Corporate social responsibility influences on …...corporate social responsibility influences on...

[135]

70906

september · december 2006 · esic market

Corporate social responsibility influences on university studentsbuying behaviourEnrique BignéLuisa AndreuUniversidad of Valencia (Spain)Ruben ChumpitazIESEG School of Management (Francia)Valerie SwaenCatholic University of Louvain (Bélgica)

AbstractCorporate Social Responsibility (CSR) is becoming the subject of conside-rable interest in marketing research and practice. In general, it seems thatconsumers are becoming more and more interested in corporate activitiesbeyond the merely economic, i.e. environmental and social activities. The-re are very few studies, however, able to corroborate this statement and,in this sense, further research on CSR from the consumer’s viewpoint isneeded. The present exploratory paper is intended to contribute informa-tion on consumer perception in reference to CSR and its influence in pur-chase decision making. The objectives of the paper are: (i) to analyze theperception of the consumer on the activities of companies that are consi-dered to be socially responsible; (ii) to study the possible differences intro-duced by gender, type of studies and level of information in the perceptionof the consumer in reference to socially responsible activities; (iii) to analy-ze the consumer perception in reference to pressure groups that are mostinfluential in the adoption by companies of socially responsible practices,and (iv) to measure the importance of CSR elements in purchase decisionmaking, on a general level as well as in two categories of specific products. Keywords: Corporate social responsibility, consumer perception and deci-sion-making.JEL Code: M31, M14.


corporate social responsibility influences on university studentsbuying behaviour

IntroductionThe philosophy of Corporate Social Responsibility (CSR) has undergonean important evolution in Spain (Fundación Ecología y Desarrollo, 2004).CSR philosophy defends that the creation of value for the different inte-rest groups present in business activity (stakeholders) will rebound to thebenefit of a greater creation of value for the society. Traditionally in mar-keting management (focus on the shareholder or on the creation of valuefor the shareholder) results have been defined in terms of sales, marketshare benefits and/or objectives in relation to a product/service within agiven period of time, taking into consideration the interests of the ownersand shareholders. Today, however, a wider perspective is taking on moreimportance, a perspective which includes the priorities of other agents orinterest groups that are related to the organization (focus on the stakehol-der). It is therefore assumed that companies not only comply with theireconomic, legal, ethical and social obligations in respect to their sharehol-ders, but also towards their employees, customers and the community (Senand Bhattacharya, 2001).

CSR has become a concept which has aroused considerable interestand popularity both from the practical as well as the academic point(Lafuente, Viñuales, Pueyo and Llaría, 2003; Maignan and Ferrell, 2004;Nieto and Fernández, 2004). A number of business organizations andresearchers have attempted to define CSR (Davis, 1973; McGuire, 1963;Warhurst, 2001; Wood, 1991), and have noted a lack of clarity and con-sensus in content as well as in the operative measurement of the CSR con-cept. Following De la Cuesta and Valor (2003), CSR can be defined as“the recognition and integration of environmental and social preoccupa-tions on the part of the companies in their operations, paving the way forbusiness practices that satisfy these concerns and configure their rela-tionships with their stakeholders” (p. 11). There are gaps, however, in theresearch into what the stakeholders consider to be a socially ir/responsiblecompany. Indeed, as has been pointed out by Maignan and Ferrell (2004),we need to know the reaction of the different interest groups in reference

[136]

710 06



to the practices of social responsibility of the companies, to the degree thatthis affects the communication strategies of the companies in relation totheir CSR commitment. In the same line, as Sen and Bhattacharya (2001)point out, studies which analyze the effects of CSR activities on consumersare still few and far between. Under this perspective, the principal objecti-ve of the present study is to contribute in the identification of businessactivities considered by university students as being the most representati-ve of CSR and to evaluate the importance of CSR business activities intheir purchase decision making.

Corporate social responsability and consumers: conceptual considerationsThe earliest conceptualisations of CSR were developed in the 1950s in theresearch area of business responsibility. Bowen (1953) argued that busi-ness people have the obligation to pursue desirable policies in terms ofsocietal objectives and values. This argument was rejected by MiltonFriedman’s famous statement that the social responsibility of business is tomake profits (1970). In recent years, however, CSR has received growingattention. Companies are increasingly expected to participate in theimprovement of society beyond the minimum standards set by the econo-mic, legal and ethical responsibilities (discretionary responsibilities). Furt-hermore, a socially responsible company is supposed to address the con-cerns and satisfy the demands of its main stakeholders (Donaldson andPreston, 1995; Jones, 1995; Nieto and Fernández, 2004) – those actorswho can, directly or indirectly, affect, or be affected by, corporate activi-ties such as customers, suppliers, employees, shareholders, the media,regulators, and interest organisations.

With respect to consumers, the awareness of CSR practices appears tohave a positive influence on attitudes toward the firm (Brown and Dacin,1997; Murray and Vogel, 1997), corporate reputation (Fombrun andShanley, 1990), and the consumers’ evaluation of product attributes(Brown and Dacin, 1997). Consumers also expect for the organizations to

[137]

71106



demonstrate congruence with the social values. Therefore, the evaluationof the alternatives that are offered to the consumer can be based on thefact that the organization acts in consistence with the welfare of the com-munity and the society (Forte and Lamont, 1998). Along this line, theMarket & Opinion Research International (MORI) CSR research (MORI,2000) confirms such results: 70% of European consumers state that acompany’s commitment to social responsibility is important to them whenbuying a product/service. However, according to Boulstridge and Carrigan(2000), CSR is far from being the most dominant criteria in consumers’purchasing decisions. Traditional criteria such as price, quality and brandfamiliarity seem to remain the most important choice criteria, and consu-mers continue buying for personal reasons rather than societal ones (cf.Beckmann, Christensen and Christensen, 2001). These relatively contra-dictory results indicate the need for further research.

