Corporate social responsibility and its impact on organizational attractiveness: Unveiling the mediating role of perceived organizational support

Figures & data

Figure 1. Theoretical framework (Author’s design).

Figure 2. Conceptual framework (author’s design).

Table 1. Respondents catchment profile.

Catchment		Frequency	Percentage
Gender	Male	257	64.9
	Female	137	34.6
	Other	2	5
Age	20–30yrs	237	59.8
	31–40yrs	110	27.8
	41–50yrs	43	10.9
	>51 & Above	6	1.5
Education Qualification	Graduates	204	51.8
	Post Graduates	176	44.4
	Doctorate	6	1.5
	Other	10	2.5
Academic Institution	Tier 1 (IIT, IIM, NIT)	63	15.9
	Tier 2 (Central University, State University, Autonomous, Private University)	301	76.0
	Tier 3 (Rural University)	29	7.3
	Tier 4 (Foreign University)	3	8
Overall Work Experience	0–5yrs	276	69.7
	6–10yrs	69	17.4
	11–15yrs	31	7.8
	>16 & Above yrs.	20	5.1

Table 2. Descriptive statistics and correlation.

Items	Mean	Std. Deviation	Skewness	Kurtosis
	Statistic	Statistic	Statistic	Statistic
OA1	4.24	0.768	−1.459	3.660
OA2	4.01	0.937	−1.128	1.127
OA3	4.15	0.863	−1.242	1.734
OA4	4.04	0.869	−1.073	1.257
OA5	4.02	0.898	−0.950	0.649
OA6	3.97	1.000	−1.045	0.714
POS1	3.95	0.956	−1.149	1.213
POS2	4.04	0.919	−1.124	1.272
POS3	3.96	0.914	−0.973	0.864
POS4	3.97	0.946	−0.985	0.595
POS5	3.88	0.915	−0.907	0.768
POS6	3.97	0.867	−1.049	1.304
POS7	3.86	0.936	−0.832	0.408
CSR1	4.08	0.806	−1.193	2.182
CSR2	4.04	0.850	−1.111	1.512
CSR3	3.99	0.918	−1.001	0.730
CSR4	4.07	0.851	−1.214	2.017
CSR5	4.01	0.945	−1.081	1.045
CSR6	4.00	0.933	−1.202	1.478
CSR7	4.03	0.838	−1.145	1.829
CSR8	4.06	0.834	−1.194	2.148
CSR9	4.12	0.850	−1.198	1.861
CSR10	4.14	0.851	−1.191	1.812
CSR11	4.21	0.869	−1.472	2.682

Table 3. Reliability and correlation.

Construct	Cronbach’s Alpha	N of Items	OA	POS	CSR
Organizational Attractiveness (OA)	0.852	6	1
Perceived organizational support (POS)	0.917	7	.693**	1
Corporate social responsibility(CSR)	0.943	11	.649**	.678**	1

Table 4. Convergent and discriminant validity.

	CR	AVE
Support	0.919	0.620
Corporate	0.936	0.571
Attractiveness	0.849	0.488

Table 5. Outlier removal.

Observation number	Mahalanobis d-squared	p1	p2
202	119.787	0	0
187	105.894	0	0
221	104.236	0	0
249	101.163	0	0
355	95.355	0	0
388	92.419	0	0
335	89.712	0	0
360	86.83	0	0
312	85.623	0	0
220	75.05	0	0
218	73.615	0	0
217	72.512	0	0
174	72.207	0	0
182	71.808	0	0
366	69.424	0	0
172	69.121	0	0
171	67.554	0	0
365	66.845	0	0
183	66.492	0	0
334	66.257	0	0
239	65.967	0	0
252	65.537	0	0
159	65.227	0	0
339	65	0	0
233	63.959	0	0
67	63.341	0	0
192	59.672	0	0
132	58.74	0	0
112	58.61	0	0
163	57.991	0	0
382	57.81	0	0
325	55.57	0	0
395	55.471	0	0
390	55.294	0	0
213	55.004	0	0
266	54.99	0	0
249	53.123	0.001	0

Table 6. Revised convergent and discriminant validity.

	CR	AVE
Support	0.924	0.635
Corporate	0.948	0.622
Attractiveness	0.861	0.510

Figure 3. Measurement model.

Table 7. Fit index of the confirmatory factor analysis.

Fit Index	Score	Recommended Threshold Value
Absolute Fit Measures
CMIN/df	3.066	≤2 a; ≤5 b
GFI	0.838	≥0.90 a; ≥0.80 b
RMSEA	0.082	≤0.80 a; ≤0.10 b
Incremental Fit Measures
NFI	0.884	≥0.90 a
AGFI	0.805	≥0.90 a; ≥0.80 b
CFI	0.918	≥0.90 a
Parsimonious Fit Measures
PGFI	0.695	Greater is good
PNFI	0.798	Greater is good

Table 8. Principal component factor analysis for harman’s one factor test.

Factor	Extraction Sums of Squared Loadings
	Total	% of Variance	Cumulative %
1	11.716	48.816	48.816
2	1.623	6.761	55.577
3	0.852	3.548	59.125
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24

Table 9. Individual path.

Predictor			Unstandardized Estimate (B)	Standardized Estimate (β)	P	R^2
Support	←	Corporate	0.721	0.722	***	0.521
Attractiveness	←	Support	0.744	0.787	***	0.620
Attractiveness	←	Corporate	0.707	0.74	***	0.547

Figure 4. Proposed structural model.

