The impact of corporate social responsibility on employee safety citizenship behavior in Chinese gas sector

Abstract

Drawing upon the Affective Events Theory (AET), we exam how and under what conditions corporate social responsibility (CSR) in gas companies relates to more employee safety citizenship behavior (SCB). In Study 1, a scenario-based experiment involving 481 gas company employees revealed that CSR initiatives positively influenced employee gratitude and SCB. Furthermore, the interaction between CSR and performance pressure significantly enhanced both employee gratitude and SCB. In Study 2, a multi-wave survey study of 370 gas company employees demonstrated that employee gratitude not only directly and positively predicted SCB but also mediated the relationship between CSR and SCB. Notably, the mediating effect of gratitude was more pronounced under conditions of low performance pressure. These findings advance theoretical understanding of the mechanisms linking CSR to safety outcomes and offer actionable insights for gas companies aiming to optimize CSR strategies to foster safer workplace behaviors.

Introduction

The continuous occurrence of environmental protection and safety accidents has prompted enterprises to start paying attention to the impact of enterprises fulfilling their social responsibilities on organizational safety. Correspondingly, the academic circle seeks to reveal from the organizational level the enhancing effect of corporate social responsibility (CSR) on their safety capabilities. Previous studies have pointed out that through perceived CSR, employees not only identify with the morality and rationality of corporate behavior, but also internalize this cognition into subsequent altruistic behavior. Recent research on CSR has also clarified the positive impact of CSR on the moral behavior of employees within the organization. However, there is insufficient research on the mechanism by which CSR affects employees’ SCB. This deficiency limits the explanation for how CSR enhances an organization’s safety capabilities. As a safety-oriented organizational citizenship behavior, the implementation of employee safety citizenship behavior (SCB) can promote the reduction of accident risks for teams and organizations and enhance the overall safety management capabilities of the organization. Studying the impact of CSR on employees’ SCB can help the academic community better explore the positive safety impact of CSR on organizations, clarify the causes of employees’ SCB, and further assist enterprises in formulating more scientific safety management measures. Therefore, the first objective of this study is to explore the relationship between CSR and SCB.

Historically, research on CSR has concentrated on its financial implications at the corporate level and its effects on organizational reputation at the societal level^1,2,3. As scholars increasingly shift their focus to the micro-level, recent studies have begun to examine the impact of CSR on employees^4,5,6,7. These studies have revealed that CSR promotes positive organizational behaviors among employees, such as safety behaviors and organizational citizenship behaviors^8,9. However, whether these findings apply to SCB remains to be further examined. For instance, Nazir (2021) argue that SCB reflect employees’ willingness to go beyond their formal roles to enhance organizational safety¹⁰. These behaviors include providing safety guidance to colleagues and offering safety-related suggestions to the organization, differing from traditional organizational citizenship behaviors in terms of purpose, process, and targets¹¹. On the other hand, unlike safety behaviors that focus on compliance with safety obligations, SCB are more self-driven and motivated by a desire to address organizational safety issues¹². They contribute to improving organizational safety capabilities¹³ and enhancing colleagues’ safety awareness¹⁴distinguishing them from traditional safety behaviors. Furthermore, current research primarily explores the pathways through which CSR influences employees’ organizational citizenship behaviors and safety behaviors from a cognitive perspective^13,15while Affective Events Theory (AET) points out that specific organizational events may further affect employee behavior by influencing employees’ emotions. The altruism reflected in the behavior of enterprises fulfilling their social responsibilities is different from the general business behavior of enterprises pursuing economic benefits. It may be the organizational clue that triggers employees’ positive emotions and subsequent SCB. Therefore, this study aims to explore the relationship between CSR and SCB from the perspective of employees’ emotions, with the aim of discovering the specific mechanism by which CSR stimulate SCB.

AET posits that positive individual emotions serve as a “bridge” connecting organizational events and employee behaviors¹⁶. Among the various positive emotions experienced by employees, work gratitude, an employee’s gratitude towards the organization, is a critical psychological mechanism linking organizational behaviors and employee safety citizenship behaviors¹⁷. Previous research has confirmed that CSR contribute to the formation of positive work experiences, such as job meaningfulness and job happiness^7,18which in turn foster work gratitude among employees¹⁹. Gratitude motivates employees to engage in subsequent positive organizational behaviors based on a sense of reciprocity. According to AET, grateful employees are more likely to maintain a positive relationship with their organization through proactive organizational reciprocation, with the aim of sustaining their current positive work experiences²⁰. Therefore, this study selects employee gratitude as a mediating variable to explore its mediating role in the relationship between CSR and employee safety citizenship behaviors.

Moreover, AET also highlights the complexity of the impact of events on employee emotions, which is influenced by a combination of organizational factors²¹. As a significant manifestation of organizational work stress, performance pressure reflects the overall work output expectations placed on individuals by the organization²². By setting quantifiable work goals and completion deadlines, organizations not only clarify the association between high performance and job security but also imply potential negative outcomes, such as demotion or termination, for those with low performance. Performance pressure, as a common characteristic of organizations, serves as a means of transmitting survival pressures from top management to employees²³. Research on performance pressure suggests that an excessive focus on performance is perceived as a continuous work threat, leading to decreased innovative efforts²⁴ and dysfunctional behaviors²⁵. We argue that the presence of performance pressure may diminish the positive emotional effects of CSR, as the psychological stress caused by performance anxiety depletes employees’ emotional resources, potentially reducing their gratitude toward the organization and subsequent safety citizenship behaviors.

Our study makes three contributions. First, Different from the existing studies, we focus on the impact of CSR on employees’ SCB and expands the research on CSR’s active safety contributions to employees. Specifically, we examine the impact of CSR on employee emotions and behaviors from an affective perspective, broadening the scope of CSR research. Scenario simulation experiments and random sample surveys are used to test the effects of CSR on employee gratitude and safety citizenship behaviors. Our findings indicate that CSR can elicit employee gratitude and subsequent safety citizenship behaviors. Second, we explore the mechanisms through which CSR trigger employee safety citizenship behaviors, based on AET, and confirm the mediating role of employee gratitude, thereby enriching the body of research on AET. Finally, we introduce performance pressure as a moderating factor, revealing the boundary conditions under which CSR influence employee safety citizenship behaviors. The results show that at low levels of performance pressure, the mediating effect of employee gratitude in the relationship between CSR and employee safety citizenship behaviors is significant. However, at high levels of performance pressure, the positive work experiences triggered by CSR are diminished, directly resulting in the non-significant mediating effect of employee gratitude.

