Journal of Business Research 161 (2023) 113809

Contents lists available at ScienceDirect

Journal of Business Research

journal homepage: www.elsevier.com/locate/jbusres

The perceived CSR-innovative behavior conundrum: Towards unlocking

the socio-emotional black box
Palvi Pasricha a, *, K.S. Nivedhitha a, Juhi Raghuvanshi b
a
Organizational Behavior and Human Resources Area, Indian Institute of Management Kozhikode, Kerala 673570, India
b
Department of Management Studies, Indian Institute of Technology Delhi, New Delhi 110016, India

A R T I C L E I N F O A B S T R A C T

Keywords: Though perceived Corporate Social Responsibility (CSR) has been linked to various employee outcomes in prior
Perceived CSR studies, its impact on the innovative behavior of employees, and more specifically the socio-emotional un­
Innovative behavior derpinnings of this impact have remained inadequately explored. In view of this, drawing on the Affective Events
Organizational pride
Theory (AET), the current study investigates into the role of organizational pride and affective commitment as
Affective commitment
Empathy
potential mediators and empathy as a potential moderator influencing the relationship between perceived CSR
and employee innovative behavior. Results of structural equation modeling, bootstrapping and PROCESS applied
on three-wave, time-lagged multi-source (self and peer-reported) data (N = 270) from employees belonging to
renewable energy organizations in India, reveal that: perceived CSR is positively related to employee innovative
behavior; organizational pride and affective commitment, each partially mediate the relationship between
perceived CSR and innovative behavior; interestingly, taken together, organizational pride and affective
commitment sequentially mediate the relationship between perceived CSR and employee innovative behavior,
and that’s a full mediation; beyond these mediations is the pronounced impact of empathy, which is found to
moderate the indirect effect of perceived CSR on employee innovative behavior, such that the impact of
perceived CSR on innovative behavior through organizational pride and affective commitment is stronger when
employees hold high levels of empathy. Accordingly, the study puts forth crucial implications for theory and
specifically practitioners facing the current tough times. It lastly suggests directions for future research.

1. Introduction In other words, an organization’s contribution to the well-being of the

vast magnitude of its stakeholders, at the end of the day, has a major say
The Indian Airline, Akasa Air, has caught an enormous attention not in whether or not it makes for a congenial workplace for its employees,
only for the low-cost business model, but also for meticulously driving and a sustainable organization in the long-run. Indeed, 75 percent of
corporate social responsibility at all levels of its operations. By launch­ organizations that took part in a study assessing contribution of the
ing low fuel consumption and energy efficient aircrafts, the firm has business’s social role on its overall growth believed that “their CSR
created a strong mark in sustainability practices. Further, the firm is also involvement was a way to build and maintain trust, support and legiti­
one of a very few innovative airlines that has introduced comfortable macy with the employees” (Moir, 2003). According to executives of
custom made and environment-friendly attire for its crew members. The organizations with top ranked workplace cultures, the organization’s
crew members are seen wearing comfortable sneaker, jackets and CSR efforts and work culture are inextricably linked (Hansen et al.,
trousers to suit the ergonomics and the fabric is specially designed using 2011; Smith, 2012). What’s more, a recent survey conducted by the
recycled marine waste. These initiatives strongly reflect the core values Society of Industrial and Organizational Psychology revealed organi­
of the organization’s corporate social responsibility and consequent zation’s social stance (leading to meaning and purposeful work) as “one
innovative initiatives driven by these core values (Chowdhury, 2022). of the top trends affecting the workplace” (Top 10 Workplace Trends for
Likewise, instances of corporate social ‘irresponsibility’ may induce 2020, 2020). The fact of the matter is that as we profile those organi­
employees to retaliate by demonstrating counterproductive behaviors zations that have earned the healthy workplace reputation falling under
resulting into detrimental individual as well as organizational outcomes. the “socially responsible” category, we are digging deeper into the

* Corresponding author.
E-mail addresses: palvipasricha@iimk.ac.in (P. Pasricha), ksnivedhitha@iimk.ac.in (K.S. Nivedhitha), juhiraghuvanshi.iitr@gmail.com (J. Raghuvanshi).

https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jbusres.2023.113809
Received 30 December 2021; Received in revised form 14 February 2023; Accepted 25 February 2023
Available online 21 March 2023
0148-2963/© 2023 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.
P. Pasricha et al. Journal of Business Research 161 (2023) 113809

perennial debate on good companies make good workplaces. When orga­ and employee behaviors. More importantly, Ng et al. (2019) advocated
nizations exhibit responsible behavior, this enhances their prestige and that employees’ cognitive appraisals of CSR may elicit emotional re­
improves the workplace milieu, and it is often followed by elevated actions, and identifying these may enlighten us on why perceptions of
performance on the employees’ part (Jones, 2010). Endorsing this, the CSR are eventually associated with key work outcomes. Calling for
burgeoning academic literature on CSR has demonstrated its positive research that utilizes this perspective, the authors further noted that
effects on numerous employee attitudes and behaviors, for instance, since across employees, intrapsychic reactions to perceptions of CSR
organizational commitment (Brammer, Millington, & Rayton, 2007; may show up in different intensities, future research that considers
Dhanesh 2014; Farooq et al., 2014b; Glavas & Kelley, 2014; Mueller boundary effects influencing these reactions would provide significant
et al., 2012), organizational citizenship behavior (Evans, Davis, & Frink, insights into the link between perceived CSR and employee behaviors. In
2011; Hansen et al., 2011; Jones, 2010; Lin et al., 2010), employee sum, adopting an emotional perspective and unfolding likely mediation
engagement (Caligiuri et al., 2013), knowledge sharing behavior (Far­ and moderation processes may serve to better explain the scantily
ooq et al., 2014a), and job satisfaction (Valentine & Fleischman, 2008; addressed conundrum of the effect of CSR perceptions on employee
Vlachos, Panagopoulos, & Rapp, 2013). Surprisingly, innovative innovative behavior.
behavior, not only a key aspect of employee performance (Scott & Bruce,
1994) but also a major contributor to organizational effectiveness and 2. Conceptual model and hypotheses development
survival (Choi et al., 2016; West et al., 2004) has been inadequately
studied (Abdelmotaleb, Metwally, & Saha, 2018; Hur, Moon, & Ko, In view of the skepticism surrounding the significance of emotional
2018; Li et al., 2021; Nazir & Islam, 2020). processes in the perceived CSR - innovative behavior relationship and of
Though used interchangeably with creativity (Scott & Bruce, 1994) the possible contingencies that influence it, the current study attempts to
that refers to idea generation (Amabile, 1983), innovative behavior is carry out an in-depth analysis (constituting not only direct but also in­
broader than creativity in that it includes idea generation as well as direct effects) of the relationship. Specifically, with the objective of
implementation (Scott & Bruce, 1994) – produces some innovative unlocking the underlying “socio-emotional black box”, drawing on the
output (De Jong & Den Hartog, 2007), and so pragmatically contributes Affective Events Theory (AET), it investigates into the role of organi­
to organizational innovation and development (Amabile et al., 1996). zational pride and affective commitment as potential mediators and
Undoubtedly, innovative work behavior on the part of employees is an empathy as a potential moderator influencing the relationship.
asset for organizations in order to stay relevant in the increasingly dy­ Organizational Pride is primarily a self-conscious emotion brought
namic and complex business arena. And so to get the most from em­ about by one’s organization’s accomplishments, is related to self-esteem
ployees, creating a favorable work environment which nurtures such and positive self-image (Tracy & Robins, 2007), and captures the extent
behavior (Amabile et al., 1996) is a sine qua non. Existing research to which individuals experience a sense of pleasure and self-respect in
suggests that an environment geared towards corporate citizenship ex­ being associated with their organization (Helm, 2013; Jones, 2010). The
erts a considerable influence on employee creativity (Wang et al., 2020) AET suggests that an individual’s emotional experience (i.e., positive or
more specifically, employees with favorable perceptions of their orga­ negative) of an event is a key determinant of his or her attitudinal and
nization’s corporate citizenship reported higher levels of creative behavioral outcomes. Since an organization’s CSR engagement conveys
involvement, given that “good corporate citizens motivate their em­ to its employees positive cues that make them feel good about them­
ployees to break out of their usual thinking patterns and to find new selves and their organization; it may develop in them a sense of pride,
ways to contribute to both society and the company” (Glavas & Piderit, which may eventually result into congruent work outcomes (Ng et al.,
2009, p. 59). Augmenting this, Brammer et al. (2015) and Hur et al. 2019). Crucially, pride is regarded as a primary emotion that may lead to
(2018) (building on the social identity and self determination perspec­ numerous positive job attitudes and behaviors among employees (De
tives) demonstrated a positive relationship between employees’ CSR Roeck et al., 2016; Elfenbein, 2007; Gouthier & Rhein, 2011; Tyler &
perceptions and creative effort. Fortunately, a few recent studies have Blader 2002; Williams & DeSteno, 2008), a major one being creativity
endeavored to render insights into how employees’ innovative behavior (Codato et al., 2013; Damian & Robins, 2012, 2013; Durrah et al., 2021;
in particular might be influenced by their perceptions of CSR. For Gouthier & Rhein, 2011), that fosters problem-solving behavior at the
instance, Gaudêncio, Coelho, and Ribeiro (2019) (utilizing a social ex­ workplace (Amabile et al., 1996; Sternberg, 1999; Scott & Bruce 1994).
change perspective) demonstrated the essentiality of organization’s CSR Besides, given that employees with greater organizational pride seek
for predicting innovative behavior through the mediating role of orga­ ways to further their organization’s success (Edwards & Kudret, 2017)
nizational trust, affective commitment and happiness, and the moder­ exhibiting productive behaviors aimed at promoting innovation is one
ating role of perceived external prestige. Also, Nazir and Islam (2020) such way they may tend to do so. We thus expect organizational pride to
(utilizing the self-determination perspective) evinced the importance of mediate the relationship between employees’ perceptions of CSR and
attending to employees’ psychological needs of autonomy, competence, innovative behavior.
and relatedness through CSR-specific activities, thus intrinsically moti­ Also, we expect affective commitment to function as a mediator in
vating employees to perform their jobs with an innovative approach. the impact of employees’ perceived CSR on their innovative behavior.
Noticeably, prior studies have principally adopted a rational Recent studies have found that a work milieu depicting the organiza­
perspective to understanding the perceived CSR-innovative behavior tion’s socially responsible values significantly influences employees’
relationship. Although informative, this approach misses out on affective commitment (Ditlev-Simonsen, 2015; Mueller et al., 2012;
emotional processes that though irrational can have a significant effect Rego et al., 2010), defined as their emotional attachment to the orga­
on human behavior (Brief & Weiss, 2002). In fact, recent CSR scholar­ nization (Meyer & Allen, 1991). Also, affective committed employees
ship highlighted the need for additional empirical research that explores have been shown to demonstrate desirable workplace behaviors such as
the emotional underpinnings of the liaison between perceived CSR and reduced absenteeism (Meyer et al., 2002), lesser turnover (Meyer et al.,
employee outcomes, thereby augments our understanding of the socio­ 2002), and ameliorated job performance (Luchak & Gellatly, 2007;
emotional microfoundations of CSR. For instance, Gond and colleagues Meyer & Herscovitch, 2001; Meyer et al., 2002). However, little
(Gond et al., 2017) suggested that “ignoring CSR evaluation processes empirical work has examined the role of affective commitment as a
might limit insights into how people experience CSR, cognitively and mechanism responsible for the relationship between social re­
emotionally, yet these experiences can influence whether and how CSR sponsibility and employee innovative behavior (Akhouri & Chaudhary,
initiatives produce effects.” Likewise, Abdelmotaleb et al. (Abdelmota­ 2019; Mercurio, 2015; Wang, Xu, & Wang, 2020). Employees’ obser­
leb et al., 2018) noted that little attention has been given to affect-based vation about the organization’s genuine involvement in CSR gives them
perspectives for understanding the relation between CSR perceptions confidence in its reliability (Rupp, 2011). From the AET perspective, this

