Human resource management (HRM) has always been one of the most outstanding research areas in the business segment. However, when speaking of HRM, it is of crucial importance to understand that employee satisfaction serves as a major variable in all theoretical frameworks related to the issue. Hence, any idea of a conceptual model implemented into an organization is inevitably influenced by human capital to a certain extent. However, when speaking of the situation from an opposite perspective, it is rather difficult to define the extent to which the employees are impacted by the working framework.
One of the most widespread frameworks integrated into the working environment is the Corporate Social Responsibility (CSR) model. According to the researchers, the latter stands for the organization’s actions aimed at positive outcomes beyond its sphere of interest, contributing to society in general (Tamvada, 2020). Thus, the following commitment implies a wider range of responsibilities for both the human capital and top management, as it encompasses a range is sustainable interventions in the working process. Taking this assumption into consideration, the research hypothesis may be outlined: employee CSR attribution considerably influences the overall level of job satisfaction.
In order to either justify or criticize the hypothesis, the following matters will be addressed in terms of the literature review:
- The relationship between CSR and job satisfaction;
- The correlation patterns between CSR and employee performance;
- The interdependence between CSR and financial performance.
Theoretical Framework of The Hypothesis
Prior to understanding the idea of interrelation between CSR and job satisfaction, it is important to identify the working definition of Corporate Social Responsibility, as the definition helps outline some of the major variables. Hence according to the researchers, the notion of CSR is frequently regarded similarly within organizations, whereas the theoretical foundation for its implementation varies significantly (Frynas & Yamahaki, 2019). Hence, while some leaders perceive CSR as a legal endeavor driven by corporative regulations, others associate the idea with collective ethical consciousness and even charitable activity. However, for the sake of rationality, the following literature review will be focused on Blowfield and Frynas’s definition that claims CSR to be an umbrella term for concepts and theories aimed at companies’ responsibility recognition in terms of social impact, environment, and sustainability (Frynas & Yamahaki, 2019). The other variables, in their turn, may be either promoted or dismissed within the organization.
Relationship Between CSR and Job Satisfaction
A variety of job satisfaction definitions exist that are characterized by a variety of factors that contribute to the notion. For example, Locke perceives job satisfaction as the employee’s positive frame of mind after the assessment of his or her working experience (Pang & Lu, 2018). Another interpretation stated that job satisfaction might be considered as an extent to which people feel content with their working conditions (Yuh & Choi, 2017). The criteria for job satisfaction are generally divided into internal and external, where the former stands for the individual’s expectations from the workplace.
Considering the aforementioned definitions, it may be outlined that everything that takes place within the working environment affects employees’ contentment. Thus, in order to understand the role of CSR in one’s job satisfaction, it is necessary to dwell on the relationship between theories relevant to certain working environments and their influence on the overall job satisfaction levels. When speaking of the stakeholder theory, the overall level of job satisfaction tends to be affected due to the fact that employees are perceived as stakeholders, therefore, play a significant role in the organization’s management patterns (Appiah, 2019).
Institutional theory, being focused on the adherence to social norms and institutions, contributes to the levels of job satisfaction by providing a structured approach to the employee’s scope of responsibilities (Van Wijk et al., 2019). Legitimacy theory, driven by the principle of justifying the organization’s actions as socially acceptable and non-harmful, tends to improve the patterns of communication between the employee and the company, resulting in the employee satisfaction modification (Fatma et al., 2019; Gallardo-Vázquez et al., 2019). Another CSR-related theory, known as the resource-based view, contributes to the perception of job performance because employees are considered as a major strategic resource in terms of management (Ahmed et al., 2018).
Agency theory is also crucial in terms of job satisfaction, as it outlines managers as the agents of any action, providing them with distinct objectives (Zogning, 2017). Considering the fact that that job description plays a pivotal role in satisfaction and performance, the managerial framework presented on the basis of agent theory considerably impacts the employee’s perception of the environment (Evans & Tourish, 2017). Finally, the major idea behind resource-dependent theory provides companies with the ability to cooperate with external organizations rather than limit their own resources, eventually leading to the minimized conflict risks on the team (Wang et al., 2020). Hence, having taken the following information into consideration, it may be concluded that the scholarly data justifies the assumption that CSR-related frameworks affect the employee’s job satisfaction regardless of the theoretical foundation chosen.
