Cornell Hospitality Quarterly http://cqx.sagepub.

com/

The Power of Meaningful Work: How Awareness of CSR Initiatives Fosters Task Significance and Positive Work
Outcomes in Service Employees
Steffen Raub and Stephan Blunschi
Cornell Hospitality Quarterly published online 30 August 2013
DOI: 10.1177/1938965513498300

The online version of this article can be found at:

http://cqx.sagepub.com/content/early/2013/08/29/1938965513498300
A more recent version of this article was published on - Jan 20, 2014

Published by:

http://www.sagepublications.com

On behalf of:

Cornell University School of Hotel Administration

Additional services and information for Cornell Hospitality Quarterly can be found at:

Email Alerts: http://cqx.sagepub.com/cgi/alerts

Subscriptions: http://cqx.sagepub.com/subscriptions

Reprints: http://www.sagepub.com/journalsReprints.nav

Permissions: http://www.sagepub.com/journalsPermissions.nav

Version of Record - Jan 20, 2014

>> OnlineFirst Version of Record - Aug 30, 2013

What is This?

Downloaded from cqx.sagepub.com at UNIVERSITE LAVAL on July 6, 2014

498300
research-article2013
CQXXXX10.1177/1938965513498300Cornell Hospitality QuarterlyRaub and Blunschi

Article
Cornell Hospitality Quarterly

The Power of Meaningful Work: How

XX(X) 1­–9
© The Author(s) 2013
Reprints and permissions:
Awareness of CSR Initiatives Fosters Task sagepub.com/journalsPermissions.nav
DOI: 10.1177/1938965513498300

Significance and Positive Work Outcomes cqx.sagepub.com

in Service Employees

Steffen Raub1 and Stephan Blunschi2

Abstract
This paper develops and tests a model of the impact of employees’ awareness of corporate social responsibility (CSR)
initiatives on perceived task significance and important attitudinal and behavioral work outcomes of service employees in
the hospitality industry. Data from 211 employees of a United Kingdom–based hotel chain provide support for the concept
that employees should be made aware of CSR actions. Results suggest that employees’ awareness of CSR activities is
positively related to job satisfaction, engagement in helping and voice behavior, and personal initiative, and CSR awareness
is negatively related to emotional exhaustion. These relationships are partly or fully mediated by perceived task significance.
We discuss implications of this research for theory and practice, and provide several recommendations for how managers
in the hospitality industry can increase employees’ awareness for corporate engagement in CSR initiatives.

Keywords
corporate social responsibility (CSR); hospitality industry; task significance; work design

Corporate social responsibility (CSR) has received consid-
erable attention in the hospitality industry (e.g., Lane 1982;
Rowe 1986; Stuckey and Jones 1996; Woods and Berger
1989), and guests’ attention to this phenomenon continues
to grow. CSR researchers have suggested that to gain a bal-
anced view of organizational effectiveness, service firms
should consider both the financial and the CSR-related per-
formance of their business (Jackson and Parsa 2009), and
have urged them to integrate CSR into their business strate-
gies (Bohdanowicz and Zientara 2008; Manson 2006;
Mullen 2006; Pérez and Rodriguez del Bosque 2012).
Moreover, there is increasing evidence that large, multina-
tional hospitality organizations not only implement CSR
activities but also report on these activities on their websites
and in their annual reports (Holcomb, Upchurch, and
Okumus 2007). Similar evidence is available for small,
independent hotels (Njite, Hancer, and Slevitch 2011), as
well as for the restaurant industry (Jones, Comfort, and
Hillier 2006).
The increasing business relevance of the topic has been
accompanied by a steady surge in research on the impact of
corporate CSR activities (Kechiche and Soparnot 2012;
Scherer and Palazzo 2011). To date, this research has been
predominantly focused on three distinct groups of stake-
holders: shareholders and investors, customers, and prospec-
tive employees. With regard to shareholders and potential
investors, the launch of the Dow Jones Sustainability Index
(DJSI) in 1999 highlights the relevance of CSR initiatives.
The DJSI rates companies according to fixed categories and
compares them within their industry. The success of this
index over the last eleven years shows that sustainability
initiatives are of significant interest for shareholders and
potential investors. Moreover, research suggests that CSR
performance is related to the financial success of organiza-
tions (Cochran and Wood 1984; Johnson and Greening
1994; McGuire, Sundgren, and Schneeweis 1988). Such a
positive effect of engagement in CSR on organizational
effectiveness (Kraft 1991), volume of business (Boluk
2013), and financial performance (Park and Lee 2009) has
also been suggested for service industries in general and the
hospitality industry in particular.
In a similar vein, the consequences of CSR activities for
customers have been investigated, and evidence for a rela-
tionship between CSR performance and consumer deci-
sions has accumulated (Romm 1994; Solomon and Hanson
1
Ecole hôtelière de Lausanne, Le Chalet-à-Gobet, Switzerland
2
MIGROS, Zürich, Switzerland
Corresponding Author:
Steffen Raub, Ecole hôtelière de Lausanne, Le Chalet-à-Gobet, Route de
Cojonnex 18, CH-1000 Lausanne 25, Switzerland.
Email: steffen.raub@ehl.ch

