Corporate Social Responsibility: Psychological, Person-Centric, and Progressing

By D. Rupp, Drew B. Mallory. 2015

436 citations recorded by the source corpus.

Subfields: Information Systems and Management, Marketing, Strategy and Management

View Paper: https://www.semanticscholar.org/paper/79cf06f508f3c25f8f9ce8e6af06b9fe90a40834

How researchers see this paper

The researchers whose trusted networks rank it highest, strongest advocate first. Every researcher gets a different order.

In Information Systems and Management

In Marketing

In Strategy and Management

Citations in the corpus

When corporate social responsibility motivates employee citizenship behavior: The sensitizing role of task significance (2018, methodology): “Given the positive attitude members of organizations have towards CSR, scholars have begun to investigate how CSR affects employee behaviors (for an extensive review, see Rupp & Mallory, 2015).”
The Influence of Corporate Social Responsibility on Incumbent Employees: A Meta-Analytic Investigation of the Mediating and Moderating Mechanisms (2020, methodology): “Micro-CSR research has studied numerous mechanisms explaining why and how employees react to CSR cognitively or behaviorally (Rupp & Mallory, 2015).”
Employees’ Perceptions of Corporate Social Responsibility and Job Performance: A Sequential Mediation Model (2016, background): “More specifically, reflecting the argument of some scholars that it is imperative to clearly explicate the relationship between CSR and particular outcomes at the individual level [9,10], this study has attempted to extend previous research by revealing the underlying mechanisms through which employ”
Critical Essay: The reconciliation of fraternal twins: Integrating the psychological and sociological approaches to ‘micro’ corporate social responsibility (2019, background): “Despite recurrent claims that micro-CSR should focus on individuals outside organizational borders (Gond et al., 2017; Jones and Rupp, 2018; Rupp and Mallory, 2015), micro-CSR studies have mainly focused on persons in actual or potential relation with corporations through the job market, for…”
Consistency Matters! How and When Does Corporate Social Responsibility Affect Employees’ Organizational Identification? (2016, background): “In line with this perspective, micro-level research analysing employees’ psychological, attitudinal, and behavioural responses to perceived CSR has recently expanded within CSR literature (Morgeson et al., 2013; Rupp and Mallory, 2015).”
Corporate social responsibility and employee engagement: The moderating role of CSR‐specific relative autonomy and individualism (2018, background): “…initiatives (e.g., to reduce pollution, support local economies, and defend human rights), as well as the perceptions of other stakeholder groups such as consumers, shareholders, and the actual groups touched by CSR initiatives (e.g., children, the environment, and citizens; Rupp & Mallory, 2015).”
Corporate Social Responsibility and Ethical Leadership: Investigating Their Interactive Effect on Employees’ Socially Responsible Behaviors (2017, background): “First, our framework focuses on the mechanisms explaining CSR’s impact on employees’ SRBs, thus answering recent calls to expand the nomological network of perceived CSR beyond its focus on traditional OB outcomes (e.g., De Roeck and Maon 2016; Gond et al. 2017; Rupp and Mallory 2015).”
The effects of managerial and employee attributions for corporate social responsibility initiatives (2017, background): “The psychology of CSR has been posited as being central in addressing this gap (Glavas, 2016; Rupp & Mallory, 2015).”
The psychological microfoundations of corporate social responsibility: A person-centric systematic review (2017, methodology): “…CSR agenda, which has been neglected at the individual level (Frynas & Stephens, 2015), by showing how multiple drivers—political and cultural (Rupp & Mallory, 2015) or religious—shape individual and collective decision-making processes related to CSR, such that they ultimately produce…”