Corporate social responsibility internal as a predictor for motivation to serve, normative commitment, and adaptive performance among State-owned Enterprises’ employee

Abstract

Very drastic environmental changes require the development of an adaptive performance management framework that supports the strengths of the company’s structure. Proving the position of internal CSR as a resource that can solve performance problems needs to be done. This study aims to analyze the role of internal corporate social responsibility as a predictor of motivation to serve, normative commitment, and adaptive performance in Pandemic COVID 19 among State-owned enterprises Employees. The research design used causal studies to test the influence by using a survey of 289 employees holding State-owned Enterprises (SOEs) of the defense industry non-managers who were randomly selected. Findings of research show the motivation for high performance grows in line with the attention and support of the company at the time of pandemic with the existence of internal corporate social responsibility. Normative commitments increase and impact adaptive performance. Performance grows along with the activation of personal norms (moral responsibility) and the activity of individual values as employees in State-owned enterprises. The employees identify themselves as part of an organization that must devote itself to the interests of the state. Internal corporate social responsibility influences adaptive performance both directly and through motivation to serve and normative commitment. Theoretical implications are focused on developing ethical theories that underlie motivation to serve and normative commitments. Practical implications are focused on efforts to realize internal corporate social responsibility based on the foundation that is sourced on environmental ethical awareness. Originality is the contribution of expanding understanding of internal corporate social responsibility functions reviewed from the process to improve performance based on Self-determination theory and norm activation theory.

Keywords:

• Corporate social responsibility internal
• motivation to serve
• normative commitment
• state-owned enterprises holding defense
• employee

PUBLIC INTEREST STATEMENT

This paper highlighted adaptive performance models based on the position of internal CSR as a driver when a pandemic COVID-19 crisis occurs. The results of empirical studies show that internal CSR either indirectly leads to adaptive performance as a specific characteristic of employee work behavior that shows adapting to new situations and changes in the organization. The concept of adaptive performance is described with unidimensional, low abstraction and can be directly measured empirically in the context of SOEs. The implication is to integrate ethical views into internal CSR and show the ethical orientation of the company. Internal CSR as a conceptual framework that serves as the basis for adaptive performance. Internal CSR is able to build a stronger corporate performance foundation structure at the micro level based on the ethical orientation of employees. Adaptive capabilities are not only managed based on the demands of the rules regarding CSR for SOEs. Adaptive performance is a form of collective awareness of the ethical responsibility of employees both in the company and in the state. Therefore, performance adaptive starts from the priority scale in the company's internal CSR.

1. Introduction

During the pandemic due to COVID-19, various companies are facing pressure including SOEs as companies that manage the business sector owned by the government for the welfare of the people.There are several SOEs that have a strategic position in terms of defense and high technology in the container of State-Owned Enterprises of Strategic Industries. Since 2019 the Ministry of SOEs as a shareholder’s action with the vision of developing a national strategic defense industry that is advanced, strong, independent, competitive and leading in the Asian region. The holding structure of the Strategic Defense Industry SOE is led by PT LEN Industri (Persero). The four SOEs under the Strategic Defense Industry holding are: 1) PT Dirgantara Indonesia (Persero), 2) PT Pindad (Persero), 3) PT Dahana (Persero), 4) PT PAL Indonesia (Persero). In 2019 State-Owned Strategic Defense Industry experiencing performance problems coupled with pressures during the pandemic due to COVID-19 such as a decrease in profits, delays in order delivery, losses due to high restructuring interest expenses. This condition has an impact on the life of the employees and ultimately decreases the performance of the organization. Whereas the work of the organization is influenced by the performance of employees (Ingusci et al., 2019). Today’s performance challenges are unprecedented pressures that tear down individual performance structures. Demands that employees be able to adapt to changes as a basic framework for developing performance concepts according to the dynamics of change. In times of high uncertainty and rapid change, adaptation conditions are essential for the organization to continue to grow (Baard et al., 2014).

Employee performance needs to be reconstructed including identifying the factors that affect it according to the dynamic conditions faced. It requires an expansion of understanding of the concept of performance based on very dynamic empirical facts. Adaptive performance is a concept built on theoretical and empirical models of how well individuals adopt or adapt to new conditions or unexpected situations (Borman & Motowidlo, 1993). Adaptive performance is proactive, resilience, role flexibility, learning agility, and workforce agility (Park & Park, 2020), It appears change-oriented (Ramos-Villagrasa et al., 2020). Marques-Quinteiro et al. (2019) present an adaptive performance of multi-dimensional construction that shows readiness to face uncertainty creatively. Therefore, the identification and construction of adaptive performance are required to be clearer and more understandable consistency.

