Chapter Four

Presentation and Analysis of Data

4.1 Demographic Data
Table 4.1: Distribution of Respondents by Department

Department Frequenc Percent Cumulative

y percent
General Banking 43 24.0 24.0
Retail Banking 20 11.2 35.2
Customer Services and 52 29.1 64.2
Technology
Credit 34 19.0 83.2
Treasury and Financial Services 14 7.8 91.1

Foreign Exchange 4 2.2 93.3

Administration 12 6.7 100
Total 179 100
Source: Field Survey, 2018
Table 4.1 above shows that 43 respondents which represent 24% of the total respondents
are working in general banking department, 20 respondents which represent 11.2% are
working in retail banking department, 52 respondents which represent 29.1% are working
in the customer services and technology department, 34 respondents which represent
19.0% are working in the credit department, 14 respondents which represent 7.8% are
working in treasury and financial services, 4 respondents which represent 2.2% are
working in the foreign exchange department while 12 respondents which represent 6.7%
of the total respondents are in administration department.

Table 4.2: Distribution of the Respondents by job status

Job Status Frequency Percent Cumulative

Percent
Junior Staff 106 59.2 59.2
Senior Staff 73 40.8 100
Total 179 100
Source: Field Survey, 2018

Table 4.2 shows that 106 respondents which represent 59.2% of the total respondents are junior
staff while 73 respondents which represent 40.8% are senior staff.
Table 4.3: Distribution of Respondents by Educational qualification
Educational Qualification Frequency Percent Cumulative
Percent
OND/HND 12 6.7 6.7
Bsc 83 46.4 53.1
Msc/MBA 44 24.6 77.7
Professional Qualification 40 22.3 100
Total 179 100
Source: Field Survey, 2018

Table 4.3 above shows that 12 respondents which represent 6.7% of the total respondents are
OND/HND holders, 83 respondents which represent 46.4% are Bsc holders while 44 respondents
which represent 24.6% have professional qualification.

Table 4.4: Distribution of Respondents by Sex

Sex Frequency Percent Cumulative
Percent
Male 130 72.6 72.6
Female 49 27.4 100
Total 179 100
Source: Field Survey, 2018
Table 4.4 above shows that 130 respondents which represent 72.6% of the respondents are male
while 49 respondents which represent 27.4% of the total respondents are female.

Table 4.5: Distribution of Respondents by Marital Status

Marital Status Frequency Percent Cumulative

Percent
Married 127 70.9 70.9
Single 52 29.1 100
Total 179 100
Source: Field Survey, 2018

Table 4.5 above shows that 127 respondents which represent 70.9% of the respondents are
married while 52 respondents which represent 29.1% of the respondents are single.
Table 4.6: Distribution of Respondents by duration of time with the bank
Duration Frequenc Percent Cumulative
y percent
Less than 2 years 36 20.1 20.1
2 years – 5 years 81 45.3 65.4
5 years – 10 years 34 19.0 84.4
10 years – 15 years 28 15.6 100
Total 179 100
Source: Field Survey, 2018

Table 4.6 above shows that 36 respondents which represent 20.1% of the respondents has been
with the bank for less than 2 years, 81 respondents which represent 45.3 have been with the bank
for two years to five years, 34 respondents which represent 19% of the respondents have been
with the bank for five years to ten years while 28 respondents which represent 15.6% of the
respondents have been with the bank for ten years to fifteen years.

