Employee Commitment Matters for CSR Practice, Reputation and Corporate Brand Performance—European Model - Publication - Bridge of Knowledge

Your account

login

Search

Employee Commitment Matters for CSR Practice, Reputation and Corporate Brand Performance—European Model

Abstract

So far, there have been no studies that explore how employee brand commitment moderates CSR practice outcomes. Employee brand commitment is often claimed as a focal input and output of the CSR. So, it means that it shapes CSR conditions. Then, it is a moderator. This study aims to verify it. Besides, commitment exists in many forms and can be achieved in many ways. Hence the question, if employees are committed to the brand, then how does it affect the outcomes of social responsibility practices such as corporate reputation or brand performance? This study analyzed a sample of 282 cases from the construction industry in Europe, using SPSS Amos and the PROCESS macro, to reveal the strong alignment of an excellent level of all three: CSR practice, corporate brand reputation, employee brand commitment. Still, it also shows that the high level of CSR practice may leverage corporate brand reputation even though employees are not brand committed. It exposes how meaningful the excellent level of CSR practice is. Moreover, the study also reveals that the lack of employee brand commitment may jeopardize reputation. So, the simplest way to achieve sustainability of brand performance is to keep employee brand commitment and CSR practice at the highest possible level to secure corporate brand reputation, which is a strong mediator between CSR practice and brand performance. The people are the company. So, in light of the study findings, it is clear that the future of corporate brands is in employees’ hands. Thus, companies should focus on improving employee commitment to achieve better corporate socialresponsibility practice outcomes. Moreover, the findings in this study present evidence supporting the importance of internal branding. This is the first study that has explored how employee brand commitment moderates CSR outcomes in a national context.

Citations

  • 1 9

    CrossRef

  • 0

    Web of Science

  • 2 0

    Scopus

Author (1)

Cite as

Full text

download paper
downloaded 480 times
Publication version
Accepted or Published Version
License
Creative Commons: CC-BY open in new tab

