Next Article in Journal
ESG Strategy and Financial Aspects Using the Example of an Oil and Gas Midstream Company: The UNIMOT Group
Next Article in Special Issue
Exploring How and When Environmental Corporate Social Responsibility Impacts Employees’ Green Innovative Work Behavior: The Mediating Role of Creative Self-Efficacy and Environmental Commitment
Previous Article in Journal
Effect of Regulated Deficit Irrigation (RDI) on the Growth and Development of Pear Fruit (Pyrus communis L.), var. Triunfo de Viena
Previous Article in Special Issue
Employee Strengths Mindset and Voice Behavior: The Roles of General Self-Efficacy and Leader–Member Exchange
 
 
Search for Articles:
Title / Keyword
Author / Affiliation / Email
Journal
Article Type
 
 
Advanced Search
 
Section
Special Issue
Volume
Issue
Number
Page
 
Journals
Sustainability
Volume 15
Issue 18
10.3390/su151813394
sustainability-logo
Submit to this Journal Review for this Journal Propose a Special Issue
► Article Menu

Article Menu

share Share announcement Help format_quote Cite question_answer Discuss in SciProfiles thumb_up
...
Endorse textsms
...
Comment
first_page
settings
Order Article Reprints
Font Type:
Arial Georgia Verdana
Font Size:
Aa Aa Aa
Line Spacing:
Column Width:
Background:
Article

Employees’ Perceptions of Corporate Social Responsibility and Their Extra-Role Behaviors: A Psychological Mechanism

by
Sung-Hoon Ko
1,
Yongjun Choi
2,
Jongsung Kim
3 and
Hyun Chul Kang
4,*
1
Graduate School of Education, Kyonggi University, Suwon 16227, Republic of Korea
2
College of Business Administration, Hongik University, Seoul 04066, Republic of Korea
3
College of General Education for Truth, Sincerity, and Love, Kyonggi University, Suwon 16227, Republic of Korea
4
College of Creative Engineering, Kyonggi University, Suwon 16227, Republic of Korea
*
Author to whom correspondence should be addressed.
Sustainability 2023, 15(18), 13394; https://doi.org/10.3390/su151813394
Submission received: 3 August 2023 / Revised: 3 September 2023 / Accepted: 5 September 2023 / Published: 7 September 2023
(This article belongs to the Special Issue Extra-Role Behaviors for Sustainable Organization Management)
Versions Notes

Abstract

:
This study examines the mechanisms through which employees’ perceptions of corporate social responsibility (CSR) facilitate their performances of extra-role behaviors (i.e., organizational citizenship behaviors (OCBs) and creative behaviors). Because we intended to explore employees’ extra-role behaviors in workplaces, we used the survey method and collected the data from 505 employees working in IT companies in South Korea. To test our hypotheses, we conducted a path analysis and a bootstrapping method using SPSS 27.0 and the PROCESS macro. Our results show that CSR perceptions are positively related to both OCBs and creative behaviors. In addition, compassion and positive psychological capital mediate positive relationships. By demonstrating the mechanism through which employees’ CSR perceptions lead to their two forms of extra-role behaviors at work via compassion and positive psychological capital, our results provide a more comprehensive view of their effects at work. Furthermore, in addition to the instrumental benefits of CSR activities, such as their positive effects on corporate performance, our results suggest that engaging in CSR activities is vital for organizations seeking corporate sustainability.

1. Introduction

Corporate social responsibility (CSR) has become vital for organizations seeking sustainable organizational management [1,2], as the extent to which organizations genuinely take responsibility for societal good is critical for organizational competitiveness [2]. As organizations actively partake in CSR initiatives, a parallel emerges, in which employees proactively engage in extra-role behaviors, such as organizational citizenship behaviors (OCBs) and creative behaviors, to contribute to their organization’s competitiveness. These proactive behaviors, exhibited by organizations and employees, are not distinct or isolated; instead, they are closely interconnected. The interwoven nature of this relationship between CSR activities and extra-role behaviors underscores their intricate interdependence.
This interplay finds support in previous studies that have demonstrated that employees’ perceptions of CSR activities can energize their extra-role behaviors [3,4,5,6,7], which are critical for ensuring corporate sustainability [8,9,10]. Hence, to achieve successful and sustainable organizational management, it is important for organizations to delve into the underlying mechanisms through which CSR perceptions facilitate employees’ extra-role behaviors [11].
Regarding the effects of CSR initiatives, past studies showed that such initiatives not only signal positive corporate images [12], but also help employees to feel that they are genuinely valued and respected [13] and to identify the meaningfulness of their work [14]. Accordingly, at the macro level, meta-analyses results showed the positive effects of CSR activities on the financial and non-financial performances of businesses [15,16,17,18]. At the micro-level, the results of recent meta-analyses also demonstrated that the extent to which employees perceive their organization’s CSR activities increases their positive work attitudes and behaviors, such as their work engagement, their job satisfaction, and their job performance [19,20,21].
More specifically, regarding the effect of CSR on employees’ extra-role behaviors, past studies provide supporting evidence that CSR perceptions can energize employees’ extra-role behaviors. First, CSR perception increases employees’ OCBs because employees who have positive perceptions of their organization’s CSR activities are more likely to behave like good citizens when they feel proud to be part of the organization [9] and experience more meaningfulness in their work [22]. Second, CSR perceptions help employees engage in creative behaviors by enhancing both their intrinsic motivation [7] and their organizational identification [23]. However, although a few studies have explored the paths through which CSR perceptions affect employees’ extra-role behaviors (e.g., [7,9,22,23]), our understanding of the psychological mechanisms through which CSR perceptions energize employees’ extra-role behaviors is still at a nascent stage [24].
In this study, we seek to extend the extant literature on CSR by exploring the unique psychological pathways through which CSR perceptions energize employees’ extra-role behaviors. First, we examine the relationships between employees’ CSR perceptions and their two pivotal forms of extra-role behaviors: OCBs and creative behaviors. Past studies on these relationships have been somewhat fragmented, predominantly focusing on either OCBs or creativity in isolation. Hence, by considering both OCBs and creative behaviors simultaneously, we seek to provide a more comprehensive picture of how CSR perceptions help employees go the extra mile in their workplaces. Specifically, to capture the full gamut of employees’ extra-role behaviors, we considered creative behaviors that are intended to benefit the organization as well as OCBs that are directed toward individuals (OCBIs), which benefit other individuals at work.
Second, our inquiry delves into the mediating role of experienced compassion in explicating the links between employees’ CSR perceptions and their extra-role behaviors. We explored how CSR activities could help employees experience compassion at work, which, in turn, could replenish the psychological resources that are vital for their performance of extra-role behaviors. In particular, extending the study of Hur et al. [7]—which examined the mediating roles of compassion and intrinsic motivation in the relationship between CSR perceptions and creativity—we take a step further by exploring the mediating roles of psychological capital, which is critical for energizing employees’ extra-role behaviors [25,26,27]. Therefore, our study endeavors to provide an enhanced comprehension of the psychological mechanisms through which CSR perceptions stimulate employees toward engaging in extra-role behaviors.
In practice, our study provides organizations with valuable insights into how to promote employees’ extra-role behaviors. Specifically, by proactively engaging in CSR activities, organizations could facilitate positive employee experiences (e.g., experiences of compassion), which, in turn, help them develop their psychological capital and engage in extra-role behaviors that are vital for corporate sustainability.
The next section delves into pertinent prior research and theories, aiming to elucidate our research inquiries. Subsequently, we present our formulated hypotheses, followed by an in-depth exposition of the methods employed and the results. Finally, this paper encapsulates the theoretical and practical implications derived from our findings.

