1 Introduction
Corporate social responsibility (CSR) has increasingly been paid attention (Dung and Giang
2021; Chatzopoulou et al.
2022; Tang et al.
2023), especially micro-level CSR (Jone et al.
2019). The internal CSR (i.e., iCSR) aspect has been recognized as a source of organizational development (Lee and Chen
2018). Firms benefit more from adopting iCSR than external CSR in influencing employees' attitudes and behaviors (Hur et al.
2019; Story and Castanheira
2019). Competitors also find it more challenging to imitate iCSR than external CSR (Jamali et al.
2015; Dung and Giang
2021). As a result, iCSR has increasingly been paid more attention (Gambetta et al.
2017; Hossen et al.
2020; Dung and Giang
2021). Nevertheless, its role in motivating individual performance or in determining employee attitudes and behaviors need to have further investigations (Guzzo et al.
2020; Farooq and Salam
2020), particularly in service organizations (Kunda et al.
2020) due to the fragmentation of the origins and consequences of iCSR in the literature (Dung and Giang
2021). Thus, there is a need for a better understanding of the micro-foundations of CSR (Shen and Zhang
2019) by providing theoretically based and more complete models or detailed empirical models to investigate possible contingencies and processes affecting the association between CSR motive attributions of employees and their effects (George et al.
2020).
The literature also shows that the CSR perspective varies across contexts (Munro et al.
2018; De Stefano et al.
2018), particularly cultural factors (Latif et al.
2019). However, while research on comparing differences in CSR has mainly been undertaken in Western Europe and North America, research on CSR in Asia has still not been widely explored (Lim et al.
2018), particularly in emerging countries (Munro et al.
2018). CSR research has also been considered an emerging research field in developing countries because CSR is “invariably contextualized and locally shaped by multi-level factors and actors embedded within wider formal and informal governance systems” (Jamali and Karam
2018, p. 32). Therefore, many scholars have suggested further investigation of CSR in Asian countries (e.g., Nguyen and Truong
2016; Xiao et al.
2020) and particularly in Southeast Asia countries (e.g., Senasu and Virakul
2015; Munro et al.
2018; Hossen et al.
2020).
Furthermore, most micro-level CSR applications consider CSR to be a unitary construct while it is a multidimensional construct (El Akremi et al.
2018). Many previous empirical studies have also mainly assumed direct relationships between CSR and employee outcomes (Glavas
2016), although CSR has two dimensions (i.e., external and internal), in which the internal dimension (i.e., iCSR) has some specific subaspects (Papasolomou-Doukakis et al.
2005; Turker
2009; Diaz-Carrion et al.
2019; Dung and Giang
2021; Tang et al.
2023). Therefore, a direct relationship investigation between these subaspects and employee outcomes—e.g., employee satisfaction and/or engagement is essential. In sum, although there are significant contributions to the CSR literature, adopting a narrow perspective in previous works (i.e., consider iCSR as a unitary construct and then investigate direct effects on employee outcomes or only investigate few dimensions of iCSR) can result in literature replicating (Chatzopoulou et al.
2022) or fragmented findings. Therefore, a more comprehensive investigation to provide a deeper understanding of processes explaining how employees respond to iCSR initiatives is necessary (De Roeck et al.
2016), particularly in Southeast Asia.
Job satisfaction, representing “the positive or negative internal feeling of an employee reflected in the employee's attitude toward his or her job” (Yadav et al.
2022, p. 513), has increasingly been paid attention. Many past studies found benefits in strengthening employees' satisfaction with the job (e.g., Chatzopoulou et al.
2022). Job satisfaction is especially emphasized in the service sector, where the organization– or customer–employee relationships are critical (Thang and Fassin
2017). Thus, many organizations proactively maintain a system to strengthen employee job satisfaction and retention (Lee et al.
2012), particularly in the banking sector (Bravo et al.
2016).
Employee engagement at work is also an increasingly noted topic, particularly since the COVID-19 pandemic began (Malik et al.
2022). This phenomenon helps an organization become robust with engaged employees (Yadav et al.