2
P. Pasricha et al. Journal of Business Research 161 (2023) 113809

may strengthen their emotional bond with the organization, which may still nascent and somewhat sparse (Tian & Robertson, 2019). Only
be reflected in their dedication, and loyalty, that is, affective commit­ recently, Tian and Robertson (2019) have substantiated that CSR per­
ment towards it (Rhoades et al., 2001). Individuals affectionately ceptions among highly empathetic employees are more likely to affect
attached to their organization tend to contribute towards achieving the their organizational identification, that is, empathy moderates the
organization’s goals (Mercurio, 2015; Meyer & Allen, 1991; Meyer & relationship between perceived CSR and organizational identification.
Herscovitch, 2001) by investing their resources such as time and effort Extending this line of research further, we propose that CSR perceptions
for the organization’s benefit (Edwards & Kudret, 2017; Kim et al., 2017; among highly empathetic employees (in comparison to their less
Meyer et al., 2002; Riketta, 2002; Solinger et al., 2008), and so are likely empathetic counterparts) are more likely to affect their attitudinal and
to provide more inputs, and utilize their intelligence in solving work behavioral responses.
related issues with an unconventional approach (Ribeiro et al., 2020). In In sum, we propose a comprehensive model (see Fig. 1) that illus­
light of this, we anticipate that affective commitment as a consequence trates how employees’ perceptions of their organization’s CSR influence
of employees’ evaluation of CSR will engender innovative behavior in their innovative behavior through the evocation of emotional responses
them. which manifest in their organizational pride and affective commitment,
In addition to the above mediation mechanisms, we propose and also how these emotional responses are contingent on individual
sequential mediation effect of organizational pride and affective differences in empathy. We test earlier unexplored multiple mediation
commitment on the association of perceived CSR with employee inno­ and moderation effects in a single model, and utilize the affective events
vative behavior. A major rationale being the inconsistency in prior approach as the theoretical rationale for our model. Advocating that the
findings concerning the role of affective commitment as a mediator AET can furnish substantial insights into the socio-emotional aspects of
between perceived CSR and employee outcomes; for example, where the perceived CSR-innovative behavior relationship, we attempt to
various studies found that affective commitment partially or fully enhance prior research on this subject (Abdelmotaleb et al., 2018; Ng
mediated the relationship between perceived CSR and employee out­ et al., 2019), hence make an overarching contribution to the extant
comes (Fu et al., 2014; Lee & Kim, 2013), others found no mediation by literature.
affective commitment (Edwards & Kudret, 2017). To overcome this
inconsistency, including another potential mediator preceding affective 2.1. Understanding the impact of perceived CSR through the lens of
commitment, specifically organizational pride may help given that Affective Events Theory (AET) - a process analysis
Masterson et al. (2017) acknowledged pride as not only a distinct
construct but also a key psychological antecedent to affective Since genesis of the CSR concept in the early 1950s, the desperate
commitment. search for a response to the question: “To what extent does the interest of
Finally, given that the attention accorded to the role of individual business in the long run merge with the interests of society?” (Bowen,
difference variables in the CSR process in micro-CSR studies is quiet 1953, p. 5) has led to a scholarly odyssey across the world. Conse­
meager (despite that the “relationship between CSR and employee quently, it features as a buzzword approached in a plethora of ways (for
outcomes (…) varies as a function of individual (…) factors” (Akhouri & instance: the moral management of stakeholders (shareholders, em­
Chaudhary, 2019, p. 367)) (Zhao et al., 2022), we explore the impact of ployees, customers, and the local community) (Carroll, 1991); the triple
individual differences in empathy on the proposed mediation processes bottom line approach comprised of the economic, social, and environ­
between employees’ perceptions of CSR and innovative behavior. mental imperatives (Aguinis, 2011), and so on…). In general, the
Highly empathetic individuals are those who hold a prosocial orienta­ concept conveys an integration of business policies, decisions and ac­
tion, exhibit an altruistic approach in their conduct with others (Eisen­ tions with social and environmental concerns (Bowen, 1953; Glavas &
berg & Miller, 1987; Eisenberg et al., 1999; Pizarro & Salovey, 2002; Kelley, 2014). Interestingly, this proliferation of approaches towards it is
Verhaert & Van den Poel, 2011), are therefore expected to be more accompanied by an evolution from a focus on the macro (i.e., organi­
concerned about the welfare of others, including stakeholders external zational) level of its analysis to the micro (i.e., individual) level (Glavas,
to the organization, and so react more strongly to their perceptions of 2016a) - with perceived CSR as key to understanding workplace atti­
CSR (Tian & Robertson, 2019). Empirical research on the boundary ef­ tudes, behaviors, and performance. Perceived CSR is commonly under­
fect of empathy on the liaison between CSR and employee outcomes is stood as: “the perception stakeholders of an organization hold of the

Fig. 1. Proposed model.

3
P. Pasricha et al. Journal of Business Research 161 (2023) 113809

impact of a company’s strategies and operating practices on the well- without any qualms express their ideas (Hur et al., 2018) and take
being of all its key stakeholders and the natural environment” (Glavas initiative towards developing novel and valued products and/or services
& Godwin, 2013, p. 17). The micro-CSR research advises that when in their endeavors to respond to customers’ demands. Previous research
studying the impact of CSR on internal stakeholders, that is, the em­ also shows that CSR activities yield increased innovation (Luo & Du,
ployees, their “perceptions of CSR should be preferred over objective 2015; Mahlouji & Anaraki, 2009; Sharma & Vredenburg, 1998; Surroca
CSR (Akremi et al., 2018; Morgeson et al., 2013; Rupp et al., 2013)”(Ng et al., 2010; Wagner, 2010). Second, employees’ perceptions of CSR are
et al., 2019, p. 110). Endorsing this, building on the appraisal theory of accompanied by their awareness of the value systems and behaviors
emotion (Lazarus, 1991; Scherer, Schorr, & Johnstone, 2001), Ng et al. (policies, procedures, and programs) advanced by the organization to
(2019) suggest that since “perceptions affect how one feels and reacts to support its responsible stand. Such policies and programs not only serve
an event more so than the objective reality (e.g., Clarkson et al., 2010), as a reference point for employees to improve their execution of work
adopting a cognitive appraisal perspective to study perceived CSR ap­ from an ethical and pro social standpoint (Valentine & Fleischman,
pears especially suitable”. 2008) but also by way of positive reinforcement provide them oppor­
According to the Affective Events Theory, employees’ appraisal of tunities for innovation. For instance, policies that reward or incentivize
events may result into positive affect based emotions, which may further employees and celebrate their efforts in terms of impactful contributions
lead to positive attitudes and behaviors (Weiss & Cropanzano, 1996). In play a significant role in encouraging them to view problems from varied
this sense, employees’ cognitive appraisals of CSR that hold the key to dimensions, and invest additional effort in finding and implementing
understanding their reactions to it, may lead to positive emotions, and novel solutions with the aim of enhancing the social value of existing
subsequently positive work outcomes. But, the question is: Does simply products and services. Third, in the course of generating and imple­
knowing that the organization’s CSR acts influence employees’ emo­ menting new ideas, employees counter risks and ethical dilemmas; here
tions, which eventually link to their attitudes and behaviors help to the organization’s socially responsible stance that accentuates ethics
fathom in-depth the employees’ emotional experiences of CSR? It does, and autonomy (Hur et al., 2018) plays a pivotal role in encouraging
in an imperative but partial manner. At the core of the AET is the innovative work behavior. Finally, employees’ perceptions of CSR
“appraisal process” that is the “process involved when events elicit prompt increased attachment (Lee et al., 2013), engagement (Glavas,
emotional reactions” (Weiss & Cropanzano, 1996, p. 31). It is during this 2016b; Glavas & Piderit, 2009), organizational commitment (Glavas &
process that the event is evaluated in terms of its importance. Crucially, Kelley, 2014; Mueller et al., 2012), knowledge sharing (Farooq et al.,
this evaluation varies across individuals owing primarily to differences 2014a), and job satisfaction (Barakat et al., 2016; Valentine & Fleisch­
in traits, and correspondingly influences the intensity of the emotional man, 2008), variables known to relate positively to innovative behavior
reaction (Weiss & Cropanzano, 1996). This in turn suggests that a (Battistelli et al., 2019; Choi et al., 2016; Scott & Bruce, 1994; Tang,
thorough understanding of the impact of perceived CSR lies in ascer­ Shao, & Chen, 2019). We therefore hypothesize:
taining how it eventuates in the experience of particular emotions;
which further entails enlightening the original appraisal process. Given H1 Perceived CSR is positively related to employee innovative
that traits (such as empathy) set the stage for individuals to have more or behavior.
less intense bouts of emotion, understanding their role in the perceived
CSR-emotion elicitation process will serve to more fully explicate indi­ 2.3. Perceived CSR, Organizational Pride, Innovative Behavior
vidual differences in employees’ emotional responses to CSR.
Why is this important? If employees’ emotional responses to CSR and Organizational Pride is associated with a sense of affiliation and
subsequently their attitudinal/behavioral outcomes are dependent on identification with the organization (Helm, 2013; Jones, 2010). Lately,
the interplay of their perceptions of the organization’s CSR and their it has been termed as a “distinct emotional experience that goes beyond
own affective dispositions, then ensuring a harmony in individual dis­ simply feeling good”, and involves “employees’ acknowledgement of
positions/traits and the organization’s social responsibility stance would their organization as one that makes a difference as well as a desire to
help maximize employee output/performance. Also resonating past speak highly about the organization to others—all of which reflects
research that defines the role of social responsibility in building better employees’ understanding of their organization as one that creates value
relationships with employees, resulting in positive work attitudes and and/or is socially valued” (Masterson et al., 2017, p. 191). Importantly,
behaviors (Akhouri & Chaudhary, 2019; Glavas, 2016a), such possibility organizational pride is experienced as a result of employees’ perceptions
would augment the use of CSR as a strategic tool for enhancing indi­ of not only the organization’s accomplishments, but also the organiza­
vidual outcomes, such as innovation at the workplace. tion’s leadership, market position, reputation, and work environment
(Carmeli & Tishler, 2004; Helm, 2013; Pierce et al., 1989; Scott & Lane,
2.2. Perceived CSR, Innovative Behavior 2000). Therefore, it surfaces when employees receive cues or informa­
tion that assists them in evaluating their organizational membership
Innovative behavior is defined as “behavior directed towards the from a positive perspective (Ng et al., 2019).
initiation and application (within a work role, group or organization) of Building on the affective events theorization, we reason that em­
new and useful ideas, processes, products or procedures (Farr & Ford, ployees’ favorable perceptions of their organization’s socially respon­
1990)” (De Jong & Den Hartog, 2007). It involves giving consideration sible behavior elicit in them the experience of organizational pride
to the changing trends/needs of people, identifying issues in the existing which in turn influences their innovative behavior. An organization’s
working methods, and suggesting novel solutions to cope with the issues CSR involvement enhances its prestige (Skudiene & Auruskeviciene,
(De Jong & Den Hartog, 2007). In consonance with prior research that 2012), thereby fulfills employees’ need for self-distinctiveness and raises
posits that favorable CSR perceptions bring along a variety of positive their self-esteem, fostering in them sound feelings about themselves and
employee behaviors (Archimi et al., 2018; Hansen et al., 2011), we their organization. Employees with favorable perceptions of their or­
argue that employees’ perceptions of CSR would be instrumental in ganization’s CSR characterize their organization as one with a fair
eliciting their innovative behavior at the workplace. First, in organiza­ management philosophy (Jones et al., 2016; Rupp et al., 2013; Thornton
tions with high levels of CSR, emphasis is laid on the maintenance of & Rupp, 2016). They view their organization as highly competent and
cordial relationships with diverse stakeholders (Du et al., 2007, 2011; dedicated towards utilizing its resources for serving the interests of
Sharma & Vredenburg, 1998; Sen et al., 2006), and members are stakeholders (Barnett, 2007; Godfrey, Merrill, & Hansen, 2009), subse­
encouraged to collaborate with customers and satisfy their varied de­ quently perceived CSR acts as a source of optimism for employees
mands (Luo & Bhattacharya, 2006; Sharma & Vredenburg, 1998). Such concerning their association with it. Likewise, a few recent studies as
encouragement creates a fear free atmosphere; subsequently employees well suggest that employees’ favorable perceptions of CSR develop in