Downloaded from cqx.sagepub.com at UNIVERSITE LAVAL on July 6, 2014

2 Cornell Hospitality Quarterly XX(X)
1985; Vandermerwe and Oliff 1990). Service industry
research also suggests that corporate engagement in CSR is
positively associated with customer assessments of service
quality, customer loyalty, brand identification, and brand
equity (Calabrese and Lancioni 2008; de los Salmones,
Crespon, and del Bosque 2005; He and Li 2011; Poolthong
and Mandhachitara 2009), and similar findings are reported
in research specifically focused on the restaurant industry
(Choi 2011; Hsin-Hui, Parsa, and Self 2010).
As far as prospective employees are concerned, research
has suggested that firms that engage in CSR activities may
develop more positive images and that, as a result, CSR
may contribute to creating a competitive advantage in the
labor market (Davis 1973; Fombrun and Shanley 1990).
Drawing on social identity theory and signaling theory,
Turban and Greening (1996) showed that firms’ corporate
social performance (CSP) is positively related to reputation
and increases their attractiveness as employers. Along the
same lines, other researchers have argued that prospective
employees could be more strongly attracted to organiza-
tions that engage in CSR activities (e.g., Brammer,
Millington, and Rayton 2007; Greening and Turban 2000;
Peterson 2004; Rupp, Ganapathi, Aguilera, and Williams
2006; Turban and Greening 1996). CSR also becomes more
relevant from the employers’ perspective. For instance,
recent hospitality research suggests that recruiters in the
hospitality industry are increasingly sensitive to CSR-
related values in job candidates and use these value orienta-
tions as an additional selection criterion (Day et al. 2013).
Given the depth of research on the impact of corporate
CSR activities on shareholders and investors, customers,
and prospective employees, there is a surprising lack of
research on its impact on another important set of stake-
holders: the organization’s current employees. In this
research, we attempt to fill this gap and investigate the rela-
tionship between corporate CSR activities and important
outcomes at the employee level.
CSR and Job Design: The Importance
of Meaningful Work
Research on job design has a long tradition in the organiza-
tional behavior field, dating back to Frederick Taylor’s
work on scientific management at the turn of the twentieth
century (see, for example, Taylor 1911) and to the human
relations movement (Roethlisberger and Dickson 1939). A
dominant place in research on work design is occupied by
Hackman and Oldham’s (1975; 1976) path-breaking work
on job characteristics theory. Hackman and Oldham identi-
fied five “core job characteristics,” which predict important
outcomes such as job satisfaction, motivation, performance,
and turnover. These core job characteristics include skill
variety (the variety of different activities that need to be car-
ried out in a job), task identity (the degree to which the job
Downloaded from cqx.sagepub.com at UNIVERSITE LAVAL on July 6, 2014
allows for the completion of a “whole” identifiable piece of
work), autonomy (the extent to which the job provides for
independence and discretion), and feedback (the extent to
which the job or other people provide feedback on the
effectiveness with which the job is carried out). For our pur-
poses, a fifth core job characteristic is most essential: task
significance.
Task significance is defined as “the degree to which the
job has a substantial impact on the lives or work of other
people—whether in the immediate organization or in the
external environment” (Hackman and Oldham 1975, 161).
The task significance construct has triggered a substantial
amount of research on how individual perceptions of being
able to make a difference for others are related to individual
job attitudes and work performance (Grant 2007; 2008). Job
design researchers have argued that job characteristics are
not simply an objective given, but that jobholders actively
participate in shaping the characteristics of their jobs and
develop their own perceptions of these characteristics
(Wrzesniewski and Dutton 2001). One of the driving forces
in this process is the search for meaning in work. In short,
meaningful work requires that employees understand the
significance of what they do (Wrzesniewski, Dutton, and
Debebe 2003).
We suggest that organizational engagement in CSR is
one mechanism by which the perceived meaning in work
can be increased. When organizations engage in CSR activ-
ities, they actively contribute to the economic, ecological,
or social environment around them. Such activities enhance
the image of the organization and allow employees to con-
struct a positive identity for themselves and the organiza-
tion in which they work as a place that cares for and
contributes to the well-being of others. This perception
should increase task significance, which involves the per-
ception of making a positive difference in the lives of
others.
For organizational CSR activities to have positive conse-
quences for individual perceptions of task significance, per-
sonal involvement or engagement in such initiatives would
certainly be beneficial. But this does not constitute a neces-
sary condition. Rather, what is critical is that employees are
aware of the organization’s engagement in CSR initiatives.
Hence, we propose the following:
Hypothesis 1: Awareness of CSR activities is positively
related to perceived task significance.
Task significance is one of the job characteristics that,
according to Hackman and Oldham (1975; 1976), contrib-
ute to positive individual work outcomes. They suggest that
when work is experienced as being meaningful, individual
job satisfaction should increase. As a baseline to our inves-
tigation, and in replication of the findings of previous work
design research, we suggest the following:
Raub and Blunschi
Hypothesis 2: Task significance is positively related to
job satisfaction.
Beyond its attitudinal impact, however, task significance
should also have behavioral consequences. Since high task
significance is associated with strong internal work motiva-
tion (Hackman and Oldham 1975; 1976), employees who
experience high task significance should be more likely to
engage in discretionary types of work behavior, such as
organizational citizenship behavior (Organ 1988), for which
intrinsic motivation is an important antecedent.
Discretionary work behaviors are of particular impor-
tance in the service industry, as they are strongly related to
customer satisfaction (Raub and Liao 2010). Two types of
organizational citizenship behavior that are frequently stud-
ied in the hospitality industry are helping behavior and
voice behavior (Stamper and Van Dyne 2001). Helping
behavior involves supporting or assisting colleagues who
are faced with difficult tasks or suffer from work overload.
Voice behavior involves making constructive suggestions
for improvements in work processes or procedures. More
recently, research on discretionary work behaviors has been
extended to include “proactive” types of work behavior,
including personal initiative (Frese et al. 1997; Griffin,
Neal, and Parker 2007). Personal initiative at work involves
a long-term oriented, proactive, change-oriented, and per-
sistent approach to work. The positive relationship between
individual initiative in service work and desirable individ-
ual and organizational outcomes has been established (Rank
et al. 2007; Raub and Liao 2012). Given that the internal
motivation generated by high task significance should be
translated into more engagement in discretionary work
behaviors, we suggest the following:
Hypothesis 3: Task significance is positively related
to helping behavior, voice behavior, and personal
initiative.
Service work is often emotionally challenging (Grandey,
Dickter, and Sin 2004; Hochschild 1983). The diversity and
range of customer demands, the need for frequent emo-
tional labor, and encounters with demanding or even
aggressive customers take a toll on service employees’
emotional resources. Coping with the emotional demands
of service work should be facilitated when service employ-
ees perceive their work as meaningful. As a result, with
high experienced task significance, the potential negative
impact of emotionally challenging service work should be
at least partly buffered, and task significance should be neg-
atively related to emotional exhaustion. We therefore sug-
gest the following:
Hypothesis 4: Task significance is negatively related to
emotional exhaustion.
Downloaded from cqx.sagepub.com at UNIVERSITE LAVAL on July 6, 2014
3
Exhibit 1:
Theoretical Model.
H2 Job Satisfaction
H3 Emotional Exhaustion
CSR H1 Task H4
Awareness Significance Helping Behavior
Voice Behavior
H5 H5
Personal Initiative
In the preceding hypotheses, we suggested that the
awareness of organizational involvement in CSR activi-
ties contributes to perceived task significance, which, in
turn, should be beneficially related to a range of attitudi-
nal and behavioral outcomes. The combination of these
hypotheses suggests a mediated model in which the ben-
eficial effect of employees’ awareness of corporate CSR
activities is fully or partly mediated by task significance.
Therefore,
Hypothesis 5: Awareness of CSR activities is positively
related to job satisfaction, helping behavior, voice
behavior, and personal initiative, and negatively
related to emotional exhaustion, and this relationship
is at least partly mediated by task significance.
Exhibit 1 provides an overview of our hypothesized
model.
Method
Sample and Procedures
We collected data with the support of a hotel chain based in
the United Kingdom, which comprises two sister brands.
The data came from four hotel properties, which belonged
to the two different brands and were located in two primary
cities in the United Kingdom. Due to the fact that a substan-
tial proportion of the employees in our sample had limited
access to a computer, we used paper-based questionnaires.
The data collection process was officially announced by the
human resources managers of the participating properties,
and employees were allowed to fill out questionnaires dur-
ing their remunerated working hours. Data collection was
personally overseen by a member of the investigating
team to guarantee full confidentiality for the participating
employees.
The sample was limited to the four hotel properties
with a total of 330 eligible employees. Overall, 211
employees completed questionnaires, corresponding to a
64 percent response rate. The mean age of respondents
was 28.25 years (SD = 8.51), their mean tenure was 2.46
years (SD = 2.51), and 52 percent of the respondents were
female.
4 Cornell Hospitality Quarterly XX(X)

