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

The past CSR activities performed by the business organizations in the study were not clearly defined and well-articulated, and can be considered implicit CSR. These efforts, which were initially implicit CSR efforts, are now being transformed into explicit CSR efforts by business organizations to better fit the international definition of CSR with the objective of legitimacy on a global level. This is consistent with recent literature about CSR in a developing country context, which suggests that firms in developing countries engage in modest forms of explicit CSR as a response to global pressures but have inherent forms of implicit CSR shaped by culture, religion, and societal norms (Jamali and Karam 2018).

Proposition 3 cannot be nullified because of the clear evidence that normative institutional pressures influence internal actors to engage in implicit CSR outcomes. Modification is also unnecessary because of the clear relationship between normative pressure and implicit CSR in the primary data. Proposition 3 is accepted and remains unchanged in the conceptual model.

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

Evidence of mimetic institutional pressures can be identified in the results of the predictive factor 'context' as defined by Oliver in 1991. The predictive dimensions were uncertainty and interconnectedness. As previously mentioned, uncertainty relates to an organization's inability to predict future changes, and interconnectedness refers to the density of inter-organizational relations among the occupants in the field (Oliver 1991).

The results and analysis of the primary data relating to mimetic pressures and explicit CSR are consistent with those in the literature. In the literature, this rise in explicit CSR in developing countries is attributed to mimetic isomorphic pressures emanating from the global context, cultural variables, and education system (Matten and Moon 2020). The proliferation of explicit CSR due to mimetic institutional pressures in a developing country context is evident in the literature and research performed in many geographical locations, such as Africa, Asia, and Latin America.

Proposition 4 cannot be nullified because of clear evidence that mimetic institutional pressures influence internal actors to engage in explicit CSR initiatives. Modification is also not necessary because of the clear relationship between mimetic pressure and explicit CSR in the primary data. Proposition 4 is accepted and remains unchanged in the conceptual model.

#### *Conceptual Model Revisited*

Using the deductive approach to create the initial conceptual model and using the inductive approach to verify, modify, or nullify the four propositions created a more robust model because it relates theoretical perceptions, or what is in the literature, to actual events, as illustrated by the primary data and analysis (Ven 2007). The new conceptual model is a revised institutional model of explicit and implicit CSR and is shown below in Figure 2. The main dif-

ference is the indication of coercive institutional pressure as being very weak in the motivation of internal actors within business organizations to engage in explicit CSR initiatives.

**Figure 2.** Revised Institutional model of explicit and implicit CSR.

#### **6. Conclusions**

Based on the analysis of the primary data and the modified conceptual model, there is clear evidence of predominantly normative and mimetic institutional pressures affecting internal actors' engagement in explicit CSR initiatives. Coercive institutional pressures have been identified as weak or nonexistent, and these results are consistent with those found in the literature. Normative and mimetic institutional pressures stem from the global business context through international organizations such as the UN Global Compact, the Global Reporting Initiative, and the International Standards Organization. They also stem from the organizational field in the form of mimetic pressures that instigate business organizations to mimic successful organizations locally and internationally with explicit CSR initiatives.

Based on the research in this study, we can also conclude that normative institutional pressure is a significant factor in isomorphic organizational changes for business organizations in developing countries chosen to engage in implicit CSR. Coercive and mimetic institutional pressures were identified as weak. The normative institutional pressures affecting implicit CSR stem from elements in the national business system, specifically the ideologies of cultural and religious institutions and their effect on internal actors to engage in ethical behavior. These CSR efforts are considered implicit because they are instigated by informal institutions in the national business system and do not require strict adherence to CSR in terms of clarity and reporting. These pressures drove implicit CSR, even before the explicit CSR movement began.

#### *6.1. Contributions of Study*

This study contributes to the institutionalization of socially responsible business practices in developing countries by providing insights into the salient institutional pressures affecting business organizations in their adoption of implicit and explicit CSR activities.

#### *6.2. Theoretical Contribution*

The main theoretical contribution of this study is the conceptual model that provides an institutional framework that can be used by future researchers to study the institutionalization of CSR. This model is novel in that it identifies the importance of the duality of CSR and the importance of international institutions in facilitating explicit CSR proliferation.

Another theoretical contribution is the consideration of CSR duality as an essential conceptualization in the institutional study of CSR. This dual construct of CSR is of prime importance for two interrelated reasons. First, the variables and pressures affecting CSR practices can influence either the use of implicit or explicit CSR activities. Second, including both implicit and explicit CSR in the study will ensure that implicit CSR is not 'lost in translation' across national contexts. As mentioned, implicit CSR in a developing country context may not fall into the explicit CSR framework and may be overlooked.

