Mediating the Role of Social Innovation in the Relationship between Corporate Social Responsibility and Sustainable Corporate Reputation "An Empirical Study on Customers of Private Universities in the Arab Republic of Egypt"

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).

This shift may lead to the modern concept of corporate social innovation (CSI). In this context, CSI emerges as an alternative for solving such problems. Social innovation is understood as the initiatives that seek to solve social problems, and also to promote social transformation, through inclusion, empowerment, participation, and new relationships (Bataglin and Kruglianskas 2022; Esen and Maden-Eyiusta 2019).

 Corporate social responsibility along with sustainability initiatives and actions with social communication are strategic aspects in consolidating corporate reputation (Zizka 2017). Currently, there can no longer be a separation between social innovation and CSR/sustainability actions and initiatives in order to build sustainable corporate reputation. Accordingly, this study seeks to investigate the relationship nature between corporate social responsibility and sustainable corporate reputation through social innovation 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).

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 1991).

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

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) Social Innovation (SI):

In 1949, Schumpeter defined social innovation as "a new form of collaborative entrepreneurial acts that lead to new forms of organization as well as technical and marketing innovations" (Neumeier 2012).

In 1994, Zapf referred to social innovation as “social innovations are new ways to reach goals, particularly new organizational forms, new regulations, and new lifestyles that change the direction of social change and solve problems better than previous practices (Mostovova 2018).

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

According to Esen and Maden-Eyiusta (2019), social innovation can be thought of as “new solutions to social problems and challenges that create social value, achieve the common good and affect society. These solutions are developed primarily through the participation of stakeholders who have interest in the problem in question".

Dimensions of Social Innovation:

According to Moulaert et al. (2005) there are various classification for the dimensions of social innovation, however the most harmonized dimensions that preferably occurring in interaction with each other are:

2.2.5.1) Content/Product Dimension: First, social innovation can be pursued with the purpose of finding an effective response to a problem, whether by redefining social needs or responding to an existing social need (Pue et al. 2016).

2.2.5.2 Process Dimension: This dimension includes changes in social relations and allows for the satisfaction of societal needs with a level of participation particularly for deprived groups (Hoelscher et al. 2015).

2.2.5.3) Empowerment dimension: This dimension is concerned with the improvement of sociopolitical capabilities and access to resources   necessary to trigger the right to satisfy human needs and to participation (Hoelscher et al. 2015; Li et al. 2018).

2.3) 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 reputation corporate. Furthermore, a variety of studies were performed concerning the impact of corporate social responsibility on social innovation but the relationship between social innovation and sustainable corporate reputation was not covered, especially in Arabic studies.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

More interestingly, the researcher argued that no prior studies have examined the indirect effect of corporate social responsibility on sustainable corporate reputation through mediating social innovation. Therefore, based on the above explanation, the study contributes to the body of knowledge through filling the previous gaps 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- What is the nature of the relationship between dimensions of the research variables (corporate social responsibility, social innovation, sustainable corporate reputation and demographic characteristics)?

2- Is there an effect of corporate social responsibility on sustainable corporate reputation?

3- Is there an effect of corporate social responsibility on social innovation?

4- Is there an effect of social innovation on sustainable corporate reputation?

5- What is the effect of social innovation as a mediating variable on the relationship between corporate social responsibility and sustainable corporate reputation?

6- Are there differences in the perceptions of customers of private universities in Egypt regarding the dimensions of corporate social responsibility, social innovation 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 corporate social responsibility and social innovation on sustainable corporate reputation, therefore the study envelopes the following objectives:

1- Determining the nature of the relationship between dimensions of the research variables (corporate social responsibility, social innovation, sustainable corporate reputation and demographic characteristics).

2- Investigating the effect of corporate social responsibility on sustainable corporate reputation.

3- Measuring the effect of corporate social responsibility on social innovation.

4- Examining the effect of social innovation on sustainable corporate reputation.

5- Identifying the effect of corporate social responsibility on sustainable corporate reputation through social innovation.