2022). However, COVID-19 has caused an uncertain context. It seriously impacts employees' perceptions, attitudes, and behaviors, and thus, how firms drive employee engagement has recently been particularly noted by both scholars and practitioners. Parallelly, while the literature shows that employee experience is an antecedent of employee engagement, these terms have often been used interchangeably, causing a misrepresentation of employee engagement in human resource management practices (Malik et al.
2022). Therefore, further research on employee engagement in the ongoing global challenging context is essential. Besides, while there has been a debate on aspects of employee engagement (Yadav et al.
2022), the approach with two factors—i.e., job engagement and organizational engagement is popular and widely adopted (Saks
2006). Furthermore, due to the organization-centric nature of employee engagement (Malik et al.
2022), an investigation emphasizing organizational engagement is considered for this study.
In sum, employees' job satisfaction and organizational engagement are considerable topics in the uncertain context. Although many previous empirical studies indicated the significantly positive influence of iCSR on organizational commitment (e.g., Farooq et al.
2017; Story and Castanheira
2019; Golob and Podnar
2021), some others did not find similar results. For example, Chatzopoulou et al. (
2022) did not find the significant effects of general iCSR on employees' job satisfaction and organizational commitment. This difference could derive from investigations with only one or few aspects of iCSR, such as legal and ethical aspects (Lee et al.
2012). It also came from investigations considering iCSR as a unitary construct (Edinger-Schons et al.
2019). In order to provide a more profound understanding of the iCSR literature, our study not only introduces a more comprehensive model of aspects of iCSR but also evaluates the intervening role of job satisfaction in the relationship of iCSR aspects with employees' organizational engagement. This approach involves an individual-level and task-oriented response construct shaped by employee attitudes toward jobs and derived from daily procedural functions (Chatzopoulou et al.
2022). Therefore, our study also aims to respond to recent calls to pursue an emerging research stream identifying alternative underlying mechanisms explaining the relationship between CSR (or iCSR) and commitment (e.g., George et al.
2020) by investigating five aspects of iCSR in the service sector (e.g., Rahman et al.
2016; Thang and Fassin
2017; Macassa et al.
2021).
On the other hand, further investigation of how employees react differently to CSR orientations is crucial (Aguinis and Glavas
2019). It is crucial to integrate psychological interpretative mechanisms that form employees' sensemaking and organize their perceptions (Maon et al.
2019). While iCSR is seen as an organizational phenomenon, the social identity theory (SIT) and the social exchange theory (SET) are considered interdependent underlying mechanisms. They are two of the most powerful frameworks to explain how underlying conditions and processes translate employees' evaluation of CSR (or iCSR) motives into positive outcomes or explicate how CSR (or iCSR) initiatives can influence the relationship between employees and organizations (Jone et al.
2019). Specifically, SIT emphasizes the effect of individual perceptions on job attitudes and working behaviors (Cinnirella
1998). SIT indicates that employees' social identity is improved when they work for a legitimate and reputable organization, positively affecting their work outcomes (Farooq et al.
2014), such as increased employee commitment due to the overall self-concept and self-worth reinforced (Dutton et al.
1994).
Nevertheless, SIT only explains how identification and membership contribute to strengthening organizational commitment without the integration of reciprocity, while this phenomenon is crucial to help understand two-way and intra-organizational relationships between employers and employees (De Roeck and Maon
2018). Thus, SET (Blau
1964) is essential for the current study. It explains the relationships among iCSR aspects, job satisfaction, and organizational engagement. More specifically, employees may be more satisfied with their jobs and feel obligated to respond in kind and repay their banks when they receive economic and socio-emotional benefits from their organization derived from iCSR initiatives. This response is compatible with the description of engagement as a two‐way relationship between the employee and employer based on the employee engagement literature (Kahn
1990). Therefore, SET is considered an appropriate theoretical foundation to explain why a bank employee chooses to engage in their banks through iCSR initiatives based on trust and value exchange foundations between an individual and their workplace practices (Malik et al.
2022).
Besides, some scholars state that these two frameworks are typically separately investigated (e.g., De Roeck and Maon
2018) or are hardly considered in the same research (e.g., Chatzopoulou et al.
