Search results

The current study aims to propose and empirically investigate a conceptual model of the most relevant antecedents and consequences of Corporate Social Responsibility (CSR) attribution, thus providing a practical and concise model as well as examining brand attachment as a mediator explaining the relationship between CSR attribution and its consequences.

A between-subjects experimental design was employed. The study included two experimental conditions; intrinsic and extrinsic CSR attribution and a control condition. An online self-administered survey was utilised for data collection. The sample was a convenience sample of 336 university students. Both one-way between-groups ANOVA and Partial Least Squares-Structural Equation Modelling (PLS-SEM) were utilised for hypotheses testing.

The most significant antecedents of CSR attribution in order of importance are the firm's approach to CSR communication, past corporate social performance, CSR type and the firm's call for customers' participation in its CSR. CSR attribution exerted a significant direct positive impact on brand attachment and trust. Three significant indirect consequences of CSR attribution were PWOM intention, purchase intention and brand loyalty intention. Whereas trust played a significant mediating role between CSR attribution and its three indirect consequences, brand attachment exerted significant mediation only between CSR attribution and brand loyalty intention. Brand attachment might mediate the relationship between CSR attribution and purchase intention. However, brand attachment failed to play a mediating role between CSR attribution and PWOM intention.

Several studies marginally investigated CSR attribution. Despite the vital role of CSR attribution in how consumers receive firms' CSR engagement, the availability of CSR attribution-centric studies is limited. By introducing a model of the most relevant antecedents and consequences of CSR attribution, this study aids in understanding the psychological mechanism underlying consumers' CSR attribution and provides valuable implications.

Managing projects is an important part of operations management, but many projects fail. This study focuses on attribution processes of such disruption from the underrepresented perspective of the project manager. The authors consider two types of causes: the more frequently researched environmental uncertainty (i.e. uncontrollable events) and the scarcely researched uncertainty imposed by non-collaborative project sponsors (i.e. other-controllable events).

The authors test conceptual arguments grounded in attribution theory and the notion of psychological contracts in a scenario-based experiment among 325 practicing project managers.

The findings indicate that non-collaborative project sponsors negatively affect project managers' motivation, whereas uncontrollable disruptions leave hope to achieve positive future outcomes. This latter effect is further strengthened when project managers have an internal attribution style. They tend to blame the disruption on themselves and generally feel in control of achieving success even if they are not.

These socio-psychological insights nuance the economic idea that uncertainty reduces motivation per se in the context of project disruption appraisal. The authors contribute to the behavioral project management literature and general attribution theory and help guide the allocation of resources during the recovery of failed projects.

Research has supported both feedback’s variable effects on performance and the effect of attributions on subsequent behavior. Managers’ attributions for subordinates’ performance affect how they react to those subordinates and the feedback they give, and subordinates’ own attributions affect their subsequent behavior. It is unclear whether (or how) a manager’s attributions for subordinate behavior affect subordinate behavior. Building on research that shows emotional reactions in response to attributions in feedback, this study aims to examine how recipients’ perceptions and subsequent effort and performance are affected when others’ attributions are shared through feedback.

Drawing on attribution theory and feedback intervention theory, this study conducts a lab experiment using manipulated performance feedback to test the effects of feedback sign and attributions in the feedback. Perceptions of the attribution are also measured to test their effects. The data were analyzed using analysis of variance and regression in SPSS 27.

Results show that perceptions of the attribution communicated in feedback, rather than feedback sign alone, affect perceived valence of the feedback (e.g. feedback with an attribution to luck is generally perceived as negative). These perceptions also affect feedback acceptance and impact subsequent effort and performance more than the “objective” attribution, underscoring the importance of recipient reactions and perceptions in the feedback process.

This paper shows that recipients’ perceptions of others’ attributions included in feedback impact feedback reactions, effort and performance. This is valuable to scholars researching feedback and to practitioners to better understand how feedback they deliver may be interpreted.

Service robots are taking over the organizational frontline. Despite a recent surge in studies on this topic, extant works are predominantly conceptual in nature. The purpose of this paper is to provide valuable empirical insights by building on the attribution theory.