Keywords

Details

Category:
Articles
Type:
artykuły w czasopismach
Published in:
Sustainability no. 12, pages 1 - 16,
ISSN:
Language:
English
Publication year:
2020
Bibliographic description:
Kucharska W.: Employee Commitment Matters for CSR Practice, Reputation and Corporate Brand Performance—European Model// Sustainability -Vol. 12,iss. 3 (2020), s.1-16
DOI:
Digital Object Identifier (open in new tab) 10.3390/su12030940
Bibliography: test
  1. Barwise, P.; Higson, C.; Likierman, A.; Marsh, P. Brands as separable assets. Bus. Strategy Rev. 1990, 1, 43- 59, doi:10.1111/j.1467-8616.1990.tb00010.x. open in new tab
  2. Kucharska, W.; Flisikowski, K.; Confente, I. Do global brands contribute to the economy of their country of origin? A dynamic spatial approach. J. Prod. Brand Manag. 2018, 27, 768-780, doi:10.1108/jpbm-10-2017-1641. open in new tab
  3. Aon Hewitt. 2017 trends in global employee engagement. 2017. Available online: http://images.respond.aonhewitt.com/Web/AonHewitt/%7Bd9a8975c-f5b1-4105-8dfd- 63a835f3213b%7D_2017-Trends-in-Global-Employee-Engagement.pdf (accessed on 15 December 2019). open in new tab
  4. Ellen MacArthur Foundation. Towards the circular economy: An economic and business rationale for an accelerated transition. 2012. Available online: https://www.ellenmacarthurfoundation.org/assets/downloads/ publications/Ellen-MacArthur-Foundation-Towards-the-Circular-Economy-vol.1.pdf (accessed on 15 December 2019).
  5. Clarkson, M.E. A stakeholder framework for analyzing and evaluating corporate social performance. Acad. Manag. Rev. 1995, 20, 92-117, doi:10.5465/amr.1995.9503271994. open in new tab
  6. Venturelli, A.; Cosma, S.; Leopizzi, R. Stakeholder engagement: An evaluation of European banks. Corp. Soc. Responsib. Environ. Manag. 2018, 25, 690-703, doi:10.1002/csr.1486 o.2017.03.177. open in new tab
  7. Testa, F.; Boiral, O.; Heras-Saizarbitoria, I. Improving CSR performance by hard and soft means: The role of organizational citizenship behaviours and the internalization of CSR standards. Corp. Soc. Responsib. Environ. Manag. 2018, 25, 853-865, doi:10.1002/csr.1502. open in new tab
  8. Hamadamin, H.H.; Atan, T. The Impact of Strategic Human Resource Management Practices on Competitive Advantage Sustainability: The Mediation of Human Capital Development and Employee Commitment. Sustainability 2019, 11, 5782, doi:10.3390/su11205782. open in new tab
  9. Bringham, J.B.; Mitchell, B.W.; Bishop, D.G.; Allen, N.J. Working for a higher purpose: A theoretical framework for commitment to organization-sponsored causes. Hum. Resour. Manag. Rev. 2013, 23 174-189, doi:10.1016/j.hrmr.2012.07.004. open in new tab
  10. Johnson, R.E.; Chang, C.-H.; Yang, L.-Q. Commitment and motivation at work: The relevance of employee identity and regulatory focus. Acad. Manag. Rev. 2010, 35, 226-245, doi:10.5465/amr.35.2.zok226. open in new tab
  11. Dixon-Fowler, H.; O'Leary-Kelly, A.; Johnson, J.; Waite, M. Sustainability and ideology-infused psychological contracts: An organizational-and employee-level perspective. Hum. Resour. Manag. Rev. 2019, doi:10.1016/j.hrmr.2019.100690. open in new tab
  12. Meyer, J.P.; Herscovitch, L. Commitment in the workplace: Toward a general model. Hum. Resour. Manag. Rev. 2001, 11, 299-326, doi:10.1016/S1053-482200053-X. open in new tab
  13. Becker, H.S. Notes on the concept of commitment. Am. J. Sociol. 1960, 66, 32-40, doi:10.1086/222820. open in new tab
  14. Becker, T.E.; Billings, R.S.; Eveleth, D.M.; Gilbert, N.L. Foci and bases of employee commitment: Implications for job performance. Acad. Manag. J. 1996, 39, 464-482, doi:10.2307/256788. open in new tab
  15. Ravens, C. Internal brand management in an international context. In Innovatives Markenmanagement; open in new tab
  16. Springer Gabler: Wiesbaden, Germany, 2014; Volume 47, pp. 3-10. open in new tab
  17. Piehler, R. Employees' brand understanding, brand commitment, and brand citizenship behaviour: A closer look at the relationships among construct dimensions. J. Brand Manag. 2018, 25, 217-234, doi:10.1057/s41262-018-0099-z. open in new tab
