Corporate Social Responsibility and Business Philosophies among Hungarian Business Students

Berényi, László ORCID: and Deutsch, Nikolett (2021) Corporate Social Responsibility and Business Philosophies among Hungarian Business Students. Sustainability, 13 (17). DOI

PDF - Requires a PDF viewer such as GSview, Xpdf or Adobe Acrobat Reader

Official URL:


This study attempts to identify a relationship between the perception of corporate social responsibility (CSR) and the business philosophies (Machiavellianism, moral objectivism, legalism, ethical relativism, social Darwinism) among Hungarian business students. The goals of the investigations are (1) to explore the perception of CSR, (2) to analyze which business philosophies describe the students, and (3) to characterize typical patterns by means of cluster analysis. The data collection was performed by means of a self-administered, voluntary online survey including the Attitudes Toward Business Ethics Questionnaire (ATBEQ) instrument. Grouping effects were tested with non-parametric analysis of variance; cluster analysis used the K-Means method. The research sample consisted of 865 responses. Machiavellianism was found to be the most dominant business philosophy among the respondents. The cluster analysis shows three patterns, namely (1) CSR believers, (2) large business-oriented, and (3) skeptic. The correlations between CSR perception and business philosophy scores confirm the relationship assumed. The understanding of the value system of the students allows targeted curriculum development for the higher education institutions and, as a result, a more effective approach to CSR applications. Moreover, the result on business philosophies itself provides a contribution to cross-national contribution in the field. Future research should include the extension of the analysis to other students and business practitioners.

Item Type:Article
Uncontrolled Keywords:CSR perception, ATBEQ, business ethics, business philosophies, business students
Subjects:Economic development
Social welfare, insurance, health care

