THE INFLUENCE OF CSR ACTIVITIES ON ETHICAL BEHAVIOUR OF EMPLOYEES

THE INFLUENCE OF CSR ACTIVITIES ON ETHICAL

BEHAVIOUR OF EMPLOYEES

Master thesis, Msc, Human Resource Management University of Groningen, Faculty of Economics and Business

June 11, 2017 ESTHER MANAFI Studentnumber: 3199754 Plutolaan 329/315 9742 GK Groningen tel.: +31 (0)633-223453 e-mail: e.manafi@student.rug.nl Supervisor Dr. Laetitia B. Mulder

TABLE OF CONTENT LIST OF TABLES ... 3 LIST OF FIGURES ... 4 ABSTRACT ... 5 INTRODUCTION ... 6 BACKGROUND ... 8 Ethical behaviour ... 8 CSR activities ... 9

The relationship between CSR activities and ethical behaviour ... 10

Organizational identification ... 12

The moderating role of organizational identification ... 12

METHOD ... 16

Participants and design ... 16

Procedure ... 17 Manipulation ... 18 Measures ... 18 RESULTS ... 22 Prior analysis ... 22 Correlations ... 22 Hypotheses testing ... 25 Additional analyses ... 27 DISCUSSION ... 30 Findings ... 31

Theoretical and managerial implications ... 32

Strengths, limitations and future directions ... 34

Conclusion ... 35

REFERENCES ... 36

APPENDIX A: Measures ... 40

APPENDIX B: Moderation effect of OID (statements) on CSR and role model ... 42

LIST OF FIGURES

FIGURE 1 ... 14

FIGURE 2 ... 16

FIGURE 3 ... 30

THE INFLUENCE OF CSR ACTIVITIES ON ETHICAL BEHAVIOUR OF EMPLOYEES

ABSTRACT

Topics like sustainability, a company’s ecological footprint and corporate social responsibility (CSR) are receiving more attention nowadays than ever before. The positive impacts that these initiatives have outside of a company are already well known. However, the influence these subjects can have within an organization are still being researched. This study proposes an influence of CSR activities on individual’s ethical behaviour, which could be positive, due to individuals imitating the example of the company, or negative, because of the individuals legitimating small unethical actions based on the ethical behaviour of the company. Furthermore, this research suggests that organizational identification moderates this relationship. High organizational identification could make individuals less prone to behave immoral because they internalize the company’s values. Albeit, a high level of identification could also lead to individuals justifying small unethical actions based on the company’s ethical behaviour, since those ethical acts of the company are perceived as their own.

In a manipulation among students of the Rijksuniversiteit Groningen (RUG), the participants’ ethical behaviour was tested. Prior, part of the students were shown the true involvement of the RUG in CSR to detect differences in the outcome. The proposed connections were examined and the results showed a positive influence of CSR activities on the ethical behaviour of students. Furthermore, higher organizational identification lead to higher interpersonal citizenship behaviour.

THE INFLUENCE OF CSR ACTIVITIES ON ETHICAL BEHAVIOUR OF EMPLOYEES

INTRODUCTION

Many companies nowadays invest in various types of ethical behaviours and actions, one being corporate social responsibility (CSR). Organizations may use CSR as an instrument to increase their short-term value, to legitimate their actions towards the public or for moral reasons, which are defined as bringing justice to involved parties even in the absence of economic gain (Dare, 2016).

CSR activities have been found to be well received by the company’s employees and positively impact employee’s creative effort, job satisfaction, commitment, and trust. Moreover, CSR activities increase the sense of unity among employees, which enables the employees to work more effectively together (Brammer, He & Mellahi, 2015; D’Aprile & Talò, 2015).

Ethical behaviour among employees has already established itself as an important objective for companies. Companies not only aim to decrease unethical behaviour, such as sabotage, fraud, and sexual harassment, but companies are also more and more concerned with values such as transparency, communication, respect, empathy and inclusiveness. The promotion and clear communication of such values aim to promote the alignment of employee’s behaviour accordingly. Thus, companies create guidelines for the employees, which aim on the one hand to prevent the employees to operate unethically and on the other hand, encourage the employees to behave in an ethical manner (D’Aprile & Talò, 2015).

individuals who identify highly with a group align their behaviour in accordance to group norms (Louis, Davies, Smith & Terry, 2007).

Nevertheless, Mazar and Zhong (2010) provide evidence, that past ethical actions often make individuals feel entitled to act immorally in a current situation. Due to previous moral performances, individuals perceive that they have done enough good to justify some bad actions. This phenomenon is called moral licensing. If employees identify highly with the organization, moral licensing could lead to employees perceiving the good acts of the companies as their own, resulting in legitimating unethical behaviour.

This research proposes a relationship between CSR and ethical behaviour, which will be further investigated. Although the impact of CSR on several individual factors has been done, the possible influence of CSR activities on ethical behaviour needs to be deeper examined. A better understanding of the connection between CSR activities and ethical behaviour will enable companies to gain knowledge about how their employees are influenced. Based on this information, companies will know how to align their actions and promotion of CSR involvement to increase ethical behaviour.

Moreover, organizational identification has not been examined in a moderating role on the relationship of CSR activities and ethical behaviour. Most studies considered organizational identification only as an outcome of CSR activities (Glavas & Godwin, 2013; D’Aprile & Talò, 2015; Brammer, He & Mellahi, 2015).

In summary, this research proposes a moderating effect of organizational identification on the relationship between CSR activities and ethical behaviour of employees. The following research questions will be investigated:

How does CSR affect ethical behaviour of employees? How is this relationship influenced by organizational identification?

