Submitted Successfully!
To reward your contribution, here is a gift for you: A free trial for our video production service.
Thank you for your contribution! You can also upload a video entry or images related to this topic.
Version Summary Created by Modification Content Size Created at Operation
1
Yi Xia
 -- 1403 2022-06-06 08:22:30 |
2 In the Description, the full name of CCI shall be indicated when the first time it appears.
Yi Xia
 + 4 word(s) 1407 2022-06-06 08:40:51 | |
3 In the Description, the full name of CCI shall be indicated when the first time it appears.
Yi Xia
 Meta information modification 1407 2022-06-06 08:41:55 | |
4 format correct
Nora Tang
 -22 word(s) 1385 2022-06-06 08:51:04 |

Video Upload Options

We provide professional Video Production Services to translate complex research into visually appealing presentations. Would you like to try it?
No, upload directly Yes

Confirm

Are you sure to Delete?
Yes No
Cite
If you have any further questions, please contact Encyclopedia Editorial Office.
Xia, Y.; Kuah, A.; , .; Wang, P. Corporate Social Responsibility Engagements Drive Consumer–Company Identification. Encyclopedia. Available online: https://encyclopedia.pub/entry/23735 (accessed on 16 November 2024).
Xia Y, Kuah A,  , Wang P. Corporate Social Responsibility Engagements Drive Consumer–Company Identification. Encyclopedia. Available at: https://encyclopedia.pub/entry/23735. Accessed November 16, 2024.
Xia, Yi, Adrian Kuah,  , Pengji Wang. "Corporate Social Responsibility Engagements Drive Consumer–Company Identification" Encyclopedia, https://encyclopedia.pub/entry/23735 (accessed November 16, 2024).
Xia, Y., Kuah, A., , ., & Wang, P. (2022, June 06). Corporate Social Responsibility Engagements Drive Consumer–Company Identification. In Encyclopedia. https://encyclopedia.pub/entry/23735
Xia, Yi, et al. "Corporate Social Responsibility Engagements Drive Consumer–Company Identification." Encyclopedia. Web. 06 June, 2022.
Corporate Social Responsibility Engagements Drive Consumer–Company Identification
Edit
This entry is adapted from the peer-reviewed paper 10.3390/su14106080

Companies expend significant financial resources on corporate social responsibility (CSR) activities to enhance their image. Local-community-focused CSR tends to influence the consumer-company identification (CCI) of egoistic consumers, while environment-focused CSR activities, such as the creation of environmentally-friendly products, drive biospheric consumers’ identification. Broader humanity-focused CSR, such as fair-trade initiatives, significantly influences the CCI of egoistic consumers, but not of altruistic consumers. These findings demonstrate to other economies the significance of local and global companies’ CSR practices and how such activities should be aligned to the CCI of their customer base unique to the region.

consumer values corporate social responsibility consumer–company identification social identity theory CSR CCI

1. Theoretical Underpinning

The current study draws on the stakeholder theory and social identity theory to formulate hypotheses. Since the 1980s, the stakeholder theory, advocated by Freeman [1], has been widely used by scholars and practitioners to understand CSR [2][3]. Freeman [1] stated that corporate managers must understand the needs of all groups who have a stake in the business (i.e., stakeholders). The essence of any business primarily lies in building relationships and creating value for all its stakeholders, since stakeholders reward or punish corporate behaviour [4]. Companies may suffer both monetary and reputational losses from failing to align their interests with those of their stakeholders [5].
Though the composition of stakeholders may differ depending on company’s industry and business model, the main stakeholders typically include employees, customers, communities, suppliers, and financiers (owners, investors). Under the current research background, the research object of CSR activity response is the consumers. Morsing [6] noted the rise of critical consumer movements demanding that transparency had been an influential factor in the demand and action of CSR. As important stakeholders, consumers need the company to carry out CSR activities and take social responsibility [7], implying that consumers’ satisfaction with CSR affects the demand for products/services [8][9]. However, research has not always supported a positive relationship between companies’ CSR commitment and consumers’ reactions; some studies suggest a positive reaction of consumers towards businesses’ CSR commitment [10][11], while others give evidence that consumers are indifferent to companies’ CSR [12], or are influenced to a limited extent by CSR [13].
Studies also showed that if different dimensions of a company’s CSR activities significantly influence consumers’ responses, the strength and valence of these impacts may differ [14][15][16]. Thus, when classifying the types of CSR activities, it is logical and meaningful for companies to consider an alignment match between consumers’ CSR needs and consumer values. However, the impact of such matching between consumer values on different CSR activities still lacks in the existing literature.
To understand the mechanism of how such matching/mismatching between a company’s CSR practices and consumers’ values affects consumers’ reactions, the current study introduces a typology of CSR practices and the concept of CCI. It then draws on the social identity theory proposed by Turner and Tajfel [17] to connect CSR and CCI as the theoretical underpinning before developing the hypotheses.