Literature review and hypotheses

CSR and SCB

McWilliams (2001) and Barnett (2007) define CSR as voluntary actions initiated by companies to promote social welfare, emphasizing the ethical nature and non-mandatory characteristics of CSR^26,27. Initially, the focus on CSR was primarily on the disclosure of sound corporate operations. However, with increasing societal attention to environmental protection and workplace safety, companies have been assigned additional social obligations, such as reducing environmental pollution, supporting vulnerable groups, and creating more pleasant work and business environments²⁸. Existing research indicates that CSR have multifaceted and multidimensional impacts on organizations, including environmental performance²⁹sustainable development capabilities³⁰environmental innovation⁸customer repurchase intentions³¹and employee job performance³². By fulfilling CSR, companies establish a positive ethical image and foster a more harmonious work environment, thereby promoting positive feedback from customers and employees. Research on the impact of CSR on employee behavior indicates that the attitudes and behaviors of employees are not directly driven by objective facts, but by their subjective interpretations and perceptions of these facts³³which further prompts the academic community to focus more research efforts on CSR perceived by individuals³². Consistent with existing studies, perceived CSR has been focused on and used to explain the organizational factors that influence employees’ gratitude and safety citizenship behavior.

Hofmann (2003) introduced the concept of safety citizenship behavior (SCB), defining it as citizenship behavior oriented towards safety¹². Subsequent studies have further expanded the boundaries of the concept regarding the manifestations of SCB in different fields^34,35. A synthesis of these definitions clarifies the key characteristics of SCB: First, SCB is motivated by organizational operational safety, with the direct impact being the improvement of individual or colleague safety performance, or the enhancement of overall organizational safety competitiveness. Second, the actors of SCB are not specific and any individual within the organization can engage in SCB. Third, as an extra-role behavior, SCB is not mandated by the organization; while organizations may encourage SCB, this encouragement is typically not linked to promotions or salary increases.

AET points out that organizational behavior can affect employees’ work experience in direct and indirect ways, and the resulting emotional fluctuations of employees will further influence their subsequent organizational behavior. In the context of the study, employees in gas service companies often engage in organizational-level task feedback and team-level task collaboration³⁶. Their SCB can take various forms, such as helping colleagues safely complete gas transmission tasks and proactively suggesting improvements in gas storage safety³⁷. Although SCB and organizational citizenship behavior (OCB) are both extra-role behaviors and are not driven by formal reward and punishment mechanisms, some scholars view SCB as a specific manifestation of OCB in the safety domain³⁸. The perspective above, however, may overlook the unique aspects of SCB. SCB is motivated by a “remedial” intent to address potential risks, with the core goal of improving safety performance¹². Its behaviors focus on preventing accidents, reducing risks, or enhancing safety culture, essentially aiming to ensure organizational safety through extra-role efforts. In contrast, OCB is driven by an “enhancement” motive to improve broad organizational effectiveness³⁹with its behaviors covering a wide range and aimed at optimizing overall operational efficiency and social image through informal contributions. In terms of contextual applicability, SCB is particularly important in high-risk industries (e.g., aviation, manufacturing), where its value is most evident in scenarios with severe accident consequences¹³. Scholars note that while a growing body of research points to a broader range of organizational and individual factors that can motivate SCB, much of the existing research has focused on the influence of organizational safety climate and individual safety traits on SCB.

Additionally, unlike safety behaviors that emphasize compliance and participation, SCB is characterized by self-driven remedial actions aimed at organizational safety⁴⁰. SCB can enhance employees’ proactive reporting of incidents⁴⁰and reduce organizational property losses⁴¹. Compared to employee safety behaviors, SCB is more influenced by non-safety-related organizational factors such as differential treatment and social norms^35,42. The impact of SCB on organizational safety capabilities⁴³ and the enhancement of colleagues’ safety awareness⁴⁴ differs from traditional safety behaviors, and exploring its motivational drivers can help better understand the causes of employees’ proactive safety engagement. Therefore, recent academic research has started to explore the organizational and individual factors influencing SCB, including organizational safety requirements and individual safety cognition. However, existing studies are relatively limited, with insufficient focus on the impact of organizational ethical behavior on SCB.

A key feature of CSR is the promotion of mutual benefits for the organization and society through proactive assistance to the community, environment, or employees⁴⁵. This, in turn, influences employees’ subsequent innovative, environmental, and organizational citizenship behaviors by fostering a sense of pride and meaning in their work^18,46,47. Similarly, SCB, as a proactive, safety-oriented and prosocial behavior, can be influenced by CSR. First, organizations provide unpaid assistance to employees through CSR activities, enhancing their sense of resource acquisition^4,7,48 and alleviating work-family imbalance-induced anxiety, which in turn fosters intrinsic cognitive trust and a sense of gain from work^1,5,30,46. To maintain a trusting relationship with the organization, employees are more motivated to enhance organizational safety levels through SCB. Second, research on organizational human capital suggests that high levels of psychological capital can effectively stimulate OCB⁴⁹ and SCB¹⁴. Companies that fulfill CSR requirement encourage employees to enhance their skills through learning, leading to the accumulation of capability capital⁵⁰. The motivational orientation of such companies also provides effective psychological capital for employees to overcome future work challenges⁶. Organizations play a crucial role in guiding and regulating employees’ daily work behaviors, especially in cultures influenced by traditional Chinese values, where individualistic behaviors often lead to negative feedback and serious violations. In alignment with this reasoning, employees will mimic or conform to the company’s behavioral patterns based on performance evaluation expectations⁵¹. Safety production capabilities reflect the sustainable competitive advantage of a company, and safety management is a critical aspect of daily operations⁵². From the employee’s perspective, providing safety assistance to the organization and colleagues to ensure safe operations aligns with the company’s objectives¹¹ and is associated with high-performance expectations⁴⁴reflecting an understanding and adherence to the organizational survival principles. Based on the above analysis, we propose the following hypothesis:

Hypothesis 1

CSR positively influence employee SCB.

