csr magisterij turker me

Influence of CSR Aspects on

Organizational Commitment What influence do the different CSR aspects have on the organizational commitment of Douwe

Egberts employees?

Name: T.A.M. Wijnants

ANR: 435337

Supervisor: Drs. Ir. K.M. Thomas

Second Reader: Dr. A.J.A.M. Naus

Number of words: 13.830

Faculty: Tilburg School of Economics and Management, Tilburg University

Thesis: Master thesis of the department of Organization & Strategy

Educational program: Master Strategic Management

Date of defence: 24th of August 2011

Master Thesis T.A.M. Wijnants

Influence of CSR Aspects on Organizational Commitment

1

Management summary

The main theoretical contribution of this research is to show that every Corporate Social

Responsibility (CSR) aspect influences organizational commitment. Finding out which aspects

influence organizational commitment of employees positively can contribute to making

communication of CSR more efficient and effective. To this CSR and organizational commitment are

defined and the influence of this relationship is reviewed in past literature. After assessing CSR

models of past research a new well based model is built to research the influence of CSR aspects on

organizational commitment. Using the organizational commitment questionnaire (OCQ) the

organizational commitment per aspect is measured and the variances of the results are analysed.

Resulting in the conclusion that the CSR aspects and the CSR dimensions they belong to have a

positive influence on organizational commitment. However there is found now statistically

significant difference between the means of organizational commitment of these aspects.

Foreword

After an extensive search for a topic during a graduation internship at Douwe Egberts/Sara Lee (DE)

this research idea was born out of a brainstorm with the Corporate Social Responsibility (CSR) team.

The CSR team had already done quite some research on what the company exactly did on CSR and

how they could communicate this in a clear way. After evaluating the whole introduction, one of the

main conclusions was they did not know what the employees thought of CSR and their role in it.

What do the employees find interesting and how could they be involved in the CSR projects in order

to feel proud and committed to the company. So this research will be done to answer these

questions but even more to demonstrate that creating awareness of CSR among employees can be

done more efficiently and effectively by researching the needs of the employees.

Firstly I would like to take this opportunity to thank the following persons that helped me during my

thesis. Starting with Marketing Manager Corporate Social Responsibility Paul Schoon of Douwe

Egberts for his cooperation in my research among the employees of Douwe Egberts. Thanks to him,

the entire research is made possible and the response rate of the questionnaire would never have

been this large without his cooperation. Moreover, I would like to thank Drs. Ir. KM Thomas for the

quality advice and active support during the writing process of my thesis. Thanks to her motivation

and confidence in my work, I was constantly encouraged to successfully conclude my thesis. I would

also like to thank Dr. A.J.A.M. Naus for his advice on the statistical part of my research. The

enthusiasm about my dataset and the suggestions of the possibilities of my data had a contagious

effect to get the most out of my results. Finally, I would like to thank my parents who supported me

during my entire study, in good and bad times the kept faith in my abilities.



2

Table of contents

Management summary ....................................................................................................................... 1

Foreword ............................................................................................................................................. 1

1: Introduction ......................................................................................................................................... 4

1.1: Background .................................................................................................................................. 4

1.2: Problem indication ....................................................................................................................... 5

1.3: Problem statement ...................................................................................................................... 6

1.4: Research strategy ......................................................................................................................... 6

1.5: Structure of the thesis ................................................................................................................. 6

2: Theoretical framework ........................................................................................................................ 7

2.1 CSR defined in literature ............................................................................................................... 7

2.2 Aspects of CSR ............................................................................................................................... 8

2.3 Organizational commitment of employees ................................................................................ 10

2.4 Effect of CSR on organizational commitment of employees ...................................................... 12

2.5 CSR Aspects and the DE employees’ organizational commitment ............................................. 14

2.5.1 People .................................................................................................................................. 14

2.5.2 Planet ................................................................................................................................... 15

2.5.3 Profit .................................................................................................................................... 16

2.6 Overview ..................................................................................................................................... 17

3: Research methodology ...................................................................................................................... 18

3.1 Research method ........................................................................................................................ 19

3.2 Research approach ...................................................................................................................... 19

3.3 Sample choice and sampling ....................................................................................................... 20

3.4 Collecting data using questionnaire ............................................................................................ 20

3.4.1 Dependent variable ............................................................................................................. 20

3.4.2 Independent variables ......................................................................................................... 21

3.4.3 Control variables .................................................................................................................. 22

3.4.4 Conditions of questionnaire ................................................................................................ 23

3.5 Data analysis ............................................................................................................................... 23

4: Results and Analysis .......................................................................................................................... 24

4.1 Results on Control Variables ....................................................................................................... 25

4.2 Ranking Aspects .......................................................................................................................... 26

4.3 Reliability OCQ Measures ............................................................................................................ 27

4.4 One-way between groups ANOVA for aspects on organizational commitment ........................ 27

4.5 Information questions ................................................................................................................. 29

4.6 Influence of control variables on differences between groups .................................................. 30

5: Conclusions, Limitations and Recommendations ............................................................................. 35

5.1 Conclusions ................................................................................................................................. 35

5.2 Limitations ................................................................................................................................... 37



3

5.3 Recommendations ...................................................................................................................... 37

References ............................................................................................................................................. 39



4

1: Introduction

In this chapter the motivation for the research and the structure of this paper are introduced. First

the background of the problem that is dealt with in this research is outlined. In paragraph 1.2 the

problem itself is defined in the problem indication. This indication leads to the formulation of the

problem statement and the resulting research questions in paragraph 1.3. Paragraph 1.4 briefly

discusses the research strategy and finally in paragraph 1.5 the structure of the rest of the research is

clarified.

1.1: Background

There is a lot of discussion about the definition of Corporate Social Responsibility (CSR) and how it is

implemented by companies. The CSR definition of Brundtland (1987): “Paths of progress which meet

the needs and aspirations of the present generation without compromising the ability of future

generations to meet their needs.” is used by a lot of companies including Douwe Egberts (DE) where

this research takes place. DE actively uses the definition within their CSR program as a benchmark for

all CSR projects that are undertaken. Since DE realizes that CSR can play a very important role in

business they actively invest in CSR. Past research has shown that solid CSR initiatives and projects

seen from the resource based view can be a rare resource of a company and difficult to imitate.

Therefore it can create a real competitive advantage for a company in the long run (Graafland, 2002).

Porter and Kramer (2006) state that environmental consciousness can improve business performance

because environment friendly companies can create competitive advantage with cost reduction,

differentiation, positive image and strategic vision. So in order to perform well, a company needs to

invest in the future and show to their stakeholders that the company works in a profitable but

sustainable way.

DE is already involved in several CSR initiatives and projects for many years. These projects and

initiatives are communicated separately to the outside world as well as the employees, but they are

never combined in a simple and clear overview. So in order to get a good overview for the company

itself and all its stakeholders, a communication plan for these CSR initiatives and projects is

developed. With this communication material DE is able to show to its stakeholders in which

projects the company is involved and what the company does for the environment and society. Last

December this communication plan called “More Sustainable from Cultivation to Cup” has been

launched for the employees. With the brochures and flyers of this plan it is easy to show employees,

customers and prospects what DE has to offer on the area of CSR (see Appendix A figure A.1).



5

1.2: Problem indication

To make the communication plan that DE launches a success in their communication to the

stakeholders, the plan needs to be adopted in the best way possible by the employees. The

communication plan is evaluated by 100 employees and results show that there are multiple subjects

of the communication plan that can be improved. The top three recommendations are:

• Workers want more specific information about certain projects (18%)

• The employees want to stay up to date on the status of the projects (10%)

• The employees would like to participate and contribute to the projects (9%)

Recent scientific research confirms that information and participation are important to employees.

Even the smallest initiatives that employees can be informed of and participate in have large

influence on their commitment towards their company (Nord and Fuller, 2009). Kim, Lee, Kim and

Lee (2010) claim that participation to CSR has a more direct influence on the commitment of

employees towards a company then the single associated feeling with CSR projects.

The importance of CSR to the employees of DE is also proven by a global survey among the staff of

the parent company Sara Lee. In these standings Corporate Responsibility was put as the number

one priority of employees scoring 81 points out of 100 on importance (see Appendix A figure A.2). In

order to make CSR a success at DE, the employees need to believe and feel that they can identify

themselves with the projects. So DE has to meet their employees in their needs in order to keep

them committed to the company. Thus the needs of the employees should be researched. With this

knowledge the company is able to focus their information flow on the most influential aspects,

therefore informing their employees more efficiently. With these updates employees can be better

informed about CSR and as implied in prior research, become more committed towards DE.

The main theoretical contribution of this research is to show that every CSR aspect influences

organizational commitment. Finding out which aspects influence organizational commitment of

employees positively can contribute to making communication of CSR more efficient and effective.

Subsequently, employees are more committed to their company and become ‘ambassadors’ of the

CSR aspects. With the support of the employees the CSR aspects can be built into a sustainable

strategic competitive advantage.



6

1.3: Problem statement

Following this problem indication the next problem statement is formulated:

What influence do the different CSR aspects have on the organizational commitment of Douwe

Egberts employees?

Derived from this problem statement the next research questions are formulated:

1. How is CSR defined?

2. How can CSR be divided in aspects of People, Planet and Profit?

3. What determines organizational commitment of employees?

4. What effect does CSR have on the organizational commitment of (DE) employees?

1.4: Research strategy

To define the variables that are used in this research, past literature on these subjects will be

consulted. To complete the framework and to make sure the composed model for this research is

applicable for practice, CSR reports of companies in the Fast Mover Consumer Goods (FMCG)

industry are reviewed. Finally the variables and the relationship of these variables in the model are

tested with an online questionnaire among the employees of DE. The results are analyzed to find if

and what kind of relationship there is between the variables of CSR aspects and organizational

commitment.

1.5: Structure of the thesis

In chapter two the research questions are answered. The first four paragraphs in chapter two deal

with one research question each and lastly paragraph 2.5 explains the formulated model. These

answers provide the theoretical framework for this research. The subsequent methodology chapter

explains how this research is composed and conducted. The results and analysis of this research are

presented in the fourth chapter. In chapter five the research questions and therefore the problem

statement is answered , resulting in derived conclusions in paragraph 5.1. Lastly, limitations and

resulting recommendations for future research are presented in respectively paragraph 5.2 and 5.3.



7

2: Theoretical framework

This chapter starts with defining CSR in paragraph 2.1. In paragraph 2.2 the models that are built to

measure CSR are reviewed. Paragraph 2.3 discusses what determines organizational commitment of

employees. In paragraph 2.4 the role that CSR plays on employees and their organizational

commitment is explained. Subsequently paragraph 2.5 elucidates the model of CSR aspects as

defined for this research. In the last paragraph the model that is used to measure the organizational

commitment towards the CSR aspects is shown and the findings of this complete chapter are

summarized.

2.1 CSR defined in literature

In prior research the definition of CSR has been used in various ways by many authors. In the 1980’s

the Brundtland report establishes the connection between environmental degradation and social-

economic development. The environmental sustainability can only be accomplished if subjects as

poverty and lack of education, for example, are addressed. Brundtland (1987) summarizes the ideas

of research until this point in time in the definition: “Paths of progress which meet the needs and

aspirations of the present generation without compromising the ability of future generations to meet

their needs.” In the 1990’s, Elkington shed his light on the consequences of sustainable development

for companies. He states that companies have environmental, social and economic impacts on

society and should contribute to sustainable development. A company that takes its responsibility

and has a positive impact on these elements gains the trust of society and ensures the continuity of

the company itself. Corporate sustainability requires companies to perform responsibly in the

economic, environmental, and social dimensions. Elkington (1997) refers to this as “the triple bottom

line” of people, planet and profit of which companies need to satisfy the needs of their stakeholders.

In the past years CSR has increasingly been in the news, with bans of products by consumers and

campaigns against brands. The previously mentioned bans and campaigns are both consequences of

companies that violate their social responsibility. Examples of these consequences can be found in

Appendix B.1.

As already stated before the concept of CSR seems difficult to pin down in previous literature and it is

difficult to judge what is part of CSR and what is not. In 1999 the Social Economic Council (SER) was

asked by the Dutch government to prepare a report about CSR. The SER report examines the

evolution of CSR and the role of companies in society and was published in 2001. The SER came up

with the next definition of Corporate Social Responsibility, which incorporates two elements. The SER

builds on the triple P bottom line of Elkington, because companies can not only create economic

value but can also create value on the environmental and social dimension. The second element in

the SER rapport is the relationship of the company with its stakeholders and the society as a whole. A



8

company is described as a form of a cooperation of different stakeholders; the company has to

balance partially between conflicting interests of these stakeholders. If a company wants to maintain

good stakeholder relations it has to be transparent and open up their way of doing business to all

stakeholders. Therefore they have to stay in a continuous interactive dialogue with all the interested

parties of the company. The SER distinguishes between primary and other stakeholders. Primary

stakeholders are employees and shareholders, because they have structural contact with the

managers of the company. Other stakeholders are consumers, suppliers, competitors, the

government and the society as a whole. They are all in contact with the company and have a certain

interest in the companies’ activities. This last definition by the SER will be used in this research.

Hereafter CSR is defined for this research, by covering the different aspects that of CSR.

2.2 Aspects of CSR

This paragraph reviews in which aspects of people, planet and profit CSR can be divided according to

literature. In literature models are built to measure the level of CSR that is applied by a company.

This is particularly important to be able to make a company accountable for its responsibilities and to

be able to assess its performance in this regard. Therefore it is necessary to develop methods to be

able to assess the CSR performance of a company. In 2001 Kok, van der Wiele, McKenna and Brown

tried to create a CSR audit to let CSR play a larger part in Quality Awards like the European Quality

Award. This distinction is awarded annually by the European Foundation for Quality Management to

the organization that is the best proponent in Europe of Total Quality Management. This was the

beginning of measurement of CSR, when it was only a part of the total quality of management by a

company. The aspects used in this audit are divided in external and internal environment. See Figure

C.1 in appendix C to view all the aspects Kok et al. (2001) used. What started as just a part of a total

quality framework later became a benchmark on its own. Graafland, Eijffinger, Stoffele, Smid, and

Coldeweijer (2004) created a CSR benchmark after research among Dutch companies that makes it

possible to compare the scores of companies and creates more transparency. With a mark for CSR

stakeholders are able to judge how responsible the company really is and is not judged on some eye-

catching incidents. By benchmarking a company knows where it stands in comparison to their

contenders and is able to evaluate and improve the process. These CSR benchmarks divide CSR into

different aspects in order to rate the total CSR activity of a company. The rating of Graafland et al.

(2004) is partly based on opinions of different stakeholders about the activity of the company in the

different aspects. Company reports on CSR and other public sources are also consulted to rate the

performance on CSR. This is to ensure non-biased answers of the stakeholders. Nowadays, these

company CSR reports are more reliable due to guidelines like the Global Reporting Initiative (GRI)

Sustainability Reporting Guidelines (2011). The GRI is an organization that standardized the

sustainability reporting, after thorough research and cooperation with progressive companies and



9

research specialists, and wrote a guideline for companies to make the reporting of companies less

biased and more comparable. Benchmarks like Graafland et al. (2004) also use this GRI reporting

guideline (2011) to select their indicators for CSR. The aspects used in the benchmark of Graafland et

al. (2004) are related to economic, ecological and social sustainability for the different stakeholders.

This is completely in line with the CSR definition of the SER (2001). The measure is built on only Dutch

companies, and since the Netherlands is a rather small player globally, the results should be tested in

a larger economy. The aspects of CSR used by this research are shown in Figure C.2 of appendix C.

Lindgreen, Swaen and Johnston (2009) investigate 401 U.S. organizations at their actual CSR practices

related to their different stakeholder groups. The general conclusion in this research is that every

company has different priorities in CSR. The choice for particular CSR practices depends on the type

of stakeholders the organization considers important. In general the employees are seen as the most

important stakeholders following this research. On a seven-point scale the employees indicate that

their organizations have adopted the most specific CSR practices relating to employees with a mean

of 5,29 (see Figure C.3 of appendix C). On a seven-point scale with a seven for well adopted and a

one for badly adopted, this is a very positive score and above the highest average score of all

stakeholders. The CSR practices Lindgreen et al. used in their research along with their main

conclusion can be viewed in Figure C.3 of appendix C. To measure CSR more accurately the aspect list

becomes longer and longer. This makes it difficult to do research due to the extensive

questionnaires. With long surveys, leading to a declined response rate and affected reliability. So

Turker (2009a) tried to shrink the list of aspects to a level where the model is still reliable. This

research starts with aspects derived from multiple scales in previous literature. After several pilots

the list shrunk to eighteen aspects that were used in the final survey. After analysis one aspect was

dropped and the remaining aspects explained 71% of the model. The CSR aspects that were used in

the final survey are displayed in Figure C.4 of appendix C. When a benchmark is built on a research in

just one single country it tends to be biased and cannot be generalized over more countries. This is a

fact for all previously mentioned studies. In 2010 the independent global non-profit organization

People 4 Planet launched their benchmark of Global Sustainability Standards for Products. They fill

the gap of a lacking global standard for sustainability on multiple dimensions. The transparency of

CSR efforts improves even more when the benchmarking of companies is done by independent

institutes (Graafland et al., 2004). Such a generally accepted, global sustainable product standard

that is developed and supported by a multi-stakeholder process provides an easy understandable

framework for a complex project. It is a foothold for companies to enhance product sustainability

and a structure to apply specific standards for a product. And finally the standard makes it possible to

provide uniform information for the stakeholders.



10

The framework is built on international conventions, regulations and guidelines. To view these

guidelines see Figure C.5 of appendix C. The aspects that People 4 Earth uses in their benchmark are

shown below in Figure 2.1.

Figure 2.1: Global Sustainability Standards for Products of People 4 Earth (2010)

With this last clear and general benchmark as guideline and the knowledge of the previous

benchmarks, the model for this research will be formed to invest the influence of the aspects of CSR

instead of the program as a whole. In order to know what influence CSR has on employees and their

organizational commitment, the way organizational commitment can be determined will be

reviewed first.

2.3 Organizational commitment of employees

In literature there are two main streams on defining what determines organizational commitment of

employees. The first stream is led by the definition of Mowday, Porter and Steers (1979); they define

organizational commitment as the level of relatedness to which employees internalize themselves

with the values of the company and prefer to help the company (Mowday et al., 1979). Mowday et

al. (1982, p27) adjusted their definition and made it more specific after further research:

“The relative strength of an individual’s identification with and involvement in a particular

organization. Conceptually, it can be characterized by at least three factors:

1. a strong belief in and acceptance of the organization’s goals and values;

2. a willingness to exert considerable effort on behalf of the organization; and

3. a strong desire to maintain membership in the organization.”

