Responsabilidade socioambiental das empresas: os consumidores percebem como sendo um valor organizacional?

Costa, Marconi Freitas da; Santos, Leissiane Leisse; Angelo, Claudio Felisoni de

Acessibilidade / Reportar erro

Brasil

Español English

sumário « anterior atual seguinte »

Sumário

ORIGINAL ARTICLE • Gest. Prod. 27 (4) • 2020 • https://doi.org/10.1590/0104-530X4688-20 copiar

Responsabilidade socioambiental das empresas: os consumidores percebem como sendo um valor organizacional?

Autoria SCIMAGO INSTITUTIONS RANKINGS

Resumo:

Este estudo investiga se os consumidores percebem a responsabilidade socioambiental (RSA) das empresas como um valor organizacional adquirido ou como sendo existente por outros fatores. Foram adotadas como referência três organizações de diferentes segmentos (cosméticos, fast food e confecções do tipo surf e street wear). A coleta de dados foi realizada por meio de levantamento com os consumidores no momento em que estes estavam no estabelecimento para efetuar uma compra. Os resultados permitem inferir que uma parte considerável dos consumidores não avalia a responsabilidade socioambiental das empresas como um valor organizacional, mas, como uma estratégia corporativa. Além disso, os consumidores não deixam de comprar de uma organização que não tem responsabilidade socioambiental. Contudo, as empresas que divulgam que têm uma postura responsável diante das questões socioambientais, mas que na prática isso não acontece, os consumidores punem deixando de comprar nessas organizações.

Palavras-chave:
Percepção; Consumidores; Responsabilidade socioambiental

Motives	Description	Authors
Ethical	- The aim is to maximize profit and social well-being and that of the groups that relate with the organization in some way.	Lantos (2001)Lantos, G. P. (2001). The boundaries of strategic corporate social responsibility. Journal of Consumer Marketing, 18(7), 595-632. http://dx.doi.org/10.1108/07363760110410281. http://dx.doi.org/10.1108/07363760110410... , Windsor (2006)Windsor, D. (2006). Corporate social responsibility: three key approaches. Journal of Management Studies, 43(1), 93-114. http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-6486.2006.00584.x. http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-6486.20... , Mendonça & Gonçalves (2002)Mendonça, J. R. C. D., & Gonçalves, J. C. S. (2002). Responsabilidade social nas empresas: uma questão de imagem ou substância? In Anais do 26º Encontro da Associação Nacional dos Programas de Pós-Graduação em Administração. Salvador: ANPAD.
	- With this ethical motivation, understanding SER as being linked to financial interests is a short-sighted and superficial view.
	- Stating that an organization relates with its stakeholders in an ethical way means that it presents conformity between actions, values, policies, culture, and strategic vision. The ethical actions take place with transparent internal and external communication or with actions that favor social development. When the company adopts ethical values, it engages in including them into the corporate culture, monitoring and practicing them.
Philanthropical	- It is the company’s contribution to the common good, the result of a general concern about society.	Lantos (2001)Lantos, G. P. (2001). The boundaries of strategic corporate social responsibility. Journal of Consumer Marketing, 18(7), 595-632. http://dx.doi.org/10.1108/07363760110410281. http://dx.doi.org/10.1108/07363760110410... , Branco & Rodrigues (2006)Branco, M. C., & Rodrigues, L. L. (2006). Corporate social responsibility: and resource-based perspectives. Journal of Business Ethics, 69(2), 111-132. http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s10551-006-9071-z. http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s10551-006-907...
Complying with norms	- It should be implemented, since there is guiding legislation. However, it represents a cost.	Miles & Covin (2000)Miles, M. P., & Covin, J. G. (2000). Environmental marketing: a source of reputational, competitive, and financial advantage. Journal of Business Ethics, 23(3), 299-311. http://dx.doi.org/10.1023/A:1006214509281. http://dx.doi.org/10.1023/A:100621450928... , Munilla & Miles(2005)Munilla, L., & Miles, M. P. (2005). The Corporate social responsibility continuum as a component of stake holder theory. Business and Society Review, 110(4), 371-387. http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/j.0045-3609.2005.00021.x. http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/j.0045-3609.20...
Due to pressures	- Pressure-exerting groups demand compensation from companies that translates into social responsibility. If the company does not attend to these groups, it may compromise its capacity to create value.	Miles et al. (2002)Miles, M. P., Munilla, L. S., & Covin, J. G. (2002). The constant gardener revisited: the effect of social blackmail on the marketing concept, innovation, and entrepreneurship. Journal of Business Ethics, 41(3), 287-295. http://dx.doi.org/10.1023/A:1021241129501. PMid:12755097. http://dx.doi.org/10.1023/A:102124112950... , Munilla & Miles (2005)Munilla, L., & Miles, M. P. (2005). The Corporate social responsibility continuum as a component of stake holder theory. Business and Society Review, 110(4), 371-387. http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/j.0045-3609.2005.00021.x. http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/j.0045-3609.20...
Economic	- The ethics that prevail in this situation are utilitarian, in which any good action has the aim of increasing profits.	Ashley (2003)Ashley, P. A. (2003). Ética e responsabilidade social nos negócios. São Paulo: Saraiva., Windsor (2006)Windsor, D. (2006). Corporate social responsibility: three key approaches. Journal of Management Studies, 43(1), 93-114. http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-6486.2006.00584.x. http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-6486.20...
Economic	- In this sense, considering that consumers are ever more informed and conscious, they tend to seek products that offer benefits for society and the environment.
Strategic	- Investment that results in competitive advantage. This responsible behavior regarding social and environmental questions represents the opening up of new business opportunities, as well as enabling the companies to enter new markets. With this, a greater value is generated for the customers and, consequently, a greater economic gain for the organization.	Miles & Covin (2000)Miles, M. P., & Covin, J. G. (2000). Environmental marketing: a source of reputational, competitive, and financial advantage. Journal of Business Ethics, 23(3), 299-311. http://dx.doi.org/10.1023/A:1006214509281. http://dx.doi.org/10.1023/A:100621450928... , Munilla & Miles (2005)Munilla, L., & Miles, M. P. (2005). The Corporate social responsibility continuum as a component of stake holder theory. Business and Society Review, 110(4), 371-387. http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/j.0045-3609.2005.00021.x. http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/j.0045-3609.20...
Fad	- Companies are only temporarily engaged in SER actions. This occurs because this behavior is perceived as the most adequate one for the time and the situation experienced.	Tomei & Lerner (1997)Tomei, P. A., & Lerner, A. (1997). Os modismos gerenciais e a dinâmica organizacional. In Anais do Encontro Anual da Associação Nacional de Pós-graduação e Pesquisa em Administração. Rio de Janeiro: ANPAD.