2022). Based on exchange- and identity-related mechanisms in forming employees' perceptions, providing cues of an organization with iCSR initiatives will enhance employees' identification with the organization to gain more favorable work outcomes. Our study, thus, focuses on an individual analysis level to thoroughly examine the relationship among iCSR aspects, job satisfaction, and organizational engagement under the SIT and SET lenses. The result helps deepen the theoretical integration of these two theoretical frameworks in explaining the psychological relationship established between individuals and organizations within the micro-level CSR research.
Our research context is banking, where employees directly affect the quality of customer service, and their well-being leads to job performance (Lee et al.
2012). iCSR has become an increasingly attention-paid issue (Chan et al.
2014; Gambetta et al.
2017; Dung and Giang
2021), especially in the crisis context and for financial organizations (Gambetta et al.
2017). The study adopted established theoretical lenses and a survey from 368 bank employees in Vietnam to analyze using structural equation modeling (SEM). The result helps make an abundance of the existing literature on iCSR and employee engagement by an investigation using the sample from an understudied geographic area (Southeast Asia), as well as providing a detailed but more comprehensive understanding of the role of five iCSR aspects instead of a general iCSR construct, in motivating employee outcomes—i.e., job satisfaction and organizational engagement in the bank sector. Some managerial implications are also suggested to improve the efficiency of banks' human resource management (HRM). The next part will present the literature review and hypotheses development, followed by the method, results, and discussions. Finally, implications, limitations, and potential research directions are shown.
3 Methods
Measurement scales of constructs vary across contexts, and thus, they would benefit from a re-validation by explorative and quantitative studies (Lang et al.
2022). This approach helps avoid omitting aspects fitting the research context but are not captured by existing scales (Srnka and Koeszegi
2007). It is particularly popular and encouraged for studies related to measurement adjustment and/or development (Latif et al.
2019). Thus, we adopted the focus group discussion technique to refine the constructs’ scales, even though our study focused on the quantitative method, which provides rigorous scale examinations (Srnka and Koeszegi
2007).
Specifically, three branch directors and two division managers from the five banks in Vietnam were invited to discuss measurements. These participants were over 40 years old and had experience in banking from 19 to 28 years. These participants held a Bachelor's degree or more. The group discussion lasted 2 h. The result shows many changes in the wording of the existing measurable indicators and provides some new ones. For instance, the indicators, “
My organization periodically trains employees on occupational safety”, “
I can easily arrange between work and personal matters”, and “
My organization trains employees via hands-on experience”, were suggested to, respectively, add for the scales of HAS, WLB, and ETD aspects. The participants also suggested deleting indicators from the existing scales that did not fit the context. For instance, the indicators, “
My organization provides stress management for employees”, “
I accept working extra hours because I am committed to my job”, “
My organization provides career counseling and planning assistance to the employees”, “
I have a sense of belonging and commitment to the organization”, and “
My organization negotiates wage-setting arrangements with trade union”, were proposed to remove from the existing scales of HAS, WLB, ETD, LAR, and SOD, in turn. In sum, the result of our discussion shows some differences from the initial scales developed by other scholars (e.g., Sutherland and Coope
1992; Wong and Ko
2009; Tsui et al.
1997; Ngo et al.
2008; Kenworthy and Kittel
2003), which is considered to be consistent with the statement of some scholars regarding the difference in measurements across research contexts (e.g., Latif et al.
2019; Lang et al.
2022).
Next, a survey questionnaire was designed using the discussion's findings. It had a filtering question to check the respondents' organization. A pre-test with 10 respondents was also performed to ensure a good understanding of the questionnaire. Two survey approaches (i.e., online and offline) were conducted parallelly. Scales were validated by Cronbach's
α reliability coefficient analysis, exploratory factor analysis (EFA), confirmatory factor analysis (CFA), the variance test, and Heterotrait–Heteromethod (HTMT) test techniques using SPSS and SPSS Amos version 24 software programs. Hypotheses were tested by covariance-based SEM. Since the discussion and survey were conducted in Vietnamese, we translated the original scales with the supervision of a professional translator as the measure translation approach of some scholars (e.g., Bravo et al.
2016). We also adopted the back-translation technique with the support of a bilingual professional to compare the source and target language versions for the scales validated from the result of the study.
