maintenance, which eventually improves relationships between companies and stakeholders” [1]. Corporate social responsibility can improve corporate sustainability and company’s market competitiveness [2], and plays an important positive role in improving social welfare and promoting social integration [3,4].
However, it is difficult to locate studies that have investigated the positive effects of corporate social responsibility in connection with organizational attitudes and behaviors, such as work satisfaction [5], organizational identification [6], and organizational commitment [3,7] and well-being of employees. The psychological well-being of employees can stimulate their potential [8] and affect their job performance. In particular, as interest in the quality of life is fast increasing mainly among modern office workers, studying the employees’ well-being that represents the psychological state of the employees is important both academically and from a practical point of view. Perceived Corporate Social Responsibility (hereafter referred to as PCSR) compared to objective CSR has been reported by previous studies as having a direct and significant impact on employee job attitudes and behaviors [9,10,11]. Therefore, the study on the effect of PCSR on subjective well-being is aimed at internal employees who are stakeholders in the organization, and the empirical survey targeting them not only makes up for the lack of theoretical research, but also presents great practical implications in terms of organizational management. Based on this research background, this study investigates whether corporate social responsibility (PCSR) perceived by members of an organization affects subjective well-being, and it is divided into individual and organizational parameters as a mediating link connecting this relationship. Thus, moral identity and organizational identification were introduced. In addition, the purpose of the study is to introduce the variable of organizational identification as an organization-level control variable.
Most of the preceding studies investigating the relationship between PCSR and subjective well-being are based on self-determination theory [12], social learning theory [13], and attribution theory [14], but it is difficult to locate a theory that identifies the mechanism of action in terms of identity within the organization. According to previous studies, variables such as organizational identification and organizational support are mainly included as prerequisites for subjective well-being [12]. Therefore, there is a tendency to adopt organizational identification as a parameter to explore the PCSR mechanism for employees’ well-being. Second, previous studies have shown that moral identity can affect the evaluation of one’s morality and improve one’s well-being and moral behavior [13]. Therefore, this paper aims to identify the explanatory mechanism of PCSR for subjective well-being by adopting organizational identification and moral identity as mediating parameters.
In addition, from the perspective of social identity theory, existing studies on organizational support and organizational identification mainly focused on organizational expectations, and there are not many studies that combine them with individual perceptions within organization. In addition, this study has a secondary purpose of investigating the moderating role of organizational support in relationship between PCSR and organizational identification.
This study aims to expand the research horizon on the effects of PCSR on employees at the individual level. Previous studies on corporate social responsibility mainly focused on the effectiveness of the organization at the macroscopic level, but this study focuses on the employee’s cognitive–perceptive perspective at an individual level. Specifically, this study aims to answer two research questions; (1) Does CSR influence employees’ subjective well-being? and (2) What are the actors that mediate this relationship? To achieve this aim, this study employs an online survey on employees of a major Chinese company. Furthermore, this study aims to contribute to current understanding on the antecedent factors of employees’ subjective well-being by introducing mediating mechanisms such as organizational identification and moral identity.

2. Theoretical Background and Hypotheses

2.1. Perceived Corporate Social Responsibility (PCSR)

Corporate social responsibility (PCSR) perceived by employees refers to the degree to which employees perceive corporate social responsibility from a subjective point of view [15]. Corporate social responsibility includes all members of the organization, from the organizational level to the microscopic level of employees, as an evaluation target. Lee contends that PCSR refers to employees’ perceived support for the company’s activities related to social responsibility and that employees are direct internal witnesses to the company’s fulfillment of social responsibility [16]. DeRoke argued that PCSR represents employee perceptions of organizational behavior as part of a means to improve awareness of external stakeholders [6].
Glavas and Kelley based their research framework on stakeholder theory and corporate citizenship, and divided PCSR into two factors, employees’ corporate social responsibility and employees’ corporate environmental responsibility [17].
In summary, PCSR can be viewed as a subjective evaluation of the official activities of the organization by internal members of the organization, and the results are expected to play an important role in improving the image of organization.

2.2. Organizational Identification

The theory of social identity points out that individual identity and social identity are affected by social classification. Tajfel affirms that organizational identity embodies an individual’s psychological recognition of the organization [18]. Mael and Ashforth clearly present a definition of organizational identity where they argue that individuals form a basic perception of the consistency between individuals and groups through the perception of identity [19]. BM Galvin, D Lange, BE Ashforth suggest that organizational identification strengthens the consistency of identity, and individuals can have the right identity for groups when their perceived personal identity coincides with perceived organizational identity [20].
Edwards and Pepei assert that the identity of the organization members is a leading variable of organizational identification [21]. In addition, Diamond applies mental organizational theory embracing the concepts of experience, relationship, and psychokinesis, and asserts that these experiences help to discover one’s organizational identification and eventually form organizational identification [22].

