the moderating effect of socially responsible human resource … · 2019-06-24 · one major...

2019 富邦人壽管理博碩士論文獎

The Moderating Effect of Socially Responsible

Human Resource Management on the Relationships

between Organizational Identification and Employee

Task Performance, Ethical Behavior, and

Organizational Citizenship Behaviors

ABSTRACT

This study aims to investigate the research question regarding whether employees’

organizational identification is positively related to employees’ task performance, ethical

behavior, and organizational citizenship behaviors (OCBs) when organizations implement

socially responsible human resource management (SRHRM). SRHRM goes beyond superior

pay and include the evaluation of employee social performance via promotions or rewards. This

study not only extends the traditional CSR research to associate CSR with human resource

management, but it also explores the notion that organizational identification has impact on

employee performance and behavior when organizations implement socially responsible human

resource management (SRHRM). By using hierarchical linear modeling (HLM) for empirical

data analysis, this study highlights the following findings. First, organizational identification is

positively related to employees’ task performance, ethical behavior, and OCBs respectively.

Second, implementing SRHRM successfully reinforces the tendency of employees who have

strong identification with organizations to devote extra effort to help coworkers in the context

of Taiwan. The findings and implications of this study are anticipated to offer useful and feasible

evidences for corporations which attempt to implement SRHRM.

Keywords: SRHRM, Organizational Identification, Task Performance, Ethical

Behavior, Organizational Citizenship Behaviors


1

1、Introduction

(1)、Research Background and Motivation

Corporate social responsibility (CSR) has been a primary subject of great interest for over

20 years. (Aguilera et al., 2007; Balmer, 1998; Sen & Bhattachary, 2001; Zenisek, 1979). To

date, a great deal of scholars from multiple management disciplines engage in the research of

CSR for knowing the application of CSR in various fields such as Marketing (Khan, Lew, &

Park, 2015; Mishra & Modi, 2016; Nan & Heo, 2007), Organizational Behavior (Glavas &

Godwin, 2013) and Finance (Flammer, 2015) in order to improve corporate social performance

and gain institutional legitimacy. In addition, the most important thing is to increase corporate

long-term competitive advantages through the way of attracting customers (Larson, Flaterty,

Zablah, Brown, & Wiener, 2008; Luo & Bhattacharya, 2006) and motivating employees (Rupp,

Ganapathi, Aguilera, & Williams, 2006).

One major dimension of CSR is CSR policies toward employees. Carroll (1998) elucidated

that socially responsible organizations are concerned mostly about discretionary and ethical

responsibilities toward corporate employees and stakeholders, and are not merely focused on

the aspect of their economic and legal obligations. The CSR policies for corporations that were

directed at their employees thus have been very critical, a trend which Shen and Benson (2014)

referred to in a term that they coined; socially responsible human resource management

(SRHRM) (Shen, & Benson, 2014). SRHRM not only provides employees with pecuniary gain

but also delineates the relevant HRM policies regarding the context of social responsibility.

SRHRM consists of two categories: skill-enhancing (e.g. CSR training) and motivation-

enhancing (e.g. rewarding social contributions). More specifically, for instance, recruiting and

retaining employees who devote to social and environmental issues, providing CSR training

and considering employees’ social contributions as one criterion of promotion and performance

appraisal (Orlitzky & Swanson, 2006; Shen & Zhu, 2011).

There are some studies in term of CSR regarding their impact on employees’ psychological

behaviors that has received empirical support (Glavas & Godwin, 2013; Idowu & Papasolomou,

2007; Peterson, 2004a; Shen & Benson, 2014). A recent study by Shen and Benson (2014)

revealed that organizational identification as a mediator as corporation implements SRHRM

indeed influence employees’ performance and behaviors, However, the related studies with

regard to the moderating effect of SRHRM on employees’ performance and behaviors have not

to date been conducted. As a result, this study takes into consideration how Taiwanese

corporations effectively and efficiently implement SRHRM policies in order to motivate,

encourage employees and develop employees’ potential in line with the goal of corporation.

In order to address this gap, using the theoretical base found by Shen and Benson (2014),

this study centers on three important employees’ performance and behaviors (i.e. task

performance, ethical behavior and OCBs) and the research goal is to explore whether

organizational identification lead employees to contribute more than before in their duty and

thus influence their task performance, ethical behavior as well as OCBs. Meanwhile, this study

also investigates how SRHRM as a moderator is likely to reinforce the relationship between

organizational identification and employees’ task performance, ethical behavior and OCBs to

further improve the relationship between organizations and employees.

(2)、Significance of the Study

This study highlights and proposes the significance of the study in the following three

points.


2

First, generally, prior empirical CSR studies rarely emphasized the CSR policies toward

employees. Very few bodies of empirical research have examined CSR from the employees’

aspect in terms of whether the CSR activities adopted by organizations enable employees to

perceive such policies and thus, whether these activities further affect their attitudes and

behaviors (Aguilera, Rupp, Williams, & Ganapathi, 2007). However, in business environments,

employees have always played a critical role in the operations of their respective organizations.

Therefore, how to achieve effective human resource management of employees for corporation

has become an important issue. This study aligns the concepts of CSR with HRM and introduces

the scholar’s novel concept of SRHRM in order to further explore how and whether the

influence of SRHRM may bring to organizations and employees.

Second, in this study, through the implementation of CSR policies toward employees, this

study facilitates the ability of organizations to further understand the relationships between

employees’ psychological process, such as organizational identification and employees’

performance or attitude. In a business environment, CSR policies can create a positive

employees’ perception of an ethical climate on the part of employees (Hansen et. al., 2016).

The key point is that Shen and Zhu (2011) initially raised the concept of SRHRM which is

regarded as an antecedent, whereas this study regards SRHRM as a moderating role. The reason

is that SRHRM can establish positive organizational climate and the extent of SRHRM adopted

by each corporation is likely to vary in the relationship between organizational identification,

and task performance, ethical behavior or OCBs.

Third, to date, the development of CSR in Taiwan has emphasized on the importance of

economic aspects, societal and corporate governance, but this has evolved to an emphasis on

how organizations successfully imbed the concept of sustainable development into

organizational culture to achieve long-term economic benefits. Employees have thus become

primary stakeholders in CSR agenda and talent employees are key elements to business growth

and innovation. Therefore, there is a growing number of corporations that shed light on the

importance of human resource management as organizations implements CSR policies (Zhu,

2018). In other words, SRHRM aims at providing CSR training and development, recruiting

and retaining socially responsible employees, and taking into consideration regarding

employees’ contributions in social campaigns (Orlitzky & Swanson, 2006; Shen & Zhu, 2011).

