Printer Friendly

The impact of ethical climate on corporate social responsibility and organizational commitment among Christian healthcare providers.

INTRODUCTION

The purpose of this study was to explore healthcare providers' perceptions of the ethical climate within their internal work environment, its associations with their perceptions of the hospital's external corporate social responsibility, and their final decisions on whether or not they would like to make an organizational commitment toward the hospital. An ethical climate is a culturally shared perception that is measured on a collective basis instead of on an individual basis. The internal ethical climate that healthcare providers perceive exerts environmental, interpersonal and moral influences are based on three major dimensions:

Ethical Climate--Egoistic Dimension

First of all, if healthcare employees perceive their hospitals as mission-driven and dominantly centralized businesses, they will feel that every single medical treatment service is associated with the institutional mission, value system, ethical practices, financial incentives and organizational growth (Numminen, Leino-Kilpi, Isoaho, & Meretoja, 2015). This premise of cultural egoism, mission driven goals, and organizational self-identity might create a strong sense of unity. Under this egoistic context, everyone has a strong sense of belonging and teamwork under strong leadership and cultural dignity, and higher degrees of this perceived egoistic view indicate a stronger and unified ethical climate within an organization.

Ethical Climate--Benevolent Dimension

Secondly, if healthcare employees perceive that their hospital's decisions and climate are more concerned with everyone's welfare and the equal distribution of benefits rather than on its own interests, they will feel that each medical treatment will be done in favor of patients' needs (Humphries & Woods, 2016). The higher degree of perceived benevolent view indicated a stronger and unified ethical climate within an organization.

Ethical Climate--Principled Dimension

Thirdly, when hospital employees perceive that their hospitals manage their healthcare services based on standards, policies, and procedures, without being self-centered or employee centered, they will follow the means (policies, procedures, rules) without consideration of the end result (hospital profits, employee/patient satisfaction). In other words, each medical treatment will be regarded as a necessary means (professional) regardless of profits (capitalistic) or employees/patients' satisfactions (socialistic). (Koh & Boo, 2001) The higher degree of perceived professional view indicates a stronger and unified ethical climate within an organization.

Major corporate social responsibility theories existing in an organization

Social Responsibility--Shareholder View

Society has been set up for public and private sectors with the concept of work division, and they should not be overlapped or duplicated. The shareholder view emphasizes that the social responsibility of the private sector is to create profits and economic incentive legally for all investors instead of taking care of social issues and public affairs (Kok, Weile, & Mckenna, 2001). If the private sector becomes socialistic and does not optimize its financial capital and resources, it will leave insufficient room for growth, expansion, R&D, and innovation. For example, if a private sector donates a significant amount to build schools in poor rural areas, it will overlap with the government's role in providing educational services. Likewise, if the public sector creates too many public goods so that it overlaps with the private goods, it will crowd out private spending.

Also another example, if the city government buys milk for all the school children, then the family will no longer purchase milk for household needs. Therefore, the private sector should not use their previous capital for creating public goods but instead use their strengths and entrepreneurial talents on developing their private goods, gaining profits to reward investors, paying taxes so that the public sector can focus on social justice and making reinvestment for expansion and growth. The shareholder view is the privatization view. "Optimal degree of CSR is determined by the trade-off between the benefit of quality improvement and the cost of quality investment" (Xu, 2014, p. 2). This corporate social responsibility is based on the mutual respect for both roles and functions, and their efficiency and structure (Snider, Hill, & Martin, 2003).

Social Responsibility--Stakeholder View

Rather than maintaining the status quo, communities should go the extra mile, while retaining the roles and functions of the public and private sectors, is the core value of the stakeholder view. In order to minimize gaps between the poor and the rich and improve social justice, the private sectors should not only pay the corporate income taxes but also have philanthropic discretions to legally donate more financial, human, and physical resources to help the economic system and support the "greater community" (Snider, Hill, & Martin, 2003). It is believed that this greater community concept will effectively and socialistically create more harmonious relationships between labor and management, private sector and society, poor and rich. However, stakeholder views going beyond private sector, and doing more for public sectors might overlap government's roles and functions.

Organizational Commitment

The commitment is defined as the "behavioral commitment" to forgo alternative courses of action and "attitudinal commitment" to facilitate the organizational goals (Mowday & Steers, 1979, p. 225). Do employees prefer to have a profitable hospital paying their paycheck regularly with bonus or merit pay, or do they prefer to have a reputable and socially responsible hospital running lots of charitable activities requiring their participation in terms of their donations or contributions? Which type of corporate social responsibility (CSR) will strengthen the employee's organizational commitment? The employees cannot easily detect the hospitals' motives for CSR but they can see the behaviors and outcome. The outcome includes the support of customers, government and community. One of the most important outcomes is their decisions and commitment to participate in the hospital's daily operations, regular service and extensive services to the community. What are their commitment-related behaviors in consideration of these two major CSR philosophies, Shareholder and Stakeholder views? Is it meaningful for the hospital and employees to walk the extra mile for extensive donation and community service?

BACKGROUND OF THIS STUDY AND LITERATURE REVIEW

Ethical Climates--Egoistic, Benevolent and Principled

Organizational Climate is "a set of perceptions regarding the policies, practices, and procedures that an organization rewards, supports, and expects" (Schneider & Reichers, 1983, p. 19). It requires collaborative efforts from employees with visions to formulate organizational cultural competence for doing something meaningful, significant, and enjoyable together. These activities include community service projects, fundraising foundation, creating jobs, or activities to fulfill corporate social responsibility (Purnell, Davidhizar, & Giger, 2011).

An ethical climate is defined as the social norm and shared perception within a specific, or in this case, healthcare, setting, with aggregate moral values and beliefs depending on the employees' determination and mutual trust in how they expect and perceive their work life. It is a fixed but also dynamic organizational personality that attracts and retains employees in the 21st century. (Tziner, Felea, & Vasiliu, 2015). It is evolving and will dominantly affect all the employees' ethical decisions, social responsibility world views and personal commitment.

A positive ethical climate is associated with more positive group dynamics, interests, perceptions, and evaluations in many dimensions. With the major benefits for a positive ethical climate indicating a positive correlation among professionalism, caring compassion, rules, independence and organizational commitment, it has the potential of resolving the high turnover of healthcare service providers (Borhani, 2014). Among ethical climate research, Victor and Cullen (Victor, 1988) used factorial analysis to develop ethical climate conceptual model in terms of egoism, benevolence and principle.

In an ethical climate, egoism is one of important components, which is defined as a focus to promoting and prioritizing organizational goals, self-interests and mission before doing favors to others. Maximization of profits and minimization of costs are priority of any organization. Egoism is a virtuous component of a positive ethical climate to which everyone sticks to their roles and functions based their self-interests. Benevolence emphasizes the importance of creating the greatest good for others including employees, customers and the community socialistically. In the middle, the component of principle in an ethical climate emphasizes that all decisions, behaviors and actions should be made based on professional rules, regulations, codes, and procedural justice (Victor, 1988).

