• No results found

“Do we really care about CSR?”: A research on the influence of different types of CSR on consumer purchasing behavior and the effect of gender

N/A
N/A
Protected

Academic year: 2021

Share "“Do we really care about CSR?”: A research on the influence of different types of CSR on consumer purchasing behavior and the effect of gender"

Copied!
50
0
0

Bezig met laden.... (Bekijk nu de volledige tekst)

Hele tekst

(1)

UNIVERSITY OF GRONINGEN FACULTY OF ECONOMICS AND BUSINESS

“Do we really care about CSR?”: A research on the

influence of different types of CSR on consumer

purchasing behavior and the effect of gender

Master Thesis, MSc. International Business & Management

June, 12th 2015 Kim Top S2592673 Zaagmuldersweg 1-41

9713LA, Groningen, The Netherlands Tel.: +316 538 577 59

E-mail: k.top@student.rug.nl or kimtop@live.nl Words: 14977 (incl. cover page, references and appendices)

Supervisor: S.N. Ponsioen

(2)

ABSTRACT

     

This research was conducted to test a possible relation between the different types of CSR (altruistic, strategic and neutral) and consumer purchasing behavior. It was hypothesized that altruistic CSR would have a greater influence on consumer purchasing behavior opposed to strategic and neutral CSR. Furthermore, it was hypothesized that gender would moderate this relation in such a way that the expected relation between CSR and purchasing behavior would be stronger for women opposed to men. A scenario with a 3 (CSR: altruistic vs. strategic vs. neutral) x 2 (gender: male vs. female) design, was used to test the hypotheses. The participants were asked to indicate if they would purchase the product (a jeans), taking into account what was said in the scenario. Support for the direct effect of the different types of CSR on consumer purchasing behavior was provided. Moreover, gender played a significant effect on this relation. In the theoretical implications, the possible explanations for the results are discussed as well as practical implications, the limitations and suggestions for future research.                

Key words: consumer purchasing behavior, corporate social responsibility (CSR), strategic philanthropic CSR, altruistic philanthropic CSR, neutral CSR, and gender.

(3)

 

TABLE OF CONTENTS

I. Introduction ... 1

II. Literature Review ... 5

1. Consumer Purchase Behavior ... 5

2. The Development of CSR ... 7

Phase 1: rise and extension (1950) ... 8

Phase 2: further expansion (1960-1970) ... 8

Phase 3: a full-fledged proliferation (1980 -1990) ... 9

Phase 4: the period of empirical study (21st century) ... 10

3. CSR the Definition ... 11

4. Different Motivational Drivers Behind CSR ... 11

Altruistic philanthropy ... 12

Strategic philanthropy ... 12

5. The Relation between CSR and Consumers’ Purchasing Behavior ... 13

6. Gender ... 15

III. Methodology ... 17

1. General Information about Participants and Design ... 17

2. Procedure ... 17

3. Measurements and Manipulations ... 18

1) The dependent variable: consumer purchasing behavior ... 18

2) The independent variable: different types of CSR ... 19

3) The moderator: gender ... 19

4) Manipulation check different types of CSR ... 19

Manipulation Checks ... 19

Hypotheses Testing ... 20

IV. Discussion, Implications and Future Direction ... 22

1. Theoretical Implications ... 22

2. Practical Implications ... 24

3. Strengths, Limitations and Future Research ... 27

4. Conclusion ... 28

(4)

I. Introduction

 

Today’s world is facing a lot of problems, environmental issues such global warming, social problems like poverty, hunger and a lack of drinking water are just a few to name. These problems have been in the world for some time but since more recently people are more aware of these topics. Why does the world face so much trouble and what is the role for business in these social issues? During the last decades corporations have started to engage in activities that have traditionally been viewed as the role of the government (Scherer & Palazzo, 2011). In particular, the multinational corporations (MNCs) are often engaging in formerly assigned tasked of the government like public health, education, social security and protection of human rights. These corporate activities often arise in cases where the state system fails, i.e. when the state withdraws or has to withdraw, when the state has not yet implemented basic citizenship rights, or when it is principally unable or willing to do so (Matten & Crane, 2005). As a result some researchers have concluded that corporations have become important political actors in the global society (Scherer & Palazzo, 2011). Furthermore, governments the media and activists (NGOs) have become adept at holding companies account for the social consequences of their activities. As a result the concept of Corporate Social Responsibility (CSR) has been a continuous source of debate among scholars, corporations and policy makers (Pleggenkuhle & Miles, 2009). The debate originates from the different viewpoints of the responsibility of the corporation. First managers have the responsibility to maximize the profits for the shareholders (Friedman, 1970). On the other hand, as corporations take resources from society, they have a duty to society and it is argued that they have more responsibility than only maximizing profits for shareholders (Pleggenkuhle & Miles, 2009).

(5)

Pampers engages in a task that in developed countries is seen as a task for the government. Donating one vaccine for one pack Pampers sold is not obligatory and therefore this campaign can be seen as a part of the CSR program of the company.

The previous example shows a company that recently has invest time and money in CSR, but did not have CSR at the core of its strategy from the beginning. There are also companies that have their CSR practises at the core of their strategy, right from the start. An example is the ice manufacturing company Ben & Jerry’s. This company operates on a three-part mission, this involves the creation of a linked prosperity for everyone that is involved in the business: suppliers, employees, franchisees and customers. The company’s first mission concerns the product, which includes the goal of producing the best possible ice cream in the best possible way (Dennis, Neck & Goldsby, 1998). This includes only using fair trade ingredients, reducing the footprint and giving something back to the community. Second, the economic mission of Ben & Jerry’s requires the company to manage their practises for sustainable financial growth. Lastly, the social mission inquires the company to use the companies’ practises in innovative ways to make the world a better place (Dennis et al., 1998). Ben & Jerry’s acknowledges the fact that corporations play an important role in today’s society. Therefore, the company bears the responsibility by initiating innovative ways to improve the quality of life locally, nationally and internationally (Dennis et al., 1998). An example of this is their goal to work towards 100% clean energy by 2050. In order to do this they work with NGO Avaaz, together they have set up a petition in order to tackle climate change at the upcoming summit in Paris (Edmondson, 2014). Ben & Jerry’s shows in all facets of their company to be social responsible. It is not compulsory by law to use fair trade ingredients, to reduce the company’s footprint or to invest time and money in working towards 100% clean energy. However, with these examples Ben & jerry’s shows that CSR is part of the company’s strategy.

(6)

The current research has made a distinction between different types of CSR coming from different motivational drivers. There is altruistic corporate philanthropy that has an underlying motivator and argues that there are companies that want to act in an ethical appropriate way from an internal drive (Sharfman, 1994; Useem, 1984; Sanchez, 2000). Besides, the current literature argues that there is strategic philanthropy CSR which involves CSR practises that are not only focused on doing something good for society, the strategic benefits also play an important factor for these corporations (Muller & Klok, 2009).

