Is a CSR Policy an Equally Effective Vaccine Against Workplace Mobbing and Psychosocial Stressors?

Włodzimierz Sroka,Jolita Vveinhardt

doi:10.3390/ijerph17197292

Abstract

In this study, the problem question was raised whether corporate social responsibility (CSR) is/can be an effective tool against workplace mobbing and psychosocial stressors in organizations. Therefore, the purpose of the study is to determine the prevalence of workplace mobbing in Lithuanian and Polish organizations in order to compare in which organizations the manifestation of the phenomenon is the strongest and analyzing psychosocial stressors in parallel. To achieve the purpose, 823 employees of three types of organizations were surveyed. The respondents belonged to organizations that implement the principles of corporate social responsibility, organizations that intend to become socially responsible and organizations that do not implement corporate social responsibility and do not seek to become socially responsible. The empirical study was conducted using the questionnaire “Mobbing as a Psychosocial Stressor in the Organizations Accessing and Implementing Corporate Social Responsibility—MOB-CSR”. This questionnaire is valid and reliable; the correlation relationships between subscales show interconnectedness and statistically reliable relationships. The research results were calculated using the chi-squared test and the linear regression model. Statistically reliable relationships were found between the prevalence of workplace mobbing, psychosocial work stressors and corporate social responsibility. The results of the study show that along with the weakening of variables of corporate social responsibility, the probability of workplace mobbing is increasing but CSR in itself does not ensure the prevention of workplace mobbing in the case of Lithuanian and Polish organizations. If the findings of the study are considered by the managers of organizations, this can affect both employees’ quality of life towards improvement and more transparent/purposeful implementation of corporate social responsibility, i.e., responding to the true meaning of CSR.

Highlights

The number of studies on corporate social responsibility (CSR) has grown in recent decades and companies are introducing socially responsible practices, employees’ safety resulting from stress caused by flawed interrelationships still remains little investigated and research findings are contradictory
To achieve the purpose of the study, employees of three types of Lithuanian and Polish organizations participated in the survey; i.e., organizations that implemented the principles of corporate social responsibility, organizations that intended to become socially responsible and organizations that did not implement corporate social responsibility (CSR) and did not seek to become CSR
To achieve the purpose of the study, employees of three types of Lithuanian and Polish organizations participated in the survey; i.e., of organizations that implemented the principles of corporate social responsibility, of organizations that intended to become socially responsible and of organizations that did not implement CSR and did not seek to become CSR

Summary

Introduction

The number of studies on corporate social responsibility (CSR) has grown in recent decades and companies are introducing socially responsible practices, employees’ safety resulting from stress caused by flawed interrelationships still remains little investigated and research findings are contradictory. Svergun and Fairlie [1] state that the perception of CSR is related to less stress and greater job satisfaction of employees but such an important circumstance as job uncertainty reduces the impact of CSR on psychological safety [2] and employees may experience stress due to over-involvement in the enterprise’s activities [3,4]. Frynas and Yamahaki [5] noted that current CSR theory is dominated by theories related to the external drivers of CSR and the theory is less developed in view of the organization’s internal dynamics. The focus is on how CSR policy is related to external stakeholders [6,7]. Public Health 2020, 17, 7292; doi:10.3390/ijerph17197292 www.mdpi.com/journal/ijerph

Objectives

Methods

Results

Conclusion