Corporate Social Responsibility--Shareholder and Stakeholder Views

Corporate Governance--Shareholder View

The CSR Shareholder view aims to legally maximize shareholder and economic performance as a whole with limited resources. Based on supply-side economics and private investment concepts in consideration of shareholder interests, environment regulations, societal expectation, government law, and economic development, the CSR involves shareholders (investors), responsible board with a faithful steward (Stewardship Theory), manager (Agent Theory), responsible loaning behaviors (Resource Dependence Theory) and thoughtful environmental, social and economic concerns (Theoretical Institutional Perspective) (Rodriguez-Fernandez, 2015). A well-operated corporate governance will distinctly and directly enhance financial performance and indirectly improve economic prosperity, political stability and societal harmony. "Any use of corporations' resources to other goals than profit making would be unethical because that use is not legitimated by shareholders" (Brandao et al., 2013)

Corporate and Government Governance--Stakeholder View

The Stakeholder View of the CSR has an altruistic and socialistic view in defining the corporate roles and functions as going beyond the self-interests of the shareholders to common societal interests. To some extent, the Stakeholder view can be regarded as the "long-term shareholder value" (Chung et al., 2013). Regardless of this ideological thinking and the possibility of overlapping government and public sector's roles in creating public goods and making social change, the CSR creates a possible public relation (PR) image and positive force to strengthen business' market share and long-term sustainability (Maignan, 2001). Because CSR will utilize the resources for the corporation's product development and marketing endeavors, is it economical to get the private sector involved with social change or the public sector? The stakeholder is still attempting to identify whether CSR will affect the corporate competitiveness, reputation and sustainability (Turker, How corporate social responsibility influences organizational commitment, 2009). It has become a sensitive topic for hospitals because many hospitals attempt to avoid responsibilities to their communities and instead act as an instrument of the government by becoming a charity institution to create social goods and benefits for the community (Sandy, 2008). For example, many hospitals avoid making cash or charity donations to the community (Gonzalez-Rodriguez, 2016). Instead, those hospitals fulfilling CSR concepts tend to create endowment funds to recruit students to implement health promotion or business projects. It is called a health capital good instead of a consumption good (Carter, 2009). However, doing good and doing well are the ideals of CSR, and the hospitals are encouraged to create community benefits voluntarily on their own costs.

Regained Interest in Organizational Commitment

Since CSR is going beyond the law and legality to pay corporate income taxes, as well as to transcend economic interests in optimizing the resources, how healthcare employees perceive the issue of legality and go the extra mile and make commitment to follow the corporate policies became very challenging in corporate decision making (Turker, How corporate social responsibility influences organizational commitment, 2009). The hospital employees would be proud of their institutions for meeting the legal requirements and feel honored being a member but may or may not agree with the effort in going the extra mile when considering marginal cost versus marginal revenue. If the marginal revenue (increasing sales and public image) is greater than marginal costs (extra donation), the employees will feel more satisfied and loyal with the CSR policy. If their perceptions are not similar to those of the organizational value system, their commitment level will drop and their want to continue to work for the organization with their full capacity and hearts will decrease. The challenge is how the hospital measures the marginal revenue and proves that the marginal revenue is more than marginal CSR costs.

Social Responsibility at Hospitals

Social responsibility is a new paradigm of hospital governance. (Brandao, Rego, Duarte, & Nunescorresponding, 2013). Education and Healthcare are two non-economical and inefficient social services utilized in order to help the lower classes turn around their poverty conditions. It could be served as tools for government's national insurance or private goods to private investment operated by the supply and demand marketing objectives. The hospital has the challenge to meet both social and market objectives, balance the law, and follow general ethical standards. Creating organizational value through performance, conformance and responsibility with employee's engagement and commitment has become very imperative in current modern society (Brandao et al., 2013). External public image is, to some extent, like an essential branding necessity for the products and service. Since the hospitals also require branding equity, practicing social responsibility and greater community concepts will also create selfbenefits. When the overloading problems are not resolved, the hospitals have to face the predicament and decision whether or not they should send nurses or doctors for the free community health service. Is it going to inspire them or lower their morale? (Hsieh et al., 2016).

RESEARCH QUESTIONS AND HYPOTHESES

The methodology of the study was to examine the perceptions and lived experiences of the healthcare providers of a Christian hospital and examine whether or not each of the ethical climates, Egoistic, Benevolent, or Principled, perceived by the employees can be effectively functioning and linked to both CSR value (Shareholder and Stakeholder) in this setting. This study was also to further explore whether or not Shareholder or Stakeholder views can enhance an employee's organization commitment levels. The research questions that framed this study were as followed:

1. What are the levels of ethical climate, social responsibility philosophical views, and organizational commitment levels perceived by Christian hospital employees in terms of gender, income, years of work experiences and ethnic background?

2. Are the perceived Egoistic, Benevolent and Principled ethical climates linked to two different views of CSR, Shareholders and Stakeholders, and organizational commitment levels among Christian hospital employees as the first-order factors?

3. Are the employee's two social responsibility philosophical views, Shareholders and Stakeholders, linked to the organizational commitment among Christian hospital employees as the second-order factors?

It is unknown and controversial empirically as to which of the three categories of ethical climates or of the two categories of corporate social responsibility views can contribute to employee's organizational commitment. Based on the research questions and the literature review, the authors of this study developed the following hypotheses:

Hypothesis 1: there are significant differences of gender, income, years of services and ethnic backgrounds in perceiving Ethical Climates, Social Responsibility and Organizational Commitment.

Regarding the gender's perception, male employees perceived the significant contribution of CSR toward the company's internal unity and morale as well as toward the protection of corporate image (Brammer, Millington, & Rayton, 2007). Goldman and Tabak (2012) found out that demographic characteristics such as gender, income and racial backgrounds played important roles in perceiving ethical climate and job satisfaction. The female, lower salary earners, and Hispanic healthcare providers who are satisfied with their jobs tend to favor caring, serving and independent ethical climates (Goldman & Tabak, 2010). Basically they want to be treated fairly, benevolently and respectfully. Gender and ethnical differences also played an important role in perceiving the importance of corporate social responsibility (Calabrese, Costa, & Rosati, 2016) The gender, age, income differences are the important demographic factors to perceive roles of CSR differently in designing the products, planning, implementing and assessing sustainability initiatives (Perez & Rodriguez del Bosque, 2015). Current literature does not find any hypothesis of corporate social responsibility, ethical climate and commitment on the years of work experience. Thus, the following hypothesis was developed:

Hypothesis 2: The perceived higher Egoistic Climate is significantly conducive to the Social Responsibility's better Shareholder view. The better Shareholder view will contribute to increase employee's organizational commitment level, which is the narrower view of Social Responsibility.

