Attitudes of University Students Regarding Potential Conflicts in Socially Responsible Companies

Abstract

Corporate social responsibility (CSR) is increasingly viewed as a strategic management tool for companies to draw in candidates. In this arena, international responsible rankings such as ‘The Great Place to Work’, ‘Family Responsible Employer Index (FREE)’ or ‘The Best Companies for Working Mothers’ put emphasis on the value of responsible behaviours, not only for surviving in the market, but also to ‘win the war for talent’. Using a sample of Spanish University students, this research aims to analyse the process of selecting responsible organizations to work and whether there is a possible future conflict of interest by students between their own and organizational values. Surprisingly, the university students assessed two opposing situations with the highest values: of looking to change employer and of letting time pass in order to ignore the conflict. The implications of the students’ assessments and the related factors which affect their decision-making criteria are explored in this article.

Keywords

Attitudes attraction of employees university students conflict of interest corporate social responsibility socially responsible companies

Introduction

As a result of the increasing market competition to attract and retain employees with the highest qualifications and growth potential, McKinsey & Company (1997) coined the term ‘war for talent’. This concept shows how those companies which incorporate in their recruitment criteria a concern to hire highly valuable professionals may obtain competitive advantages via human capital. Based on this idea, Bhattacharya, Sen and Korschun (2008) highlighted how CSR could act as an instrument which helps companies to ‘win this war’, attracting, retaining and maintaining the best employees in the labour market.

Considering this background, many researchers start by regarding the prospective candidates as one of the most relevant stakeholders for companies (Albinger & Freeman, 2000; Sen, Bhattacharya & Korschun, 2006; Turban & Greening, 1997). Following this train of thought, university students achieve the highest education in the market, being perceived by companies as one of the most valuable capitals to attract (Al Ariss, Cascio & Paauwe, 2014; Ng, Schweitzer & Lyons 2010). One of the ways for companies to make this possible is to uncover the socially responsible actions and behaviours through annual CSR reports and information based on responsible indices.

Some of the famous international responsible indicators are The Great Place to Work, Best Employers, 100 Most Desirable MBA Employers, The Best Companies for Working Mothers, Top 50 Companies for Diversity, Workplace Equality Index, Top 50 Employers and Corporate Equality Index. These indices remark upon the importance of encouraging responsible human resource policies in order to meet the labour expectations of workers. Given the current demand for responsible behaviours for companies (Kopel & Brand, 2012; Lee, Park & Lee 2013; Santhosh & Baral, 2015), it is understandable that the best qualified university students, after finishing their education, want to work for socially responsible companies (SRCs) in order to properly develop their careers. However, the personal values of the candidates at the moment they start to work for the SRC do not always fit their ethical conditions, codes and institutionalized responsible behaviours. Therefore, it is interesting for future human resource managers to know what the possible ethical and labour conflicts of prospective candidates are in their future incorporation to an SRC. The theoretical background of this article is supported in the foundations of stakeholders’ perspectives, putting emphasis on prospective employees as a key stakeholder (Argandoña, 1998; Freeman, 1984; Lee et al., 2013; Turker & Altuntas, 2013). In order to shed light on the potential conflicts of students at the moment they select an SRC to work for, and what factors affect these attitudes, we conducted research in Spanish universities. The results show how students’ attitudes to potential conflicts are affected by variables such as area of knowledge, professional experience or the fact of combining their studies with a job outside the university. Additionally, the study illustrates that the highest assessments of university students in cases of potential conflict were ‘a change of job’ and ‘letting time pass to return to the previous situation’. The academic and professional implications of the study will be discussed at the end of the article.

Theoretical Background: University Students as Key Stakeholders

The development of the stakeholder perspective implies the transformation of the traditional bilateral relationship established between the firm and other relevant groups such as shareholders and owners, into additional multilateral relationships, which include the wide range of components engaged in organizational activities: employees, unions, customers, suppliers, the government, investors, media, competitors or the local community (Argandoña, 1998; Freeman, Harrison, Wicks, Parmar & De Colle, 2010). Literature shows that the origin of the stakeholder concept arises from the field of business management, which is introduced by Freeman and defined as ‘any group or individual which can affect or be affected by the decisions and the achievement of corporate objectives’ (Freeman, 1984, p. 25). Taking into consideration the definition of Freeman, and the classification provided by Clarkson (1995), who divided the groups involved in firm activities in two (primary¹ and secondary²), regarding their nature and the relationship established with the company, the prospective employees should be classified into the second group. The potential candidates do not have a contract or legal relationship with the company, but they can play a relevant role in organizational success from the moment they start to work for it. Hence, in their future role as prospective employees, university students should be classified in the second group of stakeholders, as shown in Figure 1.