BACKGROUND

Ethical behaviour

There are several different definitions of ethical behaviour and what requirements need to be met for actions to qualify as ethical. A coherent view is that behaviour is automatically unethical if it is not legal. However, simply meeting the minimum legal standards does not necessarily imply conformation to accepted guidelines of the community. Just because behaviour is not seen as illegal does not rule out the possibility of the action having a harmful effect on others. Thus, it might not qualify as ethical behaviour. Ethical behaviour can be identified as actions that are simultaneously viewed as legal and morally acceptable by most the community. If behaviour meets the minimum moral standards of society, such as treating people with respect, it can be regarded as ethical behaviour. If behaviour goes above moral requirements, like charitable donations, the behaviour can be defined as extraordinary ethical behaviour (Hegarty & Sims, 1978; Jones, 1991; Treviño, den Niewenboer & Kish-Gephart, 2014; Gino Schweitzer, Mead & Ariely, 2011).

CSR activities

CSR activities are defined as actions that aim to further additional social good and go beyond the interests of the organization and legal requirements. In other words, CSR activities are voluntary contributions of a company for a sustainable development of society that do not primarily aim at making profit for the company. Companies initiate a contribution to the community, or the prioritization of societal issues, by going beyond obeying the legal conditions without favouring the basic economic objectives of the company itself in the interest of stimulating good. For the sake of giving back to larger society companies set up CSR activities, which often request investing more resources without getting an equal return on investment (McWilliams & Siegel, 2001; Doh, Littell and Quigley, 2015).

Despite companies not receiving an equal return on investment, there are external benefits to setting up CSR activities. Companies oftentimes use CSR to create an image of responsibility, sustainability and trustworthiness towards their stakeholders. An example would be the formulation of a code of conduct. If the company establishes a code of conduct, it shows their commitment to fairness and transparency. Thus, CSR has external benefits outside of the company, such as improving the company’s reputation and competitiveness (D’Aprile & Talò 2015).

be one of the main objectives of every company (D’Aprile & Talò, 2015; Brammer, He & Mellahi, 2015).

The relationship between CSR activities and ethical behaviour

After defining ethical behaviour and CSR activities the possible positive influence of CSR activities on ethical behaviour of employees will be illustrated using social learning theory. In summary, this theory states that observing the behaviour of others leads to the individual realizing underlying behaviour tactics. Then, this realization of the individual results in the adaption of one’s own behaviour according to the observed tactics. In other words, residing within a certain culture and having repeated contact with this culture evokes the creation of behaviour examples based on others within the culture. These examples are used by individuals to differentiate between what actions are judged or accepted and how actions are evaluated. Together these examples of how to behave form a framework, per which individuals align their behaviour. Furthermore, if a company practices reinforcing practices, such as CSR activities, this framework gets strengthened per social learning theory. Therefore, a culture in which individuals encounter the promotion of ethical behaviour among employees and through the company itself should lead to individuals emulating ethical actions, because colleagues and the company itself act as role models within the culture and are the basis for the individual’s framework (Bandura, 1978).

behaviour, if reinforcement activities are in place, has not been investigated. However, the research by Treviño and Youngblood (1990) and Ashfort et al. (2008) supports the assumption that observed behaviour within a culture leads to imitated individual behaviour of the employee. If an individual lacks interaction with colleagues, another source for ethical guidance can be found in a leader. Ethical leadership can positively influence the ethical behaviour of employees because individuals seek ethical guidance outside of oneself. In case the individual is not able to find ethical direction among his colleagues an inspiring, stimulating leader would make a significant difference. Ethical leadership creates a credible, attractive and believable example of the leader. Thus, forming guidelines of how to behave, which strongly influence employee’s effort and actions to strive for this ethical example (Brown, Treviño & Harrison, 2005).

The results of the experiment of Rosenhan & White (1967) further support this subject. The authors researched the behaviour of individuals playing a game and afterward receiving the opportunity to donate some of their winnings. The game included two rounds and some of the participants observed a more experienced individual play and behave pro-social in the first round. The results of this research show that participants who observed the model in the first round acted more pro-social in absence of this model in the second round.

Based on social learning theory, role modelling and ethical leadership the following hypothesis is proposed:

Organizational identification

Organizational identification is a construct that can’t be generalized for all employees within a company because it describes the employee’s unique match between the individual’s perception of the company and their self. More precisely, organizational identification is the psychological intertwining of one’s perception of oneself with the group and its fate, the personal experience of failures and achievements of the company and the internalization of attributes and values. Thus, one can assume that every employee within a company would highlight other aspects of a company and perceive the organization’s identity differently, simply because every employee has a unique perception of their own identity and evaluates the organization’s identity on how this image reinforces the perception of themselves and enhances the self-esteem of the employee (Ashfort & Mael, 1989; Dukerich, Golden & Shortell, 2002).

Dutton, Dukerich, and Harquail (1994) further support this definition of organizational identification. The authors describe it as a cognitive connection an individual can have with their employer. They highlight that an individual’s self-concept overlaps to a certain degree with the individual’s perceived identity of the company and the amount of the overlap is then the level of the individual’s organizational identification.

The moderating role of organizational identification

This research suggests that the proposed positive relationship between CSR activities and ethical behaviour might be stronger due to higher organizational identification.

and are motivated to align their actions with the company’s norms. To achieve this alignment employees adjust their behavioural intentions corresponding to the perceived norms of the company. The main reason for this compliance is employees experiencing the company’s attitudes as part of their own self. The individual determinants for behaviour become less relevant to the employee because the employee identifies highly with the company. Therefore, the employee’s choices are relying more on the group norms and values than their own personal ones, because their group identity is essential for their self-concept (Terry & Hogg, 1996; Jetten, Postmes & McAuliffe, 2002; Van Maanen & Barley, 1984; Ashforth & Mael, 1989).