This hypothesis is under the shareholder view that an egoistic climate will reinforce personal efforts and institutional interests to seek a better future for individual and corporation, which will facilitate the efficiency of optimizing the resources and uphold responsibility to satisfy the board's best interests in order to justify its own existence. This hypothesis is set to explore whether employees preferred to make more organizational commitment in the hospital that has egoistic climate to motivate employees to protect the turf, institutional ideology, and resources to maximize the shareholder's investment. Since church hospitals are affiliated with denominational interests and many employees of the same denominational interests are called to serve in their respective church hospitals, do they feel more secure in working for an institution that prioritizes their resources in taking care of employees', shareholders' and hospital's current operational needs and future investment needs? This Egoism Theory defines taking responsibility for self-interests and mission as the priority and focus to take care of the organizational survival and investors' resources responsibly and legally and it will minimize the self-guilt for the failure being responsible for the survival (Jennings, 2009). The enlightened self-interest theory is still limited to self-interests in which doing good should be involved with publicity and public relations benefits. When making donations, at least the institutional name should be promoted explicitly (Jennings, 2009)

Hypothesis 3: The perceived higher Benevolent Ethical Climate is significantly conducive to the Social Responsibility's better Stakeholder view. The better Stakeholder view will contribute to better employee's organizational commitment level, which is the broader view of Social Responsibility.

This hypothesis is under the stakeholder view that a benevolent climate will reinforce personal efforts to seek a better future for the individual, corporation, community and society. This hypothesis does not see the organization as the private sector but as part of the public sector to actively influence and solve the problems for the public concerns, which is going beyond its self-interests and survival concerns. This hypothesis emphasizes the maximization of end results and outcome in the long run instead of keeping all the means, roles, functions and laws. In order to walk extra miles with good hearts, a sacrifice of using extra resources seems wasteful, inefficient and uneconomical but effective and good for the environment and society. The Utilitarian theory argued that the resolution for public concerns is that private sector needs to help minimize the harm and maximize the outcome of social well-beings socialistically (Jennings, 2009) with a little sacrifice of escalated business costs. When employees see the corporation do good things toward the society, they will be more committed to their job and will not necessarily care about the corporate prosperity and their pay increase (Turker, 2009).

Hypothesis 4: Hospital employees with high levels of the organizational Principled Climate (ECQ) tend to create an influence on their corporate social responsibility and Shareholder views, which will subsequently enhance their organizational commitment levels (OCQ).

The Principled ethical climate proposes a neutral, or principled, position to resolve the problems and concerns of both the private and public sectors. The Categorical Imperative emphasizes that it is not ethical to use others for one-sided benefits (Jennings, 2009). It cannot be a universal or social norm unless everyone has agreed with it as fair action. There must be a procedural justice and principle that everyone can agrees to by law to make a donation or raise the minimum wage. The principle is based on the golden rule. If the majority feels it not ethical for business entities to pay less or donate less for the poor, it still needs to go through the legal prodigal justice and finalize the decision.

The Theory of Justice and Social Contract theory claimed that law only requires the organization to pay taxes and maintain safe business practices. Some laws require environmental protection for healthy purposes and raising minimum wage for preventing social riots, which will continue to add more operational costs. The private sector does not feel "obligated" to make donations in the public sector but just needs to follow the legal regulations and policies. It will minimize all the guilt feelings and ethical dilemmas. Let the private and public sectors keep the roles and functions distinctively (Jennings, 2009). The Right Theory, also known as known as Entitlement Theory, supports this hypothesis because it emphasizes the various rights set and protected by the government. If the business does not pay taxes, it will be punished by the government. However, if the business does not make any donations to charity or to the victims of natural disasters, it will not be fined. Therefore, everyone has rights to assess the worst outcome, make legal decisions and do extra donations at wills and rights (Jennings, 2009). Thus, the following hypothesis was developed:

Hypothesis 5: The three categories of ethical climates will be linked to two categories of corporate social responsibility and subsequently linked to employees' organizational commitment.

Shareholder and stakeholder orientations are not mutually exclusive (Etheredge & Singhapakdi, 1999). Relatively little research has been conducted to investigate whether the hospital employees are willing to take action or show emotional support and commitment to socially responsible hospitals and condemn those irresponsible hospitals. Will OC (Organizational Commitment) and CSR affect the commitment (satisfaction and loyalty) of internal employees directly or indirectly? It is unknown and controversial empirically which of three categories of ethical climates or two categories of corporate responsibility views can contribute to employee's organizational commitment.

METHODS

Sample and Data Collection

Little research was used to examine the structural components and linkages among these three latent concepts. In order to create structural equation model to test the proposed link between organizational climate and social responsibility, and between social responsibility and organizational commitment, an online survey was administered to 477 full-time employees of two Christian hospitals. Responses to the survey were anonymous. Respondents younger than 18 years or from other vulnerable populations who lack the full capacity to participate in this survey research such as computer or English illiterates were excluded by the Human Resource Department. The online survey was distributed by the hospital human resource department during the hospital evaluation process to full-time employees who had an official hospital email account. Data was collected between July 20, 2016 and September 20, 2016 with administrative approval and assistance from the Human Resources Division of the Metroplex Adventist Hospital in Killeen, Texas and Central Texas Medical Center with IRB approval during July 10, 2015-July 10, 2016). Institutional Review Board approval and resource supported were obtained from Andrews University, Berrien Springs, Michigan, The online survey may be viewed at https://docs.google.com/forms/d/e/1FAIpQLScyWbddMz76Omr7jzS8mCoNxvF48BV4efLYyFl Yf6JjrBlGiA/viewform

The respondents were encouraged to participate in this research on a voluntary basis and were told that the general results would be shared with them if they voluntarily submitted their email address at the end of the online survey. Responding to the survey on hospital ethical climates, social responsibility and organizational commitment levels was determined to pose no detrimental, physical, psychological, or social effect on the respondents. Power Analysis determined that an effective sample size of 410 would maximize the chance of achieving statistically significant results at a significance level of 0.05. The sample was selected on a voluntary self-report basis. The Gmail Doc website counter recorded the respondents' answers with their confirmation.

There were 477 full time employees who participated in this research. Fifty two percent of respondents were male and 42% were female. Thirty six percent of the respondents had worked at the hospital as full-time employees for 1 to 5 years. Hispanic American (36.5%) and Caucasian (29.8%) were the two dominant ethnic groups. Thirty-five percent of the respondents earned an annual salary less than $50, 000, 31% earned more than $70,000 annually. All the responses were transmitted electronically to an SPSS database for analysis. Because of the data analysis specification of Structural Equation Modeling, any responses missing data were dismissed from the data set.

Instrumentation and Measures

The permission to use Ethical Climate Questionnaire (ECQ), Perceived Role of Ethical and Social Responsibility (PRESOR) and Organizational Commitment (OC) were initially granted by the primary author with his written document.

Cullen and Victor (1993) surveyed 1167 individuals and developed ECQ with reliable factorial analysis into three categories, egoistic, benevolent and principled. Cronbach alpha is noted as the benchmark with.76,.85,.76 respectively. The Principled climate emphasizes rules, standards, operating procedures, laws and professional codes. Egoism is defined as prioritizing self-interests. The top priority is for everyone to fulfill their roles to maximize profits. Benevolence stresses on going beyond self-interests to create a better social good for larger community and society even at the expense of the corporation's profits and best interests. These items are shown in Table 1 of the Appendix

Etheredge and Singhapakdi (1999) developed a reliable and valid scale to measure perceived role of ethics and social responsibility (PRESOR) with factorial and reliability analysis from 532 respondents located in Peru, South Africa and United States. PRESOR was mainly conducted to measure whether or not organizational efficiency (shareholder view) or effectiveness (stakeholder view) should be adopted in business society. Cronbach alpha is noted as the benchmark with .70 and .70 respectively. These items are shown in Table 2 of the Appendix

Monday, Steers and Porter (1979) developed and validated a measurement from 2563 employees in nine organizations called Organizational Commitment Questionnaire (OCQ). The test-retest reliability was r=.72 OCQ focuses on two commitment-related behaviors, attitudinal commitment, showing how an employee identifies and facilitates the organizational goal. OCQ intends to measure personal belief, value and loyalty toward the organization's goal as well as personal willingness to exert efforts to be a good member and contributor. These items are shown in Table 3 in the Appendix.