Following this definition it can be stated that strong belief and the acceptance of the company goals

indicates that a person is proud to work for that company. It states that to feel committed to a

company it is important you feel that you share the same values as well.



11

These two determinants can be retrieved from the first part of the definition. That putting effort in

and working hard for the company contributes to the involvement of an employee with the

company, can be derived from the second part of the definition. And in the last part loyalty seems to

determine a large part of organizational commitment (Mowday, 1998).

The second stream on research of organizational commitment is led by Meyer and Allen (1991). They

propose a new organizational commitment definition with three components. They state that

organizational commitment is a psychological state that shows the employee’s relationship with a

company and has an impact on the decision to stay at a company. The three components in this

definition of organizational commitment are:

1. Affective Commitment: An employees’ psychological attachment to the company.

2. Continuance Commitment: Costs for the employee associated with leaving the company.

3. Normative Commitment: Perceived obligation to remain at the company.

As they explain themselves: “Affective commitment refers to the employee’s emotional attachment

to, identification with and involvement in the organization. Employees with a strong affective

commitment continue employment with the organization because they want to do so. Continuance

commitment refers to an awareness of the costs associated with leaving the organization. Employees

whose primary link to the organization is based on continuance commitment remain because they

need to do so. Finally normative commitment reflects a feeling of obligation to continue

employment. Employees with a high level of normative commitment feel that they ought to remain

with the organization.” (Meyer and Allen, 1991, p 67)

Both streams developed Organizational Commitment Questionnaires (OCQ) to measure how these

determinants of organizational commitment together can be measured and determine the level of

organizational commitment of an employee. The Organizational Commitment Questionnaire (OCQ)

developed by Mowday et al. (1979) was the first designed instrument to measure the organizational

commitment. The OCQ instrument contained initially fifteen items to measure the determinants of

organizational commitment and therefore the value of organizational commitment in total (see

appendix D Figure D.1 for the items). The research was held among 2563 employees working in a

wide variety of jobs in different public and private companies, so the OCQ is considered to be

generalizable. The representative research proved to be a good predictive and reliable instrument

after multiple tests on validity and reliability. In later research Mowday et al. (1982) conclude that

after reviewing the results and performing additional tests, very similar results were obtained with a

questionnaire of nine items, as compared to the initial fifteen entries in the first study. So the

questionnaire can be reduced but the reliability of the results stays nearly the same.



12

The initial OCQ model by Myer and Allen (1991) contains twenty-four items to determine the three

commitment components (see Figure D.2 of appendix D to view the items). After a review on their

results and more research on other respondents, Meyer and Allen (1993) concluded that eighteen

items were also sufficient enough to reliably measure organizational commitment.

Both OCQ measurements are still in use; the OCQ by Mowday et al. (1982) however is regarded to be

predominantly assessing the affective form of commitment (Mowday, 1998). Previous analytic

studies have shown that each form of commitment is associated with labour turnover and intentions

to leave the organization but suggest that a stronger relationship exists between affective

commitment and a couple of other desirable employee outcomes such as: attendance, job

performance, stress health, work-nonwork conflict (Meyer, Stanley, Herscovitch and Topolnytsky,

2002). Moreover affective commitment above others is fairly strongly related to positive attitudes in

the workplace. This implies that affective commitment is considered to be the most important

component of commitment for the positive approach of commitment. Studies investigating the

relationship between CSR performance and commitment have typically focused on affective

commitment (Brammer, Millington & Rayton, 2007) because of this. Another reason for the choice of

affective commitment in relation to CSR research is that being a member of a favourably reputable

organization can enhance an employee’s social identity and influence the affective component rather

than continuance and normative components (Turker, 2009b). For these reasons the choice is made

to research the relationship between the affective component of organizational commitment and the

aspects of CSR in this paper. And since the scale of OCQ by Mowday et al. (1982) is the most

frequently used and reliable measure of affective commitment (Turker, 2009b), this measurement

will be the guideline in the measurement of organizational commitment in this research. The next

paragraph reviews the effect that the already reviewed CSR has on organizational commitment.

2.4 Effect of CSR on organizational commitment of employees

Branco and Rodgriues (2006) use the resource based perspectives to research why firms engage in

CSR activities. The result reveals that companies engage in CSR because they believe it helps them to

gather a competitive advantage. The results of this research shows that the external benefits of CSR

can directly be related to the effect on corporate reputation. Therefore, Branco and Rodgriues (2006)

state that firms with a good social responsibility reputation can improve relations with internal and

external factors. Accordingly they can even attract better employees or increase current employees

motivations, morale, commitment and loyalty to the company.

Most studies have focused on the external part of CSR by looking at the influence of CSR on

prospective employees. These studies show how a socially responsible reputation of a company

influences corporate attractiveness for prospective employees such as students, or MBA students

(Albinger and Freeman, 2000; Blackhaus, Stone and Heiner, 2002).



13

The effect of CSR on organizational attractiveness is stronger for people who are looking for a job and

have plenty of job choices (Albinger and Freeman, 2000). When these jobseekers already have more

knowledge of CSR or are directly involved with issues that a CSR project of a company deals with,

they are even more sensitive to CSR (Blackhaus et al., 2002). This shows that people would take a job

only to be able to work for a certain company, implying that CSR has an influence on this loyalty

point of organizational commitment. Montgomery and Ramus (2003) even found that MBAs are

willing to partly ignore the financial benefits in order to work for a company with a good reputation

of CSR. This implies that employees would turn down offers with higher salaries to be able to work

for a certain company. This shows that CSR influences organizational commitment on this loyalty

item. The image of a company can be formed by CSR even if the applicant has had no previous

interaction with a company, because a company’s social performance sends signals to prospective

job applicants about what it would be like to work for this company (Greening and Turban, 2000).

CSR can, therefore, be seen as useful for attracting the most qualified employees and is an important

component of corporate attractiveness, corporate image and reputation.

CSR directed towards employees can be perceived positively by both prospective employees and

current employees. According to social identity theory corporate social performance can be

expected to contribute positively to the attraction, retention and motivation of employees because

they are likely to identify strongly with positive organizational values (Peterson, 2004). Identification

with organizational values is also a determinant of organizational commitment as mentioned in

paragraph 2.3. So it can be stated that CSR has in influence on the organizational values.

Commitment of employees towards these values of CSR is very important, for example

environmental policy demonstrates that employees’ support is necessary to secure that the CSR

programs and policies are executed effectively (Ramus and Steger, 2000). This research also shows

that employees are the most important link to implement CSR strategies.

The last decades, people have become more aware of the extent and consequences of environment

degradation. Therefore employees prefer to work in socially responsible companies and their

organizational commitment level is positively affected by CSR to society, natural environment, next

generations, nongovernmental organizations employees and customers (Turker, 2009b). CSR gives a

good example of what the company stands for and gives an employee a weapon to defend

themselves and the company to external stakeholders. Good deeds of companies motivate

employees to discuss with others outside the company and feel a strong sense of commitment to the

company (Stawiski, Deal and Gentry, 2010). Generally stated, if an employee starts to be proud of

being a member of socially responsible organization, his or her work attitudes can be influenced

positively (Brammer et al., 2007; Peterson, 2004). Being proud and loyal to a company are also

important determinants of organizational commitment as mentioned earlier in paragraph 2.3.



14

So past literature shows that CSR clearly has an influence on these determinants. The research of

Bhattacharya et al. (2008) found the following positive outcomes of CSR on employees organizational

commitment:

• Internal (mind of an employee): high level of commitment to their own work, greater morale,

dedication to excellence in work tasks. This all leads to satisfaction in their job, a sense of pride

towards the company and a feeling of well being in general.

• External (behaviour of an employee):

Reduction in absenteeism and employee retention, these aspects inspires the employees to work

harder, be more productive and focus more on quality.

Working harder is indicated in paragraph 2.3 as one of the determinants of organizational

commitment as well and this research shows CSR has an influence on this determinant. Now the

determinants of organizational commitment and the influence of CSR on them is reviewed, the

model that is composed and used in this research is explained in the next paragraph.

2.5 CSR Aspects and the DE employees’ organizational commitment

With the knowledge of past literature a simple but well substantiated model is built. The model

contains twelve aspects equally divided over the three dimensions of CSR that are mentioned by

Elkington (1997) and the definition of SER (2001). The guideline for the people and planet dimension

is the model of People 4 Earth (2010) supported by the other models discussed in paragraph 2.2. The

profit dimension is mainly formed by the other models discussed in 2.2 since People 4 Earth (2010)

does not include this dimension. All dimensions are also checked on their role in actual CSR reports.

The dimension people will be handled first in 2.5.1, followed by planet in 2.5.2 and profit in 2.5.3.

2.5.1 People

The dimension People contains two large focus groups that a producing company works with. The

employees are an important focus group because they produce, transport and sell the products of

the company. The society is the other large focus group of people that a company does their

business with; the company buys products from and sells products to the society (Elkington, 1997;

SER, 2001). In figure 2.1 these two focus groups are placed as subjects within People and their most

common mentioned aspects in literature and CSR reports of companies. The aspects of the subject

employees are divided in the working rights that a company handles and the training opportunities

the employees are offered (Kok et al., 2001; Graafland et al., 2004; Lindgreen et al., 2004; Turker,

2009a; Planet 4 Earth, 2010). The subject society is divided in the projects that are supported in the

country of origin of the main raw materials production and the projects that are established in the

local market where the product is produced and sold (Kok et al., 2001; Graafland et al., 2004;

Lindgreen et al., 2004; Turker, 2009a; Planet 4 Earth, 2010).



15

For a more thorough explanation of the content of these aspects and the more detailed references

these aspects are build on you can find these in Appendix E, respectively Figure E.1 to E.4 explain

these aspects of People. The next P of Elkington (1997) is Planet.

Figure 2.1 Model of the dimension People and corresponding references

2.5.2 Planet

Regarding the planet part of CSR, most companies mainly have two head subjects. On the one side

companies employ the conservation of the environment and on the other side they utilize reducing

the impact of the production process on the environment. The environment needs to be protected in

order to make sure future generations have no problems with their resources and health. Products

need to be developed with sustainable resources in order to guarantee that the needs of future

generations can still be met. To minimize the impact of production to the environment companies

need to innovate the production and disposal methods (Elkington, 1997; SER, 2001). In figure 2.2 you

see the two head subjects within Planet and their most common mentioned aspects in literature and

in CSR reports of companies. The reduction of the impact that is made on the environment is divided

in on one side the minimization of waste that is produced during the production process and after

the product is used and thrown away. The other part is the reduction of the C02 gas emission by

producing and using environment friendly generated energy and using the energy efficiently. Besides

reducing the effect on the environment it is also important to produce with sustainable resources

and protect and improve the condition of the environment(Kok et al., 2001; Graafland et al., 2004;

Lindgreen et al., 2004; Turker, 2009a; Planet 4 Earth, 2010). This part of Planet labelled as the

conservation subject is divided between the conservation of the product and the production factors



16

firstly and secondly the environment as a whole (Kok et al., 2001; Graafland et al., 2004; Lindgreen et

al., 2004; Turker, 2009a; Planet 4 Earth, 2010). The elaborate explanation of these aspects and the

references on which these aspects are composed are shown in Appendix E, more specifically figure

E.5 to E.8 explain these aspects of Planet. The last P that Elkington (1997) refers to is that of Profit.

Figure 2.2 Model of the dimension Planet and corresponding references

2.5.3 Profit

The last dimension of the triple P bottom line is profit. This dimension plays a very decisive role in

CSR. When a CSR project is not profitable or at least break even, it can damage the value of the

company. Besides, profit is a dimension that is somewhat underexposed in research on CSR. Most

research is focused on the impact of CSR on financial performance of a company, but not very often

as a part of CSR itself (Elkington, 1997; SER, 2001). The main parts that do emerge in the literature

and practice in the form of CSR reports of companies are rewards and values (see figure 2.3). To

encourage good content it is stimulating to reward people who lead by example. The two groups

who can be rewarded for their effort are the suppliers of the raw materials if they deliver quality and

the employees if they achieve their goals. This creates an extra incentive besides the morale effort to

perform in CSR (Kok et al., 2001; Graafland et al., 2004; Lindgreen et al., 2004; Turker, 2009a). Even

more important is the suggestion that CSR really delivers value to the company, be it directly

financially, or be it by increasing the image of the company (Kok et al., 2001; Graafland et al., 2004;

Lindgreen et al., 2004; Turker, 2009a). Appendix E (figure E.9 to figure E.12) can be consulted for a

more detailed explanation and references of these aspects of Profit. In the next paragraph the

conceptual model derived of this theoretical framework is shown and chapter 2 is summarized.



17

Figure 2.3 Model of the dimension Profit and corresponding references

2.6 Overview

The conceptual model that can be formed now that the theoretical framework is complete is shown

in figure 2.4. With the choice for the CSR definition of SER the importance of the dimensions People,

Planet and Profit and the relation with the stakeholders are pinpointed in paragraph 2.1. Followed by

the review of the aspects used within CSR in paragraph 2.2, the current picture of CSR is outlined.

The contents of the aspects in the model used in this research are formed by the literature as

described in paragraph 2.5 and in Appendix D. In practice all the various CSR projects of a company

can be divided over the aspects in this model to which the particular project contributes to. For the

choices in the classification of the aspects, the model of Planet 4 Earth was a guideline along with the

CSR reports of a number of large FMCG companies active in the Netherlands. The reports of these

companies are studied for the classification of this model: Douwe Egberts / Sara Lee, Unilever,

Nestle, Heinz and FrieslandCampina. The reason is that the model therefore is well applicable in

general for the rest of this sector in which this research is done. The general descriptions of the

above aspects of the research should only be replaced by the implementation of the CSR aspects by

the company, in this research DE. For the interpretation of DE of this model view the questionnaire in

appendix F figure F.1. In this questionnaire questions are included for DE to research how they could

increase commitment of employees towards the aspects of CSR and what is the best way to do this.

These questions are formulated after reviewing past literature on CSR and organizational

commitment. Since these questions are not part of the scientific research this review is shown in

Appendix F figure F.3.



18

Figure 2.4: Conceptual model of aspects of CSR commitment as defined by (Elkington, 1997; SER, 2001;

Kok et al., 2001; Graafland et al., 2004; Lindgreen et al., 2004; Turker, 2009a; Planet 4 Earth, 2010)

The organizational commitment to the aspects of CSR are measured using the definition and

measurement of Mowday et al. (1982) on organizational commitment in paragraph 2.3. This

measurement is done because the influence of CSR on the main determinants of organizational

commitment is found in paragraph 2.4. Determinants such as loyalty and being proud of the

company, identifying with the values of the company and the willingness to put in the maximum

effort for the company are found influenced by CSR in 2.4. Al these results together form the

conceptual model shown in figure 2.4. The organizational commitment per aspect together form the

organizational commitment towards the dimension of people, planet and profit they belong to.

These dimensions together form the influence of CSR on organizational commitment in total as

shown in figure 2.4. The next chapter explains how this research is composed using the model of CSR

aspects formulated in this paragraph.

3: Research methodology

This chapter discusses the methods that are used for this research. First, the research method will be

explained in paragraph 3.1. In paragraph 3.2 the research approach is addressed followed by the

sample choice and sampling in paragraph 3.3. Subsequently, the way the data is collected is handled

in paragraph 3.4. To close this chapter the way the data is analyzed is explained in paragraph 3.5.



19

3.1 Research method

For this study primary, secondary and tertiary literature sources are used. For the research of CSR a

number of primary sources such as CSR reports from companies are used, but also publications and

reports from governments and independent organizations about CSR. For the definitions and

relationships between CSR and commitment secondary literature such as journals and books are the

main literature sources. These journals and books were found through tertiary literature sources

such as indexes of the search portal of the University of Tilburg and the online academic citation

index of Web of Science (Saunders, Lewis and Thornhill , 2009). Search terms such as CSR,

sustainability, employees, commitment and derivatives thereof are used to collect literature for this

research. The sources used for this study are of course selected by relevance of the information for

this research. Only the weight and reliability of the research is checked by the impact factor of the

journal in which the research is published and/or the number of times the research is cited since the

publication. Consulted sources are for instance highly respected journals as Academy of

Management Journal. However sources also include journals related to the main topics of CSR such

as the Journal of Business Ethics. For organizational commitment is the Human Resource

Management Review a good example. Ultimately, the snowball technique is applied to the already

found literature through search results to make sure that the widest and fullest possible picture of

the issues can be outlined(Saunders et al, 2009).

3.2 Research approach

The approach of this research can be termed as deductive since the relationship between two

variables is researched and the decisive factors that influence this relationship are determined.

Thereafter this relationship is measured with the use of a newly formed model. Firstly both variables,

CSR and organizational commitment, are defined using academic literature. Also, the literature is

used to examine past research on the relationship between these variables. After this framework is

clear, this research tries to find out how this relationship between these variables is established.

After the results of this research are shown, these results are used to draw conclusions about the

additional effects of these outcomes for practice and future research. Therefore the purpose of this

study is therefore ‘descripto-explanatory’ (Saunders et al, 2009).

The research is based on primary quantitative data that tries to indicate a relationship between

variables. Since this data is collected only once among a large population of people, the easiest way

to obtain and process this data is by using the survey strategy. To be more precise the questionnaire

data collection technique is employed (Saunders et al, 2009). Since the questionnaire was only sent

out once to one sample group, this research can be called cross-sectional (Saunders et al, 2009).



20

3.3 Sample choice and sampling

This research uses a questionnaire to obtain the data needed to study the relationship between CSR

and organizational commitment of employees. Since the chance of a case to be selected for this

research is equal to all cases the sampling technique is considered as a probability type (Saunders et

al, 2009). The sampling frame of this research is clear and is formed by the employees of DE. The

total amount of employees of DE in the Netherlands is 2229 and 1000 of them are in possession of a

corporate email address. After ten days 299 employees had responded to the questionnaire. The

survey software allowed students to do free research until a maximum of 300 respondents. Since the

company did not want to invest in the possibility to enter more respondents, the questionnaire

closed and the sample size was complete at a total amount of response of 30% of the approached

sample. So the first 299 respondents that reacted to the questionnaire form the sample used in this

research. A sample size of 243 respondents would make the sample reliable for a 90% confidence

level to generalize over the whole population (Pallant, 2010).

3.4 Collecting data using questionnaire

The primary data is collected by a protected online questionnaire among all the employees that are

in possession of a corporate email address. All questions used in this questionnaire are closed

questions because of the large sample and the convenience for data analysis (Saunders et al., 2009).

