DOI: 10.1111/ijtd.12284 RE S EARCH ART I C L E Incorporating corporate social responsibility into graduate employability Zelda S. Bisschoff | Liezel Massyn Business School, University of the Free State, Bloemfontein, South Africa Correspondence Liezel Massyn, Business School, University of the Free State, PO Box 339, Bloemfontein 9301, South Africa. Email: massynL@ufs.ac.za Funding information University of the Free State; Eskom Abstract To remain sustainably viable in today's business environment, employers require appropriate skills to support their commitment to social responsibility. When recruiting skills, employers recognize that graduate attributes are essential indicators of the capability to render constructive workplace outcomes. Graduates need to develop these attributes to demon- strate their employability potential to prospective employers. However, existing employability capital frameworks do not include the graduate attributes needed to measure capability in corporate social responsibility (CSR) skills. The objective of this study was to determine which graduate attributes would support employability capability in CSR skills. Follow- ing a theoretical investigation, a mixed‐method exploratory study was undertaken in South Africa's state‐owned electricity provider to determine the employability attributes required by the organization in CSR management. The first phase involved a data collection survey, 302 managers and supervisors in South Africa's primary electricity provider rated a proposed 44 personal attributes linked to nine theoret- ical determined CSR skills and their importance in Int. J. Train. Dev. 2022;1–18. wileyonlinelibrary.com/journal/ijtd | 1 This is an open access article under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution‐NonCommercial‐NoDerivs License, which permits use and distribution in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited, the use is non‐commercial and no modifications or adaptations are made. © 2022 The Authors. International Journal of Training and Development published by Brian Towers (BRITOW) and John Wiley & Sons Ltd. http://orcid.org/0000-0002-8916-0830 http://orcid.org/0000-0002-5131-3336 mailto:massynL@ufs.ac.za https://wileyonlinelibrary.com/journal/ijtd CSR management. In the second phase, the survey results were validated through a separate Delphi technique with three Human Resource Development experts. Confirmatory factor analysis found significant relationships between the tested attributes and the nine CSR skills. The findings could assist graduates in understanding the attributes they need to develop to be deemed employable for CSR performance. Further- more, higher education institutions can include the results in curriculums to contribute to the development of CSR skills. Finally, the attributes and skills could be used to conceptualize a focused CSR employability capital, which employers can use to test employability potential. KEYWORD S corporate social responsibility, employability, employability capital, personal attributes, skills INTRODUCTION Globalization and technological advancement have touched the economic world in every facet. To face the new economic dispensation and associated societal disruption, appropriate skills have become a prominent commodity. The organizational need for appropriately skilled resources to face their dynamic operational environment gave birth to the term ‘employability’ as we know it today (Bridgstock & Jackson, 2019). An appropriate qualification is no longer deemed sufficient for employability as employers now also require graduates to demonstrate capability in the skills that would support their strategic intents and growth. The difference between graduate skills on offer and employer skills demand gives rise to the employability gap and graduate unemployment (McQuaid & Lindsay, 2005). Globally, unemployment is described as the Achilles heel of governments based on its effect on the socioeconomic environments of nations. Unemployment is largely deemed a factor of skill mismatches and not, as historically, the absence of employment opportunities. Without suitably competent employees, organizations cannot face challenges and manoeuvre consistent market changes (Singh et al., 2016). The many policies and higher education institution (HEI) strategies to address the unemployment challenge posed little progress as the employability gap expanded. In fact, the South African setting is daunting, considering the high overall unemployment rate of 34.5%, with a youth unemployment rate for ages below 25 is 63.9% (2019—30%) and for the age group 25–34 years at 42.1% (2019—40.1%) (StatsSA, 2020, 2022). Reporting the highest youth unemployment in the world, the South African scenario depicts a narrative of significant concern to the government, HEI and employers alike. HEIs' attempt to match the graduate skills proposition with what they deem to be the employers' skills needs (Boden & Nedeva, 2010). While various theories, constructs and 2 | approaches have been postulated to establish appropriate employability curricula, Wilson and Marnewick (2018) report that HEI curricula still cover only approximately 30% of the employer skills demands. Pressured for appropriate skills, employers raised a strong call for graduates to display value‐added soft skills that will assist them in manoeuvring the complex market and organizational environments (Cimatti, 2016). Accordingly, scholars turned their focus to establishing the fundamental technical and softer psychological personal attributes graduates should display to insert confidence with potential employers in their capability of future performance (Rothwell & Rothwell, 2017). These attributes are conceptualized and described as the capital required for employability (Tomlinson, 2017). The modelled capitals serve a dual purpose. On the one hand, it provides graduates with a framework of which attributes they should develop to be employable, and on the other hand, it assists employers with a baseline to assess future performance capability against their demanded skill requirements (Tomlinson, 2017). While this seems an easy quest, it is far from so. Still struggling to find their feet in a globalized economy, organizations are yet again faced with significant environmental changes—global warming, societal imbalances and depletion of critical supply materials. Forced by these external drivers, the employers shifted focus to corporate socially responsible (CSR) practices (Osagie et al., 2016). The shift in focus was partially forced by legislative requirements directing some accountability for protecting the planet and people, but more so by societal resistance against organizations that abuse the ecosystems and cause harm. Pressure is mounting from the green and socially conscious consumers who direct their purchase power towards organizations that demonstrate sound governance and ethical business practices for a sustainable world regarding people, profit and the planet (Enikolopov et al., 2018). Consumer opinion is a major driver of corporate image and a leading factor in corporate CSR investment decisions (Yoon et al., 2006). In turn, CSR is the primary driver of consumer behaviour and loyalty (Wu & Lin, 2014). It is not surprising that research reports a direct link between CSR practices and organizational profitability (Flammer, 2015; Okafor et al., 2021). The new‐world consumer brings an interesting stake to the employability table. While the historic employability contract flowed between employers' graduate skill demand and supply position, the relationship can now be described as one of triangularity where the consumer demands the CSR skills, the employer facilitates, and the graduate supplies the skill. Evidently, organizations recognize that merely implementing CSR legislation does not guarantee a sustainable market share. Consumers' demands require them to find new and innovative ways of thinking and skills to ensure loyalty, future economic and societal sustainability, sound reputation and brand management (Hur et al., 2014). In this triangular relation where corporate sustainability plays a major role, the following research question