4
P. Pasricha et al. Journal of Business Research 161 (2023) 113809

them a sense of identification, which is manifested through their the call of duty to help co-workers and realize organizational objectives,
heightened pride in being related to the organization (Lythreatis et al., creativity and innovation are likely to be visible (Kesen, 2016; Moon
2019; Ng et al., 2019; Shahzadi et al., 2020). et al., 2004; Yan & Yan, 2013). Also creativity, the “foundation of
Existing research on the organizational pride emotion shows that it innovation ideas” (Van de Ven, 1986, p. 592), has been shown to be a
directs employees’ efforts towards organization’s goals since they clas­ concomitant of affective commitment (Semedo et al., 2016).
sify themselves with the organization; consequently, it regulates their All in all, it is reasonable to expect that affective commitment
behaviors (Hogg et al., 1995). In this sense, employees’ identity as being effectuating from employees’ perceived CSR will prompt innovative
a part of a prosocial organization will encourage them to work towards behavior on their part. Therefore, we hypothesize:
being a participatory towards building and sustaining its socially
responsible stance (Ellemers et al., 2004). Subsequently, employees will H3 Affective commitment mediates the relationship between
look for and implement alternatives aimed at satisfying customers who perceived CSR and employee innovative behavior.
are the organization’s key stakeholders. Thus, pride will advance
customer oriented initiatives on the part of employees. Also, pride 2.5. Organizational pride and affective commitment as sequential
widens employees’ thought-action repertoires, boosts their receptivity mediators between perceived CSR and employee innovative behavior
of novel information, and broadens their horizon of knowledge (Fre­
drickson, 2001); this causes proud employees to put in added efforts to Beyond the above mediation effects, we predict that organizational
satisfy the organization’s customers (Arnett et al., 2002), thus enhances pride and affective commitment will serially mediate the perceived CSR-
their commitment to customer service (Gouthier & Rhein, 2011). High innovative behavior relationship. According to the AET, positive affective
level of commitment to customer service is related to increased events facilitate certain stimuli that evoke specific positive emotions,
employee innovation (Im & Workman, 2004; Lukas & Ferrell, 2000). leading to constructive behaviors, such as performance and creativity
Besides, available empirical evidence as well claims that positive emo­ (Weiss & Cropanzano, 1996; Abdelmotaleb et al., 2018). The immediate
tions are closely related to innovative behavior (Slåtten, 2011; Slåtten & reactions of such stimuli will be highly emotional in nature and studies
Mehmetoglu, 2011). have therefore drawn a positive effect of perceived CSR on organiza­
Taken together, we suggest that employees’ perceptions of CSR are tional pride (Edwards & Kudret, 2017). Further, prior research has
related to their innovative behavior through the mediation of organi­ established that pride sufficiently stimulates emotional attachment to­
zational pride. Empirical studies have substantiated the mediating role wards the organizations and their leaders (Boezeman & Ellemers, 2008;
of organizational pride in the relationship between employees’ social Brosi, Spörrle, & Welpe, 2018; Brunetto & Farr-Wharton, 2003; Chan &
responsibility perceptions and various behaviors beneficial to the or­ Mak, 2014; Nadeeshani & Nishanthi, 2020). Organizational pride, a
ganization (Im & Chung, 2018; Oo et al., 2018). Therefore, we derivative of positive evaluation about the organization, determines
hypothesize: emotional attachment and further, enhances behaviors that benefit the
individuals as well as the organizations (Boezeman & Ellemers, 2008).
H2 Organizational pride mediates the relationship between Therefore, individuals who perceive that their organization has strong
perceived CSR and employee innovative behavior. CSR, will experience a feeling of pride associated with the organization,
and they may further feel obliged to be responsible for the organiza­
2.4. Perceived CSR, Affective Commitment, Innovative Behavior tional health, which may facilitate affective commitment. This, in turn,
may reflect in their creative and innovative behaviors at workplace.
In essence, affective commitment is a reflection of employees’ posi­ Also, the extant CSR scholarship posits that employees’ appraisal of CSR
tive sentimental bond with their organization. The present study posi­ may evoke serially connected responses, where perceived CSR relates to
tions affective commitment as a mediator in the association of emotions, which relate to job attitudes that in turn culminate in diverse
employees’ perceptions of CSR with their innovative behavior. In job behaviors (Shin, Hur, & Kang, 2016; Abdelmotaleb et al., 2018; Ng
accordance with the AET, research argues that an employer’s benevolent et al., 2019). Therefore, we hypothesize:
acts can invoke affect based reactions in employees (Abdelmotaleb et al.,
2018). From this perspective, an organization’s concern for the well H4 Organizational pride and affective commitment sequentially
being of its stakeholders (both internal as well external) should mediate the relationship between perceived CSR and employee
strengthen employees’ emotional connect with it. Active pursuit of CSR innovative behavior.
is suggestive of the organization’s commitment to serve its employees; in
addition, mirrors the organization’s noble approach towards the 2.6. Empathy as moderator
respectful treatment of its employees (Archimi et al., 2018; Rupp, 2011).
Employees’ favorable inferences about CSR are therefore, indicative of As a distinctively human attribute (Selman, 1980), empathy is
their belief that the organization is supportive of their interests, provides comprised of cognitive and emotional aspects (Duan & Hill, 1996),
them safety, and empowers them (Glavas & Kelley, 2014). The organi­ where the cognitive aspect denotes one’s ability “to imagine how the
zation’s such dignified conduct towards employees is expected to person in need is affected by his or her situation” (Batson & Shaw, 1991,
stimulate their emotional attachment with the organization. In addition, p. 112), while the emotional aspect denotes an “other oriented
prior research notes that “if an employee perceives that his or her or­ emotional response elicited by and congruent with the perceived welfare
ganization behaves in a highly socially responsible manner—even to­ of someone in need” (Batson, 2008, p. 8). Individuals high on empathy
ward those outside and apart from the organization, he or she will likely are profoundly concerned for the wellbeing of others (Batson, 1990).
have positive attitudes about the company and work more productively They are better able to evaluate the adverse effects of an organization’s
on its behalf” (Hansen et al., 2011, p. 31). Employees’ perceptions about irresponsible decisions and actions, and exhibit more sensitivity to the
CSR also nurture a climate of meaningfulness (one infused with a sense organization’s CSR. So, perceptions about their organization being so­
of purpose), which is likely to enhance employees’ affective commit­ cially responsible are likely to foster favorable emotional reactions in
ment to the organization (Glavas & Kelley, 2014). them. Also, empathetic individuals generally hold pro-social values.
Besides, affectively committed employees exhibit active involvement Their favorable perceptions of CSR capture the congruence in their own
in organizational pursuits (Mowday, Porter, & Steers, 1982), positive and the organization’s values. As per the AET, such value congruence
behaviors such as assisting colleagues, and sharing information,(Sol­ occurring in the event-emotion elicitation process is likely to result into
inger et al., 2008), and also the discretionary organizational citizenship more intense emotional reactions (Kuppens & Tong, 2010; Weiss &
(Liu, 2009; Meyer et al., 2002). Importantly, when employees go beyond Cropanzano, 1996). Further, given that highly empathetic employees

5
P. Pasricha et al. Journal of Business Research 161 (2023) 113809

are better able to relate to others, in consonance with the empathy­ commitment, ultimately leading to constructive innovative behaviors.
–altruism hypothesis (whereby empathy motivates behavior intended to
help those in need (Batson, 2010)) they look for ways they can H7 Empathy moderates the indirect effect of perceived CSR on
contribute to mitigating others’ sufferings. When they perceive their employee innovative behavior through organizational pride and af­
organization as socially responsible, this satisfies their psychological fective commitment, such that the impact of perceived CSR on
need of being a contributory to doing good, hence is highly likely to innovative behavior through organizational pride and affective
accrue in them greater organizational pride. That is to say, empathy will commitment is stronger when employees hold high levels of
impact the extent to which they will experience organizational pride as a empathy.
result of CSR perceptions. Employees with high levels of empathy will
experience more pride in their membership of a socially responsible Fig. 1 shows the above developed hypotheses.
organization. Since employees low on empathy lack the ability to take
others’ perspective, CSR perceptions will not influence their organiza­ 3. Methodology
tional pride; herein the relationship between CSR perceptions and
organizational pride is expected to be weak. We thus posit that the 3.1. Sample
strength of the relationship between perceived CSR and organizational
pride is contingent on individual differences in empathy. For the purpose of the current study, organizations constituting the
energy sector (specifically those dealing in renewable energy) of the
H5 Empathy moderates the indirect effect of perceived CSR on Indian multi-sectoral industrial landscape were selected. Lately, this
employee innovative behavior through organizational pride, such sector has surfaced as the highest scorer as well as spender on CSR ini­
that the impact of perceived CSR on innovative behavior through tiatives in India (ETEnergyWorld, 2019; IiAS: COVID Relief and Vacci­
organizational pride is stronger when employees hold high levels of nations Set to Dominate CSR Spends This Year, 2020; Majmudar et al.,
empathy. 2015, 2018). With the aim of catering to the pressing societal needs,
organizations in this sector are undertaking miscellaneous responsible
Previous research has consistently emphasized the role of empathy in business activities; focusing on areas such as hunger, sanitation, health
accentuating positive affect and commitment (Zaki, 2020; Aw, Ilies, & care, poverty, education, rural development, and also environmental
De Pater, 2020). For instance, research in general has demonstrated that sustainability for instance rain-water harvesting, energy conservation,
higher levels of empathy improve the relationship between perceived soil quality improvement, greening etc (GN Bureau, 2015); Notably,
morality of an organization and affective commitment of the stake­ these organizations are acknowledged as key contributors to sustainable
holders such as consumers (Markovic et al., 2018). Empathy reflects development owing to the integration of their responsible business ac­
mutual understanding between two actors (Kenny & Albright, 1987) and tions with the Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs) (Majmudar et al.,
such positive energy helps individuals to better understand the positive 2018).
values on the organizational CSR activities through cognitive and In particular, organizations dealing in renewable energy were ear­
emotional lens. Further, it motivates individuals to form positive affect marked as the study context since the renewable energy space in the
(Daniels, Glover, & Mellor, 2014). Also, empathy is a relevant factor in country is reported to have immense growth potential as the demand for
enhancing affective bonding such as loyalty, commitment and affinity non-conventional sources is likely to outweigh that for the conventional
(Holt & Marques, 2012; Bahadur et al., 2020). Considering the previous ones in the near future. As of now, India ranks third on the Ernst &
research works that illustrated how organizational empathy can Young Renewable Energy Country Attractive Index 2021 (EY India,
enhance the affective commitment (Hobson et al., 2004), this study 2021), and third in terms of renewable energy investments 2020 as per
brings another dimension by proposing that individual empathy may the British Business Energy (Gupta, 2020; Top 10 Biggest Energy
help them to positively perceive the CSR activities, which may further Economies By Revenue, GDP & Jobs, 2020). Importantly, in its en­
enhance affective commitment and ultimately, facilitate innovative deavors to achieve the targeted renewable energy capacity by 2027, the
outcomes. Government of India is putting in place policies, and taking initiatives to
forefront research centered on the sector (Renewable Energy Industry in
H6 Empathy moderates the indirect effect of perceived CSR on India: Overview, Market Size & Growth | IBEF, 2021).
employee innovative behavior through affective commitment, such For collecting the study data, survey packets (each comprised of a
that the impact of perceived CSR on innovative behavior through cover letter and a questionnaire) were administered to employees in
affective commitment is stronger when employees hold high levels of seven renewable energy majors (prominent for their CSR activities),
empathy. which we were able to reach using personal and professional contacts.
The cover letter abiding by ethical considerations for conduct of
Empathetic people are more likely to appreciate the CSR activities of research, communicated the purpose of the study and the oath of
the organization. Interestingly, organizational pride is a form of positive confidentiality, and requested voluntary participation. We employed a
emotions and pleasure while seeking affiliation with the organization three-wave research design with a time lag of four weeks between the
(Ng et al., 2019). Therefore, organizational pride is increased when in­ waves. We measured perceived CSR through self-reports at Time 1. At
dividuals believe that their firm is performing better than the other firms Time 2, we measured organizational pride and affective commitment
(CSR, in this case) (Tsachouridi & Nikandrou, 2016). Since such beliefs also through self-reports. Finally, at Time 3, we measured empathy
are generally highlighted among the empathetic individuals, it is more through self-reports and innovative behavior through peer reports. We
likely that positive perceptions of CSR activities enhance organizational utilized peer-rated assessments of employees’ innovative behavior since
pride especially among the empathetic individuals (Raza et al., 2021). in consonance with prior research peers on account of their daily in­
Further, these pleasurable emotions and affinity derived from organi­ teractions likely possess good knowledge about one another’s behavior,
zational pride play a significant role in enhancing affective commitment and therefore are well positioned to evaluate a coworker’s engagement
(Mende & Bolton, 2011; Iglesias, Markovic, & Rialp, 2019), leading to in innovative pursuits, particularly in collectivist cultures (De Clercq,
constructive work behaviors such as innovative behaviors (Ng, Feldman, Fatima, & Jahanzeb, 2021; Raja & Johns, 2010). The peers were
& Lam, 2010) and creativity (Pasumarti, Kumar, & Singh, 2022). Given randomly selected and it was made sure that they had worked with the
these pieces of evidence, this study proposes that highly empathetic focal employees for at least six months. Each peer rated two or fewer
individuals are more likely to positively evaluate the CSR activities, employees to avoid nesting of data (De Clercq et al., 2021; Naseer et al.,
which significantly improves organizational pride and affective 2016).

6
P. Pasricha et al. Journal of Business Research 161 (2023) 113809

At Time 1, a total of 510 questionnaires were distributed. 431 re­ Table 1

sponses were received; out of these 29 were discarded since they Item factor loadings and reliability of the study constructs.
belonged to employees with less than an year’s experience in the current No. Construct and items Factor Cronbach’s
organization (it was considered they lacked the much needed familiarity Loading α
with the organization’s CSR). At Time 2, the first wave respondents were Perceived CSR 0.940
sent the second part of the questionnaire. 351 completed responses were 1 Contributing to the well-being of employees is 0.82
received. At Time 3, the second wave respondents and their peers were a high priority at my organization.
administered the remaining part of the questionnaire. We received 302 2 Contributing to the well-being of customers is 0.88
a high priority at my organization.
self reports and usable peer-reports for 270 respondents, yielding a 3 Contributing to the well-being of suppliers is a 0.92
52.94 % response rate (which is quite desirable considering the multi- high priority at my organization.
wave, multi-source study design). The respondents were 204 males 4 Contributing to the well-being of the 0.93
and 66 females; their mean age was 32.17 years; and their mean tenure community is a high priority at my
organization.
was 4.37 years. This collection of data from multiple sources and across
5 Environmental issues are integral to the 0.84
multiple waves helped us reduce concerns about social desirability and strategy of my organization.
the Common Method Variance (CMV) issue (Podsakoff, MacKenzie, & 6 Addressing environmental issues is integral to 0.78
Podsakoff, 2012), and draw inferences from the results by minimizing the daily operations of my organization.
the probable apprehension surrounding temporal causality in cross- 7 My organization achieves its short-term goals 0.70
while staying focused on its impact on the
sectional studies. environment.
Organizational Pride 0.926
3.2. Measures 1 I am proud to be part of my organization. 0.85
2 I am proud to tell others that I work for this 0.90
organization.
Standard scales from previous studies were utilized to measure the
3 I am proud to identify myself personally with 0.87
constructs (see Table 1), and a 5-point Likert scale ranging from 1 = this organization.
strongly disagree to 5 = strongly agree was utilized as the response format. 4 I am proud when others associate me with this 0.85
Perceived CSR was measured using Glavas and Kelley’s (2014) eight- organization.
item instrument, the Perceived Corporate Social Responsibility (PCSR) Affective Commitment 0.937
1 I would be very happy to spend the rest of my 0.77
Scale. Since one of the eight items exhibited loading < 0.5 (Hair et al., career with this organization.
2010), we took up the remaining seven items to measure the construct. 2 I enjoy discussing my organization with 0.88
We measured Organizational Pride using the four-item scale, with items people outside it.
developed by Cable and Turban (2003) and Helm (2013). We measured 3 I really feel as if this organization’s problems 0.82
are my own.
Affective Commitment based on eight items from the affective compo­
4 I think that I could easily become as attached 0.88
nent of the organizational commitment scale developed by Allen and to another organization as I am to this one. (R)
Meyer (1990). However, since one of these eight items reached loading 5 I do not feel “emotionally attached” to this 0.83
< 0.5 (Hair et al., 2010), we utilized the remaining seven items. For organization. (R)
measuring Innovative Behavior, we employed the ten-item scale pro­ 6 This organization has a great deal of personal 0.79
meaning for me.
vided by De Jong and Den Hartog (2010). Empathy was measured using 7 I do not feel a strong sense of “belonging” to 0.82
the ten-item instrument provided by Dietz and Kleinlogel (2014). my organization. (R)
Further, we controlled for gender (1 = male, 2 = female), age (in Empathy 0.884
years), and tenure in the current organization (in years) following prior 1 I sometimes find it difficult to see things from 0.72
the ‘‘other guy’s’’ perspective. (R)
research that demonstrates their potential impact on employee inno­
2 I sometimes try to understand my friends 0.88
vative behavior (Mumford et al., 2002). better by imagining how things look from
their perspective.
3.3. Empirical analysis 3 When I’m upset at someone, I usually try to 0.80
‘‘put myself in his shoes’’ for a while.
4 Before criticizing somebody, I try to imagine 0.87
SPSS 24 and AMOS were utilized for data analysis. Exploratory how I would feel if I were in their place.
Factor Analysis on the data indicated a satisfactory Kaiser-Meyer-Olkin 5 I often have tender, concerned feelings for 0.77
measure of sampling adequacy (0.916), and a significant Bartlett’s Test people less fortunate than me.
of Sphericity (p < 0.001). Principal Component Analysis with varimax 6 Sometimes I don’t feel very sorry for other 0.78
people when they are having problems. (R)
rotation provided: five components (with Eigen values > 1, and items
7 When I see someone being taken advantage of, 0.64
having factor loading > 0.5), and cumulative variance = 65.180 % (Hair I feel kind of protective toward them.
et al., 2010). For subsequent analysis, Structural Equation Modeling 8 Other people’s misfortunes do not usually 0.71
(SEM) consisting of the measurement and structural models’ evaluation disturb me a great deal. (R)
(Anderson & Gerbing, 1988) was employed. 9 When I see someone being treated unfairly, I 0.80
sometimes don’t feel very much pity for them.
(R)
3.4. Measurement model evaluation 10 I am often quite touched by things I see 0.82
happen.
Table 2 presents the means, standard deviations, and correlations Innovative Behavior (This person) 0.910
1 pays attention to issues that are not part of his 0.70
among the study constructs.
daily work.
Confirmatory Factor Analysis (CFA) on the data showed that the fit 2 wonders how things can be improved. 0.66
indices of the overall measurement model (comprised of all constructs) 3 searches out new working methods, 0.71
were in consonance with the goodness of fit norms (χ2/df = 2.133 techniques or instruments.
(≤3.00 as in Bagozzi & Yi, 1988; Chau & Hu, 2001; Hair et al., 2010), 4 generates original solutions for problems. 0.74
5 finds new approaches to execute tasks. 0.83
GFI = 0.873 (≥0.80 or close to 0.9 as in Bagozzi & Yi, 1988; Pasricha, 6 makes important organizational members 0.74
Singh, & Verma., 2018), AGFI = 0.752 (≥0.75 or close to 0.8 as in Chau enthusiastic for innovative ideas.
& Hu, 2001; Pasricha et al., 2018), RMSEA = 0.065 (≤0.08 as in Hair (continued on next page)
et al., 2010; Hu & Bentler, 1999), NFI = 0.836 (≥0.80 as in Bentler &

