The Linkage between University Social Responsibility and Sustainable Corporate Reputation: Evidence from Private Universities in Egypt

نوع المستند : المقالة الأصلية

المؤلف

مدرس بأكاديمية الدلتا للعلوم والتکنولوجيا

المستخلص

Abstract:
This study aims to examine the effect of university social responsibility on sustainable corporate reputation for private universities in Egypt. A sample of 390 students was selected from a population that includes 54000 students of four private universities, with a response rate of the sample members was 73%. The SPSS statistical program was used to enter statistical data.
The results of the statistical analysis showed that there is a significant effect of university social responsibility on sustainable corporate reputation. The dimension of the university economic responsibility has the highest effect on corporate reputation, while the dimension of the university legal responsibility has the highest effect on the sustainable image. Additionally, the study showed that there were no significant differences in the perceptions of students of the study variables according to the differences of the demographic variables.
الملخص:
تهدف هذه الدراسة إلى بحث تأثير المسئولية الاجتماعية للجامعات على السمعة المستدامة للمؤسسات بالجامعات الخاصة المصرية. وقد تم اختيار عينة بلغ حجمها 390 مفردة من مجتمع يضم طلاب الجامعات الخاصة من أربع جامعات خاصة والبالغ عددهم 54000 طالب، وقد بلغ معدل الاستجابة من أعضاء العينة 73%، وقد تم استخدام البرنامج الإحصائي SPSS لإدخال البيانات الإحصائية.
أظهرت نتائج التحليل الإحصائي أن هناك تأثيراً معنوياً لأبعاد المسؤولية الاجتماعية للجامعات على السمعة المستدامة للمؤسسات. وكان بعد المسئولية الاقتصادية للجامعات هو الأكثر تأثيراً على السمعة المؤسسية، في حين كان بعد المسئولية القانونية للجامعات هو الأكثر تأثيراً على الصورة الذهنية المستدامة. كما أظهرت نتائج التحليل الإحصائي أيضًا عدم وجود فروق معنوية في إدراك الطلاب لمتغيرات الدراسة باختلاف المتغيرات الديموجرافية.
 

الموضوعات الرئيسية

النص الكامل

1) Introduction: Companies carry out corporate social responsibility activities to gain competitiveness, generate wealth, respond to the demands of society and support individuals and society (Benitez et al. 2020). These activities are mainly focused on internal/external issues such as employees’ work–life balance, employee needs, workplace safety, sustainability, human resource management, the environment, poverty and community development (Alizadeh 2022). Societies hold expectations towards every business in its surroundings. Expectations might be in terms of worth or benefit to stakeholders within the society within the framework of CSR. When these expectations are not satisfied or considered insufficient or improper, this may cause stakeholders losing trust in the company that may threaten the company's presence, permanence and performance (Olateju et al. 2021). Corporate social responsibility along with sustainability initiatives and actions with social communication are strategic aspects in consolidating corporate reputation (Zizka 2017). Accordingly, this study seeks to investigate the relationship nature between corporate social responsibility and sustainable corporate reputation in private universities. 2) Literature Review: 2.1) Corporate Social Responsibility (CSR): Within the last few decades, there has been an urgent call by corporations, investors and governments to invest hugely on corporate social responsibility (CSR), so as to assist in curbing out the global crises in the society (Singh and Misra 2021). In 1953, Bowen established the first definition of social responsibility in business, with understanding the term as "the obligations of employers to follow such policies, to make those decisions, or to follow the procedural steps desired in terms of the goals and values of our society" (Gonzalez-Moreno et al. .2019). In 1963, McGuire (1963) introduced a more precise definition of social responsibility which he stated categorically that “the idea of social responsibilities presupposes that the firm has not only economic and legal obligations, but also certain responsibilities toward society that go beyond these obligations” (Bonituo 2014). However, social responsibility can be defined as “the responsibility, obligation, or commitment that members of the company have, toward themselves, and to society as a whole” (Gonzalez-Moreno et al. 2019). It can be said that social responsibility is the obligation or commitment of members of the society toward the society as a whole in order to contribute to sustainable economic development by working with employees, their families, the local community, and society at large to improve their lives for the benefit of the institution and the overall development of society (Basuony et al. 2014). University Social Responsibility (USR): Most universities tend to focus only on teaching social responsibility in terms of corporate social responsibility initiatives and do not go beyond this by attempting to improve their communities. Yet, in order to compete in the changing education industry and also, to fulfill their mission in a world of perpetual transformation, universities must recognize that their own actions should reflect the values and norms which they claim to embody. This means deepening their commitment to corporate social responsibility at the operational level as well as the academic level, mostly by curricular activities (Asemah et al 2013). Economic, social and environmental development hinges on education. It is the means to create a knowledge-based society and to achieve sustainable conditions. Therefore, universities play a fundamental role in all dimensions of CSR. Accordingly, the way universities are managed and organized has a significant