6- Determining whether there are differences in the perceptions of customers of private universities in Egypt regarding the dimensions of corporate social responsibility, social innovation 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 relationship between dimensions of the research variables (corporate social responsibility, social innovation and sustainable corporate reputation).

 

 

 

 

 

 

In the context of the researcher’s endeavor to identify the nature of the relationship between corporate social responsibility, social innovation and sustainable corporate reputation,various studies indicated these relationships including, Arikol (2012), proposed that reputation forms the basis of CSR actions, also, Hasan and Yun (2017) conclude that corporate social responsibility is one of the important drivers for corporate reputation, 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 contrast, in the context of corporate innovation the study of Ullah and Sun (2021) didn't find significant relationship between corporate social responsibility and corporate innovation. Therefore, this study suggests the following hypothesis:

H1: There is no significant relationship between dimensions of the research variables (corporate social responsibility, social innovation, sustainable corporate reputation and demographic characteristics).

6.2) The impact of corporate social responsibility on sustainable corporate reputation.

To identify the nature of the impact of corporate 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, 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.According to the above, the researchers suggest the second hypothesis as follows:

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

H2: There is no significant effect of the dimensions of corporate social responsibility on sustainable corporate reputation.

6.3) The impact of corporate social responsibility on social innovation.

The shared goal of corporate social responsibility and social innovation is the advancement of society. However, CSR is a traditional philanthropy and old paradigm which is somewhat no longer sufficient in coping with current economic situation. In today’s knowledge and innovation-led economy, organizations can no longer affords to get involve in charity and community services merely to fulfill social return without having any sort of economic payoffs. This situation warrants organizations moving beyond CSR to Corporate Social Innovation (Jali et al. 2017). Accordingly, Szegedi et al. (2016) in their study shed light on the way in which CSR which is integrated into corporate strategy can itself be considered a social innovation. Moreover, Jali et al. (2017) highlighted that CSR is somewhat no longer sufficient and not an ideal solution for organizations to hold on in order to leverage social, economic and technological payoffs concurrently where corporate social innovation is the new outstanding paradigm that are more sufficient within the era of knowledge and innovation led economy. From another perspective, the study of Odunlade (2017) proposes a basis of distinction between corporate social innovation and CSR and thereby corporate social innovation is a distinct corporate practice. Therefore, this study suggests the following hypothesis:   

H3: There is no significant effect of the dimensions of corporate social responsibility on social innovation.

6.4) The impact of social innovation onsustainable corporate reputation.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Due to the novelty of the concept of social innovation, there is still a dearth of studies addressing its relationship with other variables such as corporate reputation, sustainability, or even the composite concept of sustainable corporate reputation. According to Corkindale and Belder (2009) strength of corporate reputation possessed by a corporation can influence the likelihood of adoption of their innovative new service by potential consumers. Regarding the relationship between social innovation and sustainability, Piccarozzi (2017) indicates that the realization of social innovation is often based on sustainable actions and/or initiatives, but simultaneously fosters sustainability. Therefore, this study suggests the following hypothesis:

H4: There is no significant effect of the dimensions of social innovation on sustainable corporate reputation.

6.5) The impact of corporate social responsibility onsustainable corporate reputation through social innovation.

The scarcity of studies dealing with the impact of social innovation on the sustainable corporate reputation is reflected in the lack of studies dealing with the tripartite relationship regarding the impact of corporate social responsibility on the sustainable corporate reputation through social innovation.

In this context, the researcher addressed the impact of corporate social responsibility on the sustainable corporate reputation when mediating social innovation in just the following 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 hypothesis:

 

 

 

 

H5: There is no significant effect of the dimensions of corporate social responsibility on sustainable corporate reputation through mediating social innovation.

6.6) Differences in the views of customers of private universities in Egypt regarding the dimensions of corporate social responsibility, social innovation 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 and social innovation, 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 corporate social responsibility, social innovation and the sustainable corporate reputation according to demographic variables in the study of Santos (2011) that found no difference regarding awareness of CSR 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:  

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

H6: There are no significant differences between the views of customers of private universities in the Arab Republic of Egypt regarding the dimensions of corporate social responsibility, social innovation and sustainable corporate reputation according to the differences of the demographic characteristics.