2. A Typology of Corporate Social Responsibility Practices

CSR is generally conceptualised as a multidimensional construct [18]. Several typologies coexist in the literature [19][20][21]. The classical framework proposed by Carroll [22] pointed out that social responsibilities should be tied to social issues or topical areas such as consumerism, environment, discrimination, product safety, occupational safety, and shareholders. The first type of CSR engagement targets local community issues. For example, Merck Ltd, Thailand is a subsidiary of Merck KGaA, Germany. It maintains a long-term locallyfocused CSR programme in different regions [23]. Through the local subsidiary, Merck has contributed 20 million Thai Baht to local communities since the programme’s foundation [23]. Such community-focused CSR communicates caring about the needs of, and providing benefits to, the local community. The second type of CSR engagement targets broader environmental issues by delving into macro and global issues such as environmental protection and climate change [24][25][26]. For example, IKEA reduces waste in its value chain and uses environmentally friendly raw materials (e.g., organic cotton and recyclable materials) as much as possible [27][28][29]. The Air New Zealand CSR project, FlyNeutral, encourages passengers to purchase carbon credits, and the collected funds have been invested in New Zealand’s permanent primary forest to offset carbon emissions [30]. The third type of CSR engagement targets broader humanity issues such as violation of human rights (e.g., child labour or gender inequality) or animal rights (e.g., animal cruelty or conducting animal experiments). For example, Starbucks promises to purchase and sell ethically traded coffee [31]. The Body Shop ensures animal cruelty-free policies [32] and has donated approximately 7.5 per cent of its annual profit to charity over the years, which is higher than the donations of many other beauty brands [33]. Therefore, a company could target their CSR using different engagement strategies, i.e., activities that are local-community-focused, environment-focused, and broader humanity-focused when engaging in CSR initiatives.

3. Consumer–Company Identification

In recent years, scholars have used CCI to investigate the mechanism through which CSR affects consumer reactions. CCI stresses a social partnership that brings together a shared identity between an organisation and its customers [34]. Consumers tend to identify with companies to fulfil their self-defined needs.
There are different ways that a company could arouse consumers’ identification through their employees, brands, customer groups, special projects, and engagement. Engaging in CSRs is one such way to create CCI. A socially attractive company establishes its association, image, and values via adhering to ethical values, committing to a network with responsible business partners, and connecting with particular ethical communities, thus creating social resources [35]. When consumers see similarity between a company’s socially responsible identity and themselves, they will identify more strongly with the company and formulate positive emotional bonding [36][37]. The emotional interactions between individuals and the corporation will prompt consumers to establish strong, committed, and meaningful relationships with the corporation and become champions of its products [38]. CCI thus fosters favourable consumer reactions such as purchase intention [8], consumer loyalty [39], and positive electronic word-of-mouth (eWOM) [9][40]. Hence, the previous literature shows that CCI mediates the relationship between a company’s CSR practices and consumer reaction such as purchases. As a result, companies implement CSR engagement strategies to establish and strengthen such identification and relationships with their customers.

