Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Rethinking the Employees’ Perceptions of Corporate Citizenship Dimensionalization

  • Published:
Journal of Business Ethics Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

The article suggests that the four-factor model of corporate citizenship (CC: economic, legal, ethical, and discretionary responsibilities) does not fairly represent all pertinent dimensions of employees’ CC perceptions. Based on an empirical study with a sample of 316 employees, we show that, at least in some contexts, individuals distinguish seven CC dimensions: (1) economic responsibilities toward customers; (2) economic responsibilities toward owners; (3) legal responsibilities; (4) ethical responsibilities; (5) discretionary responsibilities toward employees; (6) discretionary responsibilities toward the community; and (7) discretionary responsibilities toward the natural environment. We do not suggest that this seven-factor model represents all of the (more) relevant CC dimensions in the employees’ minds. We aim to share evidence showing that the four-factor model proposed by Maignan et al. (Journal of the Academy of Marketing Science 27(4):455–469, 1999) may be refined, at least when the employees are the stakeholders in question.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  • Acar, W., Aupperle, K. E., & Lowy, R. M. (2001). An empirical exploration of measures of social responsibility across the spectrum of organizational types. International Journal of Organizational Analysis, 9(1), 26–57.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Backhaus, K., Stone, B., & Heiner, K. (2002). Exploring the relationship between corporate social performance and employer attractiveness. Business and Society, 41(3), 292–318.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Becker-Olsen, K. L., Cudmore, B. A., & Hill, R. P. (2006). The impact of perceived corporate social responsibility on consumer behavior. Journal of Business Research, 59(1), 46–53.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bell, D., Deighton, J., Reinartz, W. J., Rust, R. T., & Swartz, G. (2002). Seven barriers to customer equity management. Journal of Service Research, 5(1), 77–85.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Burchell, J., & Joanne, C. (2006). It’s good to talk? Examining attitudes towards corporate social responsibility dialogue and engagement processes. Business Ethics, 15(2), 154–170.

    Article  Google Scholar 

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

    Google Scholar 

  • Carroll, A. B. (1998). The four faces of corporate citizenship. Business and Society Review, 100, 1–7.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Chhokar, J. S., Brodbeck, F. C., & House, R. J. (Eds.). (2008). Culture and leadership across the world: The GLOBE book of in-depth studies of 25 societies. New York: Lawrence Erlbaum.

    Google Scholar 

  • Cunha, M. P., & Rego, A. (2008). Culture and management in Portugal: From the empire to the union. In E. Davel, J. P. Dupuis, & J. P. Chanlat (Eds.), Gestion en contexte interculturel: approches, problématiques, pratiques et plongées. Québec: Les Presses de l’Université Laval et UQAM.

    Google Scholar 

  • Egels-Zandén, N., & Sandberg, J. (2010). Distinctions in descriptive and instrumental stakeholder theory: A challenge for empirical research. Business Ethics, 19(1), 35–49.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Eisenberger, R., Armeli, S., Rexwinkel, B., Lynch, P. D., & Rhoades, L. (2001). Reciprocation of perceived organizational support. Journal of Applied Psychology, 86(1), 42–51.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • European Commission. (2001). Green paper: Promoting a European framework for corporate social responsibility, European Commission, Brussels. Retrieved from http://eur-lex.europa.eu/LexUriServ/site/en/com/2001/com2001_0366en01.pdf.

  • Flamholtz, E., & Kannan-Narasimhan, R. (2005). Differential impact of cultural elements on financial performance. European Management Journal, 23(1), 50–64.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Gelfand, M. J., Erez, M., & Aycan, Z. (2007). Cross-cultural organizational behavior. Annual Review of Psychology, 58, 479–514.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Gorden, W. I., Anderson, C. M., & Bruning, S. D. (1992). Employee perceptions of corporate partnership: An affective-moral quid pro quo. Employee Responsibilities & Rights Journal, 5(1), 75–85.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Gouldner, A. W. (1960). The norm of reciprocity: A preliminary statement. American Sociological Review, 25, 161–178.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Graafland, J., Van de Ven, B., & Stoffele, N. (2003). Strategies and instruments for organising CSR by small and large businesses in the Netherlands. Journal of Business Ethics, 47(1), 45–60.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hofstede, G. (1991). Cultures and organizations: Software of the mind. London: McGraw-Hill.