For the composition of the questionnaire it is important to have a clear view on the dependent,

independent and the control variables that are going to be measured. First the dependent variable

will be handled in paragraph 3.4.1 followed by the independent variable in paragraph 3.4.2 and the

control variables in paragraph 3.4.3. This paragraph is concluded by subparagraph 3.4.4 that shows

the conditions under which the questionnaires are completed.

3.4.1 Dependent variable

The dependent variable in this research is organizational commitment and the opinion of the

employees is asked in the different dimensions of CSR. The measurement of this variable will be on a

scale based on six questions as used by Marsden, Kalleberg and Cook (1993). The questions used in

this research constructing the scale that is analyzed are shown in figure 3.1.



21

Figure 3.1: Adjusted six questions commitment measure

The wordings of these questions correspond to that used by Marsden et al. (1993) and are only

rephrased to make them applicable to this research (Saunders et al., 2009). This measure was chosen

because the organizational commitment is being measured three times, for every CSR dimension. To

keep the survey feasible for the respondents, but still reliable for research the six questions based

scale of Marsden was used. The main determinants of organizational commitment that are measured

in this six items OCQ are derived from the definition of Mowday et al. (1982) as stated earlier.

Question one to five bear a close resemblance to items one, three, four, five and six of the fifteen

item Organizational Commitment Questionnaire (OCQ) of Mowday et al (1982, p221) which are the

same questions as in the earlier published OCQ of 1979 (see Appendix D.1). The six questions that

are used in this research capture the major aspects of organizational (affective) commitment

definition measured by the OCQ (see Mowday et al. 1982 p 27).

Question one reflects the component of willingness to exert effort on behalf of the organization,

which covers the second part of definition (see page 10 for the definition). Question four and five

concern the belief in and acceptance of the organization’s goals and values of the employees; which

refers to the first part of the definition. Question number two, three and six measure the desire to

maintain membership in the organization, representing the third part of the definition. All questions

are answered on a four point scale, so this kind of question is called a rating question put together in

a matrix for a clear overview (Saunders et al., 2009). In a four point scale the respondent is forced to

make a choice between positive and a negative answer to the question. The coding for these

questions is a one for ‘totally disagree’ and a four for ‘totally agree’. Respondents will be assigned

the mean of their scores on the six items as their score on the commitment scale of an aspect. In the

research of Marsden (1993) the internal consistency reliability of the sample was an acceptable

reliability of .74. This means that this measure explains 74% of the model. In the next paragraph the

independent variables will be clarified.

3.4.2 Independent variables

The independent variables of this research are formed by the CSR aspects within the CSR dimensions.

The model that is built and explained in paragraph 2.5 summarizes these aspects. This framework is

filled in with the context of the CSR program of the company that is researched, DE in this case. The

questions that answer to the independent value are ranking questions. The respondent is asked per

dimension to rank the aspects; with this technique the relative importance between the aspects of



22

the same dimension is discovered (Saunders et al., 2010).

A one is given to the aspect the respondent feel least committed to, a two and a three are given to

the following aspects and finally a four to the aspect they feel most committed to. When the most

important aspect of a dimension is found it can be researched separately on the level of

organizational commitment. The reason to only measure the commitment for this aspect is when the

commitment was measured for all aspects, the questionnaire would become too long and

monotonous. This would result in a drastic drop of the response rate to the questionnaire. Now that

the independent value is clear the final subparagraph defines the control variables that are

researched.

3.4.3 Control variables

Besides the main variables this research controls for a range of variables that have been identified as

significant control variables of affective commitment and CSR. These control variables have been

used in earlier research on organizational commitment. Meyer et al. (2002) researched several

determinants of commitment and found positive correlations for age and the length of employment

in the company (organizational tenure) with affective commitment. Age has an influence on the

effect of CSR on organizational commitment because people in different stages of their life, find

different things important. This view on life changes due to the experiences they have gained

(Turker, 2009b). Organizational tenure also has an effect worth mentioning on organizational

commitment. When employees gain experience with a company they tend to get more attached to

it. Also long serving employees retrospectively develop affective commitment with a company,

otherwise they would have already left the company (Meyer et al., 1997). For gender, education and

marital status Meyer et al. (2002) found no significant correlation in their research. However, there

are several researches that claim the influence of gender on CSR and commitment. Since man and

women have different work characteristics they judge commitment differently (Marsden et al. 1993).

Decisions concerning attitudes and values, which holds for CSR, can be subject to significant gender

differences (Greening and Turban, 2000). While men attach more value to instrumental or economic

concerns woman are more likely to be concerned with discretionary behaviour within a company.

This is supported by Peterson (2004) who suggests that the relationship between organizational

commitment and discretionary measures of corporate social responsibility is stronger for women

than for men. Also corporate charitable behaviour, which is usually considered to be discretionary, is

viewed more favourably by women than men. Age, gender and tenure are considered relevant and

important determinants in multiple researches (Brammer , 2007; Peterson, 2004; Turker, 2009b). The

control variable of function of an employee within the company has been added in recent research.

Strong evidence has been found a positive relationship between leadership and organizational

commitment (Walumbwa and Lawler, 2002). So differences in the function layers of a company



23

regarding CSR and commitment are to be expected (Brammer, 2007).

These control variables are added to this questionnaire for DE to be able to directly inform groups of

employees on CSR aspects that these groups find important and feel most committed to. These

control variables are defined as attribute questions (Saunders et al., 2009). They are handled with

the category questions collection because with categories it is easy to compare groups of people and

also the anonymity of the respondents is guaranteed in this way.

3.4.4 Conditions of questionnaire

Before the final questionnaire was sent out, a control group of ten employees of DE participates in a

pilot questionnaire. This pilot tests if the questionnaire is clear, measures the right variables in a

correct way and to estimate the time it takes to complete the questionnaire. These respondents also

critically review whether the questionnaire is translated in a clear and correct way. With the

feedback of this control group the final survey is composed and published online. The link of the

questionnaire is protected and only accessible to the receivers of the mail. It is also possible to fill in

the questionnaire only once per mail receivers, this to prevent a possible sabotage of the

questionnaire and the out coming data. From the moment the employees receive the mail with the

link to the questionnaire they have four weeks to respond, receiving a reminder one week before the

deadline. The questionnaire is sent out by the Marketing Manager Corporate Social Responsibility of

the company; this is done to show that the company attaches great importance to the research and

to try to increase the response rate of the questionnaire. In the accompanying letter the importance

to the employees themselves is explained and it is used to inform the respondents that the data will

also be used for a graduation research. The final questionnaire that is used in this research can be

found in appendix F figure F.1. Questions seven, eight, eleven and fourteen to seventeen are used by

DE to make the information sources about CSR for employees more efficient.

As mentioned in previous literature CSR has an impact on organizational commitment. Added to this

knowledge we know that CSR consists of several components. Combining all this knowledge, this

study wants to explore how every aspect of CSR contributes to organizational commitment. In the

next paragraph the way the data is analyzed is explained.

3.5 Data analysis

Firstly the data is checked for errors. After checking the control variables no deviations to what is

expected are found. At the check up of the dimension variables twenty-five cases are excluded

because they did not fill in the ranking questions correctly. The respondents did not use every

number between one and four only once. In the final check of the ranking to the complete model of

aspects another amount of thirteen cases are excluded because they did not use every number

between one and twelve only once. These cases are deleted ‘case listwise’ (Pallant, 2010), which



24

means they are completely deleted from the data set, not only for the missing value.

The reason to do is to prevent that respondents are only partly influencing the data. After a review

for normality of the measures, fourteen outliers were also deleted from the data set. With these

deviations deleted the error free sample contained 247 respondents. That is more than the 243

respondents needed to make the research for 90% reliable with a 5% confidence interval to the

complete population of 2229.

To check the reliability of the scales used to measure organizational commitment the Cronbach’s

Alpha is checked for every measure of the aspects separately and the dimensions separately. When

the measures are checked on reliability the data variances of the data are compared using a one-way

between-groups analysis of variance (ANOVA) to compare groups. One-way means the comparison

of one independent value which has a number of different levels on the dependent variable. These

levels correspond in this case to the different aspects of a dimension on organizational commitment.

Between-groups means that every group contains different respondents. The assumptions needed to

perform ANOVAs are tested for these measures. The ANOVAs are used to research whether there are

significant differences between the variances of organizational commitment between the aspects of

CSR. The data is analyzed using SPSS and the codebook of the data set is shown in Appendix F figure

F.2. Now it is clear how the research is composed and conducted the results and analysis are handled

in the next chapter.

4: Results and Analysis

In this chapter the direct result of the questionnaires will be given and the analysis of the obtained

data will be illustrated. First the results for the descriptive statistics of the control variables will be

given and analysed in paragraph 4.1. Secondly the results of the ranking questions will be given in

paragraph 4.2, followed by the analysis of the OCQ measure and the differences between the aspects

per dimension in paragraph 4.3 and 4.4. Then the results of the information questions of the

questionnaire will be handled in paragraph 4.5 to close the chapter with further interesting analysis

on differences between groups of the data in paragraph 4.6.



25

4.1 Results on Control Variables

In paragraph 3.5 all errors and outliers are already deleted out of the data set, so a clear overview of

the characteristics of the data sample can be made. The first four questions of the questionnaire

contain the control variables (see Appendix E figure E.1). In figure 4.1 A is shown that 163 males and

84 females have filled in the questionnaire. The response of 34% female is comparable to the 1/3

ratio that holds for the population of the employees of DE. The age, tenure and function categories

are not equally divided; the last age category above 65 did not contain respondents and lapses

automatically (see appendix G figure G.1). Since DE holds no other data records of the employees,

these figures are not known and cannot be compared with this dataset. Some categories of these

control variables are rather small and need to be reorganized in order to be suitable for ANOVA

analysis. Moreover for accurate ANOVA analysis categories need to be of comparable sizes and it is

recommended that a category contains at least 20% percent of all responses (Field, 2004). So the

categories of age, tenure and function are reorganized to logic categories of at least 20% of the

respondents of the sample. The new classifications of these control variables that will be used for the

analysis is shown below in figure 4.1 B, C and D (see Appendix G figure G.1 for the old and new

classification of the categories).

Figure 4.1: Categories Control Variables

In these new categories the age categories are very evenly divided (Figure 4.1 B). Concerning tenure

can be concluded that the largest group works more than ten years within the company (Figure 4.1

C). Finally can be concluded that a third of the respondents has a management function within DE

(Figure 4.1 D). Next in the questionnaire are the ranking questions for the aspects, these will be

handled in the next paragraph.

AgeNew Freq Perc

<35 89 36,0

35-45 74 30,0

45> 84 34,0

Total 247 100,0

Gender Freq Perc

Male 163 66,0

Female 84 34,0

Total 247 100,0

TenureNew Freq Perc

<5 years 95 38,5

5-10 years 52 21,1

>10 years 100 40,5

Total 247 100,0

FunctionNew Freq Perc

Management 87 35,2

Employee 160 64,8

Total 247 100,0



26

4.2 Ranking Aspects

In the ranking questions the respondents are asked to rank the aspects, giving them a number from

one to four. A one is given to the aspect they feel least committed to and a four to the aspect the

respondent feels most committed to, it is clearly instructed that every number may be used only

once (see question five, nine and twelve in Appendix F Figure F.1). The results of this question on all

dimensions are shown in figure 4.2 below (Appendix G figure G.2 shows also clear graphs of these

tables). The most important outcome of these results are the times an aspect is ranked as highest,

namely a four, these are shown in the column with N above it in Figure 4.1.

Figure 4.2: Ranking Results of the aspects of People, Planet and Profit

Working rights is clearly ranked a four the most of all aspects. Local projects, environment

conservation and intangible value on the other hand are clearly ranked a four the least times in their

dimension. Moreover local projects and environment conservation are ranked the most times as

lowest in their dimension too. In the profit dimension employee rights is ranked a one the most,

namely by more than a third of the respondents.

R People

a

n

k

Working

Rights

Training Country of

Origin Projects

Local Projects

N % N % N % N %

1 33 13,4 44 17,8 63 25,5 107 43,3

2 35 14,2 62 25,1 75 30,4 75 30,4

3 65 26,3 79 32,0 57 23,1 46 18,6

4 114 46,2 62 25,1 52 21,1 19 7,7

R Planet

a

n

k

Waste

Reduction

C02 Gas

Emission

Reduction

Product and

Production

Factors

Environment

Conservation

N % N % N % N %

1 24 9,7 26 10,5 31 12,6 166 67,2

2 61 24,7 71 28,7 80 32,4 35 14,2

3 83 33,6 78 31,6 59 23,9 27 10,9

4 79 32,0 72 29,1 77 31,2 19 7,7

R Profit

a

n

k

Supplier

Rewards

Employee

Rewards

Tangible Value Intangible

Value

N % N % N % N %

1 53 21,5 90 36,4 26 10,5 78 31,6

2 47 19,0 53 21,5 68 27,5 79 32,0

3 67 27,1 40 16,2 84 34,0 56 22,7

4 80 32,4 64 25,9 69 27,9 34 13,8



27

In the next question the respondent is asked to fill in the six item OCQ measure for the aspect he

ranked with a four. In the next paragraph the results of these OCQ are checked for their reliability.

4.3 Reliability OCQ Measures

The OCQ measures for People, Planet and Profit commitment are tested for their reliability (see

Appendix G figure G.3 for the tables). The Cronbach’s Alpha for People commitment is 0,710 for

Planet commitment 0,676 and for Profit commitment 0,703. A Cronbach’s Alpha value shows the

internal consistency of a measurement tool, in other words it indicates to which extent a number of

items in a test measure the same concept. Scores higher than 0,7 are considered as acceptable (Field,

2004). Since no scores in the correlation matrix are negative, suggesting the items measure

something different, all these items measure the same characteristic. Also practical every item scores

more than 0,3 on the corrected Item-Total Correlation which also points to the fact that all items

measure the same subject (Pallant, 2010). Despite the lower score on Planet commitment and the

below 0,3 score of the ‘value item’ in this specific measurement the construct will be considered as

generally reliable because the influence when this item is deleted is minimal to the construct. And

since this construct is used before in prior research and scored an acceptable Cronbach’s Alpha of

0,74 the construct is considered as a reliable measure for organizational commitment. Since the

OCQ measures are considered reliable the organizational commitment scores on the different

aspects are going to be compared using ANOVA in the next paragraph.

4.4 One-way between groups ANOVA for aspects on organizational commitment

ANOVA is short for Analysis of Variances and compares the variances of different groups if the differ

from one another and therefore perfectly suitable for this research. In order to be able to perform an

ANOVA some assumptions must be applicable to the data. The data has to be measured at an

interval or ratio level. The sampling of a measurement needs to be random and the observations

need to be independent to perform ANOVA. Finally the distribution of the data needs to be normal

and the variability of the scores for each group needs to be similar, also called ‘Homogeneity of

variance’ (Pallant et al., 2010; Field, 2004). The commitment measure in this research is measured

with a four-point Likert scale which is a scale on an interval level. Since this research is mailed to the

respondents and filled in separately by the first 299 respondents, the assumptions of the data being

independent and random holds for this research. For normality the measures are tested using the

Kolmogorov-Smirnov test. This test controls if a distribution is normal around the expected value. As

you can see in the first table of figure G.3 of appendix G, the measures violate this assumption since

the significance is below 0.05. The violation of normality should not cause problems with large

samples (>30) at least if there close to normally distributed (Pallant 2010).



28

The normality can also be reviewed looking at the scores on skewness and kurtosis, these should be

close to zero to be called normal (second table of figure F.4 of Appendix F). Also with the use of the

histogram with normally distributed line and the normal Q-Q Plot of Numeracy, also a plot to check

for normality, where the dots should be close to the linear line to be normal; show for all the

measures that the data is close to normally distributed (histogram and plot per measure in Appendix

F figure F.4). Finally the homogeneity of variance is tested for these measures with the Levene

statistic for equality of variances. The measures need to be not significant for this test (>0.05) to be

considered equal (Field, 2004). The results of this test are given with each ANOVA that follows.

Now the data is proven to be useful and reliable to analyse with ANOVA, the first one-way between-

groups analysis that will be done is between the aspects of the dimension People on the total mean

of People commitment. As mentioned earlier the respondents are asked to rank the aspects of

People, of the aspect the respondent ranks highest is asked to fill in the six item OCQ. The mean of

the answers of this six item OCQ stands for the organizational commitment towards this specific

aspect of the dimension People. This way the respondents are divided into four groups. The means

of these groups together form the commitment towards the dimension People. With the comparison

of these groups is tried to find if there is a significant difference between the variances of the aspects

on organizational commitment. Respectively the variance of means of Planet and Profit are analysed

in the same way on the total mean of Planet and Profit commitment.

Figure 4.3: Mean results for all aspects and dimensions

In figure 4.3 above the commitment means are shown per aspect. In Appendix G figure G.5 these

results are shown in graphs to make it more visual. The next step is to compare these means

statistically per dimension if they are significantly different from each other and therefore contribute

differently to the dimension commitment.



29

Figure 4.4: ANOVA results on Commitment Mean, Leven Statistic Significance and F-ratio Significance

Firstly the score on homogeneity of variances is given with the Levene Statistic . As mentioned earlier

the significance of this test needs to be above 0.05 and with a significance of 0,891; 0,470 and 0,147

for respectively People, Planet and Profit; is the homogeneity of variance assumption not violated by

any dimension (see figure 4.4). Secondly the ANOVA results shows the results for the between-group

effect, also called the ‘the experimental effect’, and the F-ratio of this effect (see Appendix G figure

G.5). The F-ratio represents the level of difference between the variances, the closer to one the

more similar the variances are. The outcome that is investigated first is the significance of this F-

ratio. When there is a significant difference between the aspects, the significance needs to be below

0,05. As shown in figure 4.4 the values for subsequently People, Planet and Profit are: 0,510; 0,570

and 0,576 (indicated as F-ratio Sig). So none of the variances of the aspects in the dimensions People,

Planet and Profit are statistically significant different. This implicates that all CSR aspects and

subsequently the dimensions of CSR equally positive influence organizational commitment. Because

on a 4-point scale the mean of more than 2.5 is on the upper side between disagree (2) and agree(3)

and therefore with a mean of 2,6689 (see figure 4.3) CSR positively influences organizational

commitment. Next the results of the commitment increase and info questions will be given.

4.5 Information questions

The next questions of the questionnaire are added for DE to find out how employees can be more

involved in the CSR initiatives the company practices and how the employees want to be informed

about these initiatives in the different dimensions. The results to these questions are shown in

Appendix F figure F.6. All possibilities increase commitment according to the respondents. Only the

employees indicate that giving options of projects that employees can participate in, is the only

possibility that should be applied. Concerning the information about projects the respondents think

every possibility would increase their commitment but the option that received the most approval

was the information of the results of the projects in all dimensions. Also on the question if this

should be implemented by DE, the most positive answers were for the communication of the results

of the projects.