4. Social Identity Theory to Link CSR and CCI

Social identity theory suggests that the individuals identify themselves with a social group due to belongingness and emotional attachment to that group [17]. Scholars have widely used this theory to explain how consumers develop their identities and belongingness with an organization involved in CSR activities [9]. Ma et al. [9] built a framework showing that a company engaged in various CSR activities to manifest its company identity. Consumers then identify with the company as a socially responsible organization to fulfil their need for self-definition of socially responsible consumers.
However, socially responsible consumers are not homogenous as consumers have different personal values which they placed emphasis on. Verma, Chandra and Kumar [41] suggested three foundational consumer values: egoistic, biospheric, and altruistic. Egoistic values focus on the costs and benefits of choices that influence people’s resources, such as wealth, power, and achievement [42]. Previous studies suggested that consumers with high egoistic values care about themselves and personal gains [42][43]. Biospheric values reflect a bigger concern for the environment without a clear link to human beings [44][45]. Altruistic values have been conceptualised as part of a personal values structure or overall guiding principle that motivates individuals to contribute to the well-being of other human beings or care for society as a whole [42][45][46]. A person with high altruistic values benefits others and does not expect external rewards [45][46].
In this entry, a consumer categorizes him/herself and other salient groups into “us” vs. “them”. Such self-categorization could be based on values shared amongst in-group members, constituting social identity. To maintain a positive social identity, people engage in intergroup comparisons that demonstrate a favourable bias toward their in-group, while displaying discriminatory behaviours toward out-groups [47][48][49][50]. In the scenario of choosing a company to identify with, a socially responsible consumer emphasizing particular values will be more likely to choose the company that engages in a certain type of CSR practices that align with his/her values. This is because such a company, though engaging in CSR aligning with a consumer’s values, connects the consumer to the company’s partners and communities sharing similar values. Hence, identifying with such a company will show the consumer’s attachment with the in-group members and enhance the consumer’s own social identity.