    Google Scholar 

  • House, R., Hanges, P., Javidan, M., Dorfman, P., & Gupta, V. (Eds.). (2004). Culture, leadership, and organizations: The GLOBE study of 62 societies. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hunt, S. D., Kiecker, P. L., & Chonko, L. B. (1990). Social responsibility and personal success: A research note. Journal of the Academy of Marketing Science, 18(3), 239–244.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Jenkins, H. (2006). Small business champions for corporate social responsibility. Journal of Business Ethics, 67(3), 241–256.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Jesuino, J. C. (2002). Latin Europe cluster: From south to north. Journal of World Business, 37(1), 81–89.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kaler, J. (2009). An optimally viable version of stakeholder theory. Journal of Business Ethics, 86(3), 297–312.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kets de Vries, M. F. R. (2001). Creating authentizotic organizations: Well-functioning Individuals in vibrant companies. Human Relations, 54(1), 101–111.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Lin, C. (2010). Modeling corporate citizenship, organizational trust, and work engagement based on attachment theory. Journal of Business Ethics, 94(4), 517–531.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Lin, C., Lyau, N., Tsai, Y., Chen, W., & Chiu, C. (2010). Modeling corporate citizenship and its relationship with organizational citizenship behaviors. Journal of Business Ethics, 95(3), 357–372.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Maignan, I. (2001). Consumers’ perceptions of corporate social responsibilities: A cross-cultural comparison. Journal of Business Ethics, 30, 57–72.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Maignan, I., & Ferrell, O. C. (2000). Measuring corporate citizenship in two countries: The case of the United States and France. Journal of Business Ethics, 23, 283–297.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Maignan, I., & Ferrell, O. C. (2001a). Antecedents and benefits of corporate citizenship: An investigation of French Businesses. Journal of Business Research, 51, 37–51.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Maignan, I., & Ferrell, O. C. (2001b). Corporate citizenship as a marketing instrument: Concepts, evidence and research directions. European Journal of Marketing, 35(3/4), 457–484.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Maignan, I., Ferrell, O. C., & Hult, G. T. M. (1999). Corporate citizenship: Cultural antecedents and business benefits. Journal of the Academy of Marketing Science, 27(4), 455–469.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Margolis, J. D., & Walsh, J. P. (2003). Misery loves companies: Rethinking social initiatives by business. Administrative Science Quarterly, 48(2), 268–305.

    Article  Google Scholar 

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

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Mercer, J. J. (2003). Corporate social responsibility and its importance to consumers. Doctoral Dissertation, The Claremont Graduate University, United States. Retrieved from http://proquest.umi.com/pqdweb?did=765688571&Fmt=7&clientId=47023&RQT=309&VName=PQD.

  • Meyer, C., & Kirby, J. (2010). Leadership in the age of transparency. Harvard Business Review, 88(4), 38–46.

    Google Scholar 

  • Mirvis, P., & Googins, B. (2006). Stages of corporate citizenship. California Management Review, 48(2), 104–126.

    Google Scholar 

  • Orlitzky, M., Schmidt, F., & Rynes, S. (2003). Corporate social and financial performance: A meta-analysis. Organization Studies, 24(3), 403–441.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Orts, E., & Strudler, A. (2009). Putting a stake in stakeholder theory. Journal of Business Ethics Supplement, 88, 605–615.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Perrini, F., Russo, A., & Tencati, A. (2007). CSR strategies of SMEs and large firms: Evidence from Italy. Journal of Business Ethics, 74(3), 285–300.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Peterson, D. K. (2004). The relationship between perceptions of corporate citizenship and organizational commitment. Business and Society, 43(3), 296–319.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Pfeffer, J. (2010). Building sustainable organizations: The human factor. Academy of Management Perspectives, February, 34–45.