7
P. Pasricha et al. Journal of Business Research 161 (2023) 113809

Table 1 (continued ) Since the indirect effect of perceived CSR on innovative behavior
No. Construct and items Factor Cronbach’s through organizational pride was sufficient and statistically significant,
Loading α H2 was supported, however, the mediation was partial (β = 0.567, p <
7 attempts to convince people to support an 0.71
0.05; see Table 4). Next, hypothesis H3 stated that affective commitment
innovative idea. mediated the relationship between perceived CSR and employee inno­
8 systematically introduces innovative ideas 0.75 vative behavior. Since the indirect effect of perceived CSR on innovative
into work practices. behavior through affective commitment was sufficient and statistically
9 contributes to the implementation of new 0.71
significant, H3 was supported, however, the mediation was partial (β =
ideas.
10 puts effort in the development of new things. 0.74 0.468, p < 0.05; see Table 5). Then, hypothesis H4 concerning
sequential mediation of organizational pride and affective commitment
Note: (R) = reverse-worded. For all items, 1 = strongly disagree, 5 = strongly
in the relationship between perceived CSR and employee innovative
agree.
behavior was examined (see Table 6). The indirect effect from perceived
CSR to employee innovative behavior through organizational pride and
Bonett, 1980; Pasricha et al., 2018), CFI = 0.905 (≥0.90 as in Chau & affective commitment was found to be statistically significant (β =
Hu, 2001; Hair et al., 2010)), indicating that the model fitted well with 0.458, p < 0.05). Notably, when we controlled for the sequential me­
the data. Further, the reliability of the constructs was established (see diators, the relationship of perceived CSR with innovative behavior was
Table 1 and Table 3) since: the factor loading of each of the items under no more statistically significant (β = 0.100, p > 0.05), suggesting that
the constructs was > 0.5 and statistically significant, and also the organizational pride and affective commitment sequentially and fully
Cronbach’s alpha (C-α) and the Composite Reliability (CR) of each mediated the relationship between perceived CSR and employee inno­
construct were ≥ 0.7 (Hair et al., 2010). Pertaining to validity assess­ vative behavior. Thus, H4 was supported with a full sequential media­
ment (see Table 3), the convergent validity of the constructs was tion. Finally, PROCESS macro (Hayes, 2013) was used to assess the
established since: the factor loading of each of the items under the moderated meditational effects. The results of the moderating effect of
constructs, and the reliability values of the constructs were in accor­ empathy on the serial mediation revealed that CSR perceptions among
dance with suggested statistical standards (as mentioned above in the highly empathetic employees are more likely to affect their organiza­
reliability assessment), also the Average Variance Extracted (AVE) of tional pride, and subsequently, affective commitment and innovative
each construct was > 0.5 and < its CR (see Table 3) (Hair et al., 2010). In behavior (H7). The conditional indirect impact of perceived CSR on
addition, as shown in Table 3, it was found that the square root of AVE innovative work behavior via organizational pride and affective
for each construct was greater than the correlation coefficient with other commitment at varied degrees of empathy (1 SD (Standard Deviation)
constructs; Further, Maximum Shared Variance was < AVE for each below the mean, at the mean, and 1 SD above the mean) was examined.
construct (Hair et al., 2010), thus, the discriminant validity of the con­ As shown in Table 6, the conditional indirect effect was significant at all
structs was established. three levels of empathy (at low level = 0.06, CI: 0.02, 0.12; at mean =
0.07, CI: 0.03, 0.13; at high level = 0.10, CI: 0.04, 0.15) as the confi­
3.5. Structural model evaluation dence bands do not include 0 (Preacher, Rucker, & Hayes, 2007). Hy­
pothesis H7 was thus supported (see Fig. 2 for the conditional indirect
Path analysis was employed for assessment of the structural model. effect plot). However, as shown in Table 4, the mediating effect of
Tables 4–6 elaborate the SEM results. Perceived CSR was found to be organizational pride on the relation between perceived CSR and inno­
positively related to employee innovative behavior, and the relationship vative behaviour was insignificant at all levels of the moderator (at low
was statistically significant (β = 0.588, p < 0.05), i.e., H1 was supported. level = 0.054, CI: − 0.022, 0.320; at mean = 0.046, CI: − 0.134, 0.477; at
Next, hypothesis H2 stated that organizational pride mediated the high level = 0.087, CI: − 0.210, 0.400) as 0 straddles between lower and
relationship between perceived CSR and employee innovative behavior. upper confidence intervals. Similarly, as shown in Table 5, the

Table 2
Means, standard deviations, and correlations.
n = 270 Mean Std. Dev Correlation between constructs

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8

1.Gender 1.24 0.434 1

2.Tenure 4.37 2.002 -0.088 1
3. Age 32.17 2.250 -0.205** 0.529** 1
4. Perceived CSR 4.02 0.617 -0.108 -0.029 0.011 1
5. Innovative Behavior 3.83 0.539 0.022 0.039 0.037 0.588** 1
6. Organizational Pride 2.24 0.802 -0.141* -0.037 0.045 0.267** 0.230** 1
7. Affective Commitment 3.54 0.765 -0.083 -0.088 0.026 0.471** 0.476** 0.230** 1
8. Empathy 2.87 0.655 -0.045 -0.031 0.022 0.366** 0.394** 0.427** 0.515** 1

Note: **. Correlation is significant at the 0.01 level (2-tailed).

*. Correlation is significant at the 0.05 level (2-tailed).

Table 3
Validity analysis results.
CR AVE MSV Max R (H) 1 2 3 4 5

1. Perceived CSR 0.942 0.702 0.410 0.955 0.838y

2. Organizational Pride 0.910 0.503 0.410 0.912 0.640 0.709y
3. Affective Commitment 0.912 0.599 0.309 0.921 0.364 0.434 0.774y
4. Empathy 0.939 0.688 0.309 0.943 0.497 0.510 0.556 0.829y
5. Innovative Behavior 0.928 0.764 0.155 0.931 0.278 0.253 0.394 0.247 0.874y

Note: CR is Composite Reliability; AVE is Average Variance Extracted; MSV is Maximum Shared Variance; MaxR(H) = Maximum Reliability(H); † = square root of AVE
and the non-diagonal values denote the correlation between the constructs.

8
P. Pasricha et al. Journal of Business Research 161 (2023) 113809

Table 4 Table 6
Organizational Pride as mediator. Organizational Pride and Affective Commitment as sequential mediators.
Direct Effect Direct Effect

Predictor Effect(after Boot SE Boot Boot Predictor Effect(after Boot Boot Boot
including LLCI ULCI including SE LLCI ULCI
mediator) mediator)

Perceived CSR 0.588 (0.547) 0.021 0.378 0.655 Perceived CSR 0.588 (0.100) 0.018 0.302 0.635
(0.11) (0.309) (0.655) (0.11) (-0.133) (0.210)

Unconditional indirect effects Unconditional indirect effects

Predictor Effect on Boot SE Boot Boot Predictor Effect on Boot Boot Boot
Innovative LLCI ULCI Innovative SE LLCI ULCI
Behavior Behavior

Perceived CSR - 0.567 0.012 0.235 0.660 Perceived CSR → 0.458 0.011 0.125 0.517
Organizational Pride- Organizational Pride →
Innovative Behavior Affective Commitment →
Innovative Behavior
Conditional indirect effects: Empathy as moderator
Conditional indirect effects: Empathy as moderator
Predictor Levels of Effect Boot Boot
moderator LLCI ULCI Predictor Levels of Effect Boot Boot
moderator LLCI ULCI
Perceived CSR - − 1 SD 0.054 − 0.022 0.320
Organizational Pride- M 0.046 − 0.134 0.477 Perceived CSR → − 1 SD 0.06 0.02 0.12
Innovative Behavior +1 SD 0.087 − 0.210 0.400 Organizational Pride → M 0.07 0.03 0.13
Affective Commitment → +1 SD 0.10 0.04 0.15
Note: Bootstrap sample = 5000; SD is Standard Deviation; M is Mean; SE is Innovative Behavior
standard error; LL is lower limit and UL is upper limit of the 95 % confidence
interval. Note: Bootstrap sample = 5000; SD is Standard Deviation; M is Mean; SE is
The results reflect partial mediation as the direct effect before and after standard error; LL is lower limit and UL is upper limit of the 95 % confidence
including the mediator (0.588 and 0.547 respectively) are significant. As dis­ interval.
played in Table, the confidence intervals revealed insignificant conditional in­ The results reflect full mediation as the direct effect after including the mediator
direct effect of Perceived CSR on Innovative Behavior through Organizational becomes insignificant (0.100, confidence intervals including 0). As displayed in
Pride at all levels of the moderator. Table, the confidence intervals revealed significant conditional indirect effects
of Perceived CSR on Innovative Behavior through sequential mediators at all
levels, higher especially at higher levels of moderator.
Table 5
Affective commitment as mediator.
Direct Effect

Predictor Effect(after Boot SE Boot Boot

including LLCI ULCI
mediator)

Perceived CSR 0.588 (0.467) 0.008 0.312 0.535

(0.11) (0.133) (0.500)

Unconditional indirect effects

Predictor Effect on Boot SE Boot Boot

Innovative LLCI ULCI
Behavior

Perceived CSR → Affective 0.468 0.021 0.225 0.510

Commitment →
Innovative Behavior

Conditional indirect effects: Empathy as moderator

Predictor Levels of Effect Boot Boot

moderator LLCI ULCI

Perceived CSR → Affective − 1 SD 0.013 − 0.013 0.220

Commitment → M 0.017 − 0.102 0.177
Innovative Behavior +1 SD 0.009 − 0.150 0.210 Fig. 2. Analysis of moderating effect.
Note: Bootstrap sample = 5000; SD is Standard Deviation; M is Mean; SE is that both organizational pride and affective commitment are essential
standard error; LL is lower limit and UL is upper limit of the 95 % confidence
for empathetic individuals to build innovative behavior by placing sig­
interval.
nificant positive perceptions about CSR activities. This specific finding
The results reflect partial mediation as the direct effect before and after
including the mediator (0.588 and 0.467 respectively) are significant. As dis­
extends and enhances the existing understanding of the connection be­
played in Table, the confidence intervals revealed insignificant conditional in­ tween empathy, CSR, individual affective states and productive work
direct effects of Perceived CSR on Innovative Behavior through Affective behaviors.
commitment at all levels of the moderator.
4. Discussion
mediating effect of affective commitment on the relation between
perceived CSR and innovative behaviour was also insignificant at all Though perceived CSR has been linked to employee creativity in
levels of the moderator (at low level = 0.013, CI: − 0.013, 0.220; at prior studies, its effect on explicitly the innovative behavior of em­
mean = 0.017, CI: − 0.102, 0.177; at high level = 0.009, CI: − 0.150, ployees has remained underexplored. The current study offers a
0.210). These results don’t confer with H5 and H6. This clearly displays framework that provides crucial insights into the impact of perceived

