Bridging macro- and micro- Corporate Social Responsibility
How the underlying motives for firm CSR engagement influence the
individual’s job pursuit intention through trustworthiness
Master’s thesis
23-6-2017
MSc Business Administration Faculty of Economics and Business
University of Amsterdam
Author: Max Olivier van der Steen Student number: 10063277 Supervisors: Dr. Ir. J.W. Stoelhorst & Dr. F. Bridoux
Statement of Originality
This document is written by Student Max van der Steen, who declares to take full responsibility for the contents of this document.
I declare that the text and the work presented in this document is original and that no sources other than those mentioned in the text and its references have been used in creating it.
The Faculty of Economics and Business is responsible solely for the supervision of completion of the work, not for the contents.
Abstract
The literature suggests that Corporate Social Responsibility (CSR) is in need of integrating its macro-level (i.e. organisational level) and micro-level (i.e. individual level) theory, however, both are predominantly researched in isolation. This study attempts to bridge this gap by examining how different dimensions of trustworthiness (ability, benevolence, and integrity) mediate the effects of
firm CSR engagement on the individual’s job pursuit intention.
This study applies a 1 x 3 between-subjects vignette experiment, manipulating CSR engagement based on the underlying motives of the firm: normative (i.e. moral motive), instrumental (i.e. profit motive), or neutral (non-disclosed motive). Possible boundary conditions are explored by including the individual’s self-enhancement and self-transcendence value orientations as second-stage moderators. A complete model of the relationships is estimated using Hayes’ SPSS plug-in PROCESS.
The results indicate that instrumental CSR engagement has a negative influence on both trustworthiness of benevolence and integrity, as well as the individual’s job pursuit intention. Normative CSR engagement does not increase trustworthiness nor job pursuit intention, when compared to not disclosing the motives. Moreover, trustworthiness of integrity is identified as pivotal in predicting the individual’s job pursuit intention. Though both first- and second-stage moderation was examined, severe multicollinearity hindered accurate interpretation of the findings concerning interaction effects of self-enhancement and self-transcendence.
The findings of this research broaden the knowledge of CSR’s effects on potential employees, who, until now, have largely been neglected in micro-CSR research. This research further unveils the potential unwanted consequences of CSR on the micro-level, such as the deteriorating effects of instrumental CSR engagement on the company’s recruitment efforts. Finally, the thorough exploration of CSR’s effects on the potential employee provides insights into how CSR activities can be used in recruitment efforts.
Table of Content
1. Introduction ... 1
2. Literature Review ... 3
2.1 A prelude to micro-CSR theory ... 3
2.1.1 The conceptualisation of CSR ... 3
2.1.2 Macro-level CSR ... 4
2.2 Corporate social responsibility at the micro-level ... 6
2.2.1 Mechanisms shaping the individual’s reactions to CSR ... 8
2.2.2 Evaluating CSR at the micro-level ... 11
2.2.3 The outcome of CSR at the individual level ... 13
2.2.4 Clusters in the individual’s reaction to CSR ... 15
2.3 Literature gap and research question ... 16
3. Theoretical framework ... 19
3.1 Trustworthiness as a three-fold mediation mechanism ... 19
3.2 Trustworthiness and job pursuit intention ... 23
3.3 The moderating effects of the individual’s value orientation. ... 24
4. Method and design ... 27
4.1 Method ... 27
4.2 Data collection and sample ... 28
4.3 Procedure and survey structure ... 29
4.4 Stimulus and measured variables ... 29
4.5 Statistical analysis approach ... 33
5. Analysis and Results ... 34
5.1 Preliminary analysis ... 34
5.1.1 Reliability, validity, normality testing, and scale computation ... 34
5.1.2 Manipulation check ... 37
5.1.3 Correlations of the variables ... 38
5.2 Hypothesis testing ... 40
5.3 Additional analysis ... 45
6. Discussion and conclusions ... 49
6.1 Implications for the literature, managers, and policy makers ... 49
6.1.1 Implications for the literature ... 49
6.1.2 Implications for mangers and policy makers ... 53
6.2 Limitations of this research ... 55
6.3 Recommendations for future research ... 56
7. References ... 59
8. Appendices ... 82
1. Gond et al. (2017) ‘The behavioural framework of micro-CSR’ ... 82
2. Sample data ... 83
3. Survey structure and measurement instruments ... 84
4. The vignettes ... 85
5. Measurement instruments ... 86
6. Conceptual- and statistical diagrams of PROCESS Models 4 and 16 ... 88
7. Mahalanobis-distance plot (multivariate normality test) ... 90
8. Manipulation- and realism check ... 90
9. Results of a hierarchical regression on job pursuit intention ... 91
10. Estimation of the mediation model ... 92
11. Estimation of the second-stage dual-moderated mediation model ... 94
12. Conceptual- and statistical diagram PROCESS Model 9 ... 95
13. Results of additional analysis [first-stage dual moderation mediation model] ... 96
Table overview
Table 1: Treatment group manipulations ... 30Table 2: Reliability of the measurement instruments ... 34
Table 3: Normality testing ... 36
Table 4: Means, standard deviations, and correlations ... 38
Table 5: The effects of CSR engagement on trustworthiness ... 42
Table 6: The effects of trustworthiness on the individual’s job pursuit intention ... 43
Table 7: The moderating effects of self-enhancement and self-transcendence ... 45
Figure overview
Figure 1. The conceptual model ... 19Figure 2: Direct effects of CSR engagement on job pursuit intention ... 41
Figure 3: Relationships in PROCESS Model 4 ... 42
Figure 4: Relationships in PROCESS Model 16 ... 44
1. Introduction
Although the origins (Carroll, 1999; Carroll & Shabana, 2010) and definition (Dahlsrud, 2008) of CSR remain ambiguous, its importance in today’s business environment is undebatable. Firms experience increasing pressures to incorporate ethics and philanthropy into their operations (Carroll, 2015) and, hence, are expected to exhibit some degree of CSR in their business practices. This trend is evident when looking at KPMG’s survey regarding CSR (KPMG, 2015), which shows that 92% of G2501 firms report on their CSR activities. Inevitably, scholarly attention to firms’ responsibilities towards society has increased over the last few decades (Fatma & Rahman, 2015).
CSR is a multi-level concept (Aguilera, Rupp, Williams, & Ganapathi, 2007), however research primarily focused on the macro-level until the 21st century (Aguinis & Glavas, 2012),
approaching it from a firm-perspective with stakeholder theory at the centre of the analysis (Rupp & Mallory, 2015). Meanwhile, micro-level CSR research was underdeveloped, accounting for only 4% of CSR studies in 2012 (Aguinis & Glavas, 2012), even though it is suggested to essentially drive the concept (Crilly, Schneider, & Zollo, 2008). Considering its potential value in opening the ‘black-box’ of macro-level results (Aguinis & Glavas, 2013), it is unsurprising that research increasingly adopts a person-centric view, examining how CSR affects the individual (i.e. the psychological microfoundations of CSR, or ‘micro-CSR’) (Rupp & Mallory, 2015). Although micro-CSR literature is growing, little attention is paid to the effects of CSR on potential employees (Jones & Rupp, 2014). Considering that attracting a high-quality workforce is essential to compete in today’s business environment (Bhattacharya, Korschun, & Sen, 2009), the effects of CSR engagement on the potential employee should be researched more extensively.
