IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/sae/sagope/v10y2020i2p2158244020924427.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

The Employee Attributions of Corporate Hypocrisy in Corporate Social Responsibility: An Explore Research Based on Grounded Theory

Author

Listed:
  • Hongdan Zhao
  • Jing Xu
  • Yuanhua Chen
  • Wenyuan Sun

Abstract

From a global perspective, the hypocrisy of enterprises in fulfilling their social responsibilities has become a common phenomenon. However, theoretical research on corporate hypocrisy, especially in the micro level, is still insufficient. To enrich the theoretical achievements of corporate hypocrisy in the micro level, this study adopted the grounded theory methods to explore the employee attributions of corporate hypocrisy in Corporate Social Responsibility (CSR) and dig deeper into the internal links and role paths between the attributions. After the process of defining problems, collecting data, three-level coding, construction theory, and saturation test, we used dates from 21 employees and found that the employee attributions of corporate hypocrisy consist of six major categories: capacity limitation, external pressure promotion, lack of supervision, sincerity of keeping promises, speculation, and external tolerance. Besides, this study proposed a mechanistic model of the employee attributions of corporate hypocrisy in CSR and pointed out that the degree of external tolerance, the sincerity of keeping promises, and speculation play moderating roles in the main effect. Moreover, the speculation also plays a mediating role in the moderation effect of external tolerance’ moderation.

Suggested Citation

  • Hongdan Zhao & Jing Xu & Yuanhua Chen & Wenyuan Sun, 2020. "The Employee Attributions of Corporate Hypocrisy in Corporate Social Responsibility: An Explore Research Based on Grounded Theory," SAGE Open, , vol. 10(2), pages 21582440209, May.
    • Handle: RePEc:sae:sagope:v:10:y:2020:i:2:p:2158244020924427
    DOI: 10.1177/2158244020924427
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://journals.sagepub.com/doi/10.1177/2158244020924427
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1177/2158244020924427?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Mark Groza & Mya Pronschinske & Matthew Walker, 2011. "Perceived Organizational Motives and Consumer Responses to Proactive and Reactive CSR," Journal of Business Ethics, Springer, vol. 102(4), pages 639-652, September.
    2. Saheli Goswami & Jung Ha-Brookshire & Wes Bonifay, 2018. "Measuring Perceived Corporate Hypocrisy: Scale Development in the Context of U.S. Retail Employees," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 10(12), pages 1-26, December.
    3. Arli, Denni & Grace, Anthony & Palmer, Janet & Pham, Cuong, 2017. "Investigating the direct and indirect effects of corporate hypocrisy and perceived corporate reputation on consumers’ attitudes toward the company," Journal of Retailing and Consumer Services, Elsevier, vol. 37(C), pages 139-145.
    4. Jay J. Janney & Steve Gove, 2011. "Reputation and Corporate Social Responsibility Aberrations, Trends, and Hypocrisy: Reactions to Firm Choices in the Stock Option Backdating Scandal," Journal of Management Studies, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 48(7), pages 1562-1585, November.
    5. Hanna Kim & Won-Moo Hur & Junsang Yeo, 2015. "Corporate Brand Trust as a Mediator in the Relationship between Consumer Perception of CSR, Corporate Hypocrisy, and Corporate Reputation," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 7(4), pages 1-12, March.
    6. Abdul Waheed & Jianhua Yang, 2019. "Effect of corporate social responsibility disclosure on firms' sales performance: A perspective of stakeholder engagement and theory," Corporate Social Responsibility and Environmental Management, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 26(3), pages 559-566, May.
    7. Arthur Nascimento Ferreira Barros & Raimundo Nonato Rodrigues & Luiz Panhoca, 2019. "Information on the fight against corruption and corporate governance practices: evidence of organized hypocrisy," International Journal of Disclosure and Governance, Palgrave Macmillan, vol. 16(2), pages 145-160, July.
    8. Sikka, Prem, 2013. "Smoke and mirrors: Corporate social responsibility and tax avoidance—A reply to Hasseldine and Morris," Accounting forum, Elsevier, vol. 37(1), pages 15-28.
    9. Prem Sikka, 2013. "Smoke and mirrors: Corporate social responsibility and tax avoidance—A reply to Hasseldine and Morris," Accounting Forum, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 37(1), pages 15-28, March.
    10. Sabrina Scheidler & Laura Marie Edinger-Schons & Jelena Spanjol & Jan Wieseke, 2019. "Scrooge Posing as Mother Teresa: How Hypocritical Social Responsibility Strategies Hurt Employees and Firms," Journal of Business Ethics, Springer, vol. 157(2), pages 339-358, June.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Yibin Li & Guiqing Zhang & Longjun Liu, 2021. "Platform Corporate Social Responsibility and Employee Innovation Performance: A Cross-Layer Study Mediated by Employee Intrapreneurship," SAGE Open, , vol. 11(2), pages 21582440211, June.