2. Theory and Hypothesis Development

Compassion refers to “an interpersonal process involving the noticing, feeling, sense-making, and acting that alleviates the suffering of another person” [28] (p. 277). Employees who perceive their organization’s CSR activities positively are likely to feel proud of maintaining their organizational membership [29]. Organizations secure positive reputations as a result of caring for social good; therefore, according to the social identity theory [30], employees form positive views of such organizations, which, in turn, help them identify with their employers [31]. Since CSR activities include an organization’s actions in taking care of its employees [32], employees are likely to experience more compassion at work. Hence, employees who perceive their organizations as social entities that provide compassionate acts [33] by means of CSR activities are likely to have perceptions of being respected and cared for by their organization [7]. Past studies on the relationship between CSR activities and compassion also support our prediction (e.g., [7,34,35]). Thus, we hypothesize the following:
Hypothesis 1.
CSR perceptions are positively related to compassion.
Experiencing compassion at work could lead employees to develop positive psychological states. Affective event theory [36] postulates that work-related events evoke employees’ emotional responses, subsequently influencing their work-related attitudes and behaviors. Miller [37] argued that compassion (i.e., one’s responses to the suffering of others, characterized by tangible acts of care involving material, temporal, and cognitive dimensions) can serve as an event within an organization, fostering a shared narrative experience among members. For instance, Lilius et al. [38] showed that experiencing compassion at work induces positive emotions, which, in turn, increase organizational commitment. Similarly, past studies demonstrated that employees experiencing compassion at work are likely to report higher job satisfaction [39], fewer less negative emotions, and less turnover intention [40]. These findings are congruent with those of Davidson [41], who argued that positive affective states lessen employees’ negative emotions, such as anxiety, by helping them replenish their psychological resources.
Drawing upon the affective events theory [36] and past findings, we suggest that employees who experience compassion are more likely to have higher levels of positive psychological capital, referred to as “an individual’s positive psychological state of development” [42] (p. 3). Positive psychological capital captures one’s positive psychological resources. Luthans et al. [43,44,45] suggested that positive psychological capital consists of four positive psychological resources: self-efficacy, optimism, hope, and residence. Positive emotions induced by experiences of compassion can energize one’s self-development and psychological development [46]. Specifically, Ko and Choi [47] showed that experiencing compassion at work could enhance positive psychological capital by helping employees to better handle the challenges at work, due to their perception of receiving social support at work. In other words, experiencing compassion at work is likely to help employees have confidence in accomplishing their tasks (i.e., self-efficacy), in developing positive views of their success (i.e., optimism and hope), and in quickly bouncing back to their true selves when facing challenges at work (i.e., resilience). Supporting this, Miller et al. [48] showed that compassion, with its potential to enhance integrative thinking, could serve as a catalyst in bolstering employees’ self-efficacy [48]. Hence, we hypothesize the following:
Hypothesis 2.
Compassion is positively related to positive psychological capital.
The optimistic effects of positive psychological capital at work are well-established in the literature. For instance, meta-analyses demonstrated that employees who have high positive psychological capital are likely to have high job satisfaction, high organizational commitment, and high job performance [49,50,51]. By extending the past findings, our study suggests that positive psychological capital is beneficial in energizing employees’ extra-role behaviors (i.e., OCBIs and creative behaviors).
First, employees with high positive psychological capital are likely to engage in more creative behaviors. Past studies have suggested that agentic psychological resources (e.g., intrinsic motivation) benefit creative behaviors [52,53,54]. Supporting this finding, while suggesting positive psychological capital as the agentic motivational process that is vital for creativity, Sweetman et al. [55] demonstrated the positive relationship between positive psychological capital and creative performance. Similarly, past findings provided support for the positive relationship between positive psychological capital and employees’ creativity [56,57,58], because positive psychological capital enables employees to benefit through their positive perceptions and motivations, which, in turn, increases their willingness to take risks and to articulate their views to enhance organizational effectiveness [42].
Second, employees with high positive psychological capital have positive views of themselves, energizing them to engage in OCBs [27,49]. Thus, positive psychological resources (i.e., psychological capital) are likely to energize them to go the extra mile for the benefit of their coworkers. Past studies, including meta-analyses [49,51], provide support for the positive relationship between psychological capital and OCBs (e.g., [27,59]). Therefore, we hypothesize the following:
Hypothesis 3.
Positive psychological capital is positively related to creative behaviors.
Hypothesis 4.
Positive psychological capital is positively related to OCBIs.
Past studies on CSR showed a positive relationship between CSR perceptions and extra-role behaviors (i.e., creative behaviors and OCBs). First, CSR activities are instrumental in creating a caring and supportive climate for generating creative ideas that benefit an organization [60]. In support of this finding, past studies showed that CSR perceptions increase employees’ creative efforts [61] and evolvement [23] because employees can enhance meaningfulness in their work. Hur et al. [7] and Shah et al. [62] demonstrated more directly the positive relationship between CSR perceptions and creativity. Second, employees who perceive their organization’s CSR activities as fair are more likely to reciprocate in a manner befitting the organization. Thus, CSR perceptions facilitate employees’ willingness to go the extra mile in contributing to organizational performance [63,64]. Past studies also support the positive link between CSR perceptions and OCBs [22,65,66,67].
Based on past findings, we suggest that compassion and positive psychological capital serially mediate the relationship between CSR perceptions and extra-role behaviors. Therefore, we suggest that employees’ experiences with compassion and increases in their positive psychological capital could explain the psychological mechanisms through which CSR perceptions energize their creative behaviors and OCBIs. More specifically, we argue that employees who perceive their organization’s CSR activities positively and as being fair are likely to develop positive attitudes toward the organization’s socially responsible acts, resulting from their perception of being genuinely cared for by their organizations. Hence, they are likely to experience compassion at work, which is vital in increasing their psychological resources (i.e., their positive psychological capital). Furthermore, according to social exchange theory [68], which emphasizes the rule of reciprocity, such employees are very likely to use their positive psychological capital to generate creative ideas and engage in behaviors that contribute to organizational effectiveness, because they are willing to reciprocate the positive and fair treatment meted out by their organization [4]. In addition, drawing upon the tenets of social identity theory [30], it can be inferred that when employees perceive that external entities have high esteem for their organization’s practices (i.e., its CSR activities), they are inclined to experience heightened pride in their affiliation with the organization. Consequently, this augmented sense of pride is likely to manifest in positive acts of organizational citizenship [69]. Similarly, a positive view of oneself could facilitate an employee’s efforts to successfully tackle the problems faced at work [29] by generating creative solutions and going beyond job duties to help others in the organizations. Therefore, we hypothesize the following:
Hypothesis 5.
The positive relationship between CSR and creative behaviors is serially mediated by compassion and positive psychological capital.
Hypothesis 6.
The positive relationship between CSR and OCBIs is serially mediated by compassion and positive psychological capital.
Table 1 provides a summary of our study’s hypotheses.