  18. da Graça Marques Casimiro Almeida, M.; Fernandes Matos Coelho, A. The antecedents of corporate reputation and image and their impacts on employee commitment and performance: The moderating role of CSR. Corp. Reput. Rev. 2018, 22, doi:10.1057/s41299-018-0053-8. open in new tab
  19. Hoppe, D. Linking employer branding and internal branding: Establishing perceived employer brand image as an antecedent of favourable employee brand attitudes and behaviours. J. Prod. Brand Manag. 2018, 27, 452-467, doi:10.1108/jpbm-12-2016-1374. open in new tab
  20. Waeraas, A.; Dahle, D.Y. When reputation management is people management: Implications for employee voice. Eur. Manag. J. 2020, doi:10.1016/j.emj.2019.08.010. open in new tab
  21. de Chernatony, L.; Drury, S.; Segal-Horn, S. Communicating services brands' values internally and externally. Serv. Ind. J. 2006, 26, 819-836. open in new tab
  22. Brodie, R.J.; Glynn, M.S.; Little, V. The service brand and the service-dominant logic: Missing fundamental premise or the need for stronger theory? Mark. Theory 2006, 6, 363-379, doi:10.1177/1470593106066797. open in new tab
  23. Gupta, M. Corporate social responsibility, employee-company identification, and organizational commitment: Mediation by employee engagement. Curr. Psychol. 2017, 36, 101-109, doi:10.1007/s12144-015- 9389-8. open in new tab
  24. Kucharska, W.; Kowalczyk, R. How to achieve sustainability? Employee's point of view on company's culture and CSR practice. Corp. Soc. Responsib. Environ. Manag. 2019, 26, 453-467, doi:10.1002/csr.1696. open in new tab
  25. Kowalczyk, R.; Kucharska, W. Corporate social responsibility practices incomes and outcomes: Stakeholders' pressure, culture, employee commitment, corporate reputation, and brand performance. A Polish-German cross-country study. Corp. Soc. Responsib. Environ. Manag. 2019, doi:10.1002/csr.1823. open in new tab
  26. Cheung, C.; Kong, H.; Song, H. How to influence hospitality employee perceptions on hotel brand performance? Int. J. Contemp. Hosp. Manag. 2014, 26, 1162-1178, doi:10.1108/IJCHM-02-2013-0090. open in new tab
  27. Garas, S.R.R.; Mahran, A.F.A.; Mohamed, H.M.H. Internal corporate branding impact on employees' brand supporting behaviour. J. Prod. Brand Manag. 2018, 27, 79-95, doi:10.1108/jpbm-03-2016-1112. open in new tab
  28. Lepak, D., Smith, K.; Taylor, M.S. Value creation and value capture: A multilevel perspective. Acad. Manag. Rev. 2007, 32, 180-194, doi:10.5465/amr.2007.23464011. open in new tab
  29. Kamakura, W.A.; Russell, G.J. Measuring brand value with scanner data. Int. J. Res. Mark. 1993, 10, 9-22, doi:10.1016/0167-811690030-3. open in new tab
  30. Piehler, R.; King, C.; Burmann, C.; Xiong, L. The importance of employee brand understanding, brand identification, and brand commitment in realizing brand citizenship behavior. Eur. J. Mark. 2016, 50, 1575- 1601, doi:10.1108/ejm-11-2014-0725. open in new tab
  31. Nygaard, A.; Biong, H. The influence of retail management's use of social power on corporate ethical values, employee commitment, and performance. J. Bus. Ethics 2010, 97, 87-108, doi:10.1007/s10551-010-0497-y. open in new tab
  32. Burmann, C.; Zeplin, S. Building brand commitment: A behavioural approach to internal brand management. J. Brand Manag. 2005, 12, 279-300, doi:10.1057/palgrave.bm.2540223. open in new tab
  33. Opoku-Dakwa, A.; Chen, C.C.; Rupp, D.E. CSR initiative characteristics and employee engagement: An impact-based perspective. J. Organ. Behav. 2018, 39, 580-593, doi:10.1002/job.2281. open in new tab
  34. Pedersen, E.R.G. All animals are equal, but…: Management perceptions of stakeholder relationships and societal responsibilities in multinational corporations. Bus. Ethics Eur. Rev. 2011, 20, 177-191, doi:10.1111/j.1467-8608.2011.01618.x. open in new tab