Accordingly, in the context of Taiwan, this study has a great interest in investigating Taiwanese

corporations which implement SRHRM, so as to understand its impact on the relationships

between employees’ organizational identification and their performance and behavior in the

study.

2、Research Model and Hypothesis Development

(1) 、 The Relationship between Organizational Identification and Task

Performance

Underpinned by social identity theory, employees’ organizational identification has a

positive impact on employees’ task performance and attitudes (Turker, 2008). In light of

employees’ identification with their organizations, employees tend to devote extra efforts to

achieve personal task performance on behalf of organizations and to further enhance an

organization’s overall interests (Carmeli, Gilat, & Waldman, 2007; Collier & Esteban, 2007;

Ellemers, De Gilder, & Haslam, 2004; Hansen, Dunford, Boss, Boss, & Angermeier, 2011;

Upham, 2006). van Knippenberg (2000) also argued that organizational identification acts as a

motivator to drive employees to take on the task’s goals’ as their own. More specifically, the

more employees identify with organizations, the more they are likely to contribute to the

organizations they feel a belonging with (van Knippenberg et al., 2004; Dukerich, Golden, &

Shortell, 2002). Accordingly, employees tend to devote more effort and are more highly


3

motivated to achieve task goals that organizations set up for them (van Knippenberg et al.,

2004). This study thus assumes that employees’ organizational identification is positively

related to task performance.

Hypothesis1: Organizational identification is positively associated with task performance

(2)、The Relationship between Organizational Identification and Ethical

Behavior

On the basis of research by van Knippenberg and E. Sleebos (2006), the crucial

characteristics that reflect organizational identification are self-reference and self-definition.

The nature of self-reference regarding organizational membership and self-definition provide

the theoretical basis for explaining the cause of organizational behavior, such as (ethical)

decision-making (Haslam et al., 2003; Hogg & Terry, 2001). Based on the nature of self-

definition, organizational identification enables individuals to take organizational interest as the

self-interest which may in turn enhance or shape individuals’ performance or behavior (van

Knippenberg & Sleebos, 2006). Therefore, organizational identification is expected to be more

suitable for being an antecedent than others (van Knippenberg & Sleebos, 2006). Social identity

theory, attributed to Tajfel and Turner (1985) indicated that people align themselves with

organizations and further classify themselves into various social groups with they feel a sense

of belongings (Ashforth & Mael, 1989). Research has suggested that employees’ (work)

performance or behavior, such as increased OCBs, job performance and decreased turnover

intentions is influenced by the strength of employees’ organizational identification (Mael &

Ashforth, 1995; van Knippenberg & van Knippenberg, 2000; Wanhuggins, Riordan, & Griffeth,

1998). Also, employees who strongly identify with their organizations may choose to act or

behave in an ethical manner in order to maintain organizations’ reputation and image. In a sense,

strong organizational identification may drive employees to enhance their ethical standards to

aid organizations in reality, such as telling the truth to supervisors or not claiming to have done

something that I have not (Fraedrich, 1993).

Given these possibilities, this study deduces that once employees strongly identify with

organizations, employees may engage in ethical behavior. Thus, this study assumes that

employees’ organizational identification is positively associated with employees’ ethical

behavior.

Hypothesis 2: Organizational identification is positively associated with ethical behavior

(3) 、 The Relationship between Organizational Identification and

Organizational Citizenship Behaviors

Social identity theory suggested that employee’s identification has a positive effect on

their work performance and behaviors (Turker, 2008). Such identification leads to “employee

actions that reinforce the organization and one’s status within it” (Upham, 2006, p.88). Given

the complexity of today’s workplace nowadays, employees are often required to act beyond the

scope of their formal duties and work together with coworkers (Koopmans, et al., 2011). There

is a growing amount of literature showing that employees who have a sense of oneness with

and belonging to an organization are likely to contribute more to promote organization’s

interests through in-role and extra-role behaviors (Carmeli et al., 2007; Collier & Esteban, 2007;

Ellemers, de Gilder, & Haslam, 2004; Upham, 2006; Widmeyer, Brawley, & Carron, 1992).

In addition, social exchange theory (Blau, 1964) has also been applied to explain the

relationship between organizational identification and OCB. Social exchange theory was

proposed by Blau (1964) explained the reciprocal relationships between two parties. As

organizations which adopt SRHRM treat their employees in positive way and thus lead them to


4

develop higher organizational identification towards their organizations. In turn, employees feel

obligated to reciprocate through the behavior of benefiting their organizations such as OCBs

(Newman, Hofman & Miao, 2015).

As such, due to OCBs, defined as discretionary behavior or a risk taking behavior, once

employees develop strong organizational identification, they may devote extra effort and be

willing to take risks by helping coworkers or performing tasks benefiting their respective

organizations (Bartels, Peters, de Jong, Pruyn, & van der Molen, 2010; Newman et al. 2015).

This study thus assumes that employees’ organizational identification will be positively

associated with OCBs which includes two broad types: individual OCB (OCBI) and

organization-focused OCB (OCBO).

Hypothesis 3a and 3b: Organizational identification is positively associated with OCBI and

OCBO

(4) 、 The Moderating Effect of SRHRM on the Relationship between

Organizational Identification and Task Performance

SRHRM was defined as organizations’ CSR policies toward employees (Shen et al., 2014).

Over time, CSR has been regarded as a crucial issue. Many modern people have paid attention

to the importance of CSR. At the same time, in contemporary workplace, prospective or current

employees are also conscious about whether or not organizations successfully implement CSR

policies.

Social information processing theory has been employed as an intervening concept to

explain the fit or congruence between SRHRM and employees’ performance and behaviors.

Social information processing theory indicated that individuals, as adaptive organisms, adapt

behaviors, attitudes, and beliefs to their social context (Salanick & Pfeffer, 1878). Thus, a

fundamental premise of social information processing is that employees are able to understand

and interpret organizational policies (e.g. SRHRM) that further influence their behaviors and

performance. According, through the social information processing, employees can receive the

information flows of SRHRM from organizations and understand such corporate ethical climate

as a shared values or norms and enhancing their task performance (Lee et al., 2013; Schein,

1983).

In addition, some scholars have also revealed that socially responsible ethics training

implemented by companies would reinforce employees’ attitudes and behaviors (Valentine &

Fleischman, 2008). As such, when organizations adopt SRHRM, such as encouraging

employees to engage more in social activities or providing CSR training to employees, this may

reinforce the tendency of employees who identify with organizations to perform better on their

job. (Berger, Cunningham, & Drumwright, 2006; Collier & Esteban, 2007). As social identity

theory indicated, employees may increase their feelings of belonging to organizations as they

feel being valued as legitimate members in an organization which in turn, may improve their

efficiency and performance. Handelman and Arnold (1999) suggested that CSR have

interaction effects and thus can be regarded as a moderator. Therefore, this study assumes that

SRHRM may moderate the relationship between organizational identification and task

performance. If employees identify with organizations, this may positively enhance their task

performance when organizations highly implement SRHRM.