1. Moore, J.E.; Mascarenhas, A.; Bain, J.; Straus, S.E. Developing a comprehensive definition of sustainability. Implement. Sci. 2017,
12, 1–8. [CrossRef] [PubMed]
2. United Nations. Transforming Our World: The 2030 Agenda for Sustainable Development. 2015. Available online: https:
// (accessed on 5 August 2021).
3. Salvia, A.L.; Filho, W.L.; Brandli, L.L.; Griebeler, J.S. Assessing research trends related to Sustainable Development Goals: Local
and global issues. J. Clean. Prod. 2019, 208, 841–849. [CrossRef]
4. Szennay, Á.; Szigeti, C.; Kovács, N.; Szabó, D.R. Through the Blurry Looking Glass—SDGs in the GRI Reports. Resources 2019,
8, 101. [CrossRef]
5. Szegedi, K.; Fülöp, G.Y.; Bereczk, Á. Fogalmi meghatározások, modellek és példák a vállalati társadalmi felel˝osség és a tár-sadalmi
innováció hazai és nemzetközi irodalmából Észak-Magy. Strat. Füzetek 2015, 12, 122–128.
6. Braun, R. A vállalatok politikája: Vállalati társadalmi felel˝osségvállalás, vállalati közösségek és a vállalati stratégia jöv˝oje.
Vezetéstudomány 2013, 44, 18–28. [CrossRef]
7. Friedman, M. The Social Responsibility of Business is to Increase its Profits. New York Times Magazine, 13 September 1970; pp.
8. Rappaport, A. Creating Shareholder Value: A Guide for Managers and Investors; Free Press: New York, NY, USA, 1997.
9. Steurer, R.; Langer, M.E.; Konrad, A.; Martinuzzi, A. Corporations, Stakeholders and Sustainable Development I: A Theoretical
Exploration of Business–Society Relations. J. Bus. Ethics 2005, 61, 263–281. [CrossRef]
10. Bowen, H.R. Social Responsibilities of the Businessman; Harper: New York, NY, USA, 1953.
11. International Organization for Standardization2010. Guidance on Social Responsibility (ISO Standard No. 26000). Available
online: (accessed on 1 June 2021).
12. Graafland, J.; Mazereeuw-van der Duijn Schouten, C. Motives for Corporate Social Responsibility. De Econ. 2012, 160, 377–396.
13. Lewis, S. Reputation and corporate responsibility. J. Commun. Manag. 2003, 7, 356–366. [CrossRef]
14. H ˛abek, P. CSR Reporting Practices in Visegrad Group Countries and the Quality of Disclosure. Sustainability 2017, 9, 2322.
15. Bhatia, A.; Makkar, B. Extent and drivers of CSR disclosure: Evidence from Russia. Transnatl. Corp. Rev. 2019, 11, 190–207.
16. Tulcanaza-Prieto, A.; Shin, H.; Lee, Y.; Lee, C.W. Relationship among CSR Initiatives and Financial and Non-Financial Corporate
Performance in the Ecuadorian Banking Environment. Sustainability 2020, 12, 1621. [CrossRef]
17. Dahlsrud, A. How corporate social responsibility is defined: An analysis of 37 definitions. Corp. Soc. Responsib. Environ. Manag.
2008, 15, 1–13. [CrossRef]
18. Fassin, Y.; Van Rossem, A.; Buelens, M. Small-Business Owner-Managers’ Perceptions of Business Ethics and CSR-Related
Concepts. J. Bus. Ethics 2011, 98, 425–453. [CrossRef]
19. De Bakker, F.G.; Groenewegen, P.; den Hond, F. A Bibliometric Analysis of 30 Years of Research on Corporate Social Responsibility
and Corporate Social Performance. Bus. Soc. 2005, 44, 283–317. [CrossRef]
20. Carroll, A.B. A History of Corporate Social Responsibility: Concepts and Practices. In The Oxford Handbook of Corporate Social
Responsibility; Crane, A., Matten, D., McWilliams, A., Moon, J., Siegel, D.S., Eds.; Oxford University Press: Oxford, UK, 2009.
21. Commission of the European Communities. Promoting a European Framework for Corporate Social Responsibility; COM (2001) 366;
European Commission: Brussels, Belgium, 2001.
22. European Commission. Communication from the Commission to the European Parliament. The Council. The European Eco-nomic and
Social Committee and the Committee of the Regions. A Renewed EU strategy 2011–2014 for Corporate Social Responsibility; COM(2011)
681; European Commission: Brussels, Belgium, 2011. Available online:
uri=COM:2011:0681:FIN:EN:PDF (accessed on 1 June 2021).
23. McAleer, S. Friedman’s Stockholder Theory of Corporate Moral Responsibility. Teach. Bus. Ethics 2003, 7, 437–451. [CrossRef]
24. Joyner, B.E.; Payne, D. Evolution and Implementation: A Study of Values, Business Ethics and Corporate Social Responsibility. J.
Bus. Ethics 2002, 41, 297–311. [CrossRef]
25. Carroll, A.B. The pyramid of corporate social responsibility: Toward the moral management of organizational stakeholders. Bus.
Horiz. 1991, 34, 39–48. [CrossRef]
26. Stevens, E. Business Ethics; Paulist Press: New York/Ramsey, NY, USA, 1979.
27. Miesing, P.; Preble, J.F. A comparison of five business philosophies. J. Bus. Ethics 1985, 4, 465–476. [CrossRef]
