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

서지정보

· 발행기관 : 한국마케팅과학회
· 수록지 정보 : Journal of Global Scholars of Marketing Science(마케팅과학연구) / 19권 / 3호 / 5 ~ 16페이지
· 저자명 : 김경진, 박종철

초록

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.

참고자료

· 없음