The Effects of the Perceived Motivation Type toward Corporate Social Responsibility Activities on Customer Loyalty

기업사회책임활동적인지인지동기류형대고객충성도적영향(企业社会责任活动的认知认知动机类型对顾客忠诚度的影响)

Corporate social responsibility (CSR) activities have been shown to be potential factors that can improve corporate image and increase the ability of corporations to compete. However, most previous studies related to CSR activities investigated how these activities influence product and corporate evaluation, as well as corporate image. In addition, some researchers treated consumers' perceptions of corporate motives as moderator variables in evaluating the relationship between corporate social responsibilities and consumer response. However, motive-based theories have some weaknesses. Corporate social responsibility activities cause two motives(egoistic vs. altruistic) for consumers, but recently, Vlachos et al. (2008) argued that these motives should be segmented. Thus, it is possible to transform the original theory into a modified theory model (persuasion knowledge model, PKM). Vlachos et al. (2008) segmented corporate social responsibility motives into four types and compared the effects of these motives on customer loyalty. Prior studies have proved that CSR activities with positive motives have positive influences on customer loyalty. However, the psychological reasons underlying this finding have not been determined empirically. Thus, the objectives of this research are twofold. First, we attempt to determine why most customers favor companies that they feel have positive motives for their corporate social responsibility activities. Second, we attempt to measure the effects of consumers' reciprocity when society benefits from corporate social responsibility activities. The following research hypotheses are constructed. H1: Values-driven motives for corporate social responsibility activities have a positive influence on the perceived reciprocity. H2: Stakeholder-driven motives for corporate social responsibility activities have a negative influence on the perceived reciprocity. H3: Egoistic-driven motives for corporate social responsibility activities have a negative influence on perceived reciprocity. H4: Strategic-driven motives for corporate social responsibility activities have a negative influence on perceived reciprocity. H5: Perceived reciprocity for corporate social responsibility activities has a positive influence on consumer loyalty. A single company is selected as a research subject to understand how the motives behind corporate social responsibility influence consumers' perceived reciprocity and customer loyalty. A total sample of 200 respondents was selected for a pilot test. In addition, to ensure a consistent response, we ensured that the respondents were older than 20 years of age. The surveys of 172 respondents (males-82, females-90) were analyzed after 28 invalid questionnaires were excluded. Based on our cutoff criteria, the model fit the data reasonably well. Values-driven motives for corporate social responsibility activities had a positive effect on perceived reciprocity (t = 6.75, p < .001), supporting H1. Morales (2005) also found that consumers appreciate a company's social responsibility efforts and the benefits provided by these efforts to society. Stakeholder-driven motives for corporate social responsibility activities did not affect perceived reciprocity (t = -.049, p > .05). Thus, H2 was rejected. Egoistic-driven motives (t = .3.11, p < .05) and strategic-driven (t = -4.65, p < .05) motives had a negative influence on perceived reciprocity, supporting H3 and H4, respectively. Furthermore, perceived reciprocity had a positive influence on consumer loyalty (t = 4.24, p < .05), supporting H5. Thus, compared with the general public, undergraduate students appear to be more influenced by egoistic-driven motives. We draw the following conclusions from our research findings. First, value-driven attributions have a positive influence on perceived reciprocity. However, stakeholder-driven attributions have no significant effects on perceived reciprocity. Moreover, both egoistic-driven attributions and strategic-driven attributions have a negative influence on perceived reciprocity. Second, when corporate social responsibility activities align with consumers' reciprocity, the efforts directed towards social responsibility activities have a positive influence on customer loyalty. In this study, we examine whether the type of motivation affects consumer responses to CSR, and in particular, we evaluate how CSR motives can influence a key internal factor (perceived reciprocity) and behavioral consumer outcome (customer loyalty). We demonstrate that perceived reciprocity plays a mediating role in the relationship between CSR motivation and customer loyalty. Our study extends the research on consumer CSR-inferred motivations, positing them as a direct indicator of consumer responses. Furthermore, we convincingly identify perceived reciprocity as a sub-process mediating the effect of CSR attributions on customer loyalty. Future research investigating the ultimate behavior and financial impact of CSR should consider that the impacts of CSR also stem from perceived reciprocity. The results of this study also have important managerial implications. First, the central role that reciprocity plays indicates that managers should routinely measure how much their socially responsible actions create perceived reciprocity. Second, understanding how consumers' perceptions of CSR corporate motives relate to perceived reciprocity and customer loyalty can help managers to monitor and enhance these consumer outcomes through marketing initiatives and management of CSR-induced attribution processes. The results of this study will help corporations to understand the relative importance of the four different motivations types in influencing perceived reciprocity.

