1932
0
  1. Home
  2. A-Z Publications
  3. Annual Review of Organizational Psychology and Organizational Behavior
  4. Volume 2, 2015
  5. Article

Annual Review of Organizational Psychology and Organizational Behavior

Volume 2, 2015

Corporate Social Responsibility: Psychological, Person-Centric, and Progressing

Abstract

Micro-CSR, or the psychological study of how corporate social responsibility (CSR) affects individuals, is gaining significant attention within industrial/organizational psychology and organizational behavior (IOOB). Although this research has the potential to offer insight into how CSR impacts individuals representing various stakeholder groups (e.g., consumers, shareholders), to date the term micro-CSR has generally been limited to describing research on employee responses to CSR initiatives. We argue that the taxonomic conscription of micro-CSR to employees alone exacerbates current friction within the field pertaining to the effects, utility, and importance of CSR. This review synthesizes the accruing research on employee-focused micro-CSR and summarizes current theories while addressing some of the concerns regarding CSR, particularly as it applies to other stakeholder groups. It repositions the study of CSR toward its ostensible ultimate purpose, reducing human suffering, and in doing so draws together theories and evidence focused on why CSR matters to employees and why the study of another stakeholder group—CSR recipients—is essential toward a valid understanding of the true micro-CSR experience (of employees, among others).

Keyword(s): corporate citizenship, corporate social responsibility, environmental sustainability, humanitarian work psychology, organizational justice, person-centric work psychology
Loading

Article metrics loading...

/content/journals/10.1146/annurev-orgpsych-032414-111505
2015-04-10
2024-04-25
Loading full text...

Full text loading...

/deliver/fulltext/orgpsych/2/1/annurev-orgpsych-032414-111505.html?itemId=/content/journals/10.1146/annurev-orgpsych-032414-111505&mimeType=html&fmt=ahah