Table 4.7: Distribution of Respondents by age

Age Frequenc Percent Cumulative

y percent
15- 25 years 30 16.8 16.8
26 – 35 years 21 11.7 28.5
36- 45 years 44 24.6 53.1
46 – 55 years 52 29.1 82.1
56 – 65 years 32 17.9 100
Total 179 100
Source: Field Survey, 2018
Table 4.7 above shows that 30 respondents which represent 16.8% are within age 15-25 years, 21
respondents which represent 11.7% of the respondents are within age 26 – 35 years, 44
respondents which represent 24.6% of the respondents are within age 36 – 45 years, 52
respondents which represent 29.1% of the respondent are within age 46 -55 years while 32
respondents which represent 17.9% are within age 56 – 65 years.
Table 4.8: Distribution of Respondents by work experience
Work Experience Frequenc Percent Cumulative
y percent
Below 5 years 43 24.0 24.0
5 – 10 years 44 24.6 48.6
10 – 15 years 51 28.5 77.1
Above 15 years 41 22.9 100
Total 179 100
Source: Field Survey, 2018
Table 4.8 above shows 43 respondents which represent 24% of the respondents have below 5
years working experience, 44 respondents which represent 24.6% of the respondents have 5 -10
years working experience, 51 respondents which represent 28.5% of the respondents have 10 –
15 years working experience while 41 respondents which represent 22.9% of the respondents
have above 15 years experience.

Table 4.9
Corporate Social Responsibility as an essential growth element and financial performance
boosting tool for firms
S/ STATEMENTS S A A NS D SD
N
Frq % Frq % frq % frq % fr %
q
1 Corporate 106 59. 49 27.4 17 9.5 - - 7 3.9
Social 2
Responsibility
is a basic tool
for the
development
of a firm in
terms of profit
maximization
2 Corporate 121 67. 46 25.7 2 1.1 10 5. - -
Social 6 6
Responsibility
is a
competitive
strategy
which is
beneficial for
 firms
3 Corporate 79 44. 78 43.6 4 2.2 16 8. 2 1.1
Social 1 9
Responsibility
has an effect
on the non-
financial and
overall
performance
of firms
4 Corporate 96 53. 51 28.5 17 9.5 15 8. - -
Social 6 4
Responsibility
could be an
essential
growth
element for
firms
5 Financial 113 63. 32 17.9 24 13.4 8 4. 2 1.1
performance 1 5
of firms is
affected by
Corporate
Social
Responsibility
activities
Source: Field Survey, 2018
Table 4.9 shows that 106 respondents which represent 59.2% strongly agreed that Corporate
Social Responsibility is a basic tool for the development of a firm in terms of profit
maximization, 49 respondents which represent 27.4% agreed with the statement, 17 respondents
which represent 9.5% were not sure while 7 respondents which represent 3.9 of the respondents
strongly disagreed that Corporate Social Responsibility is a basic tool for the development of a
firm in terms of profit maximization. The analysis in table 4.9 implies that Corporate Social
Responsibility is a basic tool for the development of a firm in terms of profit maximization.

The table also shows that 121 respondents that is 67.6% strongly agreed that Corporate Social
Responsibility is a competitive strategy which is beneficial for firms, 46 (25.7%) of the
respondents agreed with the statement, 2 (1.1%) of the respondents were not sure while 10
(5.6%) of the respondents disagreed that Corporate Social Responsibility is a competitive
strategy which is beneficial for firms. This analysis indicates that Corporate Social
Responsibility is a competitive strategy which is beneficial for firms.

The table also shows that 79 (44.1%) of the respondents strongly agreed that Corporate Social
Responsibility has an effect on the non-financial and overall performance of firms, 78 (43.6%)
agreed with the statement, 4 (2.2%) were not sure, 16 (8.9%) disagreed while 2 (1.1%) strongly
disagreed that Corporate Social Responsibility has an effect on the non-financial and overall
performance of firms. This analysis shows that Corporate Social Responsibility has an effect on
the non-financial and overall performance of firms. Likewise, the table shows that 96 (53.6%) of
the respondents strongly agreed that Corporate Social Responsibility could be an essential
growth element for firms, 51 (28.5%) of the respondents agreed with the statement, 17 (9.5%) of
the respondents were not sure while 15 (8.4%) of the respondents disagreed that Corporate
Social Responsibility could be an essential growth element for firms. This analysis indicates that
Corporate Social Responsibility could be an essential growth element for firms.