3. Methods

3.1. Study Participants and Procedure

We collected data from full-time employees in the IT industry. We chose this industry because extra-role behaviors, such as creative behaviors, are deemed more important in this industry than in other industries [70,71]. One of our research team members visited companies and delivered presentations on the purpose of this study. Upon receiving a company’s agreement, paper-and-pencil surveys were conducted and returned, using enclosed envelopes. Throughout the data collection process, the anonymity of the respondents was assured. Five hundred and forty surveys were distributed, and 515 were returned (response rate = 95.37%). After eliminating the surveys with insincere responses (i.e., the responses with the same numbers and responses with a strong central tendency), 505 surveys were used for testing our hypotheses. Of these 505 surveys, 340 (63.7%) were provided by males. Regarding the age of participants, 94 were in their 30s (18.6%), 236 were in their 40s (46.7%), and 147 were in their 50s (29.1%). In terms of hierarchical positions, 232 of the participants were assistant managers (45.8%), followed by 143 general managers (28.3%), 105 assistants (20.8%), and 25 department heads or higher (5.0%). The majority of the participants were college graduates (N = 334; 66.1%). More detailed information about our sample is displayed in Table 2.

3.2. Measures

3.2.1. CSR Perceptions

Twenty items from Maignan et al. [72] served as measures of CSR perceptions. Specifically, the same items as those used by Ko et al. [73], reflecting the Korean context, were used in this study. The reliability coefficient for CSR perceptions was 0.95.

3.2.2. Compassion

Three items from Lilius et al. [38] served as measures of compassion. Specifically, respondents ranked their responses on a five-point Likert scale (1 = never to 5 = almost all the time) regarding the three dimensions of their compassionate work-related experiences (i.e., on the job, with supervisors, and with coworkers). The reliability coefficient for compassion was 0.85.

3.2.3. Positive Psychological Capital

We used twenty-four items from Luthans et al. [42] to measure positive psychological capital. Cronbach’s alpha for positive psychological capital was 0.92.

3.2.4. Creative Behaviors

Seven items from Ettlie and O’Keefe [74] and Basadur et al. [75] were used to measure creative behaviors. Cronbach’s alpha for creative behaviors was 0.87.

3.2.5. OCB

We used seven items from Williams and Anderson [76] to measure OCBIs. The reliability coefficient for OCBIs was 0.84.
Please see Appendix A for the full list of survey items used in this study.

4. Results

4.1. Basic Data Analysis

We conducted a confirmatory factor analysis (CFA), in which we removed items with high correlations and low factor loadings, which resulted in 20 items for CSR perceptions, 3 items for compassion, 21 items for positive psychological capital, 7 items for creative behaviors, and 6 items for OCBIs. Specifically, average variance extracted (AVE) values were used to determine the discriminant validity of our study’s variables. The AVE values ranged from 0.61 to 0.91, exceeding the traditional criteria of 0.6 [77]. In addition, the fit indices of our model were satisfactory (χ2 (1493) = 2673.28 (p < 0.001); CFI = 0.92; TLI = 0.92; RMSEA = 0.04; RMR = 0.037). For detailed CFA results, please refer to Appendix B.
Table 3 presents the means, standard deviations, and correlations. As expected, CSR perceptions were positively related to compassion (r = 0.59, p < 0.01), and to two pivotal forms of extra-role behaviors—creative behaviors (r = 0.55, p < 0.01) and OCBI (r = 0.47, p < 0.01). In addition, positive psychological capital was positively related to creative behaviors (r = 0.76, p < 0.01) and OCBIs (r = 0.64, p < 0.01). However, the correlations between CSR perceptions and positive psychological capital (r = 0.70, p < 0.01) and positive psychological capital and creative behaviors (r = 0.76, p < 0.01) were relatively high. Thus, we tested the variance inflation factor (VIF) to see if our results could be potentially biased due to multicollinearity issues. Since the VIF values ranged from 1.14 to 2.19, we concluded that multicollinearity issues were not serious problems in our study. Overall, we found correlations between constructs according to the expectations of our hypotheses.

4.2. Common Method Variance

Since we used self-reported data for testing our hypotheses, we acknowledge that our results might be biased, due to common method variance. Hence, we carried out the latent variable approach [78]. The results are presented in Table 4, comparing fit indices before and after controlling for the latent variables. Prior to controlling for the latent variables, as presented in Table 4, the measurement model fit indices were χ2 (1493) = 2673.28, p < 0.001, CFI = 0.92, TLI = 0.92, IFI = 0.93, RMSEA = 0.04, and RMR = 0.04. After controlling for the latent variables, the model fit indices were χ2 (1436) = 2496.12, p < 0.001, CFI = 0.93, TLI = 0.92, IFI = 0.93, RMSEA = 0.04, and RMR = 0.03. As displayed in Table 4, the χ2 difference (df = 57) was not statistically significant (p > 0.05). Thus, we concluded that common method variance was not a serious issue in our model.

4.3. Hypothesis Testing

Using SPSS 27.0, we conducted the path analysis using structural equation modeling (SEM) to test hypotheses 1–4 [79]. SEM was used for several reasons. First, SEM facilitates the control of measurement errors by employing multiple indicators to gauge the common extracted variance, which is then utilized as a latent variable, effectively mitigating the impact of measurement inaccuracies [77]. Second, SEM offers a more streamlined approach for scrutinizing mediation effects. In mediation analyses, a mediator variable is required to fulfill the roles of an independent variable and a dependent variable concurrently. While regression analysis restricts variables to singular roles, SEM accommodates this dual role more effectively. This aspect becomes especially pertinent when the model involves multiple mediator variables, a scenario that introduces complexities in introducing and assessing these variables within regression analysis [80]. The results are summarized in Table 5. As shown in Table 5, CSR perceptions were positively related to compassion (b = 0.72, SE = 0.04, CR = 16.34, p < 0.001), which provides support for hypothesis 1. In addition, compassion was positively related to positive psychological capital (b = 0.35, SE = 0.02, CR = 15.34, p < 0.001). Thus, hypothesis 2 was supported. Regarding the relationships between positive psychological capital and extra-role behaviors, the links between psychological capital and creative behaviors (b = 0.99, SE = 0.04, CR = 26.62, p < 0.001) and psychological capital and OCBIs (b = 0.73, SE = 0.04, CR = 18.67, p < 0.001) were both positive and statistically meaningful, supporting hypotheses 4 and 5.
Hypotheses 5 and 6 were tested through a bootstrapping method, using the PROCESS macro [81]. We used bootstrapping to ascertain the significance of the indirect effect, indicated by the 95% confidence interval (95% CI = lower limit of confidence interval, upper limit of confidence interval). Specifically, we utilized the bootstrapping method to validate the dual mediating effects of compassion and positive psychological capital in the relationship between CSR perceptions and extra-role behaviors. The bootstrapping results are presented in Table 6 and Table 7. As shown in Table 6, CSR perceptions were positively related to creative behaviors via compassion (indirect effect = 0.07, SE = 0.03, CI = [0.01, 0.12]), as well as positive psychological capital (indirect effect = 0.37, SE = 0.05, CI = [0.28, 0.46]), because the confidence intervals excluded zero. More importantly, compassion and positive psychological capital serially mediated the positive relationship between CSR perceptions and creative behaviors (indirect effect = 0.10, SE = 0.02, CI = [0.06, 0.14]), lending support for hypothesis 5. Similarly, as shown in Table 7, CSR perceptions were positively related to OCBIs via compassion (indirect effect = 0.06, SE = 0.03, CI = [0.00, 0.12]), as well as positive psychological capital (indirect effect = 0.28, SE = 0.04, CI = [0.21, 0.36]), because the confidence intervals did not include zero. In addition and more importantly, our results indicate that compassion and positive psychological capital serially mediated the positive relationship between CSR perceptions and OCBIs (indirect effect = 0.07, SE = 0.02, CI = [0.04, 0.11]). Hence, hypothesis 6 was also supported.

