Skip to main content

Advertisement

Log in

Social Responsibility, Quality of Work Life and Motivation to Contribute in the Nigerian Society

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

Abstract

Presently, the social responsibility literature is replete with the diverse ways in which work organizations and the regulatory nation states in which they are domiciled can improve the quality of their workers’ lives. But do workers themselves become motivated to contribute (i.e., give back) to society when they experience a work life of better quality than their peers? Specifically, which sectors of society do such workers contribute to? Through a questionnaire that was administered to a cross section of workers in the private sector of Nigeria, this study found out that quality of work life (QWL) correlates significantly and positively with workers’ motivation to contribute to society. However, workers were less motivated to contribute to Nigeria’s government sector that is globally known for corruption than making contributions to the piety and social infrastructural sectors. Results also revealed that both the paternalistic and consultative forms of social responsibility were positively related with QWL. These results imply that social responsibility should be seen as a veritable platform on which satisfied stakeholders of business organizations can reciprocally make their own contributions for the overall good of society. By virtue of stakeholders’ contributions, the benefits of corporate social responsibility can actually reverberate into other sectors of societal life (e.g., the piety sector) that were never thought of during the design phase of socially responsible programmes. Finally, the study’s findings give credence to Anil Sarin’s Contributory Theory of Existence which states that people who have once received help from a particular organ of society (e.g., educational system, health care system, etc.) will be motivated to contribute to that organ or other organs of society.

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

Access this article

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

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  • Boisvert, M. (1981). La Qualite de vie au travail. Montreal: Agence d’Arc.

    Google Scholar 

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

    Google Scholar 

  • Champoux, J. (1981). A sociological perspective on work involvement. International Review of Applied Psychology, 30, 65–86.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Clarkson, M. (1995). A stakeholder framework for analyzing and evaluating corporate social performance. Academy of Management Review, 20, 92–117.

    Google Scholar 

  • Commons, J. (1931). Institutional economics. The American Economic Review, 21, 92–117.

    Google Scholar 

  • Cooke, G., Donaghey, J., & Zeytinoglu, I. (2013). The nuanced nature of work quality: Evidence from rural Newfoundland and Ireland. Human Relations, 66(4), 503–526.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Cornelius, N., Todres, M., Janjuha-Jivraj, S., Woods, A., & Wallace, J. (2008). Corporate social responsibility and the social enterprise. Journal of Business Ethics, 81(2), 355–370.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Dupuis, G., Taillefer, C., Etienne, M., Fontaine, O., Boivin, S., & Von Turk, A. (2000). Measurement of quality of life in cardiac rehabilitation. In J. Maltais & P. Leblanc (Eds.), Advances in cardiopulmonary rehabilitation (pp. 247–273). Champaign, IL: Human Kinetics Publishers.

    Google Scholar 

  • Efraty, D., & Sirgy, M. (1990). The effects of quality of working life (QWL) on employee behavioural responses. Social Indicators Research, 22(1), 31–47.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Fitch, H. (1976). Achieving corporate social responsibility. Academy of Management Review, 1(1), 38–46.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Fuentes-Garcia, F., Nunez-Tabales, J., & Veroz-Herradon, R. (2008). Applicability of corporate social responsibility to human resources management: Perspective from Spain. Journal of Business Ethics, 82(1), 27–44.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Garriga, E., & Mele, D. (2004). Corporate social responsibility theories: Mapping the territory. Journal of Business Ethics, 53(1–2), 51–71.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Gonzalez, M. (2010). Workers’ direct participation at the workplace and job quality in Europe. Journal of European Social Policy, 20(2), 160–168.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Goode, D. (1989). Quality of life, quality of work life. In W. Kiernan & R. Schalock (Eds.), Economics, industry and disability: A look ahead (pp. 66–73). Brookes: Baltimore.

    Google Scholar 

  • Greening, D., & Turban, D. (2000). Corporate social performance as a competitive advantage in attracting a quality workforce. Business and Society, 39(3), 254–280.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Greenwood, M. (2002). Ethics and human resource management: A review and conceptual analysis. Journal of Business Ethics, 36(3), 279–290.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Haigh, M., & Jones, M. (2006). The drivers of corporate social responsibility: A critical review. Business Review, 5(2), 245–251.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hardigan, P., Lai, L., & Carvajal, M. (2001). The influence of positive and negative affectivity on reported job satisfaction among practising pharmacists. Journal of Pharmaceutical Marketing and Management, 13(4), 57–77.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Jennings, P. (2003). Corporate social responsibility—New morals for business? In M. Sebastian (Ed.), Corporate social responsibility: Myth or reality? (Vol. 130, pp. 31–34)., Labour Education Geneva: International Labour Office.

    Google Scholar 

  • Justice, D. (2003). Corporate social responsibility: Challenges and opportunities for trade unionists. In M. Sebastian (Ed.), Corporate social responsibility: Myth or reality? (Vol. 130, pp. 1–13)., Labour Education Geneva: International Labour Office.

    Google Scholar 

  • Kiernan, W., & Knutson, K. (1990). Quality of work life. In M. Schalock & M. Begab (Eds.), Quality of life: Perspectives and issues. Washington, DC: American Association of Mental Retardation.

    Google Scholar 

  • Kohl, M., & Schooler, C. (1982). Job conditions and personality: A longitudinal assessment of reciprocal effects. American Journal of Sociology, 87, 1257–1286.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Lawler, E. (1982). Strategies for improving the quality of work life. American Psychologist, 37, 486–493.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Martel, J., & Dupuis, G. (2006). Quality of work life: Theoretical and methodological problems, and presentation of a new model and measuring instrument. Social Indicators Research, 77(2), 333–368.