#### *6.3. Practical Contribution*

This study identifies the importance of international institutions such as the UN Global Compact, Global Reporting Initiative, and International Standards Organization in relation to explicit CSR advancement in developing countries. These international institutions are aiding and guiding a handful of business organizations that perceive CSR as an integral part of economic and social development. They facilitate explicit CSR engagement for companies that perform implicit CSR in an ad hoc manner and companies that are new to CSR.

The adoption of conceptualizations and findings from this growing body of research will provide local organizations, both public and private, within developing countries, and international organizations' strategic insight in aiding the proliferation of CSR. As more scholars engage in research on this subject, new implications and strategies can be developed. These new implications and strategies will potentially have a positive effect on the societal welfare of developing countries, which is significant because these countries need it the most.

#### *6.4. Managerial Implications*

Managers of business organizations worldwide are in a constant flux in the mechanics and structure of their business models and strategies to create a symbiotic existence that is well adapted to their ever-changing environment. The dynamics of the international business environment, coupled with the significant empirical evidence that corporate social responsibility can positively affect social progress and potentially both stakeholder and shareholder wealth (Cheema et al. 2020), has materialized into an increased international concern for socially responsible business practices. Managers should be aware of this concern and adapt their business models accordingly.

In view of this increased concern for social responsibility, if social responsibility is absent in a business organization, managers should take the initiative to begin considering this subject. In the case that a business organization engages in implicit social responsibility, managers must ensure that these activities are clearly defined and reported using guidelines and methods provided by international business organizations promoting explicit social responsibility to gain legitimacy in their organizational field.

It is evident that implicit forms of CSR exist because they are embedded in the national business systems of many countries and must be accounted for. What is changing and continuing to change are the institutional forces that promote explicit CSR from multiple institutions and their impact on business organizations. Managers should be mindful of these isomorphic pressures and consider them in their strategic plans to ensure the proper fit of their business organizations. Managers should develop their implicit CSR into explicit CSR so that their social responsibility initiatives are more defined, reported, and identified in the international business community. This will allow them to gain legitimacy on an international scale and will be an integral part of their operations in international markets. This is especially important in a globalized contemporary business environment.

#### *6.5. Limitations and Future Studies*

The limitations include the conceptual lens used, elements of the research design, type of sampling used, interviewees chosen, and transferability of findings.

The first limitation is related to the conceptual lens used in this study. An institutional perspective was used to create a conceptual model and analyze the primary data. Many other perspectives could have been used, such as agency theory, resource dependency theory, theory of institutional logic, slack theory, or relational governance theory.

The second limitation is related to the type of sampling used. Purposeful sampling was used in the study, and cases were identified through a list of signatories of the UN Global Compact network in the context chosen. Another study could be conducted on the same subject using business organizations that are not found in the UN Global Compact Network, which would complement this research and may potentially result in an alternative point of view, adding to the understanding of the subject at hand.

The third limitation relates to the interviewees chosen from the business organization. They were all operational and strategic CSR leaders in their respective businesses. The same study can be conducted using interviewees from the same organizations that were not involved in CSR initiatives. This can be compared with the results of this study to analyze the variance in perception within the same organization.

**Author Contributions:** Conceptualization, S.K.; methodology, S.K.; software, S.K. and R.K.; validation, S.K., R.K. and R.A.; formal analysis, S.K., R.K. and R.A.; investigation, S.K.; resources, S.K., R.K. and R.A.; data curation, S.K., R.K. and R.A.; writing—original draft preparation, S.K.; writing review and editing, S.K., R.K. and R.A.; visualization, S.K., R.K. and R.A.; supervision, S.K., R.K. and R.A.; project administration, S.K., R.K. and R.A. 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:** Data available with authors.

**Conflicts of Interest:** The authors declare no conflict of interest.

## **Appendix A**

**Table A1.** Strategic responses to institutional processes (adapted from Oliver (1991, p. 152)).



**Table A2.** Institutional antecedents and predicted strategic responses (Oliver 1991, p. 160).

**Table A3.** Six stages in the analysis of the primary data (adapted from Jarzabkowski 2008).


#### **References**


MDPI St. Alban-Anlage 66 4052 Basel Switzerland www.mdpi.com

*Administrative Sciences* Editorial Office E-mail: admsci@mdpi.com www.mdpi.com/journal/admsci

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.

Academic Open Access Publishing

mdpi.com ISBN 978-3-0365-9117-9