This paper contributes to the need for integration of CSR’s micro-level and macro-level theory (M.-D. P. Lee, 2008), by empirically testing the mediating role of trustworthiness in the relationship between firm CSR engagement and the individual’s job pursuit intention. This three-fold mediator design, distinguishing the dimensions of trustworthiness (ability, benevolence, and integrity) (Mayer, Davis, & Schoorman, 1995), enables a thorough exploration of CSR engagement’s influence on the individual’s behavioural intentions. A design that differentiates normative- (i.e. based on moral motives) and instrumental- (i.e. based on self-interested motives) CSR engagement (Glavas, 2016) in predicting job pursuit intention has never been used in micro-CSR research. Finally, this research examines the possible second-stage moderation effects of the individual’s self-enhancement and self-transcendence value orientation (Schwartz, 1992).
Moreover, this paper aims to extend managers’ knowledge on how CSR activities can contribute to- or obstruct the company’s recruitment efforts. Though CSR is suggested to increase organisational attractiveness (Weber, 2008) and contribute to recruitment strategies (Pohl & Tolhurst, 2010), micro-CSR research primarily highlights the positive effects of the concept (Rupp & Mallory, 2015). This paper, however, provides insights into both the merits and demerits of CSR engagement, thereby contributing to a better understanding of how managers can strategically deploy their CSR activities to attract their desired workforce.
The research is structured as follows. In chapter two, relevant literature on CSR and its psychological microfoundations is reviewed, based on which a gap in the literature is identified. Subsequently, the theoretical framework and the corresponding hypotheses are developed in chapter three. The fourth chapter elaborates on both the method and design of this research. In the fifth chapter, the analysis and results are presented. Finally, the last chapter comprises of a discussion, elaborating on the study’s contributions, the limitations, suggestions for future research, and the conclusion.
2. Literature Review
This chapter provides the research with contextual background. First it elaborates on the conceptualisation of CSR and discusses several important macro-level topics. Subsequently, the micro-CSR literature is reviewed and a gap in the literature is identified.
2.1 A prelude to micro-CSR theory
2.1.1 The conceptualisation of CSR
At the core of CSR theory is the debate on whether firms have responsibilities towards society beyond their main objective of profit generation (Glavas, 2016), or whether their only social responsibility is to make profits (Friedman, 1970, 2009). The concept has an extensively debated history: some authors argue that the basics of CSR-thinking (i.e. the idea that firms should to contribute to society’s welfare) have been around for centuries (Carroll, 1999), whereas others suggest that the publication of Bowen’s book “Social Responsibilities of Businessmen” is the moment that CSR actually originated (Valor, 2005).
Much like its roots, the definition of CSR remains ambiguous. Dahlsrud (2008) demonstrated this by comparing 37 different definitions of the concept. He concluded that, even though the definitions vary in one way or another, they cover similar content concerning five different dimensions: the stakeholder dimension, the social dimension, the economic dimension, the voluntariness dimension, and the environmental dimension. He argued that due to the similar content of the definitions, the absence of one generally accepted definition is less problematic. This paper adopts Aguinis’ (2011, p. 828) definition of CSR engagement, who captured the essence of the concept by describing it as “context-specific organisational actions and policies that take into account stakeholders’ expectations and the triple bottom line of economic, social, and environmental performance”.
2.1.2 Macro-level CSR
Over 50% of the peer-reviewed publications on CSR have been published since 2000 (Aguinis & Glavas, 2012) and, until recently, research predominantly focused on analysing organisational and firm level effects (M.-D. P. Lee, 2008). In macro-level literature, the debate concerning firms’ social responsibility is extended: if firms indeed have responsibilities beyond profit generation, are CSR activities normative (i.e. are firms morally obligated to operate as such) or instrumental (i.e. do firms operate as such in their best interest) (Glavas, 2016)? Bénabou and Tirole (2010), for example, posit that CSR activities can either be voluntarily or based upon self-interested motives. Conversely, Waldman, Siegel, and Javidan (2006) argue that CSR activities should to be beyond the self-interest of the firm, its shareholders, and the requirements by law. Proponents of the normative case assert that instrumental CSR shouldn’t be classified as ‘genuine CSR’ and that stakeholders would discredit such firm behaviour rather than reward it (Weaver, Trevino, & Cochran, 1999). These two diverging views on the underlying motivations for CSR engagement are often referred to as, respectively, the ‘normative case’ and the ‘business case’ for CSR (Branco & Rodrigues, 2006). Smith (2003) points out that even though the two views are fundamentally different, firms can engage in CSR activities based on a combination of both. Despite the debate on whether the business case for CSR should indeed be considered as corporate social responsibility, firms without a doubt have varying underlying motives for engaging in such activities, making it an interesting topic to further explore.
In recent years, scepticism towards the business case for CSR expressed in various studies (e.g. Boulouta & Pitelis, 2014), yet given the number of firms engaging in socially responsible activities one would think that it has to yield some sort of benefits. An example of such benefits is at the core of the business case for CSR: it is suggested to have a positive influence on financial performance (Orlitzky, Schmidt, & Rynes, 2003; Tsoutsoura, 2004). The
relationship between CSR and the firm’s financial performance (CFP) has received a lot of attention from scholars. In the beginning of the 2000s, McWilliams and Siegel (2001) argued that after decades of research on this relationship, the results were divergent and hence the effects of CSR on CFP remained ambiguous. To this day, the literature still fails to provide a conclusive answer as to whether or not CSR leads to increased CFP (Lu, Chau, Wang, & Pan, 2014). Some authors argue that the divergent results are due to the large number of contingencies this relationship is dependent on, such as: media coverage (Chang, 2016), competitive action2 (K.-H. Kim, Kim, & Qian, 2015), normative- or instrumental CSR engagement (Tang, Hull, & Rothenberg, 2012), and several industry characteristics3 (Wang, Dou, & Jia, 2016). Glavas and Kelley (2014), however, argue that the diverging outcomes of CSR at the macro-level are due to the lack of including the concept’s effects on the individual in the analysis. This emphasises the need for further integration of the two levels of the concept.
Though the direct link between CSR and CFP is still questionable, the literature does seem to agree that CSR can contribute to firm performance through various mediators (Grewatsch & Kleindienst, 2015). The behaviours and attitudes of stakeholders are an eminent example of such mediators (Sen, Bhattacharya, & Korschun, 2006). The importance of stakeholders in driving firm performance has been established numerous times (Clarkson, 1995), highlighting the value of understanding how CSR influences their attitudes and behaviours (Glavas & Kelley, 2014). Over the years, CSR has become a principal component of the continuous dialogue between the firm and its stakeholders (Bhattacharya et al., 2009). Evidently, the scholarly world followed this trend by thoroughly examining CSR’s effects on various stakeholder-groups, such as the community, consumers, suppliers, shareholders, and employees (Jamali, 2008).