The focus in performance is about adaptive ability in new conditions or unexpected situations and being an orientation (Borman & Motowidlo, 1993). Adaptive performance put forward by (Park & Park, 2019, 2020; Pulakos et al., 2000; Smith et al., 1997). Niessen and Lang (2021), Luo et al. (2021), and Stasielowicz and Tommasi (2019) emphasized that the adaptive ability of employees is needed to deal with the dynamic of environmental change. Although adaptive performance is very important and familiar, the concept seems to have a different focus with the possibility of overlap and research comparing and clarifying various terms and concepts is still lacking. Therefore, focusing on factors that encourage performance from various sides, especially adaptive performance such as internal CSR, is very important.

However, it is clear that the orientation of internal CSR practically causes the function to build adaptive performance to be lacking. In fact, the framework for realizing the CSR function has been put forward by Glavas and Kelley (2014), Aguinis and Glavas (2012), Manzoor et al. (2019), and Ramdhan (2021) emphasized the relationship between internal CSR and employee performance. Performance can be explained by CSR directly as well as through motivation. But in the context of a very dynamic situation, the statement needs substantiation. Skudiene and Auruskeviciene (2012) expressed a stronger influence of internal CSR on motivation compared to external CSR. Boadi et al. (2019) explain the interrelationship between internal CSR, motivation, and performance. Hur et al. (2018) suggest intrinsic motivation to mediate some of CSR’s influence on creativity. Internal CSR has the potential to affect performance through employee commitment, as stated by (Trivellas et al., 2018). In contrast to Chatzopoulou et al. (2021), Ikram et al. (2019) who suggests the role of mediation of very low commitment related to CSR influence and performance is not even significant. Internal CSR as a predictor of motivation and commitment still raises doubts. Edwards and Kudret (2017) explain the perception of fairness in CSR by predicting performance either directly or indirectly through commitment. Research is needed to test the consistency of internal CSR position as an adaptive performance predictor either directly or indirectly in pandemic situations to test the consistency of the theory directly or mediating by motivation or normative commitment.

An explanation of adaptive performance based on internal CSR functions can be used to strengthen the organizational performance structure in developing countries. Ali et al. (2022), Gulema and Roba (2021), and Yasir et al. (2021) point out the importance of CSR orientation in developing countries. Metwally et al. (2021) emphasized the importance of governance integration during the COVID-19 pandemic which involves the concept of internal CSR. This study fills the gap regarding the explanation of performance in the midst of uncertain conditions and the position of internal CSR as the main driver through motivation and normative commitment in developing countries. The purpose of the study was to analyze the role of internal CSR as a predictor of motivation, normative commitment for adaptive performance in pandemic COVID-19 among State-owned enterprises (SOEs) Employees.

2. Literature review and hypotheses

2.1. Internal CSR and motivation to serve

Internal CSR functions in general can increase the responsibility of employees to company. CSR generally guarantees sustainability (Gond et al., 2017). In general, Manzoor et al. (2019) define internal CSR as an accountable condition of the company both ethically and legally to carry out tasks and take care of someone or something. It builds company-specific human resources and expands the offer of volunteer opportunities for employees to increase their capacity (Deng et al., 2019; Jamali et al. (2019). Internal CSR can be a means of achieving change in the organization (Bolton, 2020). Adu-Gyamfi et al. (2021) explained that internal CSR creates opportunities to encourage self-motivation of employees. Chang et al. (2021) showed output in the form of positive behavior towards employees. Loor-Zambrano et al. (2022) added the influence of internal CSR on the intrinsic motivation of employees.

Internal CSR as the company’s responsibility and attention to employees. Such attention gives rise to moral obligations, awareness of the role of employees in the company which is indicated by higher motivation. Employees learn from the company about collective ethics on which employees’ motivation is based. Internal CSR and motivation to serve have both assumptions about the same values and ethical awareness. Internal CSR encourages the growth of motivation to serve. Motivation to serve is an individual’s tendency to respond to motives based on public institutions and organizations (Perry & Wise, 1990; Vogel, 2020). Ethics became the basis of the growing motion to serve (Lawton et al., 2013; Ripoll & Ballart, 2019). Internal CSR initiatives are organized by the company based on ethical awareness of the psychologically prosperous lives of employees.

The positive attitude that grows with the internal CSR encourages employees to identify themselves according to the values shown and become the orientation of the company. De Roeck and Delobbe (2012) explained according to the theory of social identification that self-identification grows due to psychological processes experienced, employees classify themselves into companies, need to strengthen self-esteem and self-concept, and develop a unity of feeling within the company. Unity of feeling as an intrinsic motivation to direct itself to the demands of the organization is the motivation to serve the public interest. Perry (2000) presents three different factors that have an impact on motivation, namely sociosynthist context, motivational context, and individual characteristics. The three contexts are in internal CSR. The proposed hypothesis is:

H1: Internal CSR has a positive influence on the motivation to serve.