Literature Cited

  1. Agle BR, Mitchell RK, Sonnenfeld JA. 1999. Who matters to CEOs? An investigation of stakeholder attributes and salience, corporate performance, and CEO values. Acad. Manag. J. 42:507–25 [Google Scholar]
  2. Aguilera RV, Rupp DE, Williams CA, Ganapathi J. 2007. Putting the S back in corporate social responsibility: a multilevel theory of social change in organizations. Acad. Manag. Rev. 32:836–63 [Google Scholar]
  3. Aguinis H. 2011. Organizational responsibility: doing good and doing well. In APA Handbook of Industrial and Organizational Psychology, Vol. 3: Maintaining, Expanding, and Contracting the Organization, ed. S Zedeck, pp. 855–79. Washington, DC: Am. Psychol. Assoc.
  4. Aguinis H, Glavas A. 2012. What we know and don’t know about corporate social responsibility: a review and research agenda. J. Manag. 38:932–68 [Google Scholar]
  5. Aguinis H, Glavas A. 2013. Embedded versus peripheral corporate social responsibility: psychological foundations. Ind. Organ. Psychol. 6:314–32 [Google Scholar]
  6. Albinger HS, Freeman SJ. 2000. Corporate social performance and attractiveness as an employer to different job seeking populations. J. Bus. Ethics 28:243–53 [Google Scholar]
  7. Ashforth BE, Mael F. 1989. Social identity theory and the organization. Acad. Manag. Rev. 14:20–39 [Google Scholar]
  8. APA (Am. Psychol. Assoc.). 2002. Ethical Principles of Psychologists and Code of Conduct. Washington, DC: Am. Psychol. Assoc. http://www.apa.org/ethics/code/index.aspx
  9. Backhaus KB, Stone BA, Heiner K. 2002. Exploring the relationship between corporate social performance and employer attractiveness. Bus. Soc. 41:292–318 [Google Scholar]
  10. Bansal P, Roth K. 2000. Why companies go green: a model of ecological responsiveness. Acad. Manag. J. 43:717–36 [Google Scholar]
  11. Bartel CA. 2001. Social comparisons in boundary-spanning work: effects of community outreach on members’ organizational identity and identification. Adm. Sci. Q. 46:379–413 [Google Scholar]
  12. Behrend TS, Baker BA, Thompson LF. 2009. Effects of pro-environmental recruiting messages: the role of organizational reputation. J. Bus. Psychol. 24:341–50 [Google Scholar]
  13. Behrend TS, Thompson LF, Meade AW, Newton DA, Grayson MS. 2008. Measurement invariance in careers research using IRT to study gender differences in medical students’ specialization decisions. J. Career Dev. 35:60–83 [Google Scholar]
  14. Bennett JE, Tetrick LE. 2013. The “we” in wellness: workplace health promotion as a positive force for health in society. See Olson-Buchanan et al. 2013, pp. 205–36
  15. Bhattacharya C, Sen S, Korschun D. 2008. Using corporate social responsibility to win the war for talent. Sloan Manag. Rev 49:37–44 [Google Scholar]
  16. Bissio R. 2008. Paris declaration on aid effectiveness. Presented at Human Rights Council, Session of the Working Group on the Right to Development, High Task Force on the Implementation of the Right to Development, January 7–15, Geneva
  17. Blau PM. 1964. Exchange and Power in Social Life New York: Wiley
  18. Bradley-Geist JC, King EB. 2013. Building an inclusive work world: promoting diversity and positive inter-group relations through CSR. See Olson-Buchanan et al. 2013, pp. 176–204
  19. Brammer S, Millington A, Rayton B. 2007. The contribution of corporate social responsibility to organizational commitment. Int. J. Hum. Resour. Manag. 18:1701–19 [Google Scholar]
  20. Broom GM, Casey S, Ritchey J. 2000. Concept and theory of organization-public relationships. Public Relations as Relationship Management: A Relational Approach to the Study and Practice of Public Relations Ledingham JA, Bruning SD. 3–22 Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum [Google Scholar]
  21. British Psychological Society 2009. Code of Ethics and Conduct: Guidance Published by the Ethics Committee of the British Psychological Society Leicester, UK: Br. Psychol. Soc.
  22. Caligiuri P, Mencin A, Jiang K. 2013. Win–win–win: the influence of company-sponsored volunteerism programs on employees, NGOs, and business units. Pers. Psychol. 66:825–60 [Google Scholar]