5. Discussion

5.1. General Discussion

We examined the psychological mechanisms through which CSR perceptions facilitate employees’ extra-role behaviors (i.e., creative behaviors and OCBIs). Our results showed that employees who perceive their organization’s CSR activities are likely to engage in extra-role behaviors. In addition, our study delved into the mediating roles of compassion and positive psychological capital in the relationships between CSR perceptions and employees’ extra-role behaviors. Specifically, our findings indicate that employees who perceive their organization as caring for social good are more likely to experience compassion at work, which, in turn, enhances employees’ positive psychological capital, energizing their extra-role behaviors.

5.2. Theoretical and Managerial Implications

Our study contributes to the extant literature in the following ways. First, it demonstrates the positive relationships between employees’ CSR perceptions and their extra-role behaviors by simultaneously including both creative behaviors and OCBIs as focal outcomes. Past studies on CSR perceptions mostly focused on one form of extra-role behaviors, such as OCBs [9,22,57,58] or creative behaviors [7,23,53]. However, both creative behaviors and OCBs are discretionary behaviors performed by employees. Given that our study focused on OCBIs, the target and purpose of such behaviors could differ. Hence, by demonstrating the positive effect of CSR perceptions on two different types of discretionary behaviors at work, our study provides a more comprehensive picture of the effects of CSR perceptions.
Second, extending past studies on the mechanisms through which CSR perceptions affect employees’ attitudes and behaviors at work, our findings provide new psychological paths, via compassion and positive psychological capital. Specifically, for creative behaviors, Hur et al. [7] demonstrated the positive relationships between CSR perceptions and creative behaviors through increases in intrinsic motivation. Regarding OCBs, Gao and He [82] showed that ethical leadership mediates the positive relationship between CSR perceptions and OCBs. So far as we know, this study provides the first empirical evidence of the psychological mechanisms of CSR perceptions while concurrently considering the roles of compassion and positive psychological capital.
Third, our findings add a new antecedent to positive psychological capital by empirically demonstrating the positive relationship between compassion and positive psychological capital. Past studies on positive psychological capital showed the roles of leaders (e.g., authentic leadership, ethical leadership, and leader–member exchange) and organizations (e.g., perceived organizational support, organizational justice, and organizational climate) in increasing employees’ positive psychological capital [50,51]. Unlike past studies, our findings demonstrate that compassionate experiences at work could also help develop employees’ psychological resources (i.e., their positive psychological resources), providing new avenues for future research on positive psychological capital.
Our study provides organizations with the following practical implications. First, our findings show that organizations need to engage in valuable CSR activities to help employees experience compassion at work. Thus, in addition to providing social or organizational support to the employees, the extent to which organizations engage in fair and meaningful social activities (i.e., CSR activities) could be instrumental in helping employees to develop positive, compassionate experiences at work. Specifically, given that employees inevitably experience suffering at work [47], an organization’s CSR activities could help them alleviate and even recover from such suffering through experiences of compassion in their workplaces. Second, our study suggests that an organization’s CSR activities are conducive to increasing employees’ extra-role behaviors, which are vital for corporate sustainability. In particular, by uncovering the new psychological paths through which CSR activities affect employees’ extra-role behaviors, our findings indicate the importance of acknowledgement by organizations of the internal value of CSR activities (i.e., helping employees develop their psychological resources to engage in extra-role behaviors) and the external value of CSR activities (i.e., developing and maintaining organizations’ reputations in the market). Indeed, to facilitate the development of employees’ psychological resources (i.e., their compassionate experiences), it is important for organizations to cultivate their employees’ CSR perceptions. In pursuit of this goal, organizations need to align CSR initiatives with their organizational culture and harness their capabilities for meticulous planning, execution, and comprehensive appraisal of these endeavors [83].

5.3. Limitations and Future Research Directions

Notwithstanding the several positive implications of our study, it has limitations. First, our results are based on self-reported data. Although we tested whether our results could be biased, due to common method variance, future research using multi-sourced data could be beneficial. In particular, for creative behaviors and OCBs, future research could include employees’ supervisor ratings. In addition, our research design was cross-sectional. In other words, the use of our data in exploring causality in the research model is challenging. Hence, future research could conduct a replication study using longitudinal data to further strengthen our findings. Furthermore, because an employee’s compassionate experiences at work and positive psychological capital could vary over time, future studies using a longitudinal research design could facilitate exploring how CSR activities affect such an employee’s trajectory of compassionate experiences and positive psychological capital.
Second, the data collected were restricted to employees working in the IT industry. Although our study allowed for controlling external factors that could potentially affect our results, we acknowledge the possibility that our results could be limited to IT employees only. Therefore, to increase the generalizability of our findings, future research could replicate these findings using varying samples. Furthermore, it is essential to highlight that even within the realm of the IT industry, the diversity of participants’ job titles has the potential to affect our findings. For instance, the perceived significance of creative behaviors may manifest differently for IT architects, data analysts, and IT customer service personnel, given their distinct roles and responsibilities. Thus, future research could benefit from incorporating participants’ job titles (or job characteristics) into the research models, providing more comprehensive views about how employees’ CSR perceptions relate to their creative behaviors.
Third, we used creative behaviors and OCBs to capture the two aspects of extra-role behaviors. Specifically, because creative behaviors capture an employee’s discretionary behavior to help organizational functions, we measured employees’ discretionary behaviors that were targeted toward other individuals at work (i.e., OCBIs). Hence, we cannot entirely dismiss the possibility that the psychological mechanisms through which CSR perceptions affect OCBs that are directed toward organizations (OCBOs) could differ. Future research could expand our findings by incorporating both OCBIs and OCBOs in their research models.

6. Conclusions

In conclusion, our study represents a scholarly contribution by highlighting the intricate nexus between employees’ perceptions of CSR and their active engagement in extra-role behaviors. Through a systematic exploration of the underlying psychological mechanisms interlinking CSR perceptions, compassion, positive psychological capital, and extra-role behaviors, our findings advance the scholarly understanding of this nuanced dynamic. It elucidates the pivotal function of CSR activities as a catalyst in facilitating employees’ experiences of compassion within workplaces, thereby replenishing their psychological resources (i.e., fostering the development of positive psychological resources). As a consequence, this dynamic amplifies employee engagement in extra-role behaviors. By contributing to both theoretical knowledge and practical insights, this study enriches the dialogue on effective organizational strategies that harness the power of CSR perceptions to cultivate a thriving work environment and enhance corporate sustainability.