impact on the ecosystem that must not be neglected (Nardo et al. 2021). In such a way, universities can cause “significant environmental impacts”. Many universities as a result of their large size, expressive movement of people and vehicles, high consumption of materials, and strong development of complex activities, may even be considered as “small towns”. Therefore it is inferred that universities should be responsible toward society and their stakeholders. Stakeholders provide organizations with a range of resources such as capital, customers, employees, materials and legitimacy. They also provide the “license to operate” to the universities in return for the provision of socially acceptable, or legitimate actions (Nejati et al 2011). According to Vazquez et al. (2013a), university social responsibility represents nowadays a priority. It is oriented to the training of professionals qualified to respond efficiently to the new social and environmental needs of modern economies. When analyzing the causes of this situation, at least three reasons are worth mentioning (Vazquez et al. 2013b): 1) The consolidation of a concept of CSR in the business world has increased the demand for professionals qualified in competences for responsible management. 2) The idea that sustainable development depends largely on the responsible behavior of both organizations and citizens is more and more consolidated. 3) Universities have responsibility in educating and training professionals provided with the competences and values needed for sustainable development. Universities are, in fact, platforms for leadership activities and that they can either choose to be followers in the initiatives of corporations or seize the opportunity to be leaders and adopt CSR as a vital aspect of their competitive advantage (Mehta 2011). Dimensions of CSR: In 1979, the famous researcher in the field of corporate social responsibility, Archie B. Carroll, has made an attempt to combine the economic orientation of the company with its social orientation, or in other words the views of shareholders with those of stakeholders (Chrobon 2014). Carroll proposed dividing CSR into four levels of responsibilities that are arranged in order of priority from bottom to top to the most socially responsible activity. His categories of activity have been arranged in ascending order from foundations of economic obligation, to legal, passing through moral obligations to philanthropic obligations at the top of the pyramid (Sheehy and Farneti 2021). A) Economic Responsibility: The main economic responsibility of an organization is to produce the goods and services that customers need and want, while maximizing profits. This forms the basis for all business enterprises, and thus is the base of the pyramid (Cherobon 2014). B) Legal Responsibility: Governments impose penalties for business practices that do not act with fair profit motives. Likewise, companies are expected to comply with the laws and regulations announced by the governments. That is, legal responsibilities reflect a vision of “codified ethics,” including basic concepts of fair operations (Gonzalez-Moreno et al. 2019). C) Ethical Responsibility: Although economic and legal responsibilities embody moral standards about fairness and justice, ethical responsibilities include those activities and practices that members of a society expect or prohibit although not codified in law. Ethical responsibilities embody those standards, rules, or expectations that reflect concern for what consumers, employees, shareholders, and society consider fair or consistent with respecting or protecting the moral rights of stakeholders (Carroll 1999). Ethical responsibility comes at the third level of commitment. When companies fulfill their economic and legal responsibilities, they should turn to their ethical responsibility. This level of obligation, carrying both a negative prohibition against tort and positive jurisdiction, entails treating other parties fairly (Sheehy and Farneti 2021). The ethical component of CSR relates to actions that are permitted or prohibited within an organization without any obligation by law (Mahmood and Bashir 2020). D) Philanthropic Responsibility: Companies with their legal personality should be a good citizen. This is what is known as corporate philanthropic responsibility, whereby companies are expected to contribute financial and human resources to the development of society and the improvement of the quality of life (Arikol 2012). In this sense, noteworthy strategies are those that involve active participation in activities or programs to promote human well-being (Gonzalez-Moreno et al. 2019). 2.2) Sustainable Corporate Reputation (SCR): Practitioners and academics have become increasingly interested in the notion of sustainability and how it relates to other concepts such as corporate reputation. In part, this is because of the belief that elements of sustainability are key drivers of corporate reputation. Several authors highlight the relevance of such intangible asset to the overall organizational performance. Academic literature has suggested including sustainability standards as antecedents of a good reputation (Martinez and del Bosque 2014). By revealing sustainability initiatives, companies are able to facilitate the projection of a social image that will lead to increased legitimacy and corporate reputation. Actually, the inclusion of social and environmental activities in the corporate agenda is a part of the conversation between organizations and their publics, and it provides information on firms’ activities that help legitimize its behavior and educate, inform, and change perceptions and expectations of these stakeholders (Martinez and del Bosque 2014). Recently, the concept of corporate reputation and sustainability began to be addressed in a remarkable trend by companies in building their reputation based on environmental and social pillars, in addition to their economic successes (Pomering and Johnson, 2009; Adams et al. 2012; Ramos-Gonzalez et al. 2017). As such, sustainable corporate reputation can be defined as "the perception of the organization created over a period of time that focuses not only on what it does and how it behaves, but also on enhancing environmental and social performance, both in the short and long term, as well as having the capacity to generate sustainable positive social and environmental impacts". 