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Juhua Xu & Eun-Kyoung Han, 2021. "How Temporal Order of Inconsistent CSR Information Affects Consumer Perceptions?," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 13(8), pages 1-17, April.
    2. Nils Christian Hoffmann & Juelin Yin & Stefan Hoffmann, 2020. "Chain of Blame: A Multi-country Study of Consumer Reactions Towards Supplier Hypocrisy in Global Supply Chains," Management International Review, Springer, vol. 60(2), pages 247-286, April.
    3. Babu, Nishat & De Roeck, Kenneth & Raineri, Nicolas, 2020. "Hypocritical organizations: Implications for employee social responsibility," Journal of Business Research, Elsevier, vol. 114(C), pages 376-384.
    4. Saheli Goswami & Gargi Bhaduri, 2023. "Communicating Moral Responsibility: Stakeholder Capitalism, Types, and Perceptions," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 15(5), pages 1-17, March.
    5. Seongtae Kim & Sangho Chae, 2022. "Shareholder Value Effects of Ethical Sourcing: Comparing Reactive and Proactive Initiatives," Journal of Business Ethics, Springer, vol. 179(3), pages 887-906, September.
    6. Laura Grazzini & Diletta Acuti & Valentina Mazzoli & Luca Petruzzellis & Daniel Korschun, 2020. "Standing for politics: What consequences for brands?," Italian Journal of Marketing, Springer, vol. 2020(1), pages 49-65, March.
    7. Kenneth De Roeck & Nicolas Raineri & David A. Jones & Sabrina Scheidler, 2023. "Giving the benefit of the doubt: Investigating the insurance-like effect of CSR in mitigating negative employee reactions to psychological contract breach," Post-Print hal-04238140, HAL.
    8. Katharina Hetze, 2016. "Effects on the (CSR) Reputation: CSR Reporting Discussed in the Light of Signalling and Stakeholder Perception Theories," Corporate Reputation Review, Palgrave Macmillan, vol. 19(3), pages 281-296, October.
    9. Walaa Wahid ElKelish*, 2023. "Accounting for Corporate Human Rights: Literature Review and Future Insights," Australian Accounting Review, CPA Australia, vol. 33(2), pages 203-226, June.
    10. Lucas Amaral Lauriano & Juliane Reinecke & Michael Etter, 2022. "When Aspirational Talk Backfires: The Role of Moral Judgements in Employees’ Hypocrisy Interpretation," Journal of Business Ethics, Springer, vol. 181(4), pages 827-845, December.
    11. Xingqiang Du & Yiqi Zhang & Shaojuan Lai & Hexin Tao, 2024. "How Do Auditors Value Hypocrisy? Evidence from China," Journal of Business Ethics, Springer, vol. 191(3), pages 501-533, May.
    12. Wagner, Tillmann & Korschun, Daniel & Troebs, Cord-Christian, 2020. "Deconstructing corporate hypocrisy: A delineation of its behavioral, moral, and attributional facets," Journal of Business Research, Elsevier, vol. 114(C), pages 385-394.
    13. Zengrui Xiao & Ying Wang & Dongjie Guo, 2022. "Will Greenwashing Result in Brand Avoidance? A Moderated Mediation Model," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 14(12), pages 1-15, June.
    14. Anesa, Mattia & Bressan, Alessandro, 2024. "SMEs tax minimization as shared responsibility," CRITICAL PERSPECTIVES ON ACCOUNTING, Elsevier, vol. 98(C).
    15. repec:aud:audfin:v:21:y:2019:i:51:p:422 is not listed on IDEAS
    16. Ana Nave & João Ferreira, 2019. "Corporate social responsibility strategies: Past research and future challenges," Corporate Social Responsibility and Environmental Management, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 26(4), pages 885-901, July.
    17. Qing Miao & Jun Zhou, 2020. "Corporate Hypocrisy and Counterproductive Work Behavior: A Moderated Mediation Model of Organizational Identification and Perceived Importance of CSR," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 12(5), pages 1-20, March.
    18. Ylönen, Matti & Laine, Matias, 2015. "For logistical reasons only? A case study of tax planning and corporate social responsibility reporting," CRITICAL PERSPECTIVES ON ACCOUNTING, Elsevier, vol. 33(C), pages 5-23.
    19. Anesa, Mattia & Gillespie, Nicole & Spee, A. Paul & Sadiq, Kerrie, 2019. "The legitimation of corporate tax minimization," Accounting, Organizations and Society, Elsevier, vol. 75(C), pages 17-39.
    20. Sojin Jung & Stacy H. Lee, 2022. "The buffering effect of continuous corporate social responsibilities engagement on negative consumer responses toward brand crises," Corporate Social Responsibility and Environmental Management, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 29(5), pages 1636-1646, September.
    21. Jiaen Hu & Luis Miguel López-Bonilla & Jesús Manuel López-Bonilla, 2023. "CSR Perceptions and Brand Attitudes in Chinese Luxury Hospitality: The Moderating Effect of Ads vs. Media Reports," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 15(9), pages 1-17, May.

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:sae:sagope:v:10:y:2020:i:2:p:2158244020924427. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: SAGE Publications (email available below). General contact details of provider: .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.