Corp Soc Responsibility Env - 2021 - Mubushar - The Impact of Corporate Social Responsibility Activities On Stakeholders

Received: 19 August 2020 Revised: 23 May 2021 Accepted: 7 June 2021
DOI: 10.1002/csr.2168
RESEARCH ARTICLE
The impact of corporate social responsibility activities on

stakeholders' value co-creation behaviour
Muhammad Mubushar1 | Shahid Rasool2 | Muhammad Imtiaz Haider3 |

Roberto Cerchione4
1
Faculty of Economics and Business, Universiti
Malaysia Sarawak, Kota Samarharan, Malaysia Abstract
2
School of Management Sciences, Ghulam This paper analyses the relationships between corporate social responsible
Ishaq Khan Institute of Sciences and
employees, corporate social responsible suppliers and customer value co-creation
Technology, Khyber Pakhtunkhwa, Pakistan
3
Faculty of Management Sciences, Capital behaviour in banking industry. More in detail it aims to investigate the mediating
University of Science and Technology, effect of relationship marketing orientation between corporate social responsibility
Islamabad, Pakistan
4
(CSR) activities and customer value co-creation behaviour. Data collected from
Department of Engineering, University of
Naples Parthenope, Naples, Italy 383 banking customers are analysed through smart partial least square (PLS). The
results highlight that corporate social responsible employees and suppliers have a
Correspondence
Roberto Cerchione, Department of positive impact on customer value co-creation behaviour. Moreover, relationship
Engineering, Centro Direzionale di Napoli,
marketing orientation has a mediating role between CSR activities and customer
University of Naples Parthenope, Isola C4,
Naples 80143, Italy. value co-creation behaviour.
Email: roberto.cerchione@uniparthenope.it
KEYWORDS
corporate social responsibility (CSR), customer citizenship behaviour, customer social
behaviour, environmental management, smart partial least square (PLS), social responsible
employees, social responsible suppliers, sustainable supply chain management
1 | I N T RO DU CT I O N with key stakeholders voluntarily’ (European Commission, 2001). This

definition was modified in 2011 with the recognition that CSR is not
Corporate social responsibility (CSR) activities are becoming more only beyond the law (European Commission, 2011). The new regula-
significant for corporations in all over the world to get better recog- tion better clarifies that enterprises, to fully meet their CSR, have to
nition in the eyes of investors (Babiak & Trendafilova, 2011; Lopin integrate social, environmental, ethical, human rights, and consumer
et al., 2011; Michelon et al., 2013; Rahim et al., 2011; Saha concerns into their business operations and core strategy in close col-
et al., 2020). CSR can give many benefits to businesses such as cus- laboration with their stakeholders (Tamvada, 2020). In line with this
tomer loyalty, corporate reputation, and financial returns (Costa & aim, CSR is defined as ‘the responsibility of enterprises for their
Menichini, 2013; Dobers & Halme, 2009; Menguc & Ozanne, 2005; impacts on society’ (European Commission, 2011). In recent years,
Sharma, 2000). For obtaining the desired CSR benefits, it is very sig- some authors combined the concepts of CSR with those of sustain-
nificant to develop an understanding of how stakeholders notice ability and circular economy (Geissdoerfer et al., 2017) considering
these activities. This is the reason why the majority of CSR definitions CSR as a corporate management philosophy that better frames sus-
address the needs of stakeholders such as, ‘CSR is a conception tainability. These definitions of CSR achieve the sustainable develop-
whereby corporations try to incorporate society and environment- ment goals, and sustainable behaviour at large, for citizens,
related issues in their day to day business activities and interaction institutions and corporations (Dahlsrud, 2008).
This is an open access article under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivs License, which permits use and distribution in any
medium, provided the original work is properly cited, the use is non-commercial and no modifications or adaptations are made.
© 2021 The Authors. Corporate Social Responsibility and Environmental Management published by ERP Environment and John Wiley & Sons Ltd.
1906 wileyonlinelibrary.com/journal/csr Corp Soc Responsib Environ Manag. 2021;28:1906–1920.

