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

Figures & data

Figure 1. Structural model.

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

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

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

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

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