Like earlier mentioned, today’s society holds companies accountable for their actions but what should not be neglected is the causes and consequences of consumer purchase behavior. It is the consumer that demands certain products. Companies can put a lot of effort in their CSR practises but if consumers do not purchase these products, companies are losing. Research that deals with consumer purchase behavior needs to understand in what way consumers do take CSR activities into account when purchasing a product. Several researchers have tried to investigate the relationship between CSR and consumer purchasing behavior, without any conclusive result. On the one hand, the current research concludes that CSR does not play a role as purchasing criteria and on the other hand the current research shows that CSR gradually becomes more important (Mohr, Webb & Harris, 2001; Bharracharya & Sen, 2004; Carrigan & Atalla, 2001). By arguing that companies engage in CSR practises from different motivational drivers, this paper seeks to find a better understanding when consumers take CSR activities as purchase criteria and if the different motivations behind CSR play a role when consumers purchase a product.

Furthermore, this research will investigate if gender plays a moderating role in the relationship between different types of CSR and consumer purchasing behavior. A research done by Chung and Monroe (2003) shows that women are more likely to be affected by societal norms than men. The reasoning behind this claim is that women, more than men, want to create a positive impression about them. Women could think that buying a product that is social responsible from a company that places CSR high on the agenda, can improve their image. This gives field for speculation that women are more apt for taking CSR as purchase criteria opposed to men.

(7)

have in common is that they all investigate the influence of CSR, viewing CSR as one central concept and not taking into account the different motivational drivers behind CSR. This research takes a different approach by investigating CSR as three different concepts: altruistic, strategic and neutral. Investigating if the different motivational drivers have a different impact on consumer purchasing behavior is important. The current literature already distinguishes between altruistic and strategic CSR. This gives field for speculation that customers also view CSR coming from different motivational drivers. It is expected that they will take the different motivational drivers into account when purchasing a product. Those who run the corporations need to understand what the public thinks and in what way their CSR activities effect the purchase decision of consumers. In other words, do consumers take the different motivations behind CSR practises into account when purchasing a product?

Second, seldom studies have investigated the difference between gender and the role of CSR on the purchasing behavior although, like previously mentioned, a difference between genders is expected when it comes to taking CSR into account when purchasing a product. It is worthy to know for managers and marketers if there is a difference between men and women when it comes to the influence of CSR on consumer purchasing behavior. This leads to the following research question:

“In what way do different types of CSR (altruistic, strategic and neutral) influence the purchasing behavior of consumers? And how does gender moderate this relationship?”

(8)

II. Literature Review

1. Consumer Purchase Behavior

Csikszentmihalyi (2000) defines consuming as: “Behavior where entropy is increased in exchange for existential or experiential rewards”. Existential rewards are widely known as the Maslowian needs. Experiential rewards are those needs that refer to the temporary improvement in a positive mood that people experience when they are operating in a goal-directed, determined way. Through consuming, people achieve such experiences (Csikszentmihalyi, 2000).

Today’s world is not only consuming necessities, on the contrary, most consumption in the developed countries concentrates on luxury goods. Calculations that have been made argue that if the rest of the planet is going to develop a lifestyle like the United States and Western Europe, we need at least two extra planets to have enough energy and materials for our consumption (Csikszentmihalyi, 2000). In today’s society people consume 40 percent of the earth’s resources, thereby taking into account that the developed world consumes ten times more than the developing countries (Csikszentmihalyi, 2000).

The literature describes the concept of consuming in many different ways. This paper will continue with the following definition: “Consuming consists of energy expended to improve the quality of life by means of increasing entropy”. Where consuming involves an exchange of physic energy (i.e. money) for objects or services that satisfy people’s needs.

(9)

In the middle of the pyramid Maslow placed love and belonging. Humans are social species and therefore we are genetically programmed to enjoy the company of other humans (Maslow, 1943). Linking this need to consumer purchase behavior, one could think of the things that we are doing in our leisure time like going to bars, restaurants and museums. Furthermore, showing one’s feeling through giving gifts from baby showers to funeral arrangements and graduation gifts (Csikszentmihalyi, 2000). Next, the level of self-esteem concerns the matter to feel competent, respected and superior, which is already noticeable in children and is likely to be active when the lower needs are not fully met (Maslow, 1943). From a consumer purchasing point this level can be linked to purchases that are made to show that we are unique and which will separate us from the crowd (Csikszentmihalyi, 2000). The last level is called the need for self-actualization, which comes preeminent when all four other needs are satisfied. Of all the needs, it seems that self-actualization has the least influence on consumer purchase behavior. While a person that is driven by personal growth is more likely to live a careful life than invest a lot in goods (Maslow, 1943). For example, Maslow qualifies Albert Einstein as a model for self-actualization. Einstein did not spend much however, in many different ways they became independent of the market (Csikszentmihalyi, 2000). In Figure 1, a summary of the Pyramid of Maslow is presented.

--- Insert Figure 1 about here ---

(10)

consuming is a way in which we respond to the void that consciousness when there is nothing else to do. Interesting, consuming after a certain point is argued not to lead to a positive experience (Csikszentmihalyi, 2000). In other words, things that can be bought will not increase our happiness.

In today’s society the economic forecasts are based on increasing demands, the economy will fall unless people do not purchase more cars, houses, clothing and so on. To refrain from buying can be seen as anti-social while it can be seen as a threat to society (Csikszentmihalyi, 2000). However, it might be possible to reinvent consumption that would satisfy both existential and experiential needs with minimum energetic costs and without destroying the economy. A step into this direction can be to understand the real costs of different consumer choices. This could, in the best case, lead to a new perception of good and bad, beautiful and ugly (Csikszentmihalyi, 2000).

  To sum, in today’s society we consume a lot in particular in the developing countries. There are different motivational reasons why we consume and if we continue with consuming as much as we do, the planet will run out of materials. In the last decade, the concept of CSR is becoming more profound and companies are hold accountable for the social consequences of their company practises (Pleggenkuhle & Miles, 2009). Consumers are often forgotten in the CSR equation. However, when consumers do not purchase the product, no matter how much CSR efforts the company has invested in the product, you will lose as a company (Carrigan & Attalla, 2001). This research argues that consumers are becoming more aware of the consequences of their purchasing behavior and therefore they are expected to take the CSR practises and different motivations of companies into account when purchasing a product.

2. The Development of CSR  

(11)

Phase 1: rise and extension (1950)

During the 1950s, CSR was described in lines of philanthropically action, which abide by the values of society. It was then that the first literature about CSR was written by Bowen (1953) in his book the “Social Responsibilities of the Businessman”. He made the first attempt to define the concept of CSR, which was: “ The obligations to pursue those policies, to make those decisions, or to follow those lines of action which are desirable in terms of the objective and values of society” (Bowen, 1953: 6). Although CSR started to receive attention from researchers, there is not much evidence that the theories were implemented in business, during those years. As the corporations of that time did not have many CSR activities apart from philanthropic activities (Carroll, 1991).