An example for integrating group norms because of high commitment would be the research of Louis et al. (2007). This study proved that group identity was an important influence on individual behaviour. The influence of group identification was examined in relation to the perceived norm of eating habits among students. Results show that students, who identified highly with a group that showed an unhealthy eating norm were more likely to eat unhealthily. Applying this to a company setting the results of Louis et al. (2007) would indicate that individuals who highly identify with a company behave as the company does. The results of Jetten, Postmes & McAuliffe (2002) support this theory further. The authors found that individuals who identified highly with the norms of their group were more likely to perceive the group as an extension of their self and internalize communicated norms of the group. In other words, the individuals who identified highly with the group integrated more group norms when describing themselves.

With this argumentation in mind, the following hypothesis and conceptual model were formed.

FIGURE 1

Conceptual model 1

So far, CSR was argued to positively influence the ethical behaviour of employees, particularly when organizational identification is high. However, there is also reason to expect that CSR activities might negatively affect the ethical behaviour of employees, especially if employees identify highly with the organization. This theory is based on findings in regard to moral licensing.

The phenomenon of moral licensing needs to be taken into consideration. If an individual has engaged in selfless behaviour in the past those past ethical actions offset present unethical behaviour. This process is called moral licensing. Due to the comfort of past ethical behaviour, individuals are less compelled to show the same ethical behaviour in the current situation. Differently put, moral licensing can be compared to the process of moral accounting. If an individual behaved ethically in the past, they earned “moral credits”. These credits then allow the individual to behave unethically in the current situation, since their “moral bank account” has a certain amount of “moral balance” on it. Depending on the amount of moral “balance” there is on one’s account, one is more or less likely to act ethically. The main reason for this being, that people generally desire a moral self-image and their behaviour is hence linked to their perceived self-morality. Therefore, individuals who have behaved ethical in the past are

more inclined to act immorally due to their positive “balance”. This positive balance is going to compensate for present moral violations. However, individuals who have acted unethical and made a “drawing” from their ethical bank account are more likely to behave ethically to create a balance (West & Zhong, 2015; Shalvi, Gino, Barkan & Ayal, 2015; Mullen & Monin, 2016; Merritt, Effron & Monin, 2010).

More evidence of this topic was found through experiments of Mazar and Zhong (2010). They researched consumer behaviour after purchasing either green products, which are seen as more ethical since they are more environmentally friendly, or conventional ones. Their results show that on basis of the purchase of a green product, individuals experience a boost in their moral self-image, which allows them to weaken their regulation of their behaviour, ending in unethical actions. They feel licensed to behave selfish, due to the virtuous act they did before.

Taking the process of moral licensing into consideration I argue the following. Employees could feel as if the company’s good deeds earned them moral credits. In the case of CSR, this would mean that the more CSR activities a company has in place, the more licensed an employee feels to behave unethically because the employee feels as if they earned moral credits through the CSR activities of the company. Thus, allowing the employee to behave more unethically.

I argue that this negative effect could become even stronger if the employee identifies highly with the company. If an individual is part of a group or an organization and identifies highly with this group, the individual sees the membership as an extension of their self. Thus, an employee who identifies highly with a company is more likely to perceive the moral acts of the company as their own. This would earn the employee moral credits for the company’s CSR activities and license the employee to behave unethically.

Hypothesis 3: There is a negative relationship between CSR activities and ethical behaviour of employees.

Hypothesis 4: Organizational identification moderates the positive relationship between CSR activities and ethical behaviour of employees, which becomes weaker or negative if organizational identification is high and stronger or is not affected if organizational identification is low.

FIGURE 2

Conceptual model 2

METHOD

Participants and design

The sample (N = 178) consists of students from Rijksuniversiteit Groningen. The majority were in their Bachelor program (44.4%). The second most common program was the Master (40.4%) and lastly the Pre-Master program (15.2%). On average participants were 22.5 years old (SD = 2.55), with a gender distribution of 74.2% female and 25.8% male. The most common faculty was Economics and Business (56.2%), followed by Behavioural and Social

Sciences (19.7%), Arts (9%), Science and Engineering (6.7%), Law (4.5%), Medial Sciences (3.4%) and Spatial Sciences (0.6%).

Most participants were Dutch (46.6%) and the next biggest nationality was German (21.9%). The remaining 31.5% participants were mostly European (23.9%) and partly non-European (7.6%).

Data was collected through mobilizing the RUG student network and approaching students personally at the University Library City Centre as well as at the Zernike Campus in Groningen. Students who consented to participate, either answered the questions on a provided tablet or were given a link to do the survey on their laptops later. The survey was only available in English and participation was anonymous and voluntary.

The independent variable organizational identification and the dependent variable ethical behaviour were measured, whereas the perceived engagement of RUG in CSR (CSR/ No CSR) was manipulated. The participants were randomly assigned to one condition at the beginning of the experiment. Eighty-two participants were part of the CSR condition and 96 students were in the no CSR condition. More students in the second condition did not finish the experiment, thus creating uneven group sizes.

Procedure

First, demographic questions were presented and organizational identification with the RUG was measured.

Subsequently, manipulation checks were administered and then ethical behaviour was measured. Lastly, ethical leadership, role model, moral credits and perceived importance of CSR were measured as explanatory factors for possible effects.