企业社会责任活动已被认为是提高企业形象和企业竞争力的一个潜在因素. 然而, 先前大部分关于企业社会责任活动的研究是主要针对的是这些活动如何影响影响对产品, 企业以及企业形象的评价的评价. 另外, 一些学者将消费者对企业动机的感知作为企业社会责任和消费者反应之间直接关系中的调解变量. 然而, 动机理论和相关的研究存在一些缺点. 对消费者, 企业社会责任活动只有两个动机, 但最近, Vlachos等人(2008) 认为这些动机应该细分. 因此, 它有可能从原有理论发展为修正理论模型(说服, 个人知识管理(PKM). Vlachos等人(2008) 将企业社会责任动机细分为四种类型, 并尝试发现这些动机在影响顾客种程度方面的作用以及不同. 以前的研究已经证明具有积极动机会对的社会责任活动会有积极的影响. 但并没有实证地解释其心理原因. 因此本研究的目的是双重的. 第一, 本研究试图发现顾客为什么会在他们感受到企业社会活动的积极动机的情况下表达他们的感激. 第二, 本研究试图测试当社会从企业社会责任活动中获得利益时与消费者的回报的效果. 以下是本研究的假设: H1: 企业社会责任活动的价值驱使的动机积极影响认知的对等对于互惠的期待. H2: 企业社会责任活动的参股者驱使的动机消极影响于互惠的期待认知的对等. H3: 企业社会责任活动的利己驱使的动机消极影响于互惠的期待认知的对等. H4: 企业社会责任活动的战略驱使的动机消极影响对于互惠的期待认知的对等. H5: 对企业社会责任活动的互惠的期待认知的对等积极影响消费者忠诚度. 我们选择了一个公司作为研究对象来理解企业社会责任活动的动机是如何影响消费者于互惠的期待认知的对等和顾客忠诚度. 总样本为100名受访者被选为试验测试. 此外, 为了获得一致的回复, 我们保证所有的受访者都超过20岁. 本调查中. 在排除了28份无效问卷以后, 总受访者是172名(82名男性, 90名女性). 基于截至标准, 数据和模型的适配度良好. 在观察结果以后, 企业社会责任活动的价值驱使的动机对于互惠的期待认知的对等有积极的影响(t=6.75, p<.001)，假设1被证明. Morales (2005) 也指出消费者的确感激企业对社会所做出的努力以及对社会所给予的利益. 而且企业社会责任活动的参股者驱使的动机对于互惠的期待认知的对等没有影响(t = ‐.049, p > .05). 因此, 假设2被拒绝. 我们可以用符合论来解释这个结果. 利己驱使动机(t = ‐3.11, p < .05)和战略驱使的动机(t = ‐4.65, p < .05) 对认知的对等有消极影响. 因此H3和H4被证明. 而且认知的对等积极影响消费者的忠诚度(t = 4.24, p < .05)，H5被证明. 从结果中看, 与大众群体相比，大学生更容易受利己驱动动机的影响. 以下是本研究的结论:首先, 数据分析结果显示价值驱使的动机积极影响于互惠的期待认知的对等. 但是参股者驱动的动机对互惠的期待认知的对等没有显著影响. 另外, 利己驱使的动机和战略驱使的动机消极影响互惠的期待认知的对等. 第二, 当企业社会责任活动与消费者的回报关联时, 社会责任活动积极影响顾客忠诚度. 本研究测试了动机的种类是否影响消费者对企业社会责任的反应, 尤其是企业社会责任如何能影响关键的内在因素(认知的对等) 和消费者行为的结果(顾客忠诚度). 而且, 本研究阐述了认知对等在企业社会责任动机和顾客忠诚度的关系中起到媒介的作用. 我们的研究扩展了有关消费者企业社会责任动机方面的研究, 将他们定位为消费者反应的一个直接指标. 另外一个贡献是, 我们成功地鉴定了认知的对等作为一个次级过程在归因于顾客忠诚度的企业社会责任的影响中的中介作用. 今后在研究企业社会责任的最终行为和财务影响时应该考虑源于互惠的期待认知对等的影响. 本研究的结果具有重要的管理意义. 第一, 本研究发现的对等的中心作用表明经理人应该经常考虑这些行为将创造出多少的互惠的期待认知对等. 第二, 理解消费者对企业社会责任的动机, 的认知是如何与互惠的期待认知对等和顾客忠诚度相关, 可以帮助经理人通过营销活动和管理企业社会责任‐感应归因过程来监控和提高这些消费者的结果. 本研究的结果将帮助企业去理解影响互惠的期待认知对等的四个不同的动机的相对重要性.