Figure 1.

Source: Freeman (1984) and Clarkson (1995).

Researchers such as Cable and Turban (2001), Ng and Burke (2006) and Kavanagh and Drennan (2008) have examined the relevance of the characteristics desired by students in their future choice of a company in which to work. The findings of these researchers show the key implications for designing appropriate strategies of attraction and retention by employers and companies. More specifically, both studies provide the evidence of the usefulness of the concept ‘employer knowledge’, defined as ‘a set of beliefs that a job seeker holds about a potential employer’. This knowledge can help in understanding the profile of job applicants and the information about an organization, what students expect from the organization as employees and whether they want to work for these companies. Based on the results, and the proposal of Bhattacharya et al. (2008) on using corporate social responsibility (CSR) practices to attract the best candidates, this study aims to analyze the potential conflicts of university students in the process of selecting an SRC to work for. Researchers such as Barnea and Rubin (2010) justify that high expectations within these responsible firms can cause different conflicts among the different stakeholders of the companies. Therefore, it is expected that students can have positive attitudes towards an SRC.

The results could provide a starting point for recruiters and companies as a way to avoid conflict in companies which apply CSR actions. As Onuoha and Barendrecht (2012) report, conflict management in CSR organizations is difficult to avoid, due to the ethical, environmental and predominant social values integrated in their culture and environment.

Hereafter, we start analyzing the factors which may affect the potential conflict for students.

Review of Factors which Affect University Students’ Attitudes

The literature about the perception and decision criteria of university students is large and detailed according to different disciplines such as Psychology, Education or Business (Karagiannopoulou & Christodoulides, 2005; Lizzio, Wilson & Simons, 2002; Stevenson & Bodkin, 1998). An increasing number of articles begin by examining the university students’ perceptions of a globalized phenomenon such as CSR and Business Ethics (Sobczak, Debucquet & Havard 2006; Wang & Juslin, 2012). More specifically, works such as Bodkin and Stevenson (2007), in an analysis of perceptions about ethical marketing practices, found that it is very difficult to predict unethical behaviour, despite existing experimental techniques which affect ethical decisions.

The classic literature about the attitudes and perceptions of CSR by students highlights the contributions by Arlow (1991, p. 68), which finds relevant personal factors affecting university students’ perceptions. Arlow suggested that students’ ethical attitudes are influenced more by exposure to the larger socio-cultural norms than by education in specific disciplines. Additionally, the researcher highlighted the non-significant effect of area of knowledge, reflecting that business students are no less ethical than non-business students. Moreover, Arlow found a positive correlation in gender, demonstrating that females behave more ethically than males. Another interesting result of the analysis was the negatively related effect between age and responsible assessments. Finally, according to Arlow (1991), the working experience plays a significant role in the explanation of ethical student assessments.

Other studies such as Borkowski and Ugras (1992, p. 973) found that an ethical position in a decision by the students seems to change with age—maturity being a cause of this change—but it was impossible to determine this significant effect with one single factor. Furthermore, Burdett (2003) indicates that there are factors related to the personal and professional experience which possibly predict the decision criteria of students. In particular, Burdett (2003, p. 158) identified a key factor as maturity in students, explaining how, in the Japanese context, students usually have considerable life experience before starting their degrees in different workplaces. According to Bird (2010), ‘in Japan, older students are known as shakaijin gakusei, which literally means “students who belong to adult society”’. In practical terms, a shakaijin student is one who has spent significant time not being a student, for example, while working or raising a family full time. Moreover, Furrer et al. (2010) confirm that greater maturity among students produces effects which probably include more social and ethical consciousness and can affect their decisions when they start working for a company or making a decision.

The review of literature puts emphasis on variables such as age, work experience and the area of knowledge as main determinant factors which affect university students’ perceptions. However, little has been said about the factors able to affect the decision-criteria of students in case of potential conflict in the workplace of a SRC. A conflict of interest, according to Thompson (1993), could be defined as ‘a set of conditions in which professional judgment concerning a primary interest tends to be unduly influenced by a secondary interest’. According to Pedersen and Andersen (2006), it is expected that companies which apply CSR practices will behave as good corporate citizens, introducing the code of conduct and a philosophy of management aimed at reducing conflicts.