Research objectives and questions to researchThe purpose of this exploratory research is to contribute in identifying thecompany activities considered by consumers as being the most representa-tive of CSR and in highlighting the importance of companies’ CSR activi-ties in consumers’ buying decisions. Specifically, four objectives are setforth.

The first objective of this research is to explore the corporate activi-ties that consumers perceive as integral parts of CSR. A lack of unders-tanding of consumers’ expectations by managers could lead to misinter-pretations about which CSR activities to perform and about whichsocial issues to invest in. Investments in CSR activities that do not inte-rest consumers at all are not likely to lead to consumers’ support. It isessential for companies to have a very good knowledge of consumers’needs, desires and expectations about societal issues. Consequently, ourstudy focuses on consumer’ perceptions about responsible activities ofcompanies. Therefore, the first research question to be considered is thefollowing:

[138]

712 06



Research question 1: Identify the corporate activities that consumers per-ceive as integral parts of CSR.

The second objective of this research is to highlight the diversity in con-sumers’ perceptions of CSR. To explore this diversity, different variableswill be measured. Firstly, the consumers’ gender has to be considered: Tur-ban and Greening (1997) show that women have different CSR-relatedperceptions than men, and many previous studies suggest that green con-sumption attracts more women than men (e.g., Ottman, 1993). Secondly,the type of education seems to play a role in the level of consumers’ con-cern for CSR. As shown in previous studies (Bigné, 1997), green consu-mers have a higher level of education than average consumers. In line withthis, we chose in a first step to carry out this study on two samples of stu-dents (see methodology). Consumers’ CSR perceptions are also influencedby the level and the quality of information that consumers have about theCSR activities of companies (communications from companies, NGOs,media, government, etc.). As a result, the existence of significant differen-ces is analyzed on the basis of gender, university education (studies in thearea of economics versus non-economics area) as well as the influence ofthe level of information in reference to the object area of the study that theconsumer has available.

Research question 2: Determine the influence of gender, studies, and levelof information of CSR on the perception of socially responsible com-panies.

The third objective is centred on the analysis of the evaluation on thepart of the consumers of the importance of different stakeholders (emplo-yees, customers and suppliers, among others) as pressure groups that pro-mote and stimulate CSR in businesses. Consumers’ assessment of theimportance of various stakeholders sheds light on their perceived role asconsumers. It has been seen that over a long term, companies operating

[139]

71306



under the CSR philosophy show improved business results if they main-tain non-opportunist relationships with the different interest groups pre-sent in their business activity. In this line, the following research questionis set forth:

Research question 3: Analyze whether, from the consumer’s viewpoint, astakeholder focus is perceived taking into account the different interestgroups, or rather if a shareholder focus is perceived in the way thecompanies perform.

The fourth objective is centred on identifying the degree to which con-sumers take CSR dimensions into account in their buying criteria, in gene-ral and for two different kinds of product (sport shoes, and deodorant).That is to say, the study intends to identify, on one hand, to what degreethe information on the level of CSR is necessary or not in order to decideto purchase, and on the other hand, the level of relative importance con-sidered by the consumers about the CSR dimensions as product purchasecriteria. Two categories of products are analyzed, sport shoes and deodo-rant. These products were selected according to the Foote, Cone and Bel-ding grid (high versus low involvement and intellectual versus affectivemode; Ratchford, 1987). Moreover, since respondents in this study arestudents, we chose product categories they are interested in and likely tobuy themselves, according to the focus groups we involved. Finally, thoseproducts come from sectors of activities where there exist some well-known positive and negative CSR stories (for instance, Nike and The BodyShop). Under these premises, the following research questions were esta-blished:

Research question 4: Analyze the perceived utility of the CSR informationin the purchase of sport shoes and deodorant.

Research question 5: Measure the degree of importance of the CSR crite-ria in the purchase of sport shoes and deodorant.

[140]

714 06



Research methodology

CSR measurementGiven the broad conceptualisation of CSR, it is not surprising that thedomains of socially responsible behaviours are many and diverse. Forexample, human rights, corporate government, information transparencyin CSR, environmental policies, consumer relations and labour policies. Inthe face of the diversity of elements that are included in the concept ofCSR, we established a relatively exhaustive list of the activities characteri-sing CSR, and that on the basis of existing scales (e.g., Maignan, Ferrelland Hult, 1999), previous academic experiments (e.g., Brown and Dacin,1997; Sen and Bhattacharya, 2001), Internet address, business reports,and focus groups and individual interviews carried out on consumers.Finally, 18 items have been selected to represent the CSR activities (Swa-en, Chumpitaz, Bigné and Andreu, 2003).

Measurement instrumentThe questionnaire used in this study was structured in different sections,with questions along the following lines: (a) respondents were asked toassess the degree to which each of 18 company activities was related toCSR; (b) consumers answered questions about the importance of differentbuying criteria; (c) the level and quality of information they receive aboutthe CSR of companies; (d) their perceptions about the influence of stake-holders on the level of CSR, and (e) socio-demographic characteristics.