Manipulation

The level of CSR was manipulated through showing the participants of the CSR condition the following text about the RUG’s true involvement in CSR activities: “Sustainability is one

of the main values of the Rijksuniversiteit Groningen (RUG). the RUG wants to integrate sustainability and responsible behaviour consistently throughout the university and its people to create a circular economy and a sustainable society. It is part of the RUG’s strategic plan to put their knowledge to use and turn it into sustainable economic and societal processes. For these reasons, RUG participates in several Corporate Social Responsibility activities.

One example would be the Eric Bleumink Fond (EBF) Scholarship for talented students from developing countries, for which there is also a crowdfunding account, where several students, alumni, and teachers donate to give some students access to a modern education system. Another project that concerns itself with some areas of CSR is the Ubbo Emmius Fund, founded by RUG. They organize activities and fundraise projects mainly in the areas of Healthy Ageing, Energy, and Sustainable Society, an example being research on a new method to defeat cancer.

Moreover, RUG takes actively part in the Netherlands Initiative for Capacity Development in Higher Education (NICHE), which organizes projects to improve post-secondary education in several countries. A project that finished in 2014 was about strengthening the financial decentralisation and local financial governance in Tanzania.”.

Measures

Manipulation check. Firstly, the participants answered the question “How much, in your view,

7=Exceptionally much). Secondly, they answered three statements about the engagement of the RUG in CSR (1=Strongly disagree, 7=Strongly agree): “CSR is an important topic within the RUG”, “The RUG engages highly in CSR.” and “The RUG engages more in CSR than most other universities.”. These four items formed one scale, with a Cronbach’s alpha of .87.

Organizational identification. Organizational identification was measured in two ways. First,

the participants’ level of organizational identification was measured through ten statements adapted from Mael and Tetrick (1992) (1= Strongly disagree, 7=Strongly agree), such as “When someone criticizes the RUG, it feels like a personal insult.” and “The RUG’s successes are my successes.” (α = .80).

Second, organizational identification was measured through a visual and verbal indication designed by Bergami & Bagozzi (2000). The participants needed to indicate their perception on how their own identity and the identity of their organization align, by selecting one out of 8 images of overlapping circles, as seen in Appendix A.

Ethical behaviour. To measure ethical behaviour, two different ways were used. First, the

participants read a scenario adapted from Zhong, Lount & Murnighan (2010) and chose between four responses, which represent different level of ethical responses. Higher scores indicated a more ethical choice. The participants received the following scenario: “You work

everything that you need to know by yourself. If you tell the professor that you are certified, you are sure that you will be given the position. What do you do?”. Based on this scenario the

participants were asked to choose between the following four responses: “Tell the professor that you are certified to use the equipment and accept the position.”, “Tell the professor that you can operate the equipment.”, “Tell the professor that you can operate the equipment but have not been certified.” or “Tell the professor that you are not certified.”.

Second, the students rated 13 items adapted from Setton & Mossholder (2002) concerning interpersonal citizenship behaviour on a 7-point Likert scale (1=Strongly disagree, 7=Strongly agree). For example: “[In the next coming weeks, I plan to] listen to fellow students when they have to get something off their chest”, “[…] make an extra effort to understand the problems faced by fellow students” and “[…] cheer up fellow students who are having a bad day” (α = .90). Additional random items were added, to reduce the chances of participants understanding what this study was investigating.

Ethical leadership. 10 items starting with “Generally, the Rijksuniversiteit Groningen…”

measured the students’ perception of the RUG as an ethical leader, such as “listens to what students have to say” and “makes fair and balanced decisions” (α = .90) (Brown, Treviño & Harrison, 2005).

Role model. Four, self-developed items were presented to the participant. Namely, these items

Moral credits. To measure moral credits three, self-developed statements were rated, namely

“The activities of the RUG make me feel good about myself.”, “If RUG takes part in CSR projects, I, as a member of the RUG, am indirectly doing that as well.” and “Being part of a university that emphasizes their social responsibility makes me feel good about myself.” (α = .72).

Perceived importance of CSR. Through four, self-developed statements the perceived

importance of CSR of the students was measured. Namely, these items were: “CSR is a topic that I personally care about.”, “It is important to me that my university engages in CSR.”, “Having my university promote CSR is not really important to me.” (recoded) and “CSR is a subject that I perceive as unimportant.” (recoded) (α = .83).

Control variables. Data on different control variables was collected, to enable a differentiation

RESULTS

Prior analysis

The original dataset included 188 participants. However, three participants who indicated “No” after being asked if they understood the provided definition of CSR in the beginning of the study were removed. Four participants were removed who stopped the experiment before answering the dependent variable measures and three participants were cut because their answering patterns indicated that these participants were not answering seriously. One of these three participants indicated he has been studying at the RUG for 69 years, one answered he was 112 years old and one indicated his hobby was “sex parties”. All three of them further showed extreme answering patterns either always answering 1 or 7.

To check for normal distribution, skewness and kurtosis levels of the dependent variables were checked to be within a certain range. For skewness, this range is 1; 1) and for kurtosis (-3; 3) (Bulmer, 1979). Furthermore, a visual inspection of probability and quantile plots was performed on ethical behaviour and interpersonal citizenship behaviour. Only the values of the ethical behaviour scenario showed a very high level of kurtosis, indicating that the distribution of the data is leptokurtic. However, due to an acceptable level of skewness (skewness = -.90), the data was not transformed.

Five outliers for interpersonal citizenship behaviour were detected, however using the interquartile range rule of 3 none were categorized as extreme outliers. Thus, none had to be deleted. Lastly, an analysis of homogeneity showed that this assumption was met.