Contemplating the previous background of contributions, this research aimed to test the effects of three factors which probably affect the decision criteria about conflict situations: area of knowledge, gender (Arlow, 1991) and the maturity of students (Borkowski & Ugras, 1992; Burdett, 2003; Furrer et al., 2010). Considering the findings of Bokowski and Ugras, we divided maturity into two measurable items: the combination of studying and working in a paid job and professional experience. Thus, there are three hypotheses to be tested:

Hypothesis 1: The attitudes of university students to the potential conflicts between their values and the values of an SRC are determined by the area of knowledge.

Hypothesis 2: The attitudes of university students to the potential conflicts between their values and the values of an SRC are determined by gender.

Hypothesis 3: The attitudes of university students to the potential conflicts between their values and the values of an SRC are determined by their maturity.

Hypothesis 3.1: The attitudes of university students to the potential conflicts between their values and the values of an SRC are determined by the fact of combining their studies with a job.

Hypothesis 3.2: The attitudes of university students to the potential conflicts between their values and the values of an SRC are determined by their professional experience.

Research Methodology

The research method is quantitative, based on a questionnaire designed in two different parts. The first block of items is aimed at measuring factors which potentially affect the assessments of university students. The second part of the questionnaire is linked to the university students’ perceptions of SRCs and the possibility of working for these organizations.

Measures

The first block of items aims to identify factors which potentially affect the decision criteria and perceptions of university students. The area of knowledge was divided into six categories according to the degree of specialization: Arts and Humanities, Science, Health Sciences, Social and Legal Sciences, Engineering and Architecture and a final category, Other, in which we include the rest of studies. The second variable within this block is dichotomy, and it asks whether the students combine their studies with a paid job. The third variable is professional experience, and this was measured in four categories (0 = no experience, 1 = less than a year, 2 = between 1 and 2 years, 3 = more than two years).

The second part of the questionnaire is linked to the university students’ perception about SRCs and the possibility to work for these organizations and what might be their attitudes in case of conflict with their own values and the organizational values, using a rank preference (1 = the best option, 6 = the worst option). We proposed several alternatives to students in case of any conflict in the order in which they made their preference rank: I would apply for another job; I would speak about my objections with the board of the company; I would let time pass in order to ignore the conflict; I should try to join other people who share my interests; I should try to control the situation in a quiet manner; I should search for alternative value judgements with the board of the company aimed at not producing conflict.

Other control variables such as gender and age were measured. Age was divided into six categories according to natural academic years to control this fact (1 = less than 19 years; 2 = between 19 and 20; 3 = between 21 and 22; 4 = between 23 and 24; 5 = between 25 and 26; 6 = more than 27 years).

Sample

The questionnaires were sent to nine Spanish universities in the Andalusia region at Bachelor and Master levels in order to have richer results from any course and degree. Before sending the questionnaires via email, we staged a pretest in order to proper define and validate the items of the two blocks of the questionnaire. The results were received in the middle of 2010, obtaining a valid sample of 1,596 university students (Table 1).

Table 1.

Profile of the Sample (N = 1596)

Variables	Categories	Percentages (%)
Gender	Male	46.3
	Female	53.7
Combination of studies with a paid job	Yes	35.6
	No	64.4
Professional experience	No experience	67.2
	Less than one year	4.5
	Between 1 and 2 years	5
	More than 2 years	23.3
Age	1. (less than 19 years)	4.8
	2. (between 19 and 20 years)	21.4
	3. (between 21 and 22 years)	21.6
	4. (between 23 and 24 years)	16.1
	5. (between 25 and 26 years)	10.7
	6. (more than 27)	25.4
Area of knowledge	Arts and Humanities	7.1
	Science	8.1
	Health Sciences	10
	Social and Legal Sciences	49
	Engineering and Architecture	22.8
	Other	3

Source: Authors’ own elaboration.

According to the results reflected in Table 1, 46.3 per cent of the questionnaires were answered by males and 53.7 per cent by females. Within the sample, 35.6 per cent of students combine their studies with paid work. Regarding the variable professional experience, 67.2 per cent do not have any experience and 23.3 per cent of students have experience of two or more years. With respect to the variable age, a minority of students were below 19 years (4.8 per cent), with the greatest part of the sample having students more than 27 years of age (25.4 per cent). And, we also encountered an important participation of students between 19 and 20 years (21.4 per cent) and between 21 and 22 years (21.6 per cent).