Author Contributions

S.-H.K. wrote the first draft of this manuscript, designed the model, and conducted and analyzed the empirical test results. Y.C. was involved in refining the theory part of the article, as well as interpreting the results. J.K. and H.C.K. were involved in developing the first draft of this manuscript and writing about the implications. All authors have read and agreed to the published version of the manuscript.

Funding

This research received no external funding.

Institutional Review Board Statement

This study was conducted in accordance with the Declaration of Helsinki. Because we assured respondents’ anonymity and confidentiality, ethical review and approval were not applicable.

Informed Consent Statement

Informed consent was obtained from all subjects involved in the study.

Data Availability Statement

Upon request, data for this study are available from the corresponding author.

Conflicts of Interest

The authors declare no conflict of interest.

Appendix A. Survey Items

  • CSR Perceptions (Economic CSR)
  • Our business has a procedure in place to respond to every customer complaint.
  • We continually improve the quality of our products.
  • We use customer satisfaction as an indicator of our business performance.
  • We have been successful at maximizing our profits.
  • Top management establishes long-term strategies for our business.
  • CSR Perceptions (Legal CSR)
6.
Managers are informed about relevant environmental laws.
7.
The managers of this organization try to comply with the law.
8.
Our company seeks to comply with all laws regulating hiring and employee benefits.
9.
We have programs that encourage the diversity of our workforce (in terms of age, gender, or race).
10.
Internal policies prevent discrimination in employees’ compensation and promotion.
  • CSR Perceptions (Ethical CSR)
11.
Our business has a comprehensive code of conduct.
12.
Members of our organization follow professional standards.
13.
Top managers monitor the potential negative impacts of our activities on our community.
14.
We are recognized as a trustworthy company.
15.
A confidential procedure is in place for employees to report any misconduct at work (such as stealing or sexual harassment).
  • CSR Perceptions (Discretionary CSR)
16.
Our business encourages employees to join civic organizations that support our community.
17.
Flexible company policies enable employees to better coordinate work and personal life.
18.
Our business gives adequate contributions to charities.
19.
A program is in place to reduce the amount of energy and materials wasted in our business.
20.
We encourage partnerships with local businesses and schools.
  • Compassion
  • I frequently experience compassion on the job.
  • I frequently experience compassion from my supervisor.
  • I frequently experience compassion for my co-workers.
  • Positive Psychological Capital
  • I feel confident analyzing a long-term problem to find a solution.
  • I feel confident in representing my work area in meetings with management.
  • I feel confident contributing to discussions about the company’s strategy.
  • I feel confident helping to set targets/goals in my work area.
  • I feel confident contacting people outside the company (e.g., suppliers, customers) to discuss problems.
  • I feel confident presenting information to a group of colleagues.
  • If I should find myself in a jam at work, I could think of many ways to get out of it.
  • At the present time, I am energetically pursuing my work goals.
  • There are lots of ways to get around any problem.
  • Right now, I see myself as being pretty successful at work.
  • I can think of many ways to reach my current work goals.
  • At this time, I am meeting the work goals that I have set for myself.
  • When I have a setback at work, I have trouble recovering from it and moving on. (R)
  • I usually manage difficulties one way or another at work.
  • I can be “on my own,” so to speak, at work if I have to.
  • I usually take stressful things at work in stride.
  • I can get through difficult times at work because I’ve experienced difficulty before.
  • I feel I can handle many things at times at this job.
  • When things are uncertain for me at work, I usually expect the best.
  • If something can go wrong for me work-wise, it will. (R)
  • I always look on the bright side of things regarding my job.
  • I’m optimistic about what will happen to me in the future as it pertains to work.
  • In this job, things never work out the way I want them to. (R)
  • I approach this job as if “every cloud has a silver lining.”
  • Creative Behaviors
  • I try to be as creative as I can in my job.
  • I experiment with new approaches in performing my job.
  • When new trends develop, I am usually the first to get on board.
  • My boss feels that I am creative in performing my job.
  • On the job, I am inventive at overcoming barriers.
  • I try to connect seemingly unrelated ideas to work and the company.
  • I often talk about new strategies or ideas at work-related meetings.
  • Organizational Citizenship Behavior
  • I help others who have been absent.
  • I help others who have heavy work loads.
  • I assist supervisor with his/her work (when not asked).
  • I take time to listen to coworkers’ problems and worries.
  • I orient new people even though it is not required.
  • I spend a great deal of time on personal phone conversations.
  • I make innovative suggestions to improve the department.
(R) denotes a reversed item.

Appendix B

Table A1. Confirmatory Factor Analysis Results.
Table A1. Confirmatory Factor Analysis Results.
ConstructItemsλS.EC.R.Cronbach’s ⍺AVEC.R.
CSR
perceptions		CSR10.681--0.9500.6110.969
CSR20.6690.06315.857
CSR30.6800.07014.375
CSR40.6730.07114.235
CSR50.6480.07313.741
CSR60.6790.07314.358
CSR70.6700.06914.152
CSR80.6950.07114.674
CSR90.7230.07715.237
CSR100.6460.07413.696
CSR110.7470.05917.789
CSR120.7250.07115.373
CSR130.7000.07314.780
CSR140.6970.07114.721
CSR150.7320.07415.402
CSR160.6770.07914.285
CSR170.7140.07615.049
CSR180.7230.07815.255
CSR190.6750.07514.274
CSR200.7220.07615.190
CompassionCompassion10.843--0.8510.7760.912
Compassion 20.8390.05020.724
Compassion 30.7500.05018.305
Positive psychological capitalPsy10.659--0.9210.9080.959
Psy20.5600.07511.678
Psy30.6130.07812.666
Psy40.6160.07512.708
Psy50.6580.08013.486
Psy60.5650.07011.761
Psy70.6150.08112.704
Psy80.6450.07413.246
Psy90.5850.07412.219
Psy100.7190.07714.564
Psy110.6920.07414.081
Psy120.6570.08413.469
Psy130.6540.07413.413
Psy150.6840.07913.952
Psy160.6340.07113.123
Psy180.6440.07313.234
Psy200.6590.08613.495
Psy210.6570.07713.460
Psy220.6310.07912.930
Psy230.6370.07913.101
Psy240.6620.07913.595
Creative behaviorsCB10.641--0.8710.7970.887
CB20.6950.08313.454
CB30.6130.07612.084
CB40.7550.08614.441
CB50.7060.07713.691
CB60.7570.08014.469
CB70.7550.08114.450
Organizational citizenship behaviorOCB10.531--0.8400.6560.870
OCB20.5840.09611.501
OCB30.6020.1299.800
OCB40.6950.12710.893
OCB50.6820.12710.785
OCB60.7290.12111.076
Note. Psy = positive psychological capital, CBs = creative behaviors, OCBs = organizational citizenship behaviors.