CSR and Employee Performance
CSR is considered to be a sophisticated concept, which may work efficiently only once all the variables co-exist in a unified working environment. Hence, according to Carroll’s CSR pyramid, the model includes legal, ethical, economic, and discretionary categories (Lu et al., 2020). That is, when securing a successful business, top managers are to make sure that the economic goals crucial for the enterprise’s existence are achieved without violating neither legal nor ethical considerations. Predictably, some researchers began to question the idea of employee performance in the context of CSR model implementation (Kucharska & Kowalczyk, 2019; Asante Boadi et al., 2020). However, despite the assumption that CSR may negatively impact the performance, the results have shown the opposite, claiming internal expectations and value to be highly important for the CSR-performance paradigm (Kim & Kim, 2020). Hence, it is now important to realize the extent to which the employee performance may be positively affected by the CSR model.
It is necessary to dwell on the notion of job security as one of the major performance enhancers. For example, the recent COVID-19 pandemic outbreak has drawn much attention on the matter of how CSR may contribute to job security and satisfaction (Bae et al., 2021). Thus, one of the studies aimed at discovering the CSR’s influence on the employees’ psychological capital in terms of COVID-19 quarantine (Mao et al., 2020). The results of the survey claim positive results in terms of influence on employees’ hope, resilience, and optimism. Moreover, the notion of CRS presupposes the team’s orientation for long-term performance, which generally provides employees with a higher level of security and, consequently, performance (Trivellas et al., 2019). When speaking of other CSR aspects in performance, it is necessary to outline that the model could be combined with other initiatives in order to secure employee performance. According to the scholarly evidence, the conceptual framework between CSR implementation and employees may be mediated through endeavors such as green practices and social exchange (Paillé & Meija-Morelos, 2019; Suganthi, 2019). Taking the aforementioned literature into consideration, it may be concluded that the CSR-related models obtain a positive influence on employee performance when perceived seriously by the management.
Moreover, when speaking of the employee’s performance, it is necessary to dwell on the financial motivation behind the process. Considering the complexity of the CSR integration in the environment, it would be safe to assume that it requires much financial investment in order to succeed. Moreover, there exists a common belief that the sustainable development of the company is not profitable in the long run (Bae et al., 2021). However, considering the research data presented over the past years, it becomes evident that CSR implementation secures extremely positive financial outcomes for the company and, consequently, employees (Cho et al., 2019; Sinthupundaja et al., 2019; Awaysheh et al., 2020; Galdeano et al., 2019). These benefits include higher credibility rates in the market and headhunting the best employees to the firm. As a result, the overall implementation of CSR in the workplace creates all the necessary conditions for higher job satisfaction rates. However, it is important to understand that such economic benefit is only achievable when combined with the active promotion of non-economic CSR variables.
Conclusion
The notion of employee management is affected by a number of concepts and variables. When speaking of some major changes within an organization, it is also important to understand the scope and nature of such influence. In terms of the review, such topics as CSR definition, the relationship between job satisfaction and CSR theoretical frameworks, connection between CSR and employee performance, and financial performance were discussed. Having analyzed the aforementioned scholarly data, it may be concluded that the hypothesis outlined in the introduction has been justified by relevant secondary research.
References
Ahmed, A., Khuwaja, F. M., Brohi, N. A., Othman, I., & Bin, L. (2018). Organizational factors and organizational performance: A resource-based view and social exchange theory viewpoint. International Journal of Academic Research in Business and Social Sciences, 8(3), 579-599. Web.
Appiah, J. K. (2019). Community-based corporate social responsibility activities and employee job satisfaction in the US hotel industry: An explanatory study. Journal of Hospitality and Tourism Management, 38, 140-148. Web.
Asante Boadi, E., He, Z., Bosompem, J., Opata, C. N., & Boadi, E. K. (2020). Employees’ perception of corporate social responsibility (CSR) and its effects on internal outcomes. The Service Industries Journal, 40(9-10), 611-632. Web.
Awaysheh, A., Heron, R. A., Perry, T., & Wilson, J. I. (2020). On the relation between corporate social responsibility and financial performance. Strategic Management Journal, 41(6), 965-987. Web.