In the final part of the questionnaire the respondent is asked to rank all aspects of the model. This

question is added to give a clear overview of the most important aspect of the model in comparison

to the rest of the aspects according to the employees. The mean of all ratings of the respondents

gives a nice indication on the overall ranking of the aspects. The mean results are shown in figure 4.5.

People Planet Profit

Commitment Mean 2,7092 2,6134 2,6842

Levene Statistic Sig 0,891 0,470 0,147

F-Ratio Sig 0,510 0,570 0,576



30

Figure 4.5: Means of overall ranking of all aspects

Working rights is just as in the dimension of people the most important aspect. Environment

conservation is again, as in the dimension of planet, the least important aspect. It is remarkable that

every aspect is at least once marked as the most and the least important (see Min and Max of figure

4.5). The last two questions of the questionnaire are related to the frequency that the employees

want to be informed and with what kind of medium they would like to be informed. The results to

these questions are shown in Appendix G figure G.7. The main result of these update questions is

that the updates about CSR should be given once per quarter by a mail with a textual explanation.

Now all results of the questions are clear and the first analysis of the data are handled and turned

out insignificant the data is further analyzed to see if there are any other significant differences in the

data. In the next paragraph is analyzed if there are significant differences between the aspects when

the influence of the control variables is taken into account.

4.6 Influence of control variables on differences between groups

In order to analyse if the control variables do have a significant influence on the variance difference

between the aspects, a two-way between-groups ANOVA will be executed. In this case it is possible

to research the joint effect of two independent variables (control variables and aspects) on the

dependent variable (organizational commitment). The advantage of a two-way test is that the ‘main

effect’ for the separate independent variables is given as well as the possible ‘interaction effect’ of

the two variables combined (Pallant, 2008). This analysis is done on all dimensions and control

variables and the results of the interaction effect analysis in means, LS significance and F significance

are shown in Appendix G figure G. 9. The only significant result that was found on the influence of

the aspects of the dimension people and function within the company on organizational

commitment, as measured with the OCQ measure. The homogeneity of variances assumption is not

violated, looking at the value of 0,865 (LS Sig in Appendix G figure G.9). The respondents are divided

over the four aspects (Working Rights, Training, Country of Origin Projects and Local Projects).

Nr. Complete PPP Min Max Mean

1 Working Rights 1 12 8,27

2 Tangible Value 1 12 7,63

3 Supplier Rewards 1 12 7,09

4 Training 1 12 7,04

5 Product and Production Factors 1 12 6,79

6 Waste Reduction 1 12 6,70

7 C02 Gas Emission Reduction 1 12 6,67

8 Country of Origin Projects 1 12 6,66

9 Intangible Value 1 12 6,00

10 Employee Rewards 1 12 5,78

11 Local Projects 1 12 5,11

12 Environment Conservation 1 12 4,24



31

The interaction effect between the dimension People and function within the company are

statistically significant because, F (3, 239) = 3,877, p= 0,010 (see figure 4.5 the green circles). The

three correspondents the degrees of freedom of the effect of the model and 239 are the degrees of

freedom of the residuals of the model (blue circles in figure 4.5). Despite the difference is statistically

significant, the difference in mean scores between the aspects is rather small. The effect size, which

is measured with partial eta squared in this case is 0,046 (see figure 4.5 the brown circle). This

means that 4,6 % of the dependent variable is explained by this interaction effect of the dependent

variables. According to the guidelines of Cohen for (partial) eta squared, which states a 0,01 is a small

effect, 0,06 a medium effect and 0,0138 or higher as a large effect, this can be valued as a mediocre

effect. The guideline of Cohen can be used for both partial eta squared as eta squared, despite the

slightly different formula the interpretation of the strength of the results is the same (Pallant, 2008).

Figure 4.5: Test of Between-Subjects Effects of the aspects of the Dimension People and Function within the company

The significant difference between management functions and employees is clearly visible on the

aspects of People. The management functions feel more committed to the Working Rights and Local

Projects, while the employees feel more committed to Training and Country of Origin Projects (see

figure 4.6).

Figure 4.6: Graph of the means of the aspects of the Dimension People and the levels of Function within the company

Source

Type III Sum of

Squares df Mean Square F Sig.

Partial Eta

Squared

Corrected Model 2,323a 7 ,332 2,330 ,026 ,064

Intercept 1172,262 1 1172,262 8231,527 ,000 ,972

DimensionPeople ,152 3 ,051 ,357 ,784 ,004

FuntionNew ,148 1 ,148 1,038 ,309 ,004

DimensionPeople * FuntionNew 1,656 3 ,552 3,877 ,010 ,046

Error 34,036 239 ,142

Total 1849,250 247

Corrected Total 36,359 246



32

From the ‘main effect’ of the dimensions it is already known that there is no significance, the results

of the ‘main effect’ of the control variables is shown in Appendix G figure G.10. In the results of the

effect of the control variables on organizational commitment three significant difference results are

found. The variables gender and age both have significant effect on the organizational commitment

of the dimension Planet. And gender further has significant influence on the organizational

commitment of the complete model, referred to as PPP. The levels of gender being obviously divided

in male and female and age divides the respondents into groups of the age below 35, between 35

and 45 and above 45. The effect of gender on the organizational commitment of the dimension

Planet is statistically significant because, F (1, 245) = 9,648, p= 0,002 (see figure 4.7 A). Despite the

difference is statistically significant, the difference in means scores is also in this case rather small

(see Appendix G figure G.10). This time SPSS did not provide the partial eta squared to determine the

effect size. But the earlier mentioned eta squared can be calculated with these results. Dividing the

sum of squares between groups by the total sum of squares results in the eta squared (Pallant,

2008). For the effect of gender on organizational commitment of the dimension People the eta

squared result is 0,038 (see figure 4.7 A the brown circles). Again with the interpretation of the

Cohen guidelines this effect can be valued between small and medium. The result of this difference

states that men feel more committed to the dimension Planet then women.

Figure 4.7: ANOVA of Gender on organizational commitment of the Dimension People and the complete model (PPP)

The effect of gender on the organizational commitment of the complete model PPP is statistically

significant because, F (1, 245) = 4,614, p= 0,033 (see figure 4.7 B). Despite the difference is

statistically significant, the difference in means scores in this case is very small (see Appendix G figure

G.10). For the effect of gender on the organizational commitment of the complete model PPP the eta

squared result is 0,018. This effect can be rated as nil. The results does suggest that men feel more

commitment to the complete model PPP then women.

The final effect in this analysis that is statistically significant different is the effect of age on the

organizational commitment of the Planet dimension because, F (2, 244) = 4,322, p= 0,014 (see figure

4.8). Despite the difference is statistically significant, the difference in means scores is also in this

case not very large (see Appendix G figure G.10).

Gender Sum of Squares df Mean Square F Sig.

Planet Commitment Between Groups 1,113 1 1,113 9,648 ,002

Within Groups 28,268 245 ,115

Total 29,381 246

PPP Commitment Between Groups ,455 1 ,455 4,614 ,033


Total 24,616 246



33

Figure 4.8: ANOVA of Age on organizational commitment of the Dimension People

For the effect of age on the organizational commitment of the dimension Planet the eta squared

result is 0,034. So the effect size of age is modest. Since the age variable has more than two levels

SPSS is able to deliver post hoc tests that indicate the between-group significant differences. The

post hoc test that is used in this research is Tukey HSD which is most commonly used in research

(Field, 2004; Pallant, 2008). The only significant difference is between the under 35 group that feel

less committed to the dimension Planet then the between 35 and 45 group (see Appendix F figure

F.11).

The results of the two-way analysis do show some visible differences within certain aspects. These

differences are clearly visible in the bar charts in Appendix G figure G.9. These visible differences are

all separately ANOVA tested to find out if these differences show statistically significance. The

following three differences came out significant: gender on organizational commitment towards

Country of Origin Projects; age on organizational commitment towards Country of Origin Projects

and age on organizational commitment towards Intangible Value. As shown in Figure 4.9 (green

circles) the homogeneity assumptions are not violated with all significances of more than 0,05.

Effect Levene Statistic df1 df2 Sig.

Gender x Country of Origin Projects Commitment ,048 1 50 ,828

Age x Country of Origin Projects Commitment 2,076 2 49 ,136

Age x Country of Origin Projects Commitment ,181 2 31 ,835

Figure 4.9: Test of homogeneity of variances

And the effects are all statistically significant because, the first effect scores F (1, 50) = 4,357, p=

0,042 (figure 4.10 A), the second effect F (2,49)= 5,376, p= 0,008 (figure 4.10 B) and the third effect

scores F (2, 31)=6,103, p= 0,006 (figure 4.10 C). The effect sizes of these effects score respectively,

0,080; 0,180 and 0,282. So the first effect which implies that men feel more committed to Country of

Origin Projects than women can be interpreted as medium to large. The other 2 effects following the

guidelines of Cohen are considered to have a very large effect. After studying the post hoc analysis in

Appendix F figure F.11 is concluded that respondents below 35 years old feel less committed towards

Country of Origin Projects then their colleagues. And this same group feel less committed towards

Intangible value compared to the between 35 and 45 group.

Another possibility of analysis to find useful differences is to have a look on the construction of

organizational commitment and see if there are some notable differences between the items of the

OCQ measurement of organizational commitment.

Age Sum of Squares df Mean Square F Sig.

Planet Commitment Between Groups 1,005 2 ,503 4,322 ,014


Total 29,381 246



34

Effect Sum of Squares df Mean Square F Sig.

Gender x Country of Origin

Projects Commitment

Between Groups ,578 1 ,578 4,357 ,042


Total 7,207 51

Age x Country of Origin

Projects Commitment

Between Groups 1,297 2 ,648 5,376 ,008


Total 7,207 51

Age x Intangible Value

Commitment

Between Groups 1,859 2 ,930 6,103 ,006


Total 6,582 33

Figure 4.10: ANOVA results Gender and Age on organizational commitment of Country of Origin Projects and Age on

Intangible Value

With differences in this results the company can stimulate and approach the employees on the

determinants of organizational commitment that have the largest effects. In appendix G.13 is

analyzed if the means of the separate items of OCQ have nfluential significant differences between

the groups. The main conclusions of these analysis are also shown in appendix G.13. The aspects

differed in this case on the proud measure of OCQ. The projects that DE supports locally and abroad

make the respondents genuinely most proud. On the other hand the respondents are not very proud

on the employee rewards that are given, in comparison to the other aspects of the dimension Profit.

The results showed only small effect sizes on these significant results. The last analysis that will be

done contains an overview on groups of respondents who choose the same aspects as important.

Using crosstabs the data of the respondents for choice of most important aspect per dimension is

analyzed. This analysis could turn out to be useful in effectively approaching employee groups with

info on a certain profile they are interested in. For space reasons the crosstab is placed in Appendix

G as figure G.15. This analyzes ended with 55 different ‘profiles’ of choices. The profile which was

chosen by the most respondents contained Working Rights of the People dimension, Waste

Reduction of the Planet dimension and Supplier Rewards of the Profit dimension. Fourteen

respondents, 5,7% of the total amount of respondents, chose this profile.

So summarizing there were no significant differences found between organizational commitments of

the aspects of CSR. Taking the control variables into account there was found one interaction and

three main effects between the means of organizational commitment of the aspects of CSR on

control variables, all effects were rather small though. The largest effects were found on control

variables age en gender within three specific aspects. In the next chapter the conclusions are drawn.



35

5: Conclusions, Limitations and Recommendations

In this final chapter the research questions are answered and in consequence the problem stated is

answered. After that the remaining conclusions drawn from the results handled in chapter four are

addressed. In the second paragraph of this chapter the limitations of this research will be discussed.

The final words are devoted to recommendations for management following this research and some

suggestions for future research are given.

5.1 Conclusions

In chapter two the theoretical framework is formed answering the following questions.

1. How is CSR defined?

2. How can CSR be divided in aspects of People, Planet and Profit?

3. What determines organizational commitment of employees?

4. What effect has CSR on the organizational commitment of (DE) employees?

CSR is defined in paragraph 2.1 by SER (2001) as the dimensions on which a company should act

responsible, as a company can not only create economic value but also on the environmental and

social dimension. Referred to as the dimensions People, Planet and Profit. A company should take

the interest on these dimensions into account of all their stakeholders. In paragraph 2.2 multiple

models of CSR aspects are reviewed to finally formulate a new model supported by previous research

as explained in paragraph 2.5. In paragraph 2.3 determinants such as loyalty and being proud of the

company, identifying with the values of the company and the willingness to put in the maximum

effort for the company are identified as important determinants of organizational commitment. To

measure these determinants the organizational commitment is measured and defined by the theory

of Mowday et al. (1982) on organizational commitment as reviewed in paragraph 2.3. In paragraph

2.4 is reviewed that CSR has a positive effect on the determinants of organizational commitment as

stated in paragraph 2.3. These answers formed the conceptual model as shown in figure 2.4 on page

18, to answer the following problem statement:

What influence do the different CSR aspects have on the organizational commitment of Douwe

Egberts employees?

After analyzing the results is concluded in paragraph 4.4 that the CSR aspects all have a positive

effect on the organizational commitment of the DE employees (see figure 4.3 on page 28). Only there

are no statistically significant differences between the organizational commitments means of the

different aspects. The subsequent dimensions and the total influence of CSR on organizational

commitment of the employees is also positive. Since all means are higher than 2.5 on a four point

Likert scale with a four for totally agree, the means are on the upper side between disagree (2) and

agree (3).



36

The first conclusion that can be drawn from the other outcomes of the data is that there are visible

differences in the ranking choices the respondents made. Working rights is clearly the most

important aspect of people, since 114 respondents choice this aspect as most important. Another

clear observation is that local projects within People, Environment Conservation within Planet and

Intangible Value within Profit are clearly the least important to the employees of DE. So it can be

stated that Working Rights is the most important aspect. A closer look at the results of the complete

model ranking means confirms this since Working Rights has the highest mean (see figure 4.5 on

page 30). The three aspects that are least chosen are also on the complete model ranking among the

low means.

The conclusions of the information questions are that all given options for more influence would

increase their commitment according to the respondents. But the only choice that should be

implemented turns out to be the approach where DE hands out a number of options to participate in

towards the employees. Concerning the information about projects the respondents think every

option would increase their commitment but the option that received the most approval was the

information of the results of the projects in all dimensions. Also on the question if this should be

implemented by DE, the most positive answers were for the communication of the results of the

projects. On the question of the frequency of updates, almost half of the respondents indicated that

once per quarter would have their preference. This information should be presented with a textual

message by mail according to the results on the medium of the information. A website or a video by

mail are also considered to be valuable options.

When the data is further analyzed comparing the means of commitment on the different control

variables there are found some difference that appear to be significant. When all significant results

on gender are compared it is striking that every time the male respondents valued the items or the

mean on commitment higher than the female respondents. On the age effect it is noticeable that

the below 35 years group valued the items and commitment means lower than the rest of the

respondents. The tenure control variable showed no significant differences in this research and

seems to be no deciding factor on organizational commitment of the aspects. The final control

variable function within the company did found some significant outcomes and in every occasion the

management level of the respondents valued the measure items and commitment means higher

than their minor colleagues. Where the aspects did differ on was the proud measure of OCQ. The

projects that DE supports locally and abroad make the respondents genuinely most proud. On the

other hand the respondents are not very proud on the employee rewards that are given, in

comparison to the other aspects of the dimension Profit.



37

What can be concluded of the final analysis on the choice patterns is that there are no large groups

of respondents who choose the same ‘profile of choice’. In the next paragraph the limitations of this

research will be pinpointed.

5.2 Limitations

Since this research was only done at one company on a sample size of 247 properly completed

questionnaires, the results and conclusions can only be generalized with 90% certainty for the

employees of DE. With the use of the six items OCQ the measurement is less reliable then the more

elaborate options that are available. Moreover the organizational commitment was only measured

on the aspect that the respondent ranked as highest and therefore the results are more positively

biased in comparison when all aspects would be measured. The scale on which these items were

tested was consisted only of four points whereby the means of the measures became very close to

each other. The well based model that is used in this research is new and tested for the first time.

Now the conclusions and limitations are explained the recommendations for implementation for DE

and options for future research are handled in the last paragraph.

5.3 Recommendations

As Working Rights is considered as the most important aspect of CSR, it is recommended to start a

new projects in this aspect and increase information on the current projects. Derived from the

information questions it is advisable to give the employees some options on these projects to

volunteer in. This is very important since the analysis on function also showed that the lower levels

feel less committed and preferred to be stimulated more to participate in projects. As results show

the top down approach should be maintained and management should only give the employees

some options other possibilities where employees get more influence may not be practicable. With

repeating commitment research such as this research, the main opinion of employees is heard and

management can act on it in a feasible way. The employees should be updated once a quarter per

mail about the projects that are running and the results these projects are gaining. Since the females

and the younger employees seem to feel less committed to CSR some new projects should be

focused on these groups and also the content of the communication should be adjusted to activate

these groups. According to the results pride is a strong point of the CSR projects of DE so the

employees may actively show their pride to others. To evaluate the process it is also recommended

to repeat this research to make the progress visible.

To test whether this model is suitable to use for the research of organizational commitment of

employees regarding CSR the research should be repeated in other companies. Currently this

research is only held among employees of DE and the results are only applicable to this company and

it is not guaranteed that the research holds the same results for other companies. Since every



38

company has an other implementation the CSR aspects results can be significantly different.

Furthermore the model could be tested with another OCQ measure with more items that is more

reliable. It is also recommendable to increase the scale so the choice is larger and the possibility of

more widely separated response is possible. The research can probably end up with more significant

differences between the groups. Although the research would become extensive it is more reliable

and the data would be less biased if per respondent every aspects is measured on their contribution

on organizational commitment. To control this bias it is interesting to research if the results are the

same if all aspects are measured with OCQ.



39

References

Albinger, H. S., & Freeman, S. J. (2000). Corporate social performance and attractiveness as an

employer to different job seeking populations. Journal of Business Ethics, 28, 243-253.

Bhattacharya, C. B., Sen, S., & Korschun, D. (2008). Using corporate social responsibility to win the

war for talent. MIT Sloan Management Review, 49, 37-44.

Bowen, H.R. (1953). Social Responsibilities of the Businessman. Harper and Row, New York.