2.2. Internal CSR and normative commitment

Normative commitment of employees as a form of awareness of ethics related to their role in the company. This commitment grows and develops along with the process of interaction between employees and the company. Internal CSR describes the characteristics of the relationship between the company and its employees that have an impact not only on its commitment to live in the company but are committed to providing the best for the company based on normative awareness. Ramdhan (2021), Ramdhan et al. (2021) emphasized that internal CSR strengthens the relationship between employees and organizations based on employee ethics awareness. Internal CSR affects the commitment of the employees (Mory et al., 2016; De Silva & Lokuwaduge, 2019; Thang & Fassin, 2017).

Internal CSR as the policies and practices of an organization is related to employees’ psychological and physiological well-being (Hameed et al., 2016). Internal CSR is the conduct of companies that are responsible for employees, such as, for example, the care shown in their careers, their needs, and their education (Bouraoui et al., 2018; Jamali et al. (2019). Employees who obtain internal CSR have ethical awareness that serves as the basis for committing. Internal CSR is a psychological experience that fosters normative awareness of the importance of ethical responsibility to the environment including the company. The experience fosters commitment based on the moral obligations of the employees. Allen and Meyer (1991), Meyer et al. (1993), Meyer and Parfyonova (2010) describe normative commitment as a sense of obligation derived from internalizing normative influences. Internal CSR has a strong normative influence that encourages “rights” and moral actions to be taken. The proposed hypothesis is:

H2: Internal CSR has a positive influence on normative commitment

2.3. Internal CSR and adaptive performance

Corporate responsibility to employees describes the existence of ethical awareness and understanding of the position of employees in the organization. Based on the theory of self-identification, employees who obtain internal CSR have an orientation to maintain attitudes and behaviors by social reference groups. Such behaviors to meet the psychological need for ownership and existence are meaningful for the company. De Roeck and Delobbe (2012) psychological process start from the CSR initiative to show the attitudes and behaviors of the group. Internal CSR encourages employees’ efforts to improve their self-image according to the referral group by demonstrating their ability to produce adaptive performance despite pandemic conditions. Internal CSR encourages the growth of pride and efforts to identify themselves more strongly with the company through adaptive performance. Adu-Gyamfi et al. (2021) showed that internal CSR encourages balance and welfare and employee performance despite the dynamic conditions and very high demands for adaptation. Employees categorize themselves, integrate themselves into social referral groups, and behave adaptively.

Adaptive performance itself according to Park and Park (2020) is very broad, not only showing adaptability in problem solving, flexibility, and coping. The ability to change as an important characteristic in adaptive performance in very uncertain and dynamic conditions (Park & Park, 2020; Ramos-Villagrasa et al., 2020). The proposed hypothesis is:

H3: Internal CSR has a positive influence on adaptive performance.

2.4. Motivation to serve mediates the influence of internal CSR on adaptive performance

CSR as a collective initiative of the company needs to pay attention to its impact on employees. Along with the increasing dynamic process of learning employees about these objective values and employee identification of the company, the impact on performance can be seen in real terms. The values in CSR direct and guide employees to real performance. The employees not only feel the attention of the company. The employees feel the results of their work on the welfare of the employees themselves. Motivation to serve grows as the experience of psychological and welfare needs is met by the company’s initiative. The experience encourages employees to identify themselves with the values shown and become the image of the company. Vogel (2020) presents the relationship between the individual level and the institutional level by associating the concept of identity with the institutional structure through the response to the basic psychological needs of the individual. Abdelmotaleb and Saha (2019) stated the role of PSM in mediating internal CSR with work behavior. Positive work behavior grows along with the psychological experience of receiving CSR from the company. The psychological experience encourages the growth of efforts to identify themselves by the values of the company and ultimately realized with the form of adaptive performance. Internal CSR increases the need for employees to define their lives. Sanusi and Johl (2020), Ramdhan et al. (2021) show the influence of internal CSR on performance. Marques-Quinteiro et al. (2019) posit that adaptive performance as a result of self-regulation partition, a proactive form in response to change. Internal CSR is part of the importance for employees to organize and learn to respond to change. The proposed hypothesis is:

H4: Motivation to serve mediates the influence of internal CSR on adaptive performance.

2.5. Normative commitment mediates the influence of internal CSR on adaptive performance

Internal CSR shows the company’s ethical responsibility for the psychological well-being of employees. This responsibility fosters the moral obligation of the employees to their work. Employees identify with the company’s ethical values and raise ethical awareness based on that experience (Vogel, 2020). Experience acquires CSR as a mechanism that directs employees to act in an altruistic way. The growing awareness to take actions that affect environmental change based on its role as a SOEs is realized with a commitment to work despite the pressures of the Covid 19 pandemic. Norma shown through internal CSR initiatives directs employees’ work behavior based on obligations and moral awareness that grows based on experience with internal CSR. Ojeme and Robson (2020) suggest that moral obligation makes employees only act by the norm. The proposed hypothesis is:

H5: Normative commitment mediates the influence of internal CSR on adaptive performance.