2 “A firm’s action that fulfils its economic responsibility” (K.-H. Kim, Kim, & Qian, 2015, p. 18) 3 The authors researched contingency factors such as market environment and institutional environment
Especially the effects of CSR on employees are interesting. Socially responsible activities are suggested to positively influence the employees’ motivation (Orlitzky, 2008) and morale (Branco & Rodrigues, 2006), their workplace attitude (Ballou, Godwin, & Shortridge, 2003), and commitment to the company (Slack, Corlett, & Morris, 2015). However, besides having positive effects on the behaviour of employees (Story & Neves, 2015), CSR seems to affect potential employees as well (i.e. applicants, job seekers, or any individual in the working population). By engaging in CSR activities, firms are suggested to enhance their reputation and increase employer attractiveness (Weber, 2008), enabling them to attract better employees (Greening & Turban, 2000). As a result, firms are able to obtain a competitive advantage in human resources through engaging in CSR practices, especially when considering that CSR’s positive effects in recruitment become stronger when seeking to attract highly educated applicants (Albinger & Freeman, 2000). As employees play a crucial role in a firm’s overall performance (Y.-K. Lee, Lee, Li, & others, 2012), attracting ‘the right employees’ is of vital importance to a firm’s continuity. Thus, since the firm’s dialogue with potential employees is pivotal to its overall performance, this study focusses on this stakeholder-group.
2.2 Corporate social responsibility at the micro-level
Micro-CSR theory was underdeveloped in 2012 and in need of integrating insights obtained from other micro-level theories, such as HRM, OB, and I-O psychology (Aguinis & Glavas, 2012). This observation is unsurprising as CSR is typically seen as a macro-level concept, involving firms that engage in socially responsible activities to contribute to society. In essence, however, it is the micro-level that drives the concept: it is the individual that expresses the need to engage in CSR, that actively implements the activities, and that is affected by it (Crilly et al., 2008). Various authors have stressed the need to expand the CSR literature by looking at it through a person-centric lens (e.g.: Aguinis & Glavas, 2012; Rupp, Ganapathi, Aguilera, & Williams, 2006), broadening the scope of the concept from the macro-level to the micro-level.
The literature increasingly seems to acknowledge the potential value of individual-level research in explaining macro-level outcomes of the concept (Aguinis & Glavas, 2013). However, the inverse of the relationship has also been suggested. Lee (2008) argued that there are links between macro institutional effects of firm CSR engagement and the individual’s behaviour. He concluded that there is a need for theory that integrates both levels.
At the organisational level, CSR comprises incorporating socially responsible activities in the firm’s strategy. At the micro-level, however, CSR focuses on how such programs and policies affect internal- and external stakeholders (Frederick, 2008). This is best worded by Rupp and Mallory (2015, p. 216), who define micro-CSR as “the study of the effects and experience of CSR (however it is defined) on individuals (in any stakeholder group) as examined at the individual level of the analysis”. Moreover, the definition of CSR engagement at the micro-level differs as well: “CSR-related attitudes (e.g. do people care about CSR?), decisions (e.g., do executives invest in CSR initiatives?), appraisals (e.g., do managers see CSR positively?), and behaviours (e.g., do employees adopt eco-friendly behaviours?)” (Gond, El Akremi, Swaen, & Babu, 2017, p. 228). At this level, three groups of stakeholders have been examined primarily: investors (Berens, Van Riel, & Van Rekom, 2007), customers (Martínez & del Bosque, 2013), and employees (Hameed, Riaz, Arain, & Farooq, 2016; Rupp et al., 2006). As empirical and theoretical evidence suggests that CSR is important to stakeholders (Dawkins & Lewis, 2003; McWilliams & Siegel, 2001; Pedersen, 2006), examining how the underlying psychological mechanisms work makes sense.
Recently, an extensive overview of the current state of micro-CSR theory was published (Gond et al., 2017) (Appendix 1). By using prior published review articles (e.g. Aguinis & Glavas, 2012; Rupp & Mallory, 2015) and including new insights from HRM literature, it proposes that micro-CSR literature comprises of three main areas; the drivers of-, the evaluations of-, and the reactions to the concept. Though the scope of the framework is far too
broad for this paper, it is a useful guideline in discussing essential micro-CSR concepts that are relevant in this research.
2.2.1 Mechanisms shaping the individual’s reactions to CSR
Micro-CSR theory posits that CSR can lead to a wide variety outcomes at the individual level (Glavas, 2016). However, how do these outcomes actually come into being? The outcomes of CSR are conditional to several psychological mechanisms. Though a variety of mechanisms have been examined and proposed, only very few offer a robust explanation of why an individual reacts to CSR in a certain way (Gond et al., 2017). Three mechanisms and their underlying theory that shape the individual’s reaction to CSR will be discussed: social exchange mechanisms, social identity and organisational identification mechanisms, and signalling mechanisms.
Social exchange mechanisms are derived from social exchange theory (Rupp & Mallory, 2015), which posits that employees’ reactions to CSR are governed by the sense of reciprocity (Gond et al., 2017): a norm of mutual repayment obligations between parties in social exchange relationships (Cropanzano & Mitchell, 2005). When the reciprocal nature of a relationship is perceived as bearing benefits by all involved parties, it develops positive sentiment which results in a sense of mutual trust, the fulfilling unspecified obligations, and shared values (Blau, 1964; Foa & Foa, 1980). Especially organisational trust is a mechanism that is able to appropriately represent social exchange between employers and employees (Aryee, Budhwar, & Chen, 2002; Farooq, Payaud, Merunka, & Valette-Florence, 2014), as it is suggested to be a principal end product of social exchange (Molm, Takahashi, & Peterson, 2000). Employees tend to exhibit more positive behaviours and attitudes towards firms when they perceive an exchange relationship to be more social rather than transactional (Cropanzano & Mitchell, 2005). Moreover, CSR activities are suggested to influence the employee’s
perception of a firm’s stakeholder treatment (i.e. perceiving them as more social), which triggers reciprocal mechanisms (Harrison, Bosse, & Phillips, 2010) and establishes a social exchange relationship as a result.
The second group of mechanisms originate from social identity theory and organisational identification theory (Gond et al., 2017). Though often considered as distinct theories (e.g.: Rupp & Mallory, 2015), the two are closely related. Social identity theory, as described by Ashfort and Mael (1989), stipulates that individuals create classifications of themselves and others. These classifications enable the individual to shape their self-concepts and create a social environment in which they can allocate themselves (Stets & Burke, 2000). Organisational identification theory builds on these insights and posits that individuals identify themselves with the organisations they are affiliated to (e.g.: an employer-employee relationship) (De Roeck & Delobbe, 2012). As a result they incorporate (favourable) aspects of the organisation into their own identity (Dutton, Dukerich, & Harquail, 1994). These mechanisms imply that work is related to the individual’s self-concept: the greater the alignment to the self-concept, the greater the employee’s identification with the firm. This, on its turn, results in a higher likelihood of positive effects such as increased organisational commitment or work satisfaction (Dutton et al., 1994).