Blackhaus, K., Stone, B. A., & Heiner, K. (2002). Exploring the relationship between corporate social

performance and employer attractiveness. Business and Society, 41, 292-318.

Brammer, S., Millington, A., & Rayton, B. (2007). The Contribution of Corporate Social Responsibility

to Organizational Commitment. International Journal of Human Resource Management, 18,

1701-1719.

Branco, M. C. and Rodrigues, L.L. (2006). Corporate Social Responsibility and Resource-Based

Perspectives. Journal of Business Ethics, 69, 111-132.

Brundtland, G.H. (1987). Presentation of the report of the World Commission on Environment and

Development to UNEP’s 14th

Governing Council Session. World Commission on Environment

and Development, Nairobi.

Cohen, A. (2007). Commitment before and after: an evaluation and reconceptualization of

organizational commitment. Human Resource Management Review, 17, 336–354.

Cooper-Hakim, A. and Viswesvaran, C. (2005). The construct of work commitment: testing an

integrative framework. Psychological Bulletin, 131, 241–305.

Drucker, P.F. (1974). Management: tasks, responsibilities, practices. Harper and Row, New York.

Elkington, J. (1997) Cannibals with Forks: The Triple Bottom Line of 21st

Century Business. Capstone,

Oxford, UK.

Global Reporting Initiative (2011). Sustainable Reporting Guidelines.



40

Graafland, J.J. (2002). Modelling the trade-off between profits and principles. Economist, 150, 129-

154.

Graafland, J. J., Eijffinger, S.C.W. , Stoffele, N.C.G.M., Smid, H. & Coldeweijer, A.M. (2004). Corporate

Social Responsibility of Dutch Companies: Benchmarking and Transparency. Economist, 152,

403-426.

Greening, D.W. and Turban, D.B. (2000). Corporate Social Performance as a Competitive Advantage

in Attracting a Quality Workforce. Business and Society, 39, 254-280.

Grow, B., Hamm, S. and Lee, L. (2005). The Debate Over Doing Good. BusinessWeek, 15, 76-78

Guo, J., Sun, L. & Li, X. (2009). Corporate social responsibility assessment of Chinese corporations.

International Journal of Business and Management, 4, 54-57.

Hull, E.C. & Rothenberg, S. (2008). The interactions of corporate social performance with innovation

and industry differentiation. Strategic Management Journal, 29, 781-789.

Judge, William Q. Jr. & Douglas, Thomas J. (1998). Performance Implications of Incorporating Natural

Environmental Issues into the Strategic Planning Process: An Empirical Assessment. Journal of

Management Studies, 35, 241-262.

Kim, H.R., Lee, M., Lee, H.T. & Kim, N.M. (2010). Corporate Social Responsibility and Employee-

Company Identification. Journal of Business Ethics, 95, 557-569.

Kok, P., van der Wiele, T., McKenna, R. & Brown, A. (2001). A Corporate Social Responsibility Audit

within a Quality Management Framework. Journal of Business Ethics, 31, 285-297

Lindgreen, A., Swaen, V. & Johnston, W.J. (2009).Corporate Social Responsibility: An Empirical

Investigation of U.S. Organizations. Journal of Business Ethics, 85, 303-323.

Marsden, P. V., Kalleberg, A. L., & Cook, C. R. (1993). Gender differences in organizational

commitment: Influences of work positions and family roles. Work and Occupations, 20, 368-

390.



41

McIntosh, M. ,D. Leipziger, K. Jones and G. Coleman (1998), Corporate Citizenship: Successful

Strategies for Responsible Companies, Financial Times Management, London, pp. 61-65.

Meyer, J. P., & Allen, N. J. (1991). A three-component conceptualization of organizational

commitment. Human Resource Management Review, 1, 61-89.

Meyer, J.P., Allen, N.J. &Smith, C.A. (1993). Commitment to organizations and occupations: extension

and test of a three-component conceptualization. Journal of Applied Psychology, 78, 538–

551.

Meyer, J. P., & Allen, N. J. (1997). Commitment in the workplace. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage

Publications.

Meyer, J.P., Stanley, D.J., Herscovitch, L. and Topolnytsky, L. (2002). Affective, Continuance and

Normative Commitment to the Organization: A Meta-Analysis of Antecedents, Correlates and

Consequences. Journal of Vocational Behavior, 61, 20-52.

Montgomery, D.B. & C.A Ramus (2003). Corporate Social Responsibility Reputation Effects on MBA

Job Choice. Research paper No. 1805, Graduate School of Business, Stanford University.

Mowday, R. T., Steers, R. M., & Porter, L. W. (1979). The measurement of organizational

commitment. Journal of Vocational Behaviour, 14, 224-247.

Mowday, R. T., Porter, L.W., Steers, R.M. (1982). Employee-organization Linkages: The Psychology of

Commitment, Absenteeism and Turnover. New York: Academic Press

Mowday, R.T. (1998). Reflections on the study and relevance of organizational commitment. Human

Resource Management Review, 8, 387–402.

Nord, Walter R. and Riggs-Fuller, Sally (2009). Increasing Corporate Social Responsibility through an

Employee-centred Approach. Employee Responsibilities and Rights Journal, 21, 279-290.



42

People 4 Earth. (2010). The Global Sustainability Standard for Products

Peterson, D.K. (2004). The Relationship Between Perceptions of Corporate Citizenship and

Organizational Commitment. Business and Society, 43, 296-319.

Porter, Michael E., Kramer, Mark R. (2006). Strategy & Society: The Link Between Competitive

Advantage and Corporate Social Responsibility. Harvard Business Review, 84, 78-85.

Ramus, C.A. and Steger, U. (2000). The Role of Supervisory Support Behaviours and Environmental

Policy in Employee “ Ecoinitiatives” at Leading Edge European Companies. Academy of

Management Journal, 43, 605-626.

Redigton, I. (2005). Making CSR happen: the contribution to people management. Edited and

updated by the Chartered Institute of Personnel Development, www.csracademy.org.uk, UK.

Riordan, C. M., Gatewood, R. D., & Bill, J. B. (1997). Corporate image: Employee reactions and

implications for managing corporate social performance. Journal of Business Ethics, 16, 401-

412.

Sen, S., Bhattacharya, C.C., Korschun, D. (2006). The Role of Corporate Social Responsibility in

Strengthening Multiple Stakeholder Relationships: A Field experiment. Journal of the

Academy of Marketing Science, 34, 158-166.

Sociaal Economische Raad. (2001). Corporate Social Responsibility: A Dutch Approach. Van Gorcum,

Assen, The Netherlands.

Stawiski S., Deal, J.J., Gentry, W. (2010) Employees Perceptions of Corporate Social Responsibility: The

Implications for your Organization. Quick View Leadership Series, Centre for Creative

Leadership, USA.

Turker, D. (2009a). Measuring Corporate Social Responsibility: A Scale Development Study. Journal of

Business Ethics, 85, 411-427.

Turker, D. (2009b). How Corporate Social Responsibility Influences Organizational Commitment.

Journal of Business Ethics, 89, 189-204.



43

Vakola, M. and Nikolaou I. (2005). Attitudes Towards Organizational Change: What is the Role of

Employees’ Stress and Commitment? Employee Relations, 25, 160-17

Walumbwa, F.O. and Mackey, A. (2002) A Social Actor Conception of Organizational Identity and its Implications

for a Study of Organizational Reputation. Business and Society, 41, 393-41

Appendix Influence of CSR aspects on organizational commitment

Name: T.A.M. Wijnants

ANR: 435337

Supervisor: Drs. Ir. K.M. Thomas

Second Reader: Dr. A.J.A.M. Naus

Faculty: Tilburg School of Economics and Management, Tilburg University

Thesis: Master thesis of the department of Organization & Strategy

Educational program: Master Strategic Management

Date of defence: 24th of August 2011



1

Table of contents Appendix A .......................................................................................................................................... 3

Figure A.1: More Sustainable from Cultivation to Cup, the DE CSR communication program (2010) 3

Figure A.2: Results of Sara Lee’s Global Employee Survey (2010).................................................. 4

Appendix B .......................................................................................................................................... 5

B.1: Examples of Consequences of lacking CSR .............................................................................. 5

Appendix C .......................................................................................................................................... 6

Figure C.1: Aspects of Social Responsibility by Kok et al. (2001) .................................................... 6

Figure C.2: Aspects of CSR per stakeholder by Graafland et al. (2004) .......................................... 7

Figure C.3: Organizations’ CSR practices and relationship to identified stakeholder(s) by

Lindgreen et al. (2004) .................................................................................................................... 8

Figure C.4: CSR aspects with variance by Turker (2009a) ............................................................. 10

Figure C.5: International conventions, regulations and guidelines on which the model of People

4 Earth (2010) is build. .................................................................................................................. 11

Appendix D ........................................................................................................................................ 12

Figure D.1: Organizational Commitment Items OCQ Mowday et al. (1979) ................................ 12

Figure D.2: Organizational Commitment Items OCQ Meyer and Allen (1991)............................. 13

Appendix E ........................................................................................................................................ 14

Figure E.1: Working Rights ............................................................................................................ 14

Figure E.2: Training ....................................................................................................................... 15

Figure E.3: Country of Origin Projects .......................................................................................... 16

Figure E.4: Local Projects .............................................................................................................. 17

Figure E.5: Waste Reduction......................................................................................................... 18

Figure E.6: CO2 Gas Emission Reduction ...................................................................................... 19

Figure E.7: Product and Production Factors Conservation ........................................................... 20

Figure E.8: Environment Conservation ......................................................................................... 21

Figure E.9: Supplier Rewards ........................................................................................................ 22

Figure E.10: Employee Rewards ................................................................................................... 22

Figure E.11: Tangible Value .......................................................................................................... 23

Figure E.12: Intangible Value ........................................................................................................ 24

Appendix F ........................................................................................................................................ 25

Figure F.1: Into English translated questions of the final survey: ................................................ 25

Figure F.2: SPSS Codebook of questionnaire ................................................................................ 33

Figure F.3: Literature review of additional questions for DE on CSR and organizational

commitment ................................................................................................................................. 36

Appendix G ........................................................................................................................................ 37

Figure G.1: Frequencies of control variables and categories ....................................................... 37

Figure G.2: Descriptive statistics of ranking of aspects of People, Planet & Profit ...................... 38

Figure G.3: Reliability statistics of People, Planet & Profit commitment measures .................... 41



2

Figure G.4: Normality statistics of People, Planet & Profit commitment data ............................ 43

Figure G.5: Differences between means of aspects and amount of choices of aspects as most

important: ..................................................................................................................................... 45

Figure G.6: Results from Commitment increase and info questions of People, Planet and Profit.

...................................................................................................................................................... 46

Figure G.7: Results of update frequency and update medium of CSR. ........................................ 47

Figure G.8: Differences between mean of aspects and the influence of the control variables

People, Planet & Profit. ................................................................................................................ 48

Figure G.9: Differences between mean of the dimensions and the influence of the control

variables: ....................................................................................................................................... 51

Figure G.10: Tukey HSD Post Hoc tests of ANOVA’s of age on organizational commitment ....... 53

Figure G.11: Differences between mean of the measures and the means of the aspects: ......... 54

Figure G.12: Differences between mean of the measures

and the influence of control variables. ......................................................................................... 56

Figure G.13: Tukey HSD Post Hoc tests of ANOVA’s of age on OCQ measures ............................ 58

G.14: Analysis of difference between groups on the OCQ items ................................................. 59

Figure G.15: Analysis of respondents that make the same aspect choices per dimension: ........ 62



3

Appendix A

Figure A.1: More Sustainable from Cultivation to Cup, the DE CSR communication program (2010)



4

Figure A.2: Results of Sara Lee’s Global Employee Survey (2010)



5

Appendix B

B.1: Examples of Consequences of lacking CSR

The Greenpeace campaign in 2010 against Nestlé is an example of this kind of campaigns. The

environmental group claimed that Nestlé was using palm oil, in products like Kit Kat, from a company

that destroys Indonesian rainforests and peat lands. The diminishing of this habitat pushes the

already endangered orang-utans on the verge of extinction. The campaign was a success since Nestlé

stopped the cooperation with the producer and announced a partnership with no profit organization

The Forest Trust (TFT), promising to adhere to responsible sourcing guidelines for palm oil.

By eliminating child labour, for example and improving production conditions of products of fashion

brands, protecting the environment and so on. An example of a campaign against a brand who

violated the working rights is the “Just pay it” campaign by United Students Against Sweatshops

(USAS) in 2009, towards Nike. Nike closed two factories in Honduras, leaving two thousand workers

without severance pay. These factories produced goods for Nike, but Nike denied any responsibility

towards the workers. Students at universities across the US got involved with actions and petitions.

After a campaign of almost a year, the Honduran workers were awarded compensation of $1.54

million. The consumers are expecting companies to take their responsibility within the society in the

broadest sense of the word. The conscious of business is growing that they need to take

stakeholders and consumers social concerns into account, or otherwise lose sales and see their

reputation going down. This will inevitably turn into a negative impact on market shares and

profitability (McIntosh, Leipziger, Jones and Coleman, 1998).



6

Appendix C

Figure C.1: Aspects of Social Responsibility by Kok et al. (2001)



7

Figure C.2: Aspects of CSR per stakeholder by Graafland et al. (2004)



8

Figure C.3: Organizations’ CSR practices and relationship to identified stakeholder(s) by Lindgreen

et al. (2004)

(*) Scores on 7 point scale.



9

As a result of the increasing CSR practices Lindgreen et al. (2009, p 319) finally concluded positively:

“Managers have a relatively positive perception of CSR practices as improving business performance.

For example, CSR has a positive impact on corporate image and stakeholders’ satisfaction. The more

organizations invest in CSR more managers perceive the benefits associated with CSR with respect to

national and international visibility, support from the government, and the well being of people.

These ‘‘softer’’ benefits may be translated into ‘‘hard’’ benefits (e.g., profits and sales returns) in the

long run and also give the organization legitimacy.”



10

Figure C.4: CSR aspects with variance by Turker (2009a)

(*) Item 19 was dropped to eliminate the cross-loading between Factor 1 and Factor 3. Now every

item contributes to only one factor.



11

Figure C.5: International conventions, regulations and guidelines on which the model of People 4

Earth (2010) is build.

• ISEAL Code of Good Practice and Guidance for Setting Social and Environmental Standards

• ISO 26000 Guidance on Social Responsibility (Draft International Standard)

• Global Reporting Initiative G3 Guidelines

• OECD Guidelines for Multinational Enterprises

• United Nations Convention Against Corruption

• United Nations Global Compact



12

Appendix D

Figure D.1: Organizational Commitment Items OCQ Mowday et al. (1979)



13

Figure D.2: Organizational Commitment Items OCQ Meyer and Allen (1991)



14

Appendix E

Figure E.1: Working Rights

The aspect working rights contains all the working conditions and actions that a company has

arranged for its employees. This includes for instance that the company respects the human rights of

their employees and treats all employees fairly and indiscriminately. The company therefore adopts a

code of conduct with the main company values to which everyone within the company must comply.

Furthermore, the company needs to ensure that the working environment of the employees is safe

and healthy place to work in. Using evaluations between employers and employees the work / life

balance is monitored on regular basis. Options like sports facilities and health tests and projects are

to be offered to the employees freely or with a discount, to actively stimulate healthy living among

employees. The needs and wants of the employees are regularly probed by the company and

considered in the companies’ policy. Finally, the employees are encouraged and given the

opportunity to actively participate in CSR projects.

References of the Working Rights aspect

Kok et al.

(2001)

Graafland et al.

(2004)

Lindgreen et al.

(2004)

Turker

(2009)

Planet 4

Earth (2010)

Physical environment Human Rights Health & Safety

of employees

Encourage

participation in

CSR of employees

Health &

Safety

Working conditions Equal

opportunities for

women and

minorities

Tread all

employees

equally and fair

Provide good

work/private

balance

Working

Rights

Minorities/Diversity Good fellowship

among workers

Include interest

of employees in

decisions

Company knows

and acts on needs

and wants of

employees

Safety & Health Help in

work/private

balance

Code of conduct

Participation



15

Figure E.2: Training

Training is a very important aspect for the employees and gets extra attention within the CSR

towards employees. The providing of opportunities for staff to further their potential on a personal

level and encourage participating in these development courses are the main conditions that the

education of a company must comply to. In order to make sure that a worker develops enough

career options for themselves is all part of making the people and the company more sustainable.

Furthermore the company has to educate and raise the ethical awareness of the employees. This is

accomplished when the employees are educated in these ethical values that the company wants to

project to the outside world. In order to achieve this, the transparency of the company has to very

high, so the employees can easily pick up the information and pass it through to others among them.

References of the Training aspect

Kok et al.

(2001)

Graafland et al.

(2004)

Lindgreen et al.

(2004)

Turker

(2009)

Planet 4 Earth

(2010)

Education &

Training

Training Support

Education

Support additional

education

Education &

Development

Communication &

Transparency

Ethical Training Encourage

developing skills

of employees

Ethics Awareness



16

Figure E.3: Country of Origin Projects

Manufacturing companies are for their raw materials dependent of countries where these raw

materials are extracted. It is therefore of great importance to invest in the society of these countries

of origin. With investments in sustainable projects for the suppliers who provide these resources, the

companies ensure themselves of sustainable resources. Companies should therefore only work with

suppliers that adhere to the human rights and guarantee good labor conditions for their employees.

Companies should also remain in constant dialogue with non-governmental organizations (NGO’s).

NGO’s set up projects for society with a social, environmental or development purpose, depending

on the focus of the NGO. These NGO’s know a lot about the society and can make a company aware

of the needs and wants of the society. Furthermore, the business initiatives of this NGO's and other

charities are to be supported in their work in society. With the knowledge of needs and wants of the

society, the company can also set up their own projects to help solve problems of the society and

improve the quality of live. Investments of companies into the education and the economies of these

countries helps a company to obtain a sustainable resource flow in the future. By these initiatives the

company can show their commitment to a country and help to reduce poverty in these countries of

origin of their resources.

References of the Country of Origin aspect

Kok et al.

(2001)

Graafland et al.

(2004)

Lindgreen et al.