Phase 2: further expansion (1960-1970)

In the sixties the philanthropic approach was partially dismissed, as a result the conceptualizing of CSR started to take a more open and holistic approach (Hack, Kenyon & Wood, 2014). CSR was being described as actions, which go beyond the firm’s direct economic or technical interests (Hack et al., 2014). Additionally, it was then that CSR was recognized as a broader issue and one that could be seen as a range of actions essentially added onto business activities. Despite this openness, the responsibility was regarded as a managerial role and CSR actions could be judged on their distance from direct economic or technical interest (Hack et al., 2014). Carroll (1991) argues that the sixties were not much different than the fifties considering that the CSR concept was still seen from a theoretical point of view.

The seventies were an important period for the conceptualizing of CSR. One of the main contributions came from the Committee for Economic Development which created a “three concentric circle” to describe the concepts of CSR. The inner circle included growth, products and jobs, the basic economic functions. The intermediate circle proposed that the economic functions must be applied with an awareness of changing social values and priorities. The outer circle consisted of newly and emerging responsibilities that a firm should be active in to improve the social environment (Carroll, 1991).

(12)

are: economic-, legal-, ethical- and philanthropic responsibilities (Matten & Crane, 2005). These four dimensions are not mutually exclusive. In other words, a corporation has to address all four dimensions in order to behave social responsible (Carroll, 1979). The first responsibility of the corporation is its economic responsibility. A corporation should make profit and produce goods and services for the society. Examples are the creation of jobs, offering new products, developing new technical advancements and providing a return on investment to the stakeholders and owners (Carroll, 1979). The economic dimension is followed up by the legal responsibility of the corporation, where the business is expected to obey the law and all its operations should be within the legal framework of society (Carroll, 1979). The third dimension includes the corporation’s additional activities and behavior that are not defined by law. However, these activities are expected by society and therefore difficult for corporations to deal with (Carroll, 1979). The final dimension is discretionary responsibility later changed by Carroll in philanthropic responsibility (Carroll, 1991). According to Carroll (1979) this dimension is the most difficult to specify, since the society is not able to provide a clear definition of what can be seen as philanthropic responsibility. Thus, corporations can decide to focus their attention on a wide range of different activities (Carroll, 1979). The economic and legal responsibilities are socially required, ethical responsibilities are socially expected and philanthropic responsibilities are socially desired (Matten & Crane, 2005). In Figure 2, a summary of the four dimensions is given.

--- Insert Figure 2 about here ---

Phase 3: a full-fledged proliferation (1980 -1990)

(13)

obligations needed to mirror societal interests, not just those of stakeholders/investors (Hack et al., 2014). Some scholars even went on stated that corporations cannot be moral agents and thereby questioning the power that had been given to corporations on deciding which social issues they need to address (Hack et al., 2014). Which was, according to Milton Friedman (1970), profit maximization. Therefore, in order to ensure a successful application of CSR, corporations needed to be dealing with the same concepts and they needed to have the same understanding (Hack et al., 2014).

In the 1990’s authors did several attempts to create a definition by combining business and society. The definitions that were introduced in the 90’s were descriptions of CSR, where corporations were encouraged to focus on what is important to them individually, while reinforcing the claim that some areas of CSR are dependent on time and place (Hack et al., 2014). Also, it was in 1990 when the CSR development saw a significant expansion of philanthropy and growing practical implementation of CSR practises in the processes of corporations. It was then, that some corporations dedicated their operations/strategy to CSR practises with companies including Ben & Jerry’s and The Body Shop (Carroll, 1999). These companies have included their CSR activities in their strategy and started their business on the grounds of doing something good for society from an internal motivation.

Phase 4: the period of empirical study (21st century)

In the 21st century clearer definitions emerged and CSR started to become an entity and an ethical and responsible route for corporations. Stakeholder was introduced as an important factor in CSR and describes moreover the people and the environment that are impacted by individual corporations (Hack et al., 2014).

(14)

3. CSR the Definition

The World Business Council for Sustainable Development has pointed out that there has not been an agreed-upon definition of CSR, apart from a commitment by corporations to make a contribution to sustainable development, a concept that is extremely ambiguous. However, what is expected from corporations these days is clear, companies are expected to do more than just maximizing shareholder value (Bruce, Hay, Stavins & Vietor, 2005).

Dahlsrud (2008) did a study in the definition of CSR and concluded that there are 37 definitions that are mostly used in the current literature. He analysed these definitions and came to the conclusion that there are five dimensions that are commonly used: environment, social, economic, stakeholder and voluntariness. According to Dahlsrud (2008), the definition that is most frequently used comes from the Commission of European communities: “A concept whereby companies integrate social and environmental concerns in their business operations and in their interaction with stakeholders on a voluntary base”. Since the definition of the Commission of European communities is mostly used, this paper will continue to work further with this concept.

4. Different Motivational Drivers Behind CSR  

There are people that questioning the motives of companies to engage in CSR. These people are cynical about the positive CSR news and the cause-related marketing campaigns (Mohr et al., 2001). The current literature distinguishes between two different motivational drivers behind CSR (Saiia, Carroll & Buchholtz, 2003). First there is altruistic CSR, which comes from an internal motivation of doing something good. These social responsible companies are involved in CSR activities from an organizational drive to do good. Second, there is strategic CSR that proposes that companies involve in CSR practises for strategic reasons. One could argue that this type of CSR comes on the one hand to do something good but on the other hand, these activities will also be used as a type of ‘window dressing’.

(15)

Altruistic philanthropy

Corporate philanthropic activities can be defined as altruistic corporate philanthropy when the corporation uses its resources to address social issues that are a result of non-egoistic motivators instead of pure economic motivators. Altruism is the unselfish concern for the welfare of others (Saiia et al., 2003). Companies like Ben & Jerry’s and The Body Shop have distinguished themselves through extraordinary long-term commitment to be social responsible and started their business with the purpose for doing something good for society (Porter & Kramer, 1996).

Altruistic corporate philanthropy has an underlying motivator that wants to act in a good way, there are corporations that want to do something that is right for society, helping others is their main goal (Sharfman, 1994; Useem, 1984; Sanchez, 2000). In this sense corporations that are operating in CSR practises that are altruistic will be defined in corporations that operate from an internal motivational drive to do something good. The intrinsic approach argues that CSR is driven by morality and is thus a goal in its own right (Saiia et al., 2003; Lindenberg, 2001; Muller & Klok, 2009).

Strategic philanthropy

(16)

expectations lead to CSR activities that are more compulsory than voluntary in nature (Kolk & Muller, 2009).

Philanthropic activities in the corporation’s context can lead to benefits such as a better reputation, higher employee satisfaction and higher sales. On the other hand, corporations that operate in CSR activities due to external pressure often show CSR practises that are uncoordinated and philanthropic activities that are not connected to the strategy of the firm (Porter & Kramer, 1996). Internally this means that CSR activities that come from an external motivation are often isolated and divided over different business units. From an external point of view, the CSR activities become diffused over different efforts to give something back to society and each initiative relates to different stakeholder groups. The consequence of this fragmentation leads to a lost business opportunity. Where both, the corporate strategy and the benefits for the community are lost (Porter & Kramer, 1996).