Hypothesis 4: SRHRM moderates the relationship between organizational identification and

task performance


Organizational Identification and Ethical Behavior


5

CSR consists of the economic, legal, ethical, and philanthropic expectations that society

has of organizations at a given point in time (Carroll, 1979). Drawing on the legal, ethical and

philanthropic aspects of CSR, organizations that put SRHRM into practice create a positive

organizational climate. Some organizations aim to create an ethical climate by placing emphasis

on ethical values that shape employees’ ethical beliefs (Treviño & Nelson, 2004). Organizations

also provide employees with ethical training in order to ensure that employees perform their

work roles in an ethical manner (Valentine & Fleischman, 2004). Appropriate corporate climate

has been proven to have positive impact on employees’ behavior (Sen & Bhattacharya, 2001).

More notably, some studies have showed that employees who prefer an ethical (work) climate

can increase their commitment, engagement and job satisfaction. (Somers, 2001; Treviño &

Nelson, 2004; Garavan & McGuire, 2010). Zenisek (1979) has also indicated that organizations’

ethical culture can be enhanced by the implementation of CSR. Accordingly, based on social

information processing theory, employees would be influenced and adapted to behave in an

ethical way when they perceive that organizations attempt to provide them with corporate

ethical values through CSR ethical training.

Moreover, social identity theory, attributed to Tajfel and Turner (1985) indicates that

people often align themselves with organizations and further classify themselves into various

social groups where they feel the belongings with (Ashforth & Mael, 1989). Accordingly, once

employees have good fit of organizational policies and identify with corporate values,

employees’ ethical behavior may get shaped under the implementation of SRHRM. As such,

SRHRM may reinforce the relationship between employees who strongly identify with

organizations and their ethical behavior. This study thus assumes that SRHRM will moderate

the relationship between organizational identification and ethical behavior.

Hypothesis 5: SRHRM moderates the relationship between organizational identification and

ethical behavior


Organizational Identification and OCBs

Drawing on the legal, ethical and philanthropic aspects of CSR, organizations that put CSR

policies into practice can indeed create a positive organizational climate or culture. Appropriate

corporate climate has been proven to have positive impact on employees’ behavior (Sen &

Bhattacharya, 2001). As such, implementing CSR policies successfully is likely to have

organizations form a positive organizational climate as well as to enhance organizations’

external reputations. Some studies have shown that employees prefer the ethical (work) climate

that organizations dedicate to improve and in turn increases employees’ commitment,

engagement and job satisfaction with CSR (Somers, 2001; Treviño & Nelson, 2004; Garavan

& McGuire, 2010). Based on social identity theory, when employees have strong identification

with organizations, they may devote extra effort and be willing to take risks by helping

coworkers or carrying out tasks that benefiting organizations (Bartels, Peters, de Jong, Pruyn,

& van der Molen, 2010; Newman et al. 2016).

In addition, social information processing theory (Salancik & Pfeffer, 1978) is also

employed to explain the relationship between SRHRM and employees. As organizations take

into account legal, ethical and philanthropic responsibilities, SRHRM may reinforce the

relationship between employees’ organizational identification and their OCBs because

employees may perceive and adapt to organizational climate that organizations dedicate to

fulfill legal, ethical and philanthropic responsibilities that further influence their behaviors.

Therefore, employees would be more willing to help others of their own free will. In other

words, organizations which highly implement SRHRM may reinforce the desire of employees

who have strong identification with organizations to contribute more helping colleagues or


6

benefiting organizations. Consequently, this study assumes that SRHRM will moderate the

relationships between organizational identification and OCBI or OCBO.

Hypothesis 6a and 6b: SRHRM moderates the relationship between organizational

identification and OCBI as well as OCBO

Based on the eight Hypotheses above, the conceptual research model thus has been shown

in the following (see Figure 1).

igu

Figure 1 Conceptual Research Model

3、Research Methodology

(1)、Sample and Data

Due to the adoption and application of Hierarchical linear model, the data were collected

from 40 different companies and the total number of questionnaires that have been distributed

amounts to 749 questionnaires. During the period of collecting questionnaires, the respondents

had been sent reminder e-mails letters periodically in order to determine whether all the

questionnaires had been completed or not. The total number of valid questionnaires were 638.

As such, the response rate was 85.1%. Two types of questionnaires have been adopted in this

SRHRM

Ethical Behavior

Organizational Identification

Task Performance

H5

H4

H1

H2

Organizational

Level

Organizational Citizenship Behavior

H3a H3b

H6a H6b Individual

Level


7

study; they are paper-based survey (91.6%) and on-line survey (8.4%). There are 264 (42.1%)

male participants and 363 (57.9%) female participants. The respondent’s age ranges from under

20 to 65 and the majority of respondents ranges (83.5%) from 21 to 45 years of age. Most of

respondents have at least a high level education: bachelor degree (46.6%) and master degree

(35.6%). In term of organizational tenure, over half of the respondents have worked in their

respective organizations for less than ten years (66.4%) and most of them have worked in their

organizations from 1 to 5 years (36.1%). In addition, since non-managerial employees or lower

level supervisors are our main research subjects, non-managerial employees (76.5%) and lower-

level supervisors (13.7%) accounts for 90.2% of the total respondents.

(2)、Measures

A. Moderating Variable (Organizational Level): Socially Responsible Human

Resource Management

SRHRM was measured by using six items from Orlitzky and Swanson (2006) and

adopted seven-point Likert scale (ranging from 1=strongly disagree to 7 strongly agree).

SRHRM refers to CSR policies of company toward employees (Shen & Zhu, 2011). The

Cronbach’s alpha coefficient for this scale is 0.81. All the items are acceptable and exceed the

minimum recommended factor loading (>.40). Sample item includes “My company provides

CSR training to develop employees’ skills in receptive stakeholder engagement and

communication.”

B. Independent Variable (Individual Level): Organizational Identification

Organizational identification was measured by using ten items from Mael and Ashforth

(1989), and adopted seven-point Likert scale (ranging from 1=strongly disagree to 7 strongly

agree). Organizational identification is defined as the members of an organization having a

sense of belonging to, and a perceived unity with an organization (Ashforth & Mael, 1989).