Variables	Code	Mean	S.D.^* * Standard deviation. Source: Data from the field research.
1. I know that this company practices social and environmental responsibility.	AWASER1	3.13	1.251
2. I believe that this company really practices social and environmental responsibility.	AWASER2	3.21	1.050
3. This company discloses its social and environmental actions because it actually practices this.	AWASER3	2.99	1.064

Variables	Code	Mean	S.D.^* * Standard deviation. Source: Data from the field research.
4. This company’s social and environmental responsibility provides benefits for the whole of society.	OPIBENEF1	3.45	1.337
5. It is fundamental for the collective good that this company practices social and environmental responsibility.	OPIBENEF2	4.22	1.007
6. I believe that companies should have social and environmental responsibility.	OPIBENEF3	4.31	0.998
7. I buy from this company because it has social and environmental responsibility.	OPIBENEF4	2.63	1.256

Variables	Code	Mean	S.D.^* * Standard deviation. Source: Data from the field research.
8. I believe that this company has social and environmental responsibility as a value.	BELIEF1	3.08	1.280
9. More and more, companies adhere to social and environmental responsibility.	BELIEF2	3.36	1.272
10. This company’s social and environmental responsibility is not a value that it adopts, but rather due to other interests.	BELIEF3	3.28	1.265
11. This company’s social and environmental responsibility is a question of fad.	BELIEF4	3.24	1.098
12. This company’s social and environmental responsibility is a question of corporate strategy.	BELIEF5	3.47	1.268
13. Social and environmental responsibility should go beyond obeying the law.	BELIEF6	4.04	1.228

