972372

research-article20202020
SGOXXX10.1177/2158244020972372SAGE OpenÖzcan and Elçi

Original Research

SAGE Open

Employees’ Perception of CSR Affecting

October-December 2020: 1­–13
© The Author(s) 2020
DOI: 10.1177/2158244020972372
https://doi.org/10.1177/2158244020972372

Employer Brand, Brand Image, and journals.sagepub.com/home/sgo

Corporate Reputation

Fatih Özcan1 and Meral Elçi1

Abstract
Employees are one of the most important factors in business. Therefore, enterprises should account for the expectations
of employees, particularly their perception of the enterprise, and their behavior. This study investigates the importance of
employees’ perceived corporate social responsibility (CSR) and also examines the potential role of predicting employer
brand, brand image, and corporate reputation. The study’s participants comprise employees working in different departments
of various corporations. A total of 559 surveys were collected from randomly sampled company employees working in small
and medium-sized enterprises (SMEs) in Turkey, and the responses were analyzed using component-based least squares
modeling. The model was analyzed and validated by Smart partial least squares software. Employee-oriented CSR activities
have a positive effect on employer brand and brand image perceptions among employees in SMEs. Perceived corporate
reputation mediates this relationship.

Keywords
corporate social responsibility, employer brand, brand image, corporate reputation

Introduction employees of signals taken from the corporate social perfor-

mance of companies. A four-dimensional structure was cre-
In recent years, the importance of corporate social responsi- ated to measure employees’ perception of CSR. These four
bility (CSR) has been increasing in the academic and busi- dimensions were interpreted as responsibilities toward (a)
ness world (DeNisi et al., 2014). Studies on the efficiency social and non-social stakeholders, (b) employees, (c) con-
and benefits of CSR interventions and applications conven- sumers, and (d) the state/government (Turker, 2009). The
tionally focus on issues such as the efficiency of enterprise effect on the financial performance of companies is included
operations, employee productivity, and financial perfor- through the economic dimension of CSR (Fifka & Pobizhan,
mance. Furthermore, CSR provides firms with improved 2014; Reverte et al., 2016; Rusmanto & Williams, 2015;
corporate appeal, social status, and external prestige (Hameed Waworuntu et al., 2014). The social dimension of CSR is an
et al., 2016). It has been suggested that CSR positively important factor when the relationships between the enter-
affects employee performance and perception of work expe- prise, society, and employees are considered (Bakos, 2014;
riences (Clark et al., 2017; Mory et al., 2015), and further, Duff, 2016; S. Kim & Lee, 2012). Studies have shown that
that inconsistent CSR strategies have negative effects on the environmental dimension of CSR increases innovation in
employees (Anselmsson et al., 2016; Fassin & Buelens, enterprises, reduces costs, protects resources, and provides a
2011; Scheidler et al., 2018). competitive advantage (Cho & Patten, 2013; Flammer, 2013;
CSR, which is used as a tool by enterprises for reaching Graafland & Smid, 2017; Searcy et al., 2016; Wahba, 2008).
their organizational purposes, has been studied along four CSR provides the opportunity, innovation, and a competi-
dimensions: economic, legal, ethical, and volunteering tive edge (Porter & Kramer, 2006) to the enterprises by con-
(Carroll, 1991). Recently, an increasing number of studies tributing in commercial, ethical, and social responsibility
have considered the impact of CSR on the psychology of
employees (Powell et al., 2013; Rupp & Mallory, 2015), and
the effect of CSR on employee performance and attitudes has 1
Gebze Technical University, Turkey
also been investigated (Barrena-Martínez et al., 2017; G.
Corresponding Author:
Davies et al., 2018; Gond et al., 2017; Hansen et al., 2011; Fatih Özcan, Gebze Technical University, Yenisehir Street, Democracy
Morokane et al., 2016; Tavassoli et al., 2014). These studies Avenue İzmit, Kocaeli, Turkey.
have evaluated the attractiveness to job seekers and potential Email: [email protected]

Creative Commons CC BY: This article is distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 License
(https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/) which permits any use, reproduction and distribution of
the work without further permission provided the original work is attributed as specified on the SAGE and Open Access pages
(https://us.sagepub.com/en-us/nam/open-access-at-sage).
2 SAGE Open

areas; aiding in the development of high-quality products and organizations that want to have a strong reputation and main-
services; and ensuring fulfillment of their obligations, both tain the existing reputation.
legal and to their stakeholders (J. Singh et al., 2008). Another According to the cognitive dissonance theory (Festinger,
important advantage of CSR is its effect on brand awareness 1957), which states that individuals are seeking internal con-
and brand image (BI; Hsu, 2012; Tian et al., 2011). sistency between expectation and reality, companies are
Consequently, many studies in the literature have examined expected to help employees develop positive behaviors
how CSR affects various criteria, such as employee commit- among their employees and reduce their negative percep-
ment to the organization, job satisfaction, intention to leave, tions about their employers. Such practices that are compat-
and corporate image. ible with employee values and expectations will help deter
The employer brand (EB) is defined as a long-targeted employees’ incompatibility and negative behavior (Okolocha,
strategy to manage the awareness and perceptions of employ- 2020). CSR is recognized as a tool to attract and maintain
ees, potential employees, and all relevant stakeholders in talent by enhancing the EB, strengthening an organization’s
companies (Sullivan, 2004). EB is the image of an institution reputation.
perceived by stakeholders, shareholders, and employees Qualitative and quantitative research on CSR in small and
(Sehgal & Malati, 2013). The EB is a necessity for compa- medium-sized enterprises (SMEs) in developing countries is
nies to acquire and retain key employees. The EB is divided limited and has received little scientific interest (Liu & Fong,
into internal and external EB. Internal EB focuses on activi- 2010). Most CSR-related studies focus on large-scale com-
ties that provide opportunities for employees to develop panies (Chon & Yoo, 2013). It is also revealed that employ-
within the institution. As a result, the employee becomes the ees in medium-sized organizations are not aware of CSR
customer of the company. External EB aims to offer brand (Bashir et al., 2012). As a result, this study focuses on CSR
awareness and fulfillment of CSR goals (Kozłowski, 2012). perceptions of employees because CSR perception affects
Employee-oriented CSR activities help motivate compa- employees’ attitudes and behaviors. It aimed to fill the meth-
nies to build a strong EB by keeping their existing employees odological research gap by examining the mechanism that
(Dokania & Pathak, 2013). CSR activities in SMEs help create CR, EB, and BI among
It is only possible for institutions to have their products employees. It aims to answer the following questions with
and services accepted in the domestic and foreign markets in these identified gaps: (a) What is the relationship between
a competitive environment and turn them into a financial employee-oriented CSR activities, perceived CR, EB, and
value by having a good corporate BI. While the institutions BI? (b) Do employee-oriented CSR activities have a positive
are trying to reach their goals, the corporate BI perceptions impact on EB and BI perceptions among SMEs? (c) Does the
of the employees and the values they give to the institution perceived CR mediate the relationship between employee-
are of great importance. While a positive BI will enable oriented CSR activities and EB and BI perceptions in SMEs?
employees to integrate their identities with the organization, This research contributes to the literature in two ways.
it will make the institution attractive for future employees First, most extant research has focused on the impact of CSR
(H. Kim et al., 2015). on external stakeholders, such as consumers, competitors,
Corporate reputation (CR) is defined as a valuable and and suppliers. However, these studies have not been focused
abstract asset that affects stakeholders’ perceptions and pref- on employee perceptions and attitudes. In recent studies,
erences about the organization. It is a summary view of all employee views, opinions, and perceptions of companies’
the perceptions of the relevant stakeholders about the organi- CSR activities have shown significant benefits. The fact that
zation. It is the beliefs of stakeholders about what the institu- employees are more involved in organizational culture and
tion is and how it connects with it. It is the cognitive and that they have more real information about their company
affective assessments of the past performance of the institu- than other stakeholders supports this view. This study evalu-
tion and the estimates of its future behavior. According to ates the CSR efforts of companies according to employees’
(Chun 2005, p. 105), “corporate reputation is an umbrella perceptions, attitudes, and behaviors. Second, it contributes
structure related to the cumulative impressions of internal to the perception of CSR being linked to the EB, BI, and CR.
and external stakeholders.” Having a positive reputation is To further explore the importance and potential role of CSR
based on the institution’s employees perceiving the institu- in predicting the EB, BI, and CR of SMEs in this study, the
tion as more attractive than its competitors. Institutions current employees were selected as stakeholder groups.
should develop effective programs to protect their CR. Trust
in an institution’s services and product is realized through the
performances of the employees. Therefore, the reputation of Literature Review and Conceptual
the institution they work through is always very important. Model
The beliefs, loyalty, and thoughts of the employees regarding
their institutions are of great importance for the construction
CSR and EB
and continuation of the company’s reputation. It creates the EB is defined as the functional, economic, and psychological
necessity to conduct employee-oriented CSR activities in its benefits of the employment provided by the employer
Özcan and Elçi 3