3.1 Measures
We adopted the scales developed in different contexts in the literature and then reconciled them through a focus group discussion. Specifically, the initial measure of organizational engagement was adopted from Saks (
2006), while the initial job satisfaction scale was adapted from Lee et al. (
2012). The measure of the WLB aspect was developed based on the work of Wong and Ko (
2009). The scales of HAS, ETD, LAR, and SOD were also proposed based on the previous documents of some scholars (i.e., Sutherland and Coope
1992; Tsui et al.
1997; Lee and Bruvold
2003; Kenworthy and Kittel
2003; Ngo et al.
2008; Thang and Fassin
2017). The result of the reconciliation shows three five-indicator scales measuring the HAS, ETD, and LAR variables. The WLB scale has six indicators, while a four-indicator scale is for the SOD variable. Two six-indicator scales measure the variables of job satisfaction and organizational engagement. The five-point Likert scale was used to measure survey question items.
3.2 Sampling
The convenience sampling technique was adopted for this study. The survey lasted 3 months, from March to May, 2020. There were 368 complete questionnaires collected, of which 97 were collected through the offline survey. The respondents reported that they worked for 25 different banks. We approached them with the support of banks' leaders and managers. The valid response rate is 81.78%. The sample profile is presented in Table
1, which shows that the sample surveyed is diverse and can be representative of bank employees in Vietnam. The sample size also ensures the sample conditions required by scholars to perform empirical analyses—i.e., a minimum of 5 times the number of estimated parameters in EFA (Hair et al.
2010), 10 times in CFA (Kline
2011), and at least 200 for SEM (Hair et al.
2010; Kline
2011).
Gender | Male: 32.9% | Female: 67.1% | | |
Age | Under 30: 45.1% | 30–35: 22.0% | 36–40: 17.1% | Above 40: 15.8% |
Experience (years) | Under 1: 26.9% | 1–5: 53.8% | 6–10: 14.1% | Above 10: 5.2% |
Education | Higher school: 1.9% | College: 20.9% | University: 66.0% | Postgraduate: 11.1% |
Average monthly income (VND; millions) | Under 10: 26.1% | 10–20: 59.0% | 21–30: 11.1% | Above 30: 3.8% |
Bank type | Private joint-stock commercial banks: 77.99% | State-owned banks: 8.97% | Branches of foreign banks: 7.07% | Foreign joint-venture banks: 5.98% |
5 Discussion
Our study has a micro-level focus by evaluating the interlinkage between bank employees' perception of iCSR initiatives in their organization and their job satisfaction and organizational engagement. It not only helps this research stream further develop more systematically (Glavas
2016) but also adds or makes the findings of some previous studies more detailed. Specifically, this research provides some noteworthy findings for discussion.
First, this research improved the scales of the existing constructs by providing more focused scales. Specifically, four five-indicator scales are established to measure the WLB, HAS, ETD, and LAR variables, while a three-indicator scale is also proposed to measure the SOD variable (Table
1). These scales form a more comprehensive measurement for the iCSR construct. They differ significantly from the initial scales adapted from other scholars. Thus, the result is aligned with the implication of Latif et al. (
2019) and Lang et al. (
2022) regarding the difference in measurement scales across various contexts.
Second, this study revealed the significant role of the iCSR aspects in driving bank employees' job satisfaction and organizational engagement under the SIT and SET lenses. The result not only gives more detail but also adds differentiated findings to the iCSR literature. Specifically, our study shows that five iCSR aspects directly affect job satisfaction. Wherein the impact of the WLB aspect on job satisfaction is the most significant (0.288), followed by the impacts of LAR (0.278), ETD (0.206), SOD (0.138), and HAS (0.121), respectively. These findings support the inference of Chaudhary and Akhouri (
2018), Malik et al. (
2022), and our arguments that iCSR aspects need to be adopted as one essential strategy to improve employee job satisfaction. Furthermore, the result helps enhance the generalizability of previous studies' findings about the role of the iCSR aspects in driving job satisfaction due to conducted in a different context (i.e., a Southeast Asia emerging country), such as WLB (Chaudhuri et al.