References

  1. Freeman, R.E. Strategic Management: A Stakeholder Approach; Cambridge University Press: Boston, MA, USA, 2010.
  2. Graafland, J.; Van de Ven, B. Strategic and Moral Motivation for Corporate Social Responsibility. J. Corp. Citizsh. 2006, 22, 111–123.
  3. Lindgreen, A.; Swaen, V. Corporate social responsibility. Int. J. Manag. Rev. 2010, 12, 1–7.
  4. Donaldson, T.; Preston, L.E. The stakeholder theory of the corporation: Concepts, evidence, and implications. Acad. Manag. Rev. 1995, 20, 65–91.
  5. Cornell, B.; Shapiro, A.C. Corporate Stakeholders and Corporate Finance. Financ. Manag. 1987, 16, 5–14.
  6. Morsing, M. Conspicuous Responsibility. Corporate Values and Responsibility. 2003. Available online: https://www.kommunikationsforum.dk/Log/morsing.pdf (accessed on 5 May 2022).
  7. Jespersen, S. Purpose Is Not CSR, It′s Just Good Business. 2019. Available online: https://www.forbes.com/sites/forbesagencycouncil/2019/04/22/purpose-is-not-csr-its-just-good-business/?sh=412462743f4c (accessed on 12 February 2021).
  8. Li, J.; Chen, Y.; Qing, Q. Differentiated consumer responses to corporate social responsibility domains moderated by corporate social responsibility perceptions: A Kano model-based perspective. Corp. Soc. Responsib. Environ. Manag. 2021, 28, 1606–1619.
  9. Ma, R.; Cherian, J.; Tsai, W.H.; Sial, M.S.; Hou, L.; Álvarez-Otero, S. The Relationship of Corporate Social Responsibility on Digital Platforms, Electronic Word-of-Mouth, and Consumer-Company Identification: An Application of Social Identity Theory. Sustainability 2021, 13, 4700.
  10. Deng, X.; Xu, Y. Consumers’ Responses to Corporate Social Responsibility Initiatives: The Mediating Role of Consumer–Company Identification. J. Bus. Ethics 2017, 142, 515–526.
  11. Fatma, M.; Rahman, Z.; Khan, I. Building company reputation and brand equity through CSR: The mediating role of trust. Int. J. Bank Mark. 2015, 33, 840–856.
  12. Chomvilailuk, R.; Butcher, K. The impact of strategic CSR marketing communications on customer engagement. Mark. Intell. Plan. 2018, 36, 764–777.
  13. Abdeen, A.; Rajah, E.; Gaur, S.S. Consumers’ beliefs about firm’s CSR initiatives and their purchase behaviour. Mark. Intell. Plan. 2016, 34, 2–18.
  14. Auger, P.; Devinney, T.; Louviere, J. Using Best: Worst Scaling Methodology to Investigate Consumer Ethical Beliefs across Countries. J. Bus. Ethics 2007, 70, 299–326.
  15. McDonald, L.M.; Hung Lai, C. Impact of corporate social responsibility initiatives on Taiwanese banking customers. Int. J. Bank Mark. 2011, 29, 50–63.
  16. Abid, T.; Moulins, J.L. Une échelle de mesure de la responsabilité sociétale des marques: Application aux consommateurs de marques alimentaires biologiques. Rev. Française du Mark. 2015, 254, 23–37.
  17. Turner, J.C.; Tajfel, H. The Social Identity Theory of Intergroup Behavior. In Political Psychology: Key Readings; Jost, J.T., Sidanius, J., Eds.; Psychology Press: New York, NY, USA, 2004; pp. 276–293.
  18. Rowley, T.; Berman, S. A brand new brand of corporate social performance. Bus. Soc. 2000, 39, 397–418.
  19. Sen, S.; Bhattacharya, C.B. Does doing good always lead to doing better? Consumer reactions to corporate social responsibility. J. Mark. Res. 2001, 38, 225–243.
  20. Schwartz, M.S.; Carroll, A.B. Corporate social responsibility: A three-domain approach. Business ethics quarterly. Bus. Ethics Q. 2003, 13, 503–530.
  21. Swaen, V.; Chumpitaz, R.C. Impact of corporate social responsibility on consumer trust. Rech. Appl. Mark. 2008, 23, 7–34.
  22. Carroll, A.B. A three-dimensional conceptual model of corporate performance. Acad. Manag. Rev. 1979, 4, 497–505.
  23. Hansen, E.G.; Sextl, M.; Reichwald, R. Managing strategic alliances through a community-enabled balanced scorecard: The case of Merck Ltd, Thailand. Bus. Strategy Environ. 2010, 19, 387–399.
  24. Ehsan, S.; Nazir, M.S.; Nurunnabi, M.; Raza Khan, Q.; Tahir, S.; Ahmed, I. A Multimethod Approach to Assess and Measure Corporate Social Responsibility Disclosure and Practices in a Developing Economy. Sustainability 2018, 10, 2955.
  25. Islam, T.; Ali, G.; Asad, H. Environmental CSR and pro-environmental behaviors to reduce environmental dilapidation: The moderating role of empathy. Manag. Res. Rev. 2019, 42, 332–351.
  26. Shahzad, M.; Qu, Y.; Javed, S.A.; Zafar, A.U.; Rehman, S.U. Relation of environment sustainability to CSR and green innovation: A case of Pakistani manufacturing industry. J. Clean. Prod. 2020, 253, 119938.
  27. Brown, B.; Bleecker, J.; D′adamo, M.; Ferreira, P.; Formo, J.; Glöss, M.; Holm, M.; Höök, K.; Johnson, E.; Kaburuan, E.; et al. The IKEA Catalogue: Design Fiction in Academic and Industrial Collaborations. In Proceedings of the 19th International Conference on Supporting Group Work, Sanibel Island, FL, USA, 13–16 November 2016; pp. 335–344.