28. Neumann, Y.; Reichel, A. The Development of Attitudes Toward Business Ethics Questionnaire (ATBEQ): Concepts, Dimensions, and
Relations to Work Values; Working Paper; Department of Industrial Engineering and Management, Ben Gurion University of the
Negev: Be’er Sheva, Israel, 1987.
29. Clark, D.; Tanner, T.; Pham, L.N.; Lau, W.K.; Nguyen, L.D. Attitudes toward business ethics: Empirical investigation on different
moral philosophies among business students in Vietnam. Int. J. Bus. Gov. Ethics 2020, 14, 123–142. [CrossRef]
30. Davis, M.A.; Andersen, M.G.; Curtis, M.B. Measuring Ethical Ideology in Business Ethics: A Critical Analysis of the Ethics
Position Questionnaire. J. Bus. Ethics 2001, 32, 35–53. [CrossRef]
31. Preble, J.F.; Reichel, A. Attitudes Towards Business Ethics of Future Managers in the US and Israel. J. Bus. Ethics 1988, 7, 941–949.
32. Kneževi´c, B.; Kurnoga, N.; Šimurina, N. Multivariate analysis of attitudes on financial and other aspects of business ethics of
future managers. Croat. Oper. Res. Rev. 2017, 8, 93–105. [CrossRef]
33. Small, M.W. Attitudes towards business ethics held by Western Australian students: A comparative study. J. Bus. Ethics 1992, 11,
745–752. [CrossRef]
34. Moore, R.S.; Radloff, S.E. Attitudes towards business ethics held by South African students. J. Bus. Ethics 1996, 15, 863–869.
35. Sims, R.L.; Gegez, A.E. Attitudes towards Business Ethics: A Five Nation Comparative Study. J. Bus. Ethics 2004, 50, 253–265.
36. Kum-Lung, C.; Teck-Chai, L. Attitude towards Business Ethics: Examining the Influence of Religiosity, Gender and Education
Levels. Int. J. Mark. Stud. 2010, 2, 226–232. [CrossRef]
37. Bageac, D.; Furrer, O.; Reynaud, E. Management Students’ Attitudes Toward Business Ethics: A Comparison Between France and
Romania. J. Bus. Ethics 2011, 98, 391–406. [CrossRef]
38. Price, G.; Van Der Walt, A.J. Changes in Attitudes Towards Business Ethics Held by Former South African Business Management
Students. J. Bus. Ethics 2013, 113, 429–440. [CrossRef]
39. Shields, R.; Comegys, C.; Lupton, R.; Takei, H. Undergraduate Attitudes Toward Business Ethics: A Cross-Cultural Comparison.
J. Stud. Educ. 2013, 3, 72. [CrossRef]
40. Gulova, A.; Eryilmaz, I.; Ispirli, D. Attitudes towards business ethics: An empirical study on Turkish senior business students.
Int. Proc. Econ. Dev. Res. 2013, 65, 42–47. [CrossRef]
41. Phatshwane, P.M.D.; Mapharing, M.; Basuhi, E.J. Attitudes towards Business Ethics Held by Accountancy and Finance Students
in the University of Botswana. Int. J. Bus. Manag. 2014, 9, 17–29. [CrossRef]
42. Carroll, A.B.; Shabana, K.M. The Business Case for Corporate Social Responsibility: A Review of Concepts, Research and Practice.
Int. J. Manag. Rev. 2010, 12, 85–105. [CrossRef]
43. Jenkins, H. A Critique of Conventional CSR Theory: An SME Perspective. J. Gen. Manag. 2004, 29, 37–57. [CrossRef]
44. Santos, M.J. CSR in SMEs: Strategies, practices, motivations and obstacles. Soc. Responsib. J. 2011, 7, 490–508. [CrossRef]
45. Kechiche, A.; Soparnot, R. CSR within SMEs: Literature Review. Int. Bus. Res. 2012, 5, 97–104. [CrossRef]
46. Pham, L.N.; Nguyen, L.D.; Favia, M.J. Business students’ attitudes toward business ethics: An empirical investigation in Vietnam.
J. Asia Bus. Stud. 2015, 9, 289–305. [CrossRef]
47. Sims, R.L. Comparing ethical attitudes across cultures. Cross Cult. Manag. Int. J. 2006, 13, 101–113. [CrossRef]
48. Pallant, J. SPSS Survival Manual: A Step by Step Guide to Data Analysis Using IBM SPSS, 7th ed.; Open University Press: London,
UK, 2020.
49. Sajtos, L.; Mitev, A. SPSS Kutatási és Adatelemzési Kézikönyv; Alinea: Budapest, Hungary, 2007.
50. Pálvölgyi, T.; Nagypál, N.C.; Szlávik, J.; Csáfor, H.; Csete, M. Striking Oil? CSR and the EU Integration Processes: The Example of
Hungary. In Corporate Social Responsibility in Europe. Rhetoric and Realities; Barth, R., Wolff, E., Eds.; Edward Elgar: Cheltenham,
UK; Northampton, UK, 2009; pp. 269–288.
51. Christie, R.; Geis, F. Studies in Machiavellianism; Academic Press: New York, NY, USA, 1970.
52. Czibor, A.; Vincze, O.; Bereczkei, T. Feelings and motives underlying Machiavellian behavioural strategies; narrative reports in a
social dilemma situation. Int. J. Psychol. 2014, 49, 519–524. [CrossRef]
53. Maccormick, N. The Ethics of Legalism. Ratio Juris 1989, 2, 184–193. [CrossRef]

ID Code:6792
Deposited By: MTMT SWORD
Deposited On:15 Sep 2021 12:45
Last Modified:15 Sep 2021 12:45

Repository Staff Only: item control page


Downloads per month over past year

View more statistics