2020; Mumu et al.
2021; Yadav et al.
2022), LAR (Chung and Jeon
2020) and particularly its support aspect (Wong and Ko
2009), HAS (Thang and Fassin
2017), and ETD (Lee and Bruvold
2003; Tang et al.
2023).
The iCSR aspects were also identified to affect organizational engagement positively. Specifically, the influence of the LAR aspect is the most significant (0.256), followed by the effects of WLB (0.207), ETD (0.205), SOD (0.191), and HAS (0.180), respectively. This result supports the inference of Malik et al. (
2022) about LAR and our arguments related to HAS and SOD that these aspects directly positively influence employees' organizational engagement. Our findings also increase the generalizability of previous works related to the significant effect of WLB (Wong and Ko
2009; Saks
2022) and LAR (Schaufeli and Bakker
2004; Anitha
2014) on employees' organizational engagement, or the significant relationship between training and organizational commitment—a similar aspect to organizational engagement (Lee and Bruvold
2003). Therefore, our study not only adds but also clarifies the findings of some previous works (e.g., Yousaf et al.
2016; Story and Castanheira
2019; Golob and Podnar
2021; Chatzopoulou et al.
2022) by providing a profound and more detailed understanding of each iCSR aspects' role on bank employees' job satisfaction and organizational engagement instead of an investigation on a general iCSR construct.
In addition, our findings also have some differences from some previous works. For example, we detected a significant relationship between the ETD aspect and job satisfaction, while Hossen et al. (
2020) did not find this. We also found the significant effects of all five aspects of iCSR on bank employees' job satisfaction and organizational engagement. Thus, it can be concluded that general iCSR positively affects employee job satisfaction and organizational engagement, although this was not found in the work of Chatzopoulou et al. (
2022). Thus, our study also contributes to clarifying the role of iCSR in the existing CSR literature.
Otherwise, our findings show that banks' iCSR initiatives provide employees with the necessary cues that help them to be viewed as caring entities. As a result, employees trust their ethical stance, integrity, and overall character, which helps increase employees' willingness to reciprocate with the bank. This result also implies that iCSR is not part of an organization's mandatory business framework but instead a part of a more discretionary CSR scheme, and thus, it also differs from the implication of some other scholars in this area (e.g., Farooq et al.
2017; Chatzopoulou et al.
2022).
The research also indicated the extent of the impact of iCSR aspects. Specifically, we discovered that there is only a slight change in the order of the degree of impacts of five aspects of iCSR on job satisfaction and organizational engagement, with a replacement between the two most significant influential aspects (i.e., WLB and LAR). Moreover, the impacts of each of the five iCSR aspects on job satisfaction are found to be more significant than the impacts on organizational engagement. These findings should be considered essential notes to both scholars and practitioners. Overall, this result consolidates the arguments of Settoon et al. (
1996) and Saks (
2006) regarding employees' appropriate responses (i.e., organizational engagement) to their organization resulting from the organization's iCSR practices, as well as contributes to providing a deeper understanding of the combination of SIT and SET in evaluating the role of iCSR initiatives in strengthening job satisfaction and work outcomes.
Finally, we found evidence that job satisfaction significantly affects organizational engagement (0.159). This finding supports the previous studies (e.g., Chaudhary and Akhouri
2018) related to the significant relationship between employee experience and employee engagement. It also enhances the generalizability of the findings of the effect of repeated satisfied experiences on employee engagement (e.g., Lee et al.
2012; Itam and Ghosh
2020; Malik et al.
2022). Remarkably, the result consolidates the implication of a close relationship between job satisfaction and organizational engagement proposed by some scholars (e.g., Delina
2020). It also extends the work of several scholars (e.g., Kunda et al.
2020; Wong et al.
2022; Tang et al.
2023) regarding the relationship between job satisfaction and organizational engagement behavior types. The result also implies extending the combination of SET and the self-determination theory in evaluating the job satisfaction–organizational engagement relationship. In addition, this result seems contrary to Saks's (
2006) finding regarding the impact of organizational engagement on job satisfaction. However, we contend that this difference simply provides a multidimensional perspective for the relationship between these two variables. In brief, this finding adds empirical evidence of the relationship between job satisfaction and organizational engagement. Thus, it can also be considered a contribution to the existing employee engagement literature.