9
P. Pasricha et al. Journal of Business Research 161 (2023) 113809

CSR on employees’ innovative behavior, by substantiating not only the lucid words, empathetic employees show greater sensitivity to the so­
direct relationship between the two, but also the impact of mediators cially responsible acts of the organization, hence their favorable CSR
and a boundary condition on this relationship. The study findings show perceptions evoke emotional response which reflects in enhanced
that: perceived CSR is positively related to employee innovative organizational pride and stronger affective commitment, ultimately
behavior; organizational pride mediates the relationship between leading to increased innovative behavior. The study thus tenders
perceived CSR and innovative behavior, also affective commitment empirical evidence that individual differences in empathy are respon­
mediates the relationship between perceived CSR and innovative sible for variations in the way CSR perceptions influence innovative
behavior - however, the mediation by each is a partial one; interestingly, behavior, and offers a subtle approach towards understanding the nu­
organizational pride and affective commitment sequentially mediate the ances of the association of perceived CSR with employees’ innovative
relationship between perceived CSR and employee innovative behavior, behavior, thereby makes a significant contribution to the literature on
and that’s a full mediation; beyond these mediation mechanisms, the empathy in addition to that on CSR and innovative behavior.
study evinces that empathy moderates the indirect effect of perceived
CSR on employee innovative behavior, such that the impact of perceived 5. Managerial implications
CSR on innovative behavior through organizational pride and affective
commitment is stronger when employees hold high levels of empathy. In its endeavour to enhance understanding of the relatedness be­
These findings are distinctive and significant in that by the confluence of tween employees’ CSR perceptions and innovative behavior, the study
three key socio-emotional domain variables (organizational pride, af­ proffers several significant implications for practitioners in look out for
fective commitment, and empathy) with the domains of CSR and ways to enhance employee innovation at the workplace. In coherence
employee innovation, they offer a fine-grained understanding of the with the findings, practitioners are advised to invest in CSR, enrich the
emotional underpinnings of the liaison between employees’ CSR per­ gamut of their CSR activities, and leverage their CSR portfolio to boost
ceptions and innovative behavior. To the authors’ knowledge, this is the productive behaviors in employees (Abdelmotaleb et al., 2018).
first study to unlock the socio-emotional black box underlying the Particularly, recent developments in the business sphere highlight
perceived CSR-innovative behavior relationship, and claim that the strong linkages between CSR and employee innovation. In her book,
emotional response of employees to CSR can be so cardinal as to elicit Indira Nooyi, former Chairman and CEO of PepsiCo, and the pioneer of
innovation on their part. the “Performance with Purpose” (PwP) initiative, notes that PwP with its
The finding pertaining to the positive relationship of perceived CSR imperatives Nourish, Replenish, Cherish transformed PepsiCo, served as
with employee innovative behavior is consistent with prior research that the guiding principle aiding the organization in becoming a major
relates employees’ CSR perceptions with creative outcomes on the part contributor to confronting the world’s health and environmental chal­
of employees (Hur et al., 2018), and reiterates the importance of micro lenges, and helped drive innovation in the organization like never before
level CSR research in understanding employee behavior. (Nooyi, 2021, p. 256). Likewise, research across industries and in
The findings indicating that organizational pride and affective various contexts has consistently conveyed the crux that good corporate
commitment, each partially mediate the relationship between perceived citizenship can consolidate the employer-employee relationship and
CSR and innovative behavior provide support for the affective events fetch enhanced employee outcomes (for instance, (a) in the Indian
theory (Weiss & Cropanzano, 1996). They are in line with the notion context: in information technology firms - commitment (Dhanesh,
that employees’ appraisal of the organization’s behavior as reflected in 2014), engagement and creativity (Chaudhary & Akhouri, 2019); in
its policies and practices influences their emotions in relation to the manufacturing firms - engagement and citizenship behavior (Man­
organization, such that they respond with behaviors beneficial to it imegalai & Baral, 2018), (b) in the Pakistani context – in manufacturing
(Abdelmotaleb et al., 2018; Ng et al., 2019). Here, it is also noteworthy, companies – organizational identification and commitment (Farooq
that these findings demonstrate that organizational pride and affective et al., 2014b), (c) in the South Korean context: in hotel industry –
commitment play an explanatory role in understanding employee be­ creativity and job performance (Hur et al., 2018; Hur, Moon, & Choi,
haviors in micro-CSR research, where past research has largely 2021)). Underlining this core idea through a conceptual framework and
approached these as outcome variables of perceived CSR. Thus, the subsequent empirical investigation from a unique industry context, as
study expands the scope of applicability of and also contributes to the the present study substantiates that employees’ favourable perceptions
literatures on these variables. of CSR hold great pertinence for eliciting innovative behavior, practi­
The finding demonstrating that perceived CSR leads to organiza­ tioners are suggested to put in added efforts at uplifting the organiza­
tional pride, which leads to affective commitment, which in turn leads to tion’s CSR performance. The AET backed and empirically corroborated
innovative behavior, is a major contribution of this study. It endorses the relationships between perceived CSR, organizational pride, affective
suggestion made by CSR scholars (Abdelmotaleb et al., 2018; Ng et al., commitment, and innovative behavior demonstrate that the way em­
2019) concerning the instrumentality of understanding intra psychic ployees comprehend their organization’s socially responsible behavior -
emotional reactions when dwelling into the effects of perceived CSR on will shape their socio-emotional responses in terms of pride and/or
employee behavior. By evincing organizational pride and affective commitment - which will further contribute to their engaging innova­
commitment as sequential mediators fully mediating the relationship tively at work. Crucially, the sequential mediation relationship will be
between perceived CSR and innovative behavior, the study argues that salient in employees with higher levels of empathy. As such, CSR stance
employees’ perceptions of CSR enhance their pride in membership of the of the organization has the potential to influence its members’ innova­
organization, this experience of pride further builds their passionate tion behavior by serially enhancing positive affective states in those for
connect with the organization in the form of affective attachment, which whom personal and organizational dispositions are closely attuned. The
eventually stimulates innovative behavior on their part. It thereby study thus acquaints practitioners to be increasingly savvy that em­
prompts practitioners to rethink the role of CSR as a means by which ployees’ reactions to CSR are imbued with emotions, and being cogni­
they can channelize employees’ emotions into constructive outcomes. zant of the role of CSR in managing these is inevitably important for
Finally, the finding pertaining to the moderating role of empathy in ensuring a more productive employee base. Elevating the significance of
the indirect relationship of perceived CSR with employee innovative empathy, it further suggests that in order to elicit innovation and get the
behavior through organizational pride and affective commitment, im­ maximum out of employees as a result of the organization’s pursuit of
plies that since employees with high levels of empathy have greater CSR, employees should be intensively trained on empathy. Though
disposition towards other’s wellbeing, their favorable perceptions of the empathy is an immensely used psychological term nowadays, yet its
organization’s CSR will have a greater impact on their innovative importance is undermined when it comes to training and development.
behavior, in comparison to employees with low levels of empathy. In Practitioners should regard empathy as a crucial psychological resource,

10
P. Pasricha et al. Journal of Business Research 161 (2023) 113809

recognize its value and incorporate it as a key aspect of the training and a radically different group of stakeholders, a more enlightened one; the
development programs, since doing so will develop empathy in em­ pandemic has raised people’s expectations of increased social re­
ployees, nurture their emotional competence, and will help garner sponsibility by businesses; people are becoming more conscious of their
positive emotional responses from their perceptions of CSR. Further, it is choices, and are shifting towards responsible consumption (He & Harris,
suggested that when working towards building employees’ favourable 2020), all of which call for increased innovation, henceforth necessitate
perceptions of CSR, managers should go beyond the obvious – mainstreaming of CSR initiatives so as to better innovate and survive the
communicating organization’s CSR activities through websites, emails, now even closer public scrutiny.
ads etc. They should consider the complete employee experience. One Additionally, dealing with the pandemic caused physical and
enriched by encouraging employees’ involvement in these activities emotional trauma, people in general are becoming more empathetic in
through apt incentives and reward systems, or even better, introducing their approach towards one another (He & Harris, 2020). As evinced by
performance appraisals taking into account individual social contribu­ the current study, an organization’s socially responsible stance by
tions – so as to convey to the employees the organization’s whole appealing to its own peoples’ i.e., employees’ empathetic concerns, can
hearted devotion to social responsibility. elicit increased innovation on their part. In sum, we believe that the
While the study findings render compelling insights into the CSR pandemic has in a multitude of ways accelerated the need for organi­
perceptions-employee innovation relationship, they are crucial particularly zations to adopt CSR, and prioritizing and investing in the “green
with respect to the energy sector, that too in context of the crisis it is agenda” (rather than missing out on it) is going to reap benefits in the
facing right now in view of the pandemic. long run.
Overall, our study findings by providing in-depth insights into the
5.1. Implications for the energy sector in light of the pandemic impact of CSR on employee innovation offer guiding inputs to practi­
tioners in the country’s energy sector, specifically when meeting the
This research has been conducted amid the Covid-19 pandemic- exigencies arising out of the pandemic demands these. Since many en­
provoked lockdown in India, a nation which among many others is ergy sector organizations in nations other than India are also in throes of
reeling under an unprecedented global economic and social crisis. The the vicious pandemic, we propound that these findings hold significance
pandemic that is being viewed as analogous to a “Black Swan Event– a for them as well.
shocking event that changes the world” (He & Harris, 2020) has caused
great mayhem: families have decimated, institutional operations and 6. Limitations and future research directions
international collaborations have taken a big hit, governments have
upended, societal and economic inequalities have further entrenched, This study has a few limitations, which pave the way for future
more so economies worldwide have crushed (Rethinking Social Change research in this area.
in the Face of Coronavirus, n.d.). Amidst all this upheaval, the corner­ First, it draws empirical inferences analyzing data collected using a
stone of our economies, the critical energy sector too has been drasti­ time-lagged multi-wave multi-source design, which is relatively rare in
cally affected. Resonating this, the IEA’s World Energy Report 2020 the perceived CSR-employee outcomes literature (Glavas, 2016a). This
stated “It has been a tumultuous year for the global energy system. The helped us diminish concerns surrounding the common method bias
Covid-19 crisis has caused more disruption than any other event in (Podsakoff et al., 2012) issue. As a further check to ensure that it does
recent history, leaving scars that will last for years to come” (IEA, 2020). not impact the study results, we took various measures to cope with it: 1)
Specifically, the Indian energy sector is currently experiencing a decline at the procedural front: a unique identifier was utilized so that the re­
in energy demand; not surprisingly, this has also concurred with spondents’ anonymity could be preserved and also we could match
plummeted investments (ETEnergyWorld, 2020). While the ramifica­ questionnaires across the three waves; additionally, it was ensured that
tions of the pandemic are still evolving, resilience on the part of orga­ the focal employees couldn’t access peers’ responses and vice-versa, this
nizations in the sector has become more indispensable than ever helped us address social desirability as well; 2) at the statistical front:
(COVID-19, n.d). results of the Harman single-factor test indicated support for the
Resurgence from the crisis necessitates that energy organizations dissimilarity of the study constructs, the first factor variance was less
identify and fix vulnerabilities in their processes exposed during the than 50 %, indicating that a single factor did not account for a sub­
pandemic, update their technical prowess, and eventually ameliorate stantial part of the variance. Also, we utilized the latent CMV factor
their performance as well as ability to respond; perhaps, this will herald approach (Podsakoff et al., 2012): as shown in Table 7, results ascertain
the beginning of an era wherein the energy sector will be permeated by no major issues related to common method bias as the difference be­
upgraded expertise, processes, and infrastructure (The Energy Sector tween the regression coefficients of the proposed CFA model and the
Post COVID-19, 2020). In a nutshell, innovation will be absolutely latent factor model was less than 0.2 for all the items; also, as shown in
essential for the revival of the sector (ETEnergyWorld, 2020). Herein, Table 8, contrasting the measurement models with and without the CMV
the findings put across by the current study are quite salient. factor revealed no major differences in the fit indices. Besides, data
Corporate social responsibility, as established here, can be instru­ collection across three waves helped us separate the measurement of the
mental in fostering employee innovation and nurturing the innovation study variables and eased evaluation apprehension. Still, since data for
potential of these organizations, hence seems vital to cope with the both mediators of organizational pride and affective commitment was
prevailing dynamics. While the energy companies have been hogging collected within the same time wave (Time 2), the possibility of po­
lion’s share in the CSR matrix (which is a composite of CSR scoring and tential relationship between these can’t be ruled out. The ideal data
spending) (ETEnergyWorld, 2019), the pandemic appears to have collection design will put these variables also in two separated data
impacted their CSR engagement given that they had limited time and collection timings, or even better utilize the more effective longitudinal
resources to manoeuvre in this direction (IiAS: COVID Relief and vac­ approach rather than a time-lagged approach for gathering the study
cinations set to dominate CSR spends this year, 2020). However, data; That is, future research following this design is expected to furnish
empirical evidence shows that being socially responsible pays off with further insights into the studied relationships.
enhanced innovation, and so it needs to be understood that CSR can be Second, the study employs a single level model owing to the nature of
more of a means to an end rather than an end in itself. Through this the variables in the hypothesis (perceived CSR, organizational pride,
study, we contend that innovation can serve as the specific motivation affective commitment, innovative behavior and empathy are mainly
for energy companies to adopt CSR. A very important thing to note is individual centred, and hence, the individual-level model). Future
that the pandemic is bringing about a paradigm shift in the mindsets of research should take up a multilevel model to further dwell into the
people (He & Harris, 2020). Post pandemic, companies are likely to face influence of CSR perceptions on innovative behavior. For instance,

11
P. Pasricha et al. Journal of Business Research 161 (2023) 113809

Table 7 employee innovation.