  • Pickett-Baker, J., & Ozaki, R. (2008). Pro-environmental products: Marketing influence on consumer purchase decision. The Journal of Consumer Marketing, 25(5), 281–293.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Pine, B. J., I. I., & Gilmore, J. H. (2000). Satisfaction, sacrifice, surprise: Three small steps create one giant leap into the experience economy. Strategy & Leadership, 28(1), 18–23.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Porter, M. E., & Kramer, M. R. (1999). Philanthropy’s new agenda: Creating value. Harvard Business Review, 77(6), 121–130.

    Google Scholar 

  • Porter, M. E., & Kramer, M. R. (2002). The competitive advantage of corporate philanthropy. Harvard Business Review, 80(12), 56–68.

    Google Scholar 

  • Porter, M. E., & Kramer, M. R. (2006). Strategy and society: The link between competitive advantage and corporate social responsibility. Harvard Business Review, 84(12), 78–92.

    Google Scholar 

  • Rego, A., & Cunha, M. P. (2010). Organizational justice and citizenship behaviors: A study in the Portuguese cultural context. Applied Psychology: An International Review, 59(3), 404–430.

    Google Scholar 

  • Rego, A., Leal, S., Cunha, M. P., Faria, J., & Pinho, C. (2010). How the perceptions of five dimensions of corporate citizenship and their inter-inconsistencies predict affective commitment. Journal of Business Ethics, 94, 107–127.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Settoon, R. P., Bennett, N., & Liden, R. C. (1996). Social exchange in organizations: Perceived organizational support, leader-member exchange, and employee reciprocity. Journal of Applied Psychology, 81(3), 219–227.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Siegel, D. S., & Vitaliano, D. F. (2007). An empirical analysis of the strategic use of corporate social responsibility. Journal of Economics & Management Strategy, 16(3), 773–792.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Singhapakdi, A., Kraft, K. L., Vitell, S. J., & Rallapalli, K. C. (1995). The perceived importance of ethics and social responsibility on organisational effectiveness: A survey of marketers. Journal of the Academy of Marketing Science, 23(1), 49–56.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Spence, L. J. (2007). CSR and small business in a European policy context: The five “C”s of CSR and small business research agenda 2007. Business & Society Review, 112(4), 533–552.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Steyn, B., & Niemann, L. (2010). Enterprise strategy: A concept that explicates corporate communication’s strategic contribution at the macro-organisational level. Journal of Communication Management, 14(2), 106–126.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Turker, D. (2009a). How corporate social responsibility influences organizational commitment. Journal of Business Ethics, 89, 189–204.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Turker, D. (2009b). Measuring corporate social responsibility: A scale development study. Journal of Business Ethics, 85, 411–427.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Waddock, S. (2004). Parallel universes: Companies, academics, and the progress of corporate citizenship. Business and Society Review, 109(1), 5–42.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Waddock, S. (2008). The development of corporate responsibility/corporate citizenship. Organization Management Journal, 5, 29–39.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Williams, F. (1968). Reasoning with statistics. New York: Holt, Rinehart and Winston.

    Google Scholar 

  • Wrzesniewski, A. (2003). Finding positive meaning in work. In K. S. Cameron, J. E. Dutton, & R. E. Quinn (Eds.), Positive organizational scholarship (pp. 296–308). San Francisco: Berrett Koehler.

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Acknowledgments

This study was carried out with support of Fundação para a Ciência e Tecnologia (Program: POPH–QREN; SFRH/PROTEC/49930/2009).

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Universidade de Aveiro, Aveiro, Portugal

    Arménio Rego

  2. ISCTE-IUL, UNIDE, Lisbon, Portugal

    Arménio Rego

  3. Escola Superior de Gestão e Tecnologia, Instituto Politécnico de Santarém, Santarém, Portugal

    Susana Leal

  4. Faculdade de Economia, Universidade Nova de Lisboa, Lisboa, Portugal

    Miguel Pina e Cunha

Authors
  1. Arménio Rego
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Susana Leal
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Miguel Pina e Cunha
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Arménio Rego.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Rego, A., Leal, S. & Pina e Cunha, M. Rethinking the Employees’ Perceptions of Corporate Citizenship Dimensionalization. J Bus Ethics 104, 207–218 (2011). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10551-011-0899-5

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10551-011-0899-5

Keywords

Search

Navigation