6 Conclusion, limitations and future research directions
6.1 Theoretical contributions
Our study indicated the significant role of five iCSR aspects in strengthening bank employees' job satisfaction and organizational engagement in a Southeast Asia emerging market. Our findings contribute to the extant literature on iCSR and employee engagement by providing a profound and more detailed understanding of the role of five iCSR aspects, alongside an enhanced understanding of the combination of the SIT and SET frameworks in micro-level CSR investigation. Specifically, this study has three principal theoretical implications.
First, it explains the significant role of five iCSR aspects in driving bank employees' job satisfaction, creating engagement with the organization later. The result helps enhance the generalizability of the findings from some past studies (e.g., Chaudhuri et al.
2020; Yadav et al.
2022) due to being conducted in an understudied geographic area (i.e., Southeast Asia), especially with an employee sample, instead of managerial staff as the majority of previous studies (Xiao et al.
2020). Our findings also support some scholars' inference regarding the significant role of iCSR initiatives as one essential strategy to improve job satisfaction and employee engagement (e.g., Chaudhary and Akhouri
2018; Chung and Jeon
2020). Specifically, our study adds to the extant iCSR literature by providing a more detailed understanding of the role of five specific iCSR aspects instead of a general iCSR variable as some past works (e.g., Yousaf et al.
2016; Story and Castanheira
2019; Golob and Podnar
2021; Chatzopoulou et al.
2022). It also extends the works of some other scholars (e.g., Lee et al.
2012; Hossen et al.
2020) with some new iCSR aspects added (e.g., the ETD aspect) or provides a more profound understanding of the significant role of iCSR that some other studies (e.g., Hossen et al.
2020; Chatzopoulou et al.
2022) did not indicate or find. Our study also provides empirical evidence for the implication of several other scholars (e.g., Barrena‐Martinez et al.
2019) regarding the significant role of socially responsible HRM practices (also iCSR) in strengthening job satisfaction and organizational engagement. In addition, our findings can be a useful reference source for bank managers in Southeast Asia emerging markets to develop effective HRM solutions.
Second, our research reveals that job satisfaction significantly affects organizational engagement in a bank context in a Southeast Asia emerging country (i.e., Vietnam). The finding helps increase the generalizability of the findings of some previous studies (e.g., Lee et al.
2012; Itam and Ghosh
2020; Malik et al.
2022) due to an investigation conducted from an understudied geographic region. Thus, it can also be a contribution to the literature on employee engagement or organizational behavior by providing an added understanding.
Third, by research on the interlinkages of iCSR initiatives, job attitudes (i.e., job satisfaction), and work outcomes (i.e., organizational engagement), this approach brings the theories of stakeholders and CSR closer to the literature on organizational behavior (Chatzopoulou et al.
2022). Especially, the adoption of the postulations of both SIT and SET theories can pave the way for the potential for an integrative psychological theory that underlies research on micro-level CSR (Chatzopoulou et al.
2022). In addition, this study also contributes to the extant CSR literature by providing a more comprehensive iCSR scale. The scale has five aspects. It is recommended to apply for other studies. In summary, among the relevant abundant studies, this research can be considered one of the most comprehensive studies that accentuate employees' evaluations of the role of the iCSR aspects in driving bank employees' job satisfaction and organizational engagement through integrating the SIT and SET lenses conducted in an understudied geographic area (i.e., Southeast Asia). The findings and measurements can be employed to examine the effect of iCSR on employees' attitudes and work outcomes in other contexts.
6.2 Managerial implications
Our findings provide some implications for business practice.
First, bank managers can consider iCSR initiatives as one of the critical strategies for strengthening employees' job satisfaction and organizational engagement. Specific iCSR practices should base on five main iCSR aspects (i.e., HAS, WLB, ETD, LAR, and SOD) and their measurement indicators. Besides, six indicators of each measurement of job satisfaction and organizational engagement can be considered as goals in HRM practice.