Common method bias check results. Finally, although the study empirically evinces the interactions
Items (1) Regression coefficient (2) Regression coefficient Difference among perceived CSR, organizational pride, affective commitment,
(no latent factor) (with latent factor) (1) - empathy and innovative behavior, qualitative research involving in­
(2) terviews or case studies should provide added insights into the study
PCSR1 0.919 0.8 0.119 results and further refine our understanding of the liaison between
PCSR2 0.939 0.89 0.049 employees’ CSR perceptions and innovative behavior.
PCSR3 0.797 0.699 0.098
PCSR4 0.899 0.789 0.11
PCSR5 0.854 0.79 0.064
Informed consent
PCSR6 0.83 0.7 0.13
PCSR7 0.9 0.85 0.05 Informed consent was obtained from all individual participants
OP1 0.822 0.788 0.034 included in the study.
OP2 0.75 0.656 0.094
OP3 0.931 0.845 0.086
OP4 0.811 0.722 0.089 Ethical approval
AC1 0.877 0.756 0.121
AC2 0.92 0.87 0.05 All procedures performed in this study involving human participants
AC3 0.8 0.75 0.05
were in accordance with the ethical standards of the institutional and/or
AC4 0.72 0.65 0.07
AC5 0.9 0.83 0.07 national research committee and with the 1964 Helsinki declaration and
AC6 0.88 0.735 0.145 its later amendments or comparable ethical standards.
AC7 0.92 0.899 0.021
E1 0.919 0.877 0.042
CRediT authorship contribution statement
E2 0.933 0.854 0.079
E3 0.96 0.85 0.11
E4 0.856 0.79 0.066 Palvi Pasricha: Methodology, Investigation, Conceptualization,
E5 0.9 0.86 0.04 Formal analysis, Writing – original draft, Writing – review & editing. K.
E6 0.9 0.801 0.099 S. Nivedhitha: Writing – review & editing, Formal analysis, Validation.
E7 0.912 0.811 0.101
Juhi Raghuvanshi: Data curation, Formal analysis.
E8 0.947 0.854 0.093
E9 0.94 0.871 0.069
E10 0.901 0.85 0.051 Declaration of Competing Interest
IB1 0.953 0.879 0.074
IB2 0.976 0.829 0.147
IB3 0.901 0.835 0.066
The authors declare that they have no known competing financial
IB4 0.906 0.864 0.042 interests or personal relationships that could have appeared to influence
IB5 0.922 0.856 0.066 the work reported in this paper.
IB6 0.8 0.724 0.076
IB7 0.912 0.813 0.099
Data availability
IB8 0.911 0.834 0.077
IB9 0.923 0.877 0.046
IB10 0.9 0.812 0.088 The data that has been used is confidential.
Note: PCSR is Perceived Corporate Social Responsibility; OP is Organizational
Pride; AC is Affective Commitment; E is Empathy; IB is Innovative Behavior. References

Abdelmotaleb, M., Metwally, A. B. E. M., & Saha, S. K. (2018). Exploring the impact of
being perceived as a socially responsible organization on employee creativity.
Table 8 Management Decision, 56(11), 2325–2340.
Model fit indices’ comparison with latent factor model. Allen, N. J., & Meyer, J. P. (1990). The measurement and antecedents of affective,
continuance and normative commitment to the organization. Journal of Occupational
Indices Values(without latent factor) Values(with latent factor)
Psychology, 63(1), 1–18.
χ2/df 2.133 2.01 Aguinis, H. (2011). “Organizational responsibility: doing good and doing well”. In S.
GFI 0.873 0.811 Zedeck (Ed.), APA Handbook of Industrial and Organizational Psychology (Vol. 3, pp.
AGFI 0.752 0.720 855-879). Washington, DC: American Psychological Association).
RMSEA 0.065 0.069 Akhouri, A., & Chaudhary, R. (2019). Employee perspective on CSR: A review of the
literature and research agenda. Journal of Global Responsibility, 10(4), 355–381.
NFI 0.836 0.779
Akremi, A. E., Gond, J., Swaen, V., De Roeck, K., & Igalens, J. (2018). How do employees
CFI 0.905 0.860
perceive corporate responsibility? Development and validation of a
Note: χ2 is Chi-square; df is degrees of freedom; GFI is Goodness of Fit Index; multidimensional corporate stakeholder responsibility scale. Journal of Management,
44, 619–657.
AGFI is Adjusted Goodness of Fit Index; RMSEA is Root Mean Square Error of
Amabile, T. M. (1983). The social psychology of creativity: A componential
Approximation; NFI is Normed Fit Index; CFI is Comparative Fit Index. conceptualization. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 45(2), 357.
Amabile, T. M., Conti, R., Coon, H., Lazenby, J., & Herron, M. (1996). Assessing the work
environment for creativity. Academy of Management Journal, 39(5), 1154–1184.
group/team innovation should be examined; also, boundary conditions Anderson, J. C., & Gerbing, D. W. (1988). Structural equation modeling in practice: A
at the organizational level (Hur et al., 2018) should be tested for their review and recommended two-step approach. Psychological Bulletin, 103(5),
impact on the perceived CSR-innovative behavior relationship. 411–423.
Archimi, C. S., Reynaud, E., Yasin, H. M., & Bhatti, Z. A. (2018). How perceived
Third, carried out in particularly the energy sector organizations in
corporate social responsibility affects employee cynicism: The mediating role of
India, the study results should be examined in other sectors (for organizational trust. Journal of Business Ethics, 151(4), 907–921.
instance, the healthcare and financial) in varied countries so as to Arnett, D. B., Laverie, D. A., & McLane, C. (2002). Using job satisfaction and pride as
expand their generalizability. Also, recent research suggests that CSR is internal-marketing tools. Cornell Hotel and Restaurant Administration Quarterly, 43(2),
87–96.
endorsed in different ways and to varying degrees across different cul­ Aw, S. S., Ilies, R., & De Pater, I. E. (2020). Dispositional empathy, emotional display
tures (Mueller et al., 2012). In this sense, it is expected that perceived authenticity, and employee outcomes. Journal of Applied Psychology, 105(9), 1036.
CSR would be taken in a different manner and so responded to differ­ Bagozzi, R., & Yi, Y. (1988). On the evaluation of structural equation models. Journal of
the Academy of Marketing Science, 16(1), 74–94.
ently by employees across different cultures; this further opens up ave­ Bahadur, W., Khan, A. N., Ali, A., & Usman, M. (2020). Investigating the effect of
nues for cross-cultural research on the impact of perceived CSR on employee empathy on service loyalty: The mediating role of trust in and satisfaction
with a service employee. Journal of Relationship Marketing, 19(3), 229–252.

12
P. Pasricha et al. Journal of Business Research 161 (2023) 113809

Barakat, S. R., Isabella, G., Boaventura, J. M. G., & Mazzon, J. A. (2016). The influence of De Jong, J. P., & Den Hartog, D. N. (2007). How leaders influence employees’ innovative
corporate social responsibility on employee satisfaction. Management Decision, 54(9), behavior. European Journal of Innovation Management, 10(1), 41–64.
2325–2339. De Jong, J., & Den Hartog, D. (2010). Measuring Innovative Work Behavior. Creativity
Barnett, M. L. (2007). Stakeholder influence capacity and the variability of financial and Innovation Management, 19(1), 23–36.
returns to corporate social responsibility. Academy of Management Review, 32(3), De Roeck, K., El Akremi, A., & Swaen, V. (2016). Consistency matters! How and when
794–816. does corporate social responsibility affect employees’ organizational identification?
Batson, C. D. (1990). Self-report ratings of empathic emotion. In N. Eisenberg, & Journal of Management Studies, 53(7), 1141–1168.
J. Strayer (Eds.), Empathy and its development (pp. 356–360). New York: Cambridge Dhanesh, G. S. (2014). CSR as organization–employee relationship management strategy:
University Press. A case study of socially responsible information technology companies in India.
Batson, C. D. (2008). Empathy-induced altruism motivation. Paper presented at the Management Communication Quarterly, 28(1), 130–149.
inaugrual Herzliya symposium on ‘‘prosocial motives, emotions and beavior’’, Herzliya, Dietz, J., & Kleinlogel, E. P. (2014). Wage cuts and managers’ empathy: How a positive
Israel. emotion can contribute to positive organizational ethics in difficult times. Journal of
Batson, C. D. (2010). Empathy-induced altruistic motivation. In M. Mikulincer, & Business Ethics, 119(4), 461–472.
P. R. Shaver (Eds.), Prosocial motives, emotions, and behavior: The better angels of our Ditlev-Simonsen, C. D. (2015). The relationship between Norwegian and Swedish
nature (pp. 15–34). American Psychological Association. employees’ perception of corporate social responsibility and affective commitment.
Batson, C. D., & Shaw, L. L. (1991). Evidence for altruism: Toward a pluralism of Business & Society, 54(2), 229–253.
prosocial motives. Psychological Inquiry, 2(2), 107–122. Du, S., Bhattacharya, C. B., & Sen, S. (2007). Reaping relational rewards from corporate
Battistelli, A., Odoardi, C., Vandenberghe, C., Di Napoli, G., & Piccione, L. (2019). social responsibility: The role of competitive positioning. International Journal of
Information sharing and innovative work behavior: The role of work-based learning, Research in Marketing, 24(3), 224–241.
challenging tasks, and organizational commitment. Human Resource Development Du, S., Bhattacharya, C. B., & Sen, S. (2011). Corporate social responsibility and
Quarterly, 30(3), 361–381. competitive advantage: Overcoming the trust barrier. Management Science, 57(9),
Bentler, P. M., & Bonett, D. G. (1980). Significance tests and goodness of fit in the 1528–1545.
analysis of covariance structures. Psychological Bulletin, 88(3), 588–606. Duan, C., & Hill, C. E. (1996). The current state of empathy research. Journal of
Boezeman, E. J., & Ellemers, N. (2008). Pride and respect in volunteers’ organizational Counseling Psychology, 43(3), 261.
commitment. European Journal of Social Psychology, 38(1), 159–172. Durrah, O., Allil, K., Gharib, M., & Hannawi, S. (2021). Organizational pride as an
Bowen, H. R. (1953). Social responsibilities of the businessman. New York: Harper & Row. antecedent of employee creativity in the petrochemical industry. European Journal of
Brammer, S., He, H., & Mellahi, K. (2015). Corporate social responsibility, employee Innovation Management, 24(2), 572–588.
organizational identification, and creative effort: The moderating impact of Edwards, M. R., & Kudret, S. (2017). Multi-foci CSR perceptions, procedural justice and
corporate ability. Group & Organization Management, 40(3), 323–352. in-role employee performance: The mediating role of commitment and pride. Human
Brammer, S., Millington, A., & Rayton, B. (2007). The contribution of corporate social Resource Management Journal, 27(1), 169–188.
responsibility to organizational commitment. The International Journal of Human Eisenberg, N., & Miller, P. A. (1987). The relation of empathy to prosocial and related
Resource Management, 18(10), 1701–1719. behaviors. Psychological Bulletin, 101(1), 91–119.
Brief, A. P., & Weiss, H. M. (2002). Organizational behavior: Affect in the workplace. Eisenberg, N., Guthrie, I. K., Murphy, B. C., Shepard, S. A., Cumberland, A., & Carlo, G.
Annual Review of Psychology, 53(1), 279–307. (1999). Consistency and development of prosocial dispositions: A longitudinal study.
Brosi, P., Spörrle, M., & Welpe, I. M. (2018). Do we work hard or are we just great? The Child Development, 70(6), 1360–1372.
effects of organizational pride due to effort and ability on proactive behavior. Elfenbein, H. A. (2007). Emotion in organizations: A review and theoretical integration.
Business Research, 11(2), 357–373. Academy of Management Annals, 1(1), 315–386.
Brunetto, Y., & Farr-Wharton, R. (2003). The commitment and satisfaction of lower- Ellemers, N., De Gilder, D., & Haslam, S. A. (2004). Motivating individuals and groups at
ranked police officers: Lessons for management. Policing: An. International Journal, 26 work: A social identity perspective on leadership and group performance. Academy
(1), 43–63. of Management review, 29(3), 459–478.
Cable, D. M., & Turban, D. B. (2003). The value of organizational reputation in the ETEnergyWorld. (2019, February 28). Energy companies hog lion’s share in CSR spending:
recruitment context: A brand-equity perspective. Journal of Applied Social Psychology, CRISIL. ETEnergyworld.Com. Retrieved June 28, 2021, from https://energy.econo
33(11), 2244–2266. mictimes.indiatimes.com/news/power/energy-companies-hog-lions-share-in
Caligiuri, P., Mencin, A., & Jiang, K. (2013). Win–win–win: The influence of company- -csr-spending-crisil/68203169.
sponsored volunteerism programs on employees, NGOs, and business units. Personnel ETEnergyWorld. (2020, June 2). OPINION: The energy sector post COVID-19 - Refueling the
Psychology, 66(4), 825–860. economy. ETEnergyworld.Com. Retrieved June 28, 2021, from https://energy.econo
Carmeli, A., & Tishler, A. (2004). The relationships between intangible organizational mictimes.indiatimes.com/news/renewable/opinion-the-energy-sector-post-covid-
elements and organizational performance. Strategic Management Journal, 25(13), 19-refueling-the-economy/76161518.
1257–1278. Evans, W. R., Davis, W. D., & Frink, D. D. (2011). An examination of employee reactions
Carroll, A. B. (1991). The pyramid of corporate social responsibility: Toward the moral to perceived corporate citizenship. Journal of Applied Social Psychology, 41(4),
management of organizational stakeholders. Business Horizons, 34(4), 39–48. 938–964.
Chan, S. C., & Mak, W. M. (2014). Transformational leadership, pride in being a follower EY India. (2021, May 19). India ranks 3rd in the ‘Renewable Energy Country Attractiveness
of the leader and organizational commitment. Leadership & Organization Development Index’ released by EY. EY. Retrieved June 28, 2021, from https://www.ey.com/en_in
Journal, 35(8), 674–690. /news/2021/05/india-ranks-3rd-in-the-renewable-energy-country-attractiveness-in
Chau, P. Y. K., & Hu, P. J. H. (2001). Information technology acceptance by individual dex-released-by-ey.
professionals: A model comparison approach. Decision Sciences, 32(4), 699–719. Farooq, M., Farooq, O., & Jasimuddin, S. M. (2014). Employees response to corporate
Chaudhary, R., & Akhouri, A. (2019). CSR perceptions and employee creativity: social responsibility: Exploring the role of employees’ collectivist orientation.
Examining serial mediation effects of meaningfulness and work engagement. Social European Management Journal, 32(6), 916–927.
Responsibility Journal, 15(1), 61–74. Farooq, O., Payaud, M., Merunka, D., & Valette-Florence, P. (2014). The impact of
Choi, S. B., Kim, K., Ullah, S. E., & Kang, S. W. (2016). How transformational leadership corporate social responsibility on organizational commitment: Exploring multiple
facilitates innovative behavior of Korean workers. Personnel Review, 45(3), 459–479. mediation mechanisms. Journal of Business Ethics, 125(4), 563–580.
Chowdhury, A. (2022, July 14). Rakesh Jhunjhunwala backed Akasa wants to be the Farr, F., & Ford, C. (1990). Individual innovation. In M. A. West, & J. L. Farr (Eds.),
greenest airline in the world. The Economic Times. Retrieved July 22, 2022, from https Innovation and Creativity at Work: Psychological and Organizational Strategies.
://economictimes.indiatimes.com/industry/transportation/airlines-/-aviatio Chichester: Wiley.
n/akasa-wants-to-be-worlds-greenest-airline-dube/articleshow/92860776.cms. Fredrickson, B. L. (2001). The role of positive emotions in positive psychology: The
Clarkson, J. J., Hirt, E. R., Jia, L., & Alexander, M. B. (2010). When perception is more broaden-and-build theory of positive emotions. American Psychologist, 56(3), 218.
than reality: The effects of perceived versus actual resource depletion on self- Fu, H., Ye, B. H., & Law, R. (2014). You do well and I do well? The behavioral
regulatory behavior. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 98, 29–46. consequences of corporate social responsibility. International Journal of Hospitality
Codato, M., Damian, R., Testoni, I., & Ronconi, L. (2013). Creativity and nonattachment: Management, 40, 62–70.
A relationship moderated by pride. TPM: Testing, Psychometrics, Methodology. Applied Gaudêncio, P., Coelho, A., & Ribeiro, N. (2019). Impact of CSR perceptions on workers’
Psychology, 20(2), 185–195. innovative behavior: Exploring the social exchange process and the role of perceived
COVID-19. (n.d.). IEA. Retrieved June 28, 2021, from https://www.iea.org/topics external prestige. World Review of Entrepreneurship, Management and Sustainable
/covid-19. Development, 15(1–2), 151–173.
Damian, R. I., & Robins, R. W. (2012). The link between dispositional pride and creative Glavas, A. (2016). Corporate social responsibility and organizational psychology: An
thinking depends on current mood. Journal of Research in Personality, 46(6), integrative review. Frontiers in Psychology, 7, 144.
765–769. Glavas, A. (2016). Corporate social responsibility and employee engagement: Enabling
Damian, R. I., & Robins, R. W. (2013). Aristotle’s virtue or Dante’s deadliest sin? The employees to employ more of their whole selves at work. Frontiers in Psychology, 7,
influence of authentic and hubristic pride on creative achievement. Learning and 796.
Individual Differences, 26, 156–160. Glavas, A., & Godwin, L. N. (2013). Is the perception of ‘goodness’ good enough?
Daniels, K., Glover, J., & Mellor, N. (2014). An experience sampling study of expressing Exploring the relationship between perceived corporate social responsibility and
affect, daily affective well-being, relationship quality, and perceived performance. employee organizational identification. Journal of Business Ethics, 114(1), 15–27.
Journal of Occupational and Organizational Psychology, 87(4), 781–805. Glavas, A., & Kelley, K. (2014). The effects of perceived corporate social responsibility on
De Clercq, D., Fatima, T., & Jahanzeb, S. (2021). Bullying and turnover intentions: How employee attitudes. Business Ethics Quarterly, 24(2), 165–202.
creative employees overcome perceptions of dysfunctional organizational politics. Glavas, A., & Piderit, S. K. (2009). How does doing good matter? Effects of corporate
Personnel Review. citizenship on employees. Journal of Corporate Citizenship, 36, 51–70.

