Skip to main content

Table 3 Details the items used to measure the survey variables

From: Internal and external determinants of corporate social responsibility practices in multinational enterprise subsidiaries in developing countries: evidence from Ethiopia

Items

Cronbach α

Communality

Competitiveness oriented

(Sources: Grant [35], Russo and Fout [88], Sharma [91]

0.75

 

 (1) Our company emphasizes R&D in regard to environment safety and sustainable development

 

0.83

 (2) Our company does not expect a short-term profit by investing in social and environmental development

 

0.83

Legitimacy oriented

(Sources: Oliver [75], Zaheer [106], McWilliams and Siegel [64]

0.71

 

 (1) CSR activities can raise reputation and image of our company in host country

 

0.75

 (2) CSR activities can help our company to localize in a host country

 

0.80

Exploring CSR

(Sources: Zhao [107], McWilliams et al. [66]

0.90

 

 (1) We invite government interlocutors to seminar or forum that introduces our company’s advanced knowledge and experts in social and environmental are development.

 

0.70

 (2) Our company conducts social and environmental projects that require our company’s specialized capacity

 

0.84

 (3) Our company creates new capacity for the host country to address social-environmental issues (e.g., hold cultural campaign or event for local community, running computer education class for computer illiterate)

 

0.82

 (4) Our company conducts social and environmental projects based on our technological innovation (e.g., facilitate local government’s recycling system using our company’s recycling technology, running youth training program—human resource capacity)

 

0.87

Exploiting CSR

(Sources: Luo and Bhattacharya [56], Zheng et al. [108]

0.80

 

 (1) Our company has a specific budget for philanthropic activities

 

0.79

 (2) Our company conducts philanthropic activities on a regular basis (for example, building schools, aiding poor regions, improving local sanitation, and other local needs)

 

0.85

 (3) Our company sets up a specific team responsible for philanthropic activities

 

0.76

Collaborative behavior

(Sources: Gladwin and Walter [34], Luo and Bhattacharya [56]

 (1) When our company deals with the local government (either central government or regional government), we always approach it in proactive manner and take ourselves as the dominant side

0.85

0.86

 (2) When our company deals with industrial administrative departments, we always approach them in proactive manner and take ourselves as dominant side

 

0.87

 (3) When conflicts with the local government or industrial departments arise, we never avoid the conflicts but instead always proactively bargain with or persuade these institutions.

 

0.69

Accommodative behavior

(Sources: Gladwin and Walter [34], Luo and Bhattacharya [56]

0.88

 

 (1) Overall, the relationship between our company and the local government has been interdependent

 

0.70

 (2) We always believe that a cooperative relation with the local government is a necessary condition for firm growth and we take steps to implement such cooperation.

 

0.67

 (3) We always believe, and encourage, a win–win relationship between our company and the local government.

 

0.69

 (4) We always believe that a cooperative relation with the local government benefits both sides and can generate some synergetic gains and we encourage such cooperation.

 

0.77

 (5) In dealing with the local government, we often look at the issues from both our and the government’s perspective, rather than solely our own.

 

0.78