3) Research Problem: Although the extant literature has various studies that examined the effect of corporate social responsibility on corporate reputation there were no studies conducted to investigate the direct effect of corporate social responsibility on sustainable corporate reputation. Therefore, based on the above explanation, the study contributes to the body of knowledge through filling the previous gap as it represents the first study that examines these relationships which were not covered by researchers till now. 4) Research Questions: According to the researchers' findings after reviewing previous studies related to the subject of the study, and the exploratory study that the researcher conducted, the study problem can be formulated in the following questions: 1- Is there an effect of university economic responsibility on sustainable corporate reputation? 2- Is there an effect of university legal responsibility on sustainable corporate reputation? 3- Is there an effect of university ethical responsibility on sustainable corporate reputation? 4- Is there an effect of university philanthropic responsibility on sustainable corporate reputation? 5- Are there differences in the perceptions of customers of private universities in Egypt regarding the dimensions of university social responsibility and sustainable corporate reputation according to the differences of their demographic characteristics (gender, place of residence, academic specialization and university name)? 5) Research Objectives By examining these research questions, the researchers stated that the key aim of the research is to investigate the effect of university social responsibility on sustainable corporate reputation, therefore the study envelopes the following objectives: 1- Investigating the effect of university economic responsibility on sustainable corporate reputation. 2- Determining the effect of university legal responsibility on sustainable corporate reputation 3- Measuring the effect of university ethical responsibility on sustainable corporate reputation. 4- Examining the effect of university philanthropic responsibility on sustainable corporate reputation. 5- Determining whether there are differences in the perceptions of customers of private universities in Egypt regarding the dimensions of university social responsibility and sustainable corporate reputation according to the differences of their demographic characteristics (gender, place of residence, academic specialization and university name). 6) Research Hypotheses: In order to achieve the objectives of the study, the researchers formulated the following hypotheses: 6.1) The impact of university social responsibility on sustainable corporate reputation. To identify the nature of the impact of university social responsibility on sustainable corporate reputation, Santos (2011); Solikhin et al. (2019) in their studies concluded that corporate social responsibility initiatives have a positive and strong impact on corporate reputation, Arikol (2012), proposed that reputation forms the basis of CSR actions, Hasan and Yun (2017) conclude that corporate social responsibility is one of the important drivers for corporate reputation, also CSR is an important key part of corporate reputation (Kumar 2018) this is supported by findings of Mukasa et al. (2015); Sontaite-Petkeviciene (2015) which show that corporate reputation can be enhanced and improved by adopting CSR activities. While, the study of He et al. (2019) referred that sustainability can be improved through paying more attention to social responsibility and innovation. Likewise, according to Benitez et al. (2020) corporate social responsibility activities enable firms to build greater employer reputation. In addition, the researcher addressed the impact of corporate social responsibility on the sustainable corporate reputation when mediating social innovation in the study of Mattera and Baena (2015) where CSR management could contribute to value creation through social commitment initiatives, thus innovations should have a social implication as they could be aimed at improving community development. The study also confirms the positive association between investing in business efficiency and CSR to create and enhance a sustainable competitive advantage represented by good reputation. Moreover, companies including their stakeholders’ interests in the knowledge-creation and innovation process are able to enhance their intangible assets namely corporate reputation and thus the capitalization of such knowledge. Therefore, this study suggests the following hypotheses: H1: There is an effect of university economic responsibility on sustainable corporate reputation? H2: There is an effect of university legal responsibility on sustainable corporate reputation? H3: There is an effect of university ethical responsibility on sustainable corporate reputation? H4: There is an effect of university philanthropic responsibility on sustainable corporate reputation? 