CSR and employee gratitude

In social psychology domain, the state of gratitude refers to an individual’s psychological condition of feeling thankful over a period of time⁵³indicating that gratitude is a recognizable emotional experience⁵⁴. Subsequent research has begun to focus on the factors influencing employee work gratitude, including leader-employee supportive behaviors⁵⁵ and colleague ethical behaviors⁵⁶. Employees who feel grateful are more likely to engage in pro-organizational behaviors, such as organizational citizenship behaviors²¹ and workplace donations⁵⁷. Overall, employee gratitude is not only influenced by the altruistic behaviors of leaders and colleagues but also promotes positive work behaviors. Although the general view holds that gratitude is often positively associated with the selfless dedication of organizations and others and can further promote the generation of positive organizational behaviors among employees⁵⁸some scholars have pointed out that organizational support or positive leadership does not necessarily lead to the generation of individual gratitude⁵⁹. A typical study is the comparison of the processes in which gratitude and pride arise⁶⁰. The reason for this is that the emergence of gratitude is the result of an individual’s comprehensive consideration of external contributions and personal efforts. Only when perceiving that external contributions are greater than personal efforts can an individual develop feelings of gratitude. Therefore, when discussing the relationship between CSR and gratitude, it is necessary to pay attention to employees’ comparative cognition of CSR.

AET posits that discrete organizational events resulting from stable work environment characteristics can trigger employees’ positive work experiences, which in turn elicit emotional responses¹⁶. From the employee’s perspective, CSR is a clear and long-term obligation assigned to the company. The process of fulfilling CSR involves a series of relatively consistent, related behaviors that, when consistently exhibited over time, form the CSR events perceived by employees. For example, providing additional paid leave for long-term employees is a CSR behavior that influences employees’ perceptions and emotions. Additionally, existing research indicates that management practices, such as green human resource management, affect employee emotions through specific daily management events⁵. Moreover, an increasing number of companies are integrating CSR into their daily management practices. Therefore, this study argues that CSR can influence employee gratitude through discrete organizational events. Specifically, by focusing on employee career development and implementing scientific learning programs, companies can enhance employees’ job capabilities, broaden their psychological resources, and reduce anxiety caused by perceived inadequacies⁴⁶. Fair decision-making and support for employees’ families can also alleviate psychological stress resulting from limited work resources and work-life imbalance. These organizational investments are essentially signals of goodwill related to work resources, and employees who perceive these signals can reduce cognitive anxiety and work stress caused by difficulties in resource acquisition and resource scarcity. Under the market economy, this behavior of enterprises has gone beyond the traditional principle of equivalent exchange of “work - remuneration”. Therefore, it is regarded by employees as an external condition for enhancing the individual work experience. On the premise that employees maintain work efficiency, it can further improve the performance evaluation of employees. Organizational support represented by CSR will inspire employees to connect their self-achievement with the altruistic dedication of the organization⁶¹. The resulting positive working experience further leads to gratitude among employees.

Furthermore, CSR can enhance employees’ positive cognitive experiences from a moral perspective. CSR actions directed towards the environment, society, and customers are inherently ethical and can foster employees’ expectations of the moral attributes of their work, helping them find greater meaning in their jobs. Previous research has confirmed that CSR behaviors promote job satisfaction⁵ and job happiness¹⁸indicating that corporate altruistic behaviors towards society can enhance employees’ perceptions of the moral attributes of their work. Publicly visible environmental activities or community assistance programs can effectively establish a positive social image for the organization. Individuals within the organization not only perceive the positive societal impact of these activities but also strengthen the sense of the moral significance. This positive interaction with societal groups can reduce communication costs between employees and customers or other stakeholders³⁰. The resulting sense of job meaning and the perception of gaining psychological resources can improve employees’ work experiences and reduce their work stress. Overall, CSR enhance employees’ sense of control over work resources. The altruistic nature of CSR gives employees the perception of receiving resources without cost, the resources obtained for free have promoted the improvement of employees’ subsequent work evaluations. This model of sharing benefits and profits has facilitated the emergence of gratitude because, essentially, CSR encourages a cooperative culture. Research on employee SCB indicates that organizational support and lower work pressure are key factors in promoting extra-role safety behaviors in the workplace^51,62. Based on the above discussion, CSR can increase employees’ sense of resource acquisition and positive cognitive experiences of job meaning, thereby enhancing their gratitude. Based on the above discussion, we propose the following hypothesis:

Hypothesis 2

Corporate social responsibility behaviors positively influence employee gratitude.

Employee gratitude and SCB

AET also posits that individual emotions can influence subsequent behaviors through multiple pathways. Extensive empirical research has validated the positive impact of employee gratitude on proactive helping behaviors⁵⁶ and organizational citizenship behaviors⁶³. Employee gratitude is not only an emotional response to positive work experiences but also a source of motivation for positive work behaviors influencing individuals’ behavioral responses. Increased work gratitude enhances the willingness of employees to provide unpaid assistance to the organization and colleagues, thereby reinforcing their connection with the organization. In the context of manufacturing, SCB has a more significant impact on enhancing the sustainability and risk management capabilities of the organization compared to general organizational citizenship behavior²¹. Research on SCB indicates that employees with positive emotions are more likely to adopt heuristic strategies to address work issues and are more motivated to correct potential hazards in the workplace through safety assistance or suggestions.

In the gas industry, employees can help the company better manage operational risks by providing safety recommendations for gas storage, transportation, and usage³⁷. Additionally, providing safety assistance to colleagues enhances the team’s overall ability to identify and address safety incidents⁶⁴thereby improving the organization’s safety capabilities. On the other hand, gratitude towards the organization increases employees’ psychological dependence, linking the company’s ongoing development with their personal growth. For example, improvements in the company’s financial performance are associated with higher personal income. In the Chinese context, maintaining a vital relationship with the company often means greater opportunities for career advancement and higher salaries⁶⁴. Therefore, through SCB, gas company employees enhance their interactions with the company and colleagues, further deepening their relationships. Summarizing the above, this study proposes the following hypothesis:

Hypothesis 3

Employee gratitude positively influences safety citizenship behavior.