Concluding, there are corporations that have being ‘ethical’ as the core of their operations, just for the purpose of doing something good. Their altruistic CSR activities are rooted in their organization and are part of the strategy of the company. On the other hand, strategic philanthropy involves CSR practises that are not only focused on doing something good for society, the strategic benefits also play an important factor for corporations. Moreover, the CSR practises for strategic reasons are often found to be uncoordinated and not in line with the strategy of the corporation. This study will also test neutral CSR, there are also companies that do not invest time and money in CSR.

5. The Relation between CSR and Consumers’ Purchasing Behavior

(17)

than positive CSR associations. Where positive and negative associations relates to the

perception of the individual (Folkes & Kamins, 1999; Sprance et al., 1991; Reeder & Brewer,

1979; Skowronski & Carlston, 1987). This corresponds with research done by Sen and Bhattacharya (2001), who found that consumers’ company evaluations are more sensitive to negative CSR associations than positive CSR associations. This suggests that consumers are less likely to reward ethical behavior and are more likely to punish unethical behavior. If this is true, one might suspect that consumers who are aware of the unethical actions of a company will boycott their products, while having knowledge about a company’s ethical behavior will not automatically persuade a consumer to buy their products. Evidence for this argument can be found in the research done by Folkes and Kamins (1999), who found that, although consumers have socially responsible attitudes only 20 per cent had actually purchased a product in the last year because it was associated with a good cause (Folkes & Kamins, 1999). Furthermore Folkes & Kamins (1999) found that boycotting a product due to unethical information about the firm is unlikely when it concerns a product that the consumer relies on.

The above research suggests that negative CSR associations have more influence on consumer purchase behavior than positive CSR associations. Conversely, there is research that suggests that consumers are more likely to support positive actions than punish unethical ones (Simon, 1995). A study conducted by Mohr et al., (2001) found that half of the participants, that took part in their study, would switch brand to support companies that donate money to non-profit organizations. Also, almost one-third said they would buy a product from a specific brand simply because the manufacturer supports charitable causes. Moreover, Mason (2000) found that consumers are ‘seriously concerned’ with ethical issues. One third of his sample had bought a product or recommended a company on the grounds the ethical activities of the corporation. Which is also in line with the earlier research done by Forte and Lamont (1998) who state that consumers are gradually making more purchases on the foundation of a corporation’s ethical reputation.

(18)

CSR is rooted in the strategy of the company and therefore its is likely that these programs will be viewed as more credible. As such, customers are expected to purchase products coming from an altruistic motivational driver over a company that operates from a strategic motivational drive. This leads to the following hypothesis:

Hypothesis 1: Purchasing behavior of consumers will be higher when the CSR practises of the organization are altruistic opposed to strategic or neutral.

6. Gender

Though, it is expected that different types of CSR will have a different effect on consumer purchasing behavior, this might not be applicable for every individual. Gender difference is a worthy demographic factor to start examining the individual influences on consumer purchase behavior.

Sex roles and stereotyping has been a well-known research topic. Research on stereotyping has shown in what way stereotyping will influence responses without the awareness of that influence (Blair & Banaji, 1996; Eckes, 2002). According to the literature,

women are more communal, selfless and are concerned with others compared to men (Eagly

(19)

Moreover, a study that investigated the influence of environmental concern on consumers, found evidence for the fact that women score significantly higher than men when

it comes to ‘green buying’ (Mainieri, Barnett, Trisha, Valdero, Unipan & Oskamp, 1997).

In addition, women are more likely to be affected by societal norms than men. The

reasoning behind this claim is that women, more than men, want to create a positive impression about them, which consequently results in a stronger tendency for women to take CSR activities of a company into account when purchasing a product (Chung & Monroe, 2003). Since taking CSR activities into account when purchasing a product can be viewed as making a purchase decision in a socially desirable way.

Hence, taking into account that the purchasing behavior will be higher when a corporation operates from an altruistic motivation compared to strategic or neutral, it is argued that this effect is moderated by gender. Particularly, traits like selflessness, concerned with others and having a higher awareness for communal feelings combined with the fact that women are more affected by societal norms than men, makes it likely that women, more than

man, will take CSR activities of a company into account when purchasing a product (Shukla

& Tripathy, 1994; Jesen et al., 1990; Chung & Monroe, 2003). Additionally, from a business point of view, there is evidence for the fact that companies with more women in boards lead to higher levels of CSR (Bear et al., 2010), as these women bring in different perspectives and support community support. Therefore, it is likely that women are also more aware of these issues in their personal life. This leads to the following hypothesis:

Hypothesis 2: Purchasing behavior of consumers will be higher when the CSR practises of the organization are altruistic opposed to strategic or neutral and this effect is moderated by gender so that the effect is more pronounced for women as opposed to men.

Consequently, following from the above hypotheses, the proposed conceptual model of this research is shown in Figure 3.

(20)

III. Methodology

 

1. General Information about Participants and Design

A scenario was developed in order to collect the required data. A scenario with a 3 (CSR: strategic vs. altruistic vs. neutral) x 2 (gender: male vs. female) design was created, all in English. The pilot version was sent to the supervisor, who provided useful comments. After implementing the feedback, the scenarios including the questions, were randomly distributed on paper. The reason for choosing a paper-based survey was: the easier access to participants and the likelihood of a high response rate. In the end, the survey was handed out to 150 people from whom 126 finished the survey. Specifically, 60 male respondents (47,6%) and 66 female respondents (52,4%) filled in the survey. The average age was 26 years with the youngest participant 18 years old and the oldest 62 years old (SD=8.90). Respondents were composed of 22 different nationalities.

2. Procedure

(21)

the ultimate measure of the company’s success is their CSR program. Furthermore, the participant read about the strategy of the company, which was to find a balance between profit and people, as well as between manufacture and environmental responsibility. Then a few examples of Jeanex its working ethics were mentioned including: providing a safe, fair and ethical working environment for all employee and reducing the environmental impact by using renewable resources, sorting waste and only manufacturing jeans that are made of 100% organic cotton. On top of that, the participants were told that the company donates one pair of jeans for a child in need for every customer purchase. The altruistic CSR scenario ended with the following sentence: “The corporate social responsibility program is rooted in the entire organization and is part of the strategy of the company”. Meanwhile, the strategic CSR scenario, the participants were told that Jeanex started its business with a vision on shareholder value: the ultimate measure of the company’s success is profit maximization. Furthermore, the participants read that the strategy of the company is to envisage a trade-off between profit and people, as well as between manufacture and environmental responsibility. Then a few examples of Jeanex its working ethics were mentioned including: providing an acceptable working environment for all employees, investing money in the latest technology to reduce costs. On top of that, the participants were told that the company donates one pair of jeans for a child in need for every customer purchase in the coming three months. The strategic CSR scenario ended with the following sentence: “The corporate social responsibility program is a part of the corporation but is not completely rooted in the organization and is not part of the corporate strategy”.