  23. Carmeli A, Gilat G, Waldman DA. 2007. The role of perceived organizational performance in organizational identification, adjustment and job performance. J. Manag. Stud. 44:972–92 [Google Scholar]
  24. Carroll AB. 1979. A three-dimensional conceptual model of corporate performance. Acad. Manag. Rev. 4:497–505 [Google Scholar]
  25. Carroll AB. 1991. The pyramid of corporate social responsibility: toward the moral management of organizational stakeholders. Bus. Horiz. 34:39–48 [Google Scholar]
  26. Carroll AB, Buchholtz AK. 2014. Business and Society: Ethics, Sustainability, and Stakeholder Management Stamford, CT: Cengage Learning
  27. CEC (Commission of the European Communities). 2001. Green paper. Promoting a European framework for Corporate Social Responsibility. Presented by the Commission. July 18, Brussels. http://www.csr-in-commerce.eu/data/files/resources/717/com_2001_0366_en.pdf
  28. Crilly D, Schneider SC, Zollo M. 2008. Psychological antecedents to socially responsible behavior. Eur. Manag. Rev. 5:175–90 [Google Scholar]
  29. Cropanzano R, Byrne ZS, Bobocel DR, Rupp DE. 2001a. Moral virtues, fairness heuristics, social entities, and other denizens of organizational justice. J. Vocat. Behav. 58:164–209 [Google Scholar]
  30. Cropanzano R, Mitchell MS. 2005. Social exchange theory: an interdisciplinary review. J. Manag. 31:874–900 [Google Scholar]
  31. Cropanzano R, Rupp DE, Mohler CJ, Schminke M. 2001b. Three roads to organizational justice. Res. Pers. Hum. Resour. Manag. 20:1–113 [Google Scholar]
  32. Dahlsrud A. 2008. How corporate social responsibility is defined: an analysis of 37 definitions. Corp. Soc. Responsib. Environ. Manag. 15:1–13 [Google Scholar]
  33. Davis JH. 1973. Group decision and social interaction: a theory of social decision schemes. Psychol. Rev. 80:97–125 [Google Scholar]
  34. Davis JH, Schoorman FD, Donaldson L. 1997. Toward a stewardship theory of management. Acad. Manag. Rev. 22:20–47 [Google Scholar]
  35. De Gilder D, Schuyt TN, Breedijk M. 2005. Effects of an employee volunteering program on the work force: the ABN-AMRO case. J. Bus. Ethics 61:143–52 [Google Scholar]
  36. De Roeck K, Delobbe N. 2012. Do environmental CSR initiatives serve organizations’ legitimacy in the oil industry? Exploring employees’ reactions through organizational identification theory. J. Bus. Ethics 110:397–412 [Google Scholar]
  37. De Roeck K, Marique G, Stinglhamber F, Swaen V. 2014. Understanding employees’ responses to corporate social responsibility: mediating roles of overall justice and organisational identification. Int. J. Hum. Resour. Manag. 25:91–112 [Google Scholar]
  38. Dhanesh GS. 2014. CSR as organization–employee relationship management strategy: a case study of socially responsible information technology companies in India. Manag. Commun. Q. 28:130–49 [Google Scholar]
  39. Dutton JE, Dukerich JM, Harquail CV. 1994. Organizational images and member identification. Adm. Sci. Q. 39:239–63 [Google Scholar]
  40. Elkington J. 1999. Triple bottom-line reporting: looking for balance. Aust. CPA 69:18–21 [Google Scholar]
  41. Evans WR, Davis WD. 2011. An examination of perceived corporate citizenship, job applicant attraction, and CSR work role definition. Bus. Soc. 50:456–80 [Google Scholar]
  42. Farooq O, Payaud M, Merunka D, Valette-Florence P. 2013. The impact of corporate social responsibility on organizational commitment: exploring multiple mediation. J. Bus. Ethics 125:563–80 [Google Scholar]
  43. Folger R, Cropanzano R, Goldman B. 2005. What is the relationship between justice and morality?. Handbook of Organizational Justice Greenberg JE, Colquitt JA. 215–45 Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum [Google Scholar]
  44. Freeman E, Moutchnik A. 2013. Stakeholder management and CSR: questions and answers. Umw. Wirtsch. Forum 21:5–9 [Google Scholar]
  45. Friedman M. 1970. The social responsibility of business is to increase its profits. The New York Times Magazine, Sep. 13
  46. Glavas A, Piderit SK. 2009. How does doing good matter? Effects of corporate citizenship on employees. J. Corp. Citizsh. 36:51–70 [Google Scholar]