The mediating role of employee gratitude

AET points out that there are two paths for the influence of work events on employee behavior. Besides being able to directly affect employees’ work behavior through overall work evaluation, it also promotes the generation of emotions and the transformation of work attitudes and work behaviors through two evaluations. Specifically, the generation of emotions depends on the analysis of the relevance of work events and the significance of work. When the occurrence of events conforms to an individual’s work expectations and meets their work needs, the subsequent emergence of a positive work attitude will promote the emergence of positive work behaviors among employees. Based on the above analysis, CSR that foster employee gratitude may further enhance their motivation to engage in SCB. On one hand, CSR convey high moral standards to employees, encouraging them to meet others’ needs through proactive actions, which include both moral and other work-related aspects³³. Mediated by gratitude, employees’ positive emotions lead to a motivation to reciprocate, aiming to align with the organization’s moral standards by engaging in similar altruistic behaviors, thus enhancing organizational safety performance while maintaining a high level of work experience. As previously mentioned, in the context of gas companies, employees’ safety performance is directly related to the organization’s sustainability and financial performance³⁷. Additional safety efforts represented by SCB are a form of unpaid safety service provided by employees out of gratitude, fostering a continuous positive interaction with the organization. On the other hand, gratitude is associated with higher levels of organizational loyalty, which helps individuals integrate into the organization by emulating its behaviors¹⁷. Through the fulfillment of CSR, organizations establish explicit moral frameworks for their employees. These moral frameworks, when coupled with the organization’s safety management protocols and ethical role expectations, serve as potent motivators for employees to engage in Sustainable and Responsible Business (SRB) practices. Scholars have also noted that the implementation of organizational ethical behaviors is related to employees’ positive emotions and subsequent ethical behaviors^6,65,66,67. Based on the above analysis, we propose the following hypothesis:

Hypothesis 4

Employee gratitude mediates the relationship between CSR and employee SCB.

The influence of performance pressure on the relationship between CSR and employee SCB

Performance pressure refers to the urgency with which an organization demands that employees improve their performance levels⁶⁸. It is often associated with negative outcomes such as employee work withdrawal²⁵incivility²²and workplace anxiety⁶⁹. Although recent domestic scholars have begun to explore the positive effects of performance pressure on employees⁷⁰overall, performance pressure is linked to negative perceptions of performance evaluations. High levels of performance pressure reflect the organization’s high expectations for employee capabilities and work engagement, necessitating greater emotional resources⁷¹ and effort⁶⁹ to overcome the negative performance feedback caused by such pressure. This psychological stress objectively reduces employees’ positive work experiences. On one hand, high-performance pressure instills a greater sense of job insecurity in individuals, who must manage the negative emotions arising from this pressure in their daily work⁷². The resulting over-consumption of emotional resources diminishes the positive work experiences generated by CSR. On the other hand, performance pressure requires individuals to focus intensely on completing their tasks to enhance efficiency, thereby reducing their attention and investment in non-core, extracurricular activities and organizational cues. This ultimately affects their perception of CSR and their engagement in safety citizenship behaviors.

Conversely, low levels of performance pressure indicate that an individual’s current capabilities and resource allocation are sufficient to meet the organization’s needs²⁴. Employees do not need to expend additional personal energy to maintain future performance evaluations, allowing them to allocate more of their remaining energy to daily interactions with the organization⁷³. They can engage in more citizenship behaviors to maintain a positive relationship with the organization. Existing research suggests that low-performance pressure is often associated with high organizational performance and a favorable external environment^71,72. Organizations facing fewer external pressures have less incentive to transmit or generate work stress at the grassroots level, thereby enhancing employees’ psychological safety⁷⁴. In a low-performance pressure context, a positive work attitude and behavior pattern can be established within the organization. Employees not only handle daily challenges more effectively but also use their surplus emotional resources to focus on internal relationships and social responsibilities. In a relatively relaxed work environment, it is easier for employees to build networks of trust and support, which are crucial for promoting safety citizenship behaviors. Positive interpersonal interactions encourage mutual support and collaboration among employees, making them more willing to take on the role of “safety citizens” as they recognize their ability and responsibility to contribute to a safer work environment. Based on the above discussion, we propose the following hypotheses:

Hypothesis 5

Performance pressure moderates the relationship between corporate social responsibility behaviors and employee gratitude. Specifically, the higher the performance pressure, the weaker the positive relationship between CSR behaviors and employee gratitude.

Hypothesis 6

Performance pressure moderates the indirect relationship between corporate social responsibility behaviors and employee safety citizenship behaviors through employee gratitude. Specifically, the higher the performance pressure, the weaker the indirect positive relationship between CSR behaviors and employee safety citizenship behaviors.

In summary, the theoretical model is constructed as shown in Fig. 1.

Fig. 1

Theoretical Model.

The present research

To test our hypotheses, we conducted two studies. In Study 1, 2 (High vs. Low CSR) x 2 (High vs. Low-Performance Pressure) scenario simulation experiment was conducted to examine the causal relationships between CSR and employee SCB (Hypothesis 1), and employee gratitude (Hypothesis 2). We used SPSS21.0 to analyze the experimental data and adapted independent sample t-tests and ANOVA to analyze the effects of CSR on gratitude and SCB, as well as the moderating role of performance pressure in the process of CSR affecting gratitude (Hypothesis 5).

Although the method of using scenario simulation experiments can test the causal relationship between variables, it also has the problem of insufficient external validity, and the description of the experimental scenarios cannot well represent the morality and altruism demonstrated by diverse corporate social responsibility behaviors. Therefore, in order to enhance the external utility of the research conclusions and further verify the mediating and moderating relationships involved in the study, this paper uses the sample survey and analysis method to further test the hypotheses in Study 2. In Study 2, we replicated and extended the findings from Study 1 using a multi-time-point random sampling method. Specifically, we used path analysis to re-examine Hypotheses 1,2 and 5, and the moderated mediation model was verified by using SPSS21.0 and Mplus8.0 software and the Monte Carlo method (Hypotheses 3,4 and 6). The bootstrapping sample size was 5000. Through Studies 1 and 2, we were able to assess both the internal and external validity of our findings.

Study 1

Participants and procedure

Participants were recruited from four manufacturing companies in the Yangtze River Delta region of China, with 520 participants (130 from each company) selected through a random process. Specifically, we first contact the human resources department of the company to obtain the list of employees and their employee numbers, and then draw the employee numbers of the employees through random sampling software. To ensure the authenticity and validity of the data, several screening measures were implemented. First, attention check items were included to ensure participants remained engaged with the experimental content. Second, all experimental questionnaires were manually reviewed, and incomplete or extremely biased responses were excluded. Finally, two scenario evaluation items were added at the end of the scenario information, using a 5-point Likert scale (1 = Strongly Disagree to 5 = Strongly Agree) to assess participants’ perceptions of the scenarios.