As previously mentioned, the perceptions of the consumers about theactivities that a socially responsible company has to carry out were mea-sured by 18 items on a 10 point scale (1, very little importance, to 10, veryimportant). Regarding the importance of different purchase criteria, 10items were used, measured on a 10 point scale: “1, I would never use thiscriteria in order to choose” to 10, “of course, I would use this criteria”.The items included seven traditional criteria – quality of the products, ser-vice quality, availability, brand, advertising, and price – and three CSR cri-

[141]

71506



teria –the involvement of the company in environmental protection, con-tribution to social projects, and sponsorship of the company to culturaland sports events) for two types of products (sport shoes and deodorant).

In respect to the level and quality of the information that the consu-mers receive about the CSR of the companies, two questions were asked.First of all, they were asked if they had ever read any information aboutthe social responsibility of the company (dichotomous question, yes/no)and in the event of an affirmative reply, the interviewee was to evaluatethe type of information using a 2-item scale, measured on a semantic dif-ferential 10 point (1, rare, to 10, very frequent; 1, poor, to 10, very good).In respect to their perceptions on the influence of the stakeholders on thelevel of CSR, 16 items were analyzed (consisting of different agents, asexplained further on), measured on a 10 point (1, has no influence 10, hasa great deal of influence). Finally, the characteristics of the consumersmake reference to gender, type of university studies (area of economicsversus non-economics area) and nationality.

Data gathering and profile of the sampleFollowing a questionnaire pre-test, the questionnaire was administered totwo convenience samplings consisting of university students. The selectionof this segment was made on the basis that they are the consumers of thefuture, and already are in respect to the products that were selected for thisstudy. At the same time, previous research considered that the level of edu-cation is important for integrating elements of CSR into purchase makingdecisions. Only a small minority is willing to “cross the line” that separatesthe citizens from the consumers committed to the act of purchasing. In anycase, we are dealing with a public with higher degrees, higher age, and wholive in urban areas (Badets, 2002). The “green” consumer has a higher levelof education, a more prestigious professional occupation, and a higher levelof income than the average consumer (Dolich, Tucker and Wilson, 1981).

The survey was carried out using self-administration to a total of 275university students in the Faculty of Business Administration (economics

[142]

716 06



area sampling) and in the Faculty of Biological Sciences (sampling of thenon-economics area) of the University of Valencia. Data gathering wascarried out during the months of April and May in 2003. The total num-ber of valid questionnaires for the analysis was 253, with 155 from theeconomics area, and 98 from the non-economics area.

Taking as a base the total sampling, 67.2% of those interviewed werefemales. The average age of the students was 22, with 19 as the minimumvalue and 35 as the maximum age. As can be seen in Table 1, there are dif-ferences in the percentage distributions of the socio-demographic variablesgender and age depending on the samplings under analysis. Therefore,59.4% of the students from the economics area were females, while thisproportion was higher in the sampling of the non-economics area (79.6%were females). As far as age is concerned, those in the non-economics areagroup were, on average, younger, and logically, the percentage of the stu-dents who work was greater in the economics area group1.

(1) All students over 30years of age stated thatthey were working.

[143]

71706

Variables Total sampling Students economics Students non Chi-square(n=253) area (n=155) economics area (n=98)

GenderMale 32.8 40.6 20.4

11.15**Female 67.2 59.4 79.6

19-22 60.9 52.3 74.5

Age 23-26 32.0 40.6 23.514.67**

27-30 5.1 3.9 2.0

Over 30 2.0 3.2 -

Spanish 97.2 96.2 99.0

Nationality EU countries 1.6 1.9 1.0 2.27

Other countries 1.2 1.9 -

WorkingYes 28.9 36.1 17.3

10.32**No 71.1 63.9 82.7

Table 1. Profile of the sampling (vertical %)

** p<0.01



Analysis and results

Characteristics perceived by consumers a integral parts of CSRThe prime objective and the first research question is centred on the iden-tification of the elements that consumers perceive al integral parts of CSR.Table 2 lists the 18 CSR activities included in the questionnaire togetherwith their mean values. The results correspond to the analyses based onthe total sampling (n = 253), as well as in each one of the groups, indica-ting the significant differences between the two samplings under study.

[144]

718 06

Total Students Students nonActivities sampling economics economics t-value

(n=253) area (n=155) area (n=98)

1 Invests in research and development to make the production process more environmentally-friendly

8.59 8.47 8.79 -1.67

2 Reduces resource waste (energy, raw materials…) 8.47 8.18 8.94 -3.78**

3 Helps developing nations 8.41 8.25 8.67 -2.26*

4 Offers a fair treatment to all workers, independently of their sex, their ethnic or religious choice

8.38 8.06 8.89 -3.82**

5 Refuses to operate in countries with human rights violation

8.36 8.21 8.59 -1.52

6 Respects human rights in countries where the company is involved

8.30 8.16 8.52 -1.7

7 Contributes to the improvement of the quality of life in all regions where the company is involved

8.08 7.93 8.32 -1.83

8 Complies with all laws 7.68 7.28 8.34 -4.15**

9 Provides accurate information to customers about the composition of its products

7.62 7.19 8.30 -4.56**

10 Creates jobs 7.52 7.09 8.17 -4.52**

11 Has an ethical code of conduct 7.51 7.37 7.72 -1.43

Table 2. Mean values of CSR characteristics



From the analysis shown in Table 2, it can be observed that, taking asa reference the total sampling (n=253), of the 18 suggested activities, tho-se most associated with socially responsible companies were: (a) protec-tion of the environment: through R+D investment in order to make a pro-duction process more compatible with the environment (8.59) and thereduction of resource waste (8.47); (b) social activities: the contribution bythe company to the improvement to the standard of living in all of thoseregions in which the company operates (8,08), help to developing nations(8.41); (c) non-discrimination of employees (8.38) and (d) respect ofhuman rights, in countries in which the company operates (8.30) as wellas refusing to operate in countries which violate human rights (8.36). Theactivities that are least associated with CSR make reference to the majo-rity of economic and legal activities (for example, obtaining the highestpossible profits having low prices). Apparently the students do not con-ceive of economic and legal responsibilities as being very much associatedwith CSR practices, in comparison with environmental, ethic and social