6.2) Differences in the views of customers of private universities in Egypt regarding the dimensions of university social responsibility and sustainable corporate reputation according to demographic variables (gender, place of residence, academic specialization and university name). Although many studies depend, in evaluating the results of corporate social responsibility on performance indicators, whether financial or non-financial, and their reflections on the sustainable corporate reputation, there are some studies that relied on survey questionnaires directed to individuals, and despite their interest in identifying the demographic characteristics of the sample members, however, few of them were interested in identifying the differences in the views of the sample members. In this context, the researcher addressed differences in the views regarding the dimensions of university social responsibility and the sustainable corporate reputation according to demographic variables in the study of Santos (2011) that found no difference regarding awareness of USR initiatives in terms of gender, where in terms of age, the youngest class was less aware as opposite to all other classes that present higher awareness. Regarding corporate reputation, Feldman et al. (2013) in their study found that respondents living in the rural area gave higher scores to organizations than their counterparts living in urban areas. Age also influences assessment and ranking, given that elderly people (between 51 and 80 years old) tend to give higher reputation scores than younger people. Therefore, this study suggests the following hypothesis: H5: There are no significant differences between the views of customers of private universities in the Arab Republic of Egypt regarding the dimensions of university social responsibility and sustainable corporate reputation according to the differences of the demographic characteristics. This hypothesis includes the following sub-hypotheses: 5/1 There are no significant differences in the customers’ views regarding the study's variables according to the gender. 5/2 There are no significant differences in the customers’ views regarding the study's variables according to place of residence. 5/3 There are no significant differences in the customers’ views regarding the study's variables according to the academic specialization. 5/4 There are no significant differences in the customers’ views regarding the study's variables according to the university name. Proposed Conceptual Framework: Depending on the previous hypotheses, the study developed the conceptual framework as presented in the following figure (1): H1 H2 H3 H4 H5 H5 Figure (1): Proposed Conceptual Framework Source: Prepared by the researcher based on literature review 7) Research Importance: The importance of this study on the scientific and practical levels comes as follows: 7.1) Scientific importance: The scientific significance of this study is as follows: - This study deals with the university social responsibility, as an antecedent of sustainable corporate reputation, which is a very rare relationship that is addressed in the Arab and foreign countries. Hence, this study represents a researcher's contribution to bridging the aforementioned research gap in general and in the Arab library in particular. 7.2) Practical importance: The practical importance of this study is as follows: - Contributing to assist the management of private universities in determining their level of university social responsibility that would have a positive functional impact, if it is proven that the university social responsibility have a significant impact on sustainable corporate reputation. - Contributing to help private universities to avoid having negative corporate reputation, in case of failing to achieve the expectations of their customers, whether internal or external customers, regarding their contributions in raising the welfare of the local society. - Contributing to assist private universities to take the necessary measures to confront the reasons that may formulate negative corporate image and recover from them in the event that this stage of negative image is reached. 8) Research methods 8.1) Sample and procedures A positivist research philosophy was exploited with a quantitative approach to certify the suggested framework, and quantitative data were collected using survey questionnaires to provide answers to research questions. The respondents were the students of the private universities under research in Arab Republic of Egypt (6th of October, Faros, Horus, Delta). Importantly, students were chosen specifically in this study because they are presumed to have adequate perception of research constructs in addition to being competent to evaluate whether their universities adopts university social responsibility and its effect on achieving sustainable corporate reputation. For this study, the sampling frame is the number of students of the private universities under research in Egypt (6th of October, Faros, Horus, Delta). The list related to the number of students showed that there are 54000 students in the private universities under research in Egypt (6th of October, Faros, Horus, Delta). This list was obtained from the records of the private universities. Saunders et al. (2019) stated that the appropriate sample size depends on many factors such as the type of statistical analysis used in the study, the margin of error, the confidence level, and the population size. In order to generalize the findings to a population, the sample size had to be large enough. Therefore, according to Saunders et al. (2019), considering a margin error equals 5% which is the