(Ambler & Barrow, 1996). It has been defined as a concept and there is a strategic requirement that positively affects
that differentiates an enterprise from other enterprises (Wu & Wang, 2014). An organization’s responsibility is to
(Backhaus & Tikoo, 2004) and also as the values attributed develop an effective tool to convey the company’s corporate
to the workplace by the employees, which manifests as a brand identity to all employees. When employees under-
high-quality employment experience wherein employees stand their roles as brand ambassadors and receive apprecia-
feel secure and develop a close relationship with their tion and reward for their roles, they can be successfully
employer (Martin et al., 2011). Enterprises with a strong EB integrated into a corporate image program. There are many
benefit from increased commitment and retention of employ- ways to create a corporate infrastructure that supports the
ees and increased job performance (Knox & Freeman, 2006). role of a company as a brand ambassador. Employee-
Every company must build and consciously shape its EB to oriented CSR activities are one of these ways. As the posi-
improve its competitiveness in the market. EB of companies tive effect of CSR on corporations and brands is known and
is determined by factors such as the company’s reputation, becoming increasingly important worldwide, sensitivity (or
product and service quality, opportunities provided to insensitivity) to issues reflects on the brand. Enterprises’
employees, working environment, payment, and economic ethical and social events are known to enhance relations
conditions. Recently, companies use CSR as a more effective with the brand (J. Singh et al., 2008). CSR strengthens BI
tool to express their operational identity and strengthen their and contributes to brand value (Melo & Galan, 2011).
sustainable development in the labor market communication. Nowadays, increased consumer and employee awareness
The impact of a company’s EB strategy depends on how fostered through CSR-related social activities has an impor-
CSR messages are perceived and interpreted. Studies have tant effect on increasing the corporate brand’s value. It has
shown that EB has a positive effect on employees (Aguinis & been argued that CSR is a highly important factor in creat-
Glavas, 2012; Highhouse et al., 2009; Lievens & Slaughter, ing a BI (Green & Peloza, 2011). Theoretical and empirical
2016; Tkalac Verčič & Sinčić Ćorić, 2018). Employee per- evidence has shown a link between CSR and BI (Lange
ception of CSR is crucial in the formation of EB (G. Davies et al., 2011; Pfarrer et al., 2010), and these relations are
et al., 2018; Jones et al., 2014; Lievens & Slaughter, 2016). found to be positive and meaningful (Ellen et al., 2006;
This leads to the first hypothesis: Maon et al., 2009; Porter & Kramer, 2006). This leads to the
second hypothesis:
Hypothesis 1 (H1): There is a positive relationship
between employee-focused CSR activities and perceived Hypothesis 2 (H2): There is a positive relationship
EB. between employee-focused CSR activities and perceived
BI.
CSR and BI
CSR and CR
They revealed that the first thing affected by CSR is BI and
if it is perceived positively, it has an effect on BI (Swaen & Employees and CR are crucial tools for achieving sustain-
Chumpitaz, 2008). Big companies realize that strong brands able competitive advantage. CR for companies is vital and
cannot be built without the constant support and manage- plays a key role in managing it in employees (Gotsi &
ment of employees (Lange et al., 2011). They have sug- Wilson, 2001). Realizing the strategic role that employees
gested that a good BI attracts customers and employees, and can play in positioning CR can have significant consequences
that companies will become stronger. A. Singh and Verma for companies to achieve their goals. It will affect the CR
(2017) concluded that CSR is an opportunity to achieve a perceptions of the corporate culture, which enables the pro-
better corporate value and will increase the brand value by tection and promotion of reputation in companies. CR of
having a positive effect on the BI. It enhances the emotional businesses can also affect employees’ perception and attitude
aspect of the BI of CSR and provides a competitive advan- toward their business. There have been a limited number of
tage and protects it from competitive risks (Martínez et al., studies related to institutional reputation (Ozdora-Aksak
2014). Employees are critical for the success of the BI. One et al., 2016). Extant studies have focused mainly on external
of the first and most direct points of contact of a company stakeholders and institutional and organizational levels
with its customers is its employees. At all levels of an insti- (Aguinis & Glavas, 2012). Studying at the micro level to dis-
tution, employees have the opportunity to influence the per- cover the importance and potential effects of CSR is becom-
ception of a company’s brand during these critical touch ing an increasingly popular topic (Glavas & Kelley, 2014).
points. Regardless of their job descriptions, employees have CSR was found to be a strong pioneer of CR and has shown
two jobs, one is the job they do and the other is to convey the positive effects on employee and stakeholder behaviors
BI of the company to the outside world, as ambassadors of (Maden et al., 2012). In the analysis of the effect of CSR on
the brand. Employees serving as strong brand ambassadors CR, it was obtained as a result of the study that companies
need to be integrated into the corporate brand management have a higher CR in countries with higher CSR levels (Lu
program. It is accepted that CSR and BI are interconnected et al., 2020).
4 SAGE Open