  47. Gloss AE, Thompson LF. 2013. IO psychology without borders: the emergence of humanitarian work psychology. See Olson-Buchanan et al. 2013, pp. 353–93
  48. Greening DW, Turban DB. 2000. Corporate social performance as a competitive advantage in attracting a quality workforce. Bus. Soc. 39:254–80 [Google Scholar]
  49. Gully SM, Phillips JM, Castellano WG, Han K, Kim A. 2013. A mediated moderation model of recruiting socially and environmentally responsible job applicants. Pers. Psychol. 66:935–73 [Google Scholar]
  50. Hansen SD, Dunford BB, Boss AD, Boss RW, Angermeier I. 2011. Corporate social responsibility and the benefits of employee trust: a cross-disciplinary perspective. J. Bus. Ethics 102:29–45 [Google Scholar]
  51. Hofman PS, Newman A. 2014. The impact of perceived corporate social responsibility on organizational commitment and the moderating role of collectivism and masculinity: evidence from China. Int. J. Hum. Resour. Manag. 25:631–52 [Google Scholar]
  52. Hon LC, Grunig JE. 1999. Guidelines for Measuring Relationships in Public Relations Gainesville, FL: Inst. Public Relat.
  53. International Union of Psychological Science. 2008. Universal declaration of ethical principles for psychologists. http://www.iupsys.net/about/governance/universal-declaration-of-ethical-principles-for-psychologists.html
  54. Jones D, Willness C, Madey S. 2013. Why are job seekers attracted by corporate social performance? Experimental and field tests of three signal-based mechanisms. Acad. Manag. J. doi: 10.5465/amj.2011.0848 [Google Scholar]
  55. Jones DA. 2010. Does serving the community also serve the company? Using organizational identification and social exchange theories to understand employee responses to a volunteerism programme. J. Occup. Organ. Psychol. 83:857–78 [Google Scholar]
  56. Jones DA, Rupp D. 2014. Social responsibility IN and OF organizations: the psychology of corporate social responsibility among organizational members. Handbook of Industrial, Work, and Organizational Psychology Anderson N, Ones DS, Sinangil HK, Viswesvaran C. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage In press [Google Scholar]
  57. Jones P, Hillier D, Comfort D. 2014. Assurance of the leading UK food retailers’ corporate social responsibility/sustainability reports. Corp. Gov. 14:130–38 [Google Scholar]
  58. Jones TM. 1980. Corporate social responsibility revisited, redefined. Calif. Manag. Rev. 22:59–67 [Google Scholar]
  59. Kahn WA. 1990. Psychological conditions of personal engagement and disengagement at work. Acad. Manag. J. 33:692–724 [Google Scholar]
  60. Kakabadse NK, Rozuel C, Lee-Davis L. 2005. Corporate social responsibility and stakeholder approach: a conceptual review. Int. J. Bus. Gov. Ethics 1:277–302 [Google Scholar]
  61. Kim H-R, Lee M, Lee H-T, Kim N-M. 2010. Corporate social responsibility and employee–company identification. J. Bus. Ethics 95:557–69 [Google Scholar]
  62. Laszlo C, Zhexembayeva N. 2011. Embedded Sustainability: The Next Big Competitive Advantage Stanford, CA: Stanford Univ. Press
  63. Lefkowitz J. 2012. From humanitarian to humanistic work psychology: the morality of business. Humanitarian Work Psychology Carr SC, MacLachlan M, Furnham A. 103–28 Hampshire, UK: Palgrave Macmillan [Google Scholar]
  64. Lefkowitz J. 2013. Values and ethics of a changing I-O psychology: a call to (further) action. See Olson-Buchanan et al. 2013, pp. 13–42
  65. Lin C-P, Lyau N-M, Tsai Y-H, Chen W-Y, Chiu C-K. 2010. Modeling corporate citizenship and its relationship with organizational citizenship behaviors. J. Bus. Ethics 95:357–72 [Google Scholar]
  66. Lipsey MW, Cordray DS. 2000. Evaluation methods for social intervention. Annu. Rev. Psychol. 51:345–75 [Google Scholar]
  67. Lord RG, Maher KJ. 1991. Cognitive theory in industrial and organizational psychology. Handbook of Industrial Organizational Psychology Dunnette M, Hough L. 21–62 Palo Alto, CA: Consult. Psychol. Press [Google Scholar]
  68. Maignan I, Ferrell O. 2004. Corporate social responsibility and marketing: an integrative framework. J. Acad. Mark. Sci. 32:3–19 [Google Scholar]