Exhibit 2:
Descriptive Statistics, Reliabilities, and Zero-Order Correlations.

Variable Mean SD 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10
1 Age 28.25 8.51 —
2 Gender 0.48 0.50 .02 —
3 Tenure 2.46 2.51 .45** .03 —
4 CSR awareness 3.05 0.88 .11 −.06 .27** .86
5 Task significance 3.50 0.85 .02 −.04 .20** .23** .85
6 Job satisfaction 3.60 0.76 −.05 .15* −.07 .12 .38** .83
7 Emotional exhaustion 2.57 0.80 −.04 −.11 .06 −.15* −.16* −.45** .90
8 Helping behavior 3.95 0.66 .05 .15* .1 .20** .41** .40** −.19** .91
9 Voice behavior 3.57 0.74 .14 .17* .16* .25** .41** .28** −.08 .62** .92
10 Personal initiative 3.84 0.68 .04 .17* .11 .15* .42** .44** −.15* .76** .66** .93

Note. Bold figures on the diagonal are scale reliabilities (Cronbach’s alpha). Age and Tenure measured in years. Gender: 0 = female, 1 = male. CSR =
corporate social responsibility.
*p < .05. **p < .01.

Measures exhaustion. Sample items include, “I feel emotionally

The questionnaire consisted of three sections. The first part
assessed employees’ awareness of CSR initiatives. The sec-
ond part focused on their perception of several work design
variables, including perceived task significance. The third
part included work outcome dimensions. We used estab-
lished measures to assess the central variables of the theo-
retical model, as described below. The survey instrument
was pre-tested on a medium-size sample of hospitality stu-
dents and hospitality managers. This pilot test did not reveal
any issues with regard to the face validity of the items in the
instrument. Scale reliabilities proved to be acceptable and
similar in range to those observed in the main study.
Awareness of sustainability initiatives. The four items address-
ing awareness of sustainability initiatives were adapted
from Raub (2008). Sample items include, “I am very aware
of HOTEL’s CSR initiatives” and “I have a great deal of
knowledge about HOTEL’s CSR initiatives” (α = .86).
Task significance. Task significance was assessed with three
items from Morgeson and Humphrey’s (2006) Work Design
Questionnaire (WDQ). Sample items include, “The results
of my work are likely to significantly affect the lives of
other people” and “My job itself is very significant and
important in a broader scheme of things” (α = .85).
Job satisfaction. We used the four-item scale developed by
Quinn and Shepard (1974) to measure job satisfaction.
Sample items include, “If a good friend told me she or he
was interested in working in a job like mine we would
strongly recommend it” and “All in all, I am very satisfied
with my current job” (α = .83).
Emotional exhaustion. The eight-item scale from Maslach
and Jackson (1981) was used to measure emotional
drained from my work” and “I feel frustrated by my job”
(α = .90).
Helping behavior. Helping behavior was measured with five
items from Podsakoff et al.’s (1990) Altruism scale. Sample
items for helping include, “I help others who have been
absent” and “I help orient new people even though it is not
required” (α = .91).
Voice behavior. Voice behavior was measured with five
items adapted from Van Dyne and LePine (1998). Sample
items for voice include, “I speak up in this department with
ideas for new projects or changes in procedures” and “I
communicate my opinions about work issues to others in
this department even when my opinion is different and oth-
ers in the department disagree with me” (α = .92).
Personal initiative. We used the seven-item scale developed
by Frese et al. (1997) to measure personal initiative. Sample
items include, “I actively attack problems” and “I am par-
ticularly good at realizing ideas” (α = .93).
The response format for all items was a five-point Likert-
type scale ranging from 1 = strongly disagree to 5 = strongly
agree. The control variables included gender, age, and tenure.
Findings
Descriptive statistics, scale reliabilities, and correlations are
shown in Exhibit 2. Cronbach’s alphas range from .83 to
.93, demonstrating good scale reliabilities for all the mea-
surement scales used in this research.
In an effort to assess the discriminant validity of our key
constructs, we conducted a series of confirmatory factor
analyses. Results of these confirmatory factor analyses
(CFAs) are reported in Exhibit 3. We compared the pro-
posed seven-factor model with three theoretically plausible

Downloaded from cqx.sagepub.com at UNIVERSITE LAVAL on July 6, 2014

Raub and Blunschi 5

Exhibit 3:
Results of Confirmatory Factor Analysis.

Model df χ2 NFI CFI IFI RMSEA Δχ2

Model 1: Single factor 665 8192.38 .69 .71 .71 .22
Model 2: 2 factors (predictors, outcomes) 664 5723.86 .75 .78 .78 .18 Model 2 vs. Model 1 Δχ2(1) =
2468.52; p < .001
Model 3: 5 factors (CSR awareness, task significance, job 655 3836.02 .81 .81 .84 .15 Model 3 vs. Model 2 Δχ2(9) =
satisfaction, emotional exhaustion, performance outcomes) 1887.84; p < .001
Model 4: 7 factors (CSR awareness, task significance, job 644 2459.04 .85 .88 .88 .11 Model 4 vs. Model 3 Δχ2(11) =
satisfaction, emotional exhaustion, helping, voice, personal 1376.98; p < .001
initiative)

Note. NFI = normed fit index; CFI = comparative fit index; IFI = incremental fit index; RMSEA = root mean square error of approximation; CSR =
corporate social responsibility.

Exhibit 4: Exhibit 5:
Mediation Analysis—Step 1. Mediation Analysis—Steps 2 and 3 for Job Attitudes.

Independent Variables DV: Task Significance DV: Emotional

DV: Job Satisfaction Exhaustion
Age −.10 Independent
Gender −.01 Variables Model 1 Model 2 Model 1 Model 2
Tenure .19*
CSR awareness .18* Age −.03 .01 −.07 −.08
Gender .14 .14* −.10 −.11
Note. Table entries are standardized regression coefficients (betas). Tenure −.10 −.18* .13 .17*
DV = dependent variable; CSR = corporate social responsibility. CSR awareness .15* .07 −.19* −.16*
*p < .05. **p < .01.
Task significance .43** −.18*
Type of mediation Full Partial