  35. Rodrigo, P.; Aqueveque, C.; Duran, I.J. Do employees value strategic CSR? A tale of affective organizational commitment and its underlying mechanisms. Bus. Ethics 2019, 28, 459-475, doi:10.1111/beer.12227. open in new tab
  36. Rosati, F.; Costa, R.; Calabrese, A.; Pedersen, E.R.G. Employee attitudes towards corporate social responsibility: A study on gender, age and educational level differences. Corp. Soc. Responsib. Environ. Manag. 2018, 25, 1306-1319, doi:10.1002/csr.1640. open in new tab
  37. Story, J.; Neves, P. When corporate social responsibility (CSR) increases performance: Exploring the role of intrinsic and extrinsic CSR attribution. Bus. Ethics Eur. Rev. 2015, 24, 111-124, doi:10.1111/beer.12084. open in new tab
  38. McShane, L.; Cunningham, P. To thine own self be true? Employees' judgments of the authenticity of their organization's corporate social responsibility program. J. Bus. Ethics 2012, 108, 81-100, doi:10.1007/s10551- 011-1064-x. open in new tab
  39. Glavas, A. Corporate social responsibility and employee engagement: Enabling employees to employ more of their whole selves at work. Front. Psychol. 2016, 7, 796, doi:10.3389/fpsyg.2016.00796. open in new tab
  40. Glavas, A.; Godwin, L.N. Is the perception of 'goodness' good enough? Exploring the relationship between perceived corporate social responsibility and employee organizational identification. J. Bus. Ethics 2013, 114, 15-27, doi:10.1007/s10551-012-1323-5. open in new tab
  41. Glavas, A.; Kelley, K. The effects of perceived corporate social responsibility on employee attitudes. Bus. Ethics Q. 2014, 24, 165e202, doi:10.5840/beq20143206. open in new tab
  42. Caligiuri, P.; Mencin, A.; Jiang, K. Win-win-win: The influence of company-sponsored volunteerism programs on employees, NGOs, and business units. Pers. Psychol. 2013, 66, 825-860, doi:10.1111/peps.12019. open in new tab
  43. Gond, J.P.; El Akremi, A.; Swaen, V.; Babu, N. The psychological microfoundations of corporate social responsibility: A person-centric systematic review. J. Organ. Behav. 2017, 38, 225-246, doi:10.1002/job.2170. open in new tab
  44. Dhanesh, G.S. CSR as organization-employee relationship management strategy: A case study of socially responsible information technology companies in India. Manag. Commun. Q. 2014, 28, 130-149, doi:10.1177/0893318913517238. open in new tab
  45. Eisingerich, A.B.; Rubera, G. Drivers of brand commitment: A cross-national investigation. J. Int. Mark. 2010, 18, 64-79, doi:10.1509/jimk.18.2.64. open in new tab
  46. Farooq, O.; Payaud, M.; Merunka, D.; Valette-Florence, P. The impact of corporate social responsibility on organizational commitment: Exploring multiple mediation mechanisms. J. Bus. Ethics 2014, 125, 563-580, doi:10.1007/s10551-013-1928-3. open in new tab
  47. Hofman, P.S.; Newman, A. The impact of perceived corporate social responsibility on organizational commitment and the moderating role of collectivism and masculinity: Evidence from China. Int. J. Hum. Resour. Manag. 2014, 25, 631-652, doi:10.1080/09585192.2013.792861. open in new tab
  48. Carmeli, A.; Gilat, G.; Waldman, D.A. The role of perceived organizational performance in organizational identification, adjustment and job performance. J. Manag. Stud. 2007, 44, 972-992, doi:10.1111/j.1467- 6486.2007.00691.x. open in new tab
  49. He, H.; Li, Y. CSR and service brand: The mediating effect of brand identification and moderating effect of service quality. J. Bus. Ethics 2011, 100, 673-688, doi:10.1007/s10551-010-0703-y. open in new tab
  50. Kim, H.R.; Lee, M.; Lee, H.T.; Kim, N.M. Corporate social responsibility and employee-company identification. J. Bus. Ethics 2010, 95, 557-569, doi:10.1007/s10551-010-0440-2. open in new tab
  51. Thompson, J.A.; Bunderson, J.S. Violations of principle: Ideological currency in the psychological contract. Acad. Manag. Rev. 2003, 28, 571-586, doi:10.5465/amr.2003.10899381. open in new tab