After the scenario, the participants were asked to indicate their tendency to purchase jeans from Jeanex, taking in mind what was said in the scenario. After, questions were asked to check for the effectiveness of the manipulation of the scenario. At last, the participants were asked to answer questions regarding their gender, age and nationality. The survey ended with a thanking note for the participants.

3. Measurements and Manipulations

1) The dependent variable: consumer purchasing behavior

(22)

is it that you will buy a pair of this brand?”. The participants were asked to answer this question on a six-point Likert scale, ranging from: 1, “I will definitely not purchase the jeans” to 6, “I will definitely purchase the jeans”.

2) The independent variable: different types of CSR

The different types of scenarios were randomly distributed over the participants. Coding 1 as value for altruistic CSR condition, coding 2 as value for strategic CSR condition and coding 3 as value for neutral CSR condition created the independent variable.

3) The moderator: gender

All participants were asked to specify their gender. Coding 1 as value for male and 2 as value for female created the moderating variable.

4) Manipulation check different types of CSR

Asking three questions about the scenario tested the manipulation. The first question: ” In the scenario, it became clear that Jeanex has corporate social responsibility rooted in the entire organization”, tested the altruistic CSR condition. The second question: “Jeanex has corporate social responsibility as a strategy but it’s not rooted in the entire organization”, tested the strategic CSR condition. And the third and final question: “ In the scenario there was nothing mentioned on Jeanex and its policy with regard to corporate social responsibility practices”, tested the neutral CSR condition. The participants needed to answer on a 5 – point Likert scale ranging from 1: “completely disagree” to 5: “completely agree”.

4. Data Analysis and Results Manipulation Checks

(23)

The first manipulation question: “In the scenario, it became clear that Jeanex has corporate social responsibility rooted in the entire organization”, tested if the condition of altruistic CSR was created. This manipulation was significant (F (1,125) = 78,83, p < 0.01). A post hoc test showed that participants in the altruistic CSR condition thought indeed more strongly that Jeanex’s CSR activities were coming from an altruistic motivational drive (M = 4.00, SD = 0.72) compared to participants in the strategic CSR condition (M = 2.46, SD = 1.03, p < 0.01) and the neutral condition (M = 1.95, SD = 0.54, p < 0.01).

The second manipulation question: “Jeanex has corporate social responsibility as a strategy but it’s not rooted in the entire organization” tested if the condition of strategic CSR was created (F (1,125) = 75,00, p < 0.01). A post hoc test showed that participants in the strategic CSR condition thought indeed more strongly that Jeanex’s CSR activities were coming from a strategic motivational drive (M = 4.00, SD = 0.71), compared to participants in the altruistic CSR condition (M = 2.35, SD = 1.15, p < 0.01) and participants in the neutral CSR condition (M = 1.88, SD = 0.45, p < 0.01).

The third manipulation question:“In the scenario there was nothing mentioned on Jeanex and its policy with regard to corporate social responsibility practices” tested if the condition of neutral CSR was created (F (1,125) = 111,71, p < 0.01). A post hoc test showed that participants in the neutral condition thought indeed more strongly that Jeanex did not involve CSR activities in their strategy (M = 3.88, S = 0.77) compared to participants in the altruistic CSR condition (M = 1.95, SD = 0.62, p < 0.01) and participants in the strategic CSR condition (M = 2.02, S = 0.61, p < 0.01).

--- Insert Table 1, Table 2 & Table 3 about here ---

Hypotheses Testing

(24)

--- Insert Figure 4 about here ---

In order to test hypothesis 1: “Purchasing behavior of an organization will be higher when CSR of that same organization is altruistic opposed to strategic or neutral”, a one-way ANOVA analysis was used as the main statistical method. In Table 4, the descriptive statistics for each of the conditions of the different types of CSR are given. The results are presented in Table 5. However, the results of the one-way ANOVA analysis do not specifically show the significance difference between the conditions, therefore a post hoc test was conducted to gain further insight in the results, the results can be found in Table 6.

--- Insert Table 4, Table 5 and Table 6 about here ---

The one-way ANOVA analysis indicated a strong direct effect of the type of CSR on the dependent variable – purchasing behavior (F = (1,125) = 10,93, p < 0.01) – providing support for the claim that the type of CSR has an influence on consumer purchasing behavior. A post hoc test showed that the average for people in the altruistic CSR condition (M = 4.41, SD = 0.95) is higher than the purchase intention for strategic CSR (M = 3.63, SD = 0.86, p < 0.01) and participants in the neutral condition (M = 3.67, SD = 0.90, p < 0.01). The subsequent post hoc test furthermore showed that there was no difference between purchasing behavior between participants in strategic CSR and between participants in neutral CSR (p = 0.87). Therefore, hypothesis 1 is supported.

(25)

--- Insert Table 7, Table 8 and Table 9 about here ---

The two-way ANOVA analysis provided evidence for the claim that gender does have an interaction effect on the relationship between type of CSR and consumer purchasing behavior (F (1,125) = 3,1, p = < 0.05). A post hoc test showed that the average likelihood of purchasing the jeans for men in the strategic CSR condition (M = 4.00, SD = 0.72) is higher than the likelihood of purchasing the jeans for women in the strategic CSR condition (M = 3.21, SD = 0.79, p < 0.01). The subsequent post hoc test furthermore showed that there was no difference between the likelihood of purchasing the jeans between men participants in altruistic CSR and women participants in altruistic CSR (p = 0,29). Last, there was no significant difference between men participants in the neutral CSR condition and women in the neutral CSR condition (p = 0,42). Therefore, hypothesis 2 is partly supported.

IV. Discussion, Implications and Future Direction

 

The goal of this paper was to answer the following research question: “In what way do different types of CSR (altruistic, strategic and neutral) influence the purchasing behavior of consumers? And how does gender moderate this relationship? It was hypothesized that: purchasing behavior of consumers will be higher when the CSR practises of the organization are altruistic opposed to strategic or neutral. Furthermore, this effect was expected to be higher for woman as opposed to men. In order to test the hypotheses a one- way and a two-way ANOVA analysis were conducted. The different types of CSR did predict the purchasing behavior of consumers such that altruistic CSR led to a higher purchase behavior than strategic and neutral CSR. Therefore, the first hypothesis is supported. Moreover, the moderator effect of gender was significant, the post hoc test showed that the difference between men and women was created in the strategic CSR condition. Therefore, the second hypothesis is partly supported. The last part of this research will discuss the theoretical and practical implications as well as the strengths, limitations and suggestions for future research. 1. Theoretical Implications

(26)

purchase behavior. Like earlier mentioned, previous research on the relation between a company’s CSR activities and consumer purchase behavior found conflicting results (Bharracharya & Sen, 2004; Mohr et al., 2001; Carrigan & Atalla, 2001; Dacin, 1997; Folkes & Kamins, 1999; Sprance et al., 1991; Reeder & Brewer, 1979; Skowronski & Carlston, 1987). This study found evidence for the fact that different motivational drivers behind CSR have a different influence on consumer purchasing behavior. More specifically, when CSR was put forward to come from an altruistic motivational drive, the participants indicated that they most likely would purchase the jeans. However, when CSR was put forward coming from a strategic motivation, the participants indicated that they would probably not purchase the jeans. This was the same for the scenario that did not mention anything about the CSR practises of the organization. The results are in line with previous studies that suggests that consumers are gradually becoming more concerned about CSR activities and are gradually making purchases on the foundation of a corporation’s ethical reputation (Carrigan & Attalla, 2001; Maignan, 2001; Forte & Lamont, 1998; Mason, 2000; D’Astous & Legendre, 2009).