(2004)

Turker

(2009)

Planet 4 Earth

(2010)

Supplier relations Labour conditions

of suppliers

Include interest of

community in

decisions

Support NGO's in

problem area's

Fair-trading

Social

responsibility and

new opportunities

Contribution to

reduction of

poverty in third

world

Financially support

education in the

community

Contribute to

projects for well

being of society

Transparency

Community

relations

Dialogue with

NGO's

Improve quality of

life in the

community

Company knows

importance social

responsibility to

society

Give money to

charity in the

community

Financially support

projects in

community

Stimulate

economic

development in

the community



17

Figure E.4: Local Projects

The society in which the company markets its products and in which their employees live are also of

great importance for the company. It shows that the business takes the interest of both consumers

and employees seriously and is willing to invest in these subjects. It is therefore advisable to keep

good contact with NGO’s running projects in this community. Not only by supporting the projects of

the NGOs but also use to be able to use the knowledge they have of the community are interesting

options for businesses. Investing in local projects linked to the interests and needs of the community

indicates that the company wants forefront and to set an example for others. Helping the less

fortunate in this society and supporting good education shows that the company is willing to

contribute to the improvement of quality of live in this society. The literature references of this

aspect are displayed in Appendix D in figure D.4. Now the aspects of people are discussed the next

part will address the aspects of Planet.

References of the Local Projects aspect

Kok et al.

(2001)

Graafland et al.

(2004)

Lindgreen et al.

(2004)

Turker

(2009)

Planet 4 Earth

(2010)

Community

relations

Dialogue with

NGO's

Include interest of

community in

decisions

Support NGO's in

problem area's

Authenticity

Social

Responsibility and

new opportunities

Contribution to

local projects

Financially support

education in the

community

Contribute to

projects for well

being of society

Transparency

Respect for

costumer

Improve quality of

life in the

community

Company knows

importance social

responsibility to

society

Give money to

charity in the

community

Financially support

projects in

community

Stimulate

economic

development in

the community



18

Figure E.5: Waste Reduction

Through continuous product and packaging research and innovation, companies try to reduce the

remaining waste of a product. The voluntary innovation of the packaging and exceeding the

government regulations of waste are a good example of CSR. The recycling of used products in

production by the company itself and the encouragement of recycling of the product or parts of the

product by the consumer through collecting and reusing parts also helps to reduce waste. Another

example of waste reduction is to minimize the use of water and the efficient use of (cooling) water

by a company. With these initiatives the impact of production on the environment is minimized.

Setting goals and limits of use of certain materials and the transparent communication of these goals

in the business plan of a company, testifies of progressive planning on CSR.

References of the Waste Reduction aspect

Kok et al.

(2001)

Graafland et al.

(2004)

Lindgreen et al.

(2004)

Turker

(2009)

Planet 4 Earth

(2010)

Natural

environment

Environmental

effects

Exceed

environmental

regulations of

government

Projects to

minimize impact

on environment

Waste

reduction

Include

environmental

concerns in

decisions

Clear water

and soil

Include

environmental

performance

objectives

Minimize

environmental

impact of activities



19

Figure E.6: CO2 Gas Emission Reduction

Through the innovation of more sustainable methods for energy generation such as wind / water and

solar energy reduces CO2 gas emissions in the production process. Also reducing the use of energy

and increasing the efficiency of energy use are results from research and new innovations. The use of

these environmentally friendly energy sources and the encouragement of projects to develop these

methods are important to both the environment and the company. The use of less energy reduces

CO2 emissions which is good for the environment but also for reducing the energy costs for the

company. Moreover, more efficient transportation plans for the products and the development of

alternative and more efficient engines used in the transport equipment also ensure less

environmental impact through reduced emissions. Setting goals for emissions of CO2 and the use of

energy and clearly communicating them in the CSR reports demonstrate a high commitment towards

this aspect of CSR.

References of the CO2 Gas Emission Reduction aspect

Kok et al.

(2001)

Graafland et al.

(2004)

Lindgreen et al.

(2004)

Turker

(2009)

Planet 4 Earth

(2010)

Natural

environment

Environmental

effects

Exceed

environmental

regulations of

government

Projects to

minimize impact

on environment

Energy & GHG

Emissions

Reduction

Include

environmental

concerns in

decisions

Clear air

Include

environmental

performance

objectives

Minimize

environmental

impact of activities



20

Figure E.7: Product and Production Factors Conservation

To ensure that future stocks of raw materials are not at risk companies have to produce with

sustainable resources. Key partners in the preservation of these materials are NGO’s. Working

together with NGO’s to ensure the quality of products partly through labeling (like fair-trade) and

training people who work with these materials is very beneficial for the sustainability of the

production factors. Moreover, it is important to support these projects so that more suppliers are

trained and able to meet these “fair-trade” requirements. This is necessary because the demand of

consumers for fully sustainable products is also rising strongly. So to be able to meet the needs of

the consumers the resource supply must be sufficient. The supply of sustainable resources is growing

but is still scarce. Therefore consumers should be fully and fairly informed about the contents of the

products, this to enable them to balance en make the right choice between distinct offered

alternatives based by using this information.

References of the Product & Production Factors Conservation aspect

Kok et al.

(2001)

Graafland et al.

(2004)

Lindgreen et al.

(2004)

Turker

(2009)

Planet 4 Earth

(2010)

Consumer

relations

Supply of

sustainable

alternative

Include interest

of consumer in

decisions

Provide full and

accurate

information about

products

Natural resources

conservation

Safety & Quality of

product

Satisfy complaints

of consumer

Respect to

consumer needs

Environmental

effect of product &

production process

Provide

information for

consumers

needed to make

purchase decision



21

Figure E.8: Environment Conservation

In order to ensure the future generations of a healthy world we need to preserve and improve the

environment. Support en co-work with NGO’s and environmental organizations in environmental

projects is a start to this protection of the environment. Participating en financially supporting

projects in problem areas which try to protect and improve the environment are partly dependent on

the help of companies that work in these parts of the world. When large companies co-operate in

these projects, they give a good example to other companies and producers to follow them. Also

receiving and maintaining the ISO 14001 certification is a way of showing the commitment to

environmental conservation. ISO 14001 is an environmental certification of the International

Organization for Standardization as a prove that the company meets specific requirements of a good

“environmental management system”.

References of the Environment Conservation aspect

Kok et al.

(2001)

Graafland et al.

(2004)

Lindgreen et al.

(2004)

Turker

(2009)

Planet 4 Earth

(2010)

Natural

environment

Active dialogue

with

environmental

organisations

Financially support

environmental

initiatives

Participate in

activities which aim

to protect and

improve the quality

of the

environmental

Biodiversity

Dialogue with

NGO’s

Animal Welfare

ISO certification



22

Figure E.9: Supplier Rewards

Due to direct and transparent communication towards suppliers about the quality thresholds the

company persists, the company encourages suppliers to also participate in making the production

chain more sustainable. To make it fair and honest to all suppliers, using a system with bonus fees if

the quality of resources increases, the suppliers are stimulated correctly. Herewith the stakeholders

are working together on a more sustainable product including the employees in the next aspect.

References of the Supplier Rewards aspect

Kok et al. (2001) Graafland et al. (2004) Lindgreen et al. (2004)

Supplier relations Respect for supplier Treat suppliers fairly and

with respect

Inform suppliers about

changes

Figure E.10: Employee Rewards

When companies also communicate well with their employees about their CSR goals, they can

involve their employees in it. Just as to the suppliers it is also stimulating to the employees to set

goals. CSR goals for departments or for individuals are set and when achieved rewarded fairly with a

bonus. This creates an extra incentive besides the morale effort of the employees to perform in CSR

projects to create for example value for the company.

References of the Employee Rewards aspect

Kok et al. (2001)

Graafland et al.

(2004) Lindgreen et al. (2004) Turker (2009)

Organization structure

and management style

Correct attitude

towards employees

Provide employee

with salary that

rewards them fairly

Fair decisions towards

employees by

management



23

Figure E.11: Tangible Value

The shareholders who invest in the company are to be kept satisfied. They also expect transparency

of information of the company so the investors can assess whether all investment decisions are

taken responsibly. The results of the projects regarding to growth of revenues and profits are

calculated along with external audits on financial performance all to validate the management

choices. Measuring the environmental performance of projects are also important, energy savings

for example can reduce company costs. Besides growing numbers, CSR also increases as mentioned

earlier the image of a company explained in the next aspect.

References of the Tangible Value aspect

Kok et al. (2001) Graafland et al. (2004) Lindgreen et al. (2004)

Shareholder relations Profitability Financial performance

External audits Include interest of investors in

decisions

Prevention of inside trade of

stock

Provide full and accurate

financial info to stakeholders

Measure environmental

performance



24

Figure E.12: Intangible Value

The last and often difficult to measure and to assess aspects of CSR is the intangible value. All

projects and all rules that the company adheres to and the open communication about these facts

creates a moral value that is positively valued by all stakeholders. This has the effect that the

stakeholders are satisfied and the company creates a positive reputation. In addition if the company

respects the property of its competitors, prevents illegal cooperation within the sector and ensures

that stays bribery out of the company, the company can keep that image intact.

References of the Intangible Value aspect

Kok et al. (2001)

Graafland et al.

(2004) Lindgreen et al. (2004) Turker (2009)

Industrial relations Respect for

intellectual property

of competitors

Inform about

organization changes

Consumer satisfaction

is important for the

company

Communication &

Transparency

Measures to prevent

collusion

Measure environmental

performance

The company pays its

taxes on regular basis

Measures to prevent

bribery

Corporate

image/reputation

Company completely

complies legal

regulations

Correct attitude Morale employees

Social Reports Satisfaction consumer

Social Handbook Satisfaction other

stakeholders

Ethical committee Well being people in

general

(Inter)national visibility



25

Appendix F

Figure F.1: Into English translated questions of the final survey:

Welcome to the Douwe Egberts CSR Employee Commitment Research.

This is a study to bring the Corporate Social Responsibility (CSR) program closer to you!

In our CSR communication we use the six pillars from Cultivation to Cup. In the CSR literature the CSR

activities are also divided into the following sustainability themes: People, Planet and Profit. This

allocation will be used in this study.

The questionnaire consists of five parts. The questionnaire starts with some general questions and is

then followed by questions about the sustainability themes. Each sustainability theme is briefly

explained before the question. The last part is an overall overview and asks you for your preference

on all aspects. All this takes about 10 minutes. All responses and data will be processed

confidentially, so you can total anonymously fill in this form.

1. Are you ..?

□ Male

□ Female

2. What is your age?

□ Younger than 25

□ 25-35

□ 36-45

□ 46-55

□ 56-65

□ Over 65

3. How many years have you been working at Douwe Egberts at the moment?

□ Less than 1 year

□ 1-2 years

□ 2-3 years

□ 3-4 years

□ 5-10 years

□ More than 10 years

4. What is your function within Douwe Egberts?

□ Vice President

□ Director

□ Senior Manager

□ Manager

□ Team Leader

□ Employee



26

People

Below you see four aspects of People as Douwe Egberts applies it.

Put a 4 behind the aspect that you feel most commitment to, the next a 3 and then a 2. Give

a 1 to the aspect where you feel least committed to.

Use each number (4,3,2,and 1) only once!

5. Commitment assessment

□ Working Rights

□ Training

□ Country of Origin Projects

□ Local projects

6. In the previous question you have assessed a 4 to an aspect and therefore stated that you

feel most committed to this aspect.

Rate the following statements in response to that aspect.

(Strongly agree, agree, disagree, Strongly Disagree)

1. I am willing to work harder than normal to help Douwe Egberts, due to this aspect of CSR.

2. I feel very loyal to this aspect of CSR from Douwe Egberts.



27

3. This is an aspect wherefore I would take almost any job in order to continue working at Douwe

Egberts.

4. I find that my values and the values of Douwe Egberts are very similar in this

aspect of CSR.

5. I am proud to work for an organization that has this aspect of CSR.

6. I would turn down a job for which I get paid more at another organization to continue working at

Douwe Egberts due to this aspect of CSR.

7. Would you be more committed to this aspect if you would be more actively involved in

projects of this aspect?

(Yes or No) Yes No

If I may co-decide which project we invest in as Douwe Egberts.

Do you think this should be applied?

If I am actively approached to participate in a project.


If I get a number of options where I can apply for.


If I have an idea and I have the ability to implement it myself with a few people.


8. Would you feel more committed to this aspect, when the following information would be

provided?

(Yes or No) Yes No

More information about the reason why DE participates in the projects within

this aspect.


More information about the content of the projects DE participates in, within

this aspect.




28

More information about the implementation of the projects DE participates in,

within this aspect.


More information about the results of the projects DE participates in, within this

aspect.


Planet

Below you see four aspects of Planet as Douwe Egberts applies it.

Put a 4 behind the aspect that you feel most commitment to, the next a 3 an then a 2. Give

a 1 to the aspect where feel least committed to.



□ Waste Reduction

□ CO2 Gas Emission Reduction

□ Product and Product Factors Conservation

□ Environment Conservation






29




3. This is an aspect wherefore I would take almost any job in order to continue working at Douwe

Egberts.

4. I find that my values and the values of Douwe Egberts are very similar in this aspect of CSR.





provided?

(Yes or No) Yes No


this aspect.


More information about the content of the projects DE participates in, within

this aspect.


More information about the implementation of the projects DE participates in,

within this aspect.


More information about the results of the projects DE participates in, within this

aspect.




30

Profit

Below you see four aspects of Profit as Douwe Egberts applies it.

Put a 4 behind the aspect that you feel most commitment to, the next a 3 an then a 2. Give

a 1 to the aspect where feel least committed to.



□ Supplier rewards

□ Employee rewards

□ Tangible value

□ Intangible value









31

3. This is an aspect where I would take almost any job in order to continue working at Douwe

Egberts.

4. I find that my values and the values of Douwe Egberts are very similar in this

aspect of CSR.





provided?

(Yes or No) Yes No


this aspect.


More information about the content of the projects DE participates in within

this aspect.


More information about the implementation of the projects DE participates in

within this aspect.


More information about the results of the projects DE participates within this

aspect.




32

Overall

You have now seen all aspects of CSR and its application by Douwe Egberts pass by. Now is the

question to you to indicate what aspect of all the themes, you feel the most committed to. (If you

want to have another look at the explanation of the aspect, hold the mouse on the aspect in the

table.)

Put a 12 behind the aspect that you feel the most committed to, then a 11 for the next and so on.

And finally give a 1 to the aspect where you feel the least committed to.

Use each number only once!


□ Working Rights

□ Training Opportunities

□ Projects in the countries of origin

□ Local projects

□ Waste Reduction

□ Reduction of CO2 emissions

□ Protecting natural resources

□ Environment

□ Supplier rewards

□ Employee rewards

□ Tangible value

□ Intangible value

16. How often would you like to be updated on CSR projects?

□ Once a month

□ Once per quarter

□ Once per half a year

□ Once a year

17. How would you like to be updated on the projects within CSR?

□ By a website

□ By mail, textual

□ By mail, per video

□ By oral presentation

□ Otherwise, namely:

On behalf of the entire CSR team, thank you for your cooperation in this survey!



33

Figure F.2: SPSS Codebook of questionnaire

Variable SPSS variable name Coding instructions

Identification number ID Number assigned to each questionnaire

Gender Gender 1=Males

2=Females

Age NewAge 1= <35

2=35-45

3= >45

Tenure NewTenure 1= <5 years

2= 5-10 years

3= >10 years

Function within the company NewFunction 1= Management

2=Employee

Ranking Working Rights Peoplepref_1WR 4 (most important) to 1 (least important)

Ranking Training Peoplepref_2T 4 (most important) to 1 (least important)

Ranking Country of Origin Projects Peoplepref_3COP 4 (most important) to 1 (least important)

Ranking Local Projects Peoplepref_4LP 4 (most important) to 1 (least important)

Choice of most important CategoryPeople 1= WR

2=T

3=COP

4=LP

Organizational commitment to

most important aspect People

Peoplecomm_1Hard

Peoplecomm_2Loyal

Peoplecomm_3Job

Peoplecomm_4Value

Peoplecomm_5Proud

Peoplecomm_6Money

4 (Strongly agree) to 1 (Strongly disagree)






Mean of organizational

commitment People

TotalMeanPeopleComm Mean of scores on Peoplecomm_1Hard to

Peoplecomm_6Money

Commitment increase due to

involvement

Peoplecommincr_subject

1 (Yes) or 0 (No)


involvement should be applied

Peoplecommincr_subject

YN

1 (Yes) or 0 (No)


information

Peopleinfo_subject 1 (Yes) or 0 (No)


information should be applied

Peopleinfo_subject YN 1 (Yes) or 0 (No)

Ranking Waste Reduction Planetpref_5WR 4 (most important) to 1 (least important)

Ranking C02 Gas Emission

Reduction

Planetpref_6CGR 4 (most important) to 1 (least important)

Ranking Product & Production

process Conservation

Planetpref_7PPF 4 (most important) to 1 (least important)

Ranking Environment

Conservation

Planetpref_8E 4 (most important) to 1 (least important)

Choice of most important CategoryPlanet 1= WR

2=CGR

3=PPF

4=E



34



most important aspect Planet

Planetcomm_1Hard

Planetcomm_2Loyal

Planetcomm_3Job

Planetcomm_4Value

Planetcomm_5Proud

Planetcomm_6Money








commitment Planet

TotalMeanPlanetComm Mean of scores on Planetcomm_1Hard to

Planetcomm_6Money


information

Planetinfo_subject 1 (Yes) or 0 (No)



Planetinfo_subject YN 1 (Yes) or 0 (No)

Ranking Supplier Rewards Profitpref_9SR 4 (most important) to 1 (least important)

Ranking Employee Rewards Profitpref_10ER 4 (most important) to 1 (least important)

Ranking Tangible Value Profitpref_11TV 4 (most important) to 1 (least important)

Ranking Intangible Value Profitpref_12IV 4 (most important) to 1 (least important)

Choice of most important CategoryProfit 1=SR

2=ER

3=TV

4=IV


most important aspect Profit

Profitcomm_1Hard

Profitcomm_2Loyal

Profitcomm_3Job

Profitcomm_4Value

Profitcomm_5Proud

Profitcomm_6Money








commitment Profit

TotalMeanProfitComm Mean of scores on Profitcomm_1Hard to

Profitcomm_6Money


information

Profitinfo_subject 1 (Yes) or 0 (No)



Profitinfo_subject YN 1 (Yes) or 0 (No)



35


Ranking Supplier Rewards on total

PPP

Completepref_1WR 12 (most important) to 1 (least important)

Ranking Employee Rewards on

total PPP

Completepref_2T 12 (most important) to 1 (least important)

Ranking Tangible Value on total

PPP

Completepref_3COP 12 (most important) to 1 (least important)

Ranking Intangible Value on total

PPP

Completepref_4LP 12 (most important) to 1 (least important)

Ranking Waste Reduction on total

PPP

Completepref_5WR 12 (most important) to 1 (least important)

Ranking C02 Gas Emission

Reduction on total PPP

Completepref_6CGR 12 (most important) to 1 (least important)

Ranking Product & Production

process Conservation on total PPP

Completepref_7PPF 12 (most important) to 1 (least important)

Ranking Environment

Conservation on total PPP

Completepref_8E 12 (most important) to 1 (least important)

Ranking Supplier Rewards on total

PPP

Completepref_9SR 12 (most important) to 1 (least important)

Ranking Employee Rewards on

total PPP

Completepref_10ER 12 (most important) to 1 (least important)

Ranking Tangible Value on total

PPP

Completepref_11TV 12 (most important) to 1 (least important)

Ranking Intangible Value on total

PPP

Completepref_12IV 12 (most important) to 1 (least important)


commitment PPP

TotalMeanPlanetComm Mean of scores on

TotalMeanPeopleComm,

TotalMeanPlanetComm and

TotalMeanProfitComm

Amount of updates on CSR Updatefreq 1= 1 time per month

2= 1 time per quarter

3= 1 time per half a year

4= 1 time per year

Medium of update on CSR Updatemed 1= Via a website

2= By mail, textual

3= By mail, per video

4= By oral presentation

5= Otherwise



36

Figure F.3: Literature review of additional questions for DE on CSR and organizational commitment

Employees have mostly a lack of awareness and involvement about the CSR initiatives of their

company. They have a vague notion that there company is socially responsible but know little to

nothing about the specific activities the company engages in. Many employees are even eager to

know more about such initiatives, but they frequently find it very difficult to discover more about

them. The study of Bhattacharya et al. (2008) supports this, 90% of the respondents support that CSR

is important but only 50% had an idea what they do in it as a company. The most important tool to

create more awareness of employees is good communication methods. Companies need to inform

their employees about their CSR programs in a concrete, associated and consistent way. Such

communication has to contain the idea behind the CSR initiative and the specifics of the programs,

their operations, the company resources they are going to use and most importantly the successes of

the programs. The information given about the initiative should be realistic and objective

information. Otherwise it becomes unbelievable and can be explained in the wrong way as a simple

pr stunt (Bhattacharya et al., 2008). Companies must also encourage active participation by giving

opportunities and options to their employees; afterwards they should evaluate these projects just

like regular work in order to further stimulate participation. There is more scientific research that

support that information and participation are important to employees. Even the smallest initiatives

where employees can be informed of and participate in have large influence on their commitment

towards their company (Brammer et al., 2007; Nord and Fuller, 2009). Battacharya et al. (2008)

research shows that mostly CSR programs are designed by the higher levels of management,

commitment is higher when employees can co-decide what the program should be and even co-

create projects. So managers should involve the employees in the creation of CSR value. As co-

creators in the planning, design and implementation of CSR programs employees become

participants rather than onlookers. Stawiski et al. (2010) proposed that in order to yield maximum

benefits of CSR, employees should be involved in decision making regarding which actions should be

undertaken relating to environment community, employees themselves and the likewise.