Variables	Code	Mean	S.D.^* * Standard deviation. Source: Data from the field research.
14. If I discovered that this company did not practice social and environmental responsibility, I would stop consuming its products.	PUNISH1	2.93	1.294
15. I stop buying from a company when I discover that it does not do what it discloses.	PUNISH2	3.62	1.364

Construtos	Items (Code)	KMO	Bartlett Sphericity		Factor	Cronbach
Construtos	Items (Code)	KMO	_X2	P-value	Factor	Cronbach
Awareness of SER	AWASER1	0.623	94.327	0.000	0.811	0.713
	AWASER 2				0.870
	AWASER 3				0.714
Opinions of the benefits of SER	OPIBENEF1	0.663	95.641	0.000	0.725	0.724
	OPIBENEF2				0.803
	OPIBENEF3				0.720
	OPIBENEF4				0.562
Belief about SER	BELIEF1	0.683	87.236	0.000	0.513	0.754
	BELIEF2				0.604
	BELIEF3				0.746
	BELIEF4				0.778
	BELIEF5				0.709
	BELIEF6				0.567
Punishment for the inexistence of SER	PUNISH1	0.600	29.164	0.002	0.791	0.700
Punishment for the inexistence of SER	PUNISH2	0.600	29.164	0.002	0.791	0.700

Variable	Companies
	A (n= 50)		B (n= 48)		C (n= 46)
	Mean	S.D.^* * Standard deviation. Source: Data from the field research. Note. F = variation between sample means / variation within samples; Significance level (Sig.).	Mean	S.D.	Mean	S.D.	F	Sig.
(Variable 1)	3.08	1.41	2.7	1.03	3.6	1.25	6.6	<0.05

Variable	Companies
	A (n= 50)		B (n= 48)		C (n= 46)
	Mean	S.D.^* * Standard deviation. Source: Data from the field research. Note. F = variation between sample means / variation within samples; Significance level (Sig.).	Mean	S.D.	Mean	S.D.	F	Sig.
(Variable 5)	4.4	0.86	4	1.05	4.26	1.08	2.01	>0.05

Variable	Companies
	A (n= 50)		B (n= 48)		C (n= 46)
	Mean	S.D.^* * Standard deviation. Source: Data from the field research. Note. F = variation between sample means / variation within samples; Significance level (Sig.).	Mean	S.D.	Mean	S.D.	F	Sig.
(Variable 8)	3.16	1.23	2.91	1.32	3.15	1.3	0.558	>0.05

Variable	Education
	1 (n= 27)		2 (n= 50)		3 (n= 52)		4 (n= 12)		5 (n= 03)
	Mean	S.D.^* * Standard deviation. Source: Data from the field research. Note. F = variation between sample means / variation within samples; Significance level (Sig.).	Mean	S.D.	Mean	S.D.	Mean	S.D.	Mean	S.D.	F	Sig.
(Variable 1)	3.185	1.3	3.34	1.2	2.788	1.3	3.333	1.4	4	1	1.81	<0.05

Education
Variable	1 (n= 27)		2 (n= 50)		3 (n= 52)		4 (n= 12)		5 (n= 03)
Variable	Mean	S.D.^* * Standard deviation. Source: Data from the field research. Note. F = variation between sample means / variation within samples; Significance level (Sig.).	Mean	S.D.	Mean	S.D.	Mean	S.D.	Mean	S.D.	F	Sig.
(Variable 6)	4.296	1.17	4.44	0.8	4.1	1.1	4.583	0.7	4.66	0.58	1.1	<0.05

Education
Variable	1 (n= 27)		2 (n= 50)		3 (n= 52)		4 (n= 12)		5 (n= 03)
Variable	Mean	S.D.^* * Standard deviation. Source: Data from the field research. Note. F = variation between sample means / variation within samples; Significance level (Sig.).	Mean	S.D.	Mean	S.D.	Mean	S.D.	Mean	S.D.	F	Sig.
(Variable 14)	2.667	1.41	2.82	1.3	3.1	1.2	3	1	4	1	1.1	<0.05

Universidade Federal de São Carlos Departamento de Engenharia de Produção , Caixa Postal 676 , 13.565-905 São Carlos SP Brazil, Tel.: +55 16 3351 8471 - São Carlos - SP - Brazil
E-mail: gp@dep.ufscar.br

Acompanhe os números deste periódico no seu leitor de RSS

[1] Source: Elaborated by the authors.