13
P. Pasricha et al. Journal of Business Research 161 (2023) 113809

GN Bureau. (2015, September 28). Energy sector emerges as the highest spender. through Employees: Extending the Boundary Conditions of Self-Determination
Governance Now. Retrieved June 28, 2021, from https://www.governancenow. Theory. Sustainability, 13(11), 6104.
com/news/csr/energy-sector-emerges-highest-spender. Lin, C. P., Lyau, N. M., Tsai, Y. H., Chen, W. Y., & Chiu, C. K. (2010). Modeling corporate
Godfrey, P. C., Merrill, C. B., & Hansen, J. M. (2009). The relationship between corporate citizenship and its relationship with organizational citizenship behaviors. Journal of
social responsibility and shareholder value: An empirical test of the risk management Business Ethics, 95(3), 357–372.
hypothesis. Strategic Management Journal, 30(4), 425–445. Liu, Y. (2009). Perceived organizational support and expatriate organizational
Gond, J. P., El Akremi, A., Swaen, V., & Babu, N. (2017). The psychological citizenship behavior: The mediating role of affective commitment towards the parent
microfoundations of corporate social responsibility: A person-centric systematic company. Personnel Review, 38(3), 307–319.
review. Journal of Organizational Behavior, 38(2), 225–246. Luchak, A. A., & Gellatly, I. R. (2007). A comparison of linear and nonlinear relations
Gouthier, M. H., & Rhein, M. (2011). Organizational pride and its positive effects on between organizational commitment and work outcomes. Journal of Applied
employee behavior. Journal of Service Management, 22(5), 633–649. Psychology, 92(3), 786.
Gupta, U. (2020, May 8). India ranks third on renewable energy investment. Pv Magazine Lukas, B. A., & Ferrell, O. C. (2000). The effect of market orientation on product
India. Retrieved June 28, 2021, from https://www.pv-magazine-india.com/2020/ innovation. Journal of the Academy of Marketing Science, 28(2), 239–247.
05/08/india-is-the-worlds-third-largest-investor-in-renewable-energy/. Luo, X., & Bhattacharya, C. B. (2006). Corporate social responsibility, customer
Hair, J., Black, W., Babin, B., & Anderson, R. (2010). Multivariate data analysis (7th ed.). satisfaction, and market value. Journal of Marketing, 70(4), 1–18.
Upper Saddle River, NJ, USA: Prentice-Hall. Luo, X., & Du, S. (2015). Exploring the relationship between corporate social
Hansen, S. D., Dunford, B. B., Boss, A. D., Boss, R. W., & Angermeier, I. (2011). Corporate responsibility and firm innovation. Marketing Letters, 26(4), 703–714.
social responsibility and the benefits of employee trust: A cross-disciplinary Lythreatis, S., Mostafa, A. M. S., & Wang, X. (2019). Participative leadership and
perspective. Journal of Business Ethics, 102(1), 29–45. organizational identification in SMEs in the MENA Region: Testing the roles of CSR
Hayes, A. F. (2013). Introduction to Mediation, Moderation, and conditional process perceptions and pride in membership. Journal of Business Ethics, 156(3), 635–650.
Analysis: A Regression-Based Approach. New York: Guilford Press. Mahlouji, H., & Anaraki, N. (2009). Corporate social responsibility towards social
He, H., & Harris, L. (2020). The impact of Covid-19 pandemic on corporate social responsible innovation: A dynamic capability approach. International Review of
responsibility and marketing philosophy. Journal of Business Research, 116, 176–182. Business Research Papers, 5(6), 185–194.
Helm, S. (2013). A matter of reputation and pride: Associations between perceived Majmudar, U., Rana, N., & Sanan, N. (2015, January). India’s Top Companies for CSR &
external reputation, pride in membership, job satisfaction and turnover intentions. Sustainability 2015. IIM Udaipur. Retrieved June 28, 2021, from https://www.iimu.
British Journal of Management, 24(4), 542–556. ac.in/upload_data/main_containts/about/Social-Responsibility/IIMU_CSR_REPORT.
Hobson, C. J., Kesic, D., Rosetti, D., Delunas, L., & Hobson, N. G. (2004). Motivating pdf.
employee commitment with empathy and support during stressful life events. Majmudar, U., Rana, N., & Sanan, N. (2018, October). Responsible Business Rankings
International Journal of Management, 21(3), 332. 2018. IIM Udaipur. Retrieved June 28, 2021, from https://www.iimu.ac.in/upload_
Hogg, M. A., Terry, D. J., & White, K. M. (1995). A tale of two theories: A critical data/Publications/IIMU_CSR_REPORT_2018.pdf.
comparison of identity theory with social identity theory. Social Psychology Quarterly, Manimegalai, S., & Baral, R. (2018). Examining the mediating role of organizational trust
255–269. in the relationship between CSR practices and job outcomes. Social Responsibility
Holt, S., & Marques, J. (2012). Empathy in leadership: Appropriate or misplaced? An Journal, 14(3), 433–447.
empirical study on a topic that is asking for attention. Journal of Business Ethics, 105 Markovic, S., Iglesias, O., Singh, J. J., & Sierra, V. (2018). How does the perceived
(1), 95–105. ethicality of corporate services brands influence loyalty and positive word-of-mouth?
Hu, L. T., & Bentler, P. M. (1999). Cutoff criteria for fit indexes in covariance structure Analyzing the roles of empathy, affective commitment, and perceived quality.
analysis: Conventional criteria versus new alternatives. Structural equation modeling: Journal of Business Ethics, 148(4), 721–740.
A multidisciplinary journal, 6(1), 1–55. Masterson, C. R., Liden, R. C., & Kluemper, D. H. (2017). Peeling back the layers: A multi-
Hur, W. M., Moon, T. W., & Choi, W. H. (2021). The role of job crafting and perceived method investigation of organizational pride. In Academy of Management Proceedings
organizational support in the link between employees’ CSR perceptions and job (Vol. 2017(1, pp. 189–194). Briarcliff Manor, NY 10510: Academy of Management.
performance: A moderated mediation model. Current Psychology, 40(7), 3151–3165. Mende, M., & Bolton, R. N. (2011). Why attachment security matters: How customers’
Hur, W. M., Moon, T. W., & Ko, S. H. (2018). How employees’ perceptions of CSR attachment styles influence their relationships with service firms and service
increase employee creativity: Mediating mechanisms of compassion at work and employees. Journal of Service Research, 14(3), 285–301.
intrinsic motivation. Journal of Business Ethics, 153(3), 629–644. Mercurio, Z. A. (2015). Affective commitment as a core essence of organizational
IEA. (2020). World Energy Outlook 2020, IEA, Paris. Retrieved June 28, 2021, from http commitment: An integrative literature review. Human Resource Development Review,
s://www.iea.org/reports/world-energy-outlook-2020. 14(4), 389–414.
Iglesias, O., Markovic, S., & Rialp, J. (2019). How does sensory brand experience Meyer, J. P., & Allen, N. J. (1991). A three-component conceptualization of
influence brand equity? Considering the roles of customer satisfaction, customer organizational commitment. Human Resource Management Review, 1(1), 61–89.
affective commitment, and employee empathy. Journal of Business Research, 96, Meyer, J. P., & Herscovitch, L. (2001). Commitment in the workplace: Toward a general
343–354. model. Human Resource Management Review, 11(3), 299–326.
IiAS: COVID Relief and vaccinations set to dominate CSR spends this year. (2020, Meyer, J., Stanley, D., Herscovich, L., & Topolnytsky, L. (2002). Affective, Continuance,
December 17). Retrieved June 28, 2021, from https://www.iiasadvisory.com/insti and Normative Commitment to the Organization: A Meta-Analysis of Antecedents,
tutional-eye/iias-covid-relief-and-vaccinations-set-to-dominate-csr-spends-this-year. Correlates, and Consequences. Journal of Vocational Behavior, 61, 20–52.
Im, S., & Chung, Y. W. (2018). Employee volunteering meaningfulness and Moir, L. (2003). The business world’s latest buzzword? CSR and what it means to you.
organizational citizenship behavior: Exploring the effects of organizational support, Strategic Direction, 19(6), 7–9.
pride, and trust. Sustainability, 10(12), 4835. Moon, H., Van Dyne, L., & Wrobel, K. (2004). The circumplex model and the future of
Im, S., & Workman, J. P., Jr (2004). Market orientation, creativity, and new product organizational citizenship behavior research (pp. 1–22). Nova Science: Handbook of
performance in high-technology firms. Journal of Marketing, 68(2), 114–132. Organizational Citizenship Behavior. New York.
Jones, D. A. (2010). Does serving the community also serve the company? Using Morgeson, F. P., Aguinis, H., Waldman, D. A., & Siegel, D. S. (2013). Extending corporate
organizational identification and social exchange theories to understand employee social responsibility research to the human resource management and organizational
responses to a volunteerism programme. Journal of Occupational and Organizational behavior domains: A look to the future. Personnel Psychology, 66, 805–824.
Psychology, 83(4), 857–878. Mowday, R. T., Porter, L. W., & Steers, R. M. (1982). Organizational linkages: The
Jones, D. A., Willness, C. R., & Heller, K. W. (2016). Illuminating the signals job seekers psychology of commitment, absenteeism, and turnover. San Diego, CA: Academic Press.
receive from an employer’s community involvement and environmental Mueller, K., Hattrup, K., Spiess, S. O., & Lin-Hi, N. (2012). The effects of corporate social
sustainability practices: Insights into why most job seekers are attracted, others are responsibility on employees’ affective commitment: A cross-cultural investigation.
indifferent, and a few are repelled. Frontiers in Psychology, 7, 426. Journal of Applied Psychology, 97(6), 1186.
Kenny, D., & Albright, L. (1987). Accuracy in Interpersonal Perception: A Social Mumford, M. D., Scott, G. M., Gaddis, B., & Strange, J. M. (2002). Leading creative
Relations Analysis. Psychological Bulletin, 102(3), 390–402. people: Orchestrating expertise and relationships. The Leadership Quarterly, 13(6),
Kesen, M. (2016). Linking organizational identification with individual creativity: 705–750.
Organizational citizenship behavior as a mediator. Journal of Yaşar University, 11 Nadeeshani, M. H. C. S. & Nishanthi, H. M. (2020). Affective Commitment: The Role of
(41), 56–66. Work-life Balance and Organizational Pride (with special reference to XYZ Glove
Kim, H. L., Rhou, Y., Uysal, M., & Kwon, N. (2017). An examination of the links between Manufacturing Company in Sri Lanka). The Conference Proceedings of 11th
corporate social responsibility (CSR) and its internal consequences. International International Conference on Business & Information ICBI, University of Kelaniya, Sri
Journal of Hospitality Management, 61, 26–34. Lanka. ISSN 2465-6399, (pp. 326-348).
Kuppens, P., & Tong, E. M. (2010). An appraisal account of individual differences in Naseer, S., Raja, U., Syed, F., Donia, M. B., & Darr, W. (2016). Perils of being close to a
emotional experience. Social and Personality Psychology Compass, 4(12), 1138–1150. bad leader in a bad environment: Exploring the combined effects of despotic
Lazarus, R. S. (1991). Progress on a cognitive-motivational-relational theory of emotion. leadership, leader member exchange, and perceived organizational politics on
American Psychologist, 46(8), 819. behaviors. The Leadership Quarterly, 27(1), 14–33.
Lee, M., & Kim, W. (2013). The effect of perceived corporate social responsibility on Nazir, O., & Islam, J. U. (2020). Influence of CSR-specific activities on work engagement
hotel employee’s attitude and behavior toward the organization. International and employees’ innovative work behavior: An empirical investigation. Current Issues
Journal of Tourism Sciences, 13(3), 51–74. in Tourism, 23(24), 3054–3072.
Lee, E. M., Park, S. Y., & Lee, H. J. (2013). Employee perception of CSR activities: Its Ng, T. W., Feldman, D. C., & Lam, S. S. (2010). Psychological contract breaches,
antecedents and consequences. Journal of Business Research, 66(10), 1716–1724. organizational commitment, and innovation-related behaviors: A latent growth
Li, B., Fan, X., Álvarez-Otero, S., Sial, M. S., Comite, U., Cherian, J., & Vasa, L. (2021). modeling approach. Journal of Applied Psychology, 95(4), 744.
CSR and Workplace Autonomy as Enablers of Workplace Innovation in SMEs