15353966, 2021, 6, Downloaded from https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1002/csr.2168 by Readcube (Labtiva Inc.), Wiley Online Library on [18/02/2024]. See the Terms and Conditions (https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/terms-and-conditions) on Wiley Online Library for rules of use; OA articles are governed by the applicable Creative Commons License
MUBUSHAR ET AL. 1907
Since the CSR concept was divided into different dimensions This theory provides an opportunity for integrating symbolic commu-
involving customers, local community, employees, and suppliers nication for strategic or social benefits. Therefore, the message can be
(Cheema et al., 2020; Skudiene & Auruskeviciene, 2012), the unified or categorized (Bird et al., 2005; Celani & Singh, 2011; Con-
majority of contributions on the topic investigate the customer nelly et al., 2011). In this case, an organization decides how to catego-
perspective (Jensen et al., 2018; Li et al., 2016; Rashid et al., 2013; rize the information into different dimensions (i.e., CSR employees
Schmeltz, 2012). On the contrary, CSR activities involving and CSR suppliers) to communicate the desired message to influence
other primary stakeholders are not explored sufficiently so far the behaviour of customers.
(Hietbrink et al., 2010; Jones, 2015; Kyaw et al., 2021; Schramm- Leveraging on stakeholder theory and the application of signalling
Klein et al., 2015; Shen & Jiuhua, 2011). theory, this paper analyses the relationship between corporate social
Furthermore, the concept of CSR has explored significantly with responsible employees, corporate social responsible suppliers and cus-
the relationship of customers' outcome such as customer loyalty, customer value co-creation behaviour in banking industry (RQ). More in
tomer purchase intentions, customer satisfaction, customer trust, and detail, it aims to investigate the mediating effect of relationship
customers behavioural aspects (Ailawadi et al., 2014; Ali et al., 2020; marketing orientation between CSR activities and customer value
Green & Peloza, 2011; Jayawickramarathna, 2015; Martínez & del co-creation behaviour. Hence, to study these constructs this paper con-
Bosque, 2013; Öberseder et al., 2013). Nevertheless, CSR has not tributes in many ways. The first contribution is that this study extends
been relating to other concepts such as customer value co-creation the theory of stakeholder by linking three different constructs, namely
behaviour. Despite Laczniak and Murphy (2006) highlighted that CSR CSR, relationship marketing orientation (RMO), and value co-creation
should be explored with other concepts, only three studies explored behaviour. Secondly, it fulfils the limitations of value co-creation studies
CSR with a relationship of customer value co-creation behaviour (Liu et al., 2019; Jarvis et al., 2017) by investigating the effect of CSR
(Biggemann et al., 2014; Jarvis et al., 2017; Luu, 2019). Moreover, dimensions on value co-creation behaviour. Moreover, it explores RMO
these studies have some limitations. For instance, these studies did as a mediator between CSR activities and customer value co-creation,
not check the dimensional role of CSR in customer value co-creation answering to the criticism of service-dominant logic (Jia, 2020; Vargo &
behaviour. Lusch, 2004) that considers interaction as a mandatory issue for cus-
Following the stakeholder theory, the main focus of this study is tomer value-co-creation (Vargo & Lusch, 2011).
to explore the effect of CSR employees and suppliers on customer Lastly, it contributes to applying this novel model in an Asian
value co-creation behaviour. Besides, it explores the mediation of country (Pakistan) which is a highly collective society, whereas most
relationship marketing orientation in CSR undertakings and customer CSR studies were conducted in western contexts (Marquina &
value co-creation behaviour (Vargo & Lusch, 2011). The relationship Morales, 2012; Santos et al., 2016; Wei et al., 2014). This is the most
marketing orientation is also a further investment to build relation- obvious reason that the status of CSR in Pakistan is at a premature
ships with stakeholders (Knox & Gruar, 2007; Uhlig et al., 2020) and level (Bux et al., 2020; Mujahid & Abdullah, 2014) and needs to fur-
bring CSR values nearer to customers (Luu, 2019). ther explore for a better understanding of CSR activities. The
Customers have changed their traditional role (Vargo & remaining of the paper is organized as follows. After this introduction,
Lusch, 2011) and participate actively in the service process to feel pertinent literature has been reviewed and the conceptual framework
more satisfaction and trust (Revilla-Camacho et al., 2014). Therefore, is reported in Section 2. Section 3 presents the research methodology.
it is necessary to explore the relationship between CSR activities and Section 4 discusses the results. Finally, Section 5 extracts the conclu-
customer value co-creation behaviour. Based on service foundation, sions, the implications and the future research directions.
customers prefer to engage with employees and suppliers through
dealings in the progression of personalizing their distinctive involve-
ment (Lu et al., 2020; Payne et al., 2009; Prahalad & 2 | LI T E RA T U R E RE V I E W
Ramaswamy, 2004). In this way, joint positive outcomes of interaction
strengthen the sustainability of the organization. Even the banking 2.1 | CSR employees and customer value
industry management seeks different ways to enhance the unique co-creation behaviour
experience of customers and many authors recommending that banks
need to invest in value co-creation behaviour to develop an under- Previous studies emphasized the role of external CSR activities involv-
standing of the entire life journey of account holders through the ing customers and local community, whereas internal CSR activities
relationship-building (Mainardes et al., 2017; Ponsignon et al., 2015). involving employees remain less explored (Aguinis & Glavas, 2012;
If these relationships are not explored, then the banking industry of Akhouri & Chaudhary, 2019; Deng et al., 2020). Nevertheless, internal
Pakistan will lack to launch successful CSR activities to minimize the CSR activities are becoming more important because employees play
wider gap between customers and management (Economics Survey of a pivotal role to implement CSR strategies and interact between cus-
Pakistan, 2015; Mujahid & Abdullah, 2014). tomers and service providers (Liu et al., 2019). Strautmanis (2008)
In accordance with signalling theory, an individual decides when identified that employee-related CSR activities are those which have
and how to communicate specific information to influence the behav- value for employees such as quality, professionalism, personal devel-
iour and receiver must understand how to interpret the information. opment, employees' involvement, and participation.
1908 MUBUSHAR ET AL.
If corporations focused the most important stakeholders there is a probability that suppliers' focuses on CSR can build the cus-
(employees) through CSR activities it may generate several positive tomer value co-creation behaviour. As the above-mentioned customer
attitudes and behaviour-related outcomes such as employees' satis- value co-creation behaviour is formed by two dimensions (customer
faction about their jobs (Barakat et al., 2016; Suh, 2016; Valentine & participation and customer citizenship behaviour), recently Jarvis
Fleischman, 2008), citizenship behaviour (Choi & Yu, 2014; Kim et al. (2017) came up with though that CSR activities have utility for
et al., 2017; Lee & Seo, 2017), the commitment of employees customers which plays a role to shape customer value co-creation
(Ali et al., 2010; Brammer et al., 2007; Fu et al., 2014; Kim behaviour. So, we may hypothesize:
et al., 2010; Peterson, 2004). Based on the above-mentioned pieces
of evidence, we argue that if employees-centric CSR activities can H2a. CSR suppliers have a positive role in customer participation
generate employees' positive outcomes (Kwan, 2020), then they can behaviour.
also play a role to build the customer value co-creation behaviour.
Employees are responsible to interact with the customers directly H2b. CSR suppliers have a positive role in customer citizenship
and, in the banking sector, customers demand more quality-oriented behaviour.
interaction (Khan et al., 2015). Customer value co-creation behaviour
has two dimensions: customer participation behaviour and customer
citizenship behaviour. Customer participation behaviour consists of 2.3 | Indirect impact of CSR employees on
personal interaction, information sharing, responsible behaviour, and customer value co-creation behaviour through RMO
information sharing, whereas customer citizenship behaviour contains
advocacy, helping, trust, and feedback. Luu (2019) also supports the Berry (1983) defined the concept of relationship marketing as
linkage of CSR activities and customer value co-creation behaviour in ‘attracting, maintaining and enhancing relationships with customers’.
his study. Therefore, we hypothesize: The term relationship marketing orientation represents multi-
dimensional activities towards customers' interest. This concept con-
H1a. CSR employees have a positive role in customer participation sists of different aspects, namely reciprocity, trust, communication,
behaviour. empathy, shared value, and bonding (Sin et al., 2002). Trust is known
as the degree of preparedness to have confidence in a partner
H1b. CSR employees have a positive role in customer citizenship (Morgan & Hunt, 1994). Bonding is the business relationship stage in
behaviour. which both parties behave in unified manners (Callaghan et al., 1995).
Communication is a meaningful conversation among parties formally
or informally. Shared value is the degree in which both parties mutu-
2.2 | CSR suppliers and customer value co-creation ally believe what policies and objective are right or wrong, appropriate
behaviour or inappropriate (Morgan & Hunt, 1994). Empathy is the business rela-
tionship in which one party looks into a situation from the perspective
Like internal CSR, supplier-focused CSR activities are very pertinent of others (Berry et al., 1990). Reciprocity is the extent to which both
to develop relationships between management and suppliers to parties act for mutual benefits. If one party makes a favour the other
improve the productivity of the organization (Giannakis, 2008; party must make a favour to repay it (Callaghan et al., 1995). Stake-
Sanchez-Rodríguez et al., 2005). To become a socially responsible holder theory argued that relationship marketing is a further invest-
company, firstly it is necessary to be a good partner and have good ment for creating stronger relationships of priority with stakeholders
partners (Skudiene & Auruskeviciene, 2012). Defined CSR suppliers and customers (Knox & Gruar, 2007). Therefore, when
that ‘socially responsible’ company must stimulate their suppliers to stakeholders are focused through CSR, it emerges the organization's
meet the standard of products and services according to code of con- orientation towards its stakeholders which deepened the relationships
duct and mutually agreeing on quality control process. Monitoring the with its stakeholders (Abugre & Nyuur, 2015; Khan et al., 2020). This
labour standard of suppliers and other business partners in the code relationship marketing orientation further improves the customer's
of compliance with legal requirements, as well as formulating the com- perspective such as customer loyalty, customer share, higher prices,
plaint' procedures fall under the head of CSR suppliers (Graafland & and lower costs, and higher sales (Alrubaiee & Al-Nazer, 2010). In the
Van de Ven, 2006). case the above-mentioned outcomes can be provided, CSR customers
The most obvious reason behind the CSR suppliers is the pressure can generate customer value co-creation behaviour because RMO
of customers who want to look beyond the activities of the company dimensions including reciprocity enable customers for mutual value
from which they buy (Bartley, 2007; Kolk & Van Tulder, 2002; co-creation (Luu, 2019).
Roberts, 2003). Corporations need to incorporate customers'
demands, personal conviction, and moral obligations (De Ruyter H3a. RMO mediates between CSR employees and customer
et al., 2009). Supplier activities affect the customers' impression participation behaviour.
because they directly or indirectly use the end products/services of
suppliers (Hietbrink et al., 2010). On these premises, we can argue H3b. RMO mediates between CSR employees and customer
that if CSR suppliers can affect the customers' buying pattern, then citizenship behaviour.
2.4 | Indirect impact of CSR suppliers on customer Corporate Social Customer Participation
Responsible Behaviour
value co-creation behaviour through RMO Employees
Application of stakeholder theory claims that relationship marketing ori-