  52. Allen, N.J.; Meyer, J.P. The measurement and antecedents of affective, continuance and normative commitment to the organization. J. Occup. Psychol. 1990, 63, 1-18, doi:10.1111/j.2044-8325.1990.tb00506.x. open in new tab
  53. McWilliams, A.; Siegel, D.S. Corporate social responsibility: A theory of the firm perspective. Acad. Manag. Rev. 2001, 26, 117-127, doi:10.5465/amr.2001.4011987. open in new tab
  54. Melo, T.; Garrido-Morgado, A. Corporate reputation: A combination of social responsibility and industry. Corp. Soc. Responsib. Environ. Manag. 2012, 19, 11-31, doi:10.1002/csr.260. open in new tab
  55. Michelon, G. Sustainability disclosure and reputation: A comparative study. Corp. Reput. Rev. 2011, 14, 79- 96, doi:10.1057/crr.2011.10. open in new tab
  56. Sen, S.; Bhattacharya, C.B. Doing better at doing good: When, why and how consumers respond to corporate social initiatives. Calif. Manag. Rev. 2004, 47, 9-24, doi:10.1509/jmkr.38.2.225.18838. open in new tab
  57. Michelon, G.; Boesso, G.; Kumar, K. Examining the link between strategic corporate social responsibility and company performance: An analysis of the best corporate citizens. Corp. Soc. Responsib. Environ. Manag. 2013, 20, 81-94, doi:10.1002/csr.1278. open in new tab
  58. Neville, B.; Bell, S.; Mengüç, B. Corporate reputation, stakeholders and the social performance-financial performance relationship. Eur. J. Mark. 2005, 39, 1184-1198, doi:10.1108/03090560510610798. open in new tab
  59. Lee, K.H.; Herold, D.M.; Yu, A.L. Small and medium enterprises and corporate social responsibility practice: A Swedish perspective. Corp. Soc. Responsib. Environ. Manag. 2016, 23, 88-99, doi:10.1002/csr.1366. open in new tab
  60. Porter, M.E.; Kramer, M.R. Creating shared value. Harv. Bus. Rev. 2011, 89, 62-77.
  61. Lee, K.H. Linking stakeholders and corporate reputation towards corporate sustainability. Int. J. Innov. Sustain. Dev. 2012, 6, 219-235, doi:10.1504/ijisd.2012.046947. open in new tab
  62. López-Pérez, M.E.; Merelo-Polo, I.; Vázquez-Carrasco, R.; Cambra-Fierro, J. Sustainability and business outcomes in the context of SMEs: Comparing family firms vs. non-family firms. Sustainability 2018, 10, 4080, doi:10.3390/su10114080. open in new tab
  63. Lai, C.-S.; Chiu, C.-J.; Yang, C.-F.; Pai, D.-C. The effects of corporate social responsibility on brand performance: The mediating effect of industrial brand equity and corporate reputation. J. Bus. Ethics 2010, 95, 457-469, doi:10.1007/s10551-010-0433-1. open in new tab
  64. Hayes, A. Introduction to Mediation, Moderation and Conditional Process Analysis: A Regression-Based Approach, 2nd ed.; Guilford Press: New York, NY, USA, 2018.
  65. Torres, A.; Bijmolt, T.H.A.; Tribo, J.A.; Verhoef, P. Generating global brand equity through corporate social responsibility to key stakeholders. Int. J. Res. Mark. 2012, 29, 13-24, doi:10.1016/j.ijresmar.2011.10.002. open in new tab
  66. Pratihari, S.K.; Uzma, S.H. CSR and corporate branding effect on brand loyalty: A study on Indian banking industry. J. Prod. Brand Manag. 2018, 27, 57-78, doi:10.1108/JPBM-05-2016-1194. open in new tab
  67. Cowan, K.; Guzman, F. How CSR reputation, sustainability signals, and country-of-origin sustainability reputation contribute to corporate brand performance: An exploratory study. J. Bus. Res. 2019, doi:10.1016/j.jbusres.2018.11.017. open in new tab
  68. Karazsia, B.; Berlin, K.S. Can a mediator moderate? Considering the role of time and change in the mediator-moderator distinction. Behav. Ther. 2018, 49, 12-20, doi:10.1016/j.beth.2017.10.001. open in new tab
  69. Hur, W.M.; Moon, T.W.; Lee, H.G. Employee engagement in CSR initiatives and customer-directed counterproductive work behavior (CWB): The mediating roles of organizational civility norms and job calling. Corp. Soc. Responsib. Environ. Manag. 2018, 25, 1087-1098, doi:10.1002/csr.1522. open in new tab
  70. Verčič, A.T.; Ćorić, D.S. The relationship between reputation, employer branding and corporate social responsibility. Public Relat. Rev. 2018, 44, 444-452.