Also, the sample was classified by area of knowledge into six categories: Arts and Humanities (7.1 per cent), Science (8.1 per cent), Health Sciences (10 per cent), Social Sciences and Law (49 per cent), Engineering and Architecture (22.8 per cent) and Other (3 per cent).

Finally, students were asked what would be their behaviours or attitudes towards CSR as future employees in the event of conflict between their own values and those of the company. A descriptive analysis was performed to measure the different scores in the alternatives.

According to the descriptive analysis reflected in Table 2, the aspects which obtain the highest mean scores by students in case of conflict in a responsible company were: an application for another job (4.55) and letting time pass after the conflict (4.87). The lowest mean scores were received for the search for alternative values with the board of directors (2.47) and for trying to speak with the board of the company (2.47). Despite increased knowledge of CSR in social media, a few students chose to approach a reconciliation position between their values as employees and the organization’s values.

Table 2.

Descriptive Analysis about Alternative Conflict Situations (N = 1596)

Statistics	OtherJob	SpeakBoard	LeaveTime	JoinInterest	ControlSituation	Approx.Values
N	Valid values	1,471	1,467	1,415	1,433	1,458	1,471
	Missing values	125	129	181	163	138	125
Mean	4.55	2.57	4.87	3.54	2.75	2.47
Std Dev.	1.62	1.38	1.44	1.40	1.28	1.32
Minimum	1	1	1	1	1	1
Maximum	6	6	6	6	6	6

Source: Authors’ own elaboration.

In order to test whether these conflict assessments are affected by other variables, we performed a correlation matrix to obtain a general impression of relationships among the items.

Table 3 shows significant correlations between the area of knowledge and the four possible conflict scenarios assessed: applying for another job (0.56), letting time pass (–0.09), trying to align own interests with those of other people (0.056) and controlling the situation (–0.053). Moreover, there is another significant correlation at a 0.01 level between the fact of combining studies with paid work and the alternative decision of applying for other job (–0.084). Finally, the factor of professional experience presents a significant correlation at a 0.05 level with the alternative decision made by students of applying for another job (–0.065).

Test of Hypotheses

In order to test the hypotheses mentioned earlier, we implemented a one-factor analysis of variance (ANOVA). We introduced the area of knowledge, the combination of studies with a paid work and the professional experience as factors in the ANOVA test with regard to the dependant variables that are the alternative decisions of students in the case of a potential conflict in a responsible company.

The first ANOVA (Table 4) aimed at testing Hypothesis 1, reporting three significant relationships between the area of knowledge and the decision of applying for another job (p-value = 0.000), letting time pass (p-value = 0.000) and controlling the situation (p-value = 0.007).

In a comparison of mean values within these significant relationships, it is noted that, in the first decision about applying for another job, students of Engineering and Architecture give the highest values to this option (4.83). About the possibility to let time pass, students of Arts and Humanities and Science gave the highest scores (5.32 and 5.20, respectively). Finally, the alternative of controlling the situation in case of conflict was assessed in the highest way by students framed within the label Other (3.24). Based on the ANOVA results, we concluded that Hypothesis 1 is accepted. Consequently, area of knowledge, as a factor, can explain university students’ attitudes to the potential conflicts in SRCs.

Additionally, it is necessary to test whether gender can affect the decision of students regarding a potential conflict between their values and those of an SRC’s (Table 5).

As shown in Table 5, gender is not a significant variable in accounting for explanation of the attitudes of students to potential conflicts in SRCs. The descriptive analysis reports similar means and a low standard deviation among the answers of males and females, which probably affects the non-significant effect on potential decision about conflict.

The third ANOVA analyses shows how one of the aspects of maturity defined in the article, the fact of combining studies with a paid job, can affect the decision of students regarding a potential conflict in an SRC (Table 6).

Table 3.