[145]

71906

Total Students Students nonActivities sampling economics economics t-value

(n=253) area (n=155) area (n=98)

12 Helps all workers who want that to pursue training 7.38 7.04 7.93 -3.54**

13 Continually improves the quality of products/services. 7.17 6.83 7.71 -3.65**

14 Gives equal treatment to all customers. 7.16 6.63 7.96 -5.15**

15 Publishes an annual environmental report. 7.03 6.92 7.21 -1.09

16 Sustains financially social and cultural activities in all regions where the company is involved.

7.02 6.92 7.18 -0.98

17 Offers low prices. 5.72 5.09 6.7 -5.71**

18 Makes as much profit as possible. 4.20 3.86 4.71 -2.76**

Table 2. (Continued)

Note: 10 point scale (1, very low level of social responsability; 10, highly responsible); *p<0.05; **p<0.01



responsibilities. Probably they assume that the legal and economic res-ponsibilities are respected by the companies, contrary to environmental,ethical and social responsibilities, which they do not suppose are takeninto account, on the same level, by all companies.

As can be seen in Table 2, the results that correspond to the two sub-groups (economics area and non-economics area students) show a beha-viour analogous to that of the totality of the sampling, highlighting thehigh assessment of those activities related to environmental, ethical andsocial responsibilities. We consider it of interest, however, to analyze thedifferences between the assessments of the students of the economics areaand the non-economics area from a double perspective. On one side, non-economics area students assign a greater association among those activi-ties that characterize a socially responsible company. On the other side,economics area students receive, to a greater or lesser degree, trainingabout CSR and will be the future management of the companies. Even so,we shall proceed to analyze in greater depth the influence of the type oftraining or education of the consumers, together with gender, on the per-ception of the consumers about CSR.

Influence of gender and type of education of the consumer on the perception of CSRThe second objective and research question is centred on evaluating theinfluence of gender and the type of education (economics versus non-eco-nomics area) on consumer perceptions of CSR. The level and quality ofinformation received about CSR practices of the companies will also beanalyzed.

Perceptions of CSR. In relation to gender and considering the totalsampling (n=253), women (67.2%) and men (32.8%) use practically thesame elements to evaluate the degree of CSR (see Table 3). For both menand women, the most representative activities of CSR are: respect forhuman rights, protection of the environment, social activities and non-dis-crimination of employees. The comparative results between men and

[146]

720 06



women show scant differences, and therefore it can be concluded that menand women present no differences in terms of their perception about acti-vities related to the responsible behaviour of companies.

[147]

72106

Total sampling Students economics area Students non economics

Characteristics of CSR (n=253) (n=155) area (n=98)

Men Women t-value Men Women t-value Men Women t-value

1 Publishes an annual environmental report

6.45 7.33 -3.30** 6.37 7.31 -3.04** 6.70 7.34 -1.20

2 Respects human rights in countries where the company is involved

8.02 8.43 -1.83 7.90 8.33 -1.62 8.40 8.55 -.35

3 Continually improves the quality of products/services

6.88 7.31 -1.70 6.60 6.98 -1.24 7.70 7.72 -.03

4 Reduces resource waste 8.11 8.66 -2.62** 7.94 8.36 -1.48 8.65 9.01 -1.27

5 Has an ethical code of conduct 7.52 7.50 .06 7.52 7.27 .80 7.53 7.77 -.51

6 Offers fair treatment to all workers 8.13 8.50 -1.58 7.92 8.15 -.78 8.80 8.92 -.34

7 Helps developing nations 8.37 8.43 -.31 8.16 8.30 -.55 9.00 8.58 1.37

8 Gives equal treatment to all customers 6.92 7.27 -1.24 6.71 6.57 .43 7.61 8.04 -.81

9 Creates jobs 7.20 7.67 -1.81 6.98 7.16 -.57 7.85 8.26 -.94

10 Offers low prices. 5.42 5.86 -1.39 5.23 4.99 .77 6.06 6.85 -1.21

11 Invests in R+D to make the productionprocess more environmentally-friendly

8.53 8.62 -.45 8.40 8.51 -.50 8.95 8.75 .45

12 Complies with all laws 7.40 7.83 -1.59 7.10 7.41 -1.00 8.44 8.31 .25

13 Sustains financially social and cultural activities

6.91 7.07 -.58 6.87 6.95 -.26 7.06 7.21 -.28

14 Makes as much profit as possible 3.66 4.47 -2.48* 3.53 4.09 -1.45 4.05 4.88 -1.31

15 Helps all workers who want to to pursue training

7.19 7.48 -1.09 7.03 7.04 -.04 7.65 8.01 -.81

16 Refuses to operate in countries with human rights violations

8.10 8.49 -1.55 7.87 8.46 -1.92 8.80 8.53 .55

Table 3. Mean values of CSR depending on gender



Frequency and quality of information about CSR. Together with thosequestions that refer to the activities that the consumers perceive of as ele-ments of CSR in the companies, the young consumers were asked aboutwhether or not they had read any information about CSR and, if they had,the frequency (rare versus very frequent) and the quality of the informa-tion (bad versus good). 36.8% of the total of the sampling stated that theyhad at some time read some information about CSR. From the analysisdepending on the area of education, no significant differences were seen (p = 0.28), with 39.4% and 32.7% of those interviewed in the samplingsfrom the economic and non-economic areas, respectively, stating that theyhad at some time read information in reference to the social responsibilityof companies.