Relationship Marketing
entation is a form of investment to build stronger relationships with prior- Orientation
ity stakeholders (Knox & Gruar, 2007). This is the reason why companies
address the concern of priority stakeholders through CSR activities which Corporate Social
have utility for stakeholders (Jarvis et al., 2017). Many studies have dem- Responsible Customer Citizenship
Suppliers Behaviour
onstrated that CSR has an utility to fulfil the needs of most important
stakeholders such as employees and suppliers (De Chiara & Russo
FIGURE 1 Conceptual framework
Spena, 2011; Low et al., 2017; Skudiene & Auruskeviciene, 2012). If CSR
activities incorporate the need of suppliers, then an organization can build
stronger ties with stakeholders through relationship marketing orienta-
tion. Previous studies found a positive link in relationship marketing orien- disseminated 20%–30% of its net revenue in public and bountiful accom-
tation and customers' outcomes including customer loyalty and customer plishments (Callado-Muñoz & Utrero-Gonzalez, 2011). In spite of obliga-
behaviour (Alrubaiee & Al-Nazer, 2010; Luu, 2019). tory expenditure of corporations in CSR related practices, it emerges the
On the above-mentioned pieces of evidence, we can argue that necessity to investigate how consumers view the CSR activities in the
CSR suppliers can build value co-creation behaviour through relation- banking industry (Rugimbana et al., 2008: Paluri & Mehra, 2018) because
ship marketing orientation. In fact, when corporations focus on sup- of the limited number of studies that evaluate consumer reactions against
pliers managing CSR actions, the orientation of corporations towards CSR activities in banking industry operating in emerging countries. Sec-
the partners (Abugre & Nyuur, 2015) is in the form of relationship ondly, the disconnect between customers and management is existing in
marketing orientation. Relationship marketing orientation brings the the banking sector (Khan et al., 2015; Mujahid & Abdullah, 2014). There-
values of CSR to the customers (Abela & Murphy, 2008) and dimen- fore, the banking industry of Pakistan was selected for data collection.
sions of relationship marketing orientation (empathy, reciprocity, There are 48 banks operating in Pakistan. According to KPMG report
bonding, shared value, and communication) further reciprocate from (2015) banks were categorized on the basis of market share, total assets
customers in terms of value co-creation behaviour (Luu, 2019). Cus- and number of branches. In this research, 10 medium banks were
tomer value co-creation behaviour is created by dual aspects, namely selected for data gathering. The reason for the selection of medium banks
customer participation behaviour and customer citizenship behaviour is that these banks are competing to enhance the market share and this
(Yi & Gong, 2013). aspect is mainly due to the fact that they are more customer-oriented
(KPMG, 2015). Three hundred eighty-three questionnaires were returned
H4a. RMO mediates between CSR suppliers and customer among 500 questionnaires and the response rate was 76% which is in line
participation behaviour. with previous studies conducted in Asian countries (Abbass et al., 2012;
Raja et al., 2004). According to the State Bank of Pakistan, only 16% of
H4b. RMO mediates between CSR suppliers and customer the Pakistani populations uses the bank account (State Bank of
citizenship behaviour. Pakistan, 2016). The total population of Pakistan is 207 million as per the
recent census (Pakistan Bureau of Statistics, 2017). The total banking cus-
In summary, the proposed framework is based on five constructs tomers are only 33.1 million.
(Figure 1): (1) corporate social responsible employees, (2) corporate Out of 383 questionnaires, 270 questionnaires were filled by
social responsible suppliers, (3) relationship marketing orientation, males and 113 filled by females and their percentage is 70.5% and
(4) customer participation behaviour, and (5) customer citizenship 28.7%, respectively. The majority of our respondents belonged to the
behaviour. young age group. Out of total customers, the age of 96 customers
falls between 18 and 24 years (25.1%), 133 customers having age
between 25 and 31 years (34.7%), 86 customers having age between
3 | M E TH O DO LO GY 32 and 38 years (22.5%), 59 customers having age between 39 and
44 years (15.4%) and 9 customers are having age between 45 and
3.1 | Context of the study and data collection 50 years (2.3%).
Banks invest heavily in CSR practices (Raza et al., 2020). The advance-
ment of CSR positioning at the strategic level could be considered straight 3.2 | Measures
and defensible competitiveness for multinationals. Scholtens (2009) stud-
ied CSR actions in 30 financial institutions from many countries and con- Questionnaires drawn from the literature were used to realize the sur-
cluded that the CSR activities had remarkably enriched from 2000s. vey including the following measures. The measurement scales are
Throughout the previous two decades, the banking industry of Spain has adapted from literature which is reported in Table 1.
TABLE 1 Variable definition
Variable
type Variable Definition Source
Independent Employees CSR activities Activities that have value orientation for employees Pérez and Rodríguez del Bosque
such as quality, professionalism, personal (2013)
development
Suppliers CSR activities Activities that meet the standard of products and Cochius (2006)
services according to the code of conduct and
mutually agreeing on the quality control process
Mediator Relationship marketing The degree in which a firm involves for the Sin et al. (2005)
orientation development of long-lasting ties with its costumers
Dependent Customer participation behaviour It consists of personal interaction, information Yi and Gong (2013)
seeking, responsible behaviour, and information
sharing
Customer citizenship behaviour It comprises tolerance, feedback, helping and Yi and Gong (2013)
advocacy
Employee-focused CSR activities were adapted from the studies 4 | RE SU LT S

conducted by Pérez and Rodríguez del Bosque (2013). Specifically, we
have adapted the measures reported in previous studies and designed 4.1 | Measurement model
the questionnaire to suit the Pakistani context. Five questions per-
taining to five distinct dimensions of CSR activities related to Table 2 explains the composite reliability (CR) which shows how the
employees were selected as appropriate items for the context of different constructs are internally consistent (Gefen et al., 2000).
Pakistani banks, namely salary, safety at work, fairness, training and Memon et al. (2018) argued that 0.70 is the most appropriate and
career opportunities, pleasant work environment. Respondents were considered this value as a benchmark. As for our case, CR is higher
asked to indicate the extent to which they agree to each statement than 0.70 and this shows that all items of every construct are highly
on a five-point Likert scale ranging between 1 (‘strongly disagree’) consistent. The value of CSR employees is 0.860, CSR suppliers
and 5 (‘strongly agree’). 0.823, RMO 0.858, trust 0.817, bonding 0.839, communication 0.837,
Supplier-focused CSR activities measurement items were extracted empathy 0.769, shared value 0.791, reciprocity 0.769, information
from Cochius (2006). Respondents were asked to indicate the extent seeking 0.798, information sharing 0.826, responsible behaviour
to which they agree that their bank has implemented the supplier- 0.827, personal interaction 0.874, advocacy 0.851, feedback 0.828,
focused CSR activities on a five-point Likert scale with 1 (‘rarely’) and helping 0.843, and tolerance 0.852.
5 (‘almost always’). Outer loading (OL) is also known as indicator reliability which
Relationship marketing orientation was assessed through the mea- explains the intent of measurement which is being measured
surement items adapted by Sin et al. (2005) in terms of trust, bonding, (Urbach & Ahlemann, 2010). Memon et al. (2018) came up with this
communication, empathy, shared value, and reciprocity. We used suggestion that its cut-off value is 0.50 to measure its reliability.
22 items, and respondents were asked to indicate the extent to which Table 2 depicts the true picture of all indicators and most of the indi-
their bank has achieved relationship marketing orientation on a five- cators have 0.70 which is the reflection that indicator reliability has
point Likert scale with 1 (‘rarely’) and 5 (‘almost always’). been achieved. Table 2 also explains the convergent validity and AVE
Customer value co-creation behaviour measures were adapted from value of every construct is higher than 0.50 which shows that every
Yi and Gong (2013) and is categorized into two parts: (1) customer variable must explain a minimum of 50% of the variance by assigned
participation behaviour and (2) customer citizenship behaviour. items (Hair Jr et al., 2017). For the assessment of discriminant validity,
Respondents were asked to indicate the extent of their customer we used the standard of Fornell and Larker (1981) asserting that
value co-creation behaviour in certain areas on a five-point Likert squired root of the AVE on the diagonal must be more than the corre-
scale ranging between 1 (‘not at all willing’) and 7 (‘completely will- lation on the off-diagonal. Table 3 indicates that the diagonal values
ing’). Summarizing, the survey indicators resulted from the analysis of of all constructs are greater than off-diagonal values. The table shows
the scientific literature on the topic. The final questionnaire was that there is no discriminant validity issue. The direct effect of CSR
reviewed by a panel of experts involving researchers and senior employees and CSR suppliers on customer participation behaviour
executives—with extensive experience on CSR in the Pakistani and customer citizenship behaviour are reported in Figure 2.
banking industry—and then three pilot tests were conducted. The Table 4 describes the direct effect of CSR employees, CSR sup-
questionnaire was reviewed after each step and then submitted for pliers on customer participation behaviour, and customer citizenship
the empirical analysis. The final version of the questionnaire including behaviour. CSR employees have a positive impact on customer partici-
all the statements is reported in the Appendix. pation behaviour as t value of >1.645 at 0.05 level of significance.
TABLE 2 Outer loading, reliability and AVE
Constructs Items OL CR AVE