CR as a Mediating Variable
CR is the result of an overall assessment of the total views of
an organization by all stakeholders (Cornelissen, 2011). CR
acts as a signal with the products and services of the compa-
nies, attracting more qualified employees in the labor market,
and preferring to work in highly reputable companies, which
is a high-level factor that enables employees to develop their
loyalty and attitude positively. Reputation is all about a com-
pany’s corporate actions. Podnar and Balmer (2013) stated
that they can have a direct and indirect effect on establishing
and influencing CR, focusing on the employer’s brand and
corporate BI. There is an overlap in the literature on concep-
tual, empirical, and methodological studies of EB, and CR.
Figure 1.  Conceptual model.
The concept of reputation is often used to express the EB
(Cable & Turban, 2003). Ruiz et al. (2016) state that the EB
was associated with CR and was interconnected, defined as EB and BI perceptions and the mediating effect of CR on this
its protector and pioneer. Studies have shown that CR posi- event.
tively affects EB (Tkalac Verčič & Sinčić Ćorić, 2018).
Having good CR is an important factor for gaining competi-
tive advantage (Sánchez & Sotorrío, 2007). CR reveals the
Data Collection and Measurement Instruments
quality of products and services, and it allows for the creation A survey was used to collect data from the study population
of BI by differentiating it from its competitors. Although BI of employees from various enterprises. Survey items were
and reputation are two different things, they are clearly measured on a 5-point Likert-type scale (from 1 = strongly
strongly related and tend to be in the same direction, espe- disagree to 5 = strongly agree), and the survey contained
cially in times of crisis. In some cases, a strong BI can over- two sections. The first section contained demographic ques-
come reputation problems, and reputation problems can also tions, such as participant gender, age, education, and depart-
damage a strong brand. CR is used as an overview of all ment; the second section contains items known to measure
stakeholders (Tischer & Hildebrandt, 2014). Hoejmose et al. all constructs examined in the study. Twenty different SMEs,
(2014) stated that reputation is more permanent than image, which have 50 to 250 numbers of employees and located in
and reputation is a source of support in negative situations. It the Marmara region from Turkey, are selected. Evaluation is
is seen as a signal that guides stakeholders’ perceptions of the done among employees who have worked in the company
organization. It is concluded that CR has a mediating effect for more than a year, at least 10 people from each company.
on the relationship between CSR and brand performance The reason for this is that employees who stay in their com-
(Lai et al., 2010). According to the results, it is stated that panies for more than a year have more information about
employee-oriented CSR activities will increase the CR per- their CSR activities. During the data collection process, 20
ceptions of an institution positively. It is assumed that SMEs, which agreed to participate in our survey, were deter-
employees’ CR perceptions will also mediate the impact of mined as a result of the interview from SMEs operating in
employee-oriented CSR activities on employees’ EB and BI the production area in the Marmara region using the random
perceptions. This leads to the third and fourth hypotheses: sampling method. The total number of employees of these
SMEs is 3,000. Questionnaires were sent online to SMEs.
Hypothesis 3 (H3): CR has a mediating role between Return was received from 725 employees; 559 of these
CSR and EB. employees worked more than 1 year. According to the ran-
Hypothesis 4 (H4): CR has a mediating role between dom sampling method, approximately 3,000 employees in
CSR and BI. total need 341 in the 5% error and 95% confidence intervals,
and 543 employees in the 5% error and 99% confidence
The potential effects of CSR on EB and BI are investi- intervals; 559 employees responded to the survey.
gated. In addition, the study also examines the role of the Demographic characteristics are as follows: 75.5% of the
mediating effect of CR between CSR, EB, and BI. Based on respondents are men and 24.5% are women. In terms of the
the theoretical framework and purpose of the study, a con- departments of respondents, 25.6% were from production,
ceptual model of the research is portrayed in Figure 1. 22.5% from engineering/design, 14.8% from research and
development, 12.3% from a department not listed elsewhere,
8.9% from marketing, 7.5% from management, 5.7% from
Research Method
accounting/finance, and 2.5% from human resources. The
The main aim of the study is to empirically test the effective- distribution of highest educational attainment among respon-
ness of employee-oriented CSR activities of companies on dents was as follows: undergraduate degree, 64.8%; graduate
Özcan and Elçi 5

degree (except doctoral degree), 12.7%; 2-year college distinctiveness validity, requires that the correlation between
degree, 9.3%; high school, 8.8%; and doctoral degree, 4.5%. an unobservable variable and other unobservable variables
The items in the second part of the study were taken from be smaller than the square root of the AVE (Fornell &
scales with proven validity and reliability. As seen as in Larcker, 1981). Furthermore, for convergence validity, the
Appendix, the scale to measure employee-focused CSR was loadings of basic variables should be higher than .70
adapted from Turker (2009). The employee-focused CSR (Hulland, 1999).
was measured by means of an 11-item scale. The scale to As seen in Table 1, the AVE values are higher than the
measure EB was adapted from Knox and Freeman (2006) threshold value of .50, Cronbach’s alpha values are higher
and Lievens et al. (2007). The EB was measured by means of than the threshold value of .60, and the CRI values were
a four-item scale. The scale to measure BI was adapted from higher than the threshold value of .70. Thus, it was concluded
Bravo et al. (2010). The BI was measured by means of a that all the convergence criteria were met. In Table 2, in the
seven-item scale. The scale to measure CR was adapted from discriminant analysis used in the assessment of the distinc-
Ponzi et al. (2011). The CR was measured by means of a tiveness criteria, the values shown in bold letters indicate the
four-item scale. square root of AVE values. The other values indicate the
between-variable correlation coefficients. For all criteria, the
square root of the AVE values was higher than the correlation
Data Analysis values, indicating that the model satisfies this distinctiveness
The partial least squares (PLS) method, a variance-based criterion. The loadings applied to the activators of each indi-
method used to estimate composite-based path models, was cator (as another distinctiveness criterion) should be higher
used for data analysis. It is a multivariate statistical tech- than the cross-loadings to other activators. As seen in Table 2,
nique that can infer causal relations (Henseler et al., 2016). all indicators can be grouped by taking the highest loading
PLS data analysis is separated into two phases (outer and among the assumed activators, so the measurement model
inner) and uses a structural analysis model wherein hypoth- satisfies this distinctiveness criterion also.
eses are tested by examining the relations among latent vari- The reliability and validity of the four scales used in this
ables and path coefficients with confirmatory factor analysis study were carried out with the second-order CFA using the
(CFA) used to test the reliability and validity analyses of the maximum likelihood method. In the reliability analysis, it
measurement model. was evaluated with Cronbach’s alpha and CRI. CFA results
are presented in Table 1. The results suggested in the litera-
ture were obtained for model compatibility of CFA. In our
Assessment of Outer Measurement Model measurement model, it was concluded that all of the general
Two types of assessments of the conceptual model were goodness-of-fit (GOF) measures were acceptable, and there-
conducted using the PLS structural modeling system. These fore structural validity was provided. It is seen that all the
assessments are in the form of an assessment of the internal factors of the relevant factors are important (p < .001), the
structural model, which characterizes the relations among loads of all factors are more than .60, Cronbach’s alpha and
unobservable variables, and an assessment of the external CRI are more than .70, and the variance extract index (VEI)
measurement model, which characterizes the relation is more than .50. All values show evidence that the validity
between unobservable and observable variables. The analy- of reliability and convergence is sufficient, justifying the
sis of these models was performed using Smart PLS pro- internal reliability of the scale used.
gram, which was also used to check the model validity. In
the assessment of the external measurement model, both
Assessment of Inner Structural Model
convergence and discriminant validity need to be evaluated
when studying the relationship between activators and their After confirming the reliability and validity of the model in
indicators. Convergence validity, an indicator of internal terms of convergence and distinctiveness validity, the struc-
consistency, requires that each indicator measures only the tural validity, which indicates the model’s relations among
activator it is assumed to measure (i.e., indicators should not the structures, was conducted. In this assessment of the inter-
measure other activators). The assessment of convergence nal structural model, the following were performed for the
validity was based on Cronbach’s alpha, the composite reli- controlled variables: multicollinearity assessment, t-statistic,
ability index (CRI), and the average variance extracted path coefficient (β value) testing, and evaluation of effect
(AVE) values. The distinctiveness validity was based on dis- size and predictive relevance.
criminant validity and activator loadings. A model is con-
ventionally considered good if Cronbach’s alpha is at least Measuring the value of R2.  For the squared correlation value
.60 and the CRI score is higher than .70 (Rahman et al., (R2), which indicates the model’s predictive power, it is sug-
2013). Alternatively, an AVE of at least .50 can be consid- gested to consider values of .67, .33, and .19 as the boundaries
ered sufficient for convergence validity (Fornell & Larcker, for substantial, moderate, and weak predictions, respectively
1981). Discriminant validity, which is used in evaluating (Hair et al., 2011). For the unobservable variables, from the
6 SAGE Open

Table 1.  Measurement Model.