As can be seen in Table 4, taking as a base the sampling that had recei-ved information about CSR (n=93), there were no significant differencesinsofar as frequency and quality of information about CSR read by menand women. However, in the sub-group of the economics area, the menperceived a quality significantly inferior than the women had (meanM =3,39 vs meanW = 5.00, p <0.05).

[148]

722 06

Total sampling Students economics area Students non economics

Characteristics of CSR (n=253) (n=155) area (n=98)

Men Women t-value Men Women t-value Men Women t-value

17 Provides accurate information to customers about the composition 7.55 7.65 -.41 7.39 7.06 1.04 8.05 8.36 -.73of its products.

18 Contributes to the improvement of the quality of life in all regions where 8.11 8.07 .19 7.94 7.92 .05 8.65 8.24 .99the company is involved

Table 3. Continued

Note: 10 point scale (1, very low level of social responsability; 10, highly responsible); *p<0.05; **p<0.01



Together with the previous analyses, a test of differences in measure-ments was carried out in order to compare the perception of the activitiesof CSR depending on whether or not the consumers had at some time readinformation about CSR. The results obtained do not show any significantdifferences taking as a base the total sampling (n=253). However, goingdeeper into this analysis, depending on economics or non-economics area,according to the analysis of the differences in the sub-samplings it wasrevealed that those students that had read information about CSR consi-der the improvement in the standard of living in the regions where thecompany operates as being more representative of CSR than the other stu-dents do (8.80 versus 8.09; p<.05). Measurements analysis of studentsfrom the economics area showed no significant differences (p>.05).

Perception of the different stakeholders as influence groups in the practices of CSRIn respect to the third research question, for the total sampling (n=253),those interviewed considered management (8.25), consumer associations(7.79), European Commission (7.78), the media (7.41) and consumers(7.29) as the most important pressure groups for businesses to developCSR activities. On the other side, distributors (4.96), banks and inves-tors (5.03) and suppliers (5.04) are seen as the least important sourcesof pressure. The fact that management is the most important perceived

[149]

72306

Total sampling Economics area Non-economics area(n=93) (n=61) (n=32)

Men Women t- Men Women t- Men Women t-(n=44) (n=49) value (n=34) (n=27) value (n=10) (n=22) value

1 Rare vs frequent 3.07 3.35 -.74 3.18 3.78 -1.30 2.71 2.81 -.17

2 Bad versus good 3.82 4.55 -1.75 3.39 5.00 -2.03* 3.40 4.00 -.81

Table 4. Mean values of the quality of information received about CSR

Note: Taking into account only the sample that had read information about CSR; 10 point scale; *p<0.05.

Information aboutCSR



source of pressure is probably due to the fact that CSR is still not a sub-ject of public debate in Spain (Lafuente et al., 2003). It is also importantto point out that consumers perceive of themselves as one of the mostimportant sources of pressure to force businesses to be more socially res-ponsible. In Table 5 an Anova test has been carried out in order to iden-tify the groups exercising the most important influence using the Mini-tab version 13 program. First of all, it stands out that the groupsperceived of as being the most influential are management, consumerorganizations and the European Commission. National governments,trade unions, consumers and the competition appear in second place ofinfluence; and finally the groups perceived of as being least influentialare banks, suppliers, distributors, and employees. One question thatstands out in these results is the fact that consumers do not excludethemselves from the responsibility of influencing so that companies per-form in a responsible way.

[150]

724 06

Table 5. Comparative analysis of groups of influence



Importance of the elements of CSR in consumer purchase making decisions The fourth objective of this study intends to analyze the importance of theelements of CSR in consumer purchase making decisions, on a generallevel as well as in two categories of specific products. That is to say, theintention is to identify, on one hand, to what degree information on thelevel of social responsibility of businesses is necessary or not in order toeffect a purchase (research question 4) and, on the other hand, the level ofimportance considered by consumers in respect to the dimensions of CSRas criteria for the purchase of products (research question 5).

Insofar as the need to have available information on the level of CSRin order to effect a purchase is concerned, those who were interviewed givea mean value of 5.03 (10 point scale: 1, totally necessary in order to pur-chase, and 10, not at all necessary in order to purchase). From the analy-sis depending on the area of education, significant differences were seen(p<0.01). Non-economic students consider CSR more necessary in pur-chase making decisions (meanne =4.37), than business students (meane =5.41).

The fourth objective, the fifth research question, intends to analyze thelevel of importance of the criteria of CSR as criteria for the purchase ofproducts. Figure 1 describes the means for the total of the sampling, dif-ferentiating the two categories of products (sport shoes and deodorant).