Signalling theory, the underpinning of the third group of mechanisms, is primarily used to explain how a firm’s external CSR efforts are able to influence potential employees (Jones & Rupp, 2014). This theory posits that individuals are often unable to predict their employment experience at companies. As a result, the individual attempts to predict the outcome of working at a company by relying on indicators of possible employment experience (Spence, 1973). Thus, potential employees use contextual cues about firms in deciding where they want to be employed (Evans & Davis, 2011) and firm CSR engagement is suggested to provide such work-life and expectation cues (Rynes, 1991). Jones, Willness, and Madey (2014) recently tested
three different signal-based mechanisms through which CSR influences potential employees and found evidence to support all three mechanisms: 1) CSR sends signals concerning organisational values that shape the perceived value-fit, 2) CSR signals organisational prestige, informing individuals of the anticipated pride from being affiliated with the firm, and 3) CSR signals the firm’s prosocial orientation, shaping views on how the firm treats its employees.
In shaping the individual’s reaction to CSR, trust seems to be important; either as a consequence of- or as an antecedent to the underlying mechanisms (Gond et al., 2017). Trust is defined as “the willingness of a party to be vulnerable to the actions of another party based on the expectation that the other will perform a particular action important to the trustor, irrespective of the ability to monitor or control that other party” (Mayer et al., 1995, p. 712). As the definition delineates, trust is a function of two components. The first component is the trustor’s (i.e. the individual who trusts another party) propensity to trust, which represents the extent to which the trustor is willing to trust other parties. Propensity to trust by itself is not sufficient to establish trust (Mayer et al., 1995). Additionally, the trustor takes three characteristics of the trustee (i.e. the party that is to be trusted) into account that contribute to establishing a sense of trust: ability, benevolence, and integrity. An important distinction between these two antecedents of trust is that the trustor’s propensity to trust should be seen as a stable trait, whereas the trustworthiness characteristics of the trustee are malleable (Klotz, Motta Veiga, Buckley, & Gavin, 2013).
Trustworthiness of ability stems from the trustor’s belief that the trustee has competencies, a specific skill-set, and other traits that allow the trustee to be effective in performing its tasks (Mayer et al., 1995). Evidently, it is related to the extent that the trustor perceives the trustee to be an expert in the activities in which it engages (Giffin, 1967). Mayer et al. (1995, p. 718) note that in their model, ability “highlights the task- and situation-specific nature of the construct” instead of being applicable to a single domain. Trustworthiness of
benevolence hinges on the belief of the trustor that the trustee wants to do good (Mayer et al., 1995), rather than pursue goals based on an egocentric profit-oriented motivation. Thus it comprises placing the interest of others ahead of self-interest (Sirdeshmukh, Singh, & Sabol, 2002). The construct is suggested to be present when there is some specific attachment of the trustee to the trustor. Mayer et al. (1995) exemplify this by describing the relationship between a mentor (trustee) and protégé (trustor): though the mentor receives no extrinsic award, he/she does help the protégé, and, as a result, is perceived more favourable by the protégé. Though studies occasionally link benevolence and integrity, there is a clear distinction between both constructs. Trustworthiness of integrity is based the perception that the trustee values a set of principles that are considered acceptable or appropriate by the trustor (Mayer et al., 1995). Moreover, Mayer et al. (1995, p. 719) add that “the issue of acceptability precludes the argument that a party who is committed solely to the principle of profit seeking at all costs would be judged high in integrity (unless this principle is acceptable to the trustor)”. This notion delineates that, although it is possible that self-interested behaviour can lead to an increase of perceived trustworthiness of integrity (e.g. when the trustor deems such behaviour appropriate), it is generally seen as a construct that is based on high moral and ethical standards.
2.2.2 Evaluating CSR at the micro-level
Gond et al. (2017, p. 231) define evaluations as “the cognitive and affective processes by which people gather and organise information related to organisations’ CSR initiatives to form judgements about the initiatives, experience emotions resulting from their perceptions, and also attribute reasons to their origins”. Research suggests that the evaluations of the activities are highly important in determining reactions towards CSR, possibly even more than the objective rating of CSR activities (Rupp, Shao, Thornton, & Skarlicki, 2013).
The cognitive processes that the individual applies in evaluating CSR can be divided into two groups. The first group entails the framing of CSR perceptions. Initial studies in this field presumed an issue-based view, in which the individual’s CSR perceptions where organised based on the firm’s involvement in various issues (e.g.: social, environmental, or ethical issues) that the individual deemed important (Ford & McLaughlin, 1984). A different stream of research was based on the responsibility-based view, which posits that individuals use economic, legal, ethical, and discretionary dimensions of a firm and its corresponding activities to assess its corporate citizenship (Maignan & Ferrell, 2000). The lack of theoretical justification for the former and criticisms in response to the latter, prompted academics to look for other alternatives (Gond et al., 2017), resulting in the adoption of a justice-based view. Based on this view, Aguilera et al. (2007) argued that employees use the firm’s CSR activities to obtain information based on which they assess whether or not an it is operating fairly or not.
The second cognitive process concerns the causal attributions of CSR engagement. These processes are based on the premise that in evaluating an activity or action, the individual not only judges the tangible characteristics of the situation, but also the underlying motivations for the activity or action (Godfrey, 2005). Though these processes can lead to significant confusion for employees (e.g. a firm with ‘responsible’ activities, operating in an ‘irresponsible’ industry), they do adhere to the argument that people seem to care less about what others do than why they actually do it (Gilbert & Malone, 1995). Ellen, Webb, and Mohr (2006) argue that individuals consider four different motives for CSR: egoistic driven, value driven, stakeholder driven, and strategic driven. Not only is the underlying motivation important, but also its perceived sincerity or credibility (S. Kim & Lee, 2012). Yoon, Gürhan-Canli, and Schwarz (2006), for example, demonstrated that the effectiveness of CSR activities is largely dependent on the mediating role of the perceived sincerity of the underlying motives.
Contrary to the rich literature on cognitive processes, research on how the affective processes shape the individual’s evaluation of CSR activities is significantly less well developed (Gond et al., 2017). The link between emotions and CSR has been examined in several ways, for example: how they function as predictors to CSR engagement (Onkila, 2015) and how they mediate the relationship between CSR engagement and consumer satisfaction (e.g. Choi & Ng, 2011; Pérez & Del Bosque, 2015). Their role in evaluating CSR activities, however, is not yet examined.
2.2.3 The outcome of CSR at the individual level
The outcomes of CSR at the individual level can be seen as dyadic; they are either attitudinal or behavioural (Rupp et al., 2006). When reviewing studies that focus on attitudinal outcomes of CSR, it becomes apparent that the majority of studies explore the relationship between the employee’s perception of CSR and its effects on organisational commitment (Bashir, Hassan, & Cheema, 2012; S. B. Choi & Ebrahim, 2015). The literature seems to agree that firm CSR activities can enhance the employee’s organisational commitment (Turker, 2009). To ensure no question of causality remained unaddressed, the relationship has been tested using several mediating mechanisms, such as organisational identification (Farooq et al., 2014), as well as several moderating mechanisms, such as the person-CSR fit (Im, Chung, & Yang, 2016). By decomposing organisational commitment into several strands, scholars were able to study the relationship in more detail. This led to studies demonstrating CSR’s positive effects on, for example, employees’ affective commitment4 (Ditlev-Simonsen, 2015), employees’ attachment (E. M. Lee, Park, & Lee, 2013), and employees’ intention to refrain from quitting their job (Kundu & Gahlawat, 2015). Such outcomes are closely related to the influence of CSR engagement on the extent to which employees experience job satisfaction (Bettencourt &
4 The duty or pledge to the company
Brown, 1997) and employee engagement (Glavas & Piderit, 2009). Contrary to the rich literature on organisational commitment and equivalents, it is noteworthy that the understanding of CSR’s influence on organisational attractiveness for prospective employees (Joo, Moon, & Choi, 2016; Klimkiewicz & Oltra, 2017) and organisational identification (Farooq, Rupp, & Farooq, 2016) remains limited (Gond et al., 2017).