2.3. Moral Identity

In previous studies, moral identity has been understood as one of many concepts of social identity theory [23]. Moral identity is an extended concept of social identity theory, which posits that group members of society acquire individual self-concept by associating group identity with individual identity [24]. Information processing of social identity is managed by an individual’s self-system consisting of factors such as gender, race, education, marital status, and family status [25].
Krettenauer defined moral identity as an expectation of the way in which an individual establishes themself and aims to be a person [26], and Steven G. et al. reported that moral identity is influenced by situational factors and may affect individual beliefs, attitudes, and behaviors [27]. Choi and Winterich argued that moral identity refers to an individual’s perception and behavioral expression of moral characteristics, and that individuals form moral solidarity through a specific associative cognitive network that constitutes moral concepts [28].
Aquino and Reed presented the concept of moral identity from a social cognitive point of view, and viewed moral identity as the basis of social identity for self-justification [29]. Hart viewed that moral identity is an emotional perception of self-protection and happiness promotion and is composed of three elements: moral awareness, self-identity, and moral action opportunity [30].

2.4. Sense of Organizational Support

Organizational support represents an employee’s perception of the way in which an organization treats employee contributions and the ways in which the organization cares about employee welfare [31]. The concept refers to the extent to which an employee recognizes the organization’s efforts and contribution to the improvement of employees’ welfare.
Shore and Tetrick expanded Eisenberg’s definition to define organizational support as an employee’s own psychological judgment on an organization’s treatment of individuals [32]. McMillan pointed out that organizational support includes not only emotional support but also tool-level physical support, such as information and materials that an organization provides to employees to complete their tasks [33]. N Jabagi and AM Croteau efined organizational support as recognizing that employees tend to personify organizations and that organizations can reward employees based on legitimate rewards and that employees can access help when they need help [14].

2.5. Subjective Well-Being

Subjective well-being (SWB) was first proposed by Diener, and Diener defined subjective well-being as a positive and relatively stable psychological and emotional experience that accompanies people’s daily lives [34]. This experience originally stems from people’s ideas about a better life, which are subjective, relatively stable, and individual emotions in the long run, and can be used to some extent as an important indicator of people’s quality of life.
Past literature shows that subjective well-being has been classified as a criterion for judging mental health in medical institutions as people tend to pursue stability, health, and optimism [35]. Positive psychology continues to receive more attention in academia, and an increasing number of scholars are conducting research on the concept of subjective well-being [34]. Subjective well-being is based on Epicurus’s hedonism [36], and from this point of view, employee well-being can be deemed to represent the employee’s cognitive, emotional experience, and work evaluation. According to Wright et al., employees who thought that subjective well-being was high had a deeper job awareness and more efficient job evaluation [37].
According to a review of the prior literature, employees’ subjective well-being is highly related to factors such as employees’ personal characteristics, workplace pressure, organizational performance, and corporate behavior, and employees’ subjective well-being is expected to have a positive effect on employees’ organizational citizenship behavior and organizational satisfaction.

3. Research Hypothesis and Research Model

3.1. Perceived Corporate Social Responsibility (PCSR) and Subjective Well-Being of Employees

Agunis and Glavas defined corporate social responsibility as a strategic activity carried out by a company in a specific situation, taking into account the expectations of its stakeholders and the overall development of the company’s economic, social, and environmental performance [2]. As an internal interest party, employees have a deep understanding and awareness of corporate culture and core values, and can sense social responsibilities in various aspects that affect stakeholders such as employees, consumers, and government, and the environment and society. According to previous studies, perceived corporate social responsibility (PCSR) by employees has a positive effect on employee job satisfaction [5], organizational commitment [38], and organizational citizenship behavior [39]. In addition, Leal, Rego, and Cunha discovered that working in a socially responsible company can have a positive meaning, and by increasing the level of internal motivation of employees, it leads to more positive emotional experiences, i.e., happiness [40]. Therefore, PCSR has a positive effect on happiness in the aspects of work, psychology, and life, which suggests that the subjective well-being of employees is strengthened. Based on these previous studies, the following research hypotheses is presented.
Hypothesis 1:
Perceived corporate social responsibility (PCSR) by employees has a positive (+) effect on employees’ well-being.

3.2. PCSR and Organizational Identification

McWilliams and Siegel reported that the performance of corporate social responsibility can be differentiated from that of other organizations because stakeholders have special trust and dependence on the corporation [41]. Through the mission and values of a company, employees become more aware of corporate social responsibility [42]. In other words, when employees recognize that a company is fulfilling its social responsibility, they perceive a sense of unity with the organization out of their due social recognition of this company. In other words, when a company receives a unique and responsible identity from society, the company employees establish a close identification with the company [3].
According to social identity theory, employees generally want to work for a company with an attractive identity and to be recognized by people outside the organization. Perceived external image refers to ways in which internal stakeholders of a company judge external stakeholders’ perception of the company. The better the company’s perceived external image, the more attractive the organization is, and the more likely it is that employees will identify with it. Based on the preceding studies, the following research hypothesis is proposed.
Hypothesis 2:
Employee’s perceived corporate social responsibility (PCSR) has a positive (+) effect on organizational identification.