  71. Halkos, G.; Skouloudis, A. National CSR and institutional conditions: An exploratory study. J. Clean. Prod. 2016, 139, 1150-1156, doi:10.1016/j.jclepro.2016.07.047. open in new tab
  72. Kaiser, H. An index of factor simplicity. Psychometrika 1974, 39, 31-36, doi:10.1007/BF02291575. open in new tab
  73. Hair, J.F.; Anderson, R.E.; Babin, B.J.; Black, W.C. Multivariate Data Analysis: A Global Perspective; Pearson: Upper Saddle River, NJ, USA, 2010.
  74. Byrne, B.M. Structural Equation Modeling with Amos; Routledge: New York, NY, USA, 2016. open in new tab
  75. Podsakoff, P.M.; Organ, D. Self-reports in organizational research: Problems and prospects. J. Manag. 1986, 12, 531-544, doi:10.1177/014920638601200408. open in new tab
  76. Podsakoff, P.M.; MacKenzie, S.B.; Lee, J.-Y.; Podsakoff, N.P. Common method biases in behavioral research: Acritical review of the literature and recommended remedies. J. Appl. Psychol. 2003, 88, 879-903, doi:10.1037/0021-9010.88.5.879. open in new tab
  77. Lindell, M.K.; Whitney, D.J. Accounting for common method variance in cross-sectional research designs. J. Appl. Psychol. 2001, 86, 114-121, doi:10.1037/0021-9010.86.1.114 open in new tab
  78. Fornell, C.; Larcker, D.F. Evaluating structural equation models with unobservable variables and measurement error. J. Mark. Res. 1981, 18, 39-50, doi:10.2307/3151312. open in new tab
  79. Francis, G. Introduction to SPSS for Windows, 3rd ed.; Pearson Education: Sydney, NSW, Australia, 2001.
  80. Steiger, J.H.; Lind, J.C. Statistically Based Tests for the Number of Common Factors. Paper presented at the annual meeting of the Psychometric Society, Iowa City, IA, USA, May 1980.
  81. Wheaton, D.E.; Muthen, B.; Alwin, D.F.; Summers, G.F. Assessing reliability and stability in panel models. Sociol. Methodol. 1977, 8, 84-136, doi:10.2307/270754. open in new tab
  82. Bollen, K.A. Structural Equations with Latent Variables; open in new tab
  83. McDonald, R.P.; Marsh, H.W. Choosing a multivariate model: Noncentrality and goodness of fit. Psychol. Bull. 1990, 107, 247-255, doi:10.1037/0033-2909.107.2.247. open in new tab
  84. Dw.com. Germanyʹs foreign population reaches record 10.6 million. 2017. Available online: https://www.dw.com/en/germanys-foreign-population-reaches-record-106-million/a-43353320 (accessed on 15 December 2019). open in new tab
  85. Statista.com. Number of foreigners in Germany in 2018, by region of origin. 2018. Available online: https://www.statista.com/statistics/891324/foreigner-numbers-by-region-of-origin-germany/ (accessed on 15 December 2019).
  86. Nink, M. Engagement index Deutschland. 2015. Available online: http://www.gallup.com/de- de/181871/engagement-index-deutschland.aspx (accessed on 15 December 2019).
  87. Effectory International. The essential guide to driving employee engagement in Europe. 2019. Available online: http://www.efectory.com (accessed on 30 November 2019).
  88. Ghosh, K. How and when do employees identify with their organization? Perceived CSR, first-party (in)justice, and organizational (mis)trust at workplace. Pers. Rev. 2018, 47, 1152-1171, doi:10.1108/PR-08- 2017-0237. open in new tab
  89. Yu, Y.; Choi, Y. Stakeholder pressure and CSR adoption: The mediating role of organizational culture for Chinese companies. The Social Science Journal. 2016, 53, 226-235, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.soscij.2014.07.006 open in new tab
Verified by:
Gdańsk University of Technology

seen 124 times

Recommended for you

Corporate social responsibility practices incomes and outcomes: Stakeholders' pressure, culture, employee commitment, corporate reputation, and brand performance. A Polish–German cross‐country study

2020

Personal Branding—A New Competency in the Era of the Network Economy. Corporate Brand Performance Implications

2018

How to achieve sustainability?-Employee's point of view on company's culture and CSR practice

2019

Personal Brand Value and Social Media, the Top Football Players’ Case

2018
Meta Tags