Construct Question Factor loading Cronbach’s α AVE CRI R2 VEI

CSR CSR1 .726 .917 .648 .930 — .675
CSR2 .758
CSR3 .727
CSR4 .743
CSR5 .743
CSR6 .733
CSR7 .718
CSR8 .766
CSR9 .718
CSR10 .782
CSR11 .725
EB EB1 .819 .799 .625 .869 .687 .587
EB2 .747
EB3 .809
EB4 .785
CR CR1 .835 .871 .794 .921 .572 .619
CR2 .858
CR3 .861
CR4 .855
BI BI1 .802 .922 .682 .937 .670 .609
BI2 .820
BI3 .865
BI4 .865
BI5 .841
BI6 .792
BI7 .792

Note. χ2(df = 525) = 858.865, χ2/df = 1.634, p < .0041, CFI = 0.920, GFI = 0.930, AGFI = 0.925, SRMR = 0.032, and RMSEA = 0.054. AVE = average
variance extracted; CRI = composite reliability index; VEI = variance extract index; CSR = corporate social responsibility; EB = employer brand; CR
= corporate reputation; BI = brand image; CFI = comparative fit index; GFI = goodness of fit index; AGFI = adjusted goodness of fit index; SRMR =
standardized root mean residual; RMSEA = root mean square error of approximation.

Table 2.  Discriminant Validity. the t-values) were examined. The critical t-value is 1.96 for a
significance level of 5% and 2.58 for a significance level of
BI CSR CR EB
1% (all two-tailed, Figure 3; Hair et al., 2011). As seen in
BI .826   Table 4, the path coefficients of both the inner and outer
CSR .792 .805   models were significant (p < .01). As seen in Table 3, for the
CR .768 .793 .891   effect sizes (f 2), when the independent structure of the model
EB .759 .756 .733 .790 is ignored, the effect sizes of independent values on depen-
Note. CSR = corporate social responsibility; CR = corporate reputation;
dent values are determined by measuring changes in the
EB = employer brand; BI = brand image. value of R2. It is recommended to set the effect size thresh-
olds (at the structural level) for f 2 to .35 for large, to .15 for
medium, and to .02 for small (Hair et al., 2011).
analysis results shown in Figure 2, EB (.572), BI (.687), and
CR (.670) all had substantial predictive power. 2
Rincluded − Rexluded
2
f2 = .
Path Coefficients (β Values) and t-Statistic Values, Effect Size f 2.  1 − Rincluded
2

Hypotheses obtained from research based on the assessment

models were tested using Smart PLS software. To obtain a In the path model (Figure 2), EB has an R2 value of .687,
large sample, the minimum sample bootstrapping number CR has an R2 value of .572, and BI has an R2 value of .670,
was set to 5,000, and the path coefficients (β values), which but the value of R2 for EB (respondents [resp.], for CR) with
indicated the strength of the relation between the dependent CSR excluded is .578 (resp., .535), for CR (resp., for CR)
and independent variables of the model, and the values deter- with CSR excluded is .572 (resp., .535), and for BI (resp.,
mining the significance of relations between structures (i.e., for CR) with CSR excluded is .578 (resp., .535). Hence, the
Özcan and Elçi 7

Figure 2.  Structural model in path coefficients estimation,

Figure 3.  Structural model in t-value estimation.
measuring the value of R2. Note. EB = employer brand; CSR = corporate social responsibility; CR =
Note. EB = employer brand; CR = corporate reputation; CSR = corporate reputation; BI = brand image.
corporate social responsibility; BI = brand image.

Table 3.  Effect Size f 2.

Dependent construct İndependent construct R2 (included) R2 (excluded) Effect size (f 2) İnference
EB CSR .687 .578 .348 Medium to large
CR CSR .572 .535 .409 Medium to large
BI CSR .670 .626 .195 Medium to large
EB CR .687 .632 .175 Medium to large
BI CR .670 .629 .124 Small to medium

Note. EB = employer brand; CSR = corporate social responsibility; CR = corporate reputation; BI = brand image.

Table 4.  Direct Hypothesis Relationships. Results

Hypothetical path B value t-statistics Inference The measurements and structural models were tested using a
H1: CSR → EB .557 6.702 Significant
second-generation multivariate data analysis method called
H2: CSR → BI .508 4.875 Significant structural equation modeling (SEM), focusing on the PLS
method. To test our model, we conducted CFA, followed by
Note. χ (df = 548) = 908.865, χ /df = 1.659, p < .000, CFI = 0.912, GFI
2 2
evaluating convergence and discriminant validity. As seen in
= 0.915, AGFI = 0.918, SRMR = 0.042, and RMSEA = 0.060. CSR = Table 1, convergent validity was supported by all factors, and,
corporate social responsibility; EB = employer brand; BI = brand image;
CFI = comparative fit index; SRMR = standardized root mean residual; as seen in Table 2, discriminant validity was also supported by
RMSEA = root mean square error of approximation; GFI = goodness of the findings. As seen in Table 3, we calculated the effect size
fit index; AGFI = adjusted goodness of fit index. between the variables. In our model, the global fit index was
.68, indicating that the empirical data fit the model very well. As
value of f 2 is .348 for EB, .409 for CR, and .195 for BI. seen in Table 4, all relations were positive and significant. H1,
Consequently, the effect of the CSR construct is large. concerning the relationship between CSR and EB, was accepted,
Excluding CR, the R2 value for EB (resp., CSR) was .632 with β = .557, t = 6.702, p < .01, and f 2 = .409. Thus, CSR
(resp., .687), and the R2 value for BI (resp., CSR) was .629 had a positive impact on EB. H2, concerning the relationship
(resp., .670). Hence, the values of f 2 are .175 for EB and between CSR and BI, was accepted, with β = .508, t = 4.875,
.124 for BI. Hence, the CR construct has a medium to large p < .01, and f 2 = .195. Thus, CSR had a positive impact on BI.
effect on EB and a small to medium effect on BI.
Mediation Analysis
Model’s GOF.  GOF testing is used to verify the general con-
sistency of the model. GOF values are between 0 and 1 with Mediation analysis can be done with multiple regression and
thresholds at .1 (low GOF), .25 (medium GOF), and .36 SEM analyses. Although both methods have the same logic,
(high GOF), following Akter et al. (2011). it is the most preferred SEM method in terms of controlling
measurement errors, providing information about the entire
GOF = communality ×R 2 = .6544 × .7019 = .68. model and being more flexible than regression (Frazier et al.,
8 SAGE Open

Table 5.  Mediation Analysis. Table 6.  Sobel Test Analysis.