Additionally, a fair amount of research has focused on identifying and understanding the effects of CSR on the employee’s behaviour. CSR been proven on various occasions to influence the employee’s creativity (e.g.: Brammer, He, & Mellahi, 2015; Spanjol, Tam, & Tam, 2015). It further has a positive influence on the cooperation between employees, which can enhance the employee’s task performance (Shen & Benson, 2016). This impact on social interaction among employees is also observable in the extent to which employees share knowledge in firms engaging in CSR (Trong Tuan, 2013). Moreover, studies aiming to demonstrate behavioural outcomes have often used trust as a mediator. Hansen, Dunford, Boss, and Boss (2011), for example, used the mediation effect of organisational trust to link perceived corporate social responsibility to organisation citizenship behaviours (OCB). Raub and Blunschi (2014) add that besides enhancing OCB, CSR can increase personal initiative and decrease the likelihood of emotional exhaustion.
What is striking about the literature on micro-CSR outcomes, is that the majority of the research is aimed at establishing positive relationships between CSR and outcomes, neglecting the possibility that CSR might have negative consequences (Rupp & Mallory, 2015). This is clearly visible when reviewing the literature on both attitudinal and behavioural outcomes, as the majority of studies demonstrate either a positive relationship, or note that there is insignificant evidence to establish one (Gond et al., 2017). Although there is little research on CSR’s negative consequences, there is some. For example, Mallory and Rupp (2014) showed that under certain conditions CSR can lead to negative reactions of employees (e.g. when
resources are unfairly distributed towards CSR activities). Moreover, engaging in CSR could lead to ‘moral licencing’, resulting in less responsible behaviour because employees feel that they have contributed to society (Ormiston & Wong, 2013).
2.2.4 Clusters in the individual’s reaction to CSR
Jones and Rupp (2014) posit that there are similarities in the way individuals react to-, engage in-, and advocate for CSR at both the micro-level and the macro-level, as described in their C-S-R framework. These clusters are referred to as ‘concerns for CSR’ and are either care-based, self-based, or relationship-based (Jones & Rupp, 2014). Though the individual’s motives for engaging in- and advocating for CSR are not relevant to this research, similarities in how individuals react to CSR is.
The first cluster encompasses individuals who react to CSR based on other-concerning reasons (Morgeson, Aguinis, Waldman, & Siegel, 2013). These care-based concerns rely on the individual’s ethical standards (Aguilera et al., 2007), and assume that socially responsible activities are ‘the right thing to do’ from a moral perspective (Glavas, 2016). These concerns for CSR show similarities to Schwartz’ (1992) value orientation self-transcendence, which entails that the individual is primarily concerned with others and puts the interest of others ahead of those of him/herself. The dimensions underlying this construct (universalism and benevolence), include values such as being honest, caring about justice, and protecting the environment (Schwartz, 1994).
The second group originates from an instrumentalist view of CSR, encompassing individuals who interact with CSR aimed at serving their self-interest (Jones & Rupp, 2014). Self-interest and its relation to CSR is observed and examined at various levels within the firm; CEOs (e.g.: Fabrizi, Mallin, & Michelon, 2014; Jiraporn & Chintrakarn, 2013), executives (e.g.: Hafenbrädl & Waeger, 2016; Swanson, 1995), and employees (e.g.: Rupp et al., 2006).
Schwartz (1992, p. 43) argues that self-enhancement “motivates people to enhance their personal interests (even at the expense of others)”. He furthermore found that self-enhancement corresponds with values such as achievement, power, and hedonism (Schwartz, 1992). Such values, in turn, could limit the individual’s concern for the well-being of others (Schwartz & Bilsky, 1990).
Individuals in the third cluster interact with CSR based on the their psychological ‘need for belongingness’ (Aguilera et al., 2007), or: relationship-based concerns. These concerns include the desired outcomes of being related to a firm that engages in CSR, such as; anticipation of pride, organisational trust, and citizenship opportunities (Rupp & Mallory, 2015). Moreover, Aguilera et al. (2007) posit that CSR promotes positive social relationships between individuals, organisations, and communities, which emphasises the link between CSR and the individual’s relational concerns.
In addition to the three concerns derived from the C-S-R framework, the literature indicates that there are other factors that play a role in determining how an individual interacts with CSR. For example, both age (Wiernik, Ones, & Dilchert, 2013), and gender (Hatch & Stephen, 2015; Peterson, 2004), have been suggested to affect the individual’s reaction towards CSR. Moreover, the individual’s educational background (Sobczak, Debucquet, & Havard, 2006) seems to play a role in both how CSR is perceived and how one reacts to it. Finally, a stream of research is emerging which examines how emotions are related individual-level CSR (Supanti, Butcher, & Fredline, 2015), focusing on variables such as pride or moral affective states such as guilt and shame (Crilly et al., 2008).
2.3 Literature gap and research question
Though the literature on CSR has been developing for several decades (Carroll & Shabana, 2010), research on micro-CSR has just started to develop. Taking this into account, it is
unsurprising that micro-CSR theory still contains various gaps (Gond et al., 2017; Rupp & Mallory, 2015). The potential value of micro-CSR research, however, was identified almost a decade ago: Crilly et al. (2008) argued that linking macro institutional effects to the individual’s behaviour could lead to a better understanding of the concept of CSR as a whole, calling for ‘middle range theories’ that bridge the macro-level and the micro-level of the concept. The idea of linking the micro-level and macro-level of CSR was reiterated by Aguinis and Glavas (2013) several years later. Though repeatedly called for, CSR research explicitly linking the macro-level to the micro-level is still scarce.
When examining the research on micro-CSR outcomes more closely, it becomes clear that studies have primarily focused on the effect of CSR on employees (Brammer, Millington, & Rayton, 2007), with less focus on its effects on attracting employees and the underlying processes (Jones et al., 2014). Moreover, though it is argued that the underlying motives for CSR can result in different outcomes (Vlachos, Tsamakos, Vrechopoulos, & Avramidis, 2009), a similar distinction has never been made when researching the concept’s effects on job pursuit intention. This is an interesting observation; though organisational attractiveness has been examined numerous times at the macro-level (Backhaus, Stone, & Heiner, 2002), it is still incomplete at the micro-level.
The mediating role of trust has been researched on various occasions in micro-CSR literature, examining its role in the effects of CSR on employees (Hansen et al., 2011), consumers (Martínez & del Bosque, 2013), and stakeholders in general (Fatma, Rahman, & Khan, 2015). However, similar to the lack of research on the relationship between the underlying motive for CSR engagement and job pursuit intention, the exploration of the potential mediating effects of trustworthiness is scarce.
