Page 1 of 26
Archives of Business Research – Vol. 12, No. 3
Publication Date: March 25, 2024
DOI:10.14738/abr.123.16721.
Riaz, S. & Saleem, K. (2024). Dynamics and Effects of Corporate Social Responsibility Authenticity. Archives of Business Research,
12(3). 119-144.
Services for Science and Education – United Kingdom
Dynamics and Effects of Corporate Social Responsibility
Authenticity
Saba Riaz
Harbin Institute of Technology, China
Kashif Saleem
Lahore Leads University, Pakistan
ABSTRACT
Authentic corporate social responsibility (CSR), defined as the belief that a
company's CSR initiatives are an honest reflection of its "real self," has received
little attention in the literature on micro-CSR and management. Establishing views
of genuine CSR among workers is undoubtedly crucial for firms to fully reap the
advantages of CSR, especially in a climate when charges of corporate greenwashing
abound and cynicism about social responsibility initiatives is rampant. Using
attribution theory as a framework, we investigate two possible reasons for
engaging in CSR—strategic-driven and values-driven—to see how workers view the
legitimacy of such efforts. Along these lines,weanalyze how genuine CSR impacts
workers' faith in the company and their perceptions of organizational support.
Finally, we use a social exchange theory framework to look at how CSR authenticity
mediates the connection between how people perceive the organization's motives
and two major outcomes, how people perceive the organization's support and trust,
and how these outcomes impact how employees feel about the organization and
how they act as citizens. According to my findings, workers' views of CSR
authenticity are influenced by values-driven reasons. Moreover, these authenticity
perceptions play a mediating role in the link between values-driven motives and
perceived corporate support and trust. Employees' views of CSR authenticity and
sentiments of perceived corporate support are two channels by which values- driven motivations favorably impact organizational citizenship activities,
according to further study.
INTRODUCTION
Actions that appear to further some social good beyond the interests of the firm and that which
is required by law" (McWilliams & Siegel, 2001, p. 117), is the definition of corporate social
responsibility (CSR), and it has recently attracted a lot of attention from academics and lawyers.
It is no longer a matter of whether or if corporations should participate in CSR; rather, the
authors of a recent article by Rangan, Chase, and Karim (2012) pointed out that CSR is a
phenomenon that will remain. Businesses often tout their CSR initiatives in an effort to educate
stakeholders about their policies and procedures and garner positive feedback from them.
Despite this, many remain skeptical of organizations' motives when it comes to CSR (Basu &
Palazzo, 2008; Mazutis & Slawinski, 2013; Porter & Kramer, 2011). As a result of failing to live
up to stakeholder expectations, CSR initiatives run the risk of being seen as empty gestures
designed to placate stakeholders (Laufer, 2003). Because of this widely held belief,
Page 2 of 26
120
Archives of Business Research (ABR) Vol. 12, Issue 3, March-2024
Services for Science and Education – United Kingdom
stakeholders may question the sincerity of a company's CSR initiatives (McShane &
Cunningham, 2012).
One branch of CSR studies, known as micro-CSR, looks at the effects of CSR on people from a
psychological perspective (Rupp & Mallory, 2015). Employee reactions and perspectives on
CSR programs have been the primary focus of recent micro-CSR studies (Rupp & Mallory,
2015). In the context of corporate social responsibility (CSR), employees are an essential party
to comprehend. Although prior studies have demonstrated that CSR is beneficial for
organizations in terms of their bottom line (e.g., Orlitzky, Schmidt, & Rynes, 2003), it would be
both unrealistic and a failure to recognize the humanitarian aspect of CSR to disregard the
mechanisms through which these financial benefits are attained (Vogel, 2005). Previous studies
have linked CSR attitudes to various good outcomes at the individual level; however, the exact
processes behind these associations are still under investigation. Researching and quantifying
the ways in which workers' views of the authenticity of CSR influence employee-level outcomes
may teach us a lot about the effects of CSR. Thus, we investigate how two factors—perceived
organizational support and organizational trust—mediate the link between CSR authenticity
and emotional commitment and organizational citizenship behavior, respectively. Both factors
are outcomes of genuine CSR.