percentage used in social research, a confidence level of 95%, the sample size would be at least 384 students. A questionnaire form was utilized as a data collection tool. To select the items that represented the questionnaire's questions, the study adopted the previous literature on the subject (Cherobon (2014); Martinez and Del Bosque (2014)). The initial questionnaire form was presented in English language. For validity concerns it was then translated into Arabic to guarantee the questions were interpreted and answered correctly. Once again, the Arabic copy has been translated back into English language to be contrasted with the main form as per the validity procedures of back translation technique. Eventually, the researcher compared the two initial questionnaires to obtain a final and more fitting version. Then, a pilot testing was conducted with 38 students. The results showed that Cronbach's alpha for all of the constructs was above 0.70, reflecting high internal consistency. After performing the pilot study, the questionnaires were delivered personally to 390 students in their universities. Additionally, validity criteria were followed to certify the final form of the questionnaire and to guarantee that it measures what it is supposed to measure. Only 339 usable questionnaires were collected with a response rate of (87%). Table 1 shows the sample characteristics. The result of the t-test showed that there were no significant differences. Table (1) Response Rate University Distributed Questionnaires Received Questionnaire percentage of received to distributed Non Received Questionnaire Percentage of non-received to distributed Questionnaire without response Uncompleted Questionnaire Valid Questionnaires Percentage of Final Sample to distributed Delta 50 44 88% 6 12% 2 2 40 80% Horus 58 51 87% 7 13% 2 3 46 79% Faros 116 100 86% 16 14% 3 6 91 78% 6th of October 166 144 87% 22 13% 5 8 131 79% Total 390 339 87% 65 13.54% 12 19 308 79% Source: Prepared by the researchers 8.2) Measures All of the constructs were measured with a 5-point Likert-type scale (5 = strongly agree, to 1 = strongly disagree). University social responsibility was measured by a construct involves 18 statements adopted from Cherobon (2014). Students evaluated university social responsibility within their universities regarding environmental and social issues. This study categorizes university social responsibility into economic, philanthropic, legal and ethical responsibility. Economic dimension of university social responsibility was measured by statements from 1-5, while the second dimension; i.e. philanthropic dimension measuring statements ranging from 6-10, the third dimension; i.e. legal dimension measuring statements ranging from 11-15, and the fourth dimension; i.e. ethical dimension measuring statements ranging from 16-18. Sustainable corporate reputation was measured by a construct involves 10 statements adopted from Martinez and Del Bosque (2014), this study classified sustainable corporate reputation into corporate reputation and sustainable image dimensions. Corporate reputation dimension of sustainable corporate reputation was measured by statements from 19-25, while the second dimension; i.e. sustainable image measuring statements ranging from 26-28. The study utilized four control variables. The first variable is the customer gender. The second variable is the customer place of residence. Moreover, the third control variable is the name of the Faculty. Finally, the fourth variable is related to the name of the University. 9) Data Analysis and results: The measurement model aims to evaluate; individual reliability, construct reliability, convergent validity and discriminant validity in order to realize the appropriate degree of internal consistency that the measures hold. Table 2 shows that the factor loading for the items was above the suggested criteria of 0.70. Moreover, Cronbach's alpha coefficient (α) and the Composite Reliability (CR) for each of the constructs were greater than the standard of 0.70, showing that the measures were reliable (Hair et al., 2010). Furthermore, to estimate convergent validity, Fornell and Larcker (1981) stated that the average variance extracted (AVE) should be equal to or greater than 0.50. Table 2 shows that AVE values are greater than 0.50 for all constructs indicating adequate consistency level presented in table 2. Table (2) The validity and reliability of the measurement model Dimensions Factor Loading and Reliability Convergent Validity Questions Factor Loading Cronbach's Alpha AVE CR Economic USR Q1 0.796 0.889 0.502 0.71636943 Q2 0.775 Q3 0.787 Q4 0.581 Q5 0.564 Philanthropic USR Q6 0.683 0.772 0.539 0.758937527 Q7 0.635 Q8 0.872 Q9 0.883 Q10 0.534 Legal USR Q11 0.704 0.760 0.510 0.72607734 Q12 0.728 Q13 0.630 Q14 0.796 Q15 0.702 Ethical USR Q16 0.757 0.743 0.575 0.699780786 Q17 0.725 Q18 0.791 Corporate Reputation Q19 0.751 0.911 0.515 0.792965572 Q20 0.771 Q21 0.829 Q22 0.801 Q23 0.612 Q24 0.627 Q25 0.592 Sustainable Image Q26 0.765 0.751 0.553 0.672390517 Q27 0.833 Q28 0.616 Source: Prepared by the researchers based on statistical analysis To address the discriminant validity, Table 3 encapsulates the AVE's square root of each construct which is shown to be greater than the inter-constructs correlations. Thus, the discriminant validity is achieved. Table (3) Construct correlations and square root of average variance extracted Eco. USR Phil. USR Legal USR Ethic. USR Sus. Image Corp. Rep. Economic USR 0.708 Phil. USR 0.661 0.734 Legal USR 0.681 0.647 0.714 Ethical USR 0.614 0.646 0.632 0.758 Sus. Image 0.623 0.666 0.600 0.500 0.718 Corp. Rep. 0.686 0.640 0.581 0.457 0.622 0.744 Source: Prepared by the researchers