Organizational behavior scholars posited that organizational identification is a process of

“cognition connection between the definition of an organization and the definition a person

applied to himself” (Dutton, Dukerich, & Harquail, 1994). Sample item includes “When

someone praises my organization, it feels like a personal compliment.” The Cronbach’s alpha

coefficient of organizational identification is 0.81.

C. Dependent Variable (Individual Level): Task Performance

This study measures task performance by using seven items from Williams and Anderson

(1991). Task performance refers to all of the work activities are ruled by formal job

descriptions (William and Anderson, 1991). This study also adopts a seven-point Likert scales,

ranging from 1 (strongly disagree) to 7 (strongly agree). The Cronbach’s alpha coefficient is

0.80.

D. Dependent Variable (Individual Level): Ethical Behavior

Ethical behavior was measured by using six items from Fraedrich (1993), who adopted his

measure from Ferrell and Skinner (1988) originally and and adopted seven-point Likert scale

(ranging from 1=strongly disagree to 7 strongly agree). Ethical behavior refers to individual

behavior whose can recognize what is right and what is wrong and any behavior that deviates

from the organizations norms is regarded as unethical. Sample item includes “Sometimes I

report only part of the truth to my boss.” The Cronbach’s alpha coefficient of ethical behavior

is .77.

E. Dependent Variable (Individual Level): Organizational Citizenship Behaviors


8

This study measures OCB including OCBI and OCBO by using seven items respectively

from Willians and Anderson (1991). OCB refers to individual behavior that is discretionary

and not prescribed by formal job descriptions or reward system and can indirectly benefit the

functioning of the organization (Organ, 1988). More specifically, OCBI refers to individual

that can directly benefit specific individuals. OCBO refers to individual behavior that can

benefit the organization. This study also uses a seven-point Likert scales, ranging from 1

(strongly disagree) to 7 (strongly agree). The Cronbach’s alpha coefficients of OCBI and

OCBO are 0.89 and 0.84, respectively.

4、Research Findings

(1)、Confirmatory Factor Analysis

Confirmatory factor analysis is a technique of factor analysis that is used to cope

specifically with the relationships between observed variables and latent variables. CFA covers

a variety of purposes and one of the purposes is to estimate the reliability (i.e. composite

reliability) and validity. Table 1 is shown below.

Table 1 Reliability and Validity of each Variable

Variables Cronbach’s

Alpha

Items Standard Factor

Loadings

CR AVE

1. SRHRM .938 SRHRM4

SRHRM5

SRHRM6

.915

.960

.891

.945 .850

2.Organizational

Identification

.887

OI1

OI3

OI4

OI5

OI6

OI7

.750

.610

.673

.795

.760

.690

.862 .512

3.Task

Performance

.910 TP1

TP2

TP3

TP4

TP6

.715

.883

.888

.816

.757

.907 .664

4. Ethical Behavior .780 EB2

EB4

EB5

EB6

.680

.682

.853

.658

.812 .522

5. OCBI .916 OCBI1

OCBI4

OCBI5

OCBI6

.682

.800

.847

.791

.863 .612

6. OCBO .762 OCBO1

OCBO2

OCBO3

OCBO6

.601

.817

.644

.600

.763 .451

(2)、Discriminant Validity and Correlation Matrix of Individual Level

The diagonal line of the correlation matrix represents the square root of AVE. The square

root of AVE should be greater than the correlation value between two variables which indicates

that discriminant validity exists. According to Table 2, all values of diagonal line (the square


9

root of AVE) are greater than the correlation values. As such, the discriminant validity does

exist in the study.

Table 2 Discriminant Validity and Correlation Matrix of Individual Level

Variables AVE Mean SD 1 2 3 4 5

1.Organizational

Identification .512 5.65 .685 (.714)

2.Task

Performance .664 5.83 .664 .402** (.815)

3.Ethical

Behavior .552 5.93 .631 .419** .586** (.743)

4. OCBI .612 5.80 .681 .421** .584** .510** (.782)

5. OCBO .451 6.03 .628 .385** .560** .620** .600** (.672)

Note. (Individual level N=638; Organizational level N= 40). The diagonal line of the correlation

matrix represents the square root of AVE. Off diagonals are Pearson correlation of constructs;

* p < .05, ** p < .01

(4)、Hypothesis Test: Using Hierarchical Linear Modeling

To aid in understanding of HLM, this study briefly explains the mathematical principle of

HLM in the following. In a two- level hierarchical model, lower-level model (level 1) (e.g.

employees’ performance and behavior) is developed for each higher-level unit (e.g. SRHRM)

which is called within-unit model to explain the relationship between dependent variable and

independent variables of level 1. Here is a simple regression model developed for each

individual 𝑖 (Woltman, Feldstain, MacKay, & Rocchi, 2012).

Level 1 (Individual Level):

𝑌𝑖𝑗 = 𝛽𝑜𝑖 + 𝛽1𝑖𝑋𝑖𝑗 + 𝜀𝑖𝑗 (1)

where:

𝑌𝑖𝑗 = Dependent variable measured for individual 𝑖 in organization𝑗;

𝛽𝑜𝑖 = Intercept estimated for each organization;

𝛽1𝑖 = Regression coefficient estimated for each organization;

𝑋𝑖𝑗 = Value on the predictor for individual 𝑖 in organization 𝑗;

𝜀𝑖𝑗 = Residual.

Also, the residual 𝜀𝑖𝑗 follows the statistical assumption of normal distribution.

𝐸(𝜀𝑖𝑗) = 0; 𝑉𝑎𝑟(𝜀𝑖𝑗) = 𝜎2 (2)

𝛽𝑜𝑖 and 𝛽1𝑖 (level-1 regression coefficients) are outcome variables of level 2 which are also


10

called between-unit models to explain the variability of each organization.

Level 2 (Organizational Level):

𝛽𝑜𝑖 = 𝛾00 + 𝛾01𝑍𝑗 + 𝜇𝑜𝑗 (3)

𝛽1𝑖 = 𝛾10 + 𝛾11𝑍𝑗 + 𝜇1𝑗 (4)

Where:

𝛾00 = Second stage intercept term adjusted for Z;

𝛾01 = The slope relating Z to the intercept and slope terms from the level 1 equation;

𝛾10 = Second stage intercept term adjusted for Z;

𝛾11 = The slope relating Z to the intercept and slope terms from the level 1 equation;

𝑍𝑗 = Organization level variable;

𝜇𝑜𝑗 = Level-2 residuals;

𝜇1𝑗 = Level-2 residuals.