3.3. Organizational Identification and Subjective Well-Being

Organizational identification refers to positive emotional experiences that increase employee self-esteem [43], reduce negative emotions, and increase their emotional belonging [44]. When employees’ organizational identification is high, they can more quickly and easily accept organizational values and rules, become more engaged in their work [45], and display more positive attitudes. When happiness or subjective well-being is present, turnover intention is lowered [46], and job satisfaction is higher [47]. Combining the previous studies reviewed so far, the following research hypothesis is proposed because employees perceive subjective well-being if they perceive a high level of organizational identification.
Hypothesis 3:
Organizational identification has a positive (+) effect on the perceived subjective well-being of employees.

3.4. PCSR and Moral Identity

Moral identity refers to a kind of moral self-concept that includes the cognition, emotion, and behavioral disposition of an individual’s moral characteristics [29]. When employees have a high awareness of corporate social responsibility, they think that the company has a strong sense of social responsibility and shows responsibility [28]. Some scholars believe that while it may reduce profits in the short term in the process of carrying out social responsibilities such as environmental protection, it is helpful for the harmonious development of humans and nature and the sustainable development of businesses. During this time, as internal stakeholders of the company, employees internally acquire the moral values created by the company in terms of intrinsic corporate values and corporate culture to fulfill these corporate social responsibilities [26]. Employees also have higher self-evaluations of their moral identity. In other words, a high perception of PCSR can lead to value transfer to reinforce moral identity among employees. Based on the preceding studies, the following research hypothesis is presented.
Hypothesis 4:
Employee’s perceived corporate social responsibility (PCSR) has a positive (+) effect on moral identity.

3.5. Moral Identity and Subjective Well-Being

The level of moral identity reflects the image formed in one’s mind about one’s moral characteristics. The higher the level of moral identity, the greater the individual’s self-image, and thus psychological satisfaction and happiness [48]. A company’s low level of employee happiness not only means a company’s lack of employee management ability, but also implies a moral inconsistency resulting from the company’s lack of ethics and morality [49]. High moral identity of employees means high personal, ethical, and normative identity, and employees can obtain high psychological satisfaction when their moral identity or responsibility for their behavior at work is harmonized. Similar finding has been suggested in previous studies, namely that moral identity has a positive effect on the behavior of corporate stakeholders [50]. Based on these previous studies, the following research hypothesis is presented.
Hypothesis 5:
Moral identity has a positive (+) effect on subjective well-being.

3.6. Mediating Effect of Organizational Identification and Moral Identity

This study proposes that the relationship between PCSR and subjective well-being of employees is mediated by organizational identification and moral identity. It is inferable that there exists an indirect effect of organizational identification through Hypothesis 2 and Hypothesis 3, and similarly, it was inferred that there is an indirect effect of moral identity through Hypothesis 4 and Hypothesis 5. Based on this, this study proposes the following hypotheses regarding mediating effects.
Hypothesis 6:
Organizational identification plays a mediating role in the impact of employees’ perceived corporate social responsibility (PCSR) on subjective well-being.
Hypothesis 7:
Moral identity plays a mediating role in the impact of employees’ perceived corporate social responsibility (PCSR) on subjective well-being.

3.7. Moderating Effect of Organizational Support

When employees feel a higher sense of support from the organization, they are more likely to be loyal to the organization [51]. The organization’s profits and losses are perceived as their own [52], the organizational identity is strengthened, and employees are less inclined to leave [53]. Studies have shown that the sense of organizational support further influences the attitudes and behaviors of employees by influencing the exchange relationship between the employees and the organization [54]. From the point of view of social identity theory, the higher the sense of support from the organization, the better the employees can perceive the value that the organization delivers. Based on these previous studies, the following research hypothesis is presented.
Hypothesis 8:
The sense of organizational support has a moderating role in the impact of employees’ perceived corporate social responsibility (PCSR) on organizational identification.
Based on the research hypotheses established above, the research model shown in Figure 1 was derived.

4. Research Design

4.1. Research Data and Analysis Method

The survey data used in this study were collected in the form of a questionnaire from WeChat, Weibo, and other social media, and representativeness of the survey subjects was secured to ensure the reliability and validity of the survey results. The questionnaire was developed through a series of pretests involving five graduate students with a high level of expertise in the survey method. The measures used for the survey were drawn from a review of the literature related to major constructs discussed earlier in this study, which includesd PCSR (4 items), Moral Identity (3 items), Subjective Well-being (4 items), Organizational Support (3 items). From the survey, a total of 527 questionnaires were collected from employees of “Haier”, a Chinese home appliance manufacturing company, during one month of September 2022. Among them, 19 invalid questionnaires that were answered incompletely or unreliably were removed and 508 questionnaires were finally used.
The SPSS 24.0 statistical program was used as an analysis tool for this study. First, frequency analysis was performed to analyze demographic characteristics. Second, to check the validity of each factor, an exploratory factor analysis was performed, and the reliability was analyzed by calculating Cronbach’s α coefficient. Third, in order to test the hypothesis proposing the interrelationship between variables, the significance of the path was tested. Fifth, the moderating effect was verified using the moderated regression analysis.