based on statistical analysis 9.1) Assessing the relationships between the dimensions of university social responsibility and sustainable corporate reputation: According to table (4), it is clear that economic USR has a significant direct positive impact on sustainable image, and corporate reputation (β = 0.217, 0.340, P < 0.05) respectively. Additionally, respectively ethical USR also has a significant direct positive impact on sustainable image and corporate reputation (β = 0.211, 167 P < 0.05) respectively. Moreover, legal USR also has a significant direct positive impact on sustainable image and corporate reputation (β = 0.243, 0.272, P < 0.05) respectively. Finally, philanthropic USR also has a significant direct positive impact on sustainable image and corporate reputation (β = 0.211, 0.112 P < 0.05). Therefore, H1-H4 which represent the effect of university social responsibility on sustainable corporate reputation were totally accepted. Table (4) The results of testing direct relationship between USR and SCR Hypothesis Hypothesis direction Estimate Sig. Hypotheses result H1- H4 H1a Economic USR Sustainable Image 0.217 0.004 Accepted H2a Legal USR Sustainable Image 0.243 0.002 Accepted H3a Ethical USR Sustainable Image 0.211 0.002 Accepted H4a Philanthropic USR Sustainable Image 0.211 0.011 Accepted H1b Economic USR Corporate Reputation 0.340 0.000 Accepted H2b Legal USR Corporate Reputation 0.272 0.007 Accepted H3b Ethical USR Corporate Reputation 0.167 0.008 Accepted H4b Philanthropic USR Corporate Reputation 0.112 0.009 Accepted Source: Prepared by the researchers based on statistical analysis. 9.2) Testing the differences between the views of customers of private universities: For testing differences between the views of customers of private universities, the researchers use non parametric tests such as: Kruskal-Wallis test and Mann-Whitney test. So the researchers can illustrate these tests as follow: 9.2.1) Kruskal-Wallis test: The researchers will use Kruskal-Wallis test for identifying the differences among the universities’ customers about the chosen university. In this regard, Kruskal–Wallis test (named after William Kruskal and W. Allen Wallis). A significant Kruskal–Wallis test indicates that at least one sample stochastically dominates one other sample. The test does not identify where this stochastic dominance occurs or for how many pairs of groups stochastic dominance obtains. In this study, the results of conducting the Kruskal–Wallis test are as follow: Table (5) Kruskal-Wallis test results for differences among universities' customers about chosen private university Variables Kruskal-Wallis Result Chi-Square Sig. Independent Variable: University Social Responsibility Economic USR 0.515 0.915 insignificant Philanthropic USR 1.034 0.793 insignificant Legal USR 2.357 0.502 insignificant Ethical USR 1.555 0.670 insignificant Independent Variable: University Social Responsibility 0.948 0.814 insignificant Dependent Variable: Sustainable Corporate Reputation Corporate Reputation 1.056 0.788 insignificant Sustainable Image 5.971 0.113 insignificant Dependent Variable: Sustainable Corporate Reputation 3.422 0.331 insignificant Source: Prepared by the researchers based on statistical analysis According to table (5), there are no significant statistics for all variables, so the researchers conclude that there are no differences among universities' customers about chosen private university for all variable research. 9.2.2) Mann-Whitney test: The researchers will use Mann-Whitney test for identifying the differences among the universities’ customers about the gender, place of residence and colleges. In statistics, the Mann–Whitney U test is a nonparametric test of the null hypothesis that, for randomly selected values X and Y from two populations, the probability of X being greater than Y is equal to the probability of Y being greater than X. . In this study, the results of conducting the Mann–Whitney test are as follow: Table (6) Mann-Whitney test results for differences between universities' customers about gender Variables Mann-Whitney Result Z-Value Sig. Independent Variable: University Social Responsibility Economic USR -0.006 0.995 insignificant Philanthropic USR -0.276 0.782 insignificant Legal USR -0.697 0.486 insignificant Ethical USR -0.280 0.780 insignificant Independent Variable: University Social Responsibility -0.291 0.771 insignificant Dependent Variable: Sustainable Corporate Reputation Corporate Reputation -0.103 0.918 insignificant Sustainable Image -0.507 0.612 insignificant Dependent Variable: Sustainable Corporate Reputation -0.207 0.836 insignificant Source: Prepared by the researchers based on statistical analysis. According to table (6), there are no significant statistics for all variables, so the researchers conclude that there are no differences among universities' customers about gender for all variable research. Moreover, for testing the differences among the universities’ customers about the place of residence, the researchers conduct the Mann–Whitney test and the results are as follow: Table (7) : Mann-Whitney test results for differences between universities' customers about place of residence Variables Mann-Whitney Result Z-Value Sig. Independent Variable: University Social Responsibility Economic USR -0.254 0.800 insignificant Philanthropic USR -0.359 0.720 insignificant Legal USR -0.547 0.584 insignificant Ethical USR -0.068 0.946 insignificant Independent Variable: University Social Responsibility -0.320 0.749 insignificant Dependent Variable: Sustainable Corporate Reputation Corporate Reputation -0.275 0.783 insignificant Sustainable Image -0.001 0.999 insignificant Dependent Variable: Sustainable