Furthermore, this research found evidence for the fact that strategic CSR does not lead to consumer purchasing behavior, while the participants indicated that they would probably not purchase the jeans. This finding is in line with Porter and Kramer (1996) who claim that CSR activities that come from an external motivation often do not lead to better results for the corporation.

(27)

consolidates with the view that people with different gender may take different decisions based on their ethical point of view.

Furthermore, this average age of the participants in this research was 26 years, with the youngest participant 18 years old and the oldest 62 years old. Additionally, 47,6% of the respondents was male and 52,4% was women, composed of 22 different nationalities. This study found evidence for the fact that in the altruistic CSR condition the respondents indicated that they would purchase the jeans. This finding is not in line with earlier research done by Litteral and Dickson (1999), they found that the profile of consumers that purchase products that are socially desirable, consist of highly educated, well-off women in their forties. These women were conducted of teachers, health professionals and social workers. Furthermore, they found that people who take CSR of a organization into account when purchasing a product are high educated, have a high income and social status. In the literature, it was discussed that consumers’ minds about environmentally and socially respectable products need to change in order to get a different perception of good and bad, beautiful and ugly (Csikszentmihalyi, 2000). Only then people will make Consumer Socially Responsible choices. The research conducted by Litteral and Dickson (1999) was conducted 16 years ago, it is very likely that therefore the results are not in line with the findings of this study. People are becoming more aware of the effect of their consumer choices. At Universities and Colleges, especially in business related courses, CSR is nowadays a part of the educational program and a well-discussed topic (Segon & Booth, 2009). Therefore, it is likely that the profile of consumers that purchase products on the grounds of the organizations CSR program is changing. Since more people are conscious about the consequences of their purchase behavior. Hence, further research on this topic is required.

2. Practical Implications

(28)

When consumers are aware of the fact that they can make a difference with their product choice, this will ultimately lead to consumers making purchases on the grounds of altruistic CSR initiatives.

Second, in order to educate the consumers about the CSR initiatives and the impact of these programs on society, companies should focus on the communication of their CSR activities. Companies have to make CSR information easily accessible furthermore, companies have to point in which ways a product and the entire company is connected to CSR activities. Having in mind the results of this study, it is recommended that companies only communicate those CSR activities that are rooted in the company’s strategy, in so doing it is more likely that consumers view the CSR programs as more credible and take CSR as purchase criteria. Besides, consumers also need to be educated why such product choices are better for them, for society and for humankind.

(29)

consumers on which social responsible factors the corporations score. The themes that are evaluated are environment, climate, labor issues and transparency (Rank a brand, 2015).

Although the index would be good platform for customers to gain information about the CSR practises of companies, it would also be advised to create a CSR quality mark. Due to the fact that searching for information can be very time consuming. It would be preferable that customers can see it the shop which products are produced by companies that are genuine concerned about CSR. For example, in the Netherlands there are already quality logos in the food industry. “Ik kies bewust”, which translates to I choose conscious and the fair trade logos are just two examples (Elving & Steenhuis, 2014). It would be recommended that an independent organization would set up an altruistic CSR quality mark for products. This will help consumers to make better decisions on the grounds of the altruistic CSR programs of the corporation.

Moreover, companies have to be aware that income will influence a consumer’s capability to take CSR into account. On the question: “What is the most important factor why you would purchase the jeans?”, the participants in this study indicated that the quality of jeans (27,8%) would be the most important factor, followed a mentioning about the CSR activities of Jeanex (23,8%) and reasonable price (12,7%) as shown in Table 10. Where appropriate, companies should focus on communicating that the prices of the products of a company that has CSR rooted in the entire companies strategy, are not higher in price than products from companies that do not engage in CSR practises. Furthermore, companies should emphasize that the quality of the product will be remained or will be even better.

--- Insert Table 10 about here ---

(30)

3. Strengths, Limitations and Future Research

A strength of this research lies in the fact that the participants in this study were conducted of 22 different nationalities. Furthermore, the average age was 26 years with the youngest participant 18 years old and the oldest 62 years old (SD = 8.90). Due to the high diversity among the participants, the results can be generalized.

Like all studies, this research suffers from a few limitations. First, a limitation lays in the self-reported nature of the survey used in this research. Future studies should use different research methods to investigate if there does not exist an ‘attitude-behavior gap’ (Carrigan & Attalla, 2001). While, there can exist a gap between what people say and if they act upon this.

Second, the accuracy of the current scenario study is also cut down by a social desirable response bias (Zerbe & Paulhus, 1987). Although the survey was anonymous, there is a change that, when answering questions about the responses on CSR, the participant may want to appear thoughtful to the questionnaire and themselves. Since the cost of answering questions is lower than the cost of actual behave, there is a change that the survey actually overestimate the impact of CSR on purchasing decision.

Third, a limitation of this study lays in the fact that jeans were used in the scenario to measure the influence of CSR activities on the purchasing behavior of consumers. Although, jeans are a product that most people have, it is worthy to investigate if results will be different for other product groups. While, it does not completely leave out the possibility that jeans would not be a sufficient product in which consumers take CSR as purchasing criteria. Future research could study if the different types of CSR have a different influence in different product categories, thing of the food -, banking- or technology industry. In other words, are there industries where the motivations behind CSR activities are a stronger purchase criteria for consumers? This also leads to the limitation that this study cannot fully ensure that participants have deeply devoted themselves in the role of consumer who is looking for a new set of jeans. This low level of involvement in the scenario could affect the results.

Fourth, the survey was conducted in English. Although most participants are expected to have a high level of English, with the exception of a few native speaking participants, a language barrier could have influenced the results. Future research could use the same scenario. However, the scenario should then be translated to the participant’s native language in order to make sure that a language barrier does not lead to a different outcome.

(31)

purpose of the study. Which could lead to participants choosing answers that are social desirable. Future studies should ask more questions about the factors that influence consumers purchase intention in order to hide the real purpose of the research.

4. Conclusion

(32)

REFERENCES

   

Articles

Bear, S., Rahman, N., & Post, C. 2010. The impact of board diversity and gender composition on corporate social responsibility and firm reputation. Journal of Business Ethics, 97 (2): 207-221.

Bernardi, R.A., Bosco, S.M., & Columb, V.L. 2009. Does female representation on boards of directors associate with the most ethical companies list? Corporate Reputation Review, 12: 270 – 280.

Blair, R. V., & Banaji, M. R. 1996. Automatic and controlled processes in stereotype priming. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 70, 1142-1163.

Brown, T, J., & Dacin, P. A. 1997. The company and the product: corporate associations and consumer product responses. Journal of Marketing, 61: 68-84.