Also, the assumptions of level-2 models are as follows. First, the residuals in both level 1

and level 2 are homogeneous and abided by normal multivariate distribution with means 𝛾00

and 𝛾00 (see equation (6)) and variances 𝜏00 and 𝜏00 (see equation (7)). Second, the

covariance between 𝜇𝑜𝑗 and 𝜇𝑜𝑗 is 𝜏01 equal to covariance between 𝛽𝑜𝑖 and 𝛽1𝑖 (see

equation (8)). Third, the residuals of both level 1 and level 2 are not correlated (see equation

(9)) (Sullivan, Dukes, & Losina, 1999).

𝐸(𝜇𝑜𝑗) = 0; 𝐸(𝜇1𝑗) = 0 (5)

𝐸(𝛽𝑜𝑖) = 𝛾00; 𝐸(𝛽1𝑖) = 𝛾01 (6)

𝑉𝑎𝑟(𝛽𝑜𝑖) = 𝑉𝑎𝑟(𝜇𝑜𝑗) = 𝜏00; 𝑉𝑎𝑟(𝛽1𝑖) = 𝑉𝑎𝑟(𝜇1𝑗) = 𝜏11 (7)

𝐶𝑜𝑣(𝛽𝑜𝑖, 𝛽1𝑖) = 𝐶𝑜𝑣(𝜇𝑜𝑗, 𝜇1𝑗) = 𝜏01 (8)

𝐶𝑜𝑣(𝜇𝑜𝑗 , 𝜀𝑖𝑗) = 𝐶𝑜𝑣(𝜇1𝑗, 𝜀𝑖𝑗) = 0 (9)

In order to clearly understand the levels of the hierarchy, equation (1) is substituted by

equation (3) and equation (4) and the mixed model is as follow.

Mixed Model:

𝑌𝑖𝑗 = 𝛾00 + 𝛾10𝑋𝑖𝑗 + 𝛾01𝑍𝑗 + 𝛾11𝑍𝑗𝑋𝑖𝑗 + 𝜇1𝑗𝑋𝑖𝑗 + 𝜇𝑜𝑗 + 𝜀𝑖𝑗 (10)

The mixed model which demonstrates both fixed effect and random effect includes two level

predictors (𝑋𝑖𝑗and 𝑍𝑗), a cross-level term (𝑍𝑗𝑋𝑖𝑗) which reflects the cross-level effect as well

as the composite residual (𝜇1𝑗𝑋𝑖𝑗 + 𝜇𝑜𝑗 + 𝜀𝑖𝑗) (Gill, 2003). In equation (10), the residual can

not be independent from level-1 units which indicate the interdependent relationship between

level-1 units and level-2 units. In other words, level-1 units are nested in each level-2 unit .


11

According to above mentioned mathematical principle of HLM, 𝑅𝑤𝑔 value is needed to

be calculated before conducting the following HLM model analysis. 𝑅𝑤𝑔 value of SRHRM

is .792 which represents that research data is sufficiently homogeneous within a group and can

transform SRHRM into variable of organizational level because 𝑅𝑤𝑔 is suggested to be greater

than .70 by Klein, Kozlowski and Zohar (2000).

A. Task Performance

The first step is to specify systematic within and between group variance in task

performance in order to determine whether the model is suitable to conduct multilevel analysis.

After calculating a ratio of the between group variance to the total variance, ICC (1) of task

performance is .148 which exceeds the threshold value of .12 suggested by James (1982).

Concurrently, ICC (2) is .70 which has good reliability suggest by Klein and Kozlowski (2000).

In term of null model, Chi-square is significant (𝜒2= 155.6114, p < .001) which represents that

employees’ task performance between organizations has significant difference. As such, based

on the results of ICC(1) and ICC (2), task performacne is approporate to conduct multilevel

analysis (see Table 3). Therefore, according to above conditions, full model can be assessed and

the empirical result shows that hypothesis 4 (𝛾11= .0674, p > .05) has not been supported. As

such, cross-level interaction doesn’t exist which indicate that SRHRM doesn’t moderate the

relationship between organizational identification and task performance. In addition, consistent

with aforementioned result in SEM, hypothesis 1 (𝛾10= .3906, p < .001) has been supported by

using HLM (see Table 4).

Table 3 Null Model for Task Performance

Fixed Effect Coefficient Standard Error T-ratio df

𝛾00 5.8689 .0475 123.523*** 39

Random Effect Standard

Deviation

Variance

Component 𝜒2 df

𝜇0𝑗 .2543 .0647 155.6114*** 39

𝑟𝑖𝑗 .6113 .3737

Deviance 1234.2794

Note. N = 638; * p < .05, ** p < .01, *** p < .001

Table 4 Full Model for Task Performance


𝛾00 3.629141 .2727 13.311*** 38

𝛾01 -0.460138 .5154 -0.893 38

𝛾10 .3906 (H1) .0459 8.506*** 38

𝛾11 .0674 (H4) .0854 .790 38


Deviation

Variance

Component 𝜒2 df

𝜇0𝑗 .9670 .9351 65.6631** 38

𝜇1𝑗 .1616 .0261 64.0005** 38

𝑟𝑖𝑗 .5639 .3179

Deviance 1146.164909


12

Note. N = 638; * p < .05, ** p < .01, *** p < .001

B. Ethical Behavior

ICC (1) of ethical behavior is .185 which exceeds the threshold value of .12 suggested by

James (1982). Concurrently, ICC (2) is .750 which has good reliability suggest by Klein and

Kozlowski (2000). In term of null model, Chi-square is significant (𝜒2= 183.0298, p < .001)

which represents that employees’ ethical behavior between organizations has significant

difference. As such, based on the results of ICC(1) and ICC (2), ethical behavior is approporate

to conduct multilevel analysis (see Table 5). Therefore, full model can be conducted and the

empirical result shows that hypothesis 5 (𝛾11= .1256, p > .05) has not been supported. As such,

cross-level interaction doesn’t exist which indicate that SRHRM doesn’t moderate the

relationship between organizational identification and ethical behavior. In addition, consistent

with aforementioned result in SEM, hypothesis 2 (𝛾10= .3843, p < .001) has been supported by


Table 5 Null Model for Ethical Behavior


𝛾00 5.9694 .0491 121.623*** 39


Deviation

Variance

Component 𝜒2 df

𝜇0𝑗 .2723 .0741 183.0298*** 39

𝑟𝑖𝑗 .5709 .3260

Deviance 1154.9435

Note. N = 638; * p < .05, ** p < .01, *** p < .001

Table 6 Full Model for Ethical Behavior


𝛾00 3.7685 .2678 14.073*** 38

𝛾01 -0.7917 .5218 -1.517 38

𝛾10 .3843 (H2) .0445 8.628*** 38

𝛾11 .1256 (H5) .0839 1.498 38


Deviation

Variance

Component 𝜒2 df

𝜇0𝑗 1.0717 1.1484 65.7744** 38

𝜇1𝑗 .1698 .0288 59.7943* 38

𝑟𝑖𝑗 .5197 .2701

Note. N = 638; * p < .05, ** p < .01, *** p < .001

C. OCBI and OCBO

ICC (1) of OCBI is .143 which exceeds the threshold value of .12 suggested by James