References

  1. Chen, S.; Ji, Y. Do corporate social responsibility categories distinctly influence innovation? A resource-based theory perspective. Sustainability 2022, 14, 3154. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  2. Van Marrewijk, M. Concepts and definitions of CSR and corporate sustainability: Between agency and communion. J. Bus. Ethics 2003, 44, 95–105. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  3. Afridi, S.A.; Afsar, B.; Shahjehan, A.; Khan, W.; Rehman, Z.U.; Khan, M.A. Impact of corporate social responsibility attributions on employee’s extra-role behaviors: Moderating role of ethical corporate identity and interpersonal trust. Corp. Soc. Responsib. Environ. Manag. 2020, 30, 991–1004. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  4. Boğan, E.; Dedeoğlu, B.B. Hotel employees’ corporate social responsibility perception and organizational citizenship behavior: Perceived external prestige and pride in organization as serial mediators. Corp. Soc. Responsib. Environ. Manag. 2020, 27, 2342–2353. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  5. Chaudhary, R.; Akhouri, A. CSR perceptions and employee creativity: Examining serial mediation effects of meaningfulness and work engagement. Soc. Responsib. J. 2019, 15, 61–74. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  6. Farid, T.; Iqbal, S.; Ma, J.; Castro-González, S.; Khattak, A.; Khan, M.K. Employees’ perceptions of CSR, work engagement, and organizational citizenship behavior: The mediating effects of organizational justice. Int. J. Environ. Res. Public Health 2019, 16, 1731. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  7. Hur, W.M.; Moon, T.W.; Ko, S.H. How employees’ perceptions of CSR increase employee creativity: Mediating mechanisms of compassion at work and intrinsic motivation. J. Bus. Ethics 2018, 153, 629–644. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  8. Lee, J.; Kim, S.; Lee, J.; Moon, S. Enhancing employee creativity for a sustainable competitive advantage through perceived human resource management practices and trust in management. Sustainability 2019, 11, 2305. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  9. Oo, E.Y.; Jung, H.; Park, I.J. Psychological factors linking perceived CSR to OCB: The role of organizational pride, collectivism, and person–organization fit. Sustainability 2018, 10, 2481. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  10. Testa, F.; Todaro, N.; Gusmerotti, N.M.; Frey, M. Embedding corporate sustainability: An empirical analysis of the antecedents of organization citizenship behavior. Corp. Soc. Responsib. Environ. Manag. 2020, 27, 1198–1212. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  11. Vuong, T.K.; Bui, H.M. The role of corporate social responsibility activities in employees’ perception of brand reputation and brand equity. Case Stud. Chem. Environ. Eng. 2023, 7, 100313. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  12. Jones, D.A.; Willness, C.R.; Madey, S. Why are job seekers attracted by corporate social performance? Experimental and field tests of three signal-based mechanisms. Acad. Manag. J. 2014, 57, 383–404. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  13. Glavas, A.; Kelley, K. The effects of perceived corporate social responsibility on employee attitudes. Bus. Ethics Q. 2014, 24, 165–202. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  14. Azim, M.T. CSR and employee behavior: Mediating role of organizational commitment. Braz. Bus. Manag. Mag. 2016, 18, 207–225. [Google Scholar]
  15. Hou, M.; Liu, H.; Fan, P.; Wei, Z. Does CSR practice pay off in East Asian firms? A meta-analytic investigation. Asia Pac. J. Manag. 2016, 33, 195–228. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  16. Salehi, M.; DashtBayaz, M.L.; Khorashadizadeh, S. Corporate social responsibility and future financial performance: Evidence from Tehran Stock Exchange. EuroMed J. Bus. 2018, 13, 351–371. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  17. Velte, P. Meta-analyses on corporate social responsibility (CSR): A literature review. Manag. Rev. Q. 2022, 72, 627–675. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  18. Wang, Q.; Dou, J.; Jia, S. A meta-analytic review of corporate social responsibility and corporate financial performance: The moderating effect of contextual factors. Bus. Soc. 2016, 55, 1083–1121. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  19. Li, Y.; Chen, C.H. The impact of employee-perceived CSR on organizational citizenship behavior—Evidence from China. Asia Pac. Manag. Rev. 2023, in press. [CrossRef]
  20. Wang, Y.; Xu, S.; Wang, Y. The consequences of employees’ perceived corporate social responsibility: A meta-analysis. Bus. Ethics Eur. Rev. 2020, 29, 471–496. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  21. Zhao, X.; Wu, C.; Chen, C.C.; Zhou, Z. The influence of corporate social responsibility on incumbent employees: A meta-analytic investigation of the mediating and moderating mechanisms. J. Manag. 2022, 48, 114–146. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  22. Supanti, D.; Butcher, K. Is corporate social responsibility (CSR) participation the pathway to foster meaningful work and helping behavior for millennials? Int. J. Hosp. Manag. 2019, 77, 8–18. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  23. Brammer, S.; He, H.; Mellahi, K. Corporate social responsibility, employee organizational identification, and creative effort: The moderating impact of corporate ability. Group Organ. Manag. 2015, 40, 323–352. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  24. Comoli, M.; Tettamanzi, P.; Murgolo, M. Accounting for ‘ESG’ under disruptions: A systematic literature network analysis. Sustainability 2023, 15, 6633. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  25. Ahmad, J.; Athar, M.R.; Azam, R.I.; Hamstra, M.R.; Hanif, M. A resource perspective on abusive supervision and extra-role behaviors: The role of subordinates’ psychological capital. J. Leadersh. Organ. Stud. 2019, 26, 73–86. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  26. Giancaspro, M.L.; Callea, A.; Manuti, A. “I like it like that”: A study on the relationship between psychological capital, work engagement and extra-role behavior. Sustainability 2022, 14, 2022. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  27. Gupta, M.; Shaheen, M.; Reddy, P.K. Impact of psychological capital on organizational citizenship behavior: Mediation by work engagement. J. Manag. Dev. 2017, 36, 973–983. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  28. Dutton, J.E.; Workman, K.M.; Hardin, A.E. Compassion at work. Annu. Rev. Organ. Psychol. Organ. Behav. 2014, 1, 277–304. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  29. Peterson, C.; Seligman, M.E.P. Character Strengths and Virtues; Oxford University Press: Oxford, UK, 2004. [Google Scholar]
  30. Tajfel, H. Social identity and intergroup behaviour. Soc. Sci. Inf. 1974, 13, 65–93. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  31. Turker, D. How CSR influences organizational commitment. J. Bus. Ethics 2009, 89, 189–204. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  32. Skudiene, V.; Auruskeviciene, V. The contribution of corporate social responsibility to internal employee motivation. Balt. J. Manag. 2012, 7, 49–67. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  33. Kahn, W.A. Caring for the caregivers: Patterns of organizational caregiving. Adm. Sci. Q. 1993, 38, 539–563. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  34. Guzzo, R.F.; Wang, X.; Abbott, J. Corporate social responsibility and individual outcomes: The mediating role of gratitude and compassion at work. Cornell Hosp. Q. 2022, 63, 350–368. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  35. Moon, T.W.; Hur, W.M.; Ko, S.H.; Kim, J.W.; Yoon, S.W. Bridging corporate social responsibility and compassion at work: Relations to organizational justice and affective organizational commitment. Career Dev. Int. 2014, 19, 49–72. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  36. Weiss, H.M.; Cropanzano, R. Affective events theory. Res. Organ. Behav. 1996, 18, 1–74. [Google Scholar]
  37. Miller, K.I. Compassionate communication in the workplace: Exploring processes of noticing, connecting, and responding. J. Appl. Commun. Res. 2007, 35, 223–245. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  38. Lilius, J.M.; Worline, M.C.; Maitlis, S.; Kanov, J.; Dutton, J.E.; Frost, P. The contours and consequences of compassion at work. J. Organ. Behav. Int. J. Ind. Occup. Organ. Psychol. Behav. 2008, 29, 193–218. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  39. Rhoades, L.; Eisenberger, R. Perceived organizational support: A review of the literature. J. Appl. Psychol. 2002, 87, 698–714. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  40. Choi, H.J.; Lee, S.; No, S.-R.; Kim, E.I. Effects of compassion on employees’ self-regulation. Soc. Behav. Personal. Int. J. 2016, 44, 1173–1190. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  41. Davidson, R.J. Toward a biology of positive affect and compassion. In Visions of Compassion: Western Scientists and Tibetan Buddhists Examine Human Nature; Oxford University Press: New York, NY, USA, 2002; pp. 107–130. [Google Scholar]
  42. Luthans, F.; Avolio, B.J.; Avey, J.B.; Norman, S.M. Positive psychological capital: Measurement and relationship with performance and satisfaction. Pers. Psychol. 2007, 60, 541–572. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  43. Luthans, F.; Youssef, C.M. Emerging positive organizational behavior. J. Manag. 2007, 33, 321–349. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  44. Luthans, B.C.; Luthans, K.W.; Jensen, S.M. The impact of business school students’ psychological capital on academic performance. J. Educ. Bus. 2012, 87, 253–259. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  45. Luthans, F.; Youssef-Morgan, C.M. Psychological capital: An evidence-based positive approach. Annu. Rev. Organ. Psychol. Organ. Behav. 2017, 4, 339–366. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  46. Breines, J.G.; Chen, S. Self-compassion increases self-improvement motivation. Personal. Soc. Psychol. Bull. 2012, 38, 1133–1143. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  47. Ko, S.H.; Choi, Y. Compassion and job performance: Dual-paths through positive work-related identity, collective self esteem, and positive psychological capital. Sustainability 2019, 11, 6766. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  48. Miller, T.L.; Grimes, M.G.; McMullen, J.S.; Vogus, T.J. Venturing for others with heart and head: How compassion encourages social entrepreneurship. Acad. Manag. Rev. 2012, 37, 616–640. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  49. Avey, J.B.; Reichard, R.J.; Luthans, F.; Mhatre, K.H. Meta-analysis of the impact of positive psychological capital on employee attitudes, behaviors, and performance. Hum. Resour. Dev. Q. 2011, 22, 127–152. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  50. Kong, F.; Tsai, C.H.; Tsai, F.S.; Huang, W.; la Cruz, D.; Malapitan, S. Psychological capital research: A meta-analysis and implications for management sustainability. Sustainability 2018, 10, 3457. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  51. Wu, W.-Y.; Nguyen, K.-V.H. The antecedents and consequences of psychological capital: A meta-analytic approach. Leadersh. Organ. Dev. J. 2019, 40, 435–456. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  52. Amabile, T.M. Creativity in Context; Westview Press: Boulder, CO, USA, 1996. [Google Scholar]