Taking these three observations into account, a clear gap in the literature becomes apparent. To fill this gap, this research attempts answer the following research question:
How is the influence of a firm’s CSR engagement on the individual’s job pursuit intention mediated by the firm’s trustworthiness?
In examining this relationship, this research considers potential boundary conditions by including the individual’s self-based and moral-based concern for CSR as moderators. Therefore, to answer the research question, the following sub-questions will be answered:
1. Does the firm’s motive for CSR engagement differently affect the various dimensions of trustworthiness?
2. Do the various types of trustworthiness have similar effects on the individual’s job pursuit intention?
3. What (if any) is the moderating effect of the individual’s concerns for CSR on the relationship between firm CSR engagement and the type of trustworthiness it evokes?
3. Theoretical framework
In this chapter, the hypotheses of the research are developed. Figure 1 provides an overview of the expected relationships.
Figure 1. The conceptual model
3.1 Trustworthiness as a three-fold mediation mechanism
Previous studies suggested that both varying levels of firm CSR engagement (Duarte, Gomes, & Das Neves, 2014), as well as different underlying motives for CSR engagement (Vlachos et al., 2009), lead to divergent outcomes at the individual-level. In line with these studies, this paper posits that varying underlying motive for CSR activities will have divergent effects on the individual’s job pursuit intention. Two forms of CSR engagement are included in the analysis, each hinging on a different motive: normative CSR engagement (based on a moral motive) and instrumental CSR engagement (based on a self-interested motive) (Glavas, 2016). Furthermore, neutral CSR engagement (i.e. not disclosing the underlying motive) is used as a baseline to enable comparison. Drawing on Spence’s (1973) signalling theory, this paper posits that CSR engagement provides cues to potential employees concerning the firm’s
trustworthiness. In accordance with Mayer et al. (1995), three dimensions of trustworthiness are examined: ability, benevolence, and integrity. Thus, this paper posits that the underlying motives for CSR activities provide signals to individuals on which they base their perception of the firm’s trustworthiness.
In research on consumer buying behaviour, ethical- and pro-social behaviour is suggested to be related to a perceived lack of competence (Aaker, Vohs, & Mogilner, 2010). Though Aaker et al. (2010) focused on non-profit and for-profit organisations, their conclusion does raise an interesting point: moral-based CSR engagement could be a signal which leads the individual to perceive the firm as less competent. As a result, firms displaying such behaviour would score lower on the trustworthiness of their ability. Literature on the consumer’s product preferences makes similar suggestions. Studies have found that if a product boasts sustainability as a trait, it does not necessarily increase the consumer’s preference for a product. In some situations, it can even be a liability, especially when the consumer intends to buy a product in which strength is valued (Luchs, Naylor, Irwin, & Raghunathan, 2010). Lin and Chang (2012) support this, suggesting that consumers tend to consider environmentally friendly products to be less effective than regular products. The underlying rationale is captured by Sen and Bhattacharya (2001), who found in consumer buying behaviour what I essentially hypothesis: a trade-off between CSR activities and the perceived corporate competence. This corresponds with the following hypotheses:
H1a: If the firm exhibits normative CSR engagement, rather than neutral, the trustworthiness of the firm’s ability will decrease.
H1b: If the firm exhibits instrumental CSR engagement, rather than neutral, the trustworthiness of the firm’s ability will increase.
H1c: If the firm exhibits instrumental CSR engagement, rather than normative CSR engagement, the trustworthiness of the firm’s ability will be significantly higher.
Trustworthiness of benevolence essentially is “the perception of a positive orientation of the trustee toward the trustor” (Mayer et al., 1995, p. 719), which means that the trustee wants to do good to the trustor, rather than operate based on self-interested motives. Concepts that are either related to- or considered to be synonyms of- benevolence include an inverse relationship of the trustee’s motivation to lie (Hovland, Janis, & Kelley, 1953), the trustee’s altruism (Stimpson & Maughan, 1978), and loyalty (Butler Jr & Cantrell, 1984). The common ground between normative CSR engagement and benevolence is obvious: both include a moral component, both set the concern for others ahead of self-interest, and both adhere to values such as loyalty and altruism. Conversely, the mismatch of trustworthiness of benevolence and instrumental CSR is clear as well: poised at profit maximisation, instrumental CSR engagement does not pair with the core principles of trustworthiness of the firm’s benevolence (M. K. Lee & Turban, 2001). Moreover, profit-maximising firms are suggested to be more prone to over-communicating and, on occasion, lying about CSR activities (i.e. green-washing) (Walker & Wan, 2012). Finally, literature on CSR activities suggest that when there is suspicion concerning the underlying motives for CSR activities or when the underlying motives are perceived as insincere (i.e. self-interested), the results of the activities become ineffective and in some cases even negative (Yoon et al., 2006). This leads to the following hypotheses about the relationship between CSR engagement and trustworthiness of the firm’s benevolence:
H2a: If the firm exhibits normative CSR engagement, rather than neutral, the trustworthiness of the firm’s benevolence will increase.
H2b: If the firm exhibits instrumental CSR engagement, rather than neutral, the trustworthiness of the firm’s benevolence will decrease.
H2c: If the firm exhibits normative CSR engagement, rather than instrumental CSR engagement, the trustworthiness of the firm’s benevolence will be significantly higher.
Various studies have proposed that firms value the integrity testing of their potential applicants (e.g. Byle & Holtgraves, 2008). However, the inverse is suggested as well: the individual bestows a degree of trustworthiness of the firm’s integrity based on the information that is available to him or her (Adler, 2012). As trustworthiness of integrity hinges on value-congruence it could, under the right circumstances, be the result of instrumental CSR (e.g. when the trustor considers self-interested behaviour appropriate). However, its widely used measurement instrument seems to be poised at moral- and ethical appropriateness. The link between the normative case and integrity made on several occasions. Brown (2005), for example, called for moving beyond the business case for CSR, expressing the need for corporate integrity in the firm’s business practices. In leadership research, it is further argued that behavioural integrity is related to value-based types of corporate social responsibility (Angus-Leppan, Metcalf, & Benn, 2010). Ethical leadership (i.e. leadership based on moral values) is assigned traits such as honesty, integrity, doing the right thing, and demonstrating morality (Treviño, Brown, & Hartman, 2003). This is in line with Veríssimo and Lacerda’s results (2015) who emphasise the relationship between behavioural integrity and CSR engagement that goes beyond the firm’s self-interest. As a result, I hypothesise the following.
H3a: If the firm exhibits normative CSR engagement, rather than neutral, the trustworthiness of the firm’s integrity increases.
H3b: If the firm exhibits instrumental CSR engagement, rather than neutral, the trustworthiness of the firm’s integrity decreases.
H3c: If the firm exhibits normative CSR engagement, rather than instrumental CSR engagement, the trustworthiness of the firm’s integrity will increase.