After being informed about the confidentiality of their data and signing consent forms, the 520 participants were randomly assigned to one of the four scenarios. Participants were then asked to read the experimental scenario materials and report the manipulation information and other variable data based on the provided materials. Finally, participants were asked to complete demographic information. Participants who completed the entire experiment received a $5 reward. After excluding invalid questionnaires, the final sample consisted of 481 participants (High CSR Behavior and High-Performance Pressure, n = 126; Low CSR Behavior and High-Performance Pressure, n = 116; High CSR Behavior and Low-Performance Pressure, n = 127; Low CSR Behavior and Low-Performance Pressure, n = 112). The sample included 201 females (41.8%) and 280 males (58.2%). The age range was primarily between 26 and 40 years (388 participants, 80.7%). The average work experience was 5.88 years (SD = 5.67), and the average number of safety training sessions was 4.05 (SD = 3.998). Educational backgrounds were mainly concentrated at the bachelor’s and master’s levels (462 participants, 96%).

Ethical considerations

The data collection has been approved by the Ethics Committee of the School of Management, Wuhan University of Science and Technology (2023-06-01). The research strictly adheres to the recommendations of the Ethical Principles of Psychologists and Code of Conduct by the American Psychological Association (APA). Informed consent was obtained from all participants prior to the study.

Experimental materials

Based on the existing research^75,76we adapted the background and scenario materials for CSR behaviors and performance pressure. The background material was as follows:

Background Material: “Assume you are an employee in Department A of a manufacturing company. Your department operates production machinery collaboratively, and every Monday, there is a weekly production meeting where employees discuss recent company activities and departmental production performance.”

Scenario 1 (High CSR x High Performance Pressure): “Company A recently replaced the production machines in your department with more environmentally friendly ones and organized employees to provide free product testing and replacement services for socially disadvantaged families. The company also purchased additional personal insurance for the families of all employees, offered extra paid leave for employees who have worked for five years, and proactively covered medical expenses for employees injured on the job. Company A has clear performance requirements for employees. Employees with the lowest product quality ratings at the end of the month will be publicly criticized, receive a salary reduction, and be forced to change positions. Employees who do not meet the monthly average production targets will be summoned for discussions, and those who fail the monthly skill tests will not be eligible for timely promotions.”

Scenario 2 (High CSR x Low Performance Pressure): “Company A recently replaced the production machines in your department with more environmentally friendly ones and organized employees to provide free product testing and replacement services for socially disadvantaged families. The company also purchased additional personal insurance for the families of all employees, offered extra paid leave for employees who have worked for five years, and proactively covered medical expenses for employees injured on the job. Company A sets performance requirements based on employees’ abilities and needs. Employees with lower quality and productivity rates will be given timely reminders, but no actions such as discussions, salary reductions, or forced position changes will be taken. Skill test results will not be used as a basis for promotion.”

Scenario 3 (Low CSR x High Performance Pressure): “Company A has no plans to replace the production machines with more environmentally friendly ones or to provide free product testing and replacement services for socially disadvantaged families. The company has not purchased additional personal insurance for the families of employees and does not cover medical expenses for employees injured on the job. Company A sets performance requirements based on employees’ abilities and needs. Employees with lower quality and productivity rates will be given timely reminders, but no actions such as discussions, salary reductions, or forced position changes will be taken. Skill test results will not be used as a basis for promotion.”

Scenario 4 (Low CSR x Low Performance Pressure): “Company A has no plans to replace the production machines with more environmentally friendly ones or to provide free product testing and replacement services for socially disadvantaged families. The company has not purchased additional personal insurance for the families of employees and does not cover medical expenses for employees injured on the job. Company A sets performance requirements based on employees’ abilities and needs. Employees with lower quality and productivity rates will be given timely reminders, but no actions such as discussions, salary reductions, or forced position changes will be taken. Skill test results will not be used as a basis for promotion.”

Before the formal experiment, the validity of the scenario was tested through a pre-experiment. The manipulation test showed that the average mean values of the CSR and performance pressure scales filled out by the subjects under different levels of CSR and performance pressure were significantly different, thus indicating that the manipulation was effective.

Measurement tools

Safety Citizenship Behavior: The scale developed by Hofmann and Wang^12,34 was adapted to fit the context of the manufacturing industry. The original items were modified and adjusted, resulting in a 10-item safety citizenship behavior scale. Example items include: “In this company, I would raise safety issues during departmental discussions” and “In this company, I would teach new colleagues about safety procedures.”

Employee Gratitude: Employee gratitude scale used in this study was based on the scales developed by Sun and Qi^17,63. This scale has been validated for use in the Chinese manufacturing context and consists of three items. Example items include: “At work, I express gratitude for the company’s contributions.”

Control variables

We controlled for participants’ basic demographic information, including gender, age, and years of work experience. Additionally, given that previous research has shown that safety training significantly promotes safety citizenship behavior³⁸we also controlled for the number of safety training sessions attended by employees.

Experimental results

Manipulation check

The results of the independent samples t-test showed that the reported CSR in the manipulation group (high CSR, n = 253, M = 3.980, SD = 0.721) were significantly higher than those in the control group (low CSR, n = 228, M = 2.711, SD = 0.863), t(479) = 17.576, p < 0.001, Cohen’s d = 1.605. The reported performance pressure in the manipulation group (low performance pressure, n = 242, M = 2.595, SD = 1.206) was significantly higher than that in the control group (high performance pressure, n = 239, M = 3.937, SD = 0.825), t(479) = -14.231, p < 0.001, Cohen’s d = 1.298. These results indicate that the manipulations for CSR and performance pressure were efficacious.

Hypothesis testing

We used independent samples t-tests to analyze the main effects. According to the t-test results, employee gratitude under high CSR (M = 3.873, SD = 0.803) was significantly higher than under low CSR behaviors (M = 3.148, SD = 1.120), t(479) = 21.883, p < 0.001, Cohen’s d = 0.751. Additionally, employee SCB under high CSR (M = 3.937, SD = 0.676) was significantly higher than under low CSR (M = 3.408, SD = 0.908), t(479) = 19.947, p < 0.001, Cohen’s d = 0.665. Hypotheses 1 and 2 are supported.