Direct Indirect Total Path CSR → CR → EB CSR → CR → BI

Path effect effect effect t-statistics
Sobel test statistic 3,0086 2,7959
Step 1: CSR → EB .557 — .557 6.702 p value .0028 .0058
Step 2: CSR → BI .508 — .508 4.875
Step 3: CSR → CR .758 — .758 14.881 Note. CSR = corporate social responsibility; CR = corporate reputation;
EB = employer brand; BI = brand image.
Step 4: CR → EB .312 — .312 3.367
Step 5: CR → BI .375 — .375 3.413
Step 6: H3: CSR .557 .284 .841 21.241 BI. According to the data shown in Table 6, when the media-
→ CR → EB tion effect of CR is examined through the Sobel test, it is
Step 7: H4: CSR .508 .227 .735 18.837
seen that the intermediary variable is significant (p < .05;
→ CR → BI
Hayes, 2012).
Note. CSR = corporate social responsibility; EB = employer brand; BI =
brand image; CR = corporate reputation.
Discussion
2004; MacKinnon et al., 2002). According to Baron and CSR offers increasing and improved opportunities for new
Kenny (1986), the following steps were used to test the CR research in support of organizational prosperity. Most exist-
mediation effect. ing literature on CSR has focused on the macro level (Lee,
2008). However, some studies have shown interest in the
Step 1: To test the relationship between independent micro level of CSR (Rupp et al., 2013). Discussions regard-
variable (CSR) and dependent variable (EB). ing the roles of firms in society are also taking place at the
Step 2: To test the relationship between independent micro level. CSR employees are asking more questions about
variable (CSR) and dependent variable (BI). the role of their work. These questions will greatly change
Step 3: To test the relationship between independent how employees perceive CSR and its importance for their
variable (CSR) and mediating variable (CR). own lives. Organizations having higher CSR generally pro-
Step 4: To test the relationship between dependent variable vide better working conditions and benefits to employees, so
(EB) and mediating variable (CR). that they perceive CSR as advantageous to their own inter-
Step 5: To test the relationship between dependent variable ests. In the CSR literature, there have been gaps between
(BI) and mediating variable (CR). CSR theory and practice, and there remains a great potential
Step 6: To test the relationship between independent for difference in how employees perceive CSR. Thus, further
variables (CSR and CR) and dependent variable (EB). studies are needed to understand how CSR affects employees
Step 7: To test the relationship between independent (Glavas, 2016). Therefore, it is important to go beyond the
variables (CSR and CR) and dependent variable (BI). simple direct impact of CSR results to understand why, how,
Step 8: To test the mediation effect using Sobel test. and when employees are affected. Although we can learn a
lot from hypothetical employees, further research is needed
The mediating effect of CR between CSR on EB and BI on actual employees at work.
performance is shown in Table 5. As seen, the mediating The effects of CSR activities in large-scale companies have
effect of CR is significant, with all path coefficients signifi- been investigated in the literature. The results obtained in this
cant (p < .01). Step 1 and Step 2 results are shown in Table 4. study provided evidence on the benefits of employee-oriented
Step 3, concerning the relationship between CSR and CR, CSR activities in SMEs. It was supported in the proposed four
was accepted with β = .758, t = 14.881, p < .01, and f 2 = hypotheses. The perceived CSR is defined as the forerunner of
0.409. Thus, CSR had a positive impact on CR. Step 4, con- EB and BI among employees. Consistent with the results
cerning the relationship between CR and EB, was accepted, obtained in the literature, employee-oriented CSR activities
with β = .312, t =3.367, p < .01, and f 2 = 0.175. Thus, CR were positively correlated with the employees’ perception of
had a positive impact on EB. Step 5, concerning the relation- EB and BI. In academic literature, CR is mostly defined from
ship between CR and BI, was accepted, with β = .375, t = the perspective of the customer, and the perspective of employ-
3.413, p < .01, and f 2 = 0.124. Thus, CR had a positive ees working as internal stakeholders is often overlooked. In
impact on BI. According to the data shown in Table 5, Step this study, the pioneers, effects, and results of company reputa-
6, CR plays a mediator role in the relationship between CSR tion were evaluated from an employee perspective. Unlike the
and EB (β = .841, t = 21.2411, p < .01). Moreover, Step 7, customers, the results of the CR perception among employees
CR plays a mediator role in the relationship between CSR are defined as the result of trust among employees. It is con-
and BI (β = .735, t = 18.873, p < .01). Step 7, Sobel test, cluded that CR and CSR activities focused on employees in
was performed to confirm the importance of the mediator SMEs have a positive mediating effect on employees’ EB and
(CR) in explaining the relationship between CSR and EB and BI perceptions.
Özcan and Elçi 9

Employee perceptions of CSR are the central variable that Limitations

mediates the impact of CSR actions, and, consequently, CSR
perceptions can change the dynamics of the social organiza- There are some limitations in design of the study. Data is col-
tion. This study focuses on influencing the internal mecha- lected from SMEs operating in the manufacturing sector in
nisms of CSR on employees and explains how employee the Marmara region in Turkey. It depends on its repetition in
perceptions of CSR in the workplace trigger attitudes affect- more than one sector and multiple organizations to general-
ing EB, CR, and BI. Company executives are required to ize what is foreseen. Another challenge is that it has been
consider employees perceive CSR activities, and these per- selected from employees who have worked in the company
ceptions are very important as they will positively affect for more than a year.
organizations. CSR can help an organization gain a better
reputation among employee and create an EB by motivating
workers. The results support the idea that social welfare and
Recommendations
environmental responsibility from CSR activities positively Employees are affected by CSR in numerous ways. In our
affect the attitudes of employees. Higher levels of CSR lead study, only the mediating effect of perceived CR on CSR
to higher chances of attracting quality employees. Employee perception was investigated. As an outcome, the effect of
job-selection decisions depend on CR, and better CSR helps employees’ perceptions was only measured according to EB
potential employees gather more pertinent information about and BI. Further research should also include other scales to
their employers. CSR is understood by employees and con- confirm these results. To generalize the results, investiga-
tributes to EB. Furthermore, it is an important structure in tions are recommended to study the current problem in other
understanding the reputation. developed countries.

Appendix
Variables of the study Number of items

CSR
  Social and non- CSR1. Our company tries to invest in future generations.
social stakeholders CSR2. Our company tries to contribute to organizations and projects that will contribute to society.
responsibility CSR3. Our company targets sustainable growth that will take care of future generations.
CSR4. Our company attaches importance to social responsibilities aimed at the community.
CSR5. Our company invests in research and development aimed at protecting and improving the natural
environment.
 Employee CSR6. Our company has a management that attaches importance to the requests and needs of employees.
responsibility CSR7. Our company has policies that encourage employees to develop their talents and careers.
CSR8. Our company supports its employees who need training and contributes to their development.
CSR9. Our company adjusts working conditions that are harmful for the health of employees and which are
unsafe and allows flexible work hours.
  Legal and ethical CSR10. Our company attaches importance to fulfillment of its legal obligations to the state on time and in full.
values responsibility CSR11. Our company attributes great importance to customer satisfaction.
EB EB1. I’m in a good relationship with my superiors in the institution where I’m working.
EB2. In the institution where I’m working, the managers care about the employees.
EB3. In the institution where I’m working, the managers are sincere with the employees.
EB4. Competent employees are selected for this institution.
CR CR1. This firm is an organization I have a good feeling about.
CR2. This firm is an organization that I trust.
CR3. This firm is an organization that I admire and respect.
CR4. This firm has a good overall reputation.
BI BI1. This enterprise has better product/service quality than its competitors.
BI2. This enterprise has better environmental responsibility than its competitors.
BI3. This enterprise is more innovative than its competitors.
BI4. This enterprise has a more qualified workforce than its competitors.
BI5. This enterprise invests more in its employees than its competitors do.
BI6. This enterprise/company provides high-quality, innovative products or services.
BI7. This enterprise/company has a clear vision of its future and provides excellent leadership.