Pearson Correlation Analysis

Variables		Area Knowledge	Gender	Studies Paid Job	Prof. Experience	Other Job	Speak Board	LeaveTime	JoinInterest	ControlSituation	Approx.Values
Area of knowledge	Correlation	1	–0.059*	0.047	0.069**	0.056*	0.021	–0.090**	0.075**	–0.053*	–0.015
	Sig.		0.020	0.068	0.006	0.030	0.427	0.001	0.004	0.044	0.576
	N	1,596	1,575	1,521	1,596	1,471	1,467	1,415	1,433	1,458	1,471
Gender	Correlation		1	–0.026	–0.039	0.002	–0.006	0.016	0.005	–0.021	–0.010
	Sig.			0.307	0.126	0.936	0.809	0.555	0.846	0.422	0.696
	N		1,575	1,501	1,575	1,455	1,452	1,401	1,419	1,444	1,456
Studies paid job	Correlation			1	0.922**	–0.084**	–0.008	0.034	0.034	0.029	–0.009
	Sig.				0.000	0.002	0.776	0.219	0.211	0.276	0.726
	N			1,521	1,521	1,401	1,399	1,349	1,365	1,390	1,401
Prof. experience	Correlation				1	–0.065*	–0.011	0.039	0.029	0.027	–0.029
	Sig.					0.012	0.672	0.145	0.272	0.310	0.267
	N				1,596	1,471	1,467	1,415	1,433	1,458	1,471
Other job	Correlation					1	–0.088**	–0.219**	–0.108**	–0.309**	–0.349**
	Sig.						0.001	0.000	0.000	0.000	0.000
	N					1,471	1,432	1,400	1,417	1,429	1,432
Speak board	Correlation						1	–0.439**	–0.069**	–0.284**	–0.088**
	Sig.							0.000	0.010	0.000	0.001
	N						1,467	1,401	1,420	1,433	1,443
Leave time	Correlation							1	–0.287**	0.136**	–0.151**
	Sig.								0.000	0.000	0.000
	N							1,415	1,407	1,407	1,408
Join interest	Correlation								1	–0.301**	–0.218**
	Sig.									0.000	0.000
	N								1,433	1,416	1,420
Control sit.	Correlation									1	–0.098**
	Sig.										0.000
	N									1,458	1,442
Approx. value	Correlation										1
	Sig.
	N

Source: Authors’ own elaboration.

Notes: ** Correlation is significant at 0.01 (two tales).

* Correlation is significant at 0.05 (two tales).

Table 4.

ANOVA—Results of the First Hypothesis Testing

Decision in Case of Potential Conflict	Area of Knowledge	N	Mean	Std Deviation	F-Statistic	p-value
Other job	Arts and Humanities	106	4.28	1.459	5.882	0.000
	Science	114	4.27	1.751
	Health Sciences	155	4.68	1.650
	Social and Legal Sciences	704	4.52	1.641
	Engineering and Architecture	352	4.83	1.481
	Other	40	3.70	1.951
	Total	1,471	4.55	1.624
Speak board	Arts and Humanities	107	2.45	1.333	1.096	0.361
	Science	114	2.48	1.397
	Health Sciences	156	2.73	1.438
	Social and Legal Sciences	702	2.53	1.357
	Engineering and Architecture	349	2.65	1.426
	Other	39	2.44	1.314
	Total	1,467	2.57	1.383
Leave time	Arts and Humanities	106	5.32	1.306	4.464	0.000
	Science	105	5.20	1.289
	Health Sciences	152	4.78	1.448
	Social and Legal Sciences	672	4.83	1.528
	Engineering and Architecture	344	4.74	1.361
	Other	36	5.22	1.222
	Total	1,415	4.87	1.449
Join interest	Arts and Humanities	107	3.26	1.449	2.150	0.057
	Science	109	3.51	1.259
	Health Sciences	154	3.36	1.427
	Social and Legal Sciences	675	3.54	1.401
	Engineering and Architecture	348	3.69	1.429
	Other	40	3.63	1.427
	Total	1,433	3.54	1.408
Control sit.	Arts and Humanities	106	2.96	1.301	3.174	0.007
	Science	113	2.79	1.353
	Health Sciences	154	2.86	1.329
	Social and Legal Sciences	697	2.75	1.260
	Engineering and Architecture	351	2.58	1.253
	Other	37	3.24	1.342
	Total	1,458	2.75	1.283
Approx. value	Arts and Humanities	107	2.60	1.400	1.044	0.390
	Science	113	2.33	1.137
	Health Sciences	156	2.42	1.295
	Social and Legal Sciences	704	2.50	1.358
	Engineering and Architecture	352	2.45	1.347
	Other	39	2.15	1.065
	Total	1,471	2.47	1.329

Source: Authors’ own elaboration.

Table 5.