4.2. Operational Definition of Constructs

In order to measure 5 variables employed in this study, each item was measured on a Likert 7-point scale. Table 1 shows the operational definitions and measurement items of the constituent concepts of each variable. Operational definition of each measure was drawn from previous research from which this study adapted actual items for the survey questionnaire after modifying the original items to suit the research purpose of this study. Table 2 shows the actual items used for statistical analysis in this study. The result of factor analysis revealed that all of the scale items satisfied the loading cut-off, and thus were retained for further analysis.

5. Results of Analysis

5.1. General Characteristics of the Sample Respondents

In this study, the survey subjects consisted of 267 women (52.56%) and 241 men (47.44%). Among them, 441 (86.81%) were between the ages of 20 and 49. In addition, 315 (62.00%) of the respondents has a “university graduate” academic background. Moreover, 377 (74.2%) were with an income of 4500–9000 yuan. A total of 73 (14.37%) were employed for 5–9 years, and 306 (60.23%) were employed for 10–29 years.

5.2. Reliability and Validity Analysis

This study analyzed the reliability and validity of each measurement item using SPSS 24.0, and the results are shown in Table 2. In general, if the Cronbach’s Alpha value is greater than 0.7, the reliability of the scale can be secured. Table 2 shows that all reliability is 0.8 or higher, which indicates acceptable level of reliability. In order to examine the validity, if the AVE is 0.5 or more, it can be considered that there is convergent validity.
Therefore, the reliability and validity of the collected data are established. Table 3 shows the correlation coefficients, and the confidence interval does not include 1, so discriminant validity was confirmed to be acceptable.

5.3. Hypothesis Testing

This study’s research hypothesis was verified through the structural equation model using AMOS 23.0. The analysis results are shown in Table 4. All p-values are less than 0.001, indicating that the relationship between each variable was significant. The measurement model confirmed the acceptable fit with X²/df = 1.128, GFI = 0.958, AGFI = 0.923, and RMSEA = 0.043 (see Figure 2).

5.4. Mediating Effect Testing

Based on the test results, the study verified the mediating effect proposed in this study, as shown in Table 5. The verification method used Bootstrap, the given data set is used as the Bootstrap population, and the results are shown in Table 6. The table shows that there is a mediating effect because 0 is not included between the values of LLCI and ULCI, which are confidence intervals. If the effect value is positive (+), it can be determined that the mediating effect is positive. Therefore, both organizational identification and moral identity have significant mediating effects. Therefore, Hypothesis 6 and Hypothesis 7 were supported.

5.5. Moderation Effect Testing

In this study, the modulating effect was verified using the hierarchical moderated regression method. The specific step is to select Model 1 and enter each variable (independent, moderating, and dependent variables) in turn. The independent variable (X) is employee perceived corporate social responsibility (PCSR), the moderating variable (M) is organizational support (POS), and the dependent variable (Y) is organizational identification (OI). The results are shown in Table 6.
As confirmed in Table 4 earlier, employees’ perceived corporate social responsibility has a significant positive (+) effect on organizational identification. The interaction between independent and moderating variables (expressed as POS*PCSR) indicated a significant positive relationship with organization identification (R = 0.1383, p < 0.05). In other words, the higher the sense of support from the organization, the stronger the positive (+) relationship between employees’ perceived corporate social responsibility and the organizational identification. Therefore, Hypothesis 8 was accepted.

6. Discussions and Implications

6.1. Significance of the Study

Based on the social identity theory, this study established a relational model of perceived corporate social responsibility (PCSR) on the subjective well-being of employees, and studied the mediating role of organizational identification and moral identity and the moderating role of organizational support. The main conclusions are as follows. First, the higher the perceived corporate social responsibility (PCSR), the higher the subjective well-being. Second, PCSR has a significant effect on organizational identification of employees. Third, organizational identification has a mediating effect on PCSR and subjective well-being. Fourth, PCSR has a significant effect on the moral identity of employees. Fifth, moral identity has a significant mediating effect on PCSR and subjective well-being. Sixth, the sense of organizational support strengthens the relationship between PCSR and organizational identity. In other words, the stronger the sense of organizational support, the stronger the positive effect of PCSR on employees’ sense of organizational identity.
From a theoretical perspective, this study extends current research on the antecedents of employees’ perceived subjective well-being in organizations, in particular by linking employees’ personal, psychological, and normative variables (such as organizational identity and moral identity) to subjective well-being. This study demonstrates that in addition to job satisfaction and job loyalty, which have been extensively studied in previous studies, psychological and normative variables should also be considered as important influencing factors.
Furthermore, based on the results that the two mediating variables (organizational identification and moral identity) significantly mediate the relationship between PCSR and subjective well-being, the importance of the employee’s self-reflection vis-a-vis organization in creating employees’ perceived happiness is demonstrated. This result will be able to provide some new insights on the future research efforts in this field. For example, the future study could employ some self-reflected image variables such as employees’ psychological ownership and self-esteem as related to perceived CSR.
From a practical point of view, there are a few important implications. First, it is necessary to make employees aware of the social responsibility of the company they work for. Businesses should attach importance to the execution of social responsibilities, to maintain a favorable image inside and outside the organization by enhancing or maintaining corporate reputation and prestige. To this end, companies should enhance the intrinsic ripple effect of the organizational culture and focus on corporate PR and communication as a means to accomplish this goal. Second, it is necessary to strengthen the organizational identification of employees. To do this, companies need to improve the employee’s own emotional attachment and sense of organizational empathy. In addition, as previous studies disclosed [58], this study reconfirmed that companies should actively understand the needs of employees and establish systems to standardize and satisfy the legitimate needs of employees. Third, moral identity should be emphasized and called for. As was confirmed in this study, moral identity plays an important mediating role on subjective well-being, so companies should pay attention to the level of moral identity when selecting managers and hiring new recruits. Managers with high moral identity tend to be leaders who obey ethics and are respected by employees, which enhances employees’ trust and loyalty. Fourth, companies need to provide a high level of organizational support. They should be aware of the positive effect of organizational support on employees’ attitudes and emotional state, and implement various measures to strengthen employees’ sense of organizational support in their daily work. For example, in order to improve and maintain a high level of organizational support, companies must promote employee participation in decision-making and invest in employees’ personal development.