3. Research design

The research method used causal studies to test the influence by using a survey of 289 employees of non-manager-selected Defense Industry SOEs Holding. After the research proposal was received, the researcher began to compile a research plan by asking for data on the number of employees, determining the proportional number of each SOEs in the strategic defense industry cluster. The selection of samples is carried out by HRD (human resources development). The dissemination of questionnaires using the help of existing technology media and some is done manually. The sampling steps are: 1) calculating the sub-population in each SOEs Strategic Industry according to and the total population with non-manager criteria; 2) select a random sample according to the amount set as the research target. Formal submission of research to company leaders through the HR Manager. Data collection was carried out for 2 weeks starting in March 2022 with an average number of incoming data per day of 20 respondents. The number of questionnaires distributed was 500 and the questionnaires returned complete as much as 289. Based on this data, it can be concluded that the majority of non-manager employees of SOEs Strategic Industry are male, while the minority is female. Employees aged 20 to 55 years and aged 35 to 45 years were the majority as much as 53%. The majority of staff have the last education at the Diploma to Bachelor as much as 53% and the minority at the post-graduate to Doctor education level as much as 12%. The rest are educated vocational high schools.

Internal CSR measurement refers to Manzoor et al. (2019) adapted to current conditions. For example: a) The company pays attention to education for employees, b) Policies taken by the company are carried out to improve the balance between the personal life of employees and their work, c) The company pays attention to the training of its employees for free to improve skills in their work. Motivation to serve measurement refers to Perry and Wise (1990), Vogel (2020) namely: a) Attraction to policy-making institutions in policymaking on research, b) placing public interest above probate interests, and c) readiness for self-sacrifice. Normative commitment refers to Meyer and Allen (1991, Meyer and Parfyonova (2010) namely: a) responsibility for the job, b) having an obligation to continue working as a SOEs employee despite the job offer and better salary, c) despite the pandemic getting higher, I continue the status as SOEs employee, d) I will not leave so-called SOEs even though it is detrimental, and e) I work as a SOEs employee because of loyalty to fulfill responsibilities in the country.

Adaptive performance measurement refers to Marques-Quinteiro et al. (), Ramos-Villagrasa et al. (2020) with statements such as: a) problem solving (i.e. atypical resolution, creatively unclear and complex problems, b) dealing with uncertain or unpredictable work situations (i.e. the ability to adjust and resolve unpredictable situations, shift focus and take sensible actions), c) learn new tasks, technologies and procedures (i.e. the ability to anticipate, prepare, and learn skills needed for future work requirements), and d) handle work stress (i.e., the ability to remain calm under pressure, deal with frustration, and act as a calming influence). The answer to the statement uses the semantic differential scale of 1 to 5. Data analysis using SEM Covariant. Figure 1 shows a structural model for this study.

Figure 1. Structural model.

4. Empirical finding

The results of the Goodness of Fit Model test are shown in Table 1 as follows.

Table 1. Overall model fit analysis

The goodness of Fit Parameters	First Parameters	Second Parameters	Cut-off Value	Testing Conclusion
Absolute:
CMIN\DF	2.91	1.97	< 2.00	Good Fit
P-Value	0.000	0.000	≥ 0.05	Poor
RMSEA	0.08	0.06	≤ 0.08	Good Fit
GFI	0.80	0.90	> 0.90	Marginal Fit
RMR	0.05	0.04	< 0.08	Good Fit
ECVI	3.91	2.78	< 2.82	Good Fit
Incremental:
CFI	0.94	0.97	> 0.90; > 0.95	Good Fit
NFI	0.90	0.94	> 0.90; > 0.95	Good Fit
TLI	0.93	0.97	> 0.90; > 0.95	Good Fit
IFI	0.94	0.97	> 0.90; > 0.95	Good Fit
RFI		0.93	> 0.90; > 0.95	Good Fit
AGFI	0.76	0.84	≥ 0.90	Poor
Parsimonious:
PGFI	0.68	0.71	> 0.60	Good Fit
AIC	1127.01	800.35	< 812.00	Good Fit
CAIC	1411.67	1136.34	< 2706.57	Good Fit

Based on Table 1, there are 12 Good Fit, 1 Marginal Fit, and 2 Poor, then we can conclude that the fit between the data and model is Good Fit now. The RMSEA is better also now, 0.05, Good Fit. Then we can continue the next testing: Measurement Model Fit Analysis. The measurement model fit analysis for validity testing can be done by conducting: 1. Construct Validity Test, 2. Convergent Validity Test, and 3. Reliability Test. In this step, we will do the Construct Validity Test first, by looking at the “C.R. (Critical Ratio)” score than the “P (Probability)”. If the CR is > 1.96 (1.96 is the critical value at the significant level 0.05) and the P < 0.05. then the indicator is VALID, able to reflect the latent variable. If the “P” score shown is “***”, it means that the “P” score is significant, targeted < 0.001.