(1982). Concurrently, ICC (2) is .70 which has good reliability suggest by Klein and

Kozlowski (2000). In term of null model, Chi-square is significant (𝜒2= 140.2037, p < .001)


13

which represents that employees’ OCBI between organizations has significant difference. As

such, based on the results of ICC(1) and ICC (2), ethical behavior is approporate to conduct

multilevel analysis (see Table 7). Therefore, full model can be assessed and the empirical

result shows that hypothesis 6a (𝛾11= .2416, p < .01) has been supported. As such, cross-level

interaction indeed exists which indicates that SRHRM moderates the relationship between

organizational identification and OCBI in the study. In addition, consistent with

aforementioned result in SEM, hypothesis 3a (𝛾10= .4498, p < .001) has been supported by


Table 7 Null Model for OCBI


𝛾00 5.8186 .0486 119.639*** 39


Deviation

Variance

Component 𝜒2 df

𝜇0𝑗 .2590 .0671 140.2037*** 39

𝑟𝑖𝑗 .6331 .4008

Deviance 1278.0745

Note. N = 638; * p < .05, ** p < .01, *** p< .001

Table 8 Full Model for OCBI


𝛾00 3.2397 .2610 12.411*** 38

𝛾01 -1.4632 .5234 -2.796** 38

𝛾10 .4498(H3a) .0433 10.390*** 38

𝛾11 .2416 (H6a) .0826 2.927** 38


Deviation

Variance

Component 𝜒2 df

𝜇0𝑗 .8630 .74469 51.0015+ 38

𝜇1𝑗 .1307 .01708 47.6365 38

𝑟𝑖𝑗 .5783 .33439

Deviance 1168.956408

Note. N = 638; * p < .05, ** p < .01, *** p < .001

As for OCBO, however, due to the insignificance of slopes across groups in Random

coefficient regression model, the full model thereby would not be conducted which indicates

that H6b has been rejected.

5、Research Conclusions, Implications and Limitations

(1)、Research Discussions

A. Direct Effect of Individual Level

The empirical results of study show that organizational identification is positively related

with task performance (H1). In line with Turker (2008), employees’ organizational


14

identification has positive impact on employees’ task performance and attitudes. In light of

employees’ organizational identification with their companies, employees tend to devote extra

effort to achieve personal task performance on behalf of organizations and further enhance

organization’s overall interests (Carmeli, Gilat, & Waldman, 2007; Collier & Esteban, 2007;

Ellemers, De Gilder, & Haslam, 2004; Hansen, Dunford, Boss, Boss, & Angermeier, 2011;

Upham, 2006). Also, organizational identification is positively related with ethical behavior

(H2). On the basis of research by van Knippenberg and E. Sleebos, the crucial characteristics

that reflect organizational identification are self-reference and self-definition. The nature of

self-reference regarding organizational membership and self-definition provide the theoretical

basis for explaining the causes of organizational behavior, such as (ethical) decision-making

(Haslam et al., 2003; Hogg & Terry, 2001). Organizational identification enables individuals to

take organizational interest as the self -interest which may in turn enhance or shape individuals’

performance or behavior (van Knippenberg & Sleebos, 2006). In addition, organizational

identification is positively related with OCBI and OCBO (H3a and H3b). Turker (2008)

suggested that employees’ organizational identification has positive effect on their work

performance and behaviors. Upham (2006, p.88) indicated that such identification leads to

“employee actions that reinforce the organization and one’s status within it”. Consistent with

the results of this study, there is a large amount of literature showing that employees who have

a sense of belonging to an organization, they would contribute more to promote the

organization’s interests through in-role and extra-role behaviors (Carmeli et al., 2007; Collier

& Esteban, 2007; Ellemers, de Gilder, & Haslam, 2004; Upham, 2006; Widmeyer, Brawley, &

Carron, 1992).

B. Moderating Effect of SRHRM on the Relationship between Organizational

Identification and OCBI

The empirical results show that SRHRM moderates the relationship with OCBI (r = .242,

p < .01) (H6a) (see Figure 2). Indeed, implementing SRHRM successfully results in

organizations forming a positive organizational climate. Drawing on social identity theory, as

organizations are filled with such positive climates created by SRHRM, employees who have

organizational identification with their organizations will devote extra efforts and be willing to

take risks helping coworkers.

Moreover, according to social information processing theory (Salancik & Pfeffer, 1978),

as employees perceive their organizations which implement SRHRM, such organizational

climate conveys organizational values, norms and expectations to employees through CSR

trainings. Furthermore, employees, as adaptive organisms, adapt behaviors and attitudes to the

organizational climate. Thus, under such organizational climate, as employees feel themselves

to be regarded as legitimate and important members in their respective organizations, SRHRM

would reinforce and influence employees’ behaviors or attitudes to devote extra effort to help

their coworkers. For example, helping coworkers who have heavy workload or who are absent.


15

Figure 2 Moderating Effects of SRHRM on the Relationships between Organizational

Identification and OCBI

(2)、Theoretical Implications

This study extended the traditional CSR research by investigating the moderating effects

of SRHRM on employee task performance, ethical behavior and OCBs.

First, this study examines whether organizational identification would have a positive

impact on employees work performance and behaviors. The empirical results reveal that the

hypotheses in individual level are all supported. First, when employees who identify with their

organizations, this leads to the improvement of their task performance, ethical behavior and

OCB. The findings are consistent with Turker (2008), and Shen and Benson (2014) research

that suggested employee organizational identification is positively associated with their work

attitudes and behaviors underpinned by social identity theory. In addition, this study especially

found that organizational identification indeed positively influences employee ethical behavior

because any individual behavior that violates the laws would cause damage to organization’

interests or reputations and is not allowed in societal environment. Therefore, employees who

truly identify with the organizations would behave in an ethical manner.

Second, this study further examines whether SRHRM would reinforce employees who

have organizational identification to behave and perform much better on their behaviors and

performance. The empirical evidences show that SRHRM indeed reinforces the relationship

between organizational and OCBI. This is a great advancement in CSR research as OCBs has

a lot of potential benefits for coworkers by improvement of organizational effectiveness, job

performance and satisfaction, and interpersonal harmony (Mossholder et al., 2011; Ng & Dyne,

2005; Podsakoff, Mackenzie, Paine & Bachrach, 2000). According to social identity theory

(Ashforth & Mael, 1989) and social information processing theory (Salancik & Pfeffer, 1978),

as employees begin to take self-interest as organizational overall interest and have feeling of

belongings with their organizations, SRHRM indeed encourages and reinforce employees’

motivations to devote extra effort to benefit coworkers. In other words, employees, as adaptive

organism can perceive such positive organizational climate that SRHRM bring to organizations

and thus change their behaviors or attitudes.