  28. Sustainability at IKEA. 2010. Available online: https://www.ikea.com/gb/en/files/pdf/3c/0b/3c0b1af7/ikea-2010-sustainability-report.pdf (accessed on 10 February 2021).
  29. Laurin, F.; Fantazy, K. Sustainable supply chain management: A case study at IKEA. Transnatl. Corp. Rev. 2017, 9, 309–318.
  30. ANZ Sustainability Report. 2019. Available online: https://p-airnz.com/cms/assets/PDFs/2019-sustainability-report-v7.pdf (accessed on 1 February 2021).
  31. Hamann, L.; Luschnat, K.; Niemuth, S.; Smolarz, P.; Golombek, S. CSR in the coffee industry: Sustainability issues at Nestlé-Nespresso and Starbucks. J. Eur. Manag. Public Aff. Stud. 2014, 2, 31–35.
  32. Ganatra, V.; Sinha, R.; Srishti, S.; Pandey, R.; Kadam, P.; Ristiansyah, S.A.; Sin, L.G.; Yin, C.L.; Kee, D.M.H.; Jin, L.Y.; et al. The Body Shop #x201C;Forever Against Animal Testing”. Int. J. Appl. Bus. Int. Manag. 2021, 6, 90–100.
  33. Moon, H.C.; Parc, J.; Yim, S.H.; Park, N. An Extension of Porter and Kramer’s Creating Shared Value (CSV): Reorienting Strategies and Seeking International Cooperation. J. Int. Area Stud. 2011, 18, 49–64.
  34. Ashraf, R.; Merunka, D. The impact of customer-company identification on consumer reactions to new corporate initiatives: The case of brand extensions. Mark. Intell. Plan. 2013, 31, 489–507.
  35. Meehan, J.; Meehan, K.; Richards, A. Corporate social responsibility: The 3C-SR model. Int. J. Soc. Econ. 2006, 33, 386–398.
  36. Balmer, J.M. Corporate identity, corporate branding and corporate marketing—Seeing through the fog. Eur. J. Mark. 2001, 35, 248–291.
  37. Currás-Pérez, R.; Bigné-Alcañiz, E.; Alvarado-Herrera, A. The Role of Self-Definitional Principles in Consumer Identification with a Socially Responsible Company. J. Bus. Ethics 2009, 89, 547–564.
  38. Bhattacharya, C.B.; Sen, S. Consumer–company identification: A framework for understanding consumers’ relationships with companies. J. Mark. 2003, 67, 76–88.
  39. Huang, M.H.; Cheng, Z.H.; Chen, I.C. The importance of CSR in forming customer–company identification and long-term loyalty. J. Serv. Mark. 2017, 31, 63–72.
  40. Fatma, M.; Ruiz, A.P.; Khan, I.; Rahman, Z. The effect of CSR engagement on eWOM on social media. Int. J. Organ. Anal. 2020, 28, 941–956.
  41. Verma, V.K.; Chandra, B.; Kumar, S. Values and ascribed responsibility to predict consumers’ attitude and concern towards green hotel visit intention. J. Bus. Res. 2019, 96, 206–216.
  42. De Groot, J.I.; Steg, L. Morality and Prosocial Behavior: The Role of Awareness, Responsibility, and Norms in the Norm Activation Model. J. Soc. Psychol. 2009, 149, 425–449.
  43. Prakash, G.; Choudhary, S.; Kumar, A.; Garza-Reyes, J.A.; Khan, S.A.R.; Panda, T.K. Do altruistic and egoistic values influence consumers’ attitudes and purchase intentions towards eco-friendly packaged products? An empirical investigation. J. Retail Consum. Serv. 2019, 50, 163–169.
  44. Stern, P.C.; Dietz, T.; Kalof, L. Value Orientations, Gender, and Environmental Concern. Environ. Behav. 1993, 25, 322–348.
  45. Stern, P.C.; Dietz, T.; Abel, T.; Guagnano, G.A.; Kalof, L. A value-belief-norm theory of support for social movements: The case of environmentalism. Hum. Ecol. Rev. 1999, 6, 81–97.
  46. Schwartz, S.H. Normative Influences on Altruism. Adv. Exp. Soc. Psychol. 1977, 10, 221–279.
  47. Brewer, M.B. In-group bias in the minimal intergroup situation: A cognitive-motivational analysis. Psychol. Bull. 1979, 86, 307–324.
  48. Brewer, M.B.; Manzi, J.M.; Shaw, J.S. In-group identification as a function of depersonalization, distinctiveness, and status. Psychol. Sci. 1993, 4, 88–92.
  49. Hewstone, M. The ‘ultimate attribution error’? A review of the literature on intergroup causal attribution. Eur. J. Soc. Psychol. 1990, 20, 311–335.
  50. Fiske, S.T.; Taylor, S.E. Social Cognition; Mcgraw-Hill Book Company: New York, NY, USA, 1991.
More
© Text is available under the terms and conditions of the Creative Commons Attribution (CC BY) license; additional terms may apply. By using this site, you agree to the Terms and Conditions and Privacy Policy.
Upload a video for this entry
Information
Subjects: Business
Contributors MDPI registered users' name will be linked to their SciProfiles pages. To register with us, please refer to https://encyclopedia.pub/register :
Yi Xia
,
Adrian Kuah
,
,
Pengji Wang
View Times: 496
Revisions: 4 times (View History)
Update Date: 07 Jun 2022
Table of Contents
    1000/1000
    Hot Most Recent
    ScholarVision Creations
    Feedback