[151]

72506



In the case of the sport shoes, as can be seen in Figure 1, the CSR cri-teria (contribution by the company to social works and investment in pro-tection of the environment) are relatively little used to compare alternati-ves (4.81 and 5.66, respectively). With this product, consumers take intoconsideration as criteria for selection the price (8.98), the quality of theproduct (8.53), the service quality (7.29) and availability (7.28). Additio-nally, those who were interviewed consider the reputation of the companyas potential criteria in order to evaluate the alternatives (5.65). The repu-tation could be based on the quality, brand image, advertising, but also onthe CSR and non CSR activities of the companies. The CSR, therefore, caninfluence in the selection of the consumers, but more indirectly, through

[152]

726 06

4.29

4.46

4.81

4.89

5.65

5.66

7.28

7.29

8.53

8.98

3.72

3.02

4.44

4.92

5.63

7.08

7.27

6.81

8.70

8.37

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10

The company's sponsorship of cultural and sports events

The fashionable feature of the brand

The company contribution to charities

The sales promotion of the products

The reputation of the company

The company involvement in the protection of the environment

The availability of products in stores where you usually shop

The quality of the services offered

The quality of the products offered

The price of the products

Sport shoes Deodorant

Figure 1. Criteria used in the purchase of products. Mean values

Note: 10 point scale (1, I do not use this criteria to select; 10, I certainly do use this criteria).



communication campaigns that emphasize the brand name of the com-pany. In respect to the criteria for selection of the deodorant, those whowere interviewed considered principally the quality of the product (8.70),price (8.37) and the availability in the stores where they usually go to shop(7.27). In this case, the criteria of environmental implication is relativelyhigh (7.08), and can be explained by the emphasis in the focal points ofcommunication in the advertising campaigns on the importance of pro-tection of the ozone layer.

Analyzing specifically the groups on the basis of area of university stu-dies, significant differences stand out in the evaluation of environmentalprotection criteria in both categories of products (see Table 6). Specifically,students from the non economics area assign an importance of 6.63 insport shoes and 7.69 in the purchase of a deodorant, compared to 5.04and 6.68, respectively, in the sub-sampling of the students from the eco-nomics area. On the other hand, criteria such as “the brand name is in fas-hion” and the sales promotion of the products are more important to tho-se of the economics area in the two categories of products.

[153]

72706

Total Students Students nonCategories of products & purchase criteria sample economics area economics area t-value

(n=253) (n=155) (n=98)

Sport shoes

1 The quality of the products offered 8.53 8.34 8.83 -2.66**

2 The reputation of the company 5.65 5.95 5.17 2.77**

3 Company involvement in the protection of the environment 5.66 5.04 6.63 -5.69**

4 The quality of the services offered 7.29 7.28 7.31 -.10

5 The availability of products in stores where you usually shop 7.28 7.46 6.98 1.98*

6 The fashionable feature of the brand 4.46 4.98 3.63 4.21**

7 The sales promotion of the products 4.89 5.75 3.53 7.47**

Table 6. Mean values of purchase criteria



Taking into account the question regarding whether or not havingavailable information about the degree of social responsibility of the com-panies is totally necessary in order to make a decision to purchase or notat all necessary (scale of 1 to 10, where 1 is totally necessary in order topurchase and 10 not at all necessary), the sample was recodified into 5groups: those that assigned a score of 1 or 2 (group 1: totally necessary inorder to purchase ), of 3 or 4 (group 2: necessary), of 5 or 6 (group 3: neu-tral), of 7 or 8 (group 4: not very necessary in order to purchase) and of9 and 10 (group 5: not at all necessary in order to purchase). Considering

[154]

728 06

Total Students Students nonCategories of products & purchase criteria sample economics area economics area t-value

(n=253) (n=155) (n=98)

8 The company contribution to charities 4.81 4.60 5.14 -1.90

9 The company’s sponsorship of cultural and sports events 4.29 4.25 4.36 -.37

10 The price of the products 8.98 8.95 9.03 -.47

Deodorant

1 The quality of the products offered 8.70 8.39 9.18 -4.04**

2 The reputation of the company 5.63 5.63 5.63 -.02

3 Company involvement in the protection of the environment 7.08 6.68 7.69 -3.36**

4 The quality of the services offered 6.81 6.54 7.26 -2.37*

5 The availability of products in stores where you usually shop 7.27 7.50 6.90 2.08*

6 The fashionable feature of the brand 3.02 3.26 2.65 2.22*

7 The sales promotion of the products 4.92 5.79 3.55 6.69**

8 The company contribution to charities 4.44 4.22 4.80 -1.78

9 The company’s sponsorship of cultural and sports events 3.72 3.44 4.17 -2.44 *

10 The price of the products 8.37 8.19 8.64 -1.80

Table 6. (Continued)

Note: 10 point scale (1, I do not use this criteria to select; 10, I certainly do use this criteria); *p<0,05; **p<0,01



the total sample, 15% fall into group 1; group 2, 28.9%; group 3, 26.1%;group 4, 18.6% and group 5, 11.5%. As can be seen, the largest sector(75%) is situated in the central position and only 15% indicated that theCSR was totally necessary in order to make a purchase. On the basis ofthe area the students come from (economics versus non economics area),there are significant differences (Chi-square = 13.84; p< 0.01) in the com-position of these groups: group 1 (11% and 21.4%), group 2 (24.5% and35.7%), group 3 (30.3% and 19.4%), group 4 (19.4% and 17.3%) andgroup 5 (14.8% and 6.1%). Summarizing, students from the non econo-mics area are more conscious about information on the level of social res-ponsibility of the companies as being necessary in order to make a pur-chase.

The recognition that information on the level of social responsibility ofthe companies is necessary or not in order to make a purchase is reflectedin the criteria for selection of the consumers when they are selecting pro-ducts. Indeed, as can be seen in Table 7, there are significant differences inthe criteria for selection depending on whether the person interviewedconsiders that information about CSR is necessary or not in order to makea purchase. It can be seen that for those groups that are more involved inCSR issues (groups 1 and 2), the criteria for selection more related withthe responsible behaviour of the companies takes on a greater importance(involvement of the company with the environment and the contributionof the company to social works).