ANOVA—Results of the Second Hypothesis Testing

Decision in Case of Potential Conflict	Gender	N	Mean	Std. Deviation	F-Statistic	p-value
Other job	Male	672	4.55	1.648	0.006	0.936
	Female	783	4.55	1.602
	Total	1455	4.55	1.623
Speak board	Male	672	2.57	1.408	0.058	0.809
	Female	780	2.55	1.361
	Total	1452	2.56	1.383
Leave time	Male	644	4.85	1.466	0.349	0.555
	Female	757	4.90	1.441
	Total	1401	4.88	1.452
Join interest	Male	654	3.53	1.384	0.038	0.846
	Female	765	3.55	1.420
	Total	1419	3.54	1.403
Control sit.	Male	663	2.78	1.274	0.645	0.422
	Female	781	2.73	1.293
	Total	1444	2.75	1.284
Approx. value	Male	668	2.49	1.351	0.152	0.696
	Female	788	2.46	1.317
	Total	1456	2.47	1.332

Source: Authors’ own elaboration.

Table 6.

ANOVA—Results of the Third Hypothesis (3.1) Testing

Decision in Case of Potential Conflict	Combine Studies with a Paid Job	N	Mean	Std. Deviation	F-Statistic	p-value
Other job	No	908	4.66	1.570	10.028	0.002
	Yes	493	4.37	1.698
	Total	1,401	4.56	1.621
Speak board	No	910	2.57	1.380	0.081	0.776
	Yes	489	2.55	1.393
	Total	1,399	2.56	1.384
Leave time	No	880	4.83	1.469	1.515	0.219
	Yes	469	4.94	1.410
	Total	1,349	4.87	1.449
Join interest	No	891	3.51	1.410	1.569	0.211
	Yes	474	3.61	1.395
	Total	1,365	3.55	1.405
Control sit.	No	906	2.72	1.285	1.188	0.276
	Yes	484	2.80	1.276
	Total	1,390	2.75	1.282
Approx. value	No	914	2.47	1.314	0.123	0.726
	Yes	487	2.45	1.351
	Total	1,401	2.46	1.326

Source: Authors’ own elaboration.

Table 6 reports only one significant relationship between the factor of combining studies with a paid job and the dependant variable of applying for another job (p-value = 0.002). The mean values show that students who are not combining their studies with a paid job gave more score (4.66) than the students who are only dedicated to university duties (4.37). Despite only one alternative meeting the criteria of ANOVA to be statistically significant, Hypothesis 3.1 is accepted, showing how the potential solutions for conflict in a socially responsible workplace are affected by the fact of combining the studies with a paid job.

Finally, through an ANOVA, Table 7 reports whether the alternative decisions in case of conflict are affected by the professional experience of students.

Table 7.

ANOVA—Results of the Third Hypothesis (3.2) Testing

Decision in Case of Potential Conflict	Professional Experience	N	Mean	Std. Deviation	F-Statistic	p-value
Other job	No experience	994	4.64	1.582	4.240	0.005
	Less than 1 year	69	4.07	1.834
	1 and 2 years	72	4.60	1.633
	More than 2 years	336	4.38	1.676
	Total	1,471	4.55	1.624
Speak board	No experience	994	2.57	1.374	0.475	0.700
	Less than 1 year	69	2.71	1.496
	1 and 2 years	71	2.65	1.494
	More than 2 years	333	2.52	1.363
	Total	1,467	2.57	1.383
Leave time	No experience	962	4.85	1.463	1.123	0.339
	Less than 1 year	67	4.79	1.619
	1 and 2 years	69	4.77	1.457
	More than 2 years	317	5.00	1.362
	Total	1,415	4.87	1.449
Join interest	No experience	975	3.51	1.413	1.936	0.122
	Less than 1 year	69	3.71	1.330
	1 and 2 years	69	3.26	1.221
	More than 2 years	320	3.64	1.440
	Total	1,433	3.54	1.408
Control sit.	No experience	989	2.72	1.285	0.572	0.633
	Less than 1 year	68	2.88	1.287
	1 and 2 years	71	2.77	1.416
	More than 2 years	330	2.80	1.248
	Total	1,458	2.75	1.283
Approx. value	No experience	999	2.48	1.317	1.639	0.179
	Less than 1 year	68	2.69	1.509
	1 and 2 years	71	2.61	1.516
	More than 2 years	333	2.36	1.281
	Total	1,471	2.47	1.329

Source: Authors’ own elaboration.