Based on Table 2, we can see from Amos’ output, that all observed variables have a CR score > 1.96, and the P score shows “***”, which means < 0.05. We conclusion the result of the measurement model fit analysis is fit for the construct validity test. Then we can continue the next step with Convergent Validity Test is testing the indicator whether it has a high variance proportion or not. All the items/observed variables/indicators of a latent variable should be converging or share the high variance proportion. Conducting the convergent validity test can be done by looking at the “Loading Factor” or the “Standardized Loading Factor/SLF” score. If the SLF score is high, it shows that the observed variable and its latent variables are converged or VALID. It would converge/be valid if the SLF score is ≥ 0.70 (Hair et al., 2019).

Table 2. Regression weigh

			Estimate	S.E.	C.R.	P	Label
MTS	<—	CSR	.767	.065	11.761	***	par_1
NC	<—	CSR	.727	.060	12.219	***	par_2
AP	<—	NC	.314	.062	5.106	***	par_3
AP	<—	CSR	.247	.060	4.143	***	par_4
AP	<—	MTS	.276	.059	4.650	***	par_5
csr1	<—	CSR	1.000
csr2	<—	CSR	1.122	.052	21.699	***	par_6
csr3	<—	CSR	1.168	.062	18.854	***	par_7
csr4	<—	CSR	1.230	.067	18.401	***	par_8
csr5	<—	CSR	1.266	.067	18.850	***	par_9
csr6	<—	CSR	1.285	.068	19.022	***	par_10
csr7	<—	CSR	1.275	.067	18.962	***	par_11
csr8	<—	CSR	1.182	.064	18.500	***	par_12
csr9	<—	CSR	1.219	.066	18.469	***	par_13
csr10	<—	CSR	1.123	.066	17.128	***	par_14
csr11	<—	CSR	1.252	.066	19.076	***	par_15
csr12	<—	CSR	1.258	.064	19.524	***	par_16
csr13	<—	CSR	1.165	.062	18.829	***	par_17
csr14	<—	CSR	1.139	.065	17.506	***	par_18
csr15	<—	CSR	1.193	.066	18.082	***	par_19
csr16	<—	CSR	1.064	.063	16.764	***	par_20
MTS1	<—	MTS	1.000
MTS2	<—	MTS	1.108	.059	18.766	***	par_21
MTS3	<—	MTS	1.214	.056	21.612	***	par_22
NC1	<—	NC	1.000
NC2	<—	NC	1.149	.056	20.601	***	par_23
NC3	<—	NC	1.182	.055	21.347	***	par_24
NC4	<—	NC	1.290	.054	23.797	***	par_25
NC5	<—	NC	1.195	.053	22.725	***	par_26
AP1	<—	AP	1.000
AP2	<—	AP	1.095	.043	25.418	***	par_27
AP3	<—	AP	.981	.042	23.229	***	par_28
AP4	<—	AP	.969	.049	19.870	***	par_29

Based on Table 3, Standardized Regression Weights, all observed variables have the “Standardized Loading Factor/SLF” ≥ 0.70, leading to the conclusion that all the variables are valid.¹

Table 3. Standardized regression weights

			Estimate
MTS	<—	CSR	.713
NC	<—	CSR	.718
AP	<—	NC	.343
AP	<—	CSR	.266
AP	<—	MTS	.319
csr1	<—	CSR	.798
csr2	<—	CSR	.886
csr3	<—	CSR	.904
csr4	<—	CSR	.891
csr5	<—	CSR	.906
csr6	<—	CSR	.912
csr7	<—	CSR	.910
csr8	<—	CSR	.896
csr9	<—	CSR	.894
csr10	<—	CSR	.849
csr11	<—	CSR	.913
csr12	<—	CSR	.926
csr13	<—	CSR	.904
csr14	<—	CSR	.861
csr15	<—	CSR	.879
csr16	<—	CSR	.834
MTS1	<—	MTS	.855
MTS2	<—	MTS	.860
MTS3	<—	MTS	.937
NC1	<—	NC	.873
NC2	<—	NC	.868
NC3	<—	NC	.885
NC4	<—	NC	.929
NC5	<—	NC	.908
AP1	<—	AP	.869
AP2	<—	AP	.949
AP3	<—	AP	.917
AP4	<—	AP	.848