[155]

72906



[156]

730 06

Segments (c)

Group 1 Group 2 Group 3 Group 4 Group 5 F(b)

Categories of products & purchase criteria (a) (15%) (28.9%) (26.1%) (18.6%) (11.5%)

Necessary NotNecessary

Sport shoes

1 The quality of the products offered 8.71 8.58 8.56 8.36 8.38 0.42

2 The reputation of the company 5.61 5.40 5.86 5.66 5.83 0.45

3 Company involvement in the protection of environment 7.13 5.88 5.27 5.64 4.07 9.00**

4 The quality of the services offered 7.55 7.26 7.06 7.43 7.34 0.55

5 The availability of products in stores 6.84 7.53 7.12 7.34 7.45 1.00

6 The fashionable feature of the brand 3.47 4.30 4.48 5.11 5.03 2.66*

7 The sales promotion of the products 3.79 4.85 4.89 5.28 5.83 3.13*

8 The company contribution to charities 6.16 5.03 4.29 4.79 3.72 6.86**

9 The company’s sponsorship of cultural and sports events 5.58 4.10 3.88 4.77 3.28 6.64**

10 The price of the products 8.92 9.01 8.76 9.06 9.34 1.03

Deodorant

1 The quality of the products offered 8.89 8.66 8.61 8.64 8.83 0.28

2 The reputation of the company 5.63 5.62 5.86 5.57 5.21 0.39

3 Company involvement in the protection of environment 8.13 7.29 7.09 6.74 5.66 5.16**

4 The quality of the services offered 7.03 6.95 6.39 6.83 7.14 0.78

5 The availability of products in stores 6.92 7.47 7.21 7.32 7.28 0.37

6 The fashionable feature of the brand 2.63 3.21 3.02 3.26 2.72 0.74

7 The sales promotion of the products 4.08 4.78 5.38 4.45 6.14 3.12*

8 The company contribution to charities 5.74 4.77 4.05 4.26 3.14 5.62**

9 The company’s sponsorship of cultural and sports events 5.37 3.96 3.32 3.62 2.07 10.22**

10 The price of the products 8.50 8.45 8.06 8.47 8.52 0.56

Table 7. Mean values of purchase criteria taking into account the importance of CSR to purchase (n=253)

Notes: (a) Evaluation of criteria from 1 to10 (1, this criteria is used; 10, this criteria is not used); (b) Significant diffe-rences* p<0.05; ** p<0.01; (c) Group 1 (individuals that indicate that “information about CSR is totally necessary inorder to purchase”); Group 2 (individuals that indicate that “information about CSR is necessary in order to purcha-se”); Group 3 (individuals that indicate that “information about CSR is neither necessary nor unnecessary in order topurchase”); Group 4 (individuals that indicate that “information about CSR is not necessary in order to purchase”);Group 5 (individuals that indicate that “information about CSR is not at all necessary in order to purchase”).



ConclusionsThe analysis of the perspective of the consumer has been the subject ofvery little research in CSR (Swaen et al., 2000). From a conceptual pers-pective, the present research offers evidence on what university studentsperceive about the concept of CSR. The principal contribution of this rese-arch lies in the methodological focus of CSR from the analysis of the con-sumer. If indeed the survey carried out by MORI on CSR (MORI, 2000)provides information on the expectations of the population in respect tocompanies and their role in the society, we wish to emphasize the need tocarry out continuous studies with the objective of understanding the levelof knowledge consumers have about CSR practices. This research alsocontributes to the literature on consumer behaviour where it is not fre-quent to be working with non economics related purchasing (Drumw-right, 1994; Sen and Bhattacharya, 2001).

From a practical perspective, this study can be of help to managementin orientating their expenditures in specific CSR activities adapting to con-sumer needs. The results in relation to the questions posed in the presentpaper are synthesized below.

First of all, this research emphasizes that the activities that the consu-mers consider to be most representative of CSR are: (1) respect for humanrights, (2) protection of the environment, (3) social activities, and (4) nondiscrimination of employees. The results also reveal differences in the areaof studies of the university students, with the non economics area showingmore interest in the philosophy of CSR.

Secondly, in respect to the analysis of the influence of gender, educationand information on CSR about the perception of socially responsible com-panies, it should be pointed out that: (i) no gender specific differences wereshown to exist in reference to activities related to the responsible beha-viour of companies; (ii) insofar as education is concerned, students fromthe non economics area consistently assign a greater association betweenthe activities that characterize a socially responsible firm, and (iii) 39.4%and 32.7% of those interviewed in the sampling of the economics and non

[157]

73106



economics areas, respectively, stated they had at some time read informa-tion about the social responsible of companies.

Third, it stands out that consumers perceive of themselves as being oneof the most important sources of pressure for companies to be moresocially responsible. In respect to the perceived utility of informationabout CSR in the purchase of sport shoes and deodorant, the results showthat criteria linked to CSR has very little influence in purchase decisionmaking. Only 15% indicated that CSR is totally necessary in order tomake a purchase.

There are certain limitations of the research that should be pointed out.First of all, the use of a questionnaire as a method for gathering data caninvolve certain biases on social desire in this subject. Secondly, the samplingprocedure and the representativity of the sampling are methodological limi-tations that can be corrected in subsequent studies. Given the importanceof CSR on a worldwide level, and in particular, the notable interest in Spain(see Fundación de Ecología y Desarrollo, 2004) it would be of great inte-rest to extend the research to “real” consumers. The university students inthe economics area are involved in a process of training for positions inmanagement, and this could influence in their perceptions of business beha-viour. They are also more aware of the activities of companies – activitiesrelated or not with CSR – and about the notion of company ethics than theaverage consumer. On the other hand, students from the non economicsarea tend to be more “supportive” of environmental practices and, in thissense, give more importance to this aspect in the decisions to purchase.