alternative models, including a one-factor model, a two-
factor model separating predictor and outcome variables,
and a five-factor model in which the behavioral outcome
measures were collapsed into a single factor. The results
reveal that the seven-factor model shows acceptable fit to
the data (normed fit index [NFI] = .85, comparative fit
index [CFI] = .88, incremental fit index [IFI] = .88, root
mean square error of approximation [RMSEA] = .11) and,
more importantly, also fits the data significantly better than
the alternative models.
To assess the hypothesized mediated model, we applied
the widely used Baron and Kenny (1986) procedure. As a
first step, we assessed whether CSR awareness was posi-
tively related to task significance (our presumed mediator).
As shown in Exhibit 4, when controlling for age, gender,
and tenure, CSR awareness predicts task significance (β =
.18, p < .05). This result provides support for hypothesis 1
and indicates that the first condition of the Baron and Kenny
procedure is fulfilled.
As a second step, we tested whether CSR awareness pre-
dicted the outcome variables (while controlling for age,
gender, and tenure), with the results shown in Exhibits 5
and 6 under “Model 1.” As predicted, CSR awareness was
positively related to job satisfaction (β = .15, p < .05), help-
ing behavior (β = .21, p < .01), voice behavior (β = .22, p <
.01), and personal initiative (β = .16, p < .05), and was nega-
tively related to emotional exhaustion (β = −.19, p < .05).
Note. Table entries are standardized regression coefficients (betas).
DV = dependent variable; CSR = corporate social responsibility.
*p < .05. **p < .01.
The third step in the Baron and Kenny (1986) procedure
consists of examining a model in which the independent
variable (CSR awareness) and the mediator (task signifi-
cance) are jointly introduced as predictors of an outcome
variable. These models are designated as “Model 2” in
Exhibits 5 and 6. For mediation to occur, the effect of the
independent variable should be reduced in the last step of
the analysis. Full mediation occurs if this effect becomes
nonsignificant. A reduced but still significant regression
coefficient for the independent variable provides evidence
for partial mediation.
As shown in Exhibits 5 and 6, the introduction of task
significance in Model 2 leads to a reduction in the effect of
CSR awareness for every outcome variable.
In the case of job satisfaction (β = .15, p < .05 → β = .07,
ns) and personal initiative (β = .16, p < .05 → β = .09, ns),
the nonsignificant regression coefficients for CSR aware-
ness provide evidence for full mediation. For emotional
exhaustion (β = −.19, p < .05 → β = −.16, p < .05), helping
behavior (β = .21, p < .01 → β = .15, p < .05), and voice
behavior (β = .22, p < .01 → β = .16, p < .05), the results