Correlations

TABLE 1

Pearson's zero-order correlations

M SD 1 G 2 MC 3 PI 4 EL 5 RM 6 ER 7 C 8 OID S 9 OID C 10 ICB 11 EB S 1. Gender (1=Female, 2=Male) 1.26 .44 1

2. Moral credits 4.23 1.10 -.03 1

3. Perceived importance CSR 5.01 1.13 -.05 .27*** 1

4. Ethical Leader 4.90 .88 .05 .42*** .14 1

5. Role model 4.41 1.03 .14 .53*** .05 .70*** 1

6. Engagement RUG (Manipulation check) 4.51 .92 .06 .19* .20** .51*** .35*** 1

7. Condition (1= No CSR, 2=CSR) 1.46 .50 .05 .04 .01 -.02 -.40 .26*** 1

8. Organizational identification (statements) 4.10 .81 -.07 .44*** _{.08 .40}*** _.42*** _.18* _{-.07 1}

9. Organizational identification (circles) 4.13 1.29 -.01 .29*** _{.01 .24}** _.31*** _{.10 -.12 .47}*** ₁

10. Interpersonal Citizenship Behaviour 4.63 .88 -.16* .25*** .20** .28*** .31*** .16* -.07 .33*** .18* 1

11. Ethical behaviour (scenario) 2.97 .45 -.10 .001 .25** .03 -.02 .10 .17* -.004 .02 -27*** 1

Hypotheses testing

Manipulation check. To check if the manipulation of the condition worked, a univariate

ANOVA of the condition on the engagement of the RUG with organizational identification entered as a continuous variable in the model was performed.

The manipulation significantly affected perceived engagement of the RUG in CSR (p < .001, F = 12.68). People in the CSR condition rated the engagement of the RUG in CSR higher (M = 4.77, SD = .85) than people in the no CSR condition (M = 4.23, SD = .93). Also, organizational identification (statements) had a significant, direct effect on the engagement of the RUG (p < .01, F = 2.52). There was no interaction between the condition and organizational identification (statements) (p = .87, F = .68).

Neither a direct effect of organizational identification (circles) on the engagement of the RUG (p = .74, F = .58), nor an interaction effect with the condition were found (p = .28, F = 1.33).

Hypothesis 1 & 3. The first hypothesis of this study suggested there is a positive association

between CSR activities and ethical behaviour. The opposing third hypothesis proposed a negative association between CSR activities and ethical behaviour. There was no correlation between the condition and interpersonal citizenship behaviour (r = -.07, p = .38). However, there was a positive correlation between the condition and ethical behaviour (r = .17, p < .05). Thus, hypothesis 1 is supported for one of the measures and hypothesis 3 is not supported.

Hypothesis 2 & 3. The second hypothesis proposed a moderation of organizational

regression analyses (Hayes, 2012) were conducted with standardized moderator and independent variables. In Table 2 the results of all four analyses are shown.

Interpersonal citizenship behaviour was regressed on the condition and organizational identification (statements). No significant interaction was found with the condition and organizational identification statements on interpersonal citizenship behaviour (coeff = -.16, p = .20). The condition did not have a significant direct effect on interpersonal citizenship behaviour (coeff = -.08, p = .52). Organizational identification (statements) had a significant, positive, direct effect on interpersonal citizenship behaviour (coeff = .52, p < .01).

In the second regression analysis, interpersonal citizenship behaviour was regressed on the condition and organizational identification (circles). Organizational identification circles did not show an interaction effect with condition on interpersonal citizenship behaviour (coeff = -.14, p = .28), neither did the condition show a significant, direct effect (coeff = -.08, p = .28). Organizational identification (circles) had a direct, positive, marginally significant effect on interpersonal citizenship behaviour (coeff = .37, p < .10). These results suggest that the higher students identified with the RUG, the more ethical they behaved.

Ethical behaviour was regressed on organizational identification (statements) and the condition in the third regression analysis. No significant interaction effect was found (coeff = -.05, p = .48). However, a significant main effect of the condition on ethical behaviour could be seen (coeff = .15, p < .05).

TABLE 2 Moderation model

Note. N=178.

Additional analyses

Additional analyses were conducted to investigate the role of role model, ethical leader, moral credits, and perceived importance of CSR as mediators on interpersonal citizenship behaviour and ethical behaviour. For these analyses PROCESS model 4 macro regression analysis was used (Hayes, 2012).

A significant direct effect of role model on interpersonal citizenship behaviour was found (coeff = .27, p = .0001), but no direct effect was found of the condition on role model (coeff = -.08, p = .60) and no effect of the condition on interpersonal citizenship was found (coeff = -.10, p = .45). Lastly, no mediation occurred (LLCI = -.13, ULCI = .05).

Ethical behaviour Interpersonal Citizenship behaviour

coeff SE p LLCI ULCI coeff SE p LLCI ULCI

Interpersonal citizenship behaviour was regressed on the condition and ethical leader. No significant direct effect of the condition on interpersonal citizenship behaviour was found (coeff = -.11, p = .40) and no significant, direct effect of the condition on ethical leader was seen (coeff = -.04, p = .80). However, the direct effect of ethical leader on interpersonal citizenship behaviour was significant (coeff = .25, p = .0001). Thus, no mediation was found (LLCI = -.09, ULCI = .06).

Moral credits were not found to mediate the relationship between interpersonal citizenship behaviour and the condition (LLCI = -.04, ULCI = .10). The condition was not found to affect moral credits (coeff = .08, p = .61). The direct effect of moral credits on interpersonal citizenship behaviour was significant (coeff = .22, p = .0008) and the direct effect of the condition on interpersonal citizenship behaviour was insignificant (coeff = -.13, p = .30).