Hypothesis 5 predicted that performance pressure moderates the relationship between CSR behaviors and employee gratitude. We conducted an ANOVA to test the interaction effect. The results showed that the interaction effect between CSR and performance pressure had a significant effect on gratitude, F(3, 477) = 5.329, p < 0.05, ηp²=0.011. Simple effects analysis further indicated that, under high-performance pressure, employee gratitude under high CSR behaviors (M = 3.754, SD = 0.084) was significantly higher than under low CSR behaviors (M = 2.836, SD = 0.087), F(1, 477) = 57.630, p < 0.001. Under low-performance pressure, employee gratitude under high CSR behaviors (M = 3.992, SD = 0.083) was significantly higher than under low CSR behaviors (M = 3.470, SD = 0.089), F(1, 477) = 18.346, p < 0.001. Hypothesis 5 is supported. These results are illustrated in Fig. 2.

Fig. 2

Interaction Effect of CSR and Performance Pressure on Employee Gratitude.

Discussion

Study 1 indicates that employee gratitude and SCB are associated with CSR and performance pressure. Furthermore, our research results indicate that: (a) CSR not only directly affects employees’ SCB, but also positively influences employees’ gratitude; (b) Performance pressure, as a moderating factor, interacts with CSR and affects employees’ work gratitude. Study 1 preliminary proves that CSR, as a positive moral event in an organization, can promote the moral behavior of employees. This research result is consistent with the research conclusion of scholars such as Alhmoudi³indicating that the morality of CSR can stimulate the subsequent moral behavior of employees. At the same time, CSR can inspire employees’ work gratitude. This conclusion responds to the call of Khaskheli⁴ and explains from an emotional perspective the intrinsic motivation by which CSR influences employee behavior. Performance pressure, as the perceived source of work pressure, will weaken the positive impact of CSR on employees’ emotions. This conclusion is not only consistent with the previous research⁷but also reveals the diversity of the influence of enterprises on employees’ emotions and subsequent behaviors in a complex organizational environment.

Although Study 1 used a scenario-based simulation method to manipulate organizational factors, and the data analysis results are helpful for causal inference, the external validity of this method is limited. Second, Study 1 did not examine the mediating effect of employee gratitude or the moderating effect of performance pressure on this mediation. Third, our mediator and outcome variables were measured at the same time and from the same source, which raises concerns about common method bias (Podsakoff, 2003). Therefore, we conducted Study 2 to address these limitations.

Study 2

Sample and procedure

We conducted a multi-time field study with 375 full-time employees from eight manufacturing companies in the Yangtze River Delta region of China. The researchers obtained employee information through the human resources departments of the participating companies and distributed confidentiality statements and questionnaires via the internal office systems to ensure data confidentiality and legal use. We used the same sampling software as in Study 1 to determine the employee numbers of the respondents. To reduce the impact of common method bias on the results, we collected data at three-time points, each two months apart^7,77. At Time 1 (February 2023), we primarily collected CSR and performance pressure data. At Time 2 (April 2023), we collected data on employee gratitude. At Time 3 (June 2023), we collected data on employee SCB. Researchers provided on-site guidance and online support to ensure the voluntary and accurate completion of the questionnaires. A total of 400 questionnaires were distributed at Time 1, with 391 valid responses received. At Time 2, 391 questionnaires were distributed, with 382 valid responses received. At Time 3, 382 questionnaires were distributed, with 370 valid responses received, resulting in an overall effective response rate of 90.25%.

Measurement tools

The measurement scales used in this study are based on well-established scales from both domestic and international literature. The research team strictly followed the translation-back-translation process for all variable scales. Unless otherwise specified, all variables were measured using a 5-point Likert scale, with scores ranging from 1 (strongly disagree) to 5 (strongly agree).

Corporate Social Responsibility: We used the 15-item scale developed by Farooq (2014) to measure CSR⁷⁸. Example items include: “Our company uses more environmentally friendly equipment and production methods to protect or improve the quality of the natural environment” and “Our company cares about the needs and wishes of its employees.” The Cronbach’s α for this scale was 0.961.

Performance Pressure: We used the 4-item scale developed by Mitchell et al. (2018) to measure performance pressure²². Example items include: “I feel a great deal of pressure to meet the company’s performance requirements.” The Cronbach’s α for this scale was 0.869.

Employee Gratitude (Cronbach’s α = 0.895) and Safety Citizenship Behavior (Cronbach’s α = 0.961): These scales were the same as those used in Study 1. Previous research has shown that demographic factors such as gender, age, and education level can influence employee safety citizenship behavior. Additionally, the number of safety training sessions attended and years of work experience may increase employees’ willingness to make extra safety contributions. Therefore, these factors were included as control variables.

Ethical considerations

As in Study 1, the questionnaire in Study 2 was reviewed by the same ethics committee and the data collected came from all participants who gave their informed consent.

Analytical strategy

We used path analysis to test the proposed model. Specifically, we used Mplus8.0 to analyze the direct paths in the model. All exogenous variables (CSR and performance pressure) were mean-centered before effect calculations. We also used bootstrapping with 5000 resamples to analyze the mediating effect of employee gratitude and the moderating effect of performance pressure, examining the 95% confidence intervals of the estimates.

Results

Confirmatory factor analysis

Confirmatory factor analysis demonstrated that all items exhibited factor loadings exceeding the threshold of 0.5, indicating strong item reliability. Furthermore, Table 2 showed CR values ranged from 0.870 to 0.962, all surpassing the recommended benchmark of 0.70, thereby confirming robust internal consistency reliability. Additionally, AVE values consistently exceeded the established criterion of 0.50, ranging from 0.625 to 0.740, which supports the convergent validity of the four constructs under investigation. The hypothesized model demonstrated an excellent fit to the data, as evidenced by the following fit indices: χ²/df = 2.099; CFI = 0.949; TLI = 0.945; RMSEA = 0.054; and SRMR = 0.035. These results collectively indicate that the measurement model is both reliable and valid, aligning with established psychometric standards.

Common method bias

We used Harman’s single-factor test to examine the severity of common method bias in the sample data. The results showed that the cumulative percentage of variance explained by the first factor was 39.788%, which is below the critical value of 40%. Second, using the unmeasured latent method factor technique, the result revealed that the fit indices did not show significant improvement compared to the four-factor model. This indicates that the issue of common method bias in this study is not severe. Detailed information can be found in Table 1.

Table 1 The result of the unmeasured latent method factor technique.