Corporate Reputation -0.132 0.895 insignificant Source: Prepared by the researchers based on statistical analysis. According to table (7), there are no significant statistics for all variables, so the researcher concludes that there are no differences among universities' customers about place of residence for all variable research. Finally, for testing the differences among the universities’ customers about academic specialization, the researchers conduct the Mann–Whitney test and the results are as follow: Table (8) Mann-Whitney test results for differences between universities' customers about academic specialization Variables Mann-Whitney Result Z-Value Sig. Independent Variable: University Social Responsibility Economic USR -0.041 0.967 insignificant Philanthropic USR -0.390 0.697 insignificant Legal USR -0.717 0.474 insignificant Ethical USR -0.478 0.633 insignificant Independent Variable: University Social Responsibility -0.375 0.708 insignificant Dependent Variable: Sustainable Corporate Reputation Corporate Reputation -0.166 0.868 insignificant Sustainable Image -0.449 0.653 insignificant Dependent Variable: Sustainable Corporate Reputation -0.140 0.889 insignificant Source: Prepared by the researchers based on statistical analysis. According to table (8), there are no significant statistics for all variables, so the researcher concludes that there are no differences among universities' customers about academic specialization for all variable research. Therefore, H5 can be fully accepted because there are no significant differences between the views of customers of private universities in the Arab Republic of Egypt regarding the dimensions of university social responsibility and sustainable corporate reputation according the differences of the demographic characteristics. 10) Discussion: 10.1) Conclusion: In this study, the researcher examined the effect of university social responsibility on sustainable corporate reputation among students of private universities in Egypt. The results of the statistical analysis showed that: 1) The first hypothesis which represents the effect of university economic responsibility on sustainable corporate reputation was totally accepted. 2) The second hypothesis which represents the effect of university legal responsibility on sustainable corporate reputation was totally accepted. 3) The third hypothesis which represents the effect of university ethical responsibility on sustainable corporate reputation was totally accepted. 4) The fourth hypothesis which represents the effect of university Philanthropic responsibility on sustainable corporate reputation was totally accepted. 5) The fifth hypothesis can be fully accepted because there are no significant differences between the views of customers of private universities in the Arab Republic of Egypt regarding the dimensions of university social responsibility and sustainable corporate reputation according to the demographic characteristics. 10.2) Recommendations for private universities: This study provides significant practical implications for top management of private universities. The study recommends that private universities can support their sustainable corporate reputation through building a conscious social image in the minds of society members based on active participation in social, charitable and environmental activities of interest to the community, in a way that serves society and is reflected in improving the university’s image in light of intense competition. Private universities should also be keen on preserving and rationalizing the consumption of non-renewable environmental resources. Additionally, Private universities should implement environmentally friendly procedures which reflect an image keen to protect the environment. 10.3) Recommendations for Future Research: The current study has presented useful theoretical and practical implications it also has some future recommendations: - The study suggested that future research can depend on a larger sample size from other private universities in Egypt. - Further studies may benefit from longitudinal study to observe the changes in private universities as a result of the changes in adopting new initiatives of corporate social responsibility practices. - Conducting future study depend on a sample includes internal customers could be helpful to get acquainted with the opinion of the employees of private universities. - Further research that conduct a comparative study between private universities and public universities will make great contributions.

المراجع

References Adams, M., Thornton, B., and Sepehri, M. (2012). The Impact of the Pursuit of Sustainability on the Financial Performance of the Firm. Journal of Sustainability and Green Business. No. 1, pp. 1-14. Alizadeh, A. (2022). The Drivers and Barriers of Corporate Social Responsibility: A Comparison of the MENA Region and Western Countries. Sustainability. Vol. 14, No. 909, pp. 1-15. Arikol, G. (2012). Corporate Social Responsibility and Corporate Reputation Relationship from Individual's Value Priorities. Unpublished Master Thesis in Business Administration: Bahcesehir University. Asemah, E. S., Okpanachi, R. A. and Olumuji, E. O. (2013). Universities and Corporate Social Responsibility Performance: An Implosion of the Reality. African Research Review. Vol. 7, No. 4, pp. 195-224. Basuony, M. A. K., Elseidi, R. I. and Mohamed, E. K. A. (2014). The Impact of Corporate Social Responsibility on Firm Performance: Evidence from a Mena Country. Corporate Ownership & Control. Vol. 12, No. 1, pp. 761-774. Benitez, J., Ruiz, L. and Llorens, J. (2020). How Corporate Social Responsibility Activities Influence Employer Reputation: The Role of Social Media capability. Decision Support Systems. Vol. 129, pp. 1-34. Bonituo, P. S. (2014). Assessing the Benefits and Challenges of Corporate Social Responsibility in the Kumasi Metropolis: a Case of the Beverage Industry. Unpublished Master Thesis in Business Administration: Kwame Nkrumah University of Science and Technology. Carroll, A. B. (1999). Corporate Social Responsibility: Evolution of a Definitional Construct. Business and Society. Vol. 38, No.3, pp. 268-295. Cherobon, R. (2014). Effects of Corporate Social Responsibility Spending on a Firm's Performance: a Survey of Banks in Nakuru County. Unpublished Master Thesis in Business Administration: Kisii University. Feldman, P. M., Bahamonde, R. A. and Bellido, I. V. (2014). A New Approach for Measuring Corporate Reputation. Business Administration Magazine. Vol. 54, No. 1, pp. 53-66. Fornell, C., and Larcker, D. F. (1981). Evaluating Structural Equation Models with Unobservable Variables and Measurement Error. Journal of Marketing Research. Vol. 84, No. 1, pp. 39-50. Gonzalez-Moreno, M. J., Salvador-Ferrer, C. M. and Checa-Olmos, J. C. (2019). Corporate Social Responsibility in the Management of Human and Environmental Resources: Andalucian Perspectives. Resources. Vol. 8, No. 165, pp. 1-13. Hair, J. F., Anderson, R. E., Babin, B. J., and Black, W. C. (2010). Multivariate Data Analysis: A Global Perspective (Vol. 7). Upper Saddle River, NJ: Pearson. Hasan, R. and Yun, T. M. (2017). Theoretical Linkage between Corporate social responsibility and Corporate Reputation. Indonesian Journal of Sustainability Accounting and Management. Vol. 1, No. 2, pp. 80-89. He, Q., Chen, X., Wang, G., Zhu, J., Yang, D., Liu, X. and Li, Y. (2019). Managing Social Responsibility for Sustainability in Megaprojects: An innovation Transitions Perspective on Success. Journal of Cleaner Production. Vol. 241, No. 2, pp. 1-11. Kumar, T. (2018). Linkage between CSR and Corporate Reputation: Evidence from Public and Private Corporations in Bangladesh. Review of Integrative Business and Economics Research. Vol. 7, Supplementary Issue 1, pp. 237-247. Mahmood, A. and Bashir, J. (2020). How Does Corporate Social Responsibility Transform Brand Reputation into Brand Equity? Economic and Noneconomic Perspectives of CSR. International Journal of Engineering Business Management. Vol. 12, pp. 1-13. Martinez, P. and Del Bosque, I. R. (2014). Sustainability Dimensions: A Source to Enhance Corporate Reputation. Corporate Reputation Review. Vol. 17, No. 4, pp. 239-253. Mattera, M. and Baena, V. (2015). The Key to Carving out a High Corporate Reputation Based on Innovation: Corporate Social Responsibility. Social Responsibility Journal. Vol. 11, No. 2, pp. 221-241. Mehta, S. R. (2011). Corporate Social Responsibility (CSR) and Universities: Towards an Integrative Approach. International Journal of Social Science and Humanity. Vol. 1, No. 4, pp. 300-304. Mukasa, K. D., Kim, K. and Lim, H. (2015). How Do Corporate social responsibility Activities Influence Corporate Reputation? Evidence from Korean Firms. The Journal of Applied Business Research. Vol. 31, No. 2, pp. 383-396. Nardo, M. T., Codranu, G. C. and Roberto, F. (2021). Universities’ Social Responsibility through the Lens of Strategic Planning: A Content Analysis. Administrative Sciences. Vol. 11, No.139, pp. 1-16. Nejati, M., Shafaei, A., Salamzadeh, Y. and Daraei, M. (2011). Corporate Social Responsibility and Universities: A study of Top 10 World Universities’ Websites. African Journal of Business Management. Vol. 5, No. 2, pp. 440-447. Olateju, D. J., Olateju, O. A., Adeoye, S. V. and Ilyas, I. S. (2021). A Critical Review of the Application of the Legitimacy Theory to Corporate Social Responsibility. International Journal of Managerial Studies and Research. Vol. 9, No. 3, pp. 1-6. Pomering, A. and Johnson, L. (2009). Constructing a Corporate Social Responsibility Reputation Using Corporate Image Advertising. Australasian Marketing Journal. Vol. 17, No. 2, pp. 106-114. Ramos-Gonzalez, M. R., Andres, M. R. and Castillo, M. A. S. (2017). Building Corporate Reputation through Sustainable Entrepreneurship: The Mediating Effect of Ethical Behavior. Sustainability. Vol. 9, No. 9, pp. 1-19. Santos, M. J. (2011). Does Corporate Social Responsibility Have Impact in Corporate Reputation? an Analysis of EDP. Unpublished Master Thesis in Business Administration: University of Lisbon. Saunders, M., Lewis, P. and Thornhill, A. (2019). Research Methods for Business Students. (8th edn). Pearson Education Limited, Edinburgh Gate: England. Sheehy, B.; Farneti, F. (2021). Corporate Social Responsibility, Sustainability, Sustainable Development and Corporate Sustainability: What Is the Difference, and Does It Matter? Sustainability. Vol. 13, pp. 1-17. Singh, K. and Misra, M. (2021). The Evolving Path of CSR: toward Business and Society Relationship. Journal of Economic andAdministrative Sciences. Ahead-of-print. Solikhin, A., Lubis, T. A. and Siregar, A. P. (2019). The Role of Corporate Reputation in Corporate social responsibility Relations to Firm Performance in Jambi Province. Mulawarman International Conference on Economics and Business. Vol. 2, pp. 43-50. Sontaite-Petkeviciene, M. (2015). CSR Reasons, Practices and Impact to Corporate Reputation. Social and Behavioral Sciences. Vol. 213, pp. 503-508. Vázquez, J. L., Lanero, A. and Licandro, O. (2013). Corporate Social Responsibility and Higher Education: Uruguay University Students’ Perceptions. Economics and Sociology. Vol. 6, No 2, pp. 145-157. Zizka, L. (2017). Corporate Reputation Rankings 2016: and the Winner Is? Advances in Economics and Business. Vol. 5, No. 3, pp. 137-1

ملفات

شارك

إرسال الاستشهاد إلى

الإحصائيات