Second, satisfaction is an antecedent of employee organizational engagement. We suggest that solutions bringing perceived WLB, LAR, and ETD should be prioritized due to their important role. More specifically, it is necessary to establish flexible policies regarding the number of working hours (per day) and days (per week). Bank employees' key performance indices need to be appropriate to help them balance their working tasks, interests, and other personal issues. In particular, effective organizational interventions and policies, as well as boundary management strategies, should be adopted to strengthen employees' well-being and improve work–life integration. These solutions can help increase employees' perception of the WLB aspect of iCSR. Besides, a supportive, open, and fair organizational culture is critical, which should be implemented by top management and the HRM division. Additionally, union activities are also essential to create positive labor relations in banks. They should be encouraged, helping to strengthen the LAR aspect that leads to enhanced employee job satisfaction and organizational engagement.
ETD is also particularly crucial. The bank should frequently organize training programs that not only provide skills for current jobs but also aim for employees' future jobs and career development. These programs can be in-house courses or courses via hands-on experience. Training programs for new employees are also essential. The bank should also implement systematic and regular assessment programs for employees' skills and interests. In sum, iCSR initiatives should be adopted to ensure that bank employees perceive that they gain WLB and pleasant working relations at the workplace (i.e., LAR). They also perceive that training and development programs (ETD) are appropriate, clear, and helpful to ensure their job and career development.
Finally, employee wellbeing-oriented CSR–HRM practices are crucial due to greater employee engagement than performance-driven CSR–HRM practices (Xiao et al.
2020). An integrative external and internal CSR scheme is also essential, helping enhance the effectiveness of banks' human capital (Chatzopoulou et al.
2022). The bank can also implement socially responsible HRM practices to develop an organizational CSR climate and then gain employee support for external CSR initiatives (Shen and Zhang
2019). The solution is to recruit socially responsible-oriented employees, provide CSR training programs, and consider employees' social contributions during performance appraisal, rewards, compensation, and promotion (Shen and Benson
2016). Moreover, introducing CSR in motivational and appraisal HRM practices can motivate responsible values and help create a CSR culture in the bank (Shen and Zhu
2011). Remarkably, the merger of two CSR and HRM functions to exploit the overlaps and reduce political conflicts (over competency fields) through the support of human resource professional associations and business schools should be one of the considered solutions (De Stefano et al.
2018). In addition, we also call attention to better internal communication strategies to communicate and educate employees about the bank's efforts concerning iCSR initiatives. By doing so, bank employees' work outcomes may be more positive.
6.3 Conclusion, limitations and future research directions
Our study indicates the significant role of five iCSR aspects in driving service employees' job satisfaction and organizational engagement under the SIT and SET lenses in an understudied Southeast Asia emerging market. The findings contribute to the extant literature on iCSR and employee engagement by providing a profound and detailed understanding. Our study also implicates integrating SIT and SET lenses to form an integrative psychological theory that underlies micro-level CSR studies. The study also contributes to the literature by providing an integrative measurement scale of iCSR with five aspects for the bank context. In addition, some managerial implications are also suggested to aim to help the bank strengthen employees' job satisfaction and organizational engagement.
The current study has some limitations that pave the way for future research. First, some other potential aspects of iCSR may be absent. Further research to expand iCSR aspects is essential. Second, CSR and its internal aspects depend on the context. Thus, it needs to be explored more strictly to capture aspects and appropriate measurable indicators that may be lacking. Third, further research on other service sectors is also a considerable topic. Fourth, there may be causality impacts among aspects of iCSR; therefore, further investigation into this domain should also be noted. Fifth, the external aspect of CSR significantly affects employees' job satisfaction and organizational commitment (Chatzopoulou et al.
2022). Thus, research into combining internal and external aspects of CSR in unexplored service sectors is also helpful. Finally, exploring what HRM practices and CSR activities can be more effective in the CSR–HRM link to particular groups of employees or employee wellbeing-oriented HRM practices can also be a considerable research topic (Xiao et al.
2020). In addition, socially responsible HRM is closely associated with iCSR, but it has received limited empirical study attention (Shen and Zhang
2019). Therefore, research on the consequences of socially responsible HRM on employees is also recommended.
Publisher's Note
Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.