Note. CSR = corporate social responsibility; EB = employer brand; CR = corporate reputation; BI = brand image.
10 SAGE Open

Declaration of Conflicting Interests Cable, D. M., & Turban, D. B. (2003). The value of organizational
reputation in the recruitment context: A brand-equity perspec-
The author(s) declared no potential conflicts of interest with
tive. Journal of Applied Social Psychology, 33(11), 2244–2266.
respect to the research, authorship, and/or publication of this
https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1559-1816.2003.tb01883.x
article.
Carroll, A. B. (1991). The pyramid of corporate social responsi-
bility: Toward the moral management of organizational stake-
Funding holders. Business Horizons, 34(4), 39–48. https://doi.org/10.
The author(s) received no financial support for the research, author- 1016/0007-6813(91)90005-g
ship, and/or publication of this article. Cho, C. H., & Patten, D. M. (2013). Green accounting: Reflections
from a CSR and environmental disclosure perspective. Critical
ORCID iD Perspectives on Accounting, 24(6), 443–447. https://doi.org
/10.1016/j.cpa.2013.04.003
Fatih Özcan https://orcid.org/0000-0002-4928-0125
Chon, M. L., & Yoo, J. M. (2013). The internal impact of CSR on
employees: The moderating effect of gender difference. Journal
References of Convergence Information Technology, 8(13), 512–515.
Aguinis, H., & Glavas, A. (2012). What we know and don’t know Chun, R. (2005). Corporate reputation: Meaning and measurement.
about corporate social responsibility: A review and research International Journal of Management Reviews, 7(2), 91–109.
agenda. Journal of Management, 38(4), 932–968. https://doi. Clark, M. A., Rudolph, C. W., Zhdanova, L., Michel, J. S., &
org/10.1177/0149206311436079 Baltes, B. B. (2017). Organizational support factors and work–
Akter, S., D’Ambra, J., & Ray, P. (2011). Trustworthiness in family outcomes: Exploring gender differences. Journal of
mHealth information services: An assessment of a hierarchi- Family Issues, 38(11), 1520–1545. https://doi.org/10.1177
cal model with mediating and moderating effects using par- /0192513X15585809
tial least squares (PLS). Journal of the American Society for Cornelissen, J. P. (2011). The international encyclopedia of
Information Science and Technology, 62(1), 100–116. https:// communication. Choice Reviews Online, 46(7). https://doi.
doi.org/10.1002/asi.21442 org/10.5860/choice.46-3590
Ambler, T., & Barrow, S. (1996). The employer brands. Journal Davies, G., Mete, M., & Whelan, S. (2018). When employer brand
of Brand Management, 4(3), 185–206. https://doi.org/10.1057/ image aids employee satisfaction and engagement. Journal
bm.1996.42 of Organizational Effectiveness, 5(1), 64–80. https://doi.
Anselmsson, J., Bondesson, N., & Melin, F. (2016). Customer- org/10.1108/JOEPP-03-2017-0028
based brand equity and human resource management image: DeNisi, A. S., Wilson, M. S., & Biteman, J. (2014). Research and
Do retail customers really care about HRM and the employer practice in HRM: A historical perspective. Human Resource
brand? European Journal of Marketing, 50(7–8), 1185–1208. Management Review, 24(3), 219–231. https://doi:10.1016/j.
https://doi.org/10.1108/EJM-02-2015-0094 hrmr.2014.03.004
Backhaus, K., & Tikoo, S. (2004). Conceptualizing and researching Dokania, A. K., & Pathak, G. S. (2013). Corporate social responsi-
employer branding. Career Development International, 9(5), bility and employer branding: A case study of Indian informa-
501–517. https://doi.org/10.1108/13620430410550754 tion technology industry. Review of HRM, 2(1), 149–158.
Bakos, L. (2014). Decision-making and managerial behav- Duff, A. (2016). Corporate social responsibility reporting in pro-
ior regarding corporate social responsibility in the case of fessional accounting firms. British Accounting Review, 48(1),
small and middle-sized companies. Procedia: Social and 74–86. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.bar.2014.10.010
Behavioral Sciences, 124, 246–254. https://doi.org/10.1016/j. Ellen, P. S., Webb, D. J., & Mohr, L. A. (2006). Building cor-
sbspro.2014.02.483 porate associations: Consumer attributions for corporate
Baron, R. M., & Kenny, D. A. (1986). The moderator-­mediator socially responsible programs. Journal of the Academy of
variable distinction in social psychological research: Marketing Science, 34(2), 147–157. https://doi.org/10.1177
Conceptual, strategic, and statistical considerations. Journal /0092070305284976
of Personality and Social Psychology, 51(6), 1173–1182. Fassin, Y., & Buelens, M. (2011). The hypocrisy-sincerity con-
https://doi.org/10.1037/0022-3514.51.6.1173 tinuum in corporate communication and decision making: A
Barrena-Martínez, J., López-Fernández, M., & Romero-Fernández, model of corporate social responsibility and business ethics
P. M. (2017). Socially responsible human resource policies and practices. Management Decision, 49(4), 586–600. https://doi.
practices: Academic and professional validation. European org/10.1108/00251741111126503
Research on Management and Business Economics, 23(1), Festinger, L. (1957). A theory of cognitive dissonance. Stanford,
55–61. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.iedeen.2016.05.001 CA: Stanford University Press.
Bashir, R., Hassan, A., & Cheema, F. E. A. (2012). Impact of cor- Fifka, M. S., & Pobizhan, M. (2014). An institutional approach
porate social responsibility activities over the employees of the to corporate social responsibility in Russia. Journal of
organizations: An exploratory study. Journal of Management Cleaner Production, 82, 192–201. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.
and Social Sciences, 8(2), 11–21. jclepro.2014.06.091
Bravo, R., Montaner, T., & Pina, J. M. (2010). Corporate brand Flammer, C. (2013). Corporate social responsibility and share-
image in retail banking: Development and validation of a scale. holder reaction: The environmental awareness of investors.
Service Industries Journal, 30(8), 1199–1218. https://doi. Academy of Management Journal, 56(3), 758–781. https://doi.
org/10.1080/02642060802311260 org/10.5465/amj.2011.0744
Özcan and Elçi 11