Bae, K. H., El Ghoul, S., Gong, Z., & Guedhami, O. (2021). Does CSR matter in times of crisis? Evidence from the COVID-19 pandemic. Journal of Corporate Finance, 101876. Web.
Cho, S. J., Chung, C. Y., & Young, J. (2019). Study on the relationship between CSR and financial performance. Sustainability, 11(2), 343. Web.
Evans, S., & Tourish, D. (2017). Agency theory and performance appraisal: How bad theory damages learning and contributes to bad management practice. Management Learning, 48(3), 271-291. Web.
Fatma, M., Khan, I., & Rahman, Z. (2019). Striving for legitimacy through CSR: An exploration of employees responses in controversial industry sector. Social Responsibility Journal, 15(7), 924-938. Web.
Frynas, J. G., & Yamahaki, C. (2019). Corporate social responsibility: An outline of key concepts, trends, and theories. In Practising CSR in the Middle East (pp. 11-37). Palgrave Macmillan, Cham.
Galdeano, D., Ahmed, U., Fati, M., Rehan, R., & Ahmed, A. (2019). Financial performance and corporate social responsibility in the banking sector of Bahrain: Can engagement moderate? Management Science Letters, 9(10), 1529-1542. Web.
Gallardo-Vázquez, D., Valdez-Juárez, L. E., & Lizcano-Álvarez, J. L. (2019). Corporate social responsibility and intellectual capital: Sources of competitiveness and legitimacy in organizations’ management practices. Sustainability, 11(20), 5843. Web.
Kim, M. J., & Kim, B. J. (2020). Analysis of the importance of job insecurity, psychological safety and job satisfaction in the CSR-performance link. Sustainability, 12(9), 3514. Web.
Kucharska, W., & Kowalczyk, R. (2019). How to achieve sustainability?—Employee’s point of view on company’s culture and CSR practice. Corporate Social Responsibility and Environmental Management, 26(2), 453-467. Web.
Lu, J., Ren, L., Zhang, C., Rong, D., Ahmed, R. R., & Streimikis, J. (2020). Modified Carroll’s pyramid of corporate social responsibility to enhance organizational performance of SMEs industry. Journal of Cleaner Production, 271, 122456. Web.
Mao, Y., He, J., Morrison, A. M., & Andres Coca-Stefaniak, J. (2020). Effects of tourism CSR on employee psychological capital in the COVID-19 crisis: From the perspective of conservation of resources theory. Current Issues in Tourism, 1-19. Web.
Paillé, P., & Meija-Morelos, J. H. (2019). Organisational support is not always enough to encourage employee environmental performance. The moderating role of exchange ideology. Journal of Cleaner Production, 220, 1061-1070. Web.
Pang, K., & Lu, C. S. (2018). Organizational motivation, employee job satisfaction and organizational performance. Maritime Business Review, 3(1), 36 – 52. Web.
Sinthupundaja, J., Chiadamrong, N., & Kohda, Y. (2019). Internal capabilities, external cooperation and proactive CSR on financial performance. The Service Industries Journal, 39(15-16), 1099-1122. Web.
Suganthi, L. (2019). Examining the relationship between corporate social responsibility, performance, employees’ pro-environmental behavior at work with green practices as mediator. Journal of Cleaner Production, 232, 739-750. Web.
Tamvada, M. (2020). Corporate social responsibility and accountability: A new theoretical foundation for regulating CSR. International Journal of Corporate Social Responsibility, 5, 1-14. Web.
Trivellas, P., Rafailidis, A., Polychroniou, P., & Dekoulou, P. (2019). Corporate social responsibility (CSR) and its internal consequences on job performance. International Journal of Quality and Service Sciences. Web.
Van Wijk, J., Zietsma, C., Dorado, S., De Bakker, F. G., & Marti, I. (2019). Social innovation: Integrating micro, meso, and macro-level insights from institutional theory. Business & Society, 58(5), 887-918. Web.
Wang, T., Wu, J., Gu, J., & Hu, L. (2020). Impact of open innovation on organizational performance in different conflict management styles: Based on resource dependence theory. International Journal of Conflict Management. Web.
Yuh, J., & Choi, S. (2017). Sources of social support, job satisfaction, and quality of life among childcare teachers. The Social Science Journal, 54(4), 450-457. Web.
Zogning, F. (2017). Agency theory: A critical review. European Journal of Business and Management, 9(2), 1-8.