Interpersonal citizenship behaviour was then regressed on the condition and perceived importance of CSR. Although perceived importance of CSR has a significant, direct effect on interpersonal citizenship behaviour (coeff = .17, p = .009), neither a significant, direct effect of condition on perceived importance of CSR (coeff = .03, p = .85), nor an effect of the condition on interpersonal citizenship behaviour was found (coeff = -.12, p = .35). Therefore, a mediation could not be supported (LLCI = -.05, ULCI = .08).

Ethical behaviour was regressed on the condition and role model, which did not show a mediation (LLCI = -.01, ULCI = .02). Although the condition had a significant, direct effect on ethical behaviour (coeff = .15, p = .02), there was no direct effect of the condition on role model (coeff = -.08, p = .60) and no direct effect of role model on ethical behaviour (coeff = -.004, p = .90).

condition had no direct effect on ethical leader (coeff = -.04, p = .80). Therefore, no mediation was found (LLCI = -.02, ULCI = .01).

The condition was not found to affect moral credits (coeff = .08, p = .61) and no direct effect of moral credits on ethical behaviour was found (coeff = -.003, p = .94). However, there was a direct, significant effect of the condition on ethical behaviour (coeff = .15, p = .02). Moral credits was not supported to mediate the relationship between ethical behaviour and the condition (LLCI = -.02, ULCI = .01).

Lastly, ethical behaviour was regressed on the condition and perceived importance of CSR, which did not show a mediation (LLCI = -.03, ULCI = .06). Although perceived importance of CSR has a significant, direct effect on ethical behaviour (coeff = .11, p = .0007) and the condition had a significant direct effect on ethical behaviour (coeff = .15, p = .02), the condition did not affect perceived importance of CSR (coeff = .03, p = .85).

Furthermore, role model, ethical leader, moral credits, and perceived importance of CSR were regressed on the condition and organizational identification (statements) using PROCESS model 1 macro regression analyses (Hayes, 2012).

No interaction effect was found between organizational identification (statements) and ethical leader (coeff = .16, p = .18), moral credits (coeff = .15, p = .31), and perceived importance of CSR (coeff = .13, p = .46). However, a marginally significant interaction between the condition and organizational identification (statements) on role model was found (coeff = .27,

p = .06) and is shown in Figure 3. Further details about the regression can be found in Appendix

B.

There was no significant interaction between organizational identification (circles) and role model (coeff = .16, p = .30), moral credits (coeff = .14, p = .37), and perceived importance of CSR (coeff = .19, p = .28). Nevertheless, the interaction between the condition and organizational identification (circles) on ethical leader was significant (coeff = .27, p = .04) and can be seen in Figure 4. Additional information can be seen in Appendix C.

FIGURE 3

Interaction effect of organizational identification (statements) and CSR on role model

FIGURE 4

DISCUSSION

Findings

The goal of this research was to test the relationship between CSR activities and ethical behaviour and the moderating effect of organizational identification.

The results of this research demonstrated that CSR activities were positively associated with higher ethical behaviour, even though this was only proven for the ethical behaviour scenario. This suggests, that students who got informed about the involvement of the RUG in CSR chose a more ethical decision when confronted with the scenario in the university setting. Furthermore, a moderation of organizational identification was proposed for which opposing hypotheses concerning its effect were presented. The results pertaining to these hypotheses provided no support since no moderation of organizational identification on the relationship between CSR activities and ethical behaviour was found.

However, a direct, positive influence of organizational identification on interpersonal citizenship behaviour was found, indicating that students who identified highly with the RUG engaged in more interpersonal citizenship behaviour.

Theoretical and managerial implications

Theoretical implications. The present study indicates some theoretical implications for

research on CSR, ethical behaviour, and organizational identification.

This research shed some light on the suggested influence of CSR activities on individual ethical behaviour.

On the one hand, it showed that the higher the level of CSR activities was, the more ethical the individual behaved when choosing their response to the scenario. This positive relationship suggests that the higher the level of CSR activities is, the more ethical individuals behave when faced with a decision similar to the scenario. On the basis of social learning theory, this adaption of behaviour could be explained due to role modelling. In other words, the individual might consider the university as an example of how to behave and after reading about the involvement of the RUG in CSR, the individual felt more compelled to behave ethically (Bandura, 1978).

On the other hand, no significant effect of CSR activities on interpersonal citizenship behaviour could be found. A reason for the lack of effect could be because interpersonal citizenship behaviour was measured after the ethical behaviour scenario. Students might have felt as if they earned moral credits by choosing a more ethical response in the scenario, which licensed the students to indicate less interpersonal citizenship behaviour. This theory would be in line with the concept of moral licensing (Mullen & Monin, 2016; Merritt et al., 2010).

Furthermore, the proposed moderation of organizational identification did not occur, which could be due to a central tendency in the students’ responses of their organizational identification.

This relation shows that students who identify highly with the RUG engaged in more interpersonal citizenship behaviour, such as helping other students. If students identify highly with the RUG, it can be assumed that these students view the university as part of their self-concept (Jetten, Postmes & McAuliffe, 2002). Thus, this positive effect could be because individuals not only saw the university as an extension of themselves but also considered other students as part of their extended self since other students also belong to the RUG. Therefore, individuals strive to support colleagues as these colleagues are perceived as one with the RUG and the individual.