  53. Tierney, P.; Farmer, S.M. Creative self-efficacy: Its potential antecedents and relationship to creative performance. Acad. Manag. J. 2002, 45, 1137–1148. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  54. Zhou, J.; Shalley, C.E. Research on employee creativity: A critical review and directions for future research. In Research in Personnel and Human Resource Management; Martocchio, J.J., Ed.; Elsevier Science: Oxford, UK, 2003; pp. 165–217. [Google Scholar]
  55. Sweetman, D.; Luthans, F.; Avey, J.B.; Luthans, B.C. Relationship between positive psychological capital and creative performance. Can. J. Adm. Sci. 2011, 28, 4–13. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  56. Agarwal, P.; Farndale, E. High-performance work systems and creativity implementation: The role of psychological capital and psychological safety. Hum. Resour. Manag. J. 2017, 27, 440–458. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  57. Yu, X.; Li, D.; Tsai, C.H.; Wang, C. The role of psychological capital in employee creativity. Career Dev. Int. 2019, 24, 420–437. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  58. Zubair, A.; Kamal, A. Work-related flow, psychological capital, and creativity among employees of software houses. Psychol. Stud. 2015, 60, 321–331. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  59. Pradhan, R.K.; Jena, L.K.; Bhattacharya, P. Impact of psychological capital on organizational citizenship behavior: Moderating role of emotional intelligence. Cogent Bus. Manag. 2016, 3, 1194174. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  60. Pandey, A.; Gupta, R.K. Spirituality in management: A review of contemporary and traditional thoughts and agenda for research. Glob. Bus. Rev. 2008, 9, 65–83. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  61. Glavas, A.; Piderit, S.K. How does doing good matter? J. Corp. Citizsh. 2009, 36, 51–70. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  62. Shah, M.S.; Wu, C.; Ullah, Z. The inter-relationship between CSR, inclusive leadership and employee creativity: A case of the banking sector. Sustainability 2021, 13, 9158. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  63. Glavas, A. Corporate social responsibility and organizational psychology: An integrative review. Front. Psychol. 2016, 7, 144. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  64. Kunda, M.M.; Ataman, G.; Behram, N.K. Corporate social responsibility and organizational citizenship behavior. J. Glob. Responsib. 2019, 10, 47–68. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  65. Khaskheli, A.; Jiang, Y.; Raza, S.A.; Qureshi, M.A.; Khan, K.A.; Salam, J. Do CSR activities increase organizational citizenship behavior among employees? Mediating role of affective commitment and job satisfaction. Corp. Soc. Responsib. Environ. Manag. 2020, 27, 2941–2955. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  66. Kim, H.L.; Rhou, Y.; Uysal, M.; Kwon, N. An examination of the links between corporate social responsibility (CSR) and its internal consequences. Int. J. Hosp. Manag. 2017, 61, 26–34. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  67. Tourigny, L.; Han, J.; Baba, V.V.; Pan, P. Ethical leadership and corporate social responsibility in China: A multilevel study of their effects on trust and organizational citizenship behavior. J. Bus. Ethics 2019, 158, 427–440. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  68. Blau, P.M. Exchange and Power in Social Life; Transaction Publishers: Piscataway, NJ, USA, 1964. [Google Scholar]
  69. De Roeck, K.; Delobbe, N. Do environmental CSR initiatives serve organizations’ legitimacy in the oil industry? Exploring employees’ reactions through organizational identification theory. J. Bus. Ethics 2012, 110, 397–412. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  70. Bontje, M.; Musterd, S. Creative industries, creative class and competitiveness: Expert opinions critically appraised. Geoforum 2009, 40, 843–852. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  71. Lee, N.; Drever, E. The creative industries, creative occupations and innovation in London. Eur. Plan. Stud. 2013, 21, 1977–1997. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  72. Maignan, I.; Ferrell, O.C.; Hult, G.T.M. Corporate citizenship: Cultural antecedents and business benefits. J. Acad. Mark. Sci. 1999, 27, 455–469. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  73. Ko, S.H.; Lee, S.H.; Kim, J.Y.; Choi, Y.; Kim, J.; Kang, H.C. Effect of corporate social responsibility perception on job satisfaction. Soc. Behav. Personal. Int. J. 2021, 49, e10893. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  74. Ettlie, J.E.; O’Keefe, R.D. Innovative attitudes, values, and intentions in organizations. J. Manag. Stud. 1982, 19, 163–182. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  75. Basadur, M.; Wakabayashi, M.; Graen, G.B. Individual problem-solving styles and attitudes toward divergent thinking before and after training. Creat. Res. J. 1990, 3, 22–32. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  76. Williams, L.J.; Anderson, S.E. Job satisfaction and organizational commitment as predictors of organizational citizenship and in-role behaviors. J. Manag. 1991, 17, 601–617. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  77. Fornell, C.; Larcker, D.F. Evaluating structural equation models with unobservable variables and measurement error. J. Mark. Res. 1981, 18, 39–50. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  78. Podsakoff, P.M.; MacKenzie, S.B.; Lee, J.Y.; Podsakoff, N.P. Common method biases in behavioral research: A critical review of the literature and recommended remedies. J. Appl. Psychol. 2003, 88, 879–903. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  79. Bielby, W.T.; Hauser, R.M. Structural equation models. Annu. Rev. Sociol. 1977, 3, 137–161. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  80. Gunzler, D.; Chen, T.; Wu, P.; Zhang, H. Introduction to mediation analysis with structural equation modeling. Shanghai Arch. Psychiatry 2013, 25, 390–394. [Google Scholar] [PubMed]
  81. Preacher, K.J.; Hayes, A.F. Asymptotic and resampling strategies for assessing and comparing indirect effects in multiple mediator models. Behav. Res. Methods 2008, 40, 879–891. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  82. Gao, Y.; He, W. Corporate social responsibility and employee organizational citizenship behavior: The pivotal roles of ethical leadership and organizational justice. Manag. Decis. 2017, 55, 294–309. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  83. Lee, E.M.; Park, S.Y.; Lee, H.J. Employee perception of CSR activities: Its antecedents and consequences. J. Bus. Res. 2013, 66, 1716–1724. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
Table 1. Summary of study’s hypotheses.
Table 1. Summary of study’s hypotheses.
HypothesisDetail
1Corporate social responsibility (CSR) perceptions are positively related to compassion.
2Compassion is positively related to positive psychological capital.
3Positive psychological capital is positively related to creative behaviors.
4Positive psychological capital is positively related to organizational citizenship behaviors directed toward individuals (OCBIs).
5The positive relationship between CSR and creative behaviors is serially mediated by compassion and positive psychological capital.
6The positive relationship between CSR and OCBIs is serially mediated by compassion and positive psychological capital.
Table 2. Sample characteristics.
Table 2. Sample characteristics.
Frequency%
GenderMale34067.3
Female16532.7
Age30s9418.6
40s23646.7
50s14729.1
Over 60s 285.5
EducationHigh school graduate285.5
Associate degree7915.6
Bachelor’s degree33466.1
Master’s degree91.8
Doctoral degree5510.9
Hierarchical positionAssistant10520.8
Assistant manager23245.9
General manager14328.3
Department head224.4
Deputy general manager or higher30.6
Table 3. Construct means, standard deviations, and correlations.
Table 3. Construct means, standard deviations, and correlations.
MeanSD12345
1. CSR perceptions3.240.680.78
2. Compassion3.300.830.59 **0.88
3. Positive psychological capital3.390.520.70 **0.56 **0.95
4. Creative behaviors3.350.670.55 **0.51 **0.76 **0.89
5. Organizational citizenship behaviors (OCBs)3.590.590.47 **0.44 **0.64 **0.53 **0.81
Note. ** p < 0.01; The numbers on the diagonal are the square roots of the AVE.
Table 4. Common method variance analysis results.
Table 4. Common method variance analysis results.
χ2dfpχ2/dfRMSEACFIIFITLI
Measurement model (M. M.)2673.281493<0.0011.790.040.920.930.92
Controlled model (C. M.)2496.121436<0.0011.740.040.930.930.92
Stepwise χ2 analysisΔχ2ΔdfAccepted model
M.M.—C.M.177.1657>0.05Measurement model
Table 5. Path analysis results.
Table 5. Path analysis results.
HypothesisPathbSECRp
Hypothesis 1CSR perceptions → compassion0.720.0416.34<0.001
Hypothesis 2Compassion → positive psychological capital (PsyCap)0.350.0215.34<0.001
Hypothesis 3PsyCap → creative behaviors0.990.0426.62<0.001
Hypothesis 4PsyCap → OCBIs0.730.0418.67<0.001
Table 6. Indirect effects of CSR perceptions on creative behaviors.
Table 6. Indirect effects of CSR perceptions on creative behaviors.
EstimateCIlowCIhighBootSE
Total indirect effect0.530.430.630.05
CSR perceptions → compassion → creative behaviors0.070.010.120.03
CSR perceptions → PsyCap → creative behaviors0.370.280.460.05
CSR perceptions → compassion → PsyCap → creative behaviors0.100.060.140.02
Table 7. Indirect effects of CSR perceptions on OCBIs.
Table 7. Indirect effects of CSR perceptions on OCBIs.
EstimateCIlowCIhighBootSE
Total indirect effect0.420.330.510.05
CSR perceptions → compassion → OCBIs0.060.000.120.03
CSR perceptions → PsyCap → OCBIs0.280.210.360.04
CSR perceptions → compassion → PsyCap → OCBIs0.070.040.110.02
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.

