Corporate Social Responsibility Disclosure and Employee Commitment: Evidence from Libya

Abstract

Most research on corporate social responsibility disclosure (CSRD) describes its relationships with external factors such as financial performance and corporate reputation. There are relatively few studies that have focused employee's behaviours towards CSRD. This paper examines the relationship between CSRD on employee commitment. An exploratory approach is used in this paper by this study. This study utilizes interview method to collect data from 31 financial managers and information managers of 22 organisations; Miles and Huberman (1994) approach is used to analyse the qualitative data. The researchers have chosen the Libyan context as one of the world's developing countries that has undergone many changes over a short period of time in terms of economic, environmental and social changes. The majority view of managers interviewed is that as CSRD related to employee activities and consumer activities increases employee commitment towards its company increase. However, there is no relationship between CSRD related to environmental and employee disclosures and employee commitment in Libyan companies. The study discusses and explains important implications regarding uses of CSRD for enhancing employee's commitment.

The influence of social disclosure on the relationship between Corporate Financial Performance and Corporate Social Performance*

“…D-CSP results from management for stakeholders (Boesso & Kumar, 2007) and in uences a company's reputation by gaining the trust of stakeholders (Bayoud & Kavanagh, 2012), since the usefulness and legitimacy of organizational activities mostly occur based on information obtained in the corporate communication actions of the organization (Mendonça, Ricardo & Amantino-deAndrade, 2003). Managers are incentivized to disclose information on their various programs related to particular stakeholders with attributes of power, legitimacy, and urgency, just as the salience model from Mitchell, Agle, and Wood (1997) proposes, in order to indicate that they are in conformance with their expectations.…”

“…e initial studies focused on identifying the stage of CSP disclosure, its relationship with strategy, and a description, observation, and critical evaluation of disclosure practices (Bowman & Haire, 1976;Brockho , 1979;Dierkes, 1979;Guthrie & Parker, 1989;Preston, 1981;Schreuder, 1979;Ullmann, 1979). e studies subsequently addressed the relationship between disclosure and di erent motivating factors, such as stakeholder power and pressure, culture, reputation, and corporate governance mechanisms, among others (Bayoud & Kavanagh, 2012;Mio, Venturelli & Leopizzi, 2015;Haji, 2012;Li, Luo, Wang & Wu, 2013; Van der Laan, Adhikari & Tondkar, 2005). D-CSP is one of the ways for an organization to seek legitimacy in its actions and can be considered as an instrument for making social performance visible to stakeholders.…”

Corporate Social Responsibility in Developing Countries as an Emerging Field of Study

“…At this level, consequences fall into three categories: increased employee commitment/engagement as a result of CSR; increased attractiveness of the firm in the eyes of specific stakeholders; and positive consumer orientations and purchase intentions. For example, several articles suggest that perceptions of socially responsible firms elicit increased employee commitment to the firm (Bayoud et al 2012). Furthermore, as found by Chun (2009), perceived CSR was positively correlated with attitudes towards the environment and employees, with higher scores on conservatism and selftranscendence associated with higher environmental commitment.…”

“…D. Jamali and C. Karam (Chun 2009;Duarte 2010;Erondu et al 2004;Gupta and Hodges 2012;Katamba et al 2012;Obalola 2008;Rodrigo and Arenas 2008;Shafer et al 2007;Turker 2009;Vivier 2013) Increased employee commitment to the firm (Bayoud et al 2012;Chun 2009;Turker 2009) Personal religions orientations (Brammer et al 2007;Mandurah et al 2012) Increased OCBs ( responsibilities (Baden and Wilkinson 2014;Cai and Aguilar 2014;Dawkins et al 2014;Demuijnck and Ngnodjom 2013;Farooq et al 2014;Mahmood and Humphrey 2013;Jamali et al 2009a;Nambiar and Chitty 2014;Robertson et al 2013;Zhu et al 2014;Zu and Song 2009) describes the Monsanto Small Holder Program and suggests that the initial philanthropic intent was undermined by competing commercial pressures leaving vulnerable stakeholders underserved. Bond (2008) warns of the naïve acceptance of corporate bona fides, and Akpan (2006) similarly highlights that corporate inducement and pacification strategies through CSR have the consequence of stoking greed and opportunism and exacerbating conflicts in local communities.…”

Corporate Reputation in The Spanish Context: An Interaction Between Reporting to Stakeholders and Industry

“…Nonetheless, and in spite of all the theoretical support for the relationship between the reporting to stakeholders and CSRR, scholars have recognized that there is still little empirical evidence concerning how the information contained in the CSR reporting influences the processes by which reputation is built or destroyed. New research is specifically needed regarding how communication links to CSRR in different industries (Soppe et al, 2011;Bayoud and Kavanagh, 2012). Based on the previous ideas, the authors of this paper propose that industry effects influence the CSR reporting and its relationship with CSRR, in such a way that significant differences exist in the amount of CSR reporting provided by companies (intensity of the CSR reporting), the kinds of CSR information reported in CSR and sustainability reports (orientation of the CSR reporting) and the effect of the CSR reporting on CSRR.…”