Downloaded from cqx.sagepub.com at UNIVERSITE LAVAL on July 6, 2014

6 Cornell Hospitality Quarterly XX(X)
Exhibit 6:
Mediation Analysis—Steps 2 and 3 for Behavioral Outcomes.
Helping Behavior
DV Model 1 Model 2
Age −.02 .00
Gender .27* .17*
Tenure .05 −.02
CSR awareness .21** .15*
Task significance .38**
Type of mediation Partial
Note. Table entries are standardized regression coefficients (betas). DV = dependent variable; CSR = corporate social responsibility.
*p < .05. **p < .01.
provide evidence for partial mediation. Taken together,
these results provide support for hypotheses 2 through 5.
Discussion
Implications for Theory
From a theoretical perspective, the findings of this research
provide support for the notion that corporate engagement
in CSR initiatives can have beneficial effects for an
important stakeholder group, namely, current employees.
Whereas previous research provides evidence for the
impact of engagement in CSR on an organization’s finan-
cial performance (e.g., Cochran and Wood 1984; Johnson
and Greening 1994; McGuire, Sundgren, and Schneeweis
1988), as well as on its reputation and attractiveness in the
labor market (e.g., Greening and Turban 2000; Turban and
Greening 1996), its impact on the workforce has not been
studied to a similar extent. The fact that awareness of CSR
initiatives is positively related to discretionary work behav-
iors (including OCB and personal initiative) and negatively
related to emotional exhaustion is of particular relevance to
the service industries in general, and the hospitality indus-
try in particular, given the importance of these work behav-
iors in a service context and the frequent strain put on
employees’ emotional resources that are characteristic for
the industry.
These results also underscore the importance of task sig-
nificance as a mediating mechanism in this relationship.
When employees are aware of corporate engagement in
CSR, they perceive that together with their organization,
they can make a positive difference for other people and for
the environment. This perception of “meaningful work”
plays an important role in transmitting the effect of CSR
awareness on the outcomes we studied. These results also
underscore the importance of task significance as an impor-
tant work design variable that has long been neglected by
research and has recently benefited from a surge of interest
among organizational researchers (Grant 2008).
Downloaded from cqx.sagepub.com at UNIVERSITE LAVAL on July 6, 2014
Voice Behavior Personal Initiative
Model 1 Model 2 Model 1 Model 2
.05 .07 −.04 −.01
.17* .17* .20** .20**
.09 .02 .07 −.01
.22** .16* .16* .09
.36** .43**
Partial Full
Limitations
As with all research, this study has a number of limitations.
The use of measures obtained from employees may suggest
possible concerns about common method bias. Also, the
cross-sectional design of our study does not allow for draw-
ing conclusions about causal relationships. Finally, the fact
that our sample of employees was drawn from a limited
number of establishments of a single organization operating
in a single country and a specific segment of the hospitality
industry limits the generalizability of our results. Future
replications and extensions of this study should attempt to
investigate these relationships with multiple measures
obtained from different cultural and industry contexts, and,
if possible, use a longitudinal design.
Implications for Practice
From the viewpoint of hospitality industry practice, the
most important implication of our findings is that when hos-
pitality organizations engage in CSR activities and make
their employees aware of these activities, they can reap sub-
stantial benefits in terms of improved job attitudes and
greater engagement in discretionary work behaviors. This is
an important finding because research suggests that engage-
ment in CSR may be driven by the objective of projecting a
better image to financial investors, potential customers, or
potential employees, or may simply reflect a trend to follow
the latest management fashion (Abrahamson and Fairchild
1999), rather than being explicitly focused on promoting
outcomes at the level of the organization’s employees.
When engagement in CSR is not motivated by an explicit
concern for the attitudes and performance of current
employees, it is more likely that organizations miss out on
multiple opportunities of making their employees aware of
ongoing CSR initiatives. However, this study suggests that
it is the employees’ awareness of these initiatives that
drives results. Observation of CSR practices in the organi-
zation under investigation in our study and discussion with
Raub and Blunschi
managers revealed multiple starting points for thinking
about how hospitality businesses can foster greater aware-
ness of corporate CSR initiatives in their employees.
An important facilitating factor for fostering such an
awareness seems to be the extent to which CSR initiatives
are closely linked to and integrated with the organization’s
core business. Employees are more likely to be aware of
CSR initiatives that demonstrate a visible impact in their
immediate work environment. For instance, a hospitality
firm’s engagement in promoting sustainable development
through the local sourcing of food products or its pledge to
contribute to energy conservation through the systematic
use of energy-saving technologies in its properties is more
likely to contribute to the employees’ awareness of CSR
initiatives than is a development project in a country that is
thousands of miles away or a sponsorship of a lofty cultural
event. In essence, employees will more readily perceive the
organization’s core business as meaningful when they have
the opportunity to observe how the organization is doing
good in their daily work environment.
A second facilitating factor for greater awareness of
CSR initiatives is their degree of “localization.” Engagement
in CSR is frequently guided by overarching corporate poli-
cies. Greater awareness at the level of the organization’s
employees can be achieved when sizable portions of the
planning and execution of concrete CSR-related activities
are left to lower levels of the hierarchy (i.e., to decision
makers in individual hotel properties). For instance,
appointing a “local CSR champion” in each property puts a