Results show only one significant relation between the professional experience and the decision of applying to another company (p-value = 0.005), allowing us to accept Hypothesis 3.2. Within this relationship, students who do not have any professional experience attached higher values to the possibility of changing the company in case of conflict.

Conclusions and Implications

This study raised the existence of factors which probably affect the attitudes of Spanish University students to potential conflicts in a socially responsible firm. The empirical evidence allows us to accept Hypotheses 1 and 3, confirming the preliminary results of Arrow (1991), Bodkin and Stevenson (2007) and Borkowski and Ugras (1992) about the significant effects of variables such as the area of knowledge and university students’ maturity. However, there are non-significant effects of gender in the attitudes of university students regarding the possibility of facing a conflict in an SRC.

Hence, the Spanish University’s context provides more evidence on top of the previous findings. From an institutional level of analysis, experiences conducted a few years ago, such as the Aspen Institute Report,³ had tried to analyze a similar focus among North American University students. In this case, the report of Aspen Institute Center for Business Education (2008) emphasized that the scores given to the companies which implement CSR practices are affected by the area of knowledge. More specifically, in degrees related to Administration and Management, it is normal that subjects such as Accounting and Auditing, Marketing, Strategy and Organizational Behaviour are taught and possibly influence the student ratings regarding CSR issues. Additionally, in management areas, it is common to work with case studies and study complementary CSR issues, encouraging the debate and reinforcing the position of students over some concepts.

With regard to the possible conflict in a responsible company, Spanish University students showed as the main alternatives assessed the possibility of looking for another job and of resignation, letting time pass. However, the lowest scores were given to the chance of speaking with the directors to solve the conflict or trying to reach a compromise of values with partners within the company. In an opposite way, according to the Aspen Institute, in the case of a possible conflict of values, American students attached higher values to solutions aimed at mediation and rapprochement of positions with the governing body of the company. These differences may come about due to increased training in ethics and CSR in the North American context, as well as the largest number of debates proposed in American classrooms.

As a main implication, it can be observed that Spanish University students perceive potential conflict as a negative form and try to be practical in ways to avoid it. More research is needed in various European contexts in order to make comparison among countries and cultures about gender, due to there being no reflected significant effects in the current article. This fact could have been produced because the opinion of students, independent of gender, is more standardized in universities, and the gender programmes of Government and Public Administrations are reducing past inequalities and perceptions.

Footnotes

Notes

References

Al Ariss

, Cascio

W. F.

, & Paauwe

(2014). Talent management: Current theories and future research directions. Journal of World Business, 49(2), 173–179.

Albinger

H. S.

, & Freeman

S. J.

(2000). Corporate social performance and attractiveness as an employer to different job seeking populations. Journal of Business Ethics, 28(3), 243–253.

Argandoña

(1998). The stakeholder theory and the common good. Journal of Business Ethics, 17(10), 1093–1102.

Arlow

(1991). Personal characteristics in college students’ evaluations of business ethics and corporate social responsibility. Journal of Business Ethics, 10(1), 63–69.

Aspen Institute Center for Business Education. (2008). Where will they lead? MBA students attitudes about business and society. Retrieved 28 March 2016, from http://www.aspeninstitute.org/sites/default/files/content/docs/bsp/SAS_PRINT_FINAL.PDF

Barnea

, & Rubin

(2010). Corporate social responsibility as a conflict between shareholders. Journal of Business Ethics, 97(1), 71–86.

Bhattacharya

C. B.

, Sen

, & Korschun

(2008). Using corporate social responsibility to win the war for talent. MIT Sloan management review, 49(2), 37–44.

Bird

(2010). By definition, who are ‘adult learners’ anyway? The Japan Times. Retrieved 1 March 2016, from http://www.japantimes.co.jp/life/2010/05/30/general/by-definition-who-are-adult-learners-anyway/

Bodkin

C. D.

, & Stevenson

T. H.

(2007). University students’ perceptions regarding ethical marketing practices: Affecting change through instructional techniques. Journal of Business Ethics, 72(3), 207–228.

10.

Borkowski

S. C.

, & Ugras

Y. J.

(1992). The ethical attitudes of students as a function of age, sex and experience. Journal of Business Ethics, 11(12), 961–979.

11.

Burdett

(2003). Making groups work: University students’ perceptions. International Education Journal, 4(3), 177–191.

12.