Lastly, the interaction effect of organizational identification (circles) with CSR activities on ethical leadership could be, because students who identify highly with the university perceive CSR as an important topic like the RUG does. The same reasoning can be applied to the interaction effect of organizational identification (statements) with CSR activities on role model. Due to the fact, that students perceive the RUG as an extension of their self and internalize the RUG’s values when organizational identification is high, the students would only perceive the RUG as a role model, if there are not only CSR activities in place, but the students also identify highly with the university and thus the subject of CSR.

Managerial implications. The findings of this study have several practical implications for

companies.

Firstly, this research highlights the influence of CSR activities on ethical behaviour. This relationship indicates, that the more companies invest in CSR activities, the more ethical their employees will behave. Therefore, employees might be more likely to report mistakes and communicate more openly if they are faced with a moral dilemma. To sum up, I recommend investing in CSR activities if the increase of ethical behaviour is a clear objective for a company.

interpersonal citizenship behaviour. In other words, employees will support their colleagues more, which will enable organizations to work more effectively and will create unity among employees.

Strengths, limitations and future directions

Within the present study, several limitations and strengths need to be noted, which are associated with this study’s design and participants. These must be incorporated when interpreting the results of this research.

Firstly, this research relied on self-report of individuals collected at only one point in time. Therefore, the collected data might be bias to factors such as socially desirable answers and individual perceptions.

Secondly, the high level of kurtosis of ethical behaviour needs to be noted. However, it is assumed that this might be due to too little variance in the possible answers. There was a requirement given in the scenario and two answers clearly included not disclosing one’s lack of certification to meet this requirement. Since there were only two other possible options, of which only one revealed the lack of certification, but attempted to get the position, this might be the reason why students mainly chose this answer as the students still wanted to try to get the position. Furthermore, as there was an effect found it can be presumed that the kurtosis was not a problem.

this study did not require students to perform tasks that would demand the knowledge of managers. Thus, students are assumed to have performed equally as managers would have (Katok, Thomas & Davis, 2008; Katok, 2011). Future research might benefit from applying this concept to multiple companies to investigate this effect in a more appropriate environment. Moreover, in the right setting, some assumptions could be investigated and tested hypotheses could be re-examined with higher levels of credibility.

Lastly, this research was not able to support all proposed hypotheses. An explanation for this could be, that the manipulation used in this research was not strong enough, meaning that the level of CSR was not perceived as high enough and therefore did not have the expected effects. The presented concepts could be investigated again with a stronger manipulation and a larger sample size with more heterogeneous participants, which would broaden the applicability of the results.

Conclusion

REFERENCES

Ashfort, B. E., Gioia, D. A., Robinson, S. L. & Treviño, L. K. 2008. Introduction to special topic forum: Re-viewing organizational corruption. Academy of Management Review, 33(3): 670-684.

Ashfort, B. E. & Mael, F. 1989. Social identity theory and the organization. The

Academy of Management Review, 14(1): 20-39.

Bandura, A. 1978. Social learning theory of aggression. Journal of Communication, 28(3): 12-29.

Bergami, M. & Bagozzi, R. P. 2000. Self-categorization, affective commitment and group self-esteem as distinct aspects of social identity in the organization. British Journal of

Social Psychology, 39: 555-577.

Brammer, S., He, H. & Mellahi, K. 2015. Corporate social responsibility, employee organizational identification, and creative effort: The moderating impact of corporate ability.

Group & Organization Management, 40(3): 323-352.

Brown, M. E., Treviño, L. K. & Harrison, D. A. 2005. Ethical leadership: A social learning perspective for construct development and testing. Organizational Behavior and

Human Decision Processes, 97: 117-134.

Bulmer, M. G. (1979). Principles of statistics. New York: Dover publ.

Dare, J. 1999. Will the truth set us free? An exploration of CSR motive and commitment.

Business and Society Review, 121(1): 85-122.

Doh, J., Littell, B. & Quigley N. 2015. CSR and sustainability in emerging markets: Societal, institutional, and organizational influences. Organizational Dynamics, 44: 112-120.

Dukerich, J. M., Golden, B. R. & Shortell, S. M. 2002. Beauty is in the eye of the beholder: The impact of organizational identification, identity, and image on the cooperative behaviors of physicians. Administrative Science Quaterly, 47: 507-533.

Dutton, J. E., Dukerich, J. M. & Harquail, C. V. 1994. Organizational images and member identification. Administrative Science Quarterly, 39(2): 239-263.

Gino, F., Schweitzer, M. E., Mead, N. L. & Ariely, D. 2011. Unable to resist temptation: How self-control depletion promotes unethical behavior. Organizational Behavior and

Human Decision Processes, 115(2): 191-203.

Glavas, A. & Godwin, L. 2013. Is the perception of ‘goodness’ good enough? Exploring the relationship between perceived corporate social responsibility and employee organizational identification. Journal of Business Ethics, 114(1): 15-27.

Hayes, A. F. 2012. PROCESS: A versatile computational tool for observed variable mediation, moderation, and conditional process modeling White paper.

Hegarty, W. H & Sims, H. P. 1978. Some determinants of unethical decision behavior: An experiment. Journal of Applied Psychology, 63(4): 451-457.

Jetten, J., Postmes, T. & McAuliffe B. J. 2002. ´We’re all individuals´: group norms of individualism and collectivism, levels of identification and identity threat. European Journal

of Social Psychology, 32: 189-207.

Katok, E., Thomas, D. & Davis, D. 2008. Inventory service level agreements as coordination mechanisms: The effect of review periods. Manufacturing & Service Operations

Management, 10(4): 609–624.

Katok, E. 2011. Laboratory experiments in operations management In Geunes, J. (Ed.), Transforming Research into Action (pp. 15–35). Catonsville, MD: INFORMS.