3.2 Trustworthiness and job pursuit intention
In research on employee commitment (Farooq et al., 2014), organisational identification (De Roeck & Delobbe, 2012), and stakeholder engagement (Fatma et al., 2015), trust fosters positive mediation effects between the organisation and the individual. Since trustworthiness is a precedent to trust, it functions as a basis on which a strong trust-based relationship can be built, allowing both the firm and the individual to realise potential benefits of such a relationship (Klotz et al., 2013). As a result, one could argue that increased trustworthiness leads to increased job pursuit intention, regardless of the dimension of trustworthiness. However, there are more indications that this is the case. If the firm is perceived as benevolent and, hence, engages in CSR based on an ‘other-orientation’, stakeholders perceive CSR activities a demonstration that the firm cares for the well-being of all their stakeholders (Farooq et al., 2014). This would mean that the potential employee believes such a firm to be good to its employees, thereby increasing job pursuit intention. There also seems to be a clear relationship between corporate ability and job pursuit intention. Tsai, Lin, Ma, and Wang (2015) found that perceived corporate ability positively influences organisational attractiveness, which, in its turn, has a positive impact on the individual’s job pursuit intention. Finally, the Attraction-Selection-Attrition framework by Schneider, Goldstein, and Smith (1995) delineates that individuals are attracted to companies that they consider to be similar to themselves. This is confirmed by Meglino and Ravlin (1998), who argued that increased perceived value congruence leads to a higher likelihood of job choice. Evidently, morality plays a big part here as well: if a company’s leader scores high on perceived morality, a job seeker is more inclined to pursue a job at the company (Ogunfowora, 2014).
All three paths built on the same mechanisms: social identity theory (Ashforth & Mael, 1989) and organisational identity theory (Turban & Greening, 1997). For example, being employed at a firm that is perceived as engaging in moral activities is attractive for individuals
as it contributes to a positive self-concept (Turban & Greening, 1997). On the other hand, it is suggested that individuals often want to identify themselves with a highly capable firm as it is considered as a potential positive contribution to their self-definition. This means that individuals have the tendency to bestow the positive traits of their employer on themselves; when the firm is perceived as competent, the employers working at the firm define themselves as competent (Bhattacharya & Sen, 2003). This translates to the following to hypotheses:
H4a: Increased trustworthiness of the firm’s ability leads to higher job pursuit intention
H4b: Increased trustworthiness of the firm’s benevolence leads to higher job pursuit intention.
H4b: Increased trustworthiness of the firm’s integrity leads to higher job pursuit intention.
3.3 The moderating effects of the individual’s value orientation.
Now that it is clear how CSR engagement is expected to lead to increased job pursuit intention, it is important to consider when this actually happens. In other words: under what condition(s) does increased trustworthiness of either of the three trustee’s characteristics lead to increased job pursuit intention? Schuler and Cording (2006) argue that the effects of CSR on the individual are highly dependent on the individual’s moral values. More specifically: potential employees seem to react to an employer based on the perceived value-fit (Jones et al., 2014) and the perceived match between the individual’s ethical or moral frameworks and the activities of potential employers (Folger, Cropanzano, & Goldman, 2005). Evidently, the individual’s values are indicated to be an essential factor in determining his or her choices and decision criteria (Jager, Janssen, De Vries, De Greef, & Vlek, 2000). This suggests that the Jones and Rupp’s (2014) care-based and self-based concerns for CSR could have moderating effects on the relationship between trustworthiness and job pursuit intention. As there are no scales that accurately measure these concepts, Schwartz’ (1992) value orientations self-enhancement and self-transcendence are used as a proxy. Values are conceptualised as stable
beliefs concerning social behaviour and modes of existence that are deemed desirable by the individual (Jager et al., 2000). Value orientations essentially represent the extent to which individuals consider their own outcomes and those of others to be important, when making decisions in a situation that is characterised by social interdependence (McClintock, 1978). As previously noted, there are striking resemblances between care-based- and self-based concerns and, respectively, self-transcendence and self-enhancement (Schwartz, 1992).
Vermeir and Verbekke (2008) found that ‘power seekers’ (i.e. individuals with values such as having power over others, authority, and respect) were significantly less inclined to buy sustainable products than individuals with traditional values (i.e. being humble and polite). Individuals scoring high on enhancement (or: ‘individualists’) primarily pursue their self-interest and will not react positively on a trade-off that is not in their own benefit. Moral behaviour potentially incites a negative response from individuals scoring high on self-interested values as they signal that, in order to include such traits, other benefits are reduced. Conversely, the literature suggests that self-enhancement is linked to firms with a reputation of being competent (Mishina, Block, & Mannor, 2012). For some individuals the firm’s attractiveness is based on career success expectation (Tsai et al., 2015), compensation level (Aiman-Smith, Bauer, & Cable, 2001), promotion prospects (Judge & Bretz, 1992). Thus, when a firm scores high on trustworthiness of ability, one could argue that a self-enhancement oriented individual would expect his or her personal benefits of employment to be higher than when employed at a firm that is perceived as integer. As a result, I hypothesise the following:
H5a: An individual’s self-enhancement value orientation will positively influence the relationship between trustworthiness of the firm’s ability and job pursuit intention.
H5b: An individual’s self-enhancement value orientation will negatively influence the relationship between trustworthiness of the firm’s integrity and job pursuit intention.
Taking into account that self-enhancement and self-transcendence are polar opposites to each other (Aquino, Freeman, Reed II, Lim, & Felps, 2009), inverse moderation effects quickly come to mind. However, there are findings in the literature that suggest how self-transcendence could interact within the conceptual model. For example, Grunert and Juhl (1995) attempted to relate Schwartz’ value orientations to the individual’s environmental concern and the purchase of environmentally friendly products. They concluded that value dimensions such as benevolence and universalism (both components of self-transcendence) are related to sustainable behaviour. Such findings are unsurprising when taking the work by Boone, Declerck, and Kiyonari (2010) into account. They suggested that a core principle of individuals high on other-orientation (i.e. self-transcendence) is the expectation that their relational counterparts reciprocate. This, inherently, imposes a vulnerability on them, as the tendency to cooperate exposes them to the possibility of being exploited by non-reciprocating relational partners. As a result, such individuals look for trustworthiness of benevolence in their counterparts, thereby mitigating the possibility of exploitation by relational partners seeking to abuse their cooperative tendencies (Bogaert, Boone, & Declerck, 2008). Moreover, literature suggests that self-transcendence oriented individuals seem to consider moral goals and values as highly important (Aquino et al., 2009), while being less responsive to, for example, financial success (Grouzet et al., 2005). In conclusion, I hypothesise the following: individual’s that foster a self-transcendence value orientation consider the firm’s trustworthiness of both benevolence and integrity to be important in determining whether or not to pursue a job at a firm.
H6a: An individual’s self-transcendence value orientation will positively influence the relationship between trustworthiness of the firm’s benevolence and job pursuit intention. H6b: An individual’s self-transcendence value orientation will positively influence the relationship between trustworthiness of the firm’s integrity and job pursuit intention.
4. Method and design
This chapter provides a detailed, step by step description of the methodology and design used in this research. First, the method of this research is elaborated. Second, data collection and the sample are discussed briefly. Finally, the design of the research is explained in detail by elaborating on the procedure and structure, as well as the stimulus and measured variables.