Carrigan, M., & Attalla, A. 2001. The myth of the ethical consumer - do ethics matter in purchase behaviour? Journal of Consumer Marketing, 18 (7): 560-577.

Carroll, B. 1979. A three-dimensional conceptual model of corporate performance. Academy of Management Review, 4(4): 497-505.

Carroll, A,B. 1991. The pyramid of corporate social responsibility: Toward the moral management of organizational stakeholders. Business Horizons, 34 (4): 39-48.

Carroll, A.B. 1999. Corporate social responsibility. Business and Society, 38(3): 268-95. Chung, J. & Monroe, G. S. 2003. Exploring social desirability bias. Journal of Business Ethics, 44: 291-302.

Csikszentmihalyi, M. 2000. The costs and benefits of consuming. Journal of Consumer Research, 27 (2): 267 – 272.

Dahlsrud, A. 2008. How corporate social responsibility is defined: an analysis of 37

(33)

D'Astous, A. & Legendre, A. 2009. Understanding consumer's ethical justifications: a scale for appraising consumer's reasons for not behaving ethically. Journal of Business Ethics, 87(2): 255-68.

Dennis, B.S., Neck, C.P., & Goldsby. 1998. The scoop on ben & jerry’s inc: an examination of corporate social responsibility. Journal of Managerial Psychology, 13 (5): 387-393. Du, S., Bhattacharya, C.B., & Sen, S. 2010. Maximizing business returns to corporate social responsibility (csr): the role of csr communication. International Journal of Management Reviews, 12 (1): 8 -19.

Eagly, A. H., & Steffen, V. J. 1984. Gender stereotypes stem from the distribution of women and men into social roles. Journal Of Personality and Social Psychology, 46: 735-754. Eckes, T. 2002. Paternalistic and envious gender stereotypes: testing predictions from the stereotype content model. Sex Roles, 46, 99-114.

Elving, W., & Steenhuis, V. 2014. Ik kies bewust voor misleading? Tijdschrift voor communicatiewetenschap, 42 (2): 100 – 120.

Folkes, V.S., & Kamins, M.A. 1999. Effects of information about firms, ethical land unethical actions on consumers attitudes, Journal of Consumers Psychology, 8 (3): 243-259.

Forte, M. & Lamont, B.T. 1998. The bottom line effects of greening: implications of environmental awareness. Academy of Management, 12 (1): 89-90.

Friedman, M. 1970. The social responsibility of business is to increase profits. New York Times Magazine, 13: 33-32.

Hack, L., Kenyon, A.J., Wood, E.H. 2014. A critical corporate social responsibility (csr) timeline: how it should be understood now? International Journal of Management Cases, 16 (4): 46-55.

(34)

López, V.M., Garcia, A., & Rodriquez, L. 2007. Sustainable development and corporate performance: a study based on the dow jones sustainability index. Journal of Business Ethics, 75: 285 - 300.

Maignan, I. 2001. Consumers' perceptions of corporate social responsibilities: a cross cultural comparison. Journal of Business Ethics, 30 (1) : 57-72.

Mainieri, T., Barnett, E.G., Valdero, T. R., Unipan, J.B., & Oskamp, S. 1997. Green buying: the influence of environmental concern on consumer behavior. The Journal of Social Psychology, 137 (2): 189 - 204.

Maslow, A.H. 1943. A theory of human motivation. American Psychological Association, 50 (4) : 370 – 396.

Mason, T. 2000. The importance of being ethical, Marketing, 27.

Matten, D., & Crane, A. 2005. Corporate citizenship: toward an extended theoretical conceptualization. Academy of Management Review, 30 (1): 166 – 179.

Mohr, L. A., Webb, D. J., & Harris, K. E. 2001. Do consumers expect companies to be socially responsible? the impact of corporate social responsibility on buying behavior. Journal of Consumer Affairs, 35(1): 45-72.

Muller, A., & Kolk, A. 2000. Extrinsic and intrinsic drivers of corporate social performance: evidence from foreign and domestic firms in mexico. Journal of Management Studies, 47

(1): 1-26.

Öberseder, M., Schlegelmilch, B.B., & Gruber, V. 2011. Why don’t consumers care about csr?: a qualitative study exploring the role of csr in consumption decisions. Journal of

Business Ethics, 104 (4): 449 – 460.

(35)

Porter, M. E., & Kramer M.R. 1996. The link between competitive advantage and corporate social responsibility. Harvard Business Review, 84 (12): 78-92.

Ricks, J. M., & Williams, J. A. 2005. Strategic corporate philanthropy: addressing frontline talent needs through an educational giving program. Journal of Business Ethics, 60: 147-157.

Saiia, D. H., Carroll, A. B., & Buchholtz, A. K. 2003. Philantrophy as strategy when corporate charity begins at home. Business & Society, 42 (2): 169 – 201.

Sanchez, C. M. 2000. Motives for corporate philanthropy in el salvador: altruism and political legitimacy. Journal of Business Ethics, 27 (4) : 363-375.

Segon, M., & Booth, C. Business ethics and csr as part of mba curricula: an analysis of student preference. International Review of Business Research Paper, 5 (3) : 72 - 81. Scherer, A. G., & Palazzo, G. 2010. The new political role of business in a globalized world: a review of a new perspective on csr and its implications for the firm, governance, and democracy. Journal of Management Studies, 48 (4) : 899-931.

Sen, S., & Bhattacharya, C. B. 2001. Does doing good always lead to doing better? consumer reactions to corporate social responsibility. American Marketing Research, 8 (2): 225-243. Simon, F. L. 1995. Global corporate philanthropy: a strategic framework. International Marketing Review, 12 (4): 20 -37.

Shukla, A., & Tripathy, A. 1994. Influence of gender and hierarchical position on interpersonal relations at work. Psychological Reports, 74, 1280-1282.

(36)

Zerbe, W. J. and D. L. Paulhus. 1987. Socially desirable responding in organizational behavior: a reconception, Academy of Management Journal, 12: 250–264.

Books

Bruce, L., Hay, R, N., Stavins, R., Richard, H,K., Vietor. 2005. Environmental protection

and the social responsibility of firms, perspectives from law, economics, and business.

Routlegde.

Bowen, H.R. 1953. Social responsibilities of the businessman. New York: Harper. Edmondson, B. 2014. The ice cream social, the struggle for the soul of ben & jerry’s. Berrett-Koehler Publishers, Inc. San Francisco, California.

Litteral, M, A., & Dickson, M, A. 1999. Social responsibility in the global market. Sage Publications Inc, California.

Useem, M. 1984. The inner circle. large corporations and the rise of business political activity in the u.s and uk. Oxford University Press, Inc.

Internet  

Rank a brand. 2015. http://rankabrand.org/home/what-we-do June 10th 2015.  