face on the organization’s engagement, facilitates rapid deci-
sion-making, fosters widespread participation, and allows
recognition and rewarding of special efforts of individual
team members.
A related factor is the effective communication of CSR
initiatives. It is not sufficient to inform employees by news-
letter that the organization is supporting a particular charity.
To identify with and derive meaning from CSR initiatives,
employees need to be able to understand why a company is
engaging in the chosen initiative and how this initiative is
contributing to the welfare of others. This requires not only
continuity and coherence in the company’s engagement in
CSR but also well-orchestrated communication efforts to
help employees understand on a continuous basis what
drives the organization’s CSR philosophy, what concrete
positive impact can be generated through engagement in
CSR, and possibly also how employees themselves can
contribute to the ongoing success of these initiatives.
Last but not least, awareness of organizational engage-
ment in CSR can be facilitated when CSR initiatives are
implemented in such a way that they allow for active par-
ticipation of employees. Personal involvement fosters a bet-
ter understanding of what the company is trying to achieve.
If the participation in CSR initiatives brings the possibility
of direct contact with beneficiaries of these efforts, task
Downloaded from cqx.sagepub.com at UNIVERSITE LAVAL on July 6, 2014
7
significance can be enhanced, direct connection to the daily
work can be ensured, and positive effect of the participation
can be sustained.
Declaration of Conflicting Interests
The author(s) declared no potential conflicts of interest with respect
to the research, authorship, and/or publication of this article.
Funding
The author(s) received no financial support for the research,
authorship, and/or publication of this article.
References
Abrahamson, E., and G. Fairchild. 1999. Management fash-
ion: Lifecycles, triggers, and collective learning processes.
Administrative Science Quarterly 44:708-40.
Baron, R. M., and D. A. Kenny. 1986. The moderator-mediator vari-
able distinction in social psychological research: Conceptual,
strategic, and statistical considerations. Journal of Personality
and Social Psychology 51:1173-82.
Bohdanowicz, P., and P. Zientara. 2008. Corporate social respon-
sibility in hospitality: Issues and implications. A case study
of Scandic. Scandinavian Journal of Hospitality and Tourism
8:271-93.
Boluk, K. 2013. Using CSR as a tool for development: An inves-
tigation of the Fair Hotels Scheme in Ireland. Journal of
Quality Assurance in Hospitality and Tourism 14:49-65.
Brammer, S., A. Millington, and B. Rayton. 2007. The contri-
bution of corporate social responsibility to organizational
commitment. International Journal of Human Resource
Management 18:1701-19.
Calabrese, A., and F. Lancioni. 2008. Analysis of corporate social
responsibility in the service sector: Does exist a strategic
path? Knowledge and Process Management 15:107-125.
Choi, G. 2011. Corporate social and environmental responsi-
bility in services: Will consumers pay for it? Academy of
Management Annual Meeting Proceeding 1:1-6.
Cochran, P. L., and R. A. Wood. 1984. Corporate social respon-
sibility and financial performance. Academy of Management
Journal 27:42-56.
Davis, K. 1973. The case for and against business assumption
of social responsibilities. Academy of Management Journal
16:312-22.
Day, J., A. Karani, H. Adler, and A. Nicely. 2013. Corporate
social responsibility and college recruiting in the hospital-
ity industry. Journal of Human Resources in Hospitality and
Tourism 12:71-90.
de los Salmones, M., A. Crespo, and I. del Bosque. 2005. Influence
of corporate social responsibility on loyalty and valuation of
services. Journal of Business Ethics 61:369-85.
Fombrun, C., and M. Shanley. 1990. What’s in a name? Reputation
building and corporate strategy. Academy of Management
Journal 33:233-58.
Frese, M., D. Fay, T. Hilburger, K. Leng, and A. Tag. 1997. The
concept of personal initiative: Operationalization, reliability
and validity in two German samples. Journal of Occupational
and Organizational Psychology 70:139-61.
8 Cornell Hospitality Quarterly XX(X)
Grandey, A. A., D. N. Dickter, and H.-P. Sin. 2004. The cus-
tomer is not always right: Customer aggression and emotion
regulation of service employees. Journal of Organizational
Behavior 25:397-418.
Grant, A. M. 2007. Relational job design and the motivation to
make a prosocial difference. Academy of Management Review
32:393-417.
Grant, A. M. 2008. The significance of task significance: Job per-
formance effects, relational mechanisms and boundary condi-
tions. Journal of Applied Psychology 93:108-24.
Greening, D. W., and D. B. Turban. 2000. Corporate social perfor-
mance as a competitive advantage in attracting a quality work
force. Business and Society 39:254-80.
Griffin, M. A., A. Neal, and S. K. Parker. 2007. A new model
of work role performance: Positive behavior in uncertain and
interdependent contexts. Academy of Management Journal
50:327-47.
Hackman, J. R., and G. R. Oldham. 1975. Development of the Job
Diagnostic Survey. Journal of Applied Psychology 60:159-70.
Hackman, J. R., and G. R. Oldham. 1976. Motivation through the
design of work: Test of a theory. Organizational Behavior
and Human Performance 16:250-79.
He, H., and Y. Li. 2011. CSR and service brand: The mediating
effect of brand identification and moderating effect of service
quality. Journal of Business Ethics 100:673-88.
Hochschild, A. R. 1983. The managed heart. Berkeley: University
of California Press.
Holcomb, J. L., R. S. Upchurch, and F. Okumus. 2007. Corporate
social responsibility: What are top hotel companies report-
ing? International Journal of Contemporary Hospitality
Management 19:461-75.
Hsin-Hui, H., H. G. Parsa, and J. Self. 2010. The dynamics of
green restaurant patronage. Cornell Hospitality Quarterly
51:344-62.
Jackson, L. A., and H. G. Parsa. 2009. Corporate social respon-
sibility and financial performance: A typology for service
industries. International Journal of Business Insights and
Transformation 2:13-21.
Johnson, R. A., and D. W. Greening. 1994. The effect of corpo-
rate governance and institutional ownership types on cor-
porate social performance. Proceedings of the International
