*3.4. Conceptual Model Framework*

The conceptual model tested in this study incorporates a multi-level institutional view by considering institutional pressures from the global context, institutional pressures from the local context, and institutional pressures from the organizational field to gain insight into the reasons business organizations engage in explicit and implicit CSR activities.

Institutional theory, specifically neo-institutional theory, is a useful perspective in capturing the complexity of CSR dynamics because of the integration of external institutional pressures from the global context, the organizational field, and self-interest of the organization itself (Jamali and Karam 2018).

The first part of the model relates to global context, this includes institutional pressures emanating from the various international organizations promoting social responsibility in business on an international scale.

The second part of the model relates to local context best defined as the national business system (NBS). The NBS is the institutional framework of business, including both formal institutions such as government, associations, and civil groups; and informal groups such as religious, culture, and traditional norms in society. National business systems vary across countries which translates into variances in the source and strength of institutional pressures (Okoye 2009).

The third part of the model relates to the isomorphic forces that are affecting business organizations in their respective organizational fields (DiMaggio and Powell 1983). These various institutional pressures are affecting the perceptions of policy makers in business organizations in relation to their social obligation. This influence is driving the internal actors to engage in explicit or implicit social responsibility initiatives.

This conceptual model Figure 1 below represents an institutional model of explicit and implicit CSR. It offers four propositions that will be tested to gain insight into the institutional impact of internal actor motivations in relation to explicit and implicit CSR initiatives. This model was created using deductive reasoning from theories and conceptualizations in the literature. Inductive reasoning will be used to test the propositions in the model through the analysis of the primary data. The objective is to accept, reject, or adjust the propositions based on real observations in the field to create a more robust model.

**Figure 1.** Institutional model of explicit and implicit CSR.

This conceptual model offers the following four propositions that were tested to gain insight into the institutional impact of internal actor motivations in relation to explicit and implicit CSR initiatives.

**Proposition 1.** *Do coercive isomorphic pressures in the organizational field influence the engagement in explicit CSR practices of business organizations?*

Proposition 1 provides insight into whether business organizations pursuing financial efficiency and legitimacy are prompted to make CSR activities as clear and well-defined as possible, which can be best achieved using explicit CSR initiatives.

**Proposition 2.** *Do normative isomorphic pressures in the organizational field influence the engagement in explicit CSR practices of business organizations?*

Proposition 2 provides insight into whether business organizations engage in explicit CSR because of organizational self-interest in meeting social obligations and demands in the pursuit of legitimacy. Although stakeholders are not as critical in Proposition 1, for an organization to reach the goal of legitimacy, their CSR activities must also be clear and well-defined, which can be best achieved using explicit CSR initiatives.

**Proposition 3.** *Do normative isomorphic pressures in the organizational field influence the engagement in implicit CSR practices of business organizations?*

Proposition 3 provides insight into whether business organizations engage in implicit CSR because of an internal drive of organizations to meet social obligations and demands in the pursuit of legitimacy. As social structures are considered informal, explicit CSR initiatives are not required.

**Proposition 4.** *Do mimetic isomorphic pressures in the organizational field influence the engagement in explicit CSR practices of business organizations?*

Proposition 4 provides insight into whether business organizations engage in explicit CSR practices because of mimetic isomorphic pressures. Business organizations in a situation of strategic uncertainty may model themselves to organizations perceived as successful in their field to gain legitimacy without considering the possibility of operational inefficiency.

These four propositions were tested in the analysis of the primary data gathered from the semi-structured interviews and were verified, modified, or nullified based on patterns that emerged in the data to provide insight into the reasoning of internal actor motivations and the explicit and implicit CSR manifestations in business organizations.

#### **4. Methods**

A multiple-case study was selected as the method of analysis for this qualitative study. The use of a multiple case study at a specific point in time with an inductive and deductive approach provides a deep understanding of CSR as experienced by individual business organizations (Creswell 2013).

Primary data was gathered by conducting interviews with strategic top-level managers and their operational counterparts. This twin perspective of both top-level and operationallevel management provided rich data that is necessary to understand institutional forces and their effect on business organizations in relation to explicit and implicit CSR initiatives in a developing country context.

The theoretical framework chosen in this study relates to theory-based propositions to guide research (Yin 2009). These theoretically based propositions and the conceptual model were created using related theories and conceptualizations found in the literature. This is a deductive aspect of this study. Through data analysis, the previously mentioned propositions were accepted, rejected, or modified using inductive reasoning based on the actual primary data as observed in the field. The analysis in this study was be based on primary data because developing countries are plagued with an absence of reliable data, which has motivated many researchers to base their analysis on primary data.

The research methodology was completed using the six steps defined by Jarzabkowski (2008), as illustrated in Table A3 These techniques, orientations, and approaches were chosen because there is a need for a complex and detailed understanding of the issue, which can only be established by directly meeting the people (Creswell 2013) involved in CSR initiatives.

#### *4.1. Sampling Methodology*

Purposive or judgmental sampling was used to choose the business organizations that constituted the study population. The process of choosing cases began with the member list of indigenous Lebanese business organizations in the United Nations Global Compact (UNGC) Organization. Their voluntary membership in the UNGC is an indication that they are interested in developing social responsibility initiatives. The next step was to identify business organizations that illustrated a deep level of involvement in CSR. These were identified by experts in the field and their visible integration of CSR through business operations and structure.