This hypothesis includes the following sub-hypotheses:

6/1 There are no significant differences in the customers’ views regarding the study's variables according to the gender.

6/2 There are no significant differences in the customers’ views regarding the study's variables according to place of residence.

6/3 There are no significant differences in the customers’ views regarding the study's variables according to the academic specialization.

6/4 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

Social Innovation

 

 

                          H5

CSR

 

Economic

 

Content/ Product

 

Process

 

Empowerment

 

SCR

 

Corporate Reputation

 

 

 

 

Legal

                                      H3                                    H4

 

Ethical

 

Sustainable Image

                               

 

Philanthropic

                                         H2

                                                       H6

Demographic Characteristics

                                 H6                                              H6                                                                  

                                                     

               Direct Relation  

                Indirect Relation

 

 

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 concept of social innovation, which is a modern concept in terms of addressing the idea at the Arab level, as the Arab library suffers from a lack of addressing that concept according to the researcher's knowledge.

- This study deals with the causes of social innovation represented in the corporate social responsibility, and the consequences of social innovation represented in the dimensions of sustainable corporate reputation, which is a very rare relationship that is addressed in the Arab and foreign countries.  

- This study shows the nature of the indirect relationship between corporate social responsibility and sustainable corporate reputation, which passes through social innovation, unlike most of the study that dealt with this relationship as a direct relationship.

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 corporate social responsibility that would have a positive functional impact, if it is proven that the corporate social responsibility have a significant impact on both social innovation and 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 (6^th 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 corporate social responsibility and social innovation orientation or not, 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 (6^th 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 (6^th 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); Bulut, et al.  (2013); 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 480 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 415 usable questionnaires were collected with a response rate of (86.46%). Table 1 shows the sample characteristics. The result of the t-test showed that there were no significant differences.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Table (1)

Response Rate

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). Corporate social responsibility was measured by a construct involves 18 statements adopted from Cherobon (2014). Students evaluated corporate social responsibility within their universities regarding environmental and social issues. This study categorizes corporate social responsibility into economic, philanthropic, legaland ethical social responsibility. Economic dimension of corporate 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. ethicaldimension measuring statements ranging from 16-18. 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Social innovation was measured by a construct involves 21 statements adopted from Bulut, et al.  (2013), this study classified social innovation into content/product, process and empowerment dimensions. Content/product dimension of social innovation was measured by statements from 19-23, while the second dimension; i.e. process dimension measurement statements ranging from 24-31, the third dimension; i.e. empowerment dimension measuring statements ranging from 32-39. 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 40-46, while the second dimension; i.e. sustainable image measuring statements ranging from 47-49. 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 (Henseler et al., 2009). 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 CSR	Q1	0.796	0.889	0.502	0.71636943
	Q2	0.775
	Q3	0.787
	Q4	0.581
	Q5	0.564
Philanthropic CSR	Q6	0.683	0.772	0.539	0.758937527
	Q7	0.635
	Q8	0.872
	Q9	0.883
	Q10	0.534
Legal CSR	Q11	0.704	0.760	0.510	0.72607734
	Q12	0.728
	Q13	0.630
	Q14	0.796
	Q15	0.702
Ethical CSR	Q16	0.757	0.743	0.575	0.699780786
	Q17	0.725
	Q18	0.791

Source: Prepared by the researchers based on statistical analysis

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Continue 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
Content/ product dimension	Q19	0.705	0.912	0.515	0.731849017
	Q20	0.763
	Q21	0.697
	Q22	0.792
	Q23	0.617
Process Dimension	Q24	0.656	0.923	0.503	0.802616917
	Q25	0.670
	Q26	0.638
	Q27	0.826
	Q28	0.861
	Q29	0.723
	Q30	0.621
	Q31	0.635
Empower-ment Dimension	Q32	0.895	0.932	0.553	0.845569113
	Q33	0.774
	Q34	0.751
	Q35	0.716
	Q36	0.759
	Q37	0.670
	Q38	0.633
	Q39	0.722
Corporate Reputation	Q40	0.751	0.911	0.515	0.792965572
	Q41	0.771
	Q42	0.829
	Q43	0.801
	Q44	0.612
	Q45	0.627
	Q46	0.592
Sustainable Image	Q47	0.765	0.751	0.553	0.672390517
	Q48	0.833
	Q49	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