  69. Mallory DB, Rupp DE. 2014. “Good” leadership: using corporate social responsibility to enhance leader-member exchange. The Oxford Handbook of Leader-Member Exchange Bauer IT, Erdogan B. Oxford, UK: Oxford Univ. Press In press [Google Scholar]
  70. Margolis JD, Elfenbein HA, Walsh JP. 2007. Does it pay to be good? A meta-analysis and redirection of research on the relationship between corporate social and financial performance. Presented at Meet. Acad. Manag., 67th, Philadelphia
  71. Margolis JD, Walsh JP. 2003. Misery loves companies: rethinking social initiatives by business. Adm. Sci. Q. 48:268–305 [Google Scholar]
  72. Matten D, Moon J. 2008. “Implicit” and “explicit” CSR: a conceptual framework for a comparative understanding of corporate social responsibility. Acad. Manag. Rev. 33:404–24 [Google Scholar]
  73. McShane L, Cunningham P. 2012. To thine own self be true? Employees’ judgments of the authenticity of their organization’s corporate social responsibility program. J. Bus. Ethics 108:81–100 [Google Scholar]
  74. McWilliams A, Siegel D. 2001. Corporate social responsibility: a theory of the firm perspective. Acad. Manag. Rev. 26:117–27 [Google Scholar]
  75. Messick S. 1995. Validity of psychological assessment: validation of inferences from persons’ responses and performances as scientific inquiry into score meaning. Am. Psychol. 50:741–49 [Google Scholar]
  76. Mirvis P. 2012. Employee engagement and CSR: transactional, relational, and developmental approaches. Calif. Manag. Rev. 54:93–117 [Google Scholar]
  77. Molm LD, Takahashi N, Peterson G. 2000. Risk and trust in social exchange: an experimental test of a classical proposition. Am. J. Sociol. 105:1396–427 [Google Scholar]
  78. Montgomery DB, Ramus CA. 2003. Corporate social responsibility reputation effects on MBA job choice. Res. Pap. No. 1805. Stanford Graduate School of Business, Stanford, CA
  79. Mudrack PE, Mason ES, Stepeanski KM. 1999. Equity sensitivity and business ethics. J. Occup. Organ. Psychol. 72:539–60 [Google Scholar]
  80. Muller A, Kolk A. 2010. Extrinsic and intrinsic drivers of corporate social performance: evidence from foreign and domestic firms in Mexico. J. Manag. Stud. 47:1–26 [Google Scholar]
  81. Olson-Buchanan JB, Bryan LLK, Thompson LF. 2013. Using Industrial Organizational Psychology for the Greater Good: Helping Those Who Help Others New York: Routledge
  82. Ones DS, Dilchert S. 2012. Environmental sustainability at work: a call to action. Ind. Organ. Psychol. 5:444–66 [Google Scholar]
  83. Orlitzky M, Schmidt FL, Rynes SL. 2003. Corporate social and financial performance: a meta-analysis. Organ. Stud. 24:403–41 [Google Scholar]
  84. Ormiston ME, Wong EM. 2013. License to ill: the effects of corporate social responsibility and CEO moral identity on corporate social irresponsibility. Pers. Psychol. 66:861–93 [Google Scholar]
  85. Peloza J. 2009. The challenge of measuring financial impacts from investments in corporate social performance. J. Manag. 35:1518–41 [Google Scholar]
  86. Porter ME, Kramer MR. 2002. The competitive advantage of corporate philanthropy. Harv. Bus. Rev. 80:56–68 [Google Scholar]
  87. Reichman W, Berry MO. 2012. The evolution of industrial and organizational psychology. Humanitarian Work Psychology Carr SC, MacLachlan M, Furnham A. 34–51 Hampshire, UK: Palgrave Macmillan [Google Scholar]
  88. Rodrigo P, Arenas D. 2008. Do employees care about CSR programs? A typology of employees according to their attitudes. J. Bus. Ethics 83:265–83 [Google Scholar]
  89. Rogers B. 2013. Too many feelings and not enough facts in CSR strategy. Forbes, Oct. 17. http://www.forbes.com/sites/brucerogers/2013/10/07/too-many-feelings-and-not-enough-facts-in-csr-strategy/
  90. Rupp DE. 2011. An employee-centered model of organizational justice and social responsibility. Organ. Psychol. Rev. 1:72–94 [Google Scholar]
  91. Rupp DE, Ganapathi J, Aguilera RV, Williams CA. 2006. Employee reactions to corporate social responsibility: an organizational justice framework. J. Organ. Behav. 27:537–43 [Google Scholar]