Fornell, C., & Larcker, D. F. (1981). Evaluating structural equa- supply chain management and corporate reputation. Industrial
tion models with unobservable variables and measurement Marketing Management, 43(1), 77–90.
error. Journal of Marketing Research, 18(1), 39–50. https:// Hsu, K. T. (2012). The advertising effects of corporate social
doi.org/10.2307/3151312 responsibility on corporate reputation and brand equity:
Frazier, P. A., Tix, A. P., & Barron, K. E. (2004). Testing mod- Evidence from the life insurance industry in Taiwan. Journal
erator and mediator effects in counseling psychology research. of Business Ethics, 109(2), 189–201. https://doi.org/10.1007/
Journal of Counseling Psychology, 51(1), 115–134. https:// s10551-011-1118-0
doi:10.1037/0022-0167.51.1.115 Hulland, J. (1999). Use of partial least squares (PLS) in strategic
Glavas, A. (2016). Corporate social responsibility and organizational management research: A review of four recent studies. Strategic
psychology: An integrative review. Frontiers in Psychology, 7, Management Journal, 20(2), 195–204. https://doi.org/10.1002/
Article 144. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2016.00144 (sici)1097-0266(199902)20:2<195::aid-smj13>3.3.co;2-z
Glavas, A., & Kelley, K. (2014). The effects of perceived cor- Jones, D. A., Willness, C. R., & Madey, S. (2014). Why are job
porate social responsibility on employee attitudes. Business seekers attracted by corporate social performance? experi-
Ethics Quarterly, 24(2), 165–202. https://doi.org/10.5840/ mental and field tests of three signal-based mechanisms.
beq20143206 Academy of Management Journal, 57(2), 383–404. https://doi.
Gond, J. P., El Akremi, A., Swaen, V., & Babu, N. (2017). org/10.5465/amj.2011.0848
The psychological microfoundations of corporate social Kim, H., Hur, W. M., & Yeo, J. (2015). Corporate brand trust
responsibility: A person-centric systematic review. Journal as a mediator in the relationship between consumer percep-
of Organizational Behavior, 38(2), 225–246. https://doi. tion of CSR, corporate hypocrisy, and corporate reputation.
org/10.1002/job.2170 Sustainability, 7(4), 3683–3694. https://doi.org/10.3390/
Gotsi, M., & Wilson, A. (2001). Corporate reputation management: su7043683
“Living the brand.” Management Decision, 39(2), 99–104. Kim, S., & Lee, Y. J. (2012). The complex attribution process
Graafland, J., & Smid, H. (2017). Reconsidering the relevance of CSR motives. Public Relations Review, 38(1), 168–170.
of social license pressure and government regulation for https://doi.org/10.1016/j.pubrev.2011.09.024
environmental performance of European SMEs. Journal of Knox, S., & Freeman, C. (2006). Measuring and managing
Cleaner Production, 141, 967–977. https://doi.org/10.1016/j. employer brand image in the service industry. Journal of
jclepro.2016.09.171 Marketing Management, 22(7–8), 695–716. https://doi.org/
Green, T., & Peloza, J. (2011). How does corporate social respon- 10.1362/026725706778612103
sibility create value for consumers? Journal of Consumer Kozłowski, M. (2012). Employer branding – Building the employ-
Marketing, 28(1), 48–56. https://doi.org/10.1108/07363761 er’s image step by step. Warsaw: Wolters Kluwer Business.
111101949 Lai, C. S., Chiu, C. J., Yang, C. F., & Pai, D. C. (2010). The effects
Hair, J. F., Ringle, C. M., & Sarstedt, M. (2011). PLS-SEM: of corporate social responsibility on brand performance: The
Indeed a silver bullet. Journal of Marketing Theory and mediating effect of industrial brand equity and corporate repu-
Practice, 19(2), 139–152. https://doi.org/10.2753/mtp1069- tation. Journal of Business Ethics, 95(3), 457–469. https://doi.
6679190202 org/10.1007/s10551-010-0433-1
Hameed, I., Riaz, Z., Arain, G. A., & Farooq, O. (2016). How do Lange, D., Lee, P. M., & Dai, Y. (2011). Organizational reputation:
internal and external CSR affect employees’ organizational A review. Journal of Management, 37(1), 153–184. https://doi.
identification? A perspective from the group engagement org/10.1177/0149206310390963
model. Frontiers in Psychology, 7, Article 788. https://doi.org/ Lee, M. D. P. (2008). A review of the theories of corporate social
10.3389/fpsyg.2016.00788 responsibility: Its evolutionary path and the road ahead.
Hansen, S. D., Dunford, B. B., Boss, A. D., Boss, R. W., & International Journal of Management Reviews, 10(1), 53–73.
Angermeier, I. (2011). Corporate social responsibility and https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1468-2370.2007.00226.x
the benefits of employee trust: A cross-disciplinary perspec- Lievens, F., & Slaughter, J. E. (2016). Employer image and
tive. Journal of Business Ethics, 102(1), 29–45. https://doi.org employer branding: What we know and what we need to know.
/10.1007/s10551-011-0903-0 Social Science Research Network, 3(1), 407–440. https://doi.
Hayes, A. F. (2012). PROCESS: A versatile computational tool for org/10.1146/annurev-orgpsych-041015-062501
observed variable mediation, moderation, and conditional pro- Lievens, F., Van Hoye, G., & Anseel, F. (2007). Organizational
cess modeling [White paper]. http://www.afhayes.com/public/ identity and employer image: Towards a unifying framework.
process2012.pdf British Journal of Management, 18(Suppl. 1), S45–S59. https://
Henseler, J., Hubona, G., & Ray, P. A. (2016). Using PLS path doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-8551.2007.00525.x
modeling in new technology research: Updated guidelines. Liu, H., & Fong, M. (2010). The corporate social responsibility ori-
Industrial Management & Data Systems, 116(1), 2–20. https:// entation of Chinese small and medium enterprises. Journal of
doi.org/10.1108/IMDS-09-2015-0382 Business Systems, Governance and Ethics, 5(3), 33–50.
Highhouse, S., Brooks, M. E., & Gregarus, G. (2009). An orga- Lu, J., Ren, L., Zhang, C., Qiao, J., Kovacova, M., & Streimikis,
nizational impression management perspective on the forma- J. (2020). Assessment of corporate social responsibility and
tion of corporate reputations. Journal of Management, 35(6), its impacts on corporate reputation of companies in selected
1481–1493. https://doi.org/10.1177/0149206309348788 Balkan Countries former Yugoslavia States. Technological
Hoejmose, S. U., Roehrich, J. K., & Grosvold, J. (2014). Is doing and Economic Development of Economy, 26(2), 504–524.
more, doing better? The relationship between responsible https://doi.org/10.3846/tede.2020.12069
12 SAGE Open