Association for Business and Society, 222-27.
Jones, P., D. Comfort, and D. Hillier. 2006. Reporting and reflect-
ing on corporate social responsibility in the hospitality
industry. International Journal of Contemporary Hospitality
Management 18:329-40.
Kechiche, A., and R. Soparnot. 2012. CSR within SMEs: Literature
review. International Business Research 5:97-104.
Kraft, K. L. 1991. The relative importance of social responsibility
in determining organizational effectiveness: Managers from
two service industries. Journal of Business Ethics 10:485-91.
Lane, H. E. 1982. The corporate conscience and the role of busi-
ness in society. Cornell Hotel and Restaurant Administration
Quarterly 23:8-18.
Manson, E. 2006. Hotel groups missing out on benefits of CSR.
Caterer and Hotelkeeper 196:6.
Maslach, C., and S. Jackson. 1981. The measurement of experi-
enced burnout. Journal of Occupational Behavior 2:99-113.
Downloaded from cqx.sagepub.com at UNIVERSITE LAVAL on July 6, 2014
McGuire, J. B., A. Sundgren, and T. Schneeweis. 1988. Corporate
social responsibility and firm financial performance. Academy
of Management Journal 31:854-72.
Morgeson, F. P., and S. E. Humphrey. 2006. The Work Design
Questionnaire (WDQ): Developing and validating a compre-
hensive measure for assessing job design and the nature of
work. Journal of Applied Psychology 91:1321-39.
Mullen, R. 2006. CSR: Hotel groups must reap what they sow.
Caterer and Hotelkeeper 196:16.
Njite, D., M. Hancer, and L. Slevitch. 2011. Exploring corporate
social responsibility: A manager’s perspective on how and
why small independent hotels engage with their communi-
ties. Journal of Quality Assurance in Hospitality and Tourism
12:177-201.
Organ, D. W. 1988. Organizational citizenship behavior: The
good soldier syndrome. Lexington: Lexington Books.
Park, S. Y., and S. Lee. 2009. Financial rewards for social respon-
sibility: A mixed picture for restaurant companies. Cornell
Hospitality Quarterly 50:168-79.
Pérez, A., and I. Rodríguez del Bosque. 2012. The role of CSR in
the corporate identity of banking service providers. Journal of
Business Ethics 108:145-66.
Peterson, D. K. 2004. The relationship between perceptions of cor-
porate citizenship and organizational commitment. Business
and Society 43:296-319.
Podsakoff, P. M., S. B. MacKenzie, R. H. Moorman, and R. Fetter.
1990. Transformational leader behaviors and their effects on
followers’ trust in leader, satisfaction and organizational citi-
zenship behaviors. Leadership Quarterly 1:107-42.
Poolthong, Y., and R. Mandhachitara. 2009. Customer expectations
of CSR, perceived service quality and brand effect in Thai retail
banking. International Journal of Bank Marketing 27:408-27.
Quinn, R., and L. Shepard. 1974. The 1972-73 quality of employ-
ment survey. Ann Arbor: Michigan Survey Research Center
of the Institute for Social Research.
Rank, J., J. M. Carsten, J. M. Unger, and P. E. Spector. 2007.
Proactive customer service performance: Relationships with
individual, task, and leadership variables. Human Performance
20:363-90.
Raub, S. 2008. Merck Thailand: The role of “meaning” for work
attitudes and behaviors—Executive summary of results
(Unpublished report).
Raub, S. P., and H. Liao. 2010. Antecedents and outcomes of
proactive customer service: A cross-level model. Poster pre-
sented at the 25th Annual SIOP Conference, Atlanta.
Raub, S. P., and H. Liao. 2012. Doing the right thing without being
told: Joint effects of initiative climate and general self-effi-
cacy on employee proactive customer service performance.
Journal of Applied Psychology 97:651-667.
Roethlisberger, F. J., and W. J. Dickson. 1939. Management and
the worker. Boston: Harvard University Press.
Romm, J. J. 1994. Lean and clean. New York: Kodansha
International.
Rowe, P. D., Jr. 1986. Opening your minds to community
responsibility. Cornell Hotel and Restaurant Administration
Quarterly 27: 8.
Rupp, D. E., J. Ganapathi, R. V. Aguilera, and C. A. Williams.
2006. Employee reactions to corporate social responsibility:
Raub and Blunschi
An organizational justice framework. Journal of Organi­
zational Behavior 27:537-43.
Scherer, A., and G. Palazzo. 2011. The new political role of busi-
ness in a globalized world: A review of a new perspective
on CSR and its implications for the firm, governance, and
democracy. Journal of Management Studies 48:899-931.
Solomon, R. C., and K. R. Hanson. 1985. It’s good business. New
York: Atheneum.
Stamper, C. L., and L. Van Dyne. 2001. Work status and orga-
nizational citizenship behavior: A field study of restau-
rant employees. Journal of Organizational Behavior 22:
517-36.
Stuckey, B., and S. Jones. (1996). Learning social responsibil-
ity. Cornell Hotel and Restaurant Administration Quarterly
37:10.
Taylor, F. W. 1911. The Principles of Scientific Management.
New York and London: Harper and Brothers.
Turban, D. B., and D. W. Greening. 1996. Corporate social per-
formance and organizational attractiveness to prospective
employees. Academy of Management Journal 40:658-72.
Van Dyne, L., and J. A. LePine. 1998. Helping and voice extra-
role behaviors: Evidence of construct and predictive validity.
Academy of Management Journal 41:108-19.
Downloaded from cqx.sagepub.com at UNIVERSITE LAVAL on July 6, 2014
9
Vandermerwe, S., and M. D. Oliff. 1990. Customers drive corpo-
rations green. Long Range Planning 23:3-9.
Woods, R. H., and F. Berger. 1989. Teaching social responsibil-
ity. Cornell Hotel and Restaurant Administration Quarterly
30:61-63.
Wrzesniewski, A., and J. E. Dutton. 2001. Crafting a job:
Revisioning employees as active crafters of their work.
Academy of Management Review 26:179-201
Wrzesniewski, A., J. E. Dutton, and G. Debebe. 2003. Interpersonal
sensemaking and the meaning of work. Research in
Organizational Behavior 25:93-135.
Author Biographies
Steffen Raub is a full professor of organizational behavior at
Ecole Hôtelière de Lausanne, Switzerland (steffen.raub@ehl.ch).
His research interests include empowerment, organizational citi-
zenship behavior, proactivity, organizational climate, and work
design, with a special focus on service industries.
Stephan Blunschi graduated from Ecole hôtelière de Lausanne.
He currently works as supply chain manager in international fruit
and vegetable sourcing for the leading Swiss retailer MIGROS
(stephan.blunschi@mgb.ch).