Employee-focused CSR activities CSRE1 0.763 0.860 0.606
CSRE2 0.782
CSRE3 0.819
CSRE4 0.750
Supplier-focused CSR activities CSRS1 0.673 0.823 0.539
CSRS2 0.714
CSRS3 0.747
CSRS4 0.796
RMO
Trust TR1 0.807 0.858 0.602
TR2 0.784
TR3 0.724
TR4 0.785
Bonding BO1 0.747 0.817 0.528
BO2 0.666
BO3 0.766
BO4 0.724
Communication COM1 0.790 0.839 0.635
COM2 0.770
COM3 0.830
Empathy EM1 0.595 0.837 0.566
EM2 0.785
EM3 0.807
EM4 0.802
Shared Value SV1 0.767 0.769 0.527
SV2 0.735
SV3 0.673
Reciprocity RE1 0.807 0.791 0.558
RE2 0.784
RE3 0.724
RE4 0.785
Information seeking INSE1 0.708 0.798 0.569
INSE2 0.773
INSE3 0.781
Information sharing INSH1 0.731 0.826 0.544
INSH2 0.748
INSH3 0.768
INSH4 0.702
Responsible behaviour RB1 0.709 0.827 0.546
RB2 0.781
RB3 0.749
Personal interaction PI1 0.679 0.874 0.528
PI2 0.771
PI3 0.734
PI4 0.836
PI5 0.785
(Continues)
TABLE 2 (Continued)
Constructs Items OL CR AVE

Advocacy AD1 0.818 0.851 0.655
AD2 0.849
AD3 0.759
Feedback FB1 0.731 0.828 0.617
FB2 0.831
FB3 0.792
Helping H1 0.731 0.843 0.547
H2 0.828
H3 0.781
H4 0.683
Tolerance TO1 0.843 0.852 0.657
TO2 0.798
TO3 0.791
Abbreviations: AD, advocacy; BO, bonding; COM, communication; CSRE, corporate social responsibility employees; CSRS, corporate social responsibility
suppliers; EM, empathy; FB, feedback; H, helping; INSE, information seeking; INSH, information sharing; PI, personal interaction; RB, responsible
behaviour; RE, reciprocity; SV, shared value; TO, tolerance; TR, trust.
TABLE 3 Discriminant validity using Fornell and Lacker criteria
Constructs 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16
AD 0.81
BON 0.13 0.72
COM 0.16 0.04 0.79
EMP 0.17 0.39 0.10 0.75
CSRE 0.31 0.12 0.22 0.31 0.77
FB 0.25 0.22 0.19 0.38 0.28 0.78
HLP 0.21 0.11 0.20 0.26 0.17 0.28 0.75
IS 0.27 0.23 0.13 0.39 0.14 0.38 0.30 0.75
ISH 0.12 0.11 0.23 0.29 0.41 0.28 0.14 0.11 0.73
PI 0.2 0.15 0.14 0.21 0.30 0.28 0.26 0.24 0.19 0.76
RE 0.07 0.02 0.03 0.39 0.13 0.15 0.11 0.23 0.03 0.12 0.74
RB 0.18 0.16 0.18 0.19 0.35 0.32 0.23 0.19 0.17 0.44 0.07 0.73
SV 0.13 0.26 0.21 0.36 0.26 0.12 0.20 0.16 0.11 0.16 0.21 0.21 0.72
CSRS 0.10 0.02 0.17 0.21 0.22 0.13 0.21 0.17 0.17 0.15 0.18 0.15 0.11 0.73
TOL 0.22 0.04 0.08 0.12 0.19 0.15 0.15 0.15 0.08 0.15 0.04 0.23 0.10 0.12 0.81
TR 0.11 0.21 0.09 0.31 0.3 0.24 0.12 0.16 0.15 0.18 0.18 0.21 0.30 0.10 0.02 0.77
Abbreviations: AD, advocacy; BON, bonding; COM, communication; CSRE, corporate social responsibility employees; CSRS, corporate social responsibility
suppliers; EMP, empathy; FB, feedback; HLP, helping; INSE, information seeking; ISH, information sharing; PI, personal interaction; RB, responsible
behaviour; RE, reciprocity; SV, shared value; TOL, tolerance; TR, trust.
CSR employees positively affect customer citizenship behaviour as 0.153 and 0.141 against customer participation and customer citizen-
t value of >1.645 at 0.05 level of significance. The value of beta for ship behaviour respectively. It shows that CSR suppliers bring 15%
CSR employees is 0.464 and 0.335 for customer participation behav- and 14% change in customer participation behaviour and customer
iour and customer citizenship behaviour respectively. It shows that citizenship behaviour, respectively. The R2 value is 0.265 and 0.169
1 unit change in CSR employees brings 46% and 35% change in cus- shows that both independent variables: CSR employees and CSR sup-
tomer participation behaviour and customer citizenship behaviour. pliers explain 26% variation in customer participation behaviour,
CSR suppliers positively affect customer participation behaviour and whereas both independent variables CSR employees and CSR sup-
customer citizenship behaviour. The beta value of CSR suppliers is pliers explain 16% variation in customer citizenship behaviour
F I G U R E 2 Direct effect of CSR

employees and CSR suppliers on
customer participation behaviour and
customer citizenship behaviour
TABLE 4 Direct hypothesis testing
β SD t-Value R2 f2
H1a CSRE ! CPB 0.464 0.048 9.629 0.265 0.278
H1b CSRE ! CCB 0.335 0.059 6.010 0.144
H2a CSRS ! CPB 0.141 0.048 2.913 0.169 0.026
H2b CSRS ! CCB 0.153 0.048 2.933 0.023
Abbreviations: CCB, customer citizenship behaviour; CPB, customer participation behaviour; CSRE, corporate social responsibility employees; CSRS,
corporate social responsibility suppliers.
FIGURE 3 Mediation model
respectively. Table 4 also explains the f2 to show the effect size as behaviour. CSR employees have a medium effect on customer partici-
CSR employees have 0.278 and 0.144 for customer value co-creation. pation behaviour and a small effect on customer citizenship behav-
CSR employees have 0.026 and 0.023 for customer value co-creation iour. Whereas CSR supplier has a small effect on customer
TABLE 5 Direct effect and indirect

Mediation hypotheses β SD t-Value β SD t-Value
effect
H3a CSRE ! RMO ! CPB 0.321 0.064 5.004 0.123 0.025 4.843
H3b CSRE ! RMO ! CCB 0.229 0.074 3.092 0.119 0.029 4.173
H4a CSRS ! RMO ! CPB 0.101 0.043 2.356 0.049 0.020 2.417
H4b CSRS ! RMO ! CCB 0.098 0.046 2.106 0.048 0.020 2.354
Abbreviations: CCB, customer citizenship behaviour; CPB, customer participation behaviour; CSE,
corporate social responsibility employees; CSRS, corporate social responsibility supplier; RMO,
relationship marketing orientation.
TABLE 6 Variance accounted