ReferencesBADETS, V. (2002). “La fin de l’insouciance”, Croire Aujourd’hui, nº

127, pp. 12-21.BECKMANN, S.C., CHRISTENSEN, A. S., y CHRISTENSEN, A. G.

(2001). “Myths of nature and environmentally responsible behaviours:an exploratory study”, Proceedings of the 30th European MarketingAcademy Conference, Bergen, Mayo 2001.

[158]

732 06



BIGNÉ, E. (1997). “El Consumidor Verde: Bases de un Modelo de Com-portamiento”, Esic-Market, nº 96, pp. 29-44.

BOULSTRIDGE, E. and CARRIGAN, M. (2000). “Do consumers reallycare about corporate responsibility? Highlighting the attitude-beha-viour gap”, Journal of Communication Management, Vol. 4, pp. 355-368.

BOWEN, H. R. (1953). Social responsibilities of the businessman. Har-per-Row, New York.

BROWN, T. J. and DACIN, P. A. (1997). “The company and the product:corporate associations and consumer product responses”, Journal ofMarketing, Vol. 61, pp. 68-84.

DE LA CUESTA, M. and VALOR, C. (2003): “Responsabilidad social dela empresa. Concepto, medición y desarrollo en España”, Boletín eco-nómico del ICE, nº 2755, pp. 7-19.

DOLICH J., TUCKER, L. and WILSON D. (1981): “Profiling Environ-mentally Responsible Consumer Citizens”, Journal of the Academy ofMarketing Science, Vol. 22, pp. 99-113.

DONALDSON, T. and PRESTON, L. E. (1995): “The stakeholder theoryof the corporation: concepts, evidence, and implications”, Academy ofManagement Review, Vol. 20, pp. 65-91.

FORTE, M. and LAMONT, B. T. (1998): “The Bottom Line Effects ofGreening: Implications of Environmental Awareness”, Academy ofManagement, Vol. 12, pp. 89-90.

FOMBRUN, C. and SHANLEY, M. (1990): “What’s in a name? Reputa-tion building and corporate strategy”, Academy of Management Jour-nal, Vol. 33, pp. 233-258.

FUNDACIÓN ECOLOGÍA Y DESARROLLO (2004). Anuario sobre Res-ponsabilidad Social Corporativa en España 2003, http://www.ecodes.org/documentos/archivo/anuarioRSC.pdf

FRIEDMAN, M. (1970): “The social responsibility of business is toincrease its profits”, New York Time Magazine, 13 September, pp.122-126.

[159]

73306



JONES, T. M. (1995): “Instrumental stakeholder theory: A synthesis of ethicsand economic”, Academy of Management Review, Vol. 20, pp. 404-437.

LAFUENTE, A., VIÑUALES, V., PUEYO, R. and LLARÍA, J. (2003). Laresponsabilidad social corporativa y políticas públicas. Madrid: Fun-dación Alternativas.

MAIGNAN, I. and FERRELL, O. C. (2001): “Antecedents and Benefits ofCorporate Citizenship: An Investigation of French Businesses”, Journalof Business Research, Vol. 51, pp. 37-51.

MAIGNAN, I. and FERRELL, O.C. (2004): “Corporate Social Responsi-bility and Marketing: An Integrative Framework”, Journal of the Aca-demy of Marketing Science, Vol. 32, pp. 3-19.

MORI (2000): “European attitudes towards corporate citizenship”, Cor-porate social responsibility update 2. http://www.mori.com

MURRAY, K. B. and VOGEL, C. M. (1997): ”Using a hierarchy-of-effectsapproach to gauge the effectiveness of corporate social responsibility togenerate goodwill toward the firm: financial versus non financialimpacts”, Journal of Business Research, Vol. 38, pp. 141-159.

NIETO, M. and FERNÁNDEZ, R. (2004): “Responsabilidad social cor-porativa: la última innovación en management”, Universia BusinessReview-Actualidad Económica, Vol. 1, pp. 28-39.

OTTMAN, J. (1993). Green Marketing. Challenges and Opportunities forthe New Marketing Age. NTC Business Books, Lincolnwood, Illinois,USA.

RATCHFORD, B. T. (1987): “New insights about the FCB grid”, Journalof Advertising Research, Vol. 27, pp. 30-31.

SEN, S. and BHATTACHARYA, C. B. (2001). “Does doing good alwayslead to doing better? Consumer reactions to corporate social responsi-bility”, Journal of Marketing Research, Vol. 38, pp. 225-243.

SWAEN, V., CHUMPITAZ, R., BIGNÉ, E. and ANDREU, L. (2003):“Being a socially responsible company: what does it mean for Europe-an young consumers?”, Proceedings of the 32nd European MarketingAcademy Conference, Glasgow: University of Strathclyde.

[160]

734 06



TURBAN, D. B. and GREENING, D. W. (1997): “Corporate social per-formance and organizational attractiveness to prospective employees”,Academy of Management Journal, Vol. 40, pp. 658-672.

WARHURST, A. (2001): “Corporate Citizenship and Corporate SocialInvestment: Drivers of Tri-sector Partnerships”, Journal of CorporateCitizenship, Vol. 1, pp. 57-73.

WOOD, D. J. (1991): “Corporate Social Performance Revisited”, Aca-demy of Management Review, Vol. 1, pp. 691-718.

[161]

73506

Corporate social responsibility influences on …...corporate social responsibility influences on...

Documents

Transcript of Corporate social responsibility influences on …...corporate social responsibility influences on...