Table 10. Hypothesis testing.

Direct Effect			Unstandardized Estimate(B)	Standardized Estimate (β)	P	Hypothesis
Attractiveness	←	Corporate	0.314	0.355	***	H1 supported
Support	←	Corporate	0.824	0.723	***	H2 supported
Attractiveness	←	Support	0.412	0.531	***	H3 supported
Indirect Effect			Unstandardized Estimate(B)	Standardized Estimate (β)	P (BC two tail)	R2	Hypothesis
Attractiveness	←	Corporate	0.339	0.384	0.000	0.680	H4 supported Partial Mediation
Total Effect			Unstandardized Estimate(B)	Standardized Estimate (β)
Attractiveness	←	Corporate	0.653	0.739

Table 11. Bootstrap result.

Test for Mediation-Indirect Effect (Number of Bootstrap samples = 5000 & CI = 95%)
Corporate Social Responsibility to Organizational Attractiveness		Percentile Method			Bias-Corrected Method
	Estimate	LB 95% CCI	UB 95% CI	P	LB 95% CCI	UB 95% CI	P
Direct Effect	0.314	0.182	0.439	0	0.189	0.443	0
Indirect Effect	0.339	0.241	0.462	0	0.245	0.469	0
Total Effect	0.653	0.532	0.762	0	0.527	0.758	0.001

Table 12. Fit index of the proposed hypothesis model.

Fit Index	Score	Recommended Threshold Value
Absolute Fit Measures
CMIN/df	3.066	≤2 a; ≤5 b
GFI	0.838	≥0.90 a; ≥0.80 b
RMSEA	0.079	≤0.80 a; ≤0.10 b
Incremental Fit Measures
NFI	0.884	≥0.90 a
AGFI	0.805	≥0.90 a; ≥0.80 b
CFI	0.918	≥0.90 a
Parsimonious Fit Measures
PGFI	0.695	Greater is good
PNFI	0.798	Greater is good

Table 13. Control effect.

Gender Effect
			Male		Female
Predictor			Estimate	P	Estimate	P	z-score
Support	←	Corporate	0.818	***	0.836	***	0.135
Attractiveness	←	Support	0.425	***	0.394	***	−0.274
Attractiveness	←	Corporate	0.316	***	0.354	***	0.312
Age Effect
			20-30 yrs.		>31 and Above yrs.
Predictor			Estimate	P	Estimate	P	z-score
Support	←	Corporate	0.793	***	1.027	***	1.237
Attractiveness	-←	Support	0.415	***	0.366	***	−0.468
Attractiveness	←	Corporate	0.325	***	0.332	0.003	0.051
Education Qualification
			Under graduate		Post graduate
Predictor			Estimate	P	Estimate	P	z-score
Support	←	Corporate	0.86	***	0.813	***	−0.311
Attractiveness	←	Support	0.397	***	0.434	***	0.349
Attractiveness	←	Corporate	0.339	***	0.239	0.012	−0.856
Academic Institution
			Tier 1		Tier 2
Predictor			Estimate	P	Estimate	P	z-score
Support	←	Corporate	0.846	***	0.821	***	−0.114
Attractiveness	←	Support	0.578	***	0.376	***	−1.223
Attractiveness	←	Corporate	0.075	0.653	0.365	***	1.627
Overall Experience
			0-5Yrs		> 6 and Above yrs.
Predictor			Estimate	P	Estimate	P	z-score
Support	←	Corporate	0.812	***	0.912	***	0.573
Attractiveness	←	Support	0.472	***	0.293	***	−1.726*
Attractiveness	←	Corporate	0.26	***	0.444	***	1.414

Table

Items	Statements
CSR1	The organization participates in activities which aim to protect the quality of the natural environment
CSR2	The organization makes investments to create a better life for future generations
CSR3	The organization implements special programs to minimize its negative impact on the natural environment
CSR4	The organization targets sustainable growth, which considers future generations
CSR5	The organization supports NGOs working in needy places such as remote villages
CSR6	The organization encourages its employees to participate in social awareness programs
CSR7	The organization emphasizes the importance of its responsibilities to the society
CSR8	The organization respects consumer rights beyond the legal requirements
CSR9	The organization provides accurate information about its products to its customers
CSR10	The organization has a high customer satisfaction
CSR11	The organization complies with legal regulations completely
POP1	I found that the employees are proud to say they work for this organization
POP2	I found that the organization to be a reputed one
POP3	I found that this organization probably has a reputation as being an excellent employer
POP4	I found the organization as a prestigious place to work
POP5	I found that there are many people who would like to work at this organization
POP6	I found that the brand of the organization is well respected
OA1	I felt that this organization would be a good place to work
OA2	I felt to be intrested in the organization as the first choice
OA3	I felt that  the organization’s brand image is attractive
OA4	I felt like knowing more about the organization(its history, services, products
OA5	I felt that this organization is very appealing to me
OA6	I felt that this organization has a foregin work assignments
Catchment-Specific Profile
Gender	a	Male	b	Female	c	Others
Age	a	20–30yrs	b	31–40yrs	c	41–50yrs	d	>51 & Above
Education	a	Graduates	b	Post Graduates	c	Doctorate	d	Others
Academic Institution	a	Tier1 (IIT, IIM, NIT)	b	Tier 2(Central University, State University, Autonomous, Private University	c	Tier 3(Rural University)	d	Tier 4 (Foreign University)
Overall Work Experience	a	0–5yrs	b	6–10yrs	c	11–15yrs	d	>16 & Above yrs.