Bhattacharya et al. (2008) advises companies to implement an input-output approach to their own

unique contexts to make CSR decisions. “Using research to identify the inputs in terms of the issues

of causes the company ought to support, the processes and, most importantly, the desired employee

centric outputs of each CSR program. Once the programs are implemented, the outputs can be

monitored through internal surveys to determine which programs are delivering the most value to

employees and ultimately to the company “(Bhattacharya et al. 2008, p 42). This exactly the goal of

this research, trying to find what employees find most important and makes them more committed

to the company. And in consequence make them work harder and perform better for their company.



37

Appendix G

Figure G.1: Frequencies of control variables and categories

Age Freq Perc

Valid < 25 9 3,6

25-35 80 32,4

36-45 74 30,0

46-55 69 27,9

56-65 15 6,1

Total 247 100,0

Tenure Freq Perc

Valid < 1 year 23 9,3

1-2 year 15 6,1

2-3 year 22 8,9

3-4 year 35 14,2

5-10 year 52 21,1

> 10 year 100 40,5

Total 247 100,0

Function Freq Perc

Valid Vice-President 2 ,8

Director 3 1,2

Senior-Manager 9 3,6

Manager 46 18,6

Team leader 27 10,9

Employee 160 64,8

Total 247 100,0

Gender Freq Perc

Valid Male 163 66,0

Female 84 34,0

Total 247 100,0

AgeNew Freq Perc

Valid <35 89 36,0

35-45 74 30,0

45> 84 34,0

Total 247 100,0

TenureNew Freq Perc

Valid <5 years 95 38,5

5-10 years 52 21,1

>10 years 100 40,5

Total 247 100,0

FunctionNew Freq Perc

Valid Management 87 35,2

Employee 160 64,8

Total 247 100,0



38

Figure G.2: Descriptive statistics of ranking of aspects of People, Planet & Profit

R People

1WR 2T 3COP 4LP

N % N % N % N %

1 33 13,4 44 17,8 63 25,5 107 43,3

2 35 14,2 62 25,1 75 30,4 75 30,4

3 65 26,3 79 32,0 57 23,1 46 18,6

4 114 46,2 62 25,1 52 21,1 19 7,7



39

R Planet

5WR 6CGR 7PPF 8E

N % N % N % N %

1 24 9,7 26 10,5 31 12,6 166 67,2

2 61 24,7 71 28,7 80 32,4 35 14,2

3 83 33,6 78 31,6 59 23,9 27 10,9

4 79 32,0 72 29,1 77 31,2 19 7,7



40

R Profit

9SR 10ER 11TV 12IV

N % N % N % N %

1 53 21,5 90 36,4 26 10,5 78 31,6

2 47 19,0 53 21,5 68 27,5 79 32,0

3 67 27,1 40 16,2 84 34,0 56 22,7

4 80 32,4 64 25,9 69 27,9 34 13,8



41

Figure G.3: Reliability statistics of People, Planet & Profit commitment measures

Scale: People commitment

Reliability Statistics

Cronbach's Alpha Cronbach's Alpha Based on Standardized Items N of Items

,710 ,722 6

Inter-Item Correlation Matrix

Peoplecom

m_1Hard

Peoplecom

m_2Loyal

Peoplecom

m_3Job

Peoplecom

m_4Value

Peoplecom

m_5Proud

Peoplecom

m_6Money

Peoplecomm_1Hard 1,000 ,449 ,058 ,254 ,299 ,261

Peoplecomm_2Loyal ,449 1,000 ,261 ,394 ,421 ,321

Peoplecomm_3Job ,058 ,261 1,000 ,160 ,219 ,418

Peoplecomm_4Value ,254 ,394 ,160 1,000 ,492 ,242

Peoplecomm_5Proud ,299 ,421 ,219 ,492 1,000 ,281

Peoplecomm_6Money ,261 ,321 ,418 ,242 ,281 1,000

Item-Total Statistics

Scale Mean if

Item Deleted

Scale Variance

if Item Deleted

Corrected Item-

Total Correlation

Squared Multiple

Correlation

Cronbach's Alpha

if Item Deleted

Peoplecomm_1Hard 13,39 3,873 ,378 ,243 ,693

Peoplecomm_2Loyal 13,20 3,796 ,571 ,355 ,634

Peoplecomm_3Job 14,18 3,976 ,326 ,212 ,712

Peoplecomm_4Value 13,30 4,111 ,450 ,289 ,670

Peoplecomm_5Proud 13,13 3,956 ,510 ,325 ,653

Peoplecomm_6Money 14,09 3,745 ,471 ,260 ,661

Scale: Planet Commitment



,676 ,679 6


Planetcomm

_1Hard

Planetcomm

_2Loyal

Planetcomm

_3 Job

Planetcomm

_4Value

Planetcomm

_5Proud

Planetcom

m_6Money

Planetcomm_1Hard 1,000 ,533 ,228 ,003 ,270 ,274

Planetcomm_2Loyal ,533 1,000 ,226 ,230 ,356 ,198

Planetcomm_3Job ,228 ,226 1,000 ,160 ,083 ,603

Planetcomm_4Value ,003 ,230 ,160 1,000 ,445 ,124

Planetcomm_5Proud ,270 ,356 ,083 ,445 1,000 ,173

Planetcomm_6Money ,274 ,198 ,603 ,124 ,173 1,000



42


Scale Mean if

Item Deleted

Scale Variance

if Item Deleted

Corrected Item-

Total Correlation

Squared Multiple

Correlation

Cronbach's Alpha

if Item Deleted

Planetcomm_1Hard 12,97 2,954 ,409 ,351 ,637

Planetcomm_2Loyal 12,79 3,080 ,504 ,360 ,603

Planetcomm_3Job 13,66 3,152 ,421 ,390 ,630

Planetcomm_4Value 12,80 3,493 ,268 ,255 ,678

Planetcomm_5Proud 12,58 3,342 ,409 ,302 ,636

Planetcomm_6Money 13,60 3,054 ,441 ,393 ,622

Scale: Profit Commitment



,703 ,709 6


Profitcomm

_1Hard

Profitcomm

_2 Loyal

Profitcomm

_3 Job

Profitcomm

_4 Value

Profitcomm

_5 Proud

Profitcomm

_6Money

Profitcomm_1Hard 1,000 ,519 ,286 ,136 ,273 ,256

Profitcomm_2Loyal ,519 1,000 ,186 ,343 ,409 ,215

Profitcomm_3Job ,286 ,186 1,000 ,119 ,181 ,552

Profitcomm_4Value ,136 ,343 ,119 1,000 ,457 ,195

Profitcomm_5Proud ,273 ,409 ,181 ,457 1,000 ,209

Profitcomm_6Money ,256 ,215 ,552 ,195 ,209 1,000


Scale Mean if

Item Deleted

Scale Variance

if Item Deleted

Corrected Item-

Total Correlation

Squared Multiple

Correlation

Cronbach's Alpha

if Item Deleted

Profitcomm_1Hard 13,21 3,476 ,442 ,319 ,663

Profitcomm_2Loyal 13,14 3,748 ,517 ,376 ,642

Profitcomm_3Job 13,94 3,654 ,420 ,329 ,669

Profitcomm_4Value 13,25 3,967 ,352 ,252 ,688

Profitcomm_5Proud 13,06 3,862 ,454 ,294 ,660

Profitcomm_6Money 13,93 3,528 ,447 ,332 ,660



43

Figure G.4: Normality statistics of People, Planet & Profit commitment data

Normality Kolmogorov-Smirnov

a

Statistic df Sig.

TotalMeanPeopleComm ,120 247 ,000

TotalMeanPlanetComm ,133 247 ,000

TotalMeanProfitComm ,118 247 ,000

TotalMeanPPPComm ,074 247 ,002

Discriptives Statistic Std. Error

TotalMeanPPPComm Mean 2,6689 ,02013

Skewness ,069 ,155

Kurtosis ,748 ,309

TotalMeanPeopleComm Mean 2,7092 ,02446

Skewness -,088 ,155

Kurtosis ,793 ,309

TotalMeanPlanetComm Mean 2,6134 ,02199

Skewness -,090 ,155

Kurtosis 1,238 ,309

TotalMeanProfitComm Mean 2,6842 ,02380

Skewness ,228 ,155

Kurtosis ,450 ,309



44



45

Figure G.5: Differences between means of aspects and amount of choices of aspects as most important:

Dimension Aspect Com Mean N

People Working Rights 2,6813 114

Mean 2,7092 Training 2,7043 62

LS Sig 0,891 Country of Origin Projects 2,7788 52

F Sig 0,510 Local Projects 2,7018 19

Planet Waste Reduction 2,6139 79

Mean 2,6134 C02 Gas Emission Reduction 2,6389 72

LS Sig 0,470 Product & Production Factor Conservation 2,5736 77

F Sig 0,570 Environment Conservation 2,6754 19

Profit Supplier Rewards 2,7229 80

Mean 2,6842 Employee Rewards 2,6354 64

LS Sig 0,147 Tangible Value 2,6787 69

F Sig 0,576 Intangible Value 2,6961 34



46

Figure G.6: Results from Commitment increase and info questions of People, Planet and Profit.

Variable People Increase Freq Perc Freq Perc

Peoplecommincr_CoDec Yes 164 66,4

Apply? Yes 104 42,1

No 83 33,6 No 143 57,9

Peoplecommincr_AcApp Yes 177 71,7

Apply? Yes 109 44,1

No 70 28,3 No 138 55,9

Peoplecommincr_Option Yes 175 70,9

Apply? Yes 134 54,3

No 72 29,1 No 113 45,7

Peoplecommincr_OwnIdea Yes 170 68,8

Apply? Yes 111 44,9

No 77 31,2 No 136 55,1

Variable People Info Freq Perc Freq Perc

Peopleinfo_Reason Yes 184 74,5

Apply? Yes 142 57,5

No 63 25,5 No 105 42,5

Peopleinfo_Content Yes 197 79,8

Apply? Yes 153 61,9

No 50 20,2 No 94 38,1

Peopleinfo_Implem Yes 189 76,5

Apply? Yes 149 60,3

No 58 23,5 No 98 39,7

Peopleinfo_Result Yes 207 83,8

Apply? Yes 175 70,9

No 40 16,2 No 72 29,1

Variable Planet Info Freq Perc Freq Perc

Planetinfo_Reason Yes 164 66,4

Apply? Yes 132 53,4

No 83 33,6 No 115 46,6

Planetinfo_Content Yes 180 72,9

Apply? Yes 149 60,3

No 67 27,1 No 98 39,7

Planetinfo_Implem Yes 173 70,0

Apply? Yes 142 57,5

No 74 30,0 No 105 42,5

Planetinfo_Result Yes 199 80,6

Apply? Yes 171 69,2

No 48 19,4 No 76 30,8

Variable Profit Info Freq Perc Freq Perc

Planetinfo_Reason Yes 175 70,9

Apply? Yes 142 57,5

No 72 29,1 No 105 42,5

Planetinfo_Content Yes 183 74,1

Apply? Yes 156 63,2

No 64 25,9 No 91 36,8

Planetinfo_Implem Yes 179 72,5

Apply? Yes 148 59,9

No 68 27,5 No 99 40,1

Planetinfo_Result Yes 195 78,9

Apply? Yes 172 69,6

No 52 21,1 No 75 30,4



47

Figure G.7: Results of update frequency and update medium of CSR.

Update Frequency Freq Perc

Valid Once a month 58 23,5

Once per quarter 114 46,2

Once per half a year 48 19,4

Once a year 27 10,9

Total 247 100,0

Update Medium Freq Perc

Valid By a website 69 27,9

By mail, textual 87 35,2

By mail, per video 65 26,3

By oral presentation 15 6,1

Otherwise namely: 11 4,5

Total 247 100,0



48

Figure G.8: Differences between mean of aspects and the influence of the control variables People,

Planet & Profit.

Variable Category WR T COP LP

Gender Male 2,6961 2,6912 2,8656 2,7308

LS Sig 0,962 Female 2,6379 2,7202 2,6508 2,6389

IF Sig 0,421

Age <35 2,6313 2,6611 2,5952 2,7667

LS Sig 0,799 35-45 2,7312 2,6863 2,9537 2,5833

IF Sig 0,263 45> 2,6833 2,8111 2,8333 2,8056

Tenure <5 2,6225 2,6616 2,6905 2,8571

LS Sig 0,577 5-10 2,7460 2,6795 2,6667 2,5667

IF Sig 0,238 10> 2,6921 2,8125 2,9630 2,6429

Function Management 2,8524 2,6515 2,7000 2,8000

LS Sig 0,865 Employee 2,6055 2,7333 2,8281 2,5926

IF Sig 0,010



49

Variable Category WR CGR PPF E

Gender Male 2,6579 2,6860 2,6218 2,7727

LS Sig 0,655 Female 2,5000 2,5690 2,4733 2,5417

F Sig 0,934

Age <35 2,4924 2,6267 2,4902 2,5625

LS Sig 0,731 35-45 2,7099 2,7368 2,6458 2,6250

F Sig 0,588 45> 2,6167 2,5833 2,6316 2,8333

Tenure <5 2,5800 2,6420 2,5392 2,6852

LS Sig 0,918 5-10 2,5000 2,7111 2,5702 2,7500

F Sig 0,605 10> 2,6750 2,6000 2,6250 2,6111


LS Sig 0,654 Employee 2,6100 2,6144 2,5918 2,6667

F Sig 0,752



50

Variable Category SR ER TV IV

Gender Male 2,7556 2,6493 2,6809 2,7899

LS Sig 0,649 Female 2,6810 2,5938 2,6742 2,5000

F Sig 0,397

Age <35 2,6728 2,6597 2,8056 2,4167

LS Sig 0,029 35-45 2,8258 2,6053 2,5870 2,9000

F Sig 0,003 45> 2,6935 2,6349 2,6364 2,8833

Tenure <5 2,6905 2,6032 2,7716 2,6491

LS Sig 0,303 5-10 2,7807 2,5937 2,5952 2,6111

F Sig 0,510 10> 2,7172 2,6852 2,6310 2,7917


LS Sig 0,092 Employee 2,7153 2,6136 2,6468 2,7051

F Sig 0,895



51

Figure G.9: Differences between mean of the dimensions and the influence of the control variables:

Variable N People Planet Profit PPP

Gender

Male 163 2,7301 2,6616 2,7076 2,6697

Female 84 2,6687 2,5198 2,6389 2,6091

LS Sig 0,377 0,233 0,672 0,859

F Sig 0.235 0.002 0.172 0.033

Age

<35 79 2,6404 2,5356 2,6648 2,6136

35-45 84 2,7590 2,6914 2,7050 2,7185

45> 74 2,7381 2,6270 2,6865 2,6839

LS Sig 0,276 0,933 0,023 0,316

F Sig 0.102 0.014 0.792 0.094



52

Variable N People Planet Profit PPP

Tenure

<5 95 2,6684 2,5930 2,6860 2,6491

5-10 52 2,6923 2,6058 2,6635 2,6538

10> 100 2,7567 2,6367 2,6933 2,6956

LS Sig 0,482 0,923 0,424 0,295

F Sig 0,261 0,669 0,896 0,551

Function

Management 87 2,7605 2,6207 2,7146 2,6986

Employee 160 2,6812 2,6094 2,6677 2,6528

LS Sig 0,952 0,352 0,976 0,606

F Sig 0,122 0,806 0,348 0,278



53

Figure G.10: Tukey HSD Post Hoc tests of ANOVA’s of age on organizational commitment

Dependent Variable (I) AgeNew (J) AgeNew Mean Difference (I-J) Std. Error Sig.

TotalMeanPlanetComm <35 35-45 -,15586* ,05365 ,011

45> -,09140 ,05188 ,185

35-45 <35 ,15586* ,05365 ,011

45> ,06446 ,05437 ,463

45> <35 ,09140 ,05188 ,185

35-45 -,06446 ,05437 ,463

*The mean difference is significant at the 0,05 level

Age on organizational commitment of the dimension Planet


Age on organizational commitment of Country of Origin Projects and Intangible Value

(I) AgeNew (J) AgeNew

Mean

Difference (I-J) Std. Error Sig.