Two vignette-based experimental studies were employed. Data were collected from US respondents who were randomly assigned to scenarios focusing on a hotel’s reception service and restaurant’s waiter service.

Results indicate that respondents make stronger attributions of responsibility for the service performance toward humans than toward robots, especially when a service failure occurs. Customers thus attribute responsibility to the firm rather than the frontline robot. Interestingly, the perceived stability of the performance is greater when the service is conducted by a robot than by an employee. This implies that customers expect employees to shape up after a poor service encounter but expect little improvement in robots’ performance over time.

Robots are perceived to be more representative of a firm than employees. To avoid harmful customer attributions, service providers should clearly communicate to customers that frontline robots pack sophisticated analytical, rather than simple mechanical, artificial intelligence technology that explicitly learns from service failures.

Customer responses to frontline robots have remained largely unexplored. This paper is the first to explore the attributions that customers make when they experience robots in the frontline.

Many HRM practices are never thoroughly implemented, or are implemented ineffectively. To better understand what line managers need to implement HRM practices effectively, the authors have developed and validated a psychometrically sound measurement instrument dealing with line managers' attributions for effective HRM implementation. Based on the theory of causal attributions, the authors distinguish between internal and external attributions that determine how line managers implement HRM practices on the work floor.

A multidimensional approach has been used, and, after collecting data from 471 line managers, thorough scale development guidelines and validation procedures have been applied for instrument development.

The instrument's psychometric qualities have been assessed by calculating the reliability and validity of line managers' internal attributions – including its composing dimensions of desire and competences – and their external attributions – including the dimensions of support, capacity and policy and procedures. In particular, both convergent and discriminant validity as well as intra-class correlations have been established. The newly developed measures are found to be of good quality. The scales appear to discriminate well between the distinguished groups and show a good variation within groups.

The developed measurement instrument helps HRM professionals to better understand line managers' attributions to effectively implement HRM practices and to provide them with support and training for effective HRM implementation.

Previous research has already identified weaknesses in HRM implementation, but lacked addressing the causes of this. The study presents antecedents for HRM implementation effectiveness, based on the causal attribution theory, and a psychometrically validated instrument to measure these antecedents.

This study aims to outline the role of causal attributions in consumer responses to irresponsible corporate behaviour. Specifically, this paper presents a moderated mediation model that explains how four types of perceived motives behind an irresponsible action shape corporate blame and word-of-mouth recommendations.

To test the hypotheses, the study uses data from a large survey assessing consumer reactions to a real case of corporate socially irresponsible behaviour in the banking industry.

The findings show that market-, unethicality- and rogue employee-driven attributions increase corporate blame and subsequently make people more likely to spread negative comments regarding the culprit. The difficult situation of a bank, as a perceived reason for wrongdoing, does not reduce the blame attributed to the irresponsible organisation.

The literature offers little information on the attributions people make following egregious corporate behaviour; however, such cognitions can play an important role in stakeholders’ reactions to wrongdoing. This study therefore extends the understanding of how irresponsibility attributions affect consumers’ responses to misbehaviour. Given the empirical context, the findings might be particularly important for communication and bank managers.

A few months from the time of this survey, the nearly completed inpatient psychiatric facility within the Aminu Kano Teaching Hospital's complex would be ready for admissions. Understanding the health workers' level of experience of mental illness and their likely behavioural responses towards people with psychiatric illness, therefore, should be a good baseline to understanding their likely reactions towards admitting such patients within a general hospital setting.

The study, which used a pre-tested and adapted attribution questionnaire, was pro -spective and cross-sectional. Randomly selected health workers in Aminu Kano Teaching Hospital had their level of familiarity and attributions towards psychiatric patients assessed.