Source: Prepared by the researchers based on statistical analysis

          9.1) Assessing the correlation coefficients among variables’ dimensions:

H1: There is no significant relationship between dimensions of the research variables (corporate social responsibility, social innovation, sustainable corporate reputation and demographic characteristics).

 

 

Table (4)

Pearson correlation Matrix 

Source: Prepared by the researchers based on statistical analysis.

In this study, Pearson's r correlation among variables’ dimensions can be shown in table (4). The results included in this table ensure a positive significant relationship among all dimensions for each variable. Additionally, the results ensure a positive significant relationship between corporate social responsibility and social innovation, positive significant relationship between social innovation and sustainable corporate reputation, and positive significant relationship between corporate social responsibility and sustainable corporate reputation. Moreover, it is obvious there is no significant relationship among all demographic characteristics and all dimensions for each variable.

Accordingly, H1 was partially rejected because of the positive significant relationship among all variables and the insignificant relationship among all demographic characteristics and all dimensions for each variable.

 

 

 

9.2) The Direct relationships:

H2: There is no significant effect of the dimensions of corporate social responsibility on sustainable corporate reputation.

 

Table (5)

 The results of testing direct relationship between CSR and SCR

Source: Prepared by the researchers based on statistical analysis.

According to table (5), it is clear that economic CSR has a significant direct positive impact on sustainable image, and corporate reputation (β = 0.217, 0.340, P < 0.05) respectively. Additionally, philanthropic CSR also has a significant direct positive impact on sustainable image and corporate reputation (β = 0.211, 0.112 P < 0.05) respectively. Moreover, legal CSR also has a significant direct positive impact on sustainable image and corporate reputation (β = 0.243, 0.272, P < 0.05) respectively. Finally, ethical CSR also has a significant direct positive impact on sustainable image and corporate reputation (β = 0.211, 167 P < 0.05) respectively. Therefore, H2 which represents the effect of corporate social responsibility on sustainable corporate reputation was totally rejected.

 

H3: There is no significant effect of the dimensions of corporate social responsibility on social innovation.

Table (6)

The results of testing direct relationship between CSR and SI

Hypothesis		Hypothesis direction			Estimate	Sig.	Hypotheses result
H3	H3a	Economic CSR		Content/product dimension	0.365	0.000	rejected
	H3b	Philanthropic CSR		Content/product dimension	0.336	0.000	rejected
	H3c	Legal CSR		Content/product dimension	0.285	0.001	rejected
	H3d	Ethical CSR		Content/product dimension	0.333	0.004	rejected
	H3e	Economic CSR		Process Dimension	0.321	0.000	rejected
	H3f	Philanthropic CSR		Process Dimension	0.341	0.000	rejected
	H3g	Legal CSR		Process Dimension	0.225	0.004	rejected
	H3h	Ethical CSR		Process Dimension	0.251	0.000	rejected
	H3i	Economic CSR		Empowerment Dimension	0.303	0.000	rejected
	H3j	Philanthropic CSR		Empowerment Dimension	0.329	0.000	rejected
	H3k	Legal CSR		Empowerment Dimension	0.256	0.000	rejected
	H3l	Ethical CSR		Empowerment Dimension	0.218	0.001	rejected

Source: Prepared by the researchers based on statistical analysis.

According to table (6), it is clear that economic CSR has a significant direct positive impact on content/product dimension, process dimension and empowerment dimension (β = 0.365, 0.321, 0.303, P < 0.05) respectively. Additionally, philanthropic CSR also has a significant direct positive impact on content/product dimension, process dimension and empowerment dimension (β = 0.336, 0.341, 0.329, P < 0.05) respectively. Moreover, legal CSR also has a significant direct positive impact on content/product dimension, process dimension and empowerment dimension (β = 0.285, 0.225, 0.256, P < 0.05) respectively. Finally, ethical CSR also has a significant direct positive impact on content/product dimension, process dimension and empowerment dimension (β = 0.333, 0.251, 0.218, P < 0.05) respectively. Therefore, H3 which represents the effect of corporate social responsibility on social innovation was totally rejected.

