Does Corporate Social Responsibility Moderate the Nexus of Organizational Culture and Job Satisfaction?
Round 1
Reviewer 1 Report
Recommendations for the authors of the article:
1. Correct the section of the article: "abstract". It lacks, among other things, a description of the methodological issues of the article, including research limitations. Add a description of the structure of the issues described in the article. Similar remarks should be taken into account in the introduction to the article.
2. The section: "Literature review" should be improved. Particular attention should be paid to the description of changing views on the role of the human factor in company management. Please take into account the concept of R. Hall (1992,1993), A. Brooking (1996,1997), B. Lowendahl (1997) and M. Litsch, A. Markom, S. Schunder (2006). The views of researchers can be particularly linked to the stakeholder concept used in CSR.
3. In the article, the conclusions of the studies should be given in sub-paragraphs.
Author Response
The author(s) responses were attached in the attached file.
Author Response File: 
Author Response.docx
Reviewer 2 Report
In the assessment of the paper submitted for the review, I specifically focused on the discussed issues, applied methodology, the substantive content of the paper and its structure.
The considerations conducted in the paper are focused on such categories as: corporate social responsibility, organizational culture, job satisfaction.
The subject area discussed in the paper is important and topical.
The reviewed paper is of scientific nature. The research procedure has complex character.
The structure of the paper is clear. I would recommend:
- focus considerations conducted in the paper more on the category of sustainability.
Author Response
The author(s) responses were attached in the file.
Author Response File: Author Response.docx
Reviewer 3 Report
The Authors raise an interesting topic, but the statement that "there has not been much research done on how it affects employee job satisfaction and corporate culture" - is not entirely true. So far, many thousands of articles have been published on the impact of organizational culture on job satisfaction and vice versa, and there are also many articles examining the relationship between organizational culture, job satisfaction and CSR. Therefore, researchers from all over the world have been taking up this topic for years.
What's more, point 2.2 Organizational culture - is not about organizational culture but about motivation and motivational theories. Organizational culture is a set of values, norms, rules, basic assumptions and artifacts, while the authors describe it in terms of the motivational climate.
The hypotheses need correction. A hypothesis is an affirmative sentence, most often in the present tense and is formulated in relation to hitherto unexplained phenomena, while the relationships between the variables studied have already been investigated by other researchers. Moreover, the formulated hypotheses are trivial.
The Authors, referring to various sources, do not use the name of the author/authors of the publication, they only indicate the number in the list of references- it is very bad to read the article in this form, because it requires reaching for information in the list of references. In addition, it does not look good for aesthetic reasons. For example: According to [14], most CSR; according to [15]; [18] explained…;A scientific study by [22]; According to [33]; [34] examined; [36] pointed out that CSR; [55] define ….And so on.
The article needs improvement in editorial terms. For example, some lines of text have different fonts, like: 126 to 213, 241 to 266, 331 to 351; References also need to be improved.
I suggest that the indicated issues should be carefully considered and the corrections included in the text.
Author Response
The author(s) responses were attached in the file.
Author Response File: Author Response.docx
Reviewer 4 Report
I have a question regarding the survey's methodology. As stated in the article (pp. 337-338), the respondents' email addresses were provided by the HR departments of their respective companies, and some of the questionnaires were completed under the supervision of operational managers. This raises concerns about the anonymity of the respondents and the accuracy of their answers. It would be useful if the article provided further clarification on the steps taken to ensure the anonymity of the respondents and how the potential influence of their managers was mitigated to ensure the sincerity of their responses.
It would be intriguing to identify the industries that the tested employees of SMEs come from. It is somewhat peculiar that a sizeable portion of the respondents, aged between 18-25, reported having completed their studies. Typically, this age group pursues their bachelor's or master's degrees and has not yet completed them. Hence, the completion of undergraduate studies by the 18-22-year-old group can only be attributed to exceptional circumstances. It is worth noting that this specific cohort constitutes the largest group of respondents (34.8%) in the study.
Author Response
The author(s) responses were attached in the file.
Author Response File: Author Response.docx
Round 2
Reviewer 1 Report
Dear Authors, I think in this version the article is scientifically, methodologically and empirically on a good level. Congratulations. I wish you scientific and professional success.
Reviewer 3 Report
Thank you very much for considering my suggestions. I accept the article in the corrected form. Congratulations