Table 4.9 also shows that 113 (63.1%) of the respondents strongly agreed that Financial
performance of firms is affected by Corporate Social Responsibility activities, 32 (17.9) of the
respondents agreed with the statement, 24 (13.4%) of the respondents were not sure, 8 (4.5%) of
the respondents disagreed while 2 (1.1%) of the respondents strongly disagreed that Financial
performance of firms is affected by Corporate Social Responsibility activities. This analysis
indicates that Financial performance of firms is affected by Corporate Social Responsibility
activities.

Table 4.10
Banks will attain sound financial management by engaging in Corporate Social
Responsibility practices
SA A NS D SD
S/N STATEMENTS Fq % Fq % FQ % Fq % Fq %
1 Corporate Social 67 37.4 64 35. 38 21. 6 3.4 4 2.2
Responsibility is one of the 8 2
main means of managing risk
of social factors and their
influence on the financial
aspect of a bank
2 Corporate Social 80 44.7 58 32. 25 14 16 8.9 - -
Responsibility may be
 connected to the market value 4
of shares and financial
leverage of banks
3 Banks that engage in 73 40.8 71 39. 33 18. 2 1.1 - -
Corporate Social 7 4
Responsibility activities have a
higher investors’ base due to
investor preferences
4 The profit base of a bank can 90 50.3 54 30. 23 12. 6 3.4 6 3.4
affect the level at which it can 2 8
go with Corporate Social
Responsibility
5 High social responsibility may 92 51.4 64 35. - - 19 10.6 4 2.2
improve a firm’s access to 8
sources of capital
Source: Field Survey, 2018
Table 4.10 shows that 67(37.4%) of the respondents strongly agreed that Corporate Social
Responsibility is one of the main means of managing risk of social factors and their influence on
the financial aspect of a bank, 64 (35.8%) of the respondents agreed with this statement, 38
(21.2%) of the respondents were not sure, 6 (3.4%) of the respondents disagreed with the
statement while 4 (2.2%) of the respondents strongly disagreed that Corporate Social
Responsibility is one of the main means of managing risk of social factors and their influence on
the financial aspect of a bank. This analysis indicates that Corporate Social Responsibility is one
of the main means of managing risk of social factors and their influence on the financial aspect
of a bank.
The table also shows 80 (44.7%) of the respondents strongly agreed that Corporate Social
Responsibility may be connected to the market value of shares and financial leverage of banks,
58 (32.4%) of the respondents agreed with the statement, 25 (14.0%) of the respondents were not
sure, while 16 (8.9%) of the respondents disagreed that Corporate Social Responsibility may be
connected to the market value of shares and financial leverage of banks. This analysis indicates
that Corporate Social Responsibility may be connected to the market value of shares and
financial leverage of banks.

Table 4.10 also shows that 73 (40.8%) of the respondents strongly agreed that Banks that engage
in Corporate Social Responsibility activities have a higher investors’ base due to investor
preferences, 71 (39.7%) of the respondents agreed with the statement, 33 (18.4%) of the
respondents were not sure, while 2 (1.1%) of the respondents disagreed that Banks that engage in
Corporate Social Responsibility activities have a higher investors’ base due to investor
preferences. This analysis indicates that Banks that engage in Corporate Social Responsibility
activities have a higher investors’ base due to investor preferences.

Table 4.10 also shows that 90 (50.3%) of the respondents strongly agreed that The profit base of
a bank can affect the level at which it can go with Corporate Social Responsibility, 54 (30.2%) of
the respondents agreed with the statement, 23 (12.8%) of the respondents were not sure, 6 (3.4%)
of the respondents disagreed with the statement while 6 (3.4%) of the respondents strongly
disagreed that The profit base of a bank can affect the level at which it can go with Corporate
Social Responsibility. This analysis indicates that The profit base of a bank can affect the level at
which it can go with Corporate Social Responsibility.