MacKinnon, D. P., Lockwood, C. M., Hoffman, J. M., West, S. G., Powell, S. M., Davies, M. A. P., & Norton, D. (2013). Impact of
& Sheets, V. (2002). A comparison of methods to test mediation organizational climate on ethical empowerment and engage-
and other intervening variable effects. Psychological Methods, ment with Corporate Social Responsibility (CSR). Journal of
7, 83–104. Brand Management, 20(9), 815–839. https://doi.org/10.1057/
Maden, C., Arıkan, E., Telci, E. E., & Kantur, D. (2012). Linking bm.2013.14
Corporate Social Responsibility to Corporate Reputation: A Rahman, I. A., Memon, A. H., Azis, A. A. A., & Abdullah, N. H.
Study on Understanding Behavioral Consequences. Procedia: (2013). Modeling causes of cost overrun in large construction
Social and Behavioral Sciences, 58, 655–664. https://doi. projects with partial least square-SEM approach: Contractor’s
org/10.1016/j.sbspro.2012.09.1043 perspective. Research Journal of Applied Sciences, Engineering
Maon, F., Lindgreen, A., & Swaen, V. (2009). Designing and and Technology, 5(6), 1963–1972. https://doi.org/10.19026/
implementing corporate social responsibility: An integra- rjaset.5.4736
tive framework grounded in theory and practice. Journal of Reverte, C., Gómez-Melero, E., & Cegarra-Navarro, J. G. (2016).
Business Ethics, 87(Suppl. 1), 71–89. https://doi.org/10.1007/ The influence of corporate social responsibility practices on
s10551-008-9804-2 organizational performance: Evidence from Eco-Responsible
Martin, G., Gollan, P. J., & Grigg, K. (2011). Is there a bigger and Spanish firms. Journal of Cleaner Production, 112, 2870–2884.
better future for employer branding? Facing up to innovation, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jclepro.2015.09.128
corporate reputations and wicked problems in SHRM. Ruiz, B., García, J. A., & Revilla, A. J. (2016). Antecedents and
International Journal of Human Resource Management, 22(17), consequences of bank reputation: A comparison of the United
3618–3637. https://doi.org/10.1080/09585192.2011.560880 Kingdom and Spain. International Marketing Review, 33(6),
Martínez, P., Pérez, A., & del Bosque, I. R. (2014). CSR influ- 781–805. https://doi.org/10.1108/IMR-06-2015-0147
ence on hotel brand image and loyalty. Academia Revista Rupp, D. E., & Mallory, D. (2015). Corporate social responsibility:
Latinoamericana de Administración, 27(2), 267–283. Psychological, person-centric, and progressing. Social Science
https://doi:10.1108/arla-12-2013-0190 Research Network, 2(1), 211–236. https://doi.org/10.1146/
Melo, T., & Galan, J. I. (2011). Effects of corporate social respon- annurev-orgpsych-032414-111505
sibility on brand value. Journal of Brand Management, 18(6), Rupp, D. E., Skarlicki, D., & Shao, R. (2013). The psychology
423–437. https://doi.org/10.1057/bm.2010.54 of corporate social responsibility and humanitarian work:
Morokane, P., Chiba, M., & Kleyn, N. (2016). Drivers of employee A person-centric perspective. Industrial and Organizational
propensity to endorse their corporate brand. Journal of Psychology. https://doi.org/10.1111/iops.12068
Brand Management, 23(1), 55–66. https://doi.org/10.1057/ Rusmanto, T., & Williams, C. (2015). Compliance evaluation on
bm.2015.47 CSR activities disclosure in Indonesian publicly listed compa-
Mory, L., Wirtz, B. W., & Göttel, V. (2015). Factors of internal nies. Procedia: Social and Behavioral Sciences, 172, 150–156.
corporate social responsibility and the effect on organiza- https://doi.org/10.1016/j.sbspro.2015.01.348
tional commitment. International Journal of Human Resource Sánchez, J. L. F., & Sotorrío, L. L. (2007). The creation of value
Management, 27(13), 1393–1425. https://doi.org/10.1080/095 through corporate reputation. Journal of Business Ethics,
85192.2015.1072103 76(3), 335–346. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10551-006-9285-0
Okolocha, C. B. (2020). Influence of employee-focused corporate Scheidler, S., Edinger-Schons, L. M., Spanjol, J., & Wieseke, J.
social responsibility and employer brand on turnover intention. (2018). Scrooge posing as Mother Teresa: How hypocritical
European Journal of Business and Management, 12(9). https:// social responsibility strategies hurt employees and firms. Journal
doi.org/10.7176/EJBM/12-9-07 of Business Ethics, 157, 339–358. https://doi.org/10.1007/
Ozdora-Aksak, E., Ferguson, M. A., & Atakan Duman, S. s10551-018-3788-3
(2016). Corporate social responsibility and CSR fit as pre- Searcy, C., Dixon, S. M., & Patrick Neumann, W. (2016). The
dictors of corporate reputation: A global perspective. Public use of work environment performance indicators in cor-
Relations Review, 42(1), 79–81. https://doi.org/10.1016/j. porate social responsibility reporting. Journal of Cleaner
pubrev.2015.11.004 Production, 112, 2907–2921. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.
Pfarrer, M., Pollock, T., & Rindova, V. (2010). A tale of two jclepro.2015.10.081
assets: The effects of firm reputation and celebrity on earnings Sehgal, K., & Malati, N. (2013). Employer branding: A potent orga-
surprises and investors’ reactions. Academy of Management nizational tool for enhancing competitive advantage. The IUP
Journal, 53(5), 1131–1152. https://doi.org/10.5465/amj Journal of Brand Management, 10(1), 51–65.
.2010.54533222 Singh, A., & Verma, P. (2017). Driving brand value through
Podnar, K., & Balmer, J. (Eds.). (2013). Contemplating corporate CSR initiatives: An empirical study in Indian perspective.
marketing, identity, and communication. Routledge. Global Business Review, 19(1), 85–98. https://doi:10.1177
Ponzi, L. J., Fombrun, C. J., & Gardberg, N. A. (2011). RepTrak /0972150917713270
pulse: Conceptualizing and validating a short-form measure Singh, J., De Los Salmones Sanchez, M. D. M. G., & Del Bosque,
of corporate reputation. Corporate Reputation Review, 14(1), I. R. (2008). Understanding corporate social responsibility and
15–35. https://doi.org/10.1057/crr.2011.5 product perceptions in consumer markets: A cross-cultural
Porter, M. E., & Kramer, M. R. (2006). Strategy & society: The link evaluation. Journal of Business Ethics, 80(3), 597–611. https://
between competitive advantage and corporate social respon- doi.org/10.1007/s10551-007-9457-6
sibility. Harvard Business Review, 84(12), 78–92. https://doi. Sullivan, J. (2004, February). Eight elements of a successful
org/10.1108/sd.2007.05623ead.006 employment brand. ER Daily, 23, 501–510.
Özcan and Elçi 13

Swaen, V., & Chumpitaz, R. C. (2008). Impact of corporate social responsibility. Public Relations Review, 44(4), 444–452.
responsibility on consumer trust. Recherche et Applications https://doi.org/10.1016/j.pubrev.2018.06.005
en Marketing (English Edition), 23(4), 7–34. https://doi:10. Turker, D. (2009). How corporate social responsibility influ-
1177/205157070802300402 ences organizational commitment. Journal of Business
Tavassoli, N. T., Sorescu, A., & Chandy, R. (2014). Employee- Ethics, 89(2), 189–204. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10551-008-
based brand equity: Why firms with strong brands pay their 9993-8
executives less. Journal of Marketing Research, 51(6), 676– Wahba, H. (2008). Does the market value corporate environmental
690. https://doi.org/10.1509/jmr.13.0435 responsibility? An empirical examination. Corporate Social
Tian, Z., Wang, R., & Yang, W. (2011). Consumer responses to Responsibility and Environmental Management, 15(2), 89–99.
Corporate Social Responsibility (CSR) in China. Journal of https://doi.org/10.1002/csr.153
Business Ethics, 101(2), 197–212. https://doi.org/10.1007/ Waworuntu, S. R., Wantah, M. D., & Rusmanto, T. (2014). CSR
s10551-010-0716-6 and financial performance analysis: Evidence from top ASEAN
Tischer, S., & Hildebrandt, L. (2014). Linking corporate reputation listed companies. Procedia: Social and Behavioral Sciences,
and shareholder value using the publication of reputation rank- 164, 493–500. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.sbspro.2014.11.107
ings. Journal of Business Research, 67(5), 1007–1017. https:// Wu, S.-I., & Wang, W.-H. (2014). Impact of CSR Perception on
doi:10.1016/j.jbusres.2013.08.007 brand image, brand attitude and buying willingness: A study of
Tkalac Verčič, A., & Sinčić Ćorić, D. (2018). The relationship a global café. International Journal of Marketing Studies, 6(6).
between reputation, employer branding and corporate social https://doi:10.5539/ijms.v6n6p43