   

(37)

APPENDICES

APPENDIX A: Figures

(38)

Figure 2: the pyramid of corporate social responsibility (Carroll, 1991)

(39)
(40)

 

APPENDIX B: Tables

Table 1: Descriptive Statistics for manipulation check different scenarios Manipulation check question Condition M SD N Altruistic CSR Altruistic CSR 4.00 0.72 43 Strategic CSR 2.46 1.03 41 Neutral CSR 1.95 0.54 42 Total 2.82 1.18 126 Strategic CSR Altruistic CSR 2.35 1.15 43 Strategic CSR 4.00 0.71 41 Neutral CSR 1.88 0.45 42 Total 2.73 1.22 126 Neutral CSR Altruistic CSR 1.95 0.62 43 Strategic CSR 2.02 0.61 41 Neutral CSR 3.88 0.77 42 Total 2.62 1.12 126

Table 2: One-way Analysis of Variance manipulation questions

Scenario Source df MS F P*

Altruistic CSR Between groups 2 48.35 78.15 0.01

Within groups 123 0.62

Total 125

Strategic CSR Between groups 2 51.33 75.00 0.01

Within groups 123 0.68

Total 125

Neutral CSR Between groups 2 50.21 111.71 0.01

Within groups 123 0.45

Total 125

(41)

Table 3: Post Hoc Tests manipulation questions different types of CSR Dependent

variable

(42)

Table 4: Descriptive Statistics for different conditions on consumer purchasing behavior Condition M SD N Altruistic CSR 4.42 0.96 43 Strategic CSR 3.63 0.86 41 Neutral CSR 3.91 0.90 42 Total 3.91 0.97 126

Table 5: One-way analysis of variance

Source df MS F Sig.

Between groups 2 8.60 10.93 0.01

Within groups 123 0,82

Total 125

Significance if *p < 0.05

Table 6: Post Hoc Tests different types of CSR Dependent

Variable

(43)

Table 7: Descriptive Statistics for different conditions of CSR and gender Condition M SD N Male Altruistic CSR 4.56 0.96 16 Male Strategic CSR 4.00 0.77 21 Male Neutral CSR 3.57 1.16 23 Female Altruistic CSR 4.32 0.96 27 Female Strategic CSR 3.21 0.79 20 Female Neutral CSR 3.79 0.42 19 Total 3.91 0.97 126

Table 8: Two-way Analysis of Variance

Source df MS F P* Type of CSR 2 8.60 10.93 0.01 Gender 1 1.94 2.47 0.12 Type of CSR * Gender 2 2.45 3.12 0.05 Error 120 0.79 Significance if *p < 0.05

(44)

Male Neutral CSR Male Altruistic CSR -1,02 0,28 0,01 Male Strategic CSR -0,43 0,27 0,11 Female Altruistic CSR -0,73 0,25 0,01 Female Strategic CSR 0,35 0,27 0,20 Female Neutral CSR -0,22 0,27 0,42 Female Altruistic CSR Male Altruistic CSR -0,29 0,27 0,29 Male Strategic CSR 0,29 0,26 0,25 Male Neutral CSR 0,73 0,25 0,01 Female Strategic CSR 1,09 0,26 0,01 Female Neutral CSR 0,51 0,26 0,01 Female Strategic CSR Male Altruistic CSR -0,38 0,30 0,01 Male Strategic CSR -0,79 0,28 0,01 Male Neutral CSR -0,35 0,27 0,20 Female Altruistic CSR -1,09 0,26 0,01 Female Neutral CSR -0,58 0,29 0,05 Female Neutral CSR Male Altruistic CSR -0,80 0,30 0,01 Male Strategic CSR -0,21 0,28 0,45 Male Neutral CSR 0,22 0,27 0,42 Female Altruistic CSR -0,51 0,26 0,06 Female Strategic CSR 0,58 0,29 0,01 Significance if *p < 0.05

Table 10: The most important criteria for purchasing the jeans

Condition Frequency Percent

Reasonable price 16 12,7

Quality 35 27,8

Jeans need to fit well 20 15,9

CSR program 30 23,8

Comfort 4 3,2

Brand 15 11,9

Will benefit someone in need 3 2,4

I read about the brand 3 2,4

(45)

APPENDIX C: Scenarios

Dear participant,

Today you will take part in a research for a Master Thesis. In the next 5 minutes you first will read a scenario, followed by some questions. Please read the scenario carefully and answer the questions taking, thereby into account what was said in the scenario. There are no right or wrong answers, just answers that are true to you. Do not think too long about your answers, often the first answer that comes up to you is the best answer. It is important that you answer all questions.

The questionnaire is completely anonymous and the answers will be used solely for scientific purposes. You will be free to withdraw from the research at any time.

Thank you in advance for taking part in this research. Kind regards,

(46)

Altruistic CSR

You are considering purchasing a new set of jeans and there is a lot of choice between different brands. However, you read an article in the newspaper about Jeanex, a multinational that manufactures jeans. The article spoke about the effective way Jeanex coordinates their business and supply chain. Jeanex has been very successful and one of the factors it attributes its success to is the quality of the product.

Jeanex started their business with a vision on sustainability; the ultimate measure of the company’s success is their corporate social responsibility program. The companies’ strategy is to envisage a balance between profit and people, as well as between manufacture and environmental responsibility. Together with the garment factories Jeanex collaborates with, the company bears the responsibility to provide a safe, fair and ethical working environment for all people who are involved in the process of manufacturing the jeans. Jeanex makes sure that everyone who participates in the manufacturing of the jeans earns a living wage. Furthermore, Jeanex is continuously working on reducing the environmental impact by using renewable resources, sorting waste and only manufacture jeans that are made of 100% organic cotton. More recently, Jeanex, started as part of their corporate social responsibility program, to donate one pair of jeans to a child in need for every pair of customer purchases. This initiative also received attention in the news article. One could argue that the corporate social responsibility program is rooted in the entire organization and is part of the strategy of the company.

Strategic CSR

You are considering purchasing a new set of jeans and there is a lot of choice between different brands. However, you read an article in the newspaper about Jeanex, a multinational that manufactures jeans. The article spoke about the effective way Jeanex coordinates their business and supply chain. Jeanex has been very successful and one of the factors it attributes its success to is the quality of the product.

Referenties

GERELATEERDE DOCUMENTEN

This question will be answered firstly, by looking at national culture with the six Hofstede dimensions (power distance, individualism, masculinity, uncertainty

We argued that (a) increasing internationalisation positively influences EMNEs’ overall CSR performance; that (b) the greater EMNEs’ international market experience,

The results show that the degree of CSR orientation is not significantly related to the degree of long-term compensatio n, and that the moderating effect

The TB consist of the following firm types: listed companies, family firms, cooperatives, a remaining group of public limited companies and private limited

We tested the second hypothesis “The CSR of a firm will positively moderate the relationship between the M&amp;A effects on the customer base, that the higher the level of CSR,

The main finding of this paper shows that female CEOs earn less than males and equity-based compensation is driven by CSR investments and thus, CEOs who act in the best interest

Different industries will be examined and compared to get more insight into the effect of the salient stakeholder demands and sustainable competitive position on the CSR-CFP

Pressure resistant investors were expected to have a significant positive influence on CSR activities, because contrary to pressure sensitive investors, they do not have