6.2. Limitations and Future Research Directions

This study has limitations in terms of research methods. First, it is necessary to improve the representativeness of the sample respondents. The data in this study were collected from an online survey platform, and the reliability of the data collected through this method may be relatively lower than that of the data collected through the field survey. In addition, the data originate from employees of very famous home appliance companies in China, and the scope of the samples is too narrow, which makes the conclusions not universal. Future research needs to increase the sample size and possibly conduct the study in a multicultural context. Various types of enterprises and even government organizations, etc., will be considered, and on-site investigations with questionnaires will be combined so that the conclusions drawn are not affected by occupations and are more universal. In addition, the study will be carried out in China and South Korea at the same time. Through the comparison of data differences, the impact of PCSR on employee happiness under different cultural backgrounds can be analyzed. For example, the basic form of society, egoism and altruism, etc., will have an impact on the conclusion. In addition, since the effect of time series data was not considered in this study, it is difficult to understand the process of longitudinal variation of each variable. Therefore, in the future, it is necessary to collect data at different time intervals in order to improve its objectivity and accuracy. Finally, there is a need to expand research on mediating mechanisms. In this regard, it is necessary to introduce more new variables that address the self-reflected image that is more self-oriented than organizational identification. For instance, future researchers can consider the role of psychological ownership or self-pride.

Author Contributions

Conceptualization, S.J.Y. and T.Y.L.; methodology, T.Y.L.; software, T.Y.L.; validation, T.Y.L.; formal analysis, T.Y.L.; investigation, T.Y.L.; resources, T.Y.L.; data curation, T.Y.L.; writing—original draft preparation, T.Y.L.; writing—review and editing, T.Y.L.; visualization, T.Y.L.; supervision, S.J.Y.; project administration, S.J.Y.; funding acquisition, T.Y.L. All authors have read and agreed to the published version of the manuscript.

Funding

This research received no external funding.

Institutional Review Board Statement

Not applicable.

Informed Consent Statement

Not applicable.

Data Availability Statement

All data generated and analyzed during this study are included in this article.

Conflicts of Interest

The authors declare no conflict of interest.