Table 4. Summary of all the validity testing results

Observed Variables	CSR			MTS			NC			AP			Conclusion
	CR	P	SLF	CR	P	SLF	CR	P	SLF	CR	P	SLF
csr1	*	0.000	.798										Valid
csr2	21.699	0.000	.886										Valid
csr3	18.854	0.000	.904										Valid
csr4	18.401	0.000	.891										Valid
csr5	18.850	0.000	.906										Valid
csr6	19.022	0.000	.912										Valid
csr7	18.962	0.000	.910										Valid
csr8	18.500	0.000	.896										Valid
csr9	18.469	0.000	.894										Valid
csr10	17.128	0.000	.849										Valid
csr11	19.076	0.000	.913										Valid
csr12	19.524	0.000	.926										Valid
csr13	18.829	0.000	.904										Valid
csr14	17.506	0.000	.861										Valid
csr15	18.082	0.000	.879										Valid
csr16	16.764	0.000	.834										Valid
MTS1				*	0.000	.855							Valid
MTS2				18.766	0.000	.860							Valid
MTS3				21.612	0.000	.937							Valid
NC1							*	0.000	.873				Valid
NC2							20.601	0.000	.868				Valid
NC3							21.347	0.000	.885				Valid
NC4							23.797	0.000	.929				Valid
NC5							22.725	0.000	.908				Valid
AP1										*	0.000	.869	Valid
AP2										25.418	0.000	.949	Valid
AP3										23.229	0.000	.917	Valid
AP4										19.870	0.000	.848	Valid

Reliability Testing with Construct Reliability (CR) Test is measuring how reliable and consistent the data is. The CR score can be counted with the below formula:

(1) $\mathbf{Construct}\mathbf{Reliability}\mathbf{(}\mathbf{CR}\mathbf{)}\mathbf{=}\frac{{\mathbf{(}\sum \mathit{\text{std}}\mathit{.}\mathit{\text{loading}}\mathit{)}}^{\mathbf{2}}}{{\mathit{(}\sum \mathit{\text{std}}\mathit{.}\mathit{\text{loading}}\mathit{)}}^{\mathbf{2}}\mathit{+}\sum \mathit{\text{ej}}}$(1)

A CR score ≥ 0.70 means showing good reliability in the latent variable/construct (Hair et al., 2019). However, the 0.60 ≥ CR ≤ 0.70 is still acceptable if the validity testing results for the indicator are valid. We can count the CR score for the latent variables with the above formula. Another reliability test is using the Average Variance Extracted (AVE/VE) to complete the CR score. The AVE score can be counted using the below formula:

(2) $\mathbf{Variance}\mathbf{Estracted}\mathbf{(}\mathbf{VR}\mathbf{)}\mathbf{=}\frac{{\mathbf{(}\sum \mathit{\text{std}}\mathit{.}\mathit{\text{loading}}\mathit{)}}^{\mathbf{2}}}{{\mathbf{(}\sum \mathit{\text{std}}\mathit{.}\mathit{\text{loading}}\mathit{)}}^{\mathbf{2}}\mathbf{+}\sum \mathit{\text{ej}}}$(2)

The AVE score ≥ 0.50 means showing a good convergent in the latent variable/construct. The CR and VE score shown in Table Summary up all the reliability testing results.

Based on the Table ²summary of all the reliability testing results, we can conclude that all latent variables are RELIABLE. As all the variables passed the reliability testing, we can continue to the next testing fit analysis, namely Structural Model Fit Analysis or Hypothesis Analysis. The critical decision in Structural Model Fit or Hypothesis Testing is checking the P-Value with a significant level (alpha) at 0.05 or comparing the CR (Critical Ratio) score with the t-table (1.96). Table showing the result for Testing Fit—Structural Model Fit Analysis (Hypothesis Testing).

Table 5. Summary of all the reliability testing results

Latent Variables	CR Score	VE Score	Reliability Conclusion
CSR	0.98 ≥ 0.70	0.78 ≥ 0.50	Reliable
MTS	0.92 ≥ 0.70	0.78 ≥ 0.50	Reliable
NC	0.95 ≥ 0.70	0.80 ≥ 0.50	Reliable
AP	0.94 ≥ 0.70	0.80 ≥ 0.50	Reliable

Based on Table 6, all relationships have the CR (Critical Ratio) score > 1.96, P-value all have < 0.05 as well, and evaluating the standardized loading factor, all have < 1.00. Therefore, we conclude that all the hypothesis is accepted. CSR directly or indirectly influences performance through motivation to serve and normative commitment. The results of data analysis and testing using SEM Covariant showed internal CSR indicators, Motivation to serve, normative commitment, and adaptive performance have a standardized loading factor value of more than 0.50. In line with the concept put forward by Manzoor et al. (2019) although the internal CSR priority is the employees in the practice internal orientation still makes the community in the environment of the employees a destination and considered to be a part that is not inseparable from the employees. Motivational measurement in line with Perry and Wise (1990), and Vogel (2020) shows the ethical orientation to be the basis for the motivation of employees at SOEs. Motives are altruistic. Indicators for normative commitment are in line with Meyer and Allen (1991). Meyer et al. (1993) who construct normative commitments based on normative values. Meyer and Parfyonova (2010) that ethics are based on obligation as the basis of growing normative commitments. In adaptive performance variables, durability is an important aspect that distinguishes the character of the job performance dimension from other dimensions such as task performance. In line with Marques-Quinteiro et al. (), Ramos-Villagrasa et al. (2020), though problems and pressure orientation to create and solve problems and readiness to face pressure at the same time are important indicators of adaptive performance. The construction of each variable can be accepted to explain empirical events and can be measured as a continuous variable