Descriptive statistics

Table 2 presents the descriptive statistics and correlation analysis for variables including CSR, employee gratitude, performance pressure, and SCB. As indicated in Table 2, CSR is positively associated with employee gratitude (γ = 0.376, ρ < 0.01) and SCB (γ = 0.341, ρ < 0.01). These findings are consistent with Study 1, thereby providing further validation for Hypotheses 1 and 2. Additionally, employee gratitude is positively correlated with SCB (γ = 0.573, ρ < 0.01), which offers preliminary support for Hypothesis 3.

Hypotheses tests

We executed a path analysis to evaluate our hypotheses, using Mplus8.0 to examine the mediation effects, moderation effects, and moderated mediation effects. The results in Table 3 show that the direct effect of CSR on SCB (b = 0.155, ρ < 0.05) and employee gratitude (b = 0.372, ρ < 0.001) and employee gratitude on SCB (b = 0.504, ρ < 0.001) are all significant, supporting Hypothesis 1,2 and 3. The indirect effect of CSR on SCB through employee gratitude is 0.187, with a 95% confidence interval of [0.134, 0.249], which does not include 0. This indicates a significant mediating effect of employee gratitude, supporting Hypothesis 4.

Table 2 Descriptive statistics and correlations among variables.

Table 3 The mediation effect of employee gratitude.

As shown in Fig. 3, the interaction between CSR and performance pressure has a significant negative effect on employee gratitude (b=-0.491, ρ < 0.001), supporting Hypothesis 5. To better illustrate the moderating effect, we plotted the moderating effect using the mean and one standard deviation above and below the mean of performance pressure. Figure 4 shows that when performance pressure is high, the effect of CSR behaviors on work gratitude is weaker, and when performance pressure is low, the effect is stronger. This indicates that performance pressure negatively moderates the relationship between CSR and employee gratitude, thus supporting Hypothesis 5.

Fig. 3

Structural equation model.

Fig. 4

The moderating role of PP on the relationship between CSR and EG.

To test the moderating effect of performance pressure on the mediating effect, we used the Monte Carlo method to examine the difference in the mediating effect under high and low levels of performance pressure. The results in Table 4 show a significant difference in the mediating effect of work gratitude on the relationship between CSR and SCB at different levels of performance pressure (DIFF=-0.450, 95% CI [-0.671, -0.225], which does not include 0). At high levels of performance pressure, the mediating effect of work gratitude is not significant (indirect effect=-0.038, 95% CI [-0.158, 0.069], which includes 0). At low levels of performance pressure, the mediating effect of work gratitude is significant (indirect effect = 0.412, 95% CI [0.274, 0.541], which does not include 0). Thus, Hypothesis 6 is supported. The detailed results are presented in Table 4.

Table 4 Results of moderatedindirect effects analyses.

Discussion

To validate the impact of performance pressure on the mediating effect, Study 2 used a multi-time-point survey to collect data. The results confirmed the findings from Study 1, indicating that CSR not only directly influence employee SCB but also indirectly influence it through employee gratitude. Performance pressure, as a contextual factor, not only interacts with CSR to affect employee gratitude but also influences the path through which CSR promote SCB via employee gratitude. This research conclusion is consistent with Sun²⁵indicating that job gratitude, as a mediating factor, can serve as a bridge between organizational behavior and employee behavior. However, the difference is that previous studies have explored more from the perspectives of leadership and relationships the process by which organizations influence individuals, while this study is based on the theory of emotional events. It reveals the influence path of organizational discrete moral events on employees’ emotions and subsequent moral behaviors from the perspective of events. It is indicated that the emergence of safe citizen behavior also depends on the emotional reflexes of employees, rather than just the cognitive feedback emphasized by existing studies.

The bootstrap method with 5000 random samples showed that the mediating effect of employee gratitude on the relationship between CSR and SCB is significant under low levels of performance pressure, and the differences in the mediating effect at different levels of performance pressure are significant. Additionally, the multi-time-point survey data in Study 2 addressed the external validity limitations of Study 1, significantly enhancing the explanatory power of the theoretical model.

General discussion

To identify the impact of CSR on employee SCB, we used both scenario-based experiments and random sample surveys to test the causal relationships between variables. The results support the positive effect of CSR on employee SCB. To gain deeper insights into these relationships, Studies 1 and 2 aimed to reveal the psychological processes and conditions through which employee gratitude mediates and performance pressure moderates these relationships. The findings explored the mediating role of employee gratitude in the relationship between CSR and employee SCB, showing that CSR exert both direct and indirect influences on SCB through employee gratitude. These findings align with those of Alhmoudi⁴⁶who found that CSR create a positive work environment, directly and indirectly influencing employee innovative behaviors. The explanation for these findings lies in AET, which posits an intrinsic connection between organizational events and employee emotions. Employees tend to maintain positive interactions with the organization to sustain the positive work experiences triggered by organizational events. Implementing CSR reflects the organization’s pro-social stance and attention to key stakeholder groups. Fulfilling CSR obligations provides employees with superior work experiences, including enhanced social status and improved work environments, leading to feelings of gratitude and SCB. Additionally, to explore the conditions that may alter the strength of the relationship between CSR and SCB, we introduced performance pressure as a moderating variable. The results of Study 2 show that under low levels of performance pressure, the indirect effect of CSR on SCB through employee gratitude is more significant. These findings are consistent with those of Lee⁵⁶who found that performance pressure increases employees’ expectations of job losses, reduces their sense of work gains, and subsequently lowers their positive emotions. Our study further reveals that, in complex organizational contexts, performance pressure as a moderating factor can weaken the positive impact of CSR behaviors on employee SCB.