VAF Variables Indirect effect/Total effect % Types of mediation
for (VAF)
CSRE > RMO > CPB 0.123/0.464 26% Partial mediation
CSRE > RMO > CCB 0.119/0.335 35% Partial mediation
CSRS > RMO > CPB 0.049/0.141 34% Partial mediation
CSRS > RMO > CCB 0.048/0.153 31% Partial mediations
participation and customer citizenship behaviour. Figure 3 reports the meet challenges for changing role of customers. The study demon-
mediation model. strated that CSR employees have a positive impact on customer par-
Table 5 shows the direct effect and indirect effects of CSR activi- ticipation and customer citizenship behaviour. CSR suppliers have also
ties and customer value co-creation behaviour through RMO. In the a positive impact on customer participation behaviour and customer
direct effect of CSR, the beta values of H3a, H3b, H4a and H4b are citizenship behaviour. Moreover, results showed that relationship
0.321, 0.229, 0.101, and 0.098. They are statistically significant as marketing orientation mediates between CSR employees, customer
t value is >1.64 (Hair Jr et al., 2017). In the indirect effect the beta participation behaviour and customer citizenship behaviour. Similarly,
value of H3a, H3b, H4a, H4b are 0.123, 0.119, 0.049, 0.048. They are relationship marketing orientation mediates between CSR suppliers,
significant and t values are >1.64 (Hair Jr et al., 2017). In the indirect customer participation behaviour and customer citizenship behaviour.
effect with the appearance of relationship marketing orientation as a The results of the study confirmed the results of Luu (2019) demon-
mediator, the beta values decreased which highlights that relationship strating the role of CSR and customer value co-creation behaviour.
marketing orientation mediates in these activities and customer value This study checked the dimensional effect of CSR and concluded that
co-creation behaviour. So, H3a, H3b, H4a, and H4b are accepted. it has also a positive impact on customer's outcome. The results ful-
filled the call of Murphy (2006) that CSR must be explored with other
concepts and links the domains of CSR to value co-creation (Jarvis
4.2 | Variance accounted for et al., 2017). Previously, researchers asserted the positive connection
between CSR and behavioural consequences, but this study con-
To check mediation strength, we calculate variance accounted for (VAF). cluded that the wider gap between customers and management of
If the VAF value is greater than 80%, it highlights RMO fully mediates, if corporations can be minimized (Mujahid & Abdullah, 2014) by focus-
it falls between the 20% and 80% range, it describes partial mediation ing on the dimensions of CSR and value co-creation. CSR employees
and if it is below 20% it describes no mediation (Hair et al., 2014). must be the top priority of banking industry because they have an
As Table 6 explains the strength of RMO as mediation in CSR effect on the customers, and they are responsible for mentioning ties
activities and customer value co-creation behaviour. The value of between service providers and customers, and this interaction is the
CSR employees for customer participation and customer citizenship most important expectation of banking customers.
behaviour is 26% and 35%, respectively. The value of CSR suppliers
for customer participation and customer citizenship behaviour is 34%
and 31%, respectively. All values fall between the range of 20%–80% 5.1 | Limitations and future directions
which shows that RMO partially mediates between CSR activities
(employees, suppliers) and customer value co-creation behaviour. In this research, data were collected from twin cities and results may
differ if data would collect from more than two cities. This research
did not incorporate other stakeholders such as customers and the
5 | CONCLUSIONS AND IMPLICATIONS local community which is considered other crucial actors in the service
industry. Future research can be conducted to compare service and
The primary objective of this research was to check the impact of cus- manufacturing industries and evaluate the relationship between CSR
tomized CSR activities on customer value co-creation behaviour to activities and customer value co-creation behaviour.
ACKNOWLEDGEMEN TS Bux, H., Zhang, Z., & Ahmad, N. (2020). Promoting sustainability through
Open Access Funding provided by Universita degli Studi di Napoli corporate social responsibility implementation in the manufacturing
industry: An empirical analysis of barriers using the ISM-MICMAC
Parthenope within the CRUI-CARE Agreement. [Correction added on
approach. Corporate Social Responsibility and Environmental Manage-
23 May 2022, after first online publication: CRUI funding statement ment., 27(2), 1–20.
has been added.] Callado-Muñoz, F. J., & Utrero-Gonz alez, N. (2011). Does it pay to be
socially responsible? Evidence from Spain's retail banking sector.
European Financial Management, 17(4), 755–787.
ORCID
Callaghan, M., McPhail, J., & Yau, O. H. (1995). Dimensions of a relation-
Roberto Cerchione https://orcid.org/0000-0002-7025-3295 ship marketing orientation: An empirical exposition. Proceedings of the
Seventh Biannual World Marketing Congress, 7(2), 10–65.
RE FE R ENC E S Celani, A., & Singh, P. (2011). Signaling theory and applicant attraction out-
comes. Personnel Review, 22(3), 44–62.
Abbass, I. M. (2012). No retreat no surrender conflict for survival between
Cheema, S., Afsar, B., & Javed, F. (2020). Employees' corporate social
Fulani pastoralists and farmers in Northern Nigeria. European Scientific
responsibility perceptions and organizational citizenship behaviors for
Journal, 8(1), 331–346.
the environment: The mediating roles of organizational identification
Abela, A. V., & Murphy, P. E. (2008). Marketing with integrity: Ethics and
and environmental orientation fit. Corporate Social Responsibility and
the service-dominant logic for marketing. Journal of the Academy of
Environmental Management, 27(1), 9–21.
Marketing Science, 36(1), 39–53.
Choi, Y., & Yu, Y. (2014). The influence of perceived corporate sustainabil-
Abugre, J. B., & Nyuur, R. B. (2015). Organizations' commitment to and
ity practices on employees and organizational performance. Sustain-
communication of CSR activities: Insights from Ghana. Social Responsi-
ability, 6(1), 348–364.
bility Journal, 11(1), 161–178.
Cochius, T. (2006). Corporate social responsibility in Dutch SMEs: Motiva-
Aguinis, H., & Glavas, A. (2012). What we know and don't know about cor-
tions and CSR stakeholders. Final thesis Maasticht University Faculty
porate social responsibility: A review and research agenda. Journal of
of Economics and Business Administration. Received from https://
Management, 38(4), 932–968.
www.duurzaam-ondernemen.nl/duo/docs/
Ailawadi, K. L., Neslin, S. A., Luan, Y. J., & Taylor, G. A. (2014). Does retailer
200606020835266336.pdf
CSR enhance behavioral loyalty? A case for benefit segmentation.
Commission of the European Communities. (2001). Promoting a European
International Journal of Research in Marketing, 31(2), 156–167.
framework for corporate social responsibility: Green paper. Office for
Akhouri, A., & Chaudhary, R. (2019). Employee perspective on CSR: A
Official Publications of the European Communities.
review of the literature and research agenda. Journal of Global Respon-
Connelly, B. L., Certo, S. T., Ireland, R. D., & Reutzel, C. R. (2011). Signaling
sibility., 10(4), 355–381.
theory: A review and assessment. Journal of Management, 37(1),
Ali, H. Y., Danish, R. Q., & Asrar-ul-Haq, M. (2020). How corporate social
39–67.
responsibility boosts firm financial performance: The mediating role of
Costa, R., & Menichini, T. (2013). A multidimensional approach for CSR
corporate image and customer satisfaction. Corporate
assessment: The importance of the stakeholder perception. Expert Sys-
Social Responsibility and Environmental Management, 27(1), 166–177.
tems with Applications, 40(1), 150–161.
Ali, I., Rehman, K. U., Ali, S. I., Yousaf, J., & Zia, M. (2010). Corporate social
Dahlsrud, A. (2008). How corporate social responsibility is defined: An
responsibility influences, employee commitment and organizational
analysis of 37 definitions. Corporate Social Responsibility and Environ-
performance. African Journal of Business Management, 4(13), 2796–
mental Management, 15(1), 1–13.
2801.
De Chiara, A., & Russo Spena, T. (2011). CSR strategy in multinational
Alrubaiee, L., & Al-Nazer, N. (2010). Investigate the impact of relationship
firms: Focus on human resources, suppliers and community. Journal of
marketing orientation on customer loyalty: The customer's perspec-
Global Responsibility, 2(1), 60–74.
tive. International Journal of Marketing Studies, 2(1), 155–174.
De Ruyter, K., De Jong, A., & Wetzels, M. (2009). Antecedents and conse-
Babiak, K., & Trendafilova, S. (2011). CSR and environmental responsibil-
quences of environmental stewardship in boundary-spanning B2B
ity: Motives and pressures to adopt green management practices. Cor-
teams. Journal of the Academy of Marketing Science, 37(4), 470–487.
porate Social Responsibility and Environmental Management, 18, 11–24.
Deng, X., Long, X., Schuler, D. A., Luo, H., & Zhao, X. (2020). External cor-
Barakat, S. R., Isabella, G., Boaventura, J. M. G., & Mazzon, J. A. (2016).
porate social responsibility and labor productivity: AS-curve relation-
The influence of corporate social responsibility on employee satisfac-
ship and the moderating role of internal CSR and government subsidy.
tion. Management Decision, 54(9), 2325–2339.
Corporate Social Responsibility and Environmental Management, 27(1),
Bartley, T. (2007). Institutional emergence in an era of globalization: The
393–408.
rise of transnational private regulation of labor and environmental
Dobers, P., & Halme, M. (2009). Corporate social responsibility and devel-
conditions. American Journal of Sociology, 113(2), 297–351.
oping countries. Corporate Social Responsibility and Environmental Man-
Berry, L. L. (1983). Relationship marketing. Emerging Perspectives on Ser-
agement, 16, 237–249.
vices Marketing, 66(3), 33–47.
Economic Survey of Pakistan. (2015). Economic Survey of Pakistan.
Berry, L. L., Zeithaml, V. A., & Parasuraman, A. (1990). Five imperatives for
Retrieved from http://www.finance.gov.pk/survey_1516.html
improving service quality. MIT Sloan Management Review, 31(4),
EU A Renewed EU Strategy. (2011) 2011–14 for Corporate Social
29–42.
Responsibility. Retrieved from https://www.europarl.europa.eu/
Biggemann, S., Williams, M., & Kro, G. (2014). Building in sustainability,
meetdocs/2009_2014/documents/com/com_com(2011)0681_/com_
social responsibility and value co-creation. Journal of Business & Indus-
com(2011)0681_en.pdf
trial Marketing, 29(4), 304–312.
Fornell, C., & Larcker, D. F. (1981). Evaluating structural equation models
Bird, R., Smith, E., Alvard, M., Chibnik, M., Cronk, L., Giordani, L., &
with unobservable variables and measurement error. Journal of market-
Smith, E. (2005). Signaling theory, strategic interaction, and symbolic
ing research, 18(1), 39–50.
capital. Current Anthropology, 46(2), 221–248.
Fu, H., Ye, B. H., & Law, R. (2014). You do well and I do well? The behav-
Brammer, S., Millington, A., & Rayton, B. (2007). The contribution of cor-
ioral consequences of corporate social responsibility. International
porate social responsibility to organizational commitment. The Interna-
Journal of Hospitality Management, 4(40), 62–70.
tional Journal of Human Resource Management, 18(10), 1701–1719.
Gefen, D., Straub, D., & Boudreau, M. C. (2000). Structural equation Kyaw, K., Treepongkaruna, S., & Jiraporn, P. (2021). Stakeholder engage-
modeling and regression: Guidelines for research practice. Communica- ment and firms' innovation: Evidence from LGBT-supportive policies.
tions of the Association for Information Systems, 4(1), 7–22. Corporate Social Responsibility and Environmental Management. 1–14.
Geissdoerfer, M., Savaget, P., Bocken, N. M. P., & Hultink, E. J. (2017). The Laczniak, G. R., & Murphy, P. E. (2006). Normative perspectives for ethical
circular economy—A new sustainability paradigm? Journal of Cleaner and socially responsible marketing. Journal of Micromarketing, 26(2),
Production, 143, 757–768. 154–177.
Giannakis, M. (2008). Facilitating learning and knowledge transfer through Lee, S. Y., & Seo, Y. (2017). Corporate social responsibility motive attribu-
supplier development. Supply Chain Management: An International Jour- tion by service employees in the parcel logistics industry as a modera-
nal, 13(1), 62–72. tor between CSR perception and organizational effectiveness.
Graafland, J., & Van de Ven, B. (2006). Strategic and moral motivation for Sustainability, 9(3), 355.
corporate social responsibility. Journal of Corporate Citizenship, 4(22), Li, D., Lin, H., & Yang, Y. W. (2016). Does the stakeholders–corporate
111–123. social responsibility (CSR) relationship exist in emerging countries? Evi-
Green, T., & Peloza, J. (2011). How does corporate social responsibility dence from China. Social Responsibility Journal, 12(1), 147–166.
create value for consumers? Journal of Consumer Marketing, 28(1), Liu, J. Y., Shiue, W., Chen, F. H., & Huang, A. T. (2019). A multiple attribute
48–56. decision making approach in evaluating employee care strategies of
Hair, J. F., Jr., Sarstedt, M., Ringle, C. M., & Gudergan, S. P. (2017). corporate social responsibility. Management Decision, 57(2), 349–371.
Advanced issues in partial least squares structural equation modeling. Lopin, K., Yeh, C. C., & Yu, H. C. (2011). Disclosure of corporate social
Sage Publications. responsibility and environmental management: Evidence from China.
Hair, J. F., Jr., Sarstedt, M., Hopkins, L., & Kuppelwieser, V. G. (2014). Par- Corporate Social Responsibility and Environmental Management, 19(5),
tial least squares structural equation modeling (PLS-SEM): An emerg- 273–287.
ing tool in business research. European business review. Low, M. P., Ong, S. F., & Tan, P. M. (2017). Positioning ethics and social
Hietbrink, J. J. C., Berens, G., & Van Rekom, J. (2010). Corporate social responsibility as a strategic tool in employees' affective commitment:
responsibility in a business purchasing context: The role of CSR type Evidence from Malaysian small medium-sized enterprises (SMEs).
and supplier product share size. Corporate Reputation Review, 13(4), Annals in Social Responsibility, 3(1), 2–22.
284–300. Lu, J., Ren, L., Zhang, C., Wang, C., Ahmed, R. R., & Streimikis, J. (2020).
Jarvis, W., Ouschan, R., Burton, H. J., Soutar, G., & O'Brien, I. M. (2017). Corporate social responsibility and employee behavior: Evidence from
Customer engagement in CSR: A utility theory model with moderating mediation and moderation analysis. Corporate Social Responsibility and
variables. Journal of Service Theory and Practice, 27(4), 833–853. Environmental Management, 27(4), 1–10.
Jayawickramarathna, S. K. (2015). Corporate reputation and customer Luu, T. T. (2019). CSR and customer value co-creation behavior: The mod-
brand switching behavior in Sri Lankan telecommunication industry. eration mechanisms of servant leadership and relationship marketing
Kelaniya Journal of Management, 3(2), 68–84. orientation. Journal of Business Ethics, 155(2), 379–398.
Jensen, B., Annan-Diab, F., & Seppala, N. (2018). Exploring perceptions of Mainardes, E. W., Teixeira, A., & Romano, P. C. D. S. (2017). Determinants
customer value: The role of corporate social responsibility initiatives in of co-creation in banking services. International Journal of Bank Market-
the European telecommunications industry. European Business Review, ing, 35(2), 187–204.
30(3), 246–271. Marquina, P., & Morales, C. E. (2012). The influence of CSR on purchasing
Jia, X. (2020). Corporate social responsibility activities and firm perfor- behavior in Peru and Spain. International Marketing Review, 29(3), 299–312.
mance: The moderating role of strategic emphasis and industry com- Martínez, P., & del Bosque, I. R. (2013). CSR and customer loyalty: The
petition. Corporate Social Responsibility and Environmental Management, roles of trust, customer identification with the company and satisfac-
27(1), 65–73. tion. International Journal of Hospitality Management, 4(35), 89–99.
Jones, S. (2015). The corporate social responsibility reports of global pharma- Memon, M. A., Cheah, J., Ramayah, T., Ting, H., & Chuah, F. (2018). Media-
ceutical firms. British Journal of Healthcare Management, 21(1), 21–25. tion analysis issues and recommendations. Journal of Applied Structural
Khan, S. Z., Yang, Q., Khan, N. U., Kherbachi, S., & Huemann, M. (2020). Equation Modeling, 2(1), 1–9.
Sustainable social responsibility toward multiple stakeholders as a Menguc, B., & Ozanne, L. K. (2005). Challenges of the “green imperative”:
trump card for small and medium-sized enterprise performance (evi- A natural resource-based approach to the environmental orientation–
dence from China). Corporate Social Responsibility and Environmental business performance relationship. Journal of Business Research, 58(4),
Management, 27(1), 95–108. 430–438.
Khan, Z., Ferguson, D., & Pérez, A. (2015). Customer responses to CSR in Michelon, G., Boesso, G., & Kumar, K. (2013). Examining the link between
the Pakistani banking industry. International Journal of Bank Marketing, strategic corporate social responsibility and company performance: An
33(4), 471–493. analysis of the best corporate citizens. Corporate Social Responsibility
Kim, H. L., Rhou, Y., Uysal, M., & Kwon, N. (2017). An examination of the and Environmental Management, 20, 81–94.
links between corporate social responsibility (CSR) and its internal con- Morgan, R. M., & Hunt, S. D. (1994). The commitment-trust theory of rela-
sequences. International Journal of Hospitality Management, 2(6), tionship marketing. Journal of Marketing, 58(3), 20–38.
26–34. Mujahid, M., & Abdullah, A. (2014). Impact of corporate social responsibil-
Kim, H. R., Lee, M., Lee, H. T., & Kim, N. M. (2010). Corporate social ity on firms' financial performance and shareholders wealth. European
responsibility and employee–company identification. Journal of Busi- Journal of Business and Management, 6(31), 181–187.
ness Ethics, 95(4), 557–569. Öberseder, M., Schlegelmilch, B. B., & Murphy, P. E. (2013). CSR practices and
Knox, S., & Gruar, C. (2007). The application of stakeholder theory to rela- consumer perceptions. Journal of Business Research, 66(10), 1839–1851.
tionship marketing strategy development in a non-profit organization. Pakistan Bureau of Statistics. (2017). Province wise provisional results of
Journal of Business Ethics, 75(2), 115–135. census. Pakistan Bureau of Statistics.
Kolk, A., & Van Tulder, R. (2002). Child labor and multinational conduct: A Paluri, R. A., & Mehra, S. (2018). Influence of bank's corporate social
comparison of international business and stakeholder codes. Journal of responsibility (CSR) initiatives on consumer attitude and satisfaction in
Business Ethics, 36(3), 291–301. India. Benchmarking: An International Journal, 25(5), 1429–1446.
Kwan, C. K. (2020). Socially responsible human resource practices to Payne, A., Storbacka, K., Frow, P., & Knox, S. (2009). Co-creating brands:
improve the employability of people with disabilities. Corporate Social Diagnosing and designing the relationship experience. Journal of Busi-
Responsibility and Environmental Management, 27(1), 1–8. ness Research, 62(3), 379–389.
Pérez, A., & del Bosque, I. R. (2013). The effect of corporate associations Shen, J., & Jiuhua Zhu, C. (2011). Effects of socially responsible human
on consumer behaviour. European Journal of Marketing. resource management on employee organizational commitment. The
Peterson, D. K. (2004). The relationship between perceptions of corporate International Journal of Human Resource Management, 22(15), 3020–
citizenship and organizational commitment. Business & Society, 43(3), 3035.
296–319. Sin, L. Y., Tse, A. C., Yau, O. H., Lee, J. S., & Chow, R. (2002). The effect of rela-
Ponsignon, F., Klaus, P., & Maull, R. S. (2015). Experience co-creation in tionship marketing orientation on business performance in a service-
financial services: An empirical exploration. Journal of Service Manage- oriented economy. Journal of Services Marketing, 16(7), 656–676.
ment, 26(2), 295–320. Sin, L. Y., Alan, C. B., Yau, O. H., Chow, R. P., Lee, J. S., & Lau, L. B. (2005).
Prahalad, C. K., & Ramaswamy, V. (2004). The future of competition: Co- Relationship marketing orientation: scale development and cross-cul-
creating unique value with customers. Harvard Business Press. tural validation. Journal of Business Research, 58(2), 185–194.
Rahim, R. A., Jalaludin, F. W., & Tajuddin, K. (2011). The importance of cor- Skudiene, V., & Auruskeviciene, V. (2012). The contribution of corporate
porate social responsibility on consumer behaviour in Malaysia. Asian social responsibility to internal employee motivation. Baltic Journal of
academy of management journal, 16(1), 119–139. Management, 7(1), 49–67.
Raja, U., Johns, G., & Ntalianis, F. (2004). The impact of personality on psy- State Bank of Pakistan. (2016). 16% of the general public in Pakistan owns
chological contracts. Academy of management Journal, 47(3), 350–367. and/or uses a bank account. (Access to Finance Survey 2015—
Rashid, M., Abdeljawad, I., Manisah Ngalim, S., & Kabir Hassan, M. (2013). Cus- SBP/Gallup Pakistan). Islamabad: Sate Bank of Pakistan.
tomer-centric corporate social responsibility: A framework for Islamic Strautmanis, J. (2008). Employees' values orientation in the context of corpo-
banks on ethical efficiency. Management Research Review, 36(4), 359–378. rate social responsibility. Baltic Journal of Management, 3(3), 346–358.
Raza, A., Rather, R. A., Iqbal, M. K., & Bhutta, U. S. (2020). An assessment Suh, Y. J. (2016). The role of relational social capital and communication in
of corporate social responsibility on customer company identification the relationship between CSR and employee attitudes: A multilevel
and loyalty in banking industry: A PLS-SEM analysis. Management analysis. Journal of Leadership & Organizational Studies, 23(4), 410–423.
Research Review, 43(11), 1337–1370. Tamvada, M. (2020). Corporate social responsibility and accountability: A
Revilla-Camacho, M. A., Cossío-Silva, F. J., & Vega-Vazquez, M. (2014). new theoretical foundation for regulating CSR. International Journal of
Seeking a sustainable competitive advantage in periods of economic Corporate Social Responsibility, 5(3), 1–14.
recession for SMEs and entrepreneurs: The role of value co-creation Uhlig, M. R. H., Mainardes, E. W., & Nossa, V. (2020). Corporate social
and customer trust in the service provider. In Entrepreneurship, innova- responsibility and consumer's relationship intention. Corporate Social
tion and economic crisis (pp. 69–76). Springer. Responsibility and Environmental Management, 27(1), 313–324.
Roberts, S. (2003). Supply chain specific? Understanding the patchy suc- Urbach, N., & Ahlemann, F. (2010). Structural equation modeling in infor-
cess of ethical sourcing initiatives. Journal of Business Ethics, 44(2), mation systems research using partial least squares. Journal of Informa-
159–170. tion Technology Theory and Application, 11(2), 5–40.
Rugimbana, R., Quazi, A., & Keating, B. (2008). Applying a consumer per- Valentine, S., & Fleischman, G. (2008). Ethics programs, perceived corpo-
ceptual measure of corporate social responsibility. Journal of Corporate rate social responsibility and job satisfaction. Journal of Business Ethics,
Citizenship, 29(2), 61–74. 77(2), 159–172.
Saha, R., Kashav, S., Cerchione, R., Singh, R., & Dahiya, R. (2020). Effect of Vargo, S. L., & Lusch, R. F. (2004). The four service marketing myths: Rem-
ethical leadership and corporate social responsibility on firm perfor- nants of a goods-based, manufacturing model. Journal of Service
mance: A systematic review. Corporate Social Responsibility and Envi- Research, 6(4), 324–335.
ronmental Management, 27(2), 409–429. Vargo, S. L., & Lusch, R. F. (2011). It's all B2B… and beyond: Toward a sys-
Sanchez-Rodríguez, C., Hemsworth, D., & Martínez-Lorente, A. R. (2005). tems perspective of the market. Industrial Marketing Management, 40
The effect of supplier development initiatives on purchasing perfor- (2), 181–187.
mance: A structural model. Supply Chain Management: An International Wei, Y. C., Egri, P., & Yeh-Yun Lin, C. (2014). Do corporate social responsi-
Journal, 10(4), 289–301. bility practices yield different business benefits in eastern and western
Santos, S., Rodrigues, L. L., & Branco, M. C. (2016). Online sustainability contexts? Chinese Management Studies, 8(4), 556–576.
communication practices of European seaports. Journal of Cleaner Pro- Yi, Y., & Gong, T. (2013). Customer value co-creation behavior: Scale devel-
duction, 112, 2935–2942. opment and validation. Journal of Business research, 66(9), 1279–1284.
Schmeltz, L. (2012). Consumer-oriented CSR communication: Focusing on
ability or morality? Corporate Communications: An International Journal,
17(1), 29–49.
Scholtens, B. (2009). Corporate social responsibility in the international
How to cite this article: Mubushar, M., Rasool, S., Haider, M.
banking industry. Journal of Business Ethics, 86(2), 159–175.
Schramm-Klein, H., Morschett, D., & Swoboda, B. (2015). Retailer corpo- I., & Cerchione, R. (2021). The impact of corporate social
rate social responsibility: Shedding light on CSR's impact on profit of responsibility activities on stakeholders' value co-creation
intermediaries in marketing channels. International Journal of Retail & behaviour. Corporate Social Responsibility and Environmental
Distribution Management, 43(4/5), 403–431.
Management, 28(6), 1906–1920. https://doi.org/10.1002/
Sharma, S. (2000). Managerial interpretations and organizational context
as predictors of corporate choice of environmental strategy. Academy csr.2168
of Management Journal, 43(4), 681–697.
APPENDIX A Muslim Commercial Bank □ Allied Bank Ltd. □ Bank Al-Falah □
Name: _____ Gender: _____ Age: _____ From how many years you are regular customer of this bank …
Habib Bank Ltd. □ National Bank of Pakistan □ United Bank Ltd. □ 1–3 Years □ 4–6 Years □ 7–9 Years □ More than 10 Years □
Employee-focused CSR activities Strongly disagree Disagree Neutral Agree Strongly agree
This bank pays fair salaries to its employees 1 2 3 4 5
This bank offers safety at work to its employees 1 2 3 4 5
This bank treats its employees fairly (without discrimination 1 2 3 4 5
or abuses)
This bank offers training and career opportunities to its 1 2 3 4 5
employees
This bank offers a pleasant work environment (e.g., flexible 1 2 3 4 5
hours, conciliation)
Supplier-focused CSR activities Rarely Sometimes Occasionally Frequently Almost always
This bank incorporates the interests of their suppliers in 1 2 3 4 5
their business decisions
This bank informs their suppliers about organizational 1 2 3 4 5
changes affecting their purchasing decisions
This bank opens the purchasing principles and sign the 1 2 3 4 5
contract according to the law
This bank pays attention to how suppliers manage the 1 2 3 4 5
ethical performance of their partner
Relationship Marketing Orientation
Trust
We trust each other 1 2 3 4 5
My bank is trustworthy on important things 1 2 3 4 5
According to our past business relationship, my bank thinks 1 2 3 4 5
that they are trustworthy people
My bank trusts us 1 2 3 4 5
Bonding
We rely on each other 1 2 3 4 5
We both try very hard to establish a long-term relationship 1 2 3 4 5
We work in close cooperation 1 2 3 4 5
We keep in touch constantly 1 2 3 4 5
Communication
We communicate and express our opinions to each other 1 2 3 4 5
frequently
We can show our discontent towards each other through 1 2 3 4 5
communication
We can communicate honestly 1 2 3 4 5
Empathy
We share the same worldview 1 2 3 4 5
We share the same opinion about most things 1 2 3 4 5
We share the same feeling about most things around us 1 2 3 4 5
We share the same values 1 2 3 4 5
Shared value
We always see things from each other's view 1 2 3 4 5
We know how each other feels 1 2 3 4 5
We understand each other's values and goals 1 2 3 4 5
We care about each other's feelings 1 2 3 4 5