Table 6. Hypothesis testing

Hypothesis	Path	Standardized Loading	Value	CR Score	Conclusion
1	MTS <—CSR	.713	0.000	11.761	Significant
2	NC <—CSR	.718	0.000	12.219	Significant
3	AP <—NC	.343	0.000	5.106	Significant
4	AP <—CSR	.266	0.000	4.143	Significant
5	AP <—MTS	.319	0.000	4.650	Significant

5. Discussion

The test results show the proposed hypothesis is accepted. Internal CSR has a positional and significant influence on motivation to serve with an estimated value of 0. 713 with a value of P-value <0.00 means hypothetical is supported. In line with internal CSR has a positional and significant influence on normative commitments. The estimated value of 0.718 with a value P value <0.00 means the hypothesis is supported. In line with Perry and Wise (1990) who put forward the ethical foundations in public service motivation (PSM). There is a similarity of values that connects internal CSR and motivation to serve. SOEs and public institutions have a character suitability, that is, both exist for the public interest. In line with Vogel (2020) on the existence of an ethical orientation that underlies the motivation to provide services. It is asserted that PSM provides clear relationships between PSM and antecedents and outcome.

Internal CSR encourages employee self-identification with company values. In line with Kim et al. (2020), Lawton et al. (2013), Ripoll and Ballart (2019), and Roeck and Delobbe (2012) that internal CSR describes the historical value attachment between employees and companies. These values continue to evolve along with the company’s ethical orientation to its environment. CSR internal directly affects adaptive performance. Internal CSR as a collective idea developed based on ethical responsibility becomes the basis for SOEs employees to identify themselves as “public employees”. An estimated value of 0.266 with a value of P-value <0.00 means hypothetical is supported. Sejalan with De Roeck and Delobbe (2012) and Manzoor et al. (2019) convey that internal CSR directly affects performance.

Motivation to serve and normative commitment mediate the influence of internal CSR on adaptive performance. The results of the Sobel test showed a Z score for the sub-model put the motivation to serve as a mediating variable is 3.43 meaning to be in the area of hypothetical acceptance that manifests the role of mediation although only partially. In line with Vogel (2020) and Ojeme and Robson (2020) that there is a submodel that places normative commitment as a mediating variable, Z score is in the area of acceptance of the proposed hypothesis of 4.38. CSR encourages self-identification based on normative values of the company to act by the demands of the work as a moral obligation.

The adaptive performance of employees is a multidimensional construction with a variety of clear differences, both with contextual performance and task performance as stated (Park & Park, 2020; Ramos-Villagrasa et al., 2020). In conditions of uncertainty and pressure, the performance domain continues to evolve. The results of the study further emphasize that the construction of adaptive work is as a behavior to change in uncertainty and pressure, with intensity, or in a different way. The existence of internal CSR encourages employees to be able to solve problems creatively, change uncertain or unexpected work situations and even learn new tasks, technologies, and procedures due to restrictions including handling work stress in emergencies and crises.

To ensure adaptive performance in the pandemic, ethical values become the focus of the company. These values are integrated into the human resources governance system that is realized in internal CSR. As stated about the impact of covid by Carnevale and Hatak (2020), Evanoff et al. (2020), Kniffin et al. (2021), and Bae et al. (2021), CSR has an important position. Ethical values become the glue of these four variables. Employees need an ethical orientation gained through psychological experience and encourage self-identification based on those values. Internal CSR does not only explain how the relationship between internal CSR and adaptive performance both directly and through motivation to serve and normative commitment. The orientation to internal CSR further emphasizes the importance of strengthening the adaptive performance structure.

Therefore, in line with the CSR perspective of micro foundation theory as stated by Gond et al. (2017), internal CSR strengthens the foundation of the organization to ensure its performance even in uncertain conditions. Internal CSR encourages the collective awareness and responsibility of employees in the company despite the pressure. Employees learn to withstand pressure and show orientation to change as stated in the concept of adaptive performance proposed by (Marques-Quinteiro et al., 2019; Park & Park, 2020; Ramos-Villagrasa et al., 2020).

Despite the pressure and uncertainty, the demands on adaptive performance in employees are very high. SOEs employees are “government” employees who have obligations to the realization of state interests. But the moral foundation is not sufficiently based on obligation. There is a process that directs the critical awareness of the employees about morals realized in the form of performance as the main virtue. For the company itself, the implementation of internal CSR is not only an obligation based on existing regulations or to ensure the readiness of employees to face uncertainty due to pandemics. The Company can conduct internal CSR based on ethics of concern and ethics of justice. Based on the ethics of concern, the company optimizes and maximizes the benefits and rights of individuals. The Company organizes internal CSR based on employee considerations and how to view employees’ current positions. The ethics of justice become the basis for adding benefits while still respecting the rights of individuals to be independent in the face of changes in the pandemic. Both ethical views can be used as the basis for internal CSR management although there is often a contrast between the two. A clear ethical basis will direct CSR internally. On the other hand, employees learn to identify themselves based on the care and fairness felt by employees through the company’s CSR. To strengthen the process of self-identification into real behavior, namely pandemic performance, the strengthening of motivation to serve, and normative commitment with the support of HRM practices that solidify as a system that can adapt to pressure.