The objective of this selection process is to choose cases that demonstrate acquiescence and compromise because these strategic responses imply that the business organization is engaging in and intends to develop and rationalize its CSR activities.

#### *4.2. Population*

The cases chosen were large indigenous corporations (over 1500 employees) in the following industries: banking, telecommunication, and trading. The data gathering was performed in Lebanon, which is a developing country as specified by the international statistical institute, and the World Bank.

Eight interviews were conducted in total with both the strategic leader of CSR, and the operational leader of CSR in each of the four cases chosen. The intent of interviewing the strategic leader was to gain insight why the business organization is engaging in explicit and implicit CSR from a strategic standpoint. The intent of interviewing the operational leader of CSR was to gain insight into why CSR activities are being implemented from an operational standpoint. In addition, two sets of responses from the same organization increased the reliability of the data by providing two sets of responses pertaining to the same subjects within the organization.

The classification of these cases as mentioned before, relates to Industry, size, and UNGC signatory position. The industry classification relates to the main industry the business organization is involved in. The size classification relates to the number of employees in the business organization. The UNGC signatory position classification represents the position of the business organization in the UNGC. The positions include members, and members of the steering committee. The regular member is a signatory that is active in CSR and has the intent to adopt CSR practices based on the ten principles of the United Nations global compact. The steering committee represents a member that has additional responsibilities that include being a part of governing the UNGC in Lebanon. The classification and details of the cases that will be studied are illustrated in Table 3 below:


**Table 3.** Classification of cases chosen in the study.

#### *4.3. Data Collection Tool*

The technique for collecting data involved capitalizing on two semi-structured interview schedules. One was designed for operational interviewees and the other for strategic interviewees within the same organization. Both interview schedules focused on the same subjects, but due to the allotted meeting duration with strategic interviewees, the number of questions was reduced. Interviewing both strategic and operational counterparts of the same business organization helped provide insights from a strategic and operational standpoint. In addition, using two sources of evidence enhances construct validity.

Semi-structured interviews were chosen because even though they have an overall structure and direction, they allow flexibility to include unstructured questioning, which may result in unexpected and insightful information coming to light, thus enhancing the findings (Hair et al. 2003) and providing rich and holistic data relating to the subject at hand.

The interview questions were developed primarily based on the antecedents of strategic response conceptualization (Table A2). According to Oliver, the choice of organizational responses to institutional pressures relates to contextual factors at play. These factors include cause, constituents, content, control, and context. These relate to why the organization is being pressured, who is exerting institutional pressures, to what norms the organization is being pressured to conform, the means institutional pressures are being exerted, and what are the characteristics of the business environment or context. The goal

is to gain insight into why business organizations' internal actors are performing implicit or explicit social responsibility initiatives in view of various institutional pressures and ultimately answer the research questions.

## *4.4. Interview Question Conceptualization*

Semi-structured interviews were conducted with both strategic and operational leaders to gain insight into the cause, constituents, content, control, and context related to each type of isomorphic pressure. This provided insight into why business organizations' internal actors are engaging in implicit and explicit CSR activities in relation to institutional pressures in the organizational field.

The strategic and operational interviews are based on the same underpinnings that relate to organizational responses to institutional pressures and include why these pressures are being exerted (cause), who is exerting them (constituents), how or by what means they are being exerted (content, control), and where they occur (context).

These questions also provide insight into whether internal actors engage in CSR initiatives because of normative institutional pressures in the organizational field. Normative isomorphic pressures result from an organization's desire to better fit standards set by professional and educational institutions, certification, and accreditation bodies (Charpin et al. 2021). Regulation is not always the responsibility of the government; there are cases in which industries often establish their own self-regulation by setting standards that members must follow (Orhan et al. 2021).

#### **5. Discussion**

A deductive approach was used to create the initial conceptual model, and an inductive approach was used to verify, modify, or nullify the four propositions based on primary data. This created a more robust model because it related theoretical perception to actual events, as illustrated by the primary data and analysis (Ven 2007).

**Proposition 1.** *Do coercive isomorphic pressures in the organizational field influence the engagement in explicit CSR practices of business organizations?*

The results of the study in relation to the 'control' predictive factor indicate coercive pressures are low, and voluntary diffusion is low, but the response is acquiescence. This does not coincide with Oliver's predictive responses because the cases chose to engage in CSR efforts in a business environment that has weak or non-existent coercive pressure from regulative bodies. When coercive institutional pressures increase in strength, the expected outcome would be an increase in explicit CSR initiatives because business organizations should have clear and well-defined CSR policies and report these activities clearly to the formal organizations to avoid financial penalty, breaking the law, and losing legitimacy in their organizational field.

Proposition 1 cannot be nullified because explicit CSR is the expected and logical outcome of coercive institutional pressures. It cannot be accepted because it is evident in the analysis of the primary data that the strength of this institutional pressure is weak compared with normative and mimetic pressures. The conceptual model has been modified by representing the relationship between coercive institutional pressure and explicit CSR with a dotted line. This indicates the relative weakness of institutional pressure in influencing internal actor motivation in explicit CSR engagement.