    Article  Google Scholar 

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

    Google Scholar 

  • Meyer, J., Becker, T., & Van Dick, R. (2006). Social identities and commitments at work: Toward an integrative model. Journal of Organizational Behaviour, 27(5), 665–683.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Meyer, J., & Rowan, B. (1991). Institutional organizations: Formal structure as myth and ceremony. In P. DiMaggio & W. Walter (Eds.), The new institutionalism in organizational analysis (pp. 41–62). Chicago/London: University of Chicago Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Nadler, D., & Lawler, E. (1983). Quality of work life: Perceptions and direction. Organizational Dynamics, 11(3), 20–30.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • North, D. (1992). Institutions and economic theory. American Economist, 36, 3–6.

    Google Scholar 

  • Pallant, J. (2000). Development and validation of a scale to measure perceived control of internal states. Journal of Personality Assessment, 75(2), 308–337.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Royuela, V., Lopez-Tamayo, J., & Surinach, J. (2008). The institutional vs. the academic definition of the quality of work life: What is the focus of the European Commission? Social Indicators Research, 86(3), 401–415.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Ryder, G. (2003). The social responsibilities of business and workers’ rights. In M. Sebastian (Ed.), Corporate social responsibility: Myth or reality? (Vol. 130, pp. 21–24)., Labour Education Geneva: International Labour Office.

    Google Scholar 

  • Sarin, A. (2009). Corporate strategic motivation: Evolution continues—Henry. A. Murray’s Manifest Needs to Maslow’s Hierarchy of Needs to Anil Sarin’s Contributory Theory of Existence. Journal of American Academy of Business Cambridge, 14(2), 237–244.

    Google Scholar 

  • Sebastian, M. (2003). Corporate social responsibility: Myth or reality? (Vol. 130, pp. 5–8)., Labour Education Geneva: International Labour Office.

    Google Scholar 

  • Sirgy, J., Efraty, D., Siegel, P., & Lee, D. (2001). A new measure of quality of work life (QWL) based on need satisfaction and spillover theories. Social Indicators Research, 55(3), 241–302.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Steers, R., Mowday, R., & Shapiro, D. (2004). The future of work motivation theory. Academy of Management Review, 29(3), 379–387.

    Google Scholar 

  • Swanson, D. (1999). Toward an integrative theory of business and society: A research strategy for corporate social performance. Academy of Management Review, 24(3), 508–521.

    Google Scholar 

  • Trevino, L., & Nelson, K. (2004). Managing business ethics: Straight talk about how to do it right (3rd ed.). New York: Wiley.

    Google Scholar 

  • Turcotte, P. (1988). QVT: La Qualite de Vie au Travail: Une Voie vers l’Excellence. Montreal: Agence d’ARC.

    Google Scholar 

  • Tuzzolino, F., & Armandi, B. (1981). A need hierarchy framework for assessing corporate social responsibility. Academy of Management Review, 6(1), 21–28.

    Google Scholar 

  • Valentine, S., & Fleischman, G. (2008). Ethics programs, perceived corporate social responsibility and job satisfaction. Journal of Business Ethics, 77(2), 159–172.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Wartick, S., & Cochran, P. (1985). The evolution of the corporate social performance model. Academy of Management Review, 10(4), 758–769.

    Google Scholar 

  • Winstanley, D., Woodhall, J., & Heery, E. (1996). The agenda for ethics in human resource management. Business Ethics: A European Review, 5(4), 187–194.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Yu, X. (2009). From passive beneficiary to active stakeholder: Workers’ participation in CSR Movement against abuses. Journal of Business Ethics, 87(Supplement 1), 233–249. Supplement 1: Globalization and the Good Corporation.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Zenisek, T. (1979). Corporate social responsibility: A conceptualization based on organizational literature. Academy of Management Review, 4(3), 359–368.

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Constantine Imafidon Tongo.

Appendices: Results Obtained From Analyzing the Data and Testing the Hypotheses

Appendices: Results Obtained From Analyzing the Data and Testing the Hypotheses

Appendix 1

See Table 1.

Table 1 Skewness and kurtosis of data

Appendix 2

See Table 2.

Table 2 Reliability of the questionnaire’s sub-scales

Appendix 3

See Table 3.

Table 3 Correlation between SRTW and QWL

Appendix 4

See Table 4.

Table 4 Correlation between paternalistic social responsibility and QWL

Appendix 5

See Table 5.

Table 5 Correlation between paternalistic social responsibility and WMCS

Appendix 6

See Table 6.

Table 6 Correlation between consultative social responsibility and QWL

Appendix 7

See Table 7.

Table 7 Correlation between consultative social responsibility and WMCS

Appendix 8

See Table 8.

Table 8 Correlation between QWL and WMCS

Appendix 9

See Table 9.

Table 9 Correlation between QWL and motivation to contribute to the different sectors of society

Appendix 10

See Table 10, Figs. 1, 2.

Table 10 Multiple regression results for assessing the influence of biographic variables on WMCS
Fig. 1
figure 1

Histogram

Fig. 2
figure 2

Normal P–P plot of regression standardized residual

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Tongo, C.I. Social Responsibility, Quality of Work Life and Motivation to Contribute in the Nigerian Society. J Bus Ethics 126, 219–233 (2015). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10551-013-1940-7

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10551-013-1940-7

Keywords

Navigation