The construction of internal CSR is recognized globally as a collective idea rooted in ethical awareness. However, in developing countries, the idea needs to be developed based on the problems faced, especially related to the economic conditions of the country and the role of state-owned enterprises in economic development. The idea of internal CSR, motivation to serve, normative commitment and adaptive performance is a multidimensional concept. However, contextualization makes it easier to understand the concept, including testing the relationship and role of each variable. The theory of the explanation of adaptive performance shows that there are important dimensions in adaptive performance such as orientation changes in uncertain conditions but these changes in contexts in developing countries require structural support and understanding of micro-level processes.

5.1. Limitations of the study

SOEs in this study are considered to be in the same condition. Even though there are several SOEs that are undergoing restructuring, losses and even audits. The sample is determined randomly by companies that have the potential to cause bias towards the random method used. There are limitations to reaching employees in SOEs who are undergoing restructuring even though this can be one of the important points where employees face a pandemic situation as well as restructuring that is prone to causing inconvenience. The concept of adaptive performance is more tested and more represented by these two conditions. Therefore, the construction of adaptive performance needs to be re-examined in more complex situations in order to obtain a deeper meaning of the concept as an expansion of performance. The pressure on performance is not impossible to be heavier than during the pandemic due to COVID-19. Further research focuses on predictors and constructions on adaptive performance in more complex situations, especially in micro-enterprises that are vulnerable to pressures such as pandemic COVID-19 and its relationship to sustainability. SOEs is a government-owned company that is always assisted by the government so that performance in general is influenced by various interventions and dynamics as a state enterprise.

6. Conclusion

The motivation to serve and normative commitment mediate the influence of internal CSR on performance. The formation of motivation and commitment is based on employee interaction with CSR that encourages the need to identify themselves and be morally responsible based on the values shown by the company through internal CSR. The motivation to provide services by showing adaptive performance to the public grows along with the ethical awareness of the role of “public servants in the economic field”. This awareness is shown by the presence of internal CSR. Self-identification and ethical learning that takes place during the pandemic through internal CSR. CSR makes employees still able to survive the pressures of change while still committed and even have an orientation to change the situation.

The theoretical implication is to identify the theory of ethics to explain the process of forming normative consciousness and motivation to serve and ultimately encourages adaptive performance capabilities during pressure. Adaptive capability is an extension of performance that is contextual and innovative but the expansion process requires the support of the company’s concern and responsibility for its employees. Define internal CSR and formulate it based on differences with external CSR unequivocally. The results of the study can be used as a basis for directing the concept of adaptive performance based on the factors that affect it, especially in the context of state companies in developing countries. As confirmed by Bae et al. (2021) who raised the point of caution to make clear conclusions about the value of CSR during a crisis. In the context of research in state-owned enterprises in developing countries, CSR for employees shows its value not only for employees but for companies and of course shareholders with the performance of the company it shows. Kim et al. (2020) show CSR from an employee perspective by linking types of CSR to the theory of needs satisfaction.

The research contribution is to more specifically show adaptive performance models based on the position of internal CSR as a driver when a pandemic crisis occurs. The results of empirical studies show that internal CSR either indirectly leads to adaptive performance as a specific characteristic of employee work behavior that shows adapting to new situations and changes in the organization. This research is a proof of the literature review of the adaptive performance concept proposed (Park & Park, 2020). The concept of adaptive performance is described with unidimensional, low abstraction and can be directly measured empirically in the context of SOEs.

The practical implication is to integrate ethical views into internal CSR and show the ethical orientation of the company. Internal CSR as a conceptual framework that serves as the basis for adaptive performance. Internal CSR is able to build a stronger corporate performance foundation structure at the micro level based on the ethical orientation of employees. Adaptive capabilities are not only managed based on the demands of the rules regarding CSR for SOEs. Adaptive performance is a form of collective awareness of the ethical responsibility of employees both in the company and in the state. Therefore, performance adaptive starts from the priority scale in the company’s internal CSR.

Acknowledgements

The authors would like thank to STIA Bagasasi Research Center, Bandung, Indonesia, for supporting this research.

Disclosure statement

No potential conflict of interest was reported by the author(s).

Additional information

Funding

The author(s) reported there is no funding associated with the work featured in this article.

Notes

1. Table 4 shown the summary of all the validity testing results

2. Base on the Table 5, Summary of all the reliability testing result, ...