Although there are still differences in the discussion on the generation process and influence results of gratitude, some scholars believe that gratitude is not simply determined by organizational altruistic behaviors. However, the data analysis results prove the positive impact of CSR on employee gratitude, indicating that in the organizational context, CSR can promote the internal comparison of employees. Whether it is a horizontal comparison between organizational assistance and individual efforts, or a vertical comparison before and after organizational assistance, employees tend to attribute the main influencing factors of the subsequent positive work experience to the selfless dedication of the organization. Furthermore, the study is mainly based on the Chinese background. The relevant conclusions indicate that under the premise of Confucian culture, CSR is not simply regarded as related to an increase in individual workload. What is more complicated is that CSR can still promote the formation of positive emotions among employees. This conclusion indicates that the altruism and pro-sociality advocated by CSR are the same as the “benevolence” in Confucian culture. Both encourage people to consider the overall interests of society while pursuing personal interests, although this may mean that employees need to undertake more out-of-role behaviors. However, such experiences usually enable employees to experience the power and joy of teamwork, which in turn transforms into a stronger sense of cooperation and responsibility. Furthermore, as traditional Chinese culture attaches great importance to “harmony” and “coexistence and harmony”, enterprises also pay attention to internal communication and collaboration in the process of promoting CSR, further strengthening the connection and support system among employees. In conclusion, the conclusion of this study reveals the commonalities of Eastern and Western values reflected in CSR under Confucianism. This conclusion provides a theoretical basis for achieving enterprise internationalization and better maintaining organizational diversity.

Research contributions and future directions

Theoretical contributions

First, our study extends the research on the impact of CSR on employee SCB, broadening the scope of studies on the positive organizational behaviors of employees. While current research has begun to focus on the micro-level effects of CSR, such as their impact on employee job performance and innovation, this study expands the context to explore the positive influence of CSR on employee SCB. The results respond to the call by Hur⁴ to investigate the impact of CSR behaviors on employee safety behaviors, enriching the understanding of the positive effects of CSR behaviors on employees.

Second, from an affective perspective, our study enriches the dimensions of CSR research. Previous studies have primarily explored the moral and identity-related impacts of CSR on employees, focusing on the positive cognitive and self-moral image effects. However, SCB not only has moral attributes but also significant safety characteristics, requiring more safety efforts from employees. Under this theoretical premise, the mechanisms through which CSR influence employee SCB need further investigation. Based on AET, our study explores the positive impact of discrete CSR behaviors on employee SCB, extending the internal processes through which CSR influence proactive safety efforts. We reveal the “bridging” role of employee gratitude in the process, where employee gratitude, as an event-driven individual emotion, is influenced by organizational moral behaviors like CSR and triggers subsequent altruistic organizational behaviors, such as SCB. Meanwhile, the questionnaire analysis results of employees in Chinese companies show that the generation of gratitude does not rely on a special value system. Whether it is the West that emphasizes universal values or China that emphasizes collectivism, CSR can evoke employee gratitude. A reasonable explanation is that the concepts such as “benevolence” and “the unity of righteousness and profit” in Confucianism have commonalities in individual cognition with the pro-sociality and altruism emphasized in the West. This implicit social motivation will produce the same behavioral results under the premise of being stimulated by the same form of organization, indicating that CSR activities will generate cultural resonance under the two different value systems. It further reveals the inherent commonality of the individual arising from gratitude.

Third, we expand the boundary conditions for the impact of CSR on employee gratitude and SCB. By introducing performance pressure as a moderating factor, we highlight the complex influence of diverse organizational goals on employee emotions. Previous research has mainly focused on the amplifying or diminishing effects of employee safety traits and organizational safety requirements on employee safety citizenship behavior, lacking exploration of more diverse moderating factors. Performance pressure, as a typical organizational work atmosphere factor, has a complex impact on individuals. Existing studies show that organizational performance pressure can positively influence employee cheating behavior but also increase work attendance. Scholars also have called for a more diverse organizational context to understand the impact of performance pressure on employee behavior^70,74,79. Based on AET, we discuss the differences in the impact of CSR behaviors on employee gratitude and SCB under different levels of performance pressure. The results reveal that performance pressure, as a perceived organizational work requirement, can influence employees’ work expectations and subsequent work experiences, acting as a “valve” for the impact of CSR behaviors on employee gratitude and SCB. This conclusion helps scholars understand the reasons for the differential SCB of employees and reconciles the debate about the varying nature of performance pressure’s impact.

Managerial implications

First, Supervisors should objectively recognize the positive impact of CSR behaviors on the organization. They can create a more harmonious organizational atmosphere by developing scientific CSR implementation plans, such as regularly disclosing recent CSR activities and providing additional employee benefits (e.g., paid leave, and family insurance plans) to enhance employees’ perception of the organization’s CSR efforts. For employees experiencing high-performance pressure, early psychological counseling should be provided, along with appropriate incentives and support to reduce their work stress.

Second, developing Reasonable Performance Plans should be a key daily work issue. Managers should focus on developing reasonable performance plans to prevent unreasonable distribution of performance pressure. Based on clear performance goals, managers should allocate tasks according to employees’ capabilities and responsibilities, set and enforce fair performance evaluation standards, and establish timely performance feedback and adjustment mechanisms. Clear, quantifiable rewards should be specified for high-performing employees, and support and resources should be provided to those who need help.

Third, in the Chinese context that emphasizes benevolence and collectivism, enterprises implementing CSR should resonate with traditional Chinese morality to inspire employees’ sense of gratitude. On the one hand, the moral attributes of CSR should be highlighted to enhance employees’ moral identification with such behaviors of the organization. Social responsibility should be combined with local demands to achieve effective assistance to local vulnerable groups. For example, optimization plans for transportation facilities and education undertakings can be proposed for remote areas. On the other hand, considering the family concepts of Chinese employees, enterprises should enhance employees’ sense of gratitude by providing selfless assistance to their families, such as offering additional social insurance to employees’ family members and providing child care services to employees’ family members.

Research limitations and future directions

While this study explains the positive impact of CSR behaviors on employee SCB from an affective perspective, future research could explore this from other perspectives, such as the relational perspective. For example, examining the mediating roles of colleague relationships (cooperative, intimate) and leader-subordinate relationships (power distance) in the impact of CSR behaviors on employee proactive safety efforts could enrich the understanding of the contingent factors in the relationship between CSR behaviors and positive organizational behaviors.

Considering Other Organizational Factors: This study focused on performance pressure as a moderating factor. Future research could consider other organizational factors, such as empowering leadership and organizational learning orientation, to further explore the boundary conditions for the impact of CSR behaviors on employee behavior.

Considering the complexity of the impact of gratitude on employee behavior, the mechanism by which it affects SCB is even more complex. Based on AET, the influence of emotions on behavior is subject to the cumulative effect of the external environment. Moreover, there may be changes in individual cognitive motivation from implicit gratitude to explicit altruistic behavior, and this change process is related to the inherent personality traits of individuals. Subsequent studies should further reveal the mechanism by which gratitude affects SCB and more systematically explore the boundary factors of organizations and individuals.