Also the table shows that 92 (51.4%) of the respondents strongly agreed that High social
responsibility may improve a firm’s access to sources of capital, 64 (35.8%) of the respondents
agreed with the statement, 19 (10.6%) of the respondents disagreed with the statement while 4
(2.2%) of the respondents strongly disagreed that High social responsibility may improve a
firm’s access to sources of capital. This analysis indicates that High social responsibility may
improve a firm’s access to sources of capital.

Table 4.11
Banks have responsibilities to stakeholders in attaining sound Corporate Social Responsibility
practices.

SD A NS D SD
S/N STATEMENTS Fq % Fq % Fq % F % Fq %
q
1 Stakeholders’ perceptions of 100 55.9 5 27. 29 16.2 - - - -
Corporate Social 0 9
Responsibility can contribute
to the maximization of a
bank’s potential reputation
2 The fulfillment of the concerns 55 30.7 7 39. 52 29.1 - - 2 1.1
of the stakeholders regarding 0 1
Corporate Social
Responsibility activities
determines the future growth
of banks
 3 Banks that are socially 60 33.5 8 44. 35 19.6 4 2. - -
responsible to their 0 7 2
stakeholders gain competitive
advantage over others
4 Banks which do not include 82 45.8 6 38. 14 7.8 8 4. 7 3.9
their shareholders’ concerns 8 0 5
and welfare in their plans and
strategies threaten their long
term survival
5 Banks that are responsible to 106 59.2 4 26. 19 10.6 6 3. - -
their shareholders, employees, 8 8 4
and customers attain sound
Corporate Social
Responsibility practices

Source: Field Survey, 2018

Table 4.11 shows that 100 (55.9%) of the respondents strongly agreed that Stakeholders’
perceptions of Corporate Social Responsibility can contribute to the maximization of a bank’s
potential reputation, 50 (27.9%) of the respondents agreed with the statement while 29 (16.2%)
of the respondents were not sure that Stakeholders’ perceptions of Corporate Social
Responsibility can contribute to the maximization of a bank’s potential reputation. This analysis
is a strong indication that Stakeholders’ perceptions of Corporate Social Responsibility can
contribute to the maximization of a bank’s potential reputation.

Table 4.11 also shows that 55 (30.7%) of the respondents strongly agreed that The fulfillment of
the concerns of the stakeholders regarding Corporate Social Responsibility activities determines
the future growth of banks, 70 (39.1%) of the respondents agreed with the statement, 52 (29.1%)
of the respondents were not sure, while 2 (1.1%) of the respondents strongly disagreed that The
fulfillment of the concerns of the stakeholders regarding Corporate Social Responsibility
activities determines the future growth of banks. This analysis indicates that The fulfillment of
the concerns of the stakeholders regarding Corporate Social Responsibility activities determines
the future growth of banks.

The table also shows that 60 (33.5%) of the respondents strongly agreed that Banks that are
socially responsible to their stakeholders gain competitive advantage over others, 80 (44.7%) of
the respondents agreed with the statement, 35 (19.6%) of the respondents were not sure, while 4
(2.2%) of the respondents disagreed that Banks that are socially responsible to their stakeholders
gain competitive advantage over others. This analysis indicates that Banks that are socially
responsible to their stakeholders gain competitive advantage over others.

Table 4.11 also shows that 82 (45.5%) of the respondents strongly agreed that Banks which do
not include their shareholders’ concerns and welfare in their plans and strategies threaten their
long term survival, 68 (38.0%) of the respondents agreed with the statement, 14 (7.8%) of the
respondents were not sure, 8 (4.5%) of the respondents disagreed with statement while 7 (3.9%)
of the respondents strongly disagreed that Banks which do not include their shareholders’
concerns and welfare in their plans and strategies threaten their long term survival. This analysis
indicates that Banks which do not include their shareholders’ concerns and welfare in their plans
and strategies threaten their long term survival.