The term "perceived organizational support" (POS) refers to workers' general impressions of
how much their employer appreciates their work and worries about them as individuals
(Eisenberger, Huntington, Hutchinson, & Sowa, 1986). When it comes to how workers see their
own POS, CSR authenticity may have a disproportionately large impact. In order for workers to
believe that their organization's CSR is genuine, it must be clear that the company is fulfilling
its commitments to stakeholders and showing them that they are respected. Since workers have
a vested interest in the company's success, they should also feel appreciated. Since CSR
authenticity shows workers that the company remains committed to its CSR objective and
supports valued stakeholders both internally and outside, it stands to reason that CSR
authenticity will contribute to POS.
Workers' perceptions of genuine CSR are likely to have a significant impact on their affective
commitment, which is described as "emotional attachment to, identification with, and
involvement in the organization" (Allen & Meyer, 1990, p. 1). When workers believe the
company is genuine, they will have greater faith in developing an emotional connection and
taking pleasure in their work since they will regard the company as "real" and honest.
Employees may be hesitant to develop an attachment if they feel the business is insincere or
pretends to be something it isn't. Using a social exchange argument, we argue that when
workers have a good impression of the authenticity of CSR, it will make them feel more invested
in the company as a whole, which will increase their overall emotional commitment.16
Organizational trust is likely to be stronger among employees if they perceive the company to
be actively participating in genuine CSR. The CSR research has not investigated the link between
genuine CSR and confidence in the company, although there is evidence of a similar connection
in the literature on true leadership. It is believed that leaders who are able to convey their
genuine self to their people are more captivating (Ilies, Morgeson, Nahrgang, 2005). Leaders
who are able to project a "authentic self" are more likely to be seen as trustworthy by their
followers because of the increased transparency they exhibit. Following the same line of
Page 3 of 26
121
Riaz, S. & Saleem, K. (2024). Dynamics and Effects of Corporate Social Responsibility Authenticity. Archives of Business Research, 12(3). 119-144.
URL: http://doi.org/10.14738/abr.123.16721
reasoning, we anticipate that the organization's credibility will increase when its commitment
to CSR is seen as genuine. Podsakoff, MacKenzie, Paine, & Bachrach (2000) define
organizational citizenship behavior as employees' voluntary actions that benefit the company
as a whole. The OCB is optional, thus workers usually do it as a way to "give back" to their
company for all the good it has done for them or as a social exchange in their good connection
with the company (Organ, 1988). Since genuine CSR is likely to boost confidence in the company
and foster a good rapport between workers and management, it stands to reason that workers
would want to show their appreciation by participating in organizational citizenship behavior
(OCB).
Figure 1: Dynamics and effects of CSR authenticity
LITERATURE REVIEW
All things considered, CSR is a complex, multi-level, and sometimes disjointed body of literature
that incorporates studies from a variety of disciplines (Rupp & Mallory, 2015). Scholars in the
field of corporate social responsibility have struggled (Aguinis & Glavas, 2012, 2013; Carroll,
1991; Rupp & Mallory, 2015) to elucidate the CSR discussion more precisely. The paradigm
proposed by Carroll (1979) is one of the first and most often used explanations of CSR. Carrol
and Buchholtz (2014) offered a revised definition of CSR, stating that it "encompasses the
economic, legal, ethical, and discretionary (philanthropic) expectations that society has of
organizations at a given time" (p. 32). Although this is the most often referenced academic
definition of corporate social responsibility (CSR), we use a different, more popular one from
McWilliams and Siegel (2001): "actions that appear to further some social good, beyond the
interests of the firm and that which is required by law" (p. 118). Not limiting my research to
CSR initiatives targeting a specific group of stakeholders (like society), my definition places
more emphasis on the discretionary and ethical components of Carrol's (1979) paradigm.
Furthermore, workers are likely to associate CSR with discretionary and ethical activities
rather than economic and legal ones, as they may see the former as a "given" in corporate
settings.