Overall, SRHRM effectively has engaged employees collaborate with their teammates to

achieve organizational goals. The findings of this study extend traditional CSR research and

provide the academic field with meaningful implications.

3

3.5

4

4.5

5

5.5

6

6.5

7

Low Organizational

Identification

High Organizational

Identification

OC

BI

Low SRHRM

High SRHRM


16

(3)、Managerial Implications

Nowadays, a great deal of scholars and practitioners from multiple management

disciplines engage in the research of CSR in order to know how to apply CSR fields such as

marketing (Khan, Lew, & Park, 2015; Mishra & Modi, 2016; Nan & Heo, 2007), organizational

behavior (Glavas & Godwin, 2013) and finance (Flammer, 2015). They attempt to provide an

evidence regarding CSR that goes beyond improving financial impost and can enhance

corporate social performance. The most important thing is to increase organizational

competitive advantages by the engagement in CSR. For business managers or leaders, CSR has

thus become a key prior (McWilliams, Siegel, & Wright, 2006; Pfeffer, 2010; Porter & Kramer,

2011).

As a result, this study takes into account about how Taiwanese corporations effectively

implement SRHRM so as to motivate, encourage employees and develop employees’ potential

in line with the corporations’ goals. Based on the empirical findings of this study, formulating

and implementing appropriate SRHRM in term of company is very important policies. SRHRM

can bring a positive organizational climate or culture to organization and such positive

organizational climate influence employees’ behaviors and performance. Employees’

motivations to devote extra efforts helping their coworkers who are in needs are triggered and

reinforced by SRHRM policies in order to achieve organizational overall interests. Therefore,

it is a vital and empirical evidence found by this study for corporations to develop an appropriate

organizational climate through the implementation of SRHRM if they are to achieve and retain

their long-term competitiveness advantage in business and desired organizational outcomes.

(3)、Research Limitations and Suggestions for Future Study

This study sheds light on investigating whether and how organizational policies (i.e.

SRHRM) would have an impact on individual behaviors and performance (i.e., organizational

identification, task performance, ethical behavior and OCBs). However, noting the limitations

of this study is essential for the sake of facilitating further research.

First, the research is conducted in Taiwan, where national culture and related CSR

regulations are not similar to western countries. For example, in individualistic cultures, such

as the USA, the effect of organizational identification on OCB may be not that strong. As such,

it could be desirable to replicate this same research in western contexts.

Second, this study adopted a self-reporting survey that may have CMV-related problem.

In order to avoid potential CMV problem, this study suggests that a questionnaire should be

separated into two parts. One part is rated by employees. The other part is rated by supervisors.

In addition, this study utilizes cross-sectional data that can only explain the research at a

particular moment in time. As such, it is suggested that future research make use of longitudinal

data.

Third, regarding the sample size of HLM, although there are forty companies that have

participated in the study, the questionnaires barely exceed thirty employees of each company.

The insufficient sample sizes may result in lower reliability or ICC (Hofmann, 1997; Tse,

Dasborough, & Ashkansy, 2008). Thus, increasing sample sizes of individual level in future

studies is needed.

Fourth, the residual variance component of task performance, ethical behavior and OCBI

indicated that there might be other predictors that can explain part of the variance in the study.

Therefore, further research is essential to find out the potential independent variables or control

variables that can explain the research model, such as organizational tenure.


17

Fifth, limited by the functions of HLM statistical software, this study merely regards

SRHRM as a moderator. Thus, in future studies, SRHRM might be considered as an antecedent,

and other psychological behaviors (e.g., organizational commitment or organizational trust) can

be adopted as mediators to construct a research model by using Mplus or Multilevel Mediation

software.

References

Aguilera, R. V., Rupp, D. E., Williams, C. A., & Ganapathi, J. (2007). Putting the S back in

corporate social responsibility: A multilevel theory of social change in organizations.

Academy of Management Review, 32(3), 836-863.

Ashforth, B. E., Harrison, S. H., & Corley, K. G. (2008). Identification in organizations: An

examination of four fundamental questions. Journal of Management, 34(3), 325-374.

Ashforth, B. E., & Mael, F. (1989). Social identity theory and the organization. Academy of

Management Review, 14(1), 20-39.

Balmer, J. M., Fukukawa, K., & Gray, E. R. (2007). The nature and management of ethical

corporate identity: A commentary on corporate identity, corporate social responsibility

and ethics. Journal of Business Ethics, 76(1), 7-15.

Bartels, J., Peters, O., de Jong, M., Pruyn, A., & van der Molen, M. (2010). Horizontal and

vertical communication as determinants of professional and organizational

identification. Personnel Review, 39(2), 210-226.

Bhattacharya, C. B., & Sen, S. (2004). Doing better at doing good: When, why, and how

consumers respond to corporate social initiatives. California Management Review,

47(1), 9-24.

Carmeli, A., Gilat, G., & Waldman, D. A. (2007). The role of perceived organizational

performance in organizational identification, adjustment and job performance. Journal

of Management Studies, 44(6), 972-992.

Carroll, A. B. (1978). Linking business ethics to behavior in organizations. SAM Advanced

Management Journal, 43(3), 4-11.

Carroll, A. B. (1999). Corporate social responsibility: Evolution of a definitional construct.

Business & Society, 38(3), 268-295.

Carroll, A. B. (2016). Carroll’s pyramid of CSR: taking another look. International Journal of

Corporate Social Responsibility, 1(1), 3.

Collier, J., & Esteban, R. (2007). Corporate social responsibility and employee commitment.

Business ethics: A European review, 16(1), 19-33.

Dukerich JM, Golden BR, Shortell SM. (2002). Beauty is in the eye of the beholder: The impact

of organizational identification, identity, and image on the cooperative behaviors of

physicians. Administrative Science Quarterly, 47, 507–533.

Ellemers, N., De Gilder, D., & Haslam, S. A. (2004). Motivating individuals and groups at work:

A social identity perspective on leadership and group performance. Academy of

Management Review, 29(3), 459-478.

Ferrell, O., Gresham, L. G., & Fraedrich, J. (1989). A synthesis of ethical decision models for

marketing. Journal of Macromarketing, 9(2), 55-64.

Flammer, C. (2015). Does corporate social responsibility lead to superior financial performance?