Table 4 shows that the respondents perceived a high level of ethical climate among three observed variables, with above-average scale scores ([bar.x] = 2.5) on the 4-point ECQ. Principled Climate (PC) ([bar.x] = 3.04) ranked highest. Regarding Corporate Social Responsibility, Shareholder view (SHV) has the mean ([bar.x] = 2.98) below the scale mean ([bar.x] = 3.5), while the Stakeholder View (STV) has the mean ([bar.x] = 4.99) above the scale mean ([bar.x] = 3.5). More importantly, respondents experienced a stronger level of organizational commitment ([bar.x] = 5.06) than the scale mean ([bar.x] = 3.50).

The endogenous variables (dependent variables) are the variables affected by exogenous variables (independent variables). Confirmatory factorial analysis (CFA) was used to construct the structural equation model (SEM), and all the observed variables and components were confirmed before putting them together. As part of the process, chi-square, comparative fit index (CFI), probabilities, and Cronbach [alpha] were estimated and are displayed in Table 5. The results show that all observed variables functioned properly and effectively for testing the theoretical proposition and examining the extent of interrelationships among variables. The factor loadings with CFI greater than .95, Cronbach [alpha] greater than .80, and probability less than .05 are accepted statistically.

Table 6 presents the correlations among all the observed variables in order to evaluate the assumptions of multivariate normality and linearity. There are some missing data for the final sample of size of 477. The results indicated that organizational commitment is positively correlated with egoistic mission climate (r=0.752), benevolent climate (r=0.854), principled climate (r=0.808), stakeholder social responsibility view (r=0.795), but negatively correlated with shareholder social responsibility view (r=-0.653) in the Christian hospitals.

Measurement Model

The SEM was adopted with the maximum likelihood method. IBM SPSS 22.0 and IBM AMOS 24.0 have been used to perform instrument validation, descriptive statistics, canonical discriminant analysis, regression, CFA, and structural equation analysis (Gardner, 2016). CFA is a hypothesized model to measure and estimate a population covariance matrix with minimum differences between the estimated and observed matrices (Schumaker & Lomax, 1996). SEM is a statistical method for examining and estimating causal relationships by using a graphical combination of statistical data and qualitative assumptions (Bishop, 2008).

Figure 1 shows a CFA with three latent variables, Ethical Climate (EC), Corporate Social Responsibility (CSR) and Organizational Commitment (OC). The number "1" in the diagram represents the regression coefficient and is used to minimize and standardize the number of parameters (Schumaker & Lomax, 1996). In this study, a CFA was conducted to link three latent concepts: Ethical Climate and Corporate Social Responsibility are exogenous variables and the Organizational Commitment is the endogenous variable. The latent variables are hidden as opposite to observed variables or subsets, which can be measured by those measured items under each observed variable from the well-constructed survey instrument.

Latent variables (theoretical concepts that cannot be observed directly) = unobserved = unmeasured

Observed variables (indicators of the underlying construct which they are presumed to represent)= manifest = measured

Exogenous Variable

Latent Concept: Ethical Climate (Measured by ECQ)

Observed Variable 1: Egoistic

Observed Variable 2: Benevolent

Observed Variable 3: Principled

Exogenous Variable

Latent Concept: Corporate Social Responsibility (Measured by PRESOR)

Observed Variable 1: Shareholder View

Observed Variable 2: Stakeholder View

Endogenous Variables

Observed Variable: Organizational Commitment (Measured by OCQ)

The structural equation is shown as below:

* Organizational Commitment (One Level) = Ethical Climates (Three Factors) + Error (Disturbance Variance)

* Organizational Commitment (One Level) = Perceived Roles of Ethics and Social Responsibility (Two Factors) + Error (Disturbance Variance)

* Perceived Roles of Ethics and Social Responsibility (Two Level) = Ethical Climates (Three Factors) + Error (Disturbance Variance)

* [eta] (Latent Concepts) = [beta](Regression) x [eta](endogenous)+ [GAMMA] x [xi] (Structural Error) + [zeta] (Errors)

* X(Measured Items) = [LAMBDA] x [xi] (Exogenous) + [delta] (Errors)

* [Y.sub.i] = [[beta].sub.0] + [[beta].sub.1][X.sub.i] + [[epsilon].sub.i]

Latent variables (theoretical concepts that cannot be observed directly) = unobserved = unmeasured

Observed variables (indicators of the underlying construct which they are presumed to represent)= manifest = measured

Exogenous Variable

Latent Concept: Ethical Climate (Measured by ECQ)

Observed Variable 1: Egoistic

Observed Variable 2: Benevolent

Observed Variable 3: Principled

Exogenous Variable

Latent Concept: Corporate Social Responsibility (Measured by PRESOR)

Observed Variable 1: Shareholder View

Observed Variable 2: Stakeholder View

Endogenous Variables

Observed Variable: Organizational Commitment (Measured by OCQ)

The structural equation is shown as below:

* Organizational Commitment (One Level) = Ethical Climates (Three Factors) + Error (Disturbance Variance)

* Organizational Commitment (One Level) = Perceived Roles of Ethics and Social Responsibility (Two Factors) + Error (Disturbance Variance)

* Perceived Roles of Ethics and Social Responsibility (Two Level) = Ethical Climates (Three Factors) + Error (Disturbance Variance)

* [eta](Latent Concepts) = [beta](Regression) x [eta](endogenous)+ [GAMMA] x [xi] (Structural Error) + [zeta] (Errors)

* X(Measured Items) = [LAMBDA] x [xi] (Exogenous) + [delta] (Errors)

* [Y.sub.i] = [[beta].sub.0] + [[beta].sub.1][X.sub.i] + [[epsilon].sub.i]

The regression weight in structural equation modeling is the [beta] from without intercept but associated with structural error. The regression weight [beta] is regarded as the correlations among CFA and SEM model. (Hayduk, 1987). The SEM regression coefficients are called regression weights or beta weights under an assumption that the predictor and criterion variables are all standardized. "A beta weight equals the correlation when there is a single predictor. If there are two or predictors, a beta weights can be larger than +1 or smaller than -1, but this is due to multicollinearity" (Kenny, 2015, p. 1).

The major purpose of the SEM and the CFA was to test the reliability of the observed variables toward the unobserved latent variables (Schumaker & Lomax, 1996). The SEM model parameters were using the maximum likelihood method.