4.1 Method
To answer the research question, this study adopted a quantitative approach by applying the vignette method, allowing the researcher to study the respondents’ attitudes, perception and beliefs (Finch, 1987). Emulating the first vignette experiment by Nosanchuk (1972), this study provided the subjects with a plain-language description of a situation, in this case: fictitious ‘Company X’. Three vignettes were used that were similar, yet not identical, as an important trait of Company X was manipulated in each of them (Wallander, 2009): the underlying motive for CSR engagement (i.e. the independent variable or IV). Each respondent was randomly assigned to a vignette and only saw one manipulation of the IV, thereby avoiding researcher induced bias (Saunders, Lewis, & Thornhill, 2009) and ensuring internal validity of the experiment (Berens et al., 2007). Thus, this paper adopted a 1 x 3 between-subjects design.
The vignette method is considered to be a reliable method to study the attitudes and behaviours of individuals (Alexander & Becker, 1978), making it suitable to analyse the individual’s job pursuit intention. The method allows the researcher to standardise the social stimuli across the respondents, while simultaneously making the decision-making situation closer to a real-life situation (Alexander & Becker, 1978). The resemblance with a real-life situation increases the likelihood that respondents’ reactions correspond with their reaction when facing a real-life situation (Hughes, 1998) and decreases the probability that they provide socially acceptable responses (Alexander & Becker, 1978).
4.2 Data collection and sample
To collect data, a Qualtrics-based survey was distributed via social media, primarily using the researcher’s network on Facebook. The survey took about 10 minutes to complete. This was considered to be a relatively inexpensive way to gather the respondents needed to find significant relationships within a short time frame (Saunders et al., 2009). The only costs involved was the purchase of a €50,- Bol.com gift-card, which the respondents could win by means of a raffle after completing the survey.
As a rule of thumb, each treatment-group in a vignette study needs approximately 50 respondents to find significant relationships (Saunders & Lewis, 2014). The program G*Power was used to ensure that a (more than) suitable sample size was gathered (Mayr, Erdfelder, Buchner, & Faul, 2007). The program calculated that, based on three treatment groups, a confidence level of 95%, and a small to average effect size of .10 (representing a conservative estimation of the effects), ±175 respondents were needed to find significant relationships.
Given the limited time-frame to collect gather data, data-collection occurred on a non-probability basis, tapping into the researcher’s network to gather data (Saunders et al., 2009). The specific sampling technique used was snowball-sampling (Saunders et al., 2009): by posting the survey link on social media and requesting the researcher’s network to both fill out the survey as well as share the link, a total of 229 completed surveys were gathered within a week (starting on May 11th, 2017).
The sample consisted of a healthy mix between men and women, accounting for, respectively, 112 (48.91%) and 117 (51.09%) respondents. The majority of the sample was aged between 20 and 29 years (91.70 %). As a result, the average age was 25.6 years, with the youngest participant being 19 and the oldest being 63. In total, four respondents refused to provide their age. Most of the participants indicated that their highest level of education was
either University of Applied Science (HBO, 20.96%), Bachelor of Science (BSc, 29.26%), or Master of Science (MSc, 41.92%). The majority of the respondents were employed (161 or 70.36%) rather than unemployed (68 or 29.69%). For an extensive overview of socio-demographic data, please refer to Appendix 2.
4.3 Procedure and survey structure
Before starting the survey, the participants were first presented with an introduction message, providing a short description of the research, an indication of the time required to participate, instructions on the procedure, a reminder of the raffle and the €50,- Bol.com gift-card prize, a statement of anonymity, and an expression of gratitude for participating in the experiment.
The survey was structured using the traditional vignette-study design (Atzmüller & Steiner, 2010). The first section encompassed the vignette experiment (Nosanchuk, 1972), aimed at examining the hypotheses of mediating effects of trustworthiness on the relationship between CSR engagement and job pursuit intention. The second section consisted of traditional survey-type questions for complementary measurement of respondent-specific characteristics (Atzmüller & Steiner, 2010), including data concerning the moderators and control variables.
At the end of the survey, the respondents were able to submit their e-mail address, allowing them to enter the raffle for the Bol.com gift-card and to opt-in to receive a copy of the study once it is finished. The structure of the survey is included in Appendix 3.
4.4 Stimulus and measured variables
4.4.1 The main manipulation
Each vignette were adapted from another thesis (Ensing, 2013) and consisted of a description of Company X; introducing the job vacancy, the company’s CSR activities, and the underlying motive for engaging in these activities. The respondent was first asked to imagine that he/she
was looking for a job and continued by explaining that Company X had a job vacancy which met the respondent’s requirements (Judge & Bretz, 1992). The description proceeded by elaborating on Company X’s CSR program and, to introduce the manipulation, the notion that “a reputable research organisation has investigated CSR programs in the industry of Company X”, followed by the results of their research (i.e. the underlying motives or IV). This specific context was adapted from a study by Bridoux, Stofberg, and Den Hartog (2015) and aimed at increasing the vignette’s credibility.
In the normative- and instrumental CSR engagement vignettes, an underlying reason for the activities of Company X was specified. The neutral CSR engagement vignette served as a baseline and, hence, did not specify the underlying motive for the activities. Table 1 provides an overview of the various treatment-groups and the vignettes are included in Appendix 4.
Table 1: Treatment group manipulations
4.4.2 Measured variables
Each measurement instrument that was included in the survey is briefly discussed in this sub-chapter. A complete overview of the scales can be found in Appendix 5.1-5.6.
The mediating variable
Trustworthiness – this construct was measured using an adaptation of the scale by Colquitt, Scott, and LePine (2007) scale, who modified Mayer and David’s (1999) original scale to make it applicable to any trustor-trustee relationship. The scale measures the trustworthiness of
Company X’s ability, benevolence, and integrity on, respectively, six, five, and six items. All items were measured using a 5-point Likert scale (1 = very unlikely, 5 = very likely) and includes items such as “the firm is very capable of performing the firm’s job”, “the firm is very concerned with my welfare”, and “the firm has a strong sense of justice”.
The dependent variable
Job pursuit intention – this construct was measured using a modified version of the five item scale by Avery et al. (2013). Each item was measured using a 7-point Likert scale (1 = strongly disagree, 7 = strongly agree). Examples of items on this scale are: “if I was offered a job there, I would accept the offer” and “if I were looking for a job, I would be interested in pursuing an application with this company”.
Manipulation checks
CSR engagement – to test whether or not respondents perceived the manipulation of the IV correctly, a manipulation check was included in the survey. An adaptation of the scale by Groza, Pronschinske, and Walker (2011) was used, which measures the perceived value-driven attributions (i.e. normative traits) and strategic-driven attributions (i.e. instrumental traits) of CSR engagement, using a total of six items. The items were measured on a 7-point Likert scale (1 = strongly disagree, 7 = strongly agree). Examples of items include: “the company has a long-term interest in society” and “the company expects to get more customers because of its CSR activities”.
Realism – to ensure external validity of the research, a realism check was included (Rossi & Anderson, 1982). In line with Dabholkar’s (1994) study, the respondents were asked to indicate the extent to which they agreed with two statements: “the situation described was realistic” and “I had no difficulty imagining myself in the situation”. Both items were measured on a 7-point Likert scale (1 = strongly disagree, 7 = strongly agree).