A regression discontinuity approach. Management Science, 61(11), 2549-2568.

Garavan, T. N., & McGuire, D. (2010). Human resource development and society: Human

resource development’s role in embedding corporate social responsibility, sustainability,

and ethics in organizations. Advances in Developing Human Resources, 12(5), 487-507.

Glavas, A., & Godwin, L. N. (2013). Is the perception of ‘goodness’ good enough? Exploring


18

the relationship between perceived corporate social responsibility and employee

organizational identification. Journal of Business Ethics, 114(1), 15-27.

Handelman, J. M., & Arnold, S. J. (1999). The role of marketing actions with a social dimension:

Appeals to the institutional environment. Journal of Marketing, 33-48.

Hansen, S. D., Dunford, B. B., Alge, B. J., & Jackson, C. L. (2016). Corporate social

responsibility, ethical leadership, and trust propensity: A multi-experience model of

perceived ethical climate. Journal of Business Ethics, 137(4), 649-662.

Khan, Z., Lew, Y. K., & Park, B. I. (2015). Institutional legitimacy and norms-based CSR

marketing practices: Insights from MNCs operating in a developing economy.

International Marketing Review, 32(5), 463-491.

Klein, K. J., & Kozlowski, S. W. (2000). From micro to meso: Critical steps in conceptualizing

and conducting multilevel research. Organizational Research Methods, 3(3), 211-236.

Larson, B. V., Flaherty, K. E., Zablah, A. R., Brown, T. J., & Wiener, J. L. (2008). Linking

cause-related marketing to sales force responses and performance in a direct selling

context. Journal of the Academy of Marketing Science, 36(2), 271-277.

Lee, S. M. (1971). An empirical analysis of organizational identification. Academy of

Management Journal, 14(2), 213-226.

Lee, V. E. (2000). Using hierarchical linear modeling to study social contexts: The case of

school effects. Educational Psychologist, 35(2), 125-141.

Lee, E. M., Park, S. Y., & Lee, H. J. (2013). Employee perception of CSR activities: Its

antecedents and consequences. Journal of Business Research, 66(10), 1716-1724.

Luo, X., & Bhattacharya, C. B. (2006). Corporate social responsibility, customer satisfaction,

and market value. Journal of Marketing, 70(4), 1-18.

MacCallum, R. C., & Hong, S. (1997). Power analysis in covariance structure modeling using

GFI and AGFI. Multivariate Behavioral Research, 32(2), 193-210.

McWilliams, A., & Siegel, D. (2001). Corporate social responsibility: A theory of the firm

perspective. Academy of Management Review, 26(1), 117-127.

McWilliams, A., Siegel, D. S., & Wright, P. M. (2006). Introduction by guest editors corporate

social responsibility: international perspectives. Journal of Business Strategies, 23(1),

1.

Mishra, S., & Modi, S. B. (2016). Corporate social responsibility and shareholder wealth: the

role of marketing capability. Journal of Marketing, 80(1), 26-46.

Nan, X., & Heo, K. (2007). Consumer responses to corporate social responsibility (CSR)

initiatives: Examining the role of brand-cause fit in cause-related marketing. Journal of

Advertising, 36(2), 63-74.

Newman, A., Miao, Q., Hofman, P. S., & Zhu, C. J. (2016). The impact of socially responsible

human resource management on employees' organizational citizenship behaviour: the

mediating role of organizational identification. The International Journal of Human

Resource Management, 27(4), 440-455.

Orlitzky, M., Swanson, D. L., & Quartermaine, L. K. (2006). Normative myopia, executives'

personality, and preference for pay dispersion: Toward implications for corporate social

performance. Business & society, 45(2), 149-177.

Podsakoff, P. M., MacKenzie, S. B., Lee, J.-Y., & Podsakoff, N. P. (2003). Common method

biases in behavioral research: A critical review of the literature and recommended

remedies. Journal of Applied Psychology, 88(5), 879.

Podsakoff, P. M., & Organ, D. W. (1986). Self-reports in organizational research: Problems and

prospects. Journal of Management, 12(4), 531-544.


19

Rupp, D. E., Ganapathi, J., Aguilera, R. V., & Williams, C. A. (2006). Employee reactions to

corporate social responsibility: An organizational justice framework. Journal of

organizational Behavior, 27(4), 537-543.

Salancik, G. R., & Pfeffer, J. (1978). A social information processing approach to job attitudes

and task design. Administrative science quarterly, 224-253.

Shen, J., & Benson, J. (2014). When CSR Is a Social Norm. Journal of Management, 42(6),

1723-1746. doi:10.1177/0149206314522300

Shen, J., & Jiuhua Zhu, C. (2011). Effects of socially responsible human resource management

on employee organizational commitment. The International Journal of Human

Resource Management, 22(15), 3020-3035. doi:10.1080/09585192.2011.599951

Tajfel, H., & Turner, J. C. (1979). An integrative theory of intergroup conflict. The Social

Psychology of Intergroup Relations, 33(47), 74.

Trevino, L. K. (1986). Ethical decision making in organizations: A person-situation

interactionist model. Academy of Management Review, 11(3), 601-617.

Tse, H. H., & Dasborough, M. T. (2008). A study of exchange and emotions in team member

relationships. Group & Organization Management, 33(2), 194-215.

Turker, D. (2009). How corporate social responsibility influences organizational commitment.

Journal of Business Ethics, 89(2), 189.

Upham, S. (2006). A Model for Giving. Journal of Corporate Citizenship(22).

Valentine, S., & Fleischman, G. (2004). Ethics training and businesspersons’ perceptions of

organizational ethics. Journal of Business Ethics, 52(4), 391-400.

Valentine, S., & Fleischman, G. (2008). Ethics programs, perceived corporate social

responsibility and job satisfaction. Journal of Business Ethics, 77(2), 159-172.

van Knippenberg, D. (2000). Work motivation and performance: A social identity perspective.

Applied Psychology, 49, 357–371.

van Knippenberg, D., van Knippenberg, B., De Cremer, D., & Hogg, M. A. (2004). Leadership,

self, and identity: A review and research agenda. Leadership Quarterly, 15, 825–856.

Van Knippenberg, D., & Sleebos, E. (2006). Organizational identification versus organizational

commitment: self‐definition, social exchange, and job attitudes. Journal of

Organizational Behavior: The International Journal of Industrial, Occupational and

Organizational Psychology and Behavior, 27(5), 571-584.

Zenisek, T. J. (1979). Corporate social responsibility: A conceptualization based on

organizational literature. Academy of Management Review, 4(3), 359-368.

the moderating effect of socially responsible human resource … · 2019-06-24 · one major...

Documents