Structural Equation Model

In reference to model fit, it is necessary to validate each latent variable and use several goodness-of-fit indicators to assess the model. Figure 2 presents the structural equation model of Ethical Climate, Corporate Social Responsibility and Organizational Commitment for the scale validation purpose prior to the model assembling. This factor structure and goodness of fit (GFI) adequately fit the data with CFI = 0.921 (Moderate), [chi square]=1979.9, degrees of freedom = 735, probability level (p) = 0.000, RMSEA =0.048, NFI = 0.933, IFI = 0.942, TLI = 0.948.

Table 7 showed the standardized regression values for each latent concept and their component in terms of Confirmatory Factor Analysis. Three ethical climates, Egoistic ([[beta].bar] =0.881), Benevolent ([[beta].bar] = 0.912), and Principled ([[beta].bar] = 0.877), have been confirmed as effective measurement constructs. Two Corporate Social Responsibility, Shareholder ([[beta].bar] = -0.836) and Stakeholder ([[beta].bar] = 0.911), have been confirmed as effective construct components.

Table 8 shows that predictors of Years of Service (p=0.000), Income (p=0.000) and Gender groups (p=0.000) correlated significantly with the dependent variable, organizational commitment. This demonstrated that respondents' commitment of their hospital work were related to their demographic backgrounds and can be attributed as moderating effects (Carroll, 2010). The findings show that racial diversification is quite acceptable in the Christian hospitals.

Table 9 shows that predictors of all subsets (p=0.000) are correlated significantly with the independent variable, Ethical Climate (EC) three components, Egoistic, Benevolent and Principled. The findings of this multivariate analysis demonstrated that respondents' perception of their hospital ethical climates in three dimensions were related to their demographic backgrounds and can be attributed as moderating effects (Carroll, 2010).

Table 10 showed the regression weight P, Canonical Correlation, Variance, Wilk's Lambda and Eigenvalue among these three latent concepts. The ethical climates perceived by healthcare providers highly contribute to their perception of roles and functions in corporate social responsibility. More importantly, both ethical climate and corporate social responsibility directly contribute to their organizational commitment.

DISCUSSION

The findings of this SEM model convey an important message. The organizational commitment of healthcare employees is determined and significantly influenced by the well-formulated ethical climate and well-supported corporate social responsibility. Hypotheses 1-5 were tested and accepted on the basis of statistical analysis, with a significance level of 0.01 and high goodness of fit (CFI = 0.921).

The internal cohesiveness and mutual understanding in a hospital has proven to build a solid and strong ethical climate. In terms of the Egoistic ethical component (mission driven), the findings showed that everyone understands their respective hospital's special missions and interests and will not intentionally violate them. This self-discipline mindset and commitment set a solid foundation for growth and development, and the clear sense of direction with internal consensus creates a sense of unity and synergy for the hospital. In terms of the Benevolent ethical component, the findings showed that everyone understands the hospital philosophy of not only caring about the patient's well-being, but also about the employee's well-being. When healthcare providers perceived being treated nicely and kindly, they will pass out the love and caring compassion to patients. In other words, when the internal customers are fairly and professionally treated well, these internal customers will learn how to treat external customers in the same manner they were treated as well. It is a contagious and influential process of relationship climate management in the healthcare industry. In terms of the principled ethical component, relationship climate management is equivalent to task management. The medical and healthcare industry is a highly regulated industry, with many strict rules, regulations, and policies, and employees should be highly aware and understand that this adherence of these rules is not just a consensus, but a mandate. The higher the degree of mutual understanding on these rigorous rules, the stronger the ethical climate will be. The moderately high egoistic, benevolent and principled ethical climate proved that these Christian hospitals have high levels of cohesive internal climates.

When assessing CSR, which is how a hospital views the society and identifies the appropriate attitudes and visions to fulfill roles and functions, findings indicate that the majority of the employees from the two Christian hospitals disagree with the shareholder view while strongly siding with the stakeholder view. Recalling the definitions of both views, the shareholder view indicates that individual best interest is limited by the need to maximize resources and profits, and hospitals should set the top priority to satisfy the board members and investors' special interests and focus on the resource utilization, leverage effects, cost minimization and profit maximization. The mean score in this category is below scale mean. In terms of stakeholder view, however, the findings showed that the surveyed healthcare service providers strongly agreed that Christian hospitals should focus on the social responsibility and go beyond the profit maximization. They think that profitability and corporate social responsibility should not be mutually exclusive but complementary to each other in a long term survival. When the employees see themselves doing good things in a good business, they will be motivated intrinsically. The findings showed high regression weight [beta] and canonical correlation between ethical climate and corporate social responsibilities, which proved that internal ethical value management, will be able to affect the employees' external and broader views in corporate social responsibility.

The findings showed those strong ethical climates in terms of egoistic (mission driven), benevolent (caring) and principled (following medical protocol) perceptions together with the broader stakeholder view significantly contribute to organizational commitment. The employees are more willing to go the extra miles to help hospitals fulfill their duty of social responsibility. They appreciate the hospital using their strengths and developing their talents so that they would not accept almost any job but in turn recommend their hospital's jobs to their friends. This high level of commitment and loyalty tied their career with the prospect of the hospital.

Among the demographic variables tested, Years of Service, Income, Ethnicity Group and Gender had an effect on perception of level of perception of ethical climates, corporate social responsibility and organizational commitment. In terms of organizational commitment, the findings showed that there are no racial differences in strong commitment toward the Christian hospitals.

IMPLICATIONS OF THIS STUDY

Shareholder view emphasizes no role ambiguity between private and public sectors and is efficient, capitalistic and outcome-driven, while Stakeholder view emphasizes the means to build organic communities and collaborative relationships jointly between public and private sectors. The common interests or gray zone is that the shareholder view may still walk the extra mile to donate money, make self-presentation and run impression management for improving social media publicity based on self-interests and good brains. The stakeholder view may donate money to the charity or public sector to win more trust from the government, beneficiaries, customers and media based on their self-interests and good hearts. No one can truly judge the motives but the explicit CSR behaviors and outcomes. Snider, Hill & Martin (2003) mentioned that 85% of corporation published their good deeds in their website to inform everyone about their corporate social responsibility image. Who really has the good hearts or good brain in extending extra miles?

Our findings imply that Christian hospitals practice and exemplify ethical principles, as well as instill values into their roles and mission in the broader view of corporate social responsibilities. Because the employees highly agreed with their roles to walk the extra mile for the hospitals and the society, it creates an intrinsic motivation, unity, synergy and morale to work together effectively as a team. Their organizational commitment levels are dramatically enhanced. This empirical data in this SEM model is supportive of this logical explanation.

Common interests for both Shareholder and Stakeholder views are for creating profitability. Whether private good or public/social goods is better has been controversial. The Christian hospital employees chose to create larger public/social goods but might deplete the financial and human resources and win the trust from the government and consumers effectively (demand-side socialistic economics) while the opponents feel the resource preservation and optimization will make the hospital stronger, profitable and more efficient (supply-side and capitalistic economics). Under Christian context, the findings implied that Adventist hospitals will be benefited and profited by the participation and fulfillment of corporate social responsibility.