References

  1. Barnett, M.L.; Salomon, R.M. Beyond dichotomy: The curvilinear relationship between social responsibility and financial performance. Strateg. Manag. J. 2007, 27, 1101–1122. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  2. Aguinis, H.; Glavas, A. What We Know and Do not Know about Corporate Social Responsibility: A Review and Research Agenda. J. Manag. 2012, 38, 932–968. [Google Scholar]
  3. Bhattacharya, C.B.; Sen, S. Doing Better at Doing Good: When, Why and How Consumers Respond to Corporate Social Initiatives. Calif. Manag. Rev. 2012, 47, 9–24. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  4. Lu, J.; Ren, L.; Lin, W.; He, Y.; Streimikis, J. Policies to promote corporate social responsibility (csr) and assessment of csr impacts. Econ. Manag. 2019, 22, 82–98. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  5. Bauman, C.W.; Skitka, L.J. Corporate social responsibility as a source of employee satisfaction. Res. Organ. Behav. 2012, 32, 63–86. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  6. De Roeck, K.; El Akremi, A.; Swaen, V. Consistency Matters! How and When Does Corporate Social Responsibility Affect Employees’ Organizational Identification? J. Manag. Stud. 2016, 53, 1141–1168. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  7. Shaikh, E.; Brahmi, M.; Thang, P.C.; Watto, W.A.; Trang TT, N.; Loan, N.T. Should I Stay or Should I Go? Explaining the Turnover Intentions with Corporate Social Responsibility (CSR), Organizational Identification and Organizational Commitment. Sustainability 2022, 14, 6030. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  8. Dowling, P.J. Exploring the effects of high-performance work systems (HPWS) on the work-related well-being of Chinese hospital employees. Int. J. Hum. Resour. Manag. 2013, 24, 3196–3212. [Google Scholar]
  9. Ahmed, A.K. The Role of Corporate Support for Employee Volunteering in Strengthening the Impact of Green Human Resource Management Practices on Corporate Social Responsibility in the Egyptian Firms. Eur. Manag. Rev. 2019, 16, 1079–1095. [Google Scholar]
  10. Barnett, M.L. Stakeholder influence capacity and the variability of financial returns to corporate social responsibility. Acad. Manag. Rev. 2007, 32, 794–816. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  11. Roeck, K.; Delobbe, N. Do Environmental CSR Initiatives Serve Organizations’ Legitimacy in the Oil Industry? Exploring Employees’ Reactions Through Organizational Identification Theory. J. Bus. Ethics 2012, 110, 397–412. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  12. Su, L.; Swanson, S.R. Perceived corporate social responsibility’s impact on the well-being and supportive green behaviors of hotel employees: The mediating role of the employee-corporate relationship. Tour. Manag. 2019, 72, 4377–4450. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  13. Kim, H.; Woo, E.; Uysal, M. The effects of corporate social responsibility (CSR) on employee well-being in the hospitality industry. Int. J. Contemp. Hosp. Manag. 2018, 30, 1584–1600. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  14. Jabagi, N.; Croteau, A.M.; Audebrand, L. Perceived Organizational Support in the Face of Algorithmic Management: A Conceptual Model. In Proceedings of the 53rd Hawaii International Conference on System Sciences, Maui, HI, USA, 7–10 January 2020; Available online: https://hdl.handle.net/10125/64231 (accessed on 1 March 2023).
  15. Jeon, M.M.; Lee, S.; Jeong, M. Perceived corporate social responsibility and customers’ behaviors in the ridesharing service industry. Int. J. Hosp. Manag. 2020, 84, 102341. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  16. Lee, S.H. The effects of employee services on organizational commitment and intentions to quit. Pers. Rev. 2013, 37, 222–237. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  17. Glavas, A.; Kelley, K. The Effects of Perceived Corporate Social Responsibility on Employee Attitudes. Bus. Ethics Q. 2014, 24, 165–202. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  18. Tajfel, T.E. Differentiation between Social Groups: Studies in the Social Psychology of Intergroup Relations; Academic Press: London, UK, 1982; Chapter 1–3. [Google Scholar]
  19. Mael, F.; Ashforth, B.E. Alumni and their alma mater: A partial test of the reformulated model of organizational identification. J. Organ. Behav. 1992, 13, 103–123. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  20. Galvin, B.M.; Lange, D.; Ashforth, B.E. Narcissistic organizational identification: Seeing oneself as central to the organization’s identity. Acad. Manag. Rev. 2015, 40, 163–181. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  21. Edwards, M.R.; Pecei, R.P. Perceived Organizational Suppport, Organizational Identification, and Employee Outcomes. J. Pers. Psychol. 2015, 9, 17–26. [Google Scholar]
  22. Diamond, M.A. Psychoanalytic organisation theory and identity: A psychosocial framework. J. Psychosoc. Stud. 2020, 18, 141–163. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  23. Skarlicki, D.P.; van Jaarsveld, D.D.; Walker, D.D. Getting even for customer mistreatment: The role of moral identity in the relationship between customer interpersonal injustice and employee sabotage. J. Appl. Psychol. 2008, 93, 1335–1347. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  24. Rehman Khan, S. Different and better than you: The interplay between social identity, moral identity, and social comparison. J. Community Appl. Soc. Psychol. 2021, 31, 615–635. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  25. Pąchalska, M. Integrated self-system: A microgenetic approach. Acta Neuropsychol. 2019, 17, 349–392. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  26. Krettenauer, T. Moral Identity as a goal of moral action: A Self-Determination Theory perspective. J. Moral Educ. 2020, 49, 330–345. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  27. Hertz, S.G.; Krettenauers, T. Does Moral Identity Effectively Predict Moral Behavior?: A Meta-Analysis. Rev. Gen. Psychol. 2016, 20, 129–140. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  28. Choi, W.J.; Winterich, K.P. Can Brands Move In from the Outside? How Moral Identity Enhances Out-Group Brand Attitudes. J. Mark. 2013, 77, 96–111. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  29. Aquino, K.; Reed, A., II. The self-importance of moral identity. J. Personal. Soc. Psychol. 2002, 83, 1423–1440. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  30. Hart, D. Adding Identity to the Moral Domain. Hum. Dev. 2005, 48, 257–261. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  31. Caesens, G.; Stinglhamber, F.; Demoulin, S.; De Wilde, M. Perceived organizational support and employees’well-being: The mediating role of organizational dehumanization. Eur. J. Work Organ. Psychol. 2017, 26, 527–540. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  32. Shore, L.M.; Tetrick, L.E.; Taylor, M.S. The employee-organizational relationship: A timely concept in a period of transition. Res. Pers. Hum. Resour. Manag. 2004, 23, 291–370. [Google Scholar]
  33. Mc Millian, R. Customer Satisfaction and Organizational Support for Service Providers. Master’s Thesis, University of Florida, Ganesrille, FL, USA, 1997. [Google Scholar]
  34. Diener, E. Subjective well-being. Psychol. Bull. 1984, 95, 542–575. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  35. Wilson, M.G.; Dejoy, D.M.; Vandenberg, R.J.; Richardson, H.A.; Mcgrath, A.L. Work characteristics and employee health and well-being: Test of a model of healthy work organization. J. Occup. Organ. Psychol. 2011, 77, 565–588. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  36. Dursun, P. Optimism, Hope and Subjective Well-Being: A Literature Overview. Çatalhöyük Uluslararası Turizm ve Sosyal Araştırmalar Dergisi 2021, 61–74. Available online: https://dergipark.org.tr/en/pub/cutsad/issue/63565/946124 (accessed on 1 March 2023).
  37. Wright, T.A.; Cropanzano, R. The Role of Psychological Well-Bing in Job Performance. Organ. Dyn. 2004, 33, 338–351. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  38. Turker, D. How Corporate Social Responsibility Influences Organizational Commitment. J. Bus. Ethics 2009, 89, 189–204. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  39. Farh, J.-L.; Zhong, C.-B.; Organ, D.W. Organizational Citizenship Behavior in the People’s Republic of China. Organ. Sci. 2004, 15, 241–253. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  40. Leal, S.; Rego ACunha, M.P. How the Employees’ Perceptions of Corporate Social Responsibility Make Them Happier and Psychologically Stronger. Int. J. Sustain. Dev. 2015, 8, 113–126. [Google Scholar]
  41. McWilliams, A.; Siegel, D. Corporate Social Responsibility: A Theory of the Firm Perspective. Acad. Manag. Rev. 2001, 26, 117–127. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  42. Scott, S.G.; Lane, V.R. A Stakeholder Approach to Organizational Identity. Acad. Manag. Rev. 2000, 25, 43–62. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  43. Smidts, A.; Pruyn, A.T.H.; Van Riel, C.B. The Impact of Employee Communication and Perceived External Prestige On Organizational Identification. AMJ 2001, 44, 1051–1062. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  44. Amaro, L.M.; Joseph, N.T.; de los Santos, T.M. Relationships of Online Social Comparison and Parenting Satisfaction among New Mothers: The Mediating Roles of Belonging and Emotion. J. Fam. Commun. 2019, 19, 144–156. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  45. Khorakian, A.; Mohammadi Shahroodi, H.; Jahangir, M.; Nikkhah Farkhani, Z. Innovative Work Behavior in Public Organizations: The Roles of Ethical and Knowledge Sharing Behaviors. Creat. Res. J. 2019, 31, 164–173. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  46. Kim, S.O.; Moon, S.-H. Factors Influencing Turnover Intention among Male Nurses in Korea. Int. J. Environ. Res. Public Health 2021, 18, 9862. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  47. Bartel, C.A. Social Comparisons in Boundary-Spanning Work: Effects of Community Outreach on Members’ Organizational Identity and Identification. Adm. Sci. Q. 2001, 46, 379–413. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  48. Li, B.; Ma, H.; Guo, Y.; Xu, F.; Yu, F.; Zhou, Z. Positive psychological capital: A new approach to social support and subjective well-being. Sci. J. Publ. 2014, 42, 135–144. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  49. Horomnea, E.; Pascu, A.-M. Ethical and Morality in Accounting Epistemological Approach. J. East. Eur. Res. Bus. Econ. 2012, 2012, 405721. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  50. Choi, M. Employees’ attitudes toward organizational change: A literature review. Hum. Resour. Manage. 2011, 50, 479–500. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  51. Bukhari, S.R.; Alam, N.A.; Batool, A.; Hussain, Y.; Asim, S.; Khatttak, N.; Tabassum, S. Perceived organizational support predicts emotional labor among nurses. Asian Soc. Sci. 2020, 16, 68. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  52. Eisenberger, R.; Huntington, R.; Hutchison, S.; Sowa, D. Perceived organizational support. J. Appl. Psychol. 1986, 71, 500. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  53. Sulistyo, A.R.; Suhartini, S. The role of work engagement in moderating the impact of job characteristics, perceived organizational support, and self-efficacy on job satisfaction. Integr. J. Bus. Econ. 2019, 3, 15–31. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  54. Shore, L.M.; Wayne, S.J. Commitment and employee behavior: Comparison of affective commitment and continuance commitment with perceived organizational support. J. Appl. Psychol. 1993, 78, 774. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  55. Mael, F.A.; Tetrick, L.E. Identifying organizational identification. Educ. Psychol. Meas. 1992, 52, 813–824. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  56. Reed II, A.; Aquino, K.F. Moral identity and the expanding circle of moral regard toward out-groups. J. Personal. Soc. Psychol. 2003, 84, 1270. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  57. Zhou, Y.; Zhou, L.; Fu, C.; Wang, Y.; Liu, Q.; Wu, H.; Zhang, R.; Zheng, L. Socio-economic factors related with the subjective well-being of the rural elderly people living independently in China. Int. J. Equity Health 2015, 14, 5. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  58. Mayr, F.B.; Talisa, V.B.; Shaikh, O.; Yende, S.; Butt, A.A. Effectiveness of homologous or heterologous COVID-19 boosters in veterans. N. Engl. J. Med. 2022, 386, 1375–1377. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
Sustainability 15 07497 g001 550
Figure 1. Research model.
Figure 1. Research model.
Sustainability 15 07497 g001
Sustainability 15 07497 g002 550
Figure 2. Hypothesis verification of structural equation model.
Figure 2. Hypothesis verification of structural equation model.
Sustainability 15 07497 g002
Table
Table 1. Composition of Question Items.
Table 1. Composition of Question Items.
VariableOperational DefinitionNumberSource
PCSRThe degree to which corporate social responsibility is inherent in an organization4Turker (2009) [38],
Glavas (2014) [17]
Organizational IdentificationPerceived emotional attachment or sense of belonging to the organization3Mael (1992) [55]
Moral IdentityThe degree of conformity with the morally recognized values of the organization3Reed (2003) [56]
Subjective Well-Being Degree of happiness with job, company, and colleagues4Zheng (2015) [57]
Organizational Support The degree to which the organization is interested in and supports my job and needs3Eisenberger (1986) [52]
Table
Table 2. Result of Reliability and Validity Analysis.
Table 2. Result of Reliability and Validity Analysis.
VariableItemsFactor
Loading		AVECronbach’s α
PCSRProtect the natural environment and participate in improvement activities0.77440.876
The company attaches great importance to the needs of its employees0.772
Company complies with laws and regulations0.808
Company encourages employees to participate in volunteer activities0.817
Organizational IdentificationCompany is interested in employees’ evaluation of the company0.79830.871
I often use “we” instead of “them”0.811
The compliment I receive from the company feels like a compliment to myself0.806
Moral IdentityI have the same values as the company0.78130.799
I recognize company’s moral social responsibility0.734
I actively participate in moral behavior 0.817
Subjective Well-BeingMy job is very fun0.75940.841
I am satisfied with the results I achieved0.779
I am confident and confident in myself0.671
I feel happy to help others0.697
Organizational SupportThe company is very proud of what I do0.84130.859
My company is interested in my goals and values0.576
My company can always help me0.613
Table
Table 3. Correlation Analysis Result.
Table 3. Correlation Analysis Result.
DivisionPCSROrganizational IdentificationMoral IdentitySubjective Well-Being
PCSR1
Organizational Identification0.633 **1
Moral Identity0.595 **0.589 **1
Subjective Well-Being0.607 **0.622 **0.616 **1
** Sig(p) < 0.01.
Table
Table 4. Result of Hypothesis Testing.
Table 4. Result of Hypothesis Testing.
PathEstimateS.E.C.R.PResult
H1: PCSR → Subjective Well-Being0.3210.0436.351***support
H2: PCSR → Organizational Identification0.2850.0594.057***support
H3: Organizational Identification → Subjective Well-Being0.2020.0513.166***support
H4: PCSR → Moral Identity0.2450.0325.932***support
H5: Moral Identity → Subjective Well-Being0.2160.0483.504***support
*** Sig(p) < 0.001.
Table
Table 5. Result of Mediation Effect Testing.
Table 5. Result of Mediation Effect Testing.
PathEffectBoot LLCIBoot ULCIResult
H6: PCSR→ Organizational Identification → Subjective Well-Being0.0460.0020.068adopted
H7: PCSR → Moral Identity → Subjective Well-Being0.2590.0060.064adopted
Table
Table 6. Result of Moderation Effect Testing.
Table 6. Result of Moderation Effect Testing.
PathRStandard DeviationtpResult
H8: Moderating effect of organizational support
(POS*PCSR)		0.1383 *0.07871.75740.0498adopted
* Sig(p) < 0.5.
Disclaimer/Publisher’s Note: The statements, opinions and data contained in all publications are solely those of the individual author(s) and contributor(s) and not of MDPI and/or the editor(s). MDPI and/or the editor(s) disclaim responsibility for any injury to people or property resulting from any ideas, methods, instructions or products referred to in the content.

Share and Cite

MDPI and ACS Style

Liang, T.Y.; Yoon, S.J. The Effect of Perceived Corporate Social Responsibility (PCSR) on Subjective Well-Being. Sustainability 2023, 15, 7497. https://doi.org/10.3390/su15097497

AMA Style

Liang TY, Yoon SJ. The Effect of Perceived Corporate Social Responsibility (PCSR) on Subjective Well-Being. Sustainability. 2023; 15(9):7497. https://doi.org/10.3390/su15097497

Chicago/Turabian Style

Liang, Teng Yue, and Sung Joon Yoon. 2023. "The Effect of Perceived Corporate Social Responsibility (PCSR) on Subjective Well-Being" Sustainability 15, no. 9: 7497. https://doi.org/10.3390/su15097497

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