14
P. Pasricha et al. Journal of Business Research 161 (2023) 113809

Ng, T. W., Yam, K. C., & Aguinis, H. (2019). Employee perceptions of corporate social Slåtten, T., & Mehmetoglu, M. (2011). Antecedents and effects of engaged frontline
responsibility: Effects on pride, embeddedness, and turnover. Personnel Psychology, employees. Managing Service Quality: An International Journal, 21(1), 88–107.
72(1), 107–137. Smith, J. (2012, December 10). The Companies With the Best CSR Reputations. Retrieved
Nooyi, I. (2021). My life in full: Work, family, and our future. India: Hachette. June 7, 2021, from https://www.forbes.com/sites/jacquelynsmith/2012/12/1
Oo, E. Y., Jung, H., & Park, I. J. (2018). Psychological factors linking perceived CSR to 0/the-companies-with-the-best-csr-reputations/?sh=12e687d64404.
OCB: The role of organizational pride, collectivism, and person–organization fit. Solinger, O. N., Van Olffen, W., & Roe, R. A. (2008). Beyond the three-component model
Sustainability, 10(7), 2481. of organizational commitment. Journal of Applied Psychology, 93(1), 70–83.
Pasricha, P., Singh, B., & Verma, P. (2018). Ethical leadership, organic organizational Sternberg, R. J., & (Ed.).. (1999). Handbook of creativity. Cambridge University Press.
cultures and corporate social responsibility: An empirical study in social enterprises. Surroca, J., Tribó, J. A., & Waddock, S. (2010). Corporate responsibility and financial
Journal of Business Ethics, 151(4), 941–958. performance: The role of intangible resources. Strategic Management Journal, 31(5),
Pasumarti, S. S., Kumar, M., & Singh, P. K. (2022). HR practices, affective commitment 463–490.
and creative task performance: A review and futuristic research agenda. International Tang, Y., Shao, Y. F., & Chen, Y. J. (2019). Assessing the mediation mechanism of job
Journal of Human Resources Development and Management, 22(1–2), 56–74. satisfaction and organizational commitment on innovative behavior: The perspective
Pierce, J. L., Gardner, D. G., Cummings, L. L., & Dunham, R. B. (1989). Organization- of psychological capital. Frontiers in Psychology, 10, 2699.
based self-esteem: Construct definition, measurement, and validation. Academy of The energy sector post COVID-19. (2020, June 1). Retrieved June 28, 2021, from htt
Management journal, 32(3), 622–648. ps://home.kpmg/in/en/home/insights/2020/06/the-energy-sector-post-covid-1
Pizarro, D. A., & Salovey, P. (2002). Being and becoming a good person: The role of 9-refueling-the-recovery.html.
emotional intelligence in moral development and behavior. In Improving academic Thornton, M. A., & Rupp, D. E. (2016). The joint effects of justice climate, group moral
achievement (pp. 247–266). Academic Press. identity, and corporate social responsibility on the prosocial and deviant behaviors
Podsakoff, P. M., MacKenzie, S. B., & Podsakoff, N. P. (2012). Sources of method bias in of groups. Journal of Business Ethics, 137(4), 677–697.
social science research and recommendations on how to control it. Annual Review of Tian, Q., & Robertson, J. L. (2019). How and when does perceived CSR affect employees’
Psychology, 63, 539–569. engagement in voluntary pro-environmental behavior? Journal of Business Ethics, 155
Preacher, K. J., Rucker, D. D., & Hayes, A. F. (2007). Addressing moderated mediation (2), 399–412.
hypotheses: Theory, methods, and prescriptions. Multivariate Behavioral Research, 42 Top 10 Workplace Trends for 2020. (2020, February 13). Retrieved April 10, 2021, from
(1), 185–227. https://www.siop.org/Research-Publications/Items-of-Interest/ArtMID/19366/Art
Raja, U., & Johns, G. (2010). The joint effects of personality and job scope on in-role icleID/3361/Top-10-Workplace-Trends-for-2020.
performance, citizenship behaviors, and creativity. Human Relations, 63(7), Top 10 Biggest Energy Economies By Revenue, GDP & Jobs. (2020, May 2). British
981–1005. Business Energy. Retrieved June 28, 2021, from https://britishbusinessenergy.co.
Raza, A., Farrukh, M., Iqbal, M. K., Farhan, M., & Wu, Y. (2021). Corporate social uk/biggest-energy-economies/.
responsibility and employees’ voluntary pro-environmental behavior: The role of Tracy, J. L., & Robins, R. W. (2007). Emerging insights into the nature and function of
organizational pride and employee engagement. Corporate Social Responsibility and pride. Current Directions in Psychological Science, 16(3), 147–150.
Environmental Management, 28(3), 1104–1116. Tsachouridi, I., & Nikandrou, I. (2016). Organizational virtuousness and spontaneity: A
Rego, A., Leal, S., Cunha, M. P., Faria, J., & Pinho, C. (2010). How the perceptions of five social identity view. Personnel Review, 45(6), 1302–1322.
dimensions of corporate citizenship and their inter-inconsistencies predict affective Tyler, T. R., & Blader, S. L. (2002). Autonomous vs. comparative status: Must we be
commitment. Journal of Business Ethics, 94(1), 107–127. better than others to feel good about ourselves? Organizational Behavior and Human
Renewable Energy Industry in India: Overview, Market Size & Growth | IBEF. (2021, Decision Processes, 89(1), 813–838.
June 14). IBEF. Retrieved June 28, 2021, from https://www.ibef.org/industry/rene Valentine, S., & Fleischman, G. (2008). Ethics programs, perceived corporate social
wable-energy.aspx. responsibility and job satisfaction. Journal of Business Ethics, 77(2), 159–172.
Rethinking Social Change in the Face of Coronavirus. (n.d.). SSIR. Retrieved June 28, 2021, Van de Ven, A. H. (1986). Central problems in the management of innovation.
from https://ssir.org/rethinking_social_change_in_the_face_of_coronavirus. Management Science, 32(5), 590–607.
Rhoades, L., Eisenberger, R., & Armeli, S. (2001). Affective commitment to the Verhaert, G. A., & Van den Poel, D. (2011). Empathy as added value in predicting
organization: The contribution of perceived organizational support. Journal of donation behavior. Journal of Business Research, 64(12), 1288–1295.
Applied Psychology, 86(5), 825. Vlachos, P. A., Panagopoulos, N. G., & Rapp, A. A. (2013). Feeling good by doing good:
Ribeiro, N., Duarte, A. P., Filipe, R., & Torres de Oliveira, R. (2020). How authentic Employee CSR-induced attributions, job satisfaction, and the role of charismatic
leadership promotes individual creativity: The mediating role of affective leadership. Journal of Business Ethics, 118(3), 577–588.
commitment. Journal of Leadership & Organizational Studies, 27(2), 189–202. Wagner, M. (2010). Corporate social performance and innovation with high social
Riketta, M. (2002). Attitudinal organizational commitment and job performance: A benefits: A quantitative analysis. Journal of Business Ethics, 94(4), 581–594.
meta-analysis. Journal of Organizational Behavior: The International Journal of Wang, Y., Xu, S., & Wang, Y. (2020). The consequences of employees’ perceived
Industrial, Occupational and Organizational Psychology and Behavior, 23(3), 257–266. corporate social responsibility: A meta-analysis. Business Ethics: A European Review,
Rupp, D. E. (2011). An employee-centered model of organizational justice and social 29(3), 471–496.
responsibility. Organizational Psychology Review, 1(1), 72–94. West, M. A., Hirst, G., Richter, A., & Shipton, H. (2004). Twelve steps to heaven:
Rupp, D. E., Shao, R., Thornton, M. A., & Skarlicki, D. P. (2013). Applicants’ and Successfully managing change through developing innovative teams. European
employees’ reactions to corporate social responsibility: The moderating effects of Journal of Work and Organizational Psychology, 13(2), 269–299.
first-party justice perceptions and moral identity. Personnel Psychology, 66(4), Weiss, H. M., & Cropanzano, R. (1996). Affective Events Theory: A Theoretical
895–933. Discussion of The Structure, Cause and Consequences of Affective Experiences at
Scherer, K. R., Schorr, A., Johnstone, T., & (Eds.).. (2001). Appraisal processes in emotion: Work. Research in Organizational Behavior, 18(1), 1–74.
Theory, methods, research. Oxford University Press. Williams, L. A., & DeSteno, D. (2008). Pride and perseverance: The motivational role of
Scott, S. G., & Bruce, R. A. (1994). Determinants of innovative behavior: A path model of pride. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 94(6), 1007.
individual innovation in the workplace. Academy of Management Journal, 37(3), Yan, L., & Yan, J. (2013). Leadership, organizational citizenship behavior, and
580–607. innovation in small business: An empirical study. Journal of Small Business &
Scott, S. G., & Lane, V. R. (2000). A stakeholder approach to organizational identity. Entrepreneurship, 26(2), 183–199.
Academy of Management Review, 25(1), 43–62. Zaki, J. (2020). Integrating empathy and interpersonal emotion regulation. Annual
Selman, R. L. (1980). The growth of interpersonal understanding. New York: Academic Review of Psychology, 71, 517–540.
Press. Zhao, X., Wu, C., Chen, C. C., & Zhou, Z. (2022). The influence of corporate social
Semedo, A. S. D., Coelho, A. F. M., & Ribeiro, N. M. P. (2016). Effects of authentic responsibility on incumbent employees: A meta-analytic investigation of the
leadership, affective commitment and job resourcefulness on employees’ creativity mediating and moderating mechanisms. Journal of Management, 48(1), 114–146.
and individual performance. Leadership & Organization Development Journal, 37(8),
1038–1055.
Dr. Palvi Pasricha is Faculty Fellow in the Organizational Behavior and Human Resources
Sen, S., Bhattacharya, C. B., & Korschun, D. (2006). The role of corporate social
Area at the Indian Institute of Management Kozhikode, Kerala, India. Her key research
responsibility in strengthening multiple stakeholder relationships: A field
areas are Corporate Social Responsibility, leadership, and innovation. Her works have
experiment. Journal of the Academy of Marketing science, 34(2), 158–166.
been published in the FT 50 and ABDC academic journals including the Journal of Business
Shahzadi, G., Qadeer, F., John, A., & Jia, F. (2020). CSR and identification: The
Ethics, Creativity and Innovation Management, etc. She has presented papers and has been
contingencies of employees’ personal traits and desire. Social Responsibility Journal,
conferred the Best Research Paper Award in various reputed international conferences.
16(8), 1239–1251.
Sharma, S., & Vredenburg, H. (1998). Proactive corporate environmental strategy and
the development of competitively valuable organizational capabilities. Strategic Dr. Nivedhitha K. S. is Assistant Professor in the Organizational Behavior and Human
Management Journal, 729–753. Resources Area at the Indian Institute of Management Kozhikode, Kerala, India. Her
Shin, I., Hur, W. M., & Kang, S. (2016). Employees’ perceptions of corporate social research works include human-computer interaction and creative behaviors. She has
responsibility and job performance: A sequential mediation model. Sustainability, 8 published several papers in A rank journals, such as the Behavior and Information Tech­
(5), 493. nology, Leisure Research, and Internet Research.
Skudiene, V., & Auruskeviciene, V. (2012). The contribution of corporate social
responsibility to internal employee motivation. Baltic Journal of Management, 7(1),
Dr. Juhi Raghuvanshi is Visiting Faculty in the Department of Management Studies at the
49–67.
Indian Institute of Technology Delhi, New Delhi, India. Her research is centered on
Slåtten, T. (2011). Antecedents and effects of employees’ feelings of joy on employees’
entrepreneurship and innovation management. She has authored or co-authored papers in
innovative behavior. International Journal of Quality and Service Sciences, 3(1),
various international journals.
93–109.

15