The table equally shows that 106 (59.2%) of the respondents strongly agreed that Banks that are
responsible to their shareholders, employees, and customers attain sound Corporate Social
Responsibility practices, 48 (26.8%) of the respondents agreed with the statement, 19 (10.9%) of
the respondents were not sure while 6 (3.4%) of the respondents disagreed that Banks that are
responsible to their shareholders, employees, and customers attain sound Corporate Social
Responsibility practices. This analysis indicates that Banks that are responsible to their
shareholders, employees, and customers attain sound Corporate Social Responsibility practices.

Table 4.12
Investments in Corporate Social Responsibility and financial fortunes of banks.

SA A NS D SD
S/N STATEMENTS Fq % Fq % Fq % Fq % Fq %
1 Most banks do not engage in 10 57.0 5 31.8 12 6.7 8 4.5 - -
Corporate Social 2 7
Responsibility because they
see it as mere expenditure
2 Expenditure on Corporate 71 39.7 6 38.5 31 17.3 - - 8 4.5
Social Responsibility in the 9
long run improves the bank’s
returns
3 The impact of Corporate 89 49.7 5 31.8 27 15.1 - - 6 3.4
Social Responsibility on the 7
 financial performance of
banks may prove negative at
the initial stage of
implementation
4 Corporate Social 55 30.7 7 40.8 32 17.9 1 10.6 - -
Responsibility initiatives 3 9
require huge investments in
the short run but produces
considerable returns in the
long run
5 Corporate Social 10 59.8 4 22.3 22 12.3 4 2.2 6 3.4
Responsibility expenditure 7 0
leads to future financial
fortunes
Source: Field Survey, 2018

Table 4.12 shows that 102 (57.0%) of the respondents strongly agreed that Most banks do not
engage in Corporate Social Responsibility because they see it as mere expenditure, 57 (31.8%) of
the respondents agreed with the statement, 12 (6.7%) of the respondents were not sure, while 8
(4.5%) of the respondents disagreed that Most banks do not engage in Corporate Social
Responsibility because they see it as mere expenditure. This analysis indicates that Most banks
do not engage in Corporate Social Responsibility because they see it as mere expenditure.

Table 4.12 also shows that 71 (39.7%) of the respondents strongly agreed that Expenditure on
Corporate Social Responsibility in the long run improves the bank’s returns, 69 (38.5%) of the
respondents agreed with the statement, 31 (17.3%) of the respondents were not sure, while 8
(4.5%) of the respondents strongly disagreed that Expenditure on Corporate Social
Responsibility in the long run improves the bank’s returns. This analysis indicates that
Expenditure on Corporate Social Responsibility in the long run improves the bank’s returns.

The table also shows that 89 (49.7%) of the respondents strongly agreed that The impact of
Corporate Social Responsibility on the financial performance of banks may prove negative at the
initial stage of implementation, 57 (31.8%) of the respondents agreed with the statement, 27
(15.1%) of the respondents were not sure, while 6 (3.4%) of the respondents strongly disagreed
that The impact of Corporate Social Responsibility on the financial performance of banks may
prove negative at the initial stage of implementation. This analysis indicates that The impact of
Corporate Social Responsibility on the financial performance of banks may prove negative at the
initial stage of implementation.
Table 4.12 also shows that 55 (30.7%) of the respondents strongly agreed that Corporate Social
Responsibility initiatives require huge investments in the short run but produces considerable
returns in the long run, 73 (40.8%) of the respondents agreed with the statement, 32 (17.9%) of
the respondents were not sure, while 19 (10.6%) of the respondents disagreed that Corporate
Social Responsibility initiatives require huge investments in the short run but produces
considerable returns in the long run. This analysis indicates that Corporate Social Responsibility
initiatives require huge investments in the short run but produces considerable returns in the long
run.

Table 4.12 equally shows that 107 (59.8%) of the respondents strongly agreed that Corporate
Social Responsibility expenditure leads to future financial fortunes, 40 (22.3%) of the
respondents agreed with the statement, 22 (12.3%) of the respondents were not sure, 4 (2.2%) of
the respondents disagreed with the statement while 6 (3.4%) of the respondents strongly
disagreed that Corporate Social Responsibility expenditure leads to future financial fortunes.
This analysis indicates that Corporate Social Responsibility expenditure leads to future financial
fortunes.