Cable

D. M.

, & Turban

D. B.

(2001). Establishing the dimensions, sources and value of job seekers’ employer knowledge during recruitment. In Ferris

G. E.

(Ed.), Research in personnel and human resource management (pp. 115–163). New York, NY: Elsevier Science.

13.

Clarkson

(1995). A stakeholder framework for analyzing and evaluating corporate social responsibility. The Academy of Management Review, 20(1), 92–118.

14.

Freeman

R. E.

(1984). Strategic management: A stakeholder approach. Boston, MA: Pitman.

15.

Freeman

R. E.

, Harrison

J. S.

, Wicks

A. C.

, Parmar

B. L.

, & De Colle

(2010). Stakeholder theory: The state of the art. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

16.

Furrer

, Egri

C. P.

, Ralston

D. A.

, Danis

A. P. W.

M., Reynaud

, Naoumova

A. P. I.

, Molteni

, ... & Starkus

, Darder

, Dabic

& Furrer-Perrinjaquet

(2010). Attitudes toward corporate responsibilities in Western Europe and in Central and East Europe. Management International Review, 50(3), 379–398.

17.

Karagiannopoulou

, & Christodoulides

(2005). The impact of Greek University students’ perceptions of their learning environment on approaches to studying and academic outcomes. International Journal of Educational Research, 43(6), 329–350.

18.

Kavanagh

M. H.

, & Drennan

(2008). What skills and attributes does an accounting graduate need? Evidence from student perceptions and employer expectations. Accounting and Finance, 48(2), 279–300.

19.

Kopel

, & Brand

(2012). Socially responsible firms and endogenous choice of strategic incentives. Economic Modelling, 29(3), 982–989.

20.

Lee

E. M.

, Park

S. Y.

, & Lee

H. J.

(2013). Employee perception of CSR activities: Its antecedents and consequences. Journal of Business Research, 66(10), 1716–1724.

21.

Lizzio

, Wilson

, & Simons

(2002). University students’ perceptions of the learning environment and academic outcomes: Implications for theory and practice. Studies in Higher Education, 27(1), 27–52.

22.

E. S.

, & Burke

R. J.

(2006). The next generation at work-business students’ views, values and job search strategy: Implications for universities and employers. Education + Training, 48(7), 478–492.

23.

E. S.

, Schweitzer

, & Lyons

S. T.

(2010). New generation, great expectations: A field study of the millennial generation. Journal of Business and Psychology, 25(2), 281–292.

24.

Onuoha

, & Barendrecht

(2012). Issues between company and community: Towards terms of reference for CSR—conflict management systems. Retrieved from http://ssrn.com/abstract=2230102orhttps://dx-doi-org.web.bisu.edu.cn/10.2139/ssrn.2230102.

25.

Pedersen

E. R.

, & Andersen

(2006). Safeguarding corporate social responsibility (CSR) in global supply chains: How codes of conduct are managed in buyer–supplier relationships. Journal of Public Affairs, 6(3–4), 228–240.

26.

Santhosh

, & Baral

(2015). A conceptual framework for exploring the impacts of corporate social responsibility on employee attitudes and behaviour. Journal of Human Values, 21(2) 127–136.

27.

Sen

, Bhattacharya

C. B.

, & Korschun

(2006). The role of corporate social responsibility in strengthening multiple stakeholder relationships: A field experiment. Journal of the Academy of Marketing Science, 34(2), 158–166.

28.

Sobczak

, Debucquet

, & Havard

(2006). The impact of higher education on students’ and young managers’ perception of companies and CSR: An exploratory analysis. Corporate Governance: The international Journal of Business in Society, 6(4), 463–474.

29.

Stevenson

T. H.

, & Bodkin

C. D.

(1998). A cross-national comparison of university students’ perceptions regarding the ethics and acceptability of sales practices. Journal of Business Ethics, 17(1), 45–55.

30.

Thompson

D. F.

(1993). Understanding financial conflicts of interest. The New England Journal of Medicine, 329(8), 573–576.

31.

Turban

D. B.

, & Greening

D. W.

(1997). Corporate social performance and organizational attractiveness to prospective employees. Academy of Management Journal, 40(3), 658–672.

32.

Turker

, & Altuntas

(2013). Ethics of social responsibility to indirect stakeholders: A strategic perspective. International Journal of Business Governance and Ethics, 8(2), 137–154.

33.

Wang

, & Juslin

(2012). Values and corporate social responsibility perceptions of Chinese University students. Journal of Academic Ethics, 10(1), 57–82.