  92. Rupp DE, Shao R, Skarlicki D, Kim TY, Nadisic T. 2013a. Corporate social responsibility and employee engagement: the moderating role of self-determination and individualism. Presented at Annu. Meet. Acad. Manag., 73rd, Lake Buena Vista, FL
  93. Rupp DE, Shao R, Thornton MA, Skarlicki DP. 2013b. Applicants’ and employees’ reactions to corporate social responsibility: the moderating effects of first-party justice perceptions and moral identity. Pers. Psychol. 66:895–933 [Google Scholar]
  94. Rupp DE, Skarlicki D, Shao R. 2014. The psychology of corporate social responsibility and humanitarian work: a person centric perspective. Ind. Organ. Psychol 7:361–68 [Google Scholar]
  95. Rupp DE, Williams CA, Aguilera RV. 2011. Increasing corporate social responsibility through stakeholder value internalization (and the catalyzing effect of new governance): an application of organizational justice, self-determination, and social influence theories. Manag. Ethics Manag. Psychol. Moral. 2011:71–90 [Google Scholar]
  96. Rynes SL. 1991. Recruitment, job choice, and post-hire consequences: a call for new research directions. Handbook of Industrial and Organizational Psychology Dunnette MD, Hough LM. 399–444 Palo Alto, CA: Consult. Psychol. Press [Google Scholar]
  97. Scott JC, Aguinis H, McWha I, Rupp DE, Thompson LF, Cruse S. 2013. News from the SIOP-United Nations Team: SIOP has joined the UN Global Compact and so can you. Ind. Organ. Psychol. 50:65–68 [Google Scholar]
  98. Sen S, Bhattacharya CB, Korschun D. 2006. The role of corporate social responsibility in strengthening multiple stakeholder relationships: a field experiment. J. Acad. Mark. Sci. 34:158–66 [Google Scholar]
  99. Stites JP, Michael JH. 2011. Organizational commitment in manufacturing employees: relationships with corporate social performance. Bus. Soc. 50:50–70 [Google Scholar]
  100. Sully de Luque MF, Washburn NT, Waldman DA, House RJ. 2008. Unrequited profit: how stakeholder and economic values relate to subordinates’ perceptions of leadership and firm performance. Adm. Sci. Q. 53:626–54 [Google Scholar]
  101. Tsai Y-H, Joe S-W, Lin C-P, Wang R-T. 2014. Modeling job pursuit intention: moderating mechanisms of socio-environmental consciousness. J. Bus. Ethics 125:287–98 [Google Scholar]
  102. Turban DB, Greening DW. 1997. Corporate social performance and organizational attractiveness to prospective employees. Acad. Manag. J. 40:658–72 [Google Scholar]
  103. Turker D. 2009. How corporate social responsibility influences organizational commitment. J. Bus. Ethics 89:189–204 [Google Scholar]
  104. Vogel DJ. 2005. Is there a market for virtue? The business case for corporate social responsibility. Calif. Manag. Rev. 47:19–45 [Google Scholar]
  105. Waddock S. 2004. Parallel universes: companies, academics, and the progress of corporate citizenship. Bus. Soc. Rev. 109:5–42 [Google Scholar]
  106. Waddock SA, Graves SB. 1997. The corporate social performance. Strateg. Manag. J. 8:303–19 [Google Scholar]
  107. Walker M, Kent A. 2013. The roles of credibility and social consciousness in the corporate philanthropy-consumer behavior relationship. J. Bus. Ethics 116:341–53 [Google Scholar]
  108. Weiss HM, Rupp DE. 2011. Experiencing work: an essay on a person-centric work psychology. Ind. Organ. Psychol. 4:83–97 [Google Scholar]
  109. Wood DJ. 1991. Corporate social performance revisited. Acad. Manag. Rev. 16:691–718 [Google Scholar]
/content/journals/10.1146/annurev-orgpsych-032414-111505
Loading
Corporate Social Responsibility: Psychological, Person-Centric, and Progressing
Annual Review of Organizational Psychology and Organizational Behavior 2, 211 (2015); https://doi.org/10.1146/annurev-orgpsych-032414-111505
/content/journals/10.1146/annurev-orgpsych-032414-111505
/content/journals/10.1146/annurev-orgpsych-032414-111505
Loading

Data & Media loading...

  • Article Type: Review Article

Most Cited Most Cited RSS feed

This is a required field
Please enter a valid email address
Approval was a Success
Invalid data
An Error Occurred
Approval was partially successful, following selected items could not be processed due to error