Reciprocity
My bank regards ‘never forget a good turn’ as into business 1 2 3 4 5
motto
We keep our promises to each other in any situation 1 2 3 4 5
If customers gave assistance when my bank had difficulties, 1 2 3 4 5
then it would repay their kindness
Customer value co-creation behaviour Not at all willing Slightly willing Neutral Willing Completely willing
Customer participation behaviour
Information seeking
I have asked others for information on what this bank offers 1 2 3 4 5
I have searched for information on where this bank is 1 2 3 4 5
located
I have paid attention to how others behave to use this 1 2 3 4 5
service well
Information sharing
I clearly explained what I wanted the employee to do 1 2 3 4 5
I gave the employee proper information 1 2 3 4 5
I provided necessary information so that the employee 1 2 3 4 5
could perform his or her duties
I answered all the employee's service-related questions 1 2 3 4 5
Responsible behaviour
I performed all the tasks that are required 1 2 3 4 5
I adequately completed all the expected behaviours 1 2 3 4 5
I fulfilled responsibilities to the business 1 2 3 4 5
I followed the employee's directives or orders 1 2 3 4 5
Personnel interaction
I was friendly to the employee 1 2 3 4 5
I was kind to the employee 1 2 3 4 5
I was polite to the employee 1 2 3 4 5
I was courteous to the employee 1 2 3 4 5
I did not act rudely to the employee 1 2 3 4 5
Advocacy
If I have a useful idea on how to improve service, I let the 1 2 3 4 5
employee know
When I receive good service from the employee, I comment 1 2 3 4 5
about it
When I experience a problem, I let the employee know 1 2 3 4 5
about it
If I have a useful idea on how to improve service, I let the 1 2 3 4 5
employee know
Feedback
I said positive things about my bank and the employee to 1 2 3 4 5
others
I recommended my banks and the employee to others 1 2 3 4 5
I encouraged friends and relatives to use services of my 1 2 3 4 5
bank
Customer citizenship behaviour
Helping Strongly Disagree Disagree Neutral Agree Strongly Agree
I assist other customers if they need my help 1 2 3 4 5
I help other customers if they seem to have problems 1 2 3 4 5
(Continues)
I teach other customers to use the service correctly 1 2 3 4 5