LIMITATIONS OF THE STUDY

This study demonstrates the validity, power, and contribution of an ethical climate and corporate social responsibility in one organizational outcome, organizational commitment. However, several limitations should be addressed. First, this study relied on validated, one-source from two hospitals, self-reported questionnaires with content and construct validity. These findings must be validated on repeat measures by showing consistency with the findings in other populations using the same instruments. The correlation matrix shows that minimizing the common variance has controlling power and will not affect the hypothesis testing. Second, the cross-construct validity must be established, such that our findings are consistent with those obtained by other measures and instruments, both quantitative and qualitative approaches. Third, respondents were all recruited from two Adventist-affiliated Christian hospital in Texas. The cultures of Texas and this Christian denomination might be regarded as extraneous factors that limit the generalizability of the findings. Fourth, increasing sample size and using repeated measures will ensure that the population mean is close to sample means and give statistical power adequate for rejecting the null hypothesis. Since this was one-source measurement, because of resource and time constraints, the power analysis was used to determine the effective sample size for a one-time measure. This is theoretically acceptable and durable, but there are some extraneous variables such as internal events, seasonality, or leadership tenure on the position limiting and intervening the validity of findings. Fifth, even though the response rate was good, the responses are based on voluntary participation rather than randomized selection.

DIRECTIONS FOR FUTURE RESEARCH

There are capitalistic and socialistic views for hospital management in healthcare industry. The hospitals have to comply with government regulations socialistically because the government tightly controls the national insurance and charges. Christian hospitals have a strong ethical climate to follow the protocol and will not try to overcharge the patients and abuse the DRG codes. However, fulfilling corporate social responsibility roles still requires financial resources.

If the extra donation (marginal cost) will create leverage effects to generate significant profitability, it will justify the endeavors of assuming the corporate social responsibility roles. The longitudinal economic model can be used as the measurement for the charity donation and see if the donation (treatment effect) can prove the statistical differences between pre-test and post-test.

The next research can be conducted to explore the methods that the Christian hospitals can help the society strategically without endangering the financial health or how Christian hospitals can raise the capitals from those non-national insurance categories.

CONCLUSION

Adventist Hospital employees at the Metroplex Adventist Hospital and Central Texas Medical Center perceived a high level of Christian hospitals' ethical climates in three dimensions, Benevolent, Principled and Egoistic (mission driven), which are positively and highly conducive to the broader Stakeholder view of Corporate Social Responsibility and significantly resist the narrower self-centered Shareholder CSR view. The support of the broader Stakeholder view and opposition to the shareholder view are significantly correlated with the high level of organizational commitment. The strong organizational ethical climate creates both direct and indirect effects on the high level of organizational commitment among these two Christian hospitals.

APPENDIX
Table 1

Scale of Measurement--Ethical Climate Questionnaire (ECQ)

Egoistic Climate

1. My hospital emphasizes the importance of furthering its interests.

2. Employees in my hospital are not expected to be concerned with the
hospital's interests all the time. (R)

3. All decisions and actions in my hospital are expected to contribute
to the hospital's interests.

4. Work that hurts my hospital's interests can be acceptable. (R)

Benevolent Climate

5. Concern for employees is prevalent in my hospital.

6. My hospital does not emphasize employee welfare. (R)

7. All decisions and actions in my hospital are expected to result
in what is generally best for everyone.

8. My hospital does not consider the well-being of all employees. (R)

Principled Climate

9. Compliance with hospital rules and procedures is very important
in my hospital.

10. Employees in my hospital are not expected to stick to hospital
policies strictly. (R)

11. People who do not follow hospital rules and procedures are not
viewed favorably in my hospital.

12. My hospital does not emphasize the importance of its rules,
procedures and policies. (R)

(R) Indicated reverse-scored items

Table 2

Scale of Measurement--Perceived Role of Ethics and Social
Responsibility (PRESOR)

Shareholder View

1. The most important concern for a hospital is making a profit,
even if it means bending or breaking the rules.

2. To remain competitive in a global environment, hospitals will
have to disregard ethics and social responsibility.

3. If survival of a hospital is at stake, then you must forget about
ethics and social responsibility.

4. Efficiency is much more important to a hospital than whether or
not the hospital is seen as ethically or socially responsible.

5. If the shareholders are unhappy, nothing else matters.

Stakeholder View

6. Being ethical and socially responsible is the most important thing
a hospital can do.

7. The ethics and social responsibility of a hospital is essential to
its long-term profitability.

8. The overall effectiveness of a hospital can be determined to a
great extent by the degree to which it is ethical and socially
responsible.

9. Business ethics and social responsibility are critical to the
survival of a business enterprise.

10. A hospital's first priority should be employee morale.

11. Business has a social responsibility beyond making a profit.

12. Social responsibility and profitability can be compatible.

13. Good ethics is often good business.

(R) Indicated reverse-scored items.

Table 3

Scale of Measurement--Organizational Commitment Questionnaire (OCQ)

1. I am willing to put in a great deal of effort beyond that normally
expected in order to help this hospital to be successful.

2. I talk up this hospital to my friends as a great hospital to
work for.

3. I feel very little loyalty to this hospital (R)

4. I would accept almost any type of job assignment in order
to keep working for this hospital.

5. I find that my values and the hospital values are very similar.

6. I am proud to tell others that I am part of this hospital.

7. I could just as well be working for a different hospital as
long as the type of work was similar. (R).

8. This hospital really inspires the very best in me in the way
of job performance.

9. It would take very little change in my present circumstances to
cause me to leave this hospital (R).

10. I am extremely glad that I chose this hospital to work for over
others I was considering at the time I joined.

11. There's not too much to be gained by sticking with this
hospital indefinitely (R).

12. Often I find it difficult to agree with this hospital's policies
on important matters relating to its employees (R).

13. I really care about the fate of this hospital.

14. For me this is the best of all possible hospitals for which
to work.

15. Deciding to work for this hospital was a definite mistake on
my part (R).


Acknowledgment

The authors would like to acknowledge the administrative approval and IRB support from Mr. Carlyle Walton, President of Metroplex Healthcare System (Killeen, Texas) and Mr. Anthony Stahl, President, and Mr. Jesse Sutton, CFO at Central Texas Medical Center; We also would like to thank the Scott & White Healthcare System, the IRB Committee of Southwestern Adventist University (Keene, Texas), and the support throughout multiple phases of this research provided by the Schools of Business Administration and Nursing at Andrews University, Berrien Springs, Michigan. This paper is presented at the IABPAD Conference 2017 on Jan 2-5, 2017 at Orlando Florida, and the authors thank the participants for their valuable questions and suggestions.

REFERENCE

Borhani, F. (2014). Nurses' perception of ethical climate and organizational commitment. Nursing Ethics, 21(3), 278-288.

Brammer, S., Millington, A., & Rayton, B. (2007). The contribution of corporate social responsibility to organizational commitment. The International Journal of Human Resource Management, 15(10), 1701-1719.

Brandao, C., Rego, G., Duarte, I., & Nunescorresponding, R. (2013). Social responsibility: a new paradigm of hospital governance? Health Care Analysis, 21(4), 390-402.

Calabrese, A., Costa, R., & Rosati, F. (2016). Gender differences in customer expectations and perceptions of corporate social responsibility. Journal of Cleaner Production, 116, 135-149.