The respondents showed a high level of experience with mental illness, with more than 3 in 5 of them having watched movies on mental illness before. More than half of them held positive (favorable) attributions towards persons with mental illness on nine of the ten assessed attribution factors. Almost all held negative (unfavourable) opinion towards intimate relationships with such persons. Attribution factors, “Responsibility, “Anger”, “Dangerousness”, “Fear” and “Segregation” were significantly related to the respondents' level of education (P<0.05). Marital status of the respondents related significantly to “Pity” and “Avoidance” factors (P<0.05). Having watched movies on mental illness significantly related to “Responsibility” and “Fear” factors (P<0.05).

Programs designed to improve the health workers mental health literacy, and increased positive professional contacts with mentally ill persons on treatment, would further enhance their perceived positive attributions towards them.

This study aims to investigate whether and how strongly cultural (mis)matches influence immigrant customers’ satisfaction, as well as if this relationship is mediated by cultural or service employee performance attributions. In addition, the authors test whether attributions differ depending on the service delivery outcome (success vs failure).

The 2 (origin of service employee: Austria or Turkey) × 2 (service delivery outcome: success or failure) scenario-based experiment includes 120 Turkish immigrant customers in Austria.

Contrary to previous research, the results indicate that in an immigrant customer context, cultural (mis)match does not influence customer satisfaction. The service delivery outcome is a boundary condition. With a positive service delivery outcome, immigrant customers attribute the results to the cultural background of the employee if it is the same as their own, but they attribute success to employees’ performance if they belong to the immigration destination culture. For negative service delivery outcomes, neither cultural nor performance attributions arise.

This study is the first to focus specifically on immigrant customer behavior in a high-involvement service context. The results challenge the predictions of social identity theory and the similarity-attraction paradigm and highlight that the immigrant context is unique. In this context, attributions play a key role in determining customer satisfaction.

This study aims to examine the impact of controversial governance practices on media coverage under a specific context. Based on the attribution theory, this study develops a theoretical framework to explore how antecedent factors can influence attribution process under a particular cultural context.

This paper presents a behavioral view of the media and corporate governance to demonstrate how media attributes different reasons for the same controversial governance practice in Chinese-specific context. Using 1,198 non-state-owned listed company observations in China as the study sample, cross-section data are used to build a multiple linear regression mode to test hypotheses.

The analysis indicates that the media imposes fewer penalties on founder-CEO firms than on non-founder-CEO firms for engaging in controversial governance practices, such as CEO compensation. CEO tenure negatively moderates the effect of CEO compensation on negative media coverage in non-founder-CEO firms. The positive media bias evidence for founder-CEO firms exists only when the firm is better performed.

This study’s contribution to the governance literature starts with its logical reasoning of basic assumptions in the agency theory, and that media penalty will arise when managers impose actions that against interests of shareholders or other stakeholders. This study shows that the rule is not always true. The findings also bridge the connection of governance literature and reputation literature to better explain how media can act as a social arbitration role.

This study provides insights into how belief and information of reputational evaluators affect attribution consequences on controversial governance practices. Moreover, this study looks beyond the internal elements and focuses on China’s traditional cultural context as well. Specifically, the authors concentrate on the attribution process by showing the importance of evaluators’ framing tendency with regard to controversial practices. The results extend the knowledge about how conformity makes media coverage shows a bias effect on interactions during the evaluation process.

The purpose of this paper is to explore the impact of critical, journalistic documentaries on viewers. More precisely, it investigates the effects of responsibility attribution and surprise on stakeholder attitude, trust and identification.

In a quasi-experimental pre-post setting, 127 participants viewed a documentary about Austrian beverage and marketing company Red Bull. The film inquired into the deaths of six extreme athletes sponsored by the company. As a critical, investigative piece, the documentary was designed to give viewers the impression that Red Bull was, at least partially, responsible for the athletes’ deaths.

Results show that responsibility attribution, the feeling of being surprised and being in a state of negative affect, had a significant impact on viewers’ attitude and trust toward, and identification with Red Bull.

The study adds insights on surprise as a factor in viewers’ assessment of responsibility. The study is original in terms of methodology by using real-time rating to ascertain which sequences trigger changes in responsibility attribution among viewers. Furthermore, implications of the study’s findings with regard to inoculation theory are discussed.