I give advice to other customers 1 2 3 4 5
Tolerance
If service is not delivered as expected, I would be willing to 1 2 3 4 5
put up with it
If the employee makes a mistake during service delivery, I 1 2 3 4 5
would be willing to be patient
If I have to wait longer than I normally expected to receive 1 2 3 4 5
the service, I would be willing to adapt

Corp Soc Responsibility Env - 2021 - Mubushar - The Impact of Corporate Social Responsibility Activities On Stakeholders

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

Corp Soc Responsibility Env - 2021 - Mubushar - The Impact of Corporate Social Responsibility Activities On Stakeholders

Uploaded by

Document Information

Original Title

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

Corp Soc Responsibility Env - 2021 - Mubushar - The Impact of Corporate Social Responsibility Activities On Stakeholders

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

Received: 19 August 2020 Revised: 23 May 2021 Accepted: 7 June 2021

The impact of corporate social responsibility activities on

Muhammad Mubushar1 | Shahid Rasool2 | Muhammad Imtiaz Haider3 |

1 | I N T RO DU CT I O N with key stakeholders voluntarily’ (European Commission, 2001). This

1906 wileyonlinelibrary.com/journal/csr Corp Soc Responsib Environ Manag. 2021;28:1906–1920.

Application of stakeholder theory claims that relationship marketing ori-

TABLE 1 Variable definition

Employee-focused CSR activities were adapted from the studies 4 | RE SU LT S

TABLE 2 Outer loading, reliability and AVE

Constructs Items OL CR AVE

Constructs Items OL CR AVE

TABLE 3 Discriminant validity using Fornell and Lacker criteria

F I G U R E 2 Direct effect of CSR

TABLE 4 Direct hypothesis testing

FIGURE 3 Mediation model

TABLE 5 Direct effect and indirect

TABLE 6 Variance accounted

APPENDIX A Muslim Commercial Bank □ Allied Bank Ltd. □ Bank Al-Falah □

We care about each other's feelings 1 2 3 4 5

I teach other customers to use the service correctly 1 2 3 4 5

You might also like