Testing of Hypotheses
Hypothesis I
H01: CSR will not be an essential growth element and financial performance boosting tool for
firms.
H1: CSR will be an essential growth element and financial performance boosting tool for firms.
Table 4.13
Test Statistics

Financial performance of firms is affected by

Corporate Social Responsibility activities

Chi-Square 224.268a
Df 4
Asymp. Sig. .000
a. 0 cells (0.0%) have expected frequencies less than 5. The minimum expected
cell frequency is 35.8.
From table 4.13 above, X2 calculated is 224.268, while X2 tabulated is 9.49. the chi square
calculated is greater than chi square tabulated. Hence the null hypothesis is rejected while the
alternative hypothesis is accepted which states that CSR will be an essential growth element and
financial performance boosting tool for firms.

Hypothesis II:
H0: Banks will not attain appreciable financial management by engaging in Corporate Social
Responsibility practices.
H1: Banks will attain appreciable financial management by engaging in Corporate Social
Responsibility practices.
Significance Level
α = 0.05
Critical Value(s) and Rejection Region(s)
Reject the null hypothesis if p-value ≤ 0.05

Table 4.14 Regression Analysis

Model Summaryb

Model R R Square Adjusted R Std. Error of the Durbin-Watson

Square Estimate

1 .344a .118 .113 .898 1.711

a. Predictors: (Constant), Corporate Social Responsibility

b. Dependent Variable: Bank’s sound financial management

Table 4.15
Coefficientsa

Model Unstandardized Standardize t Sig. 95.0% Confidence Interval

Coefficients d for B
Coefficients

B Std. Error Beta Lower Upper

Bound Bound

(Constant) 2.972 .295 10.059 .000 2.389 3.555

1 Corporate Social .340 .070 .344 4.873 .000 .202 .477

Responsibility
a. Dependent Variable: Bank’s sound Financial management
T = 4.873, P- value = 0.000

Conclusion
Since p-value = 0.000 ≤ 0.05, we shall reject the null hypothesis.
At the = α = 0.05 level of significance, there exists enough evidence to conclude that the slope of
regression line is not zero and, hence, Banks will attain appreciable financial management by
engaging in Corporate Social Responsibility practices.

Hypothesis III
H03: Banks do not have responsibilities to shareholders, employees and customers in attaining
sound Corporate Social Responsibility practices.
H3: Banks have responsibilities to shareholders, employees and customers in attaining sound
Corporate Social Responsibility practices.

Table 4.16
ANOVA
Banks that are responsible to their shareholders, employees, and customers
attain sound Corporate Social Responsibility practices
Sum of Squares Df Mean Square F Sig.

Between Groups 8.899 3 2.966 4.777 .003

Within Groups 108.676 175 .621
Total 117.575 178

Table 4.16 shows that the significant P-value =0.003 is lesser than critical value 0.05. Therefore,
reject H03 and accept H3 which says Banks have responsibilities to shareholders, employees and
customers in attaining sound Corporate Social Responsibility practices.

Hypothesis IV
H04: Investments in CSR activities will not lead to bigger financial fortunes to the banks.
H04: Investments in CSR activities will not lead to bigger financial fortunes to the banks.

Table 4.17
Test Statistics

Corporate Social Responsibility expenditure

leads to future financial fortunes
Chi-Square 200.469a
Df 4
Asymp. Sig. .000
a. 0 cells (0.0%) have expected frequencies less than 5. The minimum
expected cell frequency is 35.8.
From table 4.17 above, X2 calculated is 200.469, while X2 tabulated is 9.49. the chi square
calculated is greater than chi square tabulated. Hence the null hypothesis is rejected while the
alternative hypothesis is accepted which states that Investments in CSR activities will not lead to
bigger financial fortunes to the banks.