H4: There is no significant effect of the dimensions of social innovation on sustainable corporate reputation.

Table (7)

The results of testing direct relationship between SI and SCR

Hypothesis		Hypothesis direction			Estimate	Sig.	Hypotheses result
H4	H4a	Content/product dimension		Sustainable Image	0.386	0.031	rejected
	H4b	Process Dimension		Sustainable Image	0.479	0.002	rejected
	H4c	Empowerment Dimension		Sustainable Image	0.365	0.004	rejected
	H4d	Content/product dimension		Corporate Reputation	0.391	0.000	rejected
	H4e	Process Dimension		Corporate Reputation	0.541	0.002	rejected
	H4f	Empowerment Dimension		Corporate Reputation	0.174	0.029	rejected

Source: Prepared by the researchers based on statistical analysis.

According to table (7), it is clear that content/product dimension has a significant direct positive impact on sustainable image and corporate reputation (β = 0.386, 0.391 P < 0.05) respectively. Additionally, process dimension also has a significant direct positive impact on sustainable image and corporate reputation (β = 0.479, 0.541 P < 0.05) respectively. Moreover, empowerment dimension also has a significant direct positive impact on sustainable image and corporate reputation (β = 0.365, 0.174 P < 0.05) respectively. Therefore, H4 which represents the effect of social innovation on sustainable corporate reputation was totally rejected.

 

 

 

9.3) The Indirect Relationships:

Table (8) shows the results of testing the mediating effect of social innovation in the relationship between corporate social responsibility and sustainable corporate reputation.

Table (8)

The results of testing the indirect relationships

Source: Prepared by the researchers based on statistical analysis.

As shown above from the table (8), there are several results can be illustrated belows:

• The content/product dimension fully mediating the relationship between corporate social responsibility and sustainable image, where all indirect effects are significant.

 

 

 

• The process dimension is fully mediating the relationship between corporate social responsibility and sustainable image, where all indirect effects are significant.
• The empowerment dimension is partially mediating the relationship between corporate social responsibility and sustainable image, where all indirect effects are significant except the dimensions legal CSR and ethical CSR.
• The content/product dimension is fully mediating the relationship between corporate social responsibility and corporate reputation, where all indirect effects are significant.
• The process dimension is fully mediating the relationship between corporate social responsibility and corporate reputation, where all indirect effects are significant.
• The empowerment dimension has no mediation effect on the relationship between corporate social responsibility and corporate reputation, where all indirect effects are insignificant.

Therefore, H5 which represents the indirect effect of social innovation on the relationship between corporate social responsibility and sustainable corporate reputation was partially rejected because the social innovation is partially mediating the relationship.

9.4) 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:

 

 

 

 

 

 

9.4.1) 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 (9) Kruskal-Wallis test results for differences among universities' customers about chosen private university
Variables		Kruskal-Wallis		Result
		Chi-Square	Sig.
Independent Variable: Corporate Social Responsibility	Economic CSR	0.515	0.915	insignificant
	Philanthropic CSR	1.034	0.793	insignificant
	Legal CSR	2.357	0.502	insignificant
	Ethical CSR	1.555	0.670	insignificant
Independent Variable: Corporate Social Responsibility		0.948	0.814	insignificant
Mediator Variable: Social Innovation	Content/product dimension	7.026	0.071	insignificant
	Process Dimension	0.376	0.945	insignificant
	Empowerment Dimension	1.254	0.740	insignificant
Mediator Variable: Social Innovation		1.008	0.799	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 (9), 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.