Share and Cite

MDPI and ACS Style

Ko, S.-H.; Choi, Y.; Kim, J.; Kang, H.C. Employees’ Perceptions of Corporate Social Responsibility and Their Extra-Role Behaviors: A Psychological Mechanism. Sustainability 2023, 15, 13394. https://doi.org/10.3390/su151813394

AMA Style

Ko S-H, Choi Y, Kim J, Kang HC. Employees’ Perceptions of Corporate Social Responsibility and Their Extra-Role Behaviors: A Psychological Mechanism. Sustainability. 2023; 15(18):13394. https://doi.org/10.3390/su151813394

Chicago/Turabian Style

Ko, Sung-Hoon, Yongjun Choi, Jongsung Kim, and Hyun Chul Kang. 2023. "Employees’ Perceptions of Corporate Social Responsibility and Their Extra-Role Behaviors: A Psychological Mechanism" Sustainability 15, no. 18: 13394. https://doi.org/10.3390/su151813394

APA Style

Ko, S. -H., Choi, Y., Kim, J., & Kang, H. C. (2023). Employees’ Perceptions of Corporate Social Responsibility and Their Extra-Role Behaviors: A Psychological Mechanism. Sustainability, 15(18), 13394. https://doi.org/10.3390/su151813394

Note that from the first issue of 2016, this journal uses article numbers instead of page numbers. See further details here.

Article Metrics

Back to TopTop