Louis, W., Davies, S., Smith, J. & Terry, D. 2007. Pizza and pop and the student identity: The role of referent group norms in healthy and unhealthy eating. The Journal of Social

Psychology, 147(1): 57-74.

Mael, F. A. & Tetrick, L. E. 1992. Identifying organizational identification. Educational

and Psychological Measurement, 52: 813-824.

Mazar, N. & Zhong, C. 2010. Do green products make us better people? Psychological

Science, 21(4): 494-498.

McWilliams, A. & Siegel, D. 2001. Corporate social responsibility: A theory of the firm perspective. Academy of Management Review, 26(1): 117-127.

Merritt, A. C., Effron, D. & Monin, B. 2010. Moral self-licensing: When being good frees us to be bad. Social Personality Psychology Compass, 4(5): 344-357.

Mullen, E. & Monin, B. 2016. Consistency versus licensing effects of past moral behavior. Annual Review of Psychology, 67: 363-385.

Robinson, S. L. & O’Leary-Kelly, A. M. 1998. Monkey see, monkey do: The influence of work groups on the antisocial behavior of employees. The Academy of Management

Journal, 41(6): 658-672.

Settoon, R. P. & Mossholder, K. W. 2002. Relationship quality and relationship context as antecedents of person- and task-focused interpersonal citizenship behavior. Journal Of

Applied Psychology, 87(2): 255-267.

Shalvi S., Gino F., Barkan R. & Ayal S. 2015. Self-serving justifications: Doing wrong and feeling moral. Psychologial Science, 24(2): 125-130.

Terry, D. J. & Hogg, M. A. 1996. Group norms and the attitude-behavior relationship: a role for group identification. Society for Personality and Social Psychology, 22(8): 776-793. Terry, D. J., Hogg, M. A. & White, K. M. 1999. The theory of planned behaviour: Self-identity, social identity and group norms. British Journal of Social Psychology, 38: 225-244. Treviño, L. K. & Youngblood S. A. 1990. Bad apples in bad barrels: A causal analysis of ethical decision-making behavior. Journal of Applied Psychology, 75(4): 378-385.

Treviño, L., den Nieuwenboer, N. & Kish-Gephart, J. 2014. (Un)ethical behavior in organizations. Annual Review of Psychology, 65: 635-660.

Van Maanen, J. & Barley, S. R. 1984. Occupational communities: Culture and control in organizations. American Psychological Assosication, 6: 287-365.

West, C. & Zhong, C. 2015. Moral cleansing. Current Opinion in Psychology, 6: 221-225.

Zhong, C., Ku, G., Lount, R. B. & Murnighan, J. K. 2010. Compensatory ethics. Journal

APPENDIX A: Measures

Organizational identification statements (adapted from Mael and Tetrick, 1992): - When someone criticizes the RUG, it feels like a personal insult.

- I’m very interested in what others think about the RUG.

- When I talk about the RUG, I usually say “we” rather than “they”. - The RUG’s successes are my successes.

- When someone praises the RUG, it feels like a personal compliment. - I act like a person from the RUG to a great extent.

- If a story in the media criticized the RUG, I would feel embarrassed. - I don’t act like a typical person from the RUG.

- I have a number of qualities typical of people from the RUG. - The limitation associated with people in the RUG apply to me also. Organizational identification circles (Bergami & Bagozzi, 2000):

Interpersonal citizenship behaviour (adapted from Setton & Mossholder, 2002):

- listen to fellow students when they have to get something off their chest - take time to listen to fellow students’ problems and worries

- show concern and courtesy toward fellow students, even under the most tying study

situations

- make an extra effort to understand the problems faced by fellow students - go out of my way to make newer fellow students feel welcome at RUG - cheer up fellow students who are having a bad day

- compliment fellow students when they succeed in their studies

- take on extra responsibilities in order to help fellow students when things get demanding

in their studies

- help fellow students with difficult assignments, even when assistance is not directly

requested

- assist fellow students with heavy workloads even though it is not part of my study - help fellow students who are running behind with their study activities

- help fellow students with their studies when they have been absent - go out of my way to help fellow students with study-related problems Ethical leadership (adapted from Brown, Treviño & Harrison, 2005):

Generally, the Rijksuniversiteit Groningen …

- listens to what students have to say

- disciplines students who violate ethical standards - conducts RUG business in an ethical manner - has the best interests of students in mind - makes fair and balanced decisions - can be trusted

- sets an example of how to do things the right way in terms of ethics - defines success not just by result but also the way that they are obtained - when making decisions, asks “what is the right thing to do?”

APPENDIX B: Moderation effect of OID (statements) on CSR and role model

TABLE 3

Moderation model of organizational identification (statements) on CSR and role model

coeff se t p

Organizational Identification (statements) .05 .22 .21 .83

CSR -.02 .14 -.14 .89

Interaction .27 .14 1.89 .06

Note. N=178.

TABLE 4

Moderation effect of organizational identification (statements) on CSR and role model

Organizational identification (statements) Effect se t p -1 -.29 .20 -1.45 .15 0 -.02 .14 -.14 .89 1 .25 .20 1.23 .22

APPENDIX C: Moderation effect of OID (circles) on CSR and ethical leader

TABLE 5

Moderation model of organizational identification (circles) on CSR and ethical leader

coeff se t p

Organizational Identification (circles) -.20 .21 -.96 .34

CSR .02 .13 .14 .89

Interaction .27 .13 2.10 .04

TABLE 6

Moderation effect of organizational identification (circles) on CSR and ethical leader