9.4.2) 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 (10)  Mann-Whitney test results for differences between universities' customers about gender
Variables		Mann-Whitney		Result
		Z-Value	Sig.
Independent Variable: Corporate Social Responsibility	Economic CSR	-0.006	0.995	insignificant
	Philanthropic CSR	-0.276	0.782	insignificant
	Legal CSR	-0.697	0.486	insignificant
	Ethical CSR	-0.280	0.780	insignificant
Independent Variable: Corporate Social Responsibility		-0.291	0.771	insignificant
Mediator Variable: Social Innovation	Content/product dimension	-0.751	0.452	insignificant
	Process Dimension	-0.174	0.862	insignificant
	Empowerment Dimension	-0.487	0.626	insignificant
Mediator Variable: Social Innovation		-0.307	0.759	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 (10), 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 (11) : Mann-Whitney test results for differences between universities' customers about place of residence
Variables		Mann-Whitney		Result
		Z-Value	Sig.
Independent Variable: Corporate Social Responsibility	Economic CSR	-0.254	0.800	insignificant
	Philanthropic CSR	-0.359	0.720	insignificant
	Legal CSR	-0.547	0.584	insignificant
	Ethical CSR	-0.068	0.946	insignificant
Independent Variable: Corporate Social Responsibility		-0.320	0.749	insignificant
Mediator Variable: Social Innovation	Content/product dimension	-0.384	0.701	insignificant
	Process Dimension	-0.234	0.815	insignificant
	Empowerment Dimension	-0.448	0.654	insignificant
Mediator Variable: Social Innovation		-0.182	0.856	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 (11), 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 (12)  Mann-Whitney test results for differences between universities' customers about academic specialization
Variables		Mann-Whitney		Result
		Z-Value	Sig.
Independent Variable: Corporate Social Responsibility	Economic CSR	-0.041	0.967	insignificant
	Philanthropic CSR	-0.390	0.697	insignificant
	Legal CSR	-0.717	0.474	insignificant
	Ethical CSR	-0.478	0.633	insignificant
Independent Variable: Corporate Social Responsibility		-0.375	0.708	insignificant
Mediator Variable: Social Innovation	Content/product dimension	-0.934	0.350	insignificant
	Process Dimension	-0.211	0.833	insignificant
	Empowerment Dimension	-0.558	0.577	insignificant
Mediator Variable: Social Innovation		-0.350	0.726	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 (12), 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, H6 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 corporate social responsibility, social innovation 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 corporate social responsibility on sustainable corporate reputation among students of private universities in Egypt when mediating social innovation.

The results of the statistical analysis showed that:

1) The first hypothesis which represents the relationship among dimensions of the research variables (corporate social responsibility, social innovation, sustainable corporate reputation and demographic characteristics) was partially rejected because of the positive significant relationship among all variables and the insignificant relationship among all demographic characteristics and all dimensions for each variable.

2) The second hypothesis which represents the effect of corporate social responsibility on sustainable corporate reputation was totally rejected.

3) The third hypothesis which represents the effect of corporate social responsibility on social innovation was totally rejected.

4) The fourth hypothesis which represents the effect of social innovation on sustainable corporate reputation was totally rejected.

5) The fifth hypothesis which represents the indirect effect of social innovation on the relationship between corporate social responsibility and sustainable corporate reputation was partially rejected because the social innovation is partially mediating the relationship.

6) The sixth 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 corporate social responsibility, social innovation 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, with paying attention to scientific research by moving towards innovation in a way that serves society and adopting social innovation which is reflected in improving the university’s image in light of intense competition

Therefore, private universities should incorporate environmental plans into its overall business plans. Moreover, private universities should invest heavily in social innovation through the following:

- Educate staff and students about the need to properly save energy, water, and material.

- Providing environmentally friendly services based on low pollution technologies.

- Adopting waste recycling initiatives.

- Reducing the use of environmental pollutants such as plastic and other petroleum derivatives.

- Exploiting renewable energy in a providing its services compatible with the environment such as relying on solar energy as a source of electricity.

10.3) Recommendations for Future Research:

The current study has presented useful theoretical and practical implications it also has some futurerecommendations:

- 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 and social innovation 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.

Article View: 334

PDF Download: 322