Age x MeanCOPComm

<35 35-45 -,48333* ,16160 ,015

45> -,46667* ,16160 ,019

35-45 <35 ,48333* ,16160 ,015

45> ,01667 ,17454 ,995

45> <35 ,46667* ,16160 ,019

35-45 -,01667 ,17454 ,995

Age x MeanIVComm

<35 35-45 -,35847* ,11155 ,006

45> -,23810 ,12256 ,138

35-45 <35 ,35847* ,11155 ,006

45> ,12037 ,12640 ,610

45> <35 ,23810 ,12256 ,138

35-45 -,12037 ,12640 ,610



54

Figure G.11: Differences between mean of the measures and the means of the aspects:

Variable LS Sig F Sig WR T COP LP People

Peoplecomm_1Hard 0,016 0,018 2,73 2,94 3,06 2,95 2,87

Peoplecomm_2Loyal 0,344 0,057 2,97 3,03 3,21 3,16 3,05

Peoplecomm_3Job 0,735 0,120 2,16 2,11 1,92 1,89 2,08

Peoplecomm_4Value 0,590 0,327 2,92 2,94 3,08 2,95 2,96

Peoplecomm_5Proud 0,126 0,039 3,08 3,05 3,29 3,26 3,13

Peoplecomm_6Money 0,285 0,448 2,23 2,16 2,12 2,00 2,17

Variable LS Sig F Sig WR CGR PPF E Planet

Planetcomm_1Hard 0,100 0,401 2,66 2,82 2,66 2,68 2,71

Planetcomm_2Loyal 0,404 0,978 2,87 2,90 2,91 2,89 2,89

Planetcomm_3Job 0,676 0,145 2,09 2,03 1,91 2,16 2,02

Planetcomm_4Value 0,364 0,928 2,86 2,89 2,87 2,95 2,88

Planetcomm_5Proud 0,271 0,848 3,08 3,14 3,08 3,11 3,10

Planetcomm_6Money 0,335 0,323 2,13 2,06 2,01 2,26 2,08



55

Variable LS Sig F Sig SR ER TV IV Profit

Profitcomm_1Hard 0,529 0,483 2,93 2,91 2,80 3,00 2,89

Profitcomm_2Loyal 0,176 0,089 3,01 2,83 2,99 3,06 2,96

Profitcomm_3Job 0,038 0,160 2,11 2,30 2,19 2,03 2,17

Profitcomm_4Value 0,007 0,006 2,96 2,66 2,91 2,88 2,86

Profitcomm_5Proud 0,353 0,007 3,13 2,86 3,07 3,15 3,04

Proficomm_6Money 0,007 0,389 2,20 2,27 2,12 2,06 2,17



56

Figure G.12: Differences between mean of the measures

and the influence of control variables.

Var Pe1H Pe2L Pe3J Pe4V Pe5P Pe6

M

Pl1H Pl2L Pl3J Pl4V Pl5P Pl6M Pr1H Pr2L Pr3J Pr4V Pr5P Pr6M

Gen

Male 2,85 3,08 2,13 2,94 3,15 2,23 2,77 2,94 2,09 2,90 3,11 2,16 2,90 2,96 2,21 2,87 3,06 2,26

Female 2,90 3,00 1,98 2,99 3,08 2,06 2,60 2,80 1,88 2,85 3,07 1,93 2,89 2,96 2,10 2,85 3,02 2,01

LS Sig 0,066 0,276 0,987 0,949 0,086 0,186 0,903 0,023 0,348 0,026 0,722 0,882 0,686 0,944 0,693 0,756 0,423 0,029

F Sig 0,520 0,281 0,094 0,533 0,329 0,051 0,050 0,039 0,005 0,477 0,550 0,003 0,975 0,987 0,175 0,789 0,649 0,005

Age

<35 2,90 2,98 1,89 2,87 3,13 2,08 2,65 2,80 1,85 2,84 3,12 1,94 2,98 2,99 2,11 2,79 3,03 2,09

35-45 2,86 3,12 2,09 3,07 3,18 2,23 2,81 3,00 2,08 2,95 3,16 2,15 2,92 2,96 2,14 2,89 3,11 2,22

45> 2,83 3,07 2,26 2,96 3,08 2,21 2,68 2,90 2,14 2,88 3,01 2,17 2,79 2,94 2,26 2,90 3,00 2,23

LS Sig 0,303 0,563 0,128 0,020 0,004 0,227 0,979 0,017 0,542 0,269 0,001 0,162 0,388 0,042 0,119 0,018 0,016 0,958

F Sig 0,814 0,232 0,001 0,044 0,552 0,240 0,265 0,051 0,001 0,416 0,122 0,021 0,161 0,824 0,243 0,302 0,405 0,309



57

Var Pe1H Pe2L Pe3J Pe4V Pe5P Pe6

M

Pl1H Pl2L Pl3J Pl4V Pl5P Pl6M Pr1H Pr2L Pr3J Pr4V Pr5P Pr6M

Ten

<5 2,94 2,96 1,86 2,98 3,09 2,18 2,71 2,81 1,91 2,94 3,16 2,04 2,94 2,96 2,09 2,91 3,08 2,14

5-10 2,73 3,17 2,12 2,87 3,19 2,08 2,67 2,98 1,98 2,81 3,13 2,06 2,90 2,98 2,17 2,71 3,00 2,21

10> 2,87 3,08 2,26 2,99 3,13 2,21 2,73 2,93 2,15 2,86 3,02 2,13 2,85 2,96 2,24 2,89 3,03 2,19

LS Sig 0,003 0,419 0,020 0,918 0,287 0,226 0,032 0,220 0,029 0,520 0,003 0,455 0,045 0,313 0,378 0,003 0,596 0,455

F Sig 0,205 0,061 0,000 0,332 0,571 0,472 0,877 0,122 0,008 0,330 0,114 0,550 0,664 0,963 0,264 0,093 0,595 0,762

Fun

Man 3,01 3,17 2,07 2,98 3,23 2,10 2,83 2,95 1,97 2,82 3,13 2,03 3,00 3,01 2,13 2,89 3,11 2,15

Empl 2,79 2,99 2,08 2,95 3,08 2,21 2,64 2,86 2,05 2,91 3,08 2,11 2,84 2,94 2,19 2,84 3,01 2,19

LS Sig 0,139 0,208 0,711 0,388 0,049 0,016 0,854 0,592 0,566 0,663 0,500 0,225 0,863 0,860 0,117 0,148 0,252 0,500

F Sig 0,012 0,011 0,892 0,695 0,029 0,229 0,034 0,196 0,257 0,170 0,485 0,359 0,070 0,280 0,417 0,573 0,111 0,660



58

Figure G.13: Tukey HSD Post Hoc tests of ANOVA’s of age on OCQ measures

Dependent Variable (I) AgeNew (J) AgeNew Mean Difference (I-J) Std. Error Sig.

Peoplecomm_3Job <35 35-45 -,207 ,104 ,119

45> -,374* ,101 ,001

35-45 <35 ,207 ,104 ,119

45> -,167 ,106 ,256

45> <35 ,374* ,101 ,001

35-45 ,167 ,106 ,256

Planetcomm_3Job <35 35-45 -,227* ,086 ,024

45> -,289* ,083 ,002

35-45 <35 ,227* ,086 ,024

45> -,062 ,087 ,758

45> <35 ,289* ,083 ,002

35-45 ,062 ,087 ,758

Planetcomm_6Money <35 35-45 -,205 ,091 ,065

45> -,223* ,088 ,032

35-45 <35 ,205 ,091 ,065

45> -,018 ,092 ,979

45> <35 ,223* ,088 ,032

35-45 ,018 ,092 ,979




59

G.14: Analysis of difference between groups on the OCQ items

With the analysis of the differences between groups and the means of the OCQ items is tried to find

if there are outstanding differences in the build up of organizational commitment. First the OCQ

measures are analyzed on the aspects per dimension. The results of these analyses are summarized

in Appendix G figure G.11. Two analyses found significant differences namely, aspects of dimension

People and Profit on the OCQ measure “Proud to work for a company with this aspect”. Both of the

effects do not violate the homogeneity of variances with values of 0,126 and 0,353 (see Appendix G

figure G.11). And the effects both are statistically significant because, F (3,243) = 2,823, p = 0,039

holds for the effect on the aspects of the dimension People and F (3,243) = 4,121, p = 0,007 for the

effect on the aspects of dimension Profit (see figure G.14.1). The effect sizes for these effects are

respectively, 0,034 and 0,031 and can be considered as modest influences. This indicates that the

respondents are more proud on the fact that the company supports projects local and abroad than

the fact that the company has good working rights and training options for the employees. And the

second result claims that the respondents are more proud on the fact that suppliers get honestly

rewarded and the image of the company is upheld than that the employees are rewarded for their

efforts. The difference on the ‘proud item’ between employee rewards and the tangible values of the

company is not significantly different.

Variables Sum of Squares df Mean Square F Sig.

Dimensions People

People Commitment

OCQ on Proud

Between Groups 2,353 3 ,784 2,823 ,039


Total 69,854 246

Dimension Profit

Profit Commitment

OCQ on Proud

Between Groups 3,123 3 1,041 4,121 ,007


Total 100,858 246

Figure G.14.1: ANOVA results of aspects of dimension People and Profit on OCQ Measure Proud

Next is analyzed if the control variables have significant differences on the six OCQ measures. The

results of these analyses are summarized in Appendix G figure G.12.

These analyses found several significant results, the first that will be handled are the results of the

control variable gender. The significant results are found on the OCQ measures “Would take any job

within company due to this aspect” and “Would turn down job offer from other company for more

money due to this aspect” within the Planet dimension. Homogeneity of variances is not violated by

both effects with values of 0,348 and 0,882 (see Appendix G figure G.12) and are significant with the

values F (1,245) = 8,129, p = 0,005 and F (1,245) = 8,896, p = 0,003 (see figure G.14.2). The effect

sizes though are again modest with values of 0,032 and 0,035.



60

Both results indicate that women tend to have less interest in taken another job or refusing a job

offer with a higher salary when it comes to the aspects of the dimension Planet.

Figure G.14.2: ANOVA results of aspects of Gender on OCQ Measures Job and Money of the dimension Planet

On the control variable age are also found some significant differences, namely on the just

mentioned OCQ measures of Job on the aspects of the dimensions People and Planet and Money on

the aspects of the dimension Planet. With values of 0,128; 0,542 and 0,162 the homogeneity of

variance assumptions are not violated (see Appendix G figure G.12). And with values F (2,244) =

6,910, p = 0,001; F (2,244) = 6,691, p= 0,001 and F (2,244) = 3,925, p = 0,021 all three effects are

statistically significant (see figure G.14.3). And with effect sizes of 0,054 and 0,053 for respectively

the two Job OCQ measures of People and Planet the effects can be called mediocre. With an effect

size 0,031 the last effect of age is a little less influential. After studying the post hoc analysis (see

Appendix G figure G.13) the results on the first effect can be interpreted as that the respondents

below 35 tend to be less eager to take another job within the company due to the aspects of People

then the respondents above 45. For the second effect the respondents below 35 feel also less

tempted for the aspects of the Planet dimension contrary to the rest of the respondents. The last

effect explains that the respondents below 35 feel less reluctant to turn down an offer for more

money of another company then the respondents of above 45 years old.

Figure G.14.3: ANOVA results of aspects of Age on OCQ Measures Job and Money of the dimension People and Planet

Gender Sum of Squares df Mean Square F Sig.

Planet Commitment

OCQ on Job

Between Groups 2,470 1 2,470 8,129 ,005


Total 76,899 246

Planet Commitment

OCQ on Money

Between Groups 2,956 1 2,956 8,896 ,003


Total 84,381 246

Age Sum of Squares df Mean Square F Sig.

People Commitment

OCQ on Job

Between Groups 6,086 2 3,043 6,910 ,001


Total 113,538 246

Planet Commitment

OCQ on Job

Between Groups 3,998 2 1,999 6,691 ,001


Total 76,899 246

Planet Commitment

OCQ on Money

Between Groups 2,630 2 1,315 3,925 ,021


Total 84,381 246



61

The last control variable that showed significant differences is the ‘function within the company’

variable. The effects that show up with this variable are on ‘The willingness to work harder for this

aspect’ OCQ measure on the aspects of the People and Planet dimension and the ‘Feel loyal towards

this aspect’ OCW measure on the aspects of the People dimension. The homogeneity of variances

assumption is with values of respectively 0,139; 0,208 and 0,854 not violated (See Appendix G figure

G.13). And the significance of these effects are shown in the resulting values F (1,245) = 6,429, p =

0,012; F (1,245) = 6,522, p = 0,011 and F (1,245) = 4,526, p = 0,034 (see figure G.14.4). The influences

of these effects are very small though, with effect sizes of respectively, 0,026; 0,026 and 0,018. The

interpretation of these results are that management is prepared to work harder and feel more loyal

towards the aspects of People and are also prepared to work harder for the aspects of the Planet

dimension. The last analysis that will be done contains an overview on groups of respondents who

choose the same aspects as important.

Figure G.14.4: ANOVA results of aspects of Function on OCQ Measures Hard and Loyal of the dimension People and

Planet

Function Sum of Squares df Mean Square F Sig.

People Commitment

OCQ on Hard

Between Groups 2,828 1 2,828 6,429 ,012


Total 110,591 246

People Commitment

OCQ on Loyal

Between Groups 1,927 1 1,927 6,522 ,011


Total 74,316 246

Planet Commitment

OCQ on Hard

Between Groups 1,905 1 1,905 4,526 ,034


Total 105,012 246



62

Figure G.15: Analysis of respondents that make the same aspect choices per dimension:

Warnings

The crosstabulation of HighPeoplepref_2T * HighPlanetpref_8E * HighProfitpref_11TV is empty.

The crosstabulation of HighPeoplepref_3COP * HighPlanetpref_5WR * HighProfitpref_10ER is

empty.

The crosstabulation of HighPeoplepref_3COP * HighPlanetpref_8E * HighProfitpref_10ER is empty.

The crosstabulation of HighPeoplepref_4LP * HighPlanetpref_5WR * HighProfitpref_9SR is empty.

The crosstabulation of HighPeoplepref_4LP * HighPlanetpref_6CGR * HighProfitpref_12IV is empty.

The crosstabulation of HighPeoplepref_4LP * HighPlanetpref_7PPF * HighProfitpref_10ER is empty.

The crosstabulation of HighPeoplepref_4LP * HighPlanetpref_8E * HighProfitpref_10ER is empty.

The crosstabulation of HighPeoplepref_4LP * HighPlanetpref_8E * HighProfitpref_11TV is empty.

The crosstabulation of HighPeoplepref_4LP * HighPlanetpref_8E * HighProfitpref_12IV is empty.

Crosstabs Valid

N Percent

HighPeoplepref_1WR *

HighPlanetpref_5WR *

HighProfitpref_9SR

11 4,5%



HighProfitpref_10ER

14 5,7%



HighProfitpref_11TV

8 3,2%



HighProfitpref_12IV

5 2,0%


HighPlanetpref_6CGR *

HighProfitpref_9SR

13 5,3%



HighProfitpref_10ER

11 4,5%



HighProfitpref_11TV

9 3,6%



HighProfitpref_12IV

5 2,0%



63


HighPlanetpref_7PPF *

HighProfitpref_9SR

9 3,6%



HighProfitpref_10ER

10 4,0%



HighProfitpref_11TV

7 2,8%



HighProfitpref_12IV

3 1,2%


HighPlanetpref_8E *

HighProfitpref_9SR

1 ,4%


HighPlanetpref_8E *

HighProfitpref_10ER

4 1,6%


HighPlanetpref_8E *

HighProfitpref_11TV

1 ,4%


HighPlanetpref_8E *

HighProfitpref_12IV

3 1,2%

HighPeoplepref_2T *


HighProfitpref_9SR

1 ,4%

HighPeoplepref_2T *


HighProfitpref_10ER

8 3,2%

HighPeoplepref_2T *


HighProfitpref_11TV

9 3,6%

HighPeoplepref_2T *


HighProfitpref_12IV

2 ,8%

HighPeoplepref_2T *


HighProfitpref_9SR

4 1,6%

HighPeoplepref_2T *


HighProfitpref_10ER

2 ,8%



64

HighPeoplepref_2T *


HighProfitpref_11TV

5 2,0%

HighPeoplepref_2T *


HighProfitpref_12IV

1 ,4%

HighPeoplepref_2T *


HighProfitpref_9SR

6 2,4%

HighPeoplepref_2T *


HighProfitpref_10ER

7 2,8%

HighPeoplepref_2T *


HighProfitpref_11TV

10 4,0%

HighPeoplepref_2T *


HighProfitpref_12IV

2 ,8%

HighPeoplepref_2T *

HighPlanetpref_8E *

HighProfitpref_9SR

2 ,8%

HighPeoplepref_2T *

HighPlanetpref_8E *

HighProfitpref_10ER

2 ,8%

HighPeoplepref_2T *

HighPlanetpref_8E *

HighProfitpref_12IV

1 ,4%

HighPeoplepref_3COP *


HighProfitpref_9SR

8 3,2%



HighProfitpref_11TV

6 2,4%



HighProfitpref_12IV

1 ,4%



HighProfitpref_9SR

11 4,5%



HighProfitpref_10ER

1 ,4%



65



HighProfitpref_11TV

2 ,8%



HighProfitpref_12IV

2 ,8%



HighProfitpref_9SR

7 2,8%



HighProfitpref_10ER

2 ,8%



HighProfitpref_11TV

3 1,2%



HighProfitpref_12IV

5 2,0%


HighPlanetpref_8E *

HighProfitpref_9SR

2 ,8%


HighPlanetpref_8E *

HighProfitpref_11TV

1 ,4%


HighPlanetpref_8E *

HighProfitpref_12IV

1 ,4%

HighPeoplepref_4LP *


HighProfitpref_10ER

1 ,4%



HighProfitpref_11TV

4 1,6%



HighProfitpref_12IV

1 ,4%



HighProfitpref_9SR

1 ,4%



HighProfitpref_10ER

2 ,8%



66



HighProfitpref_11TV

3 1,2%



HighProfitpref_9SR

3 1,2%



HighProfitpref_11TV

1 ,4%



HighProfitpref_12IV

2 ,8%


HighPlanetpref_8E *

HighProfitpref_9SR

1 ,4%

csr magisterij turker me

Documents