Carter, T. (2009). Health Insurance and Corporate Social Responsibility. Journal of Hospital Marketing & Public Relations, 19(1), 64-86.

Chung, K.-H., Yu, J.-E., Choi, M.-G., & Shin, J.-I. (2013). The effects of CSR on customer satisfaction and loyalty in China: the moderating role of corporate image. Journal of Economics, Business and Management, 2(5), 542-547.

Cullen, J. B., & Victor, B. (1993). The ethical climate questinnnaire: an assessment of its development and validity. Pschological Report, 667-674.

Etheredge, J. M., & Singhapakdi, A. (1999). The perceived role of ethics and social responsibility: an alternative scale structure. Journal of Busines Ethics, 15(1), 51-64.

Goldman, A., & Tabak, N. (2010). Perception of ethical climate and its relationship to nurses' demographic characteristics and job satisfaction. Nursing Ethics, 17(2), 233-246.

Goldman, A., & Tabak, N. (2010). Perception of ethical climate and its relationship to nurses' demographic characteristics and job satisfaction. Nursing Ethics, 17(2), 233-246.

Gonzalezrodriguez, M. D. (2016). Relation between Background variables, values and corporate social responsibility. RAE: Revista de Administragao de Empresas. jan/fev2016, Vol. 56 Issue 1, p5-19. 12p, 56(1), 8-19.

Hayduk, H. A. (1987). Structural Equation Modeling with LISREL. Baltimore and London: The Johns Hopkins University Press.

Hsieh, S.C., Chiu, H.C., Hsieh, Y.H., & Ho, P.S. (2016). The Perceptions and Expectations Toward the Social Responsibility of Hospitals and Organizational Commitment of Nursing Staff. Journal of Nursing Research, 24(3), 249-261.

Humphries, A., & Woods, M. (2016). A study of nurses' ethcial climate perceptions: commpreomosing in an uncompromising enrionvment. Nursing Ethics, 23(3), 265-276.

Jennings, M. M. (2009). Business ethics: case studies and selected readings. Mason, OH: South-Western Cengage Learning.

Kenny, D. A. (2015, 12 26). SEM: Multiple Regression. Retrieved from davidakenny.net : http://davidakenny.net/cm/mr.htm

Koh, H. C., & Boo, E. H. (2001). The link between organizational ethics and job satisfaction: a study of managers in Singapore. Journal of Business Ethics, 29, 309-324.

Kok, P. T., Weile, R., & Mckenna, A. B. (2001). A corporate social responsibility audit within a quality managemetn framework. Journal of Business Ethics, 31(4), 285-297.

Maignan, I. (2001). Consumers' perceptions of corporate social responsibilities: a cross-cultural comparison. Journal of Business Ethics, 30, 57-72.

Mowday, R. T., & Steers, R. M. (1979). The measurement of organizational commiment. Journal of Vocational Behavior, 14, 224-247.

Mowday, R. T., Steers, R. M., & Porter, L. W. (1979). The measurement of organizational commitment. Journal of vocational Behavior, 14, 224-247.

Numminen, O., Leino-Kilpi, H., Isoaho, H., & Meretoja, R. (2015). Ethical climate and nurse competence-newly graduated nurses' perceptions. Nursing Ethics, 22(8), 845-859.

Perez, A., & Rodriguez del Bosque, I. ( 2015). How customers construct corporate social responsibility images: Testing the moderating role of demographic characteristics. Business Research Quarterly, 18(2), 127-141.

Purnell, L., Davidhizar, R., & Giger, J. N. (2011). A Guide to Developing a Culturally Competent Organization. Journal of Transcultural Nursing, 22(1), 7-14.

Rodriguez-Fernandez, M. (2015). Social responsibility and financial performance: The role of good corporate governance. Business Research Quarterly, 19 (2), 137-151.

Sandy, L. (2008). Choosing Your Charity. Journal of Healthcare Management, 53(5), 287-290.

Schneider, B., & Reichers, A. (1983). On the etiology of climates. Personnel Psychology, 36, 19-41.

Snider, J., Hill, R. P., & Martin, D. (2003). Corporate social responsiblity in the 21st century: a view from the world's most successful firm. Journal of Busienss Ethics, 48, 175-187.

Turker, D. (2009). How corporate social responsibility influences organizational commitment. Journal of Business Ethics, 89, 189-204.

Tziner, A., Felea, M., & Vasiliu, C. (2015). Relating ethical climate, organizational justice perceptions, and leader-member exchange (LMX) in Romanian organizations. Journal of Work and Organizational Psychology, 1, 51-57.

Victor, V. (1988). A theory and measure of ethical climate in organizations. Research in Corporate Social Performance and Policy, 9, 51-71.

Xu, Y. (2014). CSR Impact on Hospital Duopoly with Price and Quality Competition. Journal of Applied Mathematics, 1-12.

Grace C. Chi

Jerry L. Chi

Andrews University

Grace C. Chi holds a Ph.D. in Nursing Science from Texas Woman's University, Dr. Grace Chi is an Associate Professor of Department of Nursing at Andrews University School of Health Professions in Berrien Springs, Michigan. She is the recipient of the International Research Dissertation Award of the Sigma Theta Tau International Honor Society of Nursing in 2011.

Jerry L. Chi holds a Ph.D. in Statistics and Research Evaluation from Illinois State University, Ph.D. in Leadership and Administration and MBA from Andrews University. Dr. Jerry Chi is the Assistant Dean, Graduate Program Director and Professor of Management at Andrews University School of Business Administration.

Caption: Figure 1

Default Structural Equation Model (SEM) of Organizational Commitment (OC), Ethical Climates (EC) and Corporate Social Responsibility (CSR)

Caption: Figure 2

Complete Structural Equation Model (SEM) of Organizational Commitment (OC), Ethical Climates (EC) and Corporate Social Responsibility (CSR)
Table 4

Descriptive Statistics for Observed Variables

Categories                          N   CRONBACH  REGRESSION    M
                                         ALPHA      WEIGHT

Latent Concept: Ethical                                       Scale
Climate Questionnaire (ECQ)                                   M=2.5
--Unobserved Variable

Observed Variable 1: Egoistic
Climate (EC)                       477   0.912       0.91     2.86

Observed Variable 2: Benevolent
Climate (BC)                       473   0.944       0.91     3.01

Observed Variable 3: Principled
Climate (PC)                       473   0.929       0.87     3.04

Latent Concept:--Perceived                                    Scale
Roles of Ethics and Social                                    M=3.5
Responsibility -Unobserved
Variable

Observed Variable 1: Shareholder
View (SHV)                         471   0.713      -0.84     2.98

Observed Variable 2: Stakeholder
View (STV)                         465   0.937       0.91     4.99

Latent Concept:--Organizational                               Scale
Commitment Questionnaire                                      M=3.5
(OCQ)--Unobserved Variable

Observed Variable 1:
Organizational Commitment (OC)     469   0.977       0.89     5.06

Ethical Climate and
Organizational Commitment          477               0.49

Perceived Roles of Ethics and
Social Responsibility and
Organizational Commitment          477               0.48

Ethical Climate and Perceived
Roles of Ethics and Social
Responsibility                     477               0.86

Categories                          SD

Latent Concept: Ethical
Climate Questionnaire (ECQ)
--Unobserved Variable

Observed Variable 1: Egoistic
Climate (EC)                       0.92

Observed Variable 2: Benevolent
Climate (BC)                       0.95

Observed Variable 3: Principled
Climate (PC)                       0.96

Latent Concept:--Perceived
Roles of Ethics and Social
Responsibility -Unobserved
Variable

Observed Variable 1: Shareholder
View (SHV)                         1.16

Observed Variable 2: Stakeholder
View (STV)                         1.89

Latent Concept:--Organizational
Commitment Questionnaire
(OCQ)--Unobserved Variable

Observed Variable 1:
Organizational Commitment (OC)     1.79

Ethical Climate and
Organizational Commitment

Perceived Roles of Ethics and
Social Responsibility and
Organizational Commitment

Ethical Climate and Perceived
Roles of Ethics and Social
Responsibility

Table 5

Validation of Observed Variables through SEM and Reliability Analysis

Categories

Latent Concept: Ethical               [chi square]   CFI      P
Climate Questionnaire
(ECQ)--Unobserved Variable

Observed Variable 1: Egoistic
Climate (EC)                             5.735      0.957  0.047 *

Observed Variable 2: Benevolent
Climate (BC)                             6.853      0.977  0.033 *

Observed Variable 3: Principled
Climate (PC)                             5.186      0.966  0.037 *

Latent Concept:--Perceived Roles
of Ethics and Social
Responsibility--Unobserved
Variable

Observed Variable 1: Shareholder
View (SHV)                               41.97      0.985  0.00 **

Observed Variable 2: Stakeholder
View (STV)                               342.4      0.955  0.00 **

Latent Concept:--Organizational
Commitment Questionnaire
(OCQ)--Unobserved Variable

Observed Variable 1: Organizational
Commitment (OC)                          979.9      0.951  0.00 **

Categories

Latent Concept: Ethical               Cronbach
Climate Questionnaire                  [alpha]
(ECQ)--Unobserved Variable

Observed Variable 1: Egoistic
Climate (EC)                            0.912

Observed Variable 2: Benevolent
Climate (BC)                            0.944

Observed Variable 3: Principled
Climate (PC)                            0.929

Latent Concept:--Perceived Roles
of Ethics and Social
Responsibility--Unobserved
Variable

Observed Variable 1: Shareholder
View (SHV)                              0.813

Observed Variable 2: Stakeholder
View (STV)                              0.937

Latent Concept:--Organizational
Commitment Questionnaire
(OCQ)--Unobserved Variable

Observed Variable 1: Organizational
Commitment (OC)                         0.977

*. Means significance level at the 0.05 level (2-tailed)

**. Means significance level at the 0.01 level (2-tailed)

Table 6

Correlations for CFA and SEM Analysis

Observed Variables              1          2          3          4

1. Organizational               1
Commitment (OC)

2. Egoistic Climate (EC)    0.752 **       1

3. Benevolent Climate (BC)  0.854 **   0.710 **       1

4. Principled Climate (PC)  0.808 **   0.708 **   0.793 **       1

5. Shareholder View (SHV)  -0.653 **  -0.629 **  -0.659 **  -0.651 **

6. Stakeholder View (STV)   0.795 **   0.669 **   0.678 **   0.727 **

Observed Variables              5      6

1. Organizational
Commitment (OC)

2. Egoistic Climate (EC)

3. Benevolent Climate (BC)

4. Principled Climate (PC)

5. Shareholder View (SHV)       1

6. Stakeholder View (STV)   -0.570 **  1

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

Table 7

Standardized Coefficients for Confirmatory Factor Analysis CFA Analysis

                       [beta]   SE    Probability

 Egoistic    <--  EC    .881   0.048    0.00 **
Benevolent   <--  EC    .912   0.049    0.00 **
Principled   <--  EC    .877   0.041    0.00 **
Shareholder  <--  CSR  -.836   0.041    0.00 **
Stakeholder  <--  CSR   .911   0.045    0.00 **
    CSR      <--  EC    .868   0.107    0.00 **
    OC       <--  CSR   .489   0.038    0.00 **
    OC       <--  EC    .489   0.037    0.00 **

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

Table 8

Canonical Correlations Between Organizational Commitment and
Demographic Characteristics

  Demographic    Eigenvalue   Canonical   Chi-Square  Wilk's
  Backgrounds                Correlation              Lambda

Year of Service    0.059        0.736      225.166     .944
Ethnic Groups      0.492        0.574      175.320     .570
Income             0.614        0.617      208.832     .620
Gender             0.861        0.373       68.87      .861

  Demographic    Probability
  Backgrounds

Year of Service   0.000 **
Ethnic Groups     0.062
Income            0.000 **
Gender            0.000 **

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

Table 9

Canonical Correlations Between Ethical Climates and Demographic
Characteristics

  Demographic    Eigenvalue   Canonical   Chi-Square  Wilk's
  Backgrounds                Correlation              Lambda

Year of Service    0.196        0.405       91.247    0.821
Ethnic Groups      1.663        0.790      458.628    0.372
Income             0.551        0.596      209.229    0.636
Gender             0.082        0.275       36.603    0.924

  Demographic    Probability
  Backgrounds

Year of Service   0.006 **
Ethnic Groups     0.004 **
Income            0.000 **
Gender            0.000 **

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

Table 10

Canonical Correlations Among Ethical Climate,
Corporate Social Responsibility and Organizational Commitment

                     Regression       Canonical    Variance   Wilk's
                    weight [beta]    Correlation              Lambda

     Ethical
   Climate and
    Corporate           0.86          0.812 **      88.01%     0.095
     Social
 Responsibility

     Ethical
   Climate and          0.49           0.850**      67.80%     0.093
 Organizational
   Commitment

    Corporate
     Social
 Responsibility         0.49          0.788 **      68.50%     0.185
       and
 Organizational
   Commitment

                   Eigenvalue    Probability

     Ethical
   Climate and
    Corporate         9.844       0.000 **
     Social
 Responsibility

     Ethical
   Climate and        7.945       0.000 **
 Organizational
   Commitment

    Corporate
     Social
 Responsibility       8.122       0.000 **
       and
 Organizational
   Commitment

** is significant at the 0.01 level (2-tailed).
COPYRIGHT 2016 International Academy of Business and Public Administration Disciplines
No portion of this article can be reproduced without the express written permission from the copyright holder.
Copyright 2016 Gale, Cengage Learning. All rights reserved.

Article Details
Printer friendly Cite/link Email Feedback
Author:Chi, Grace C.; Chi, Jerry L.
Publication:International Journal of Business and Public Administration (IJBPA)
Article Type:Report
Geographic Code:1USA
Date:Dec 22, 2016
Words:9596
Previous Article:The relationships between organizational culture and organizational innovation.
Next Article:To join or not to join the world trade organization: a survey of Iranian banking executives from a historical perspective in view of intervention by...
Topics:

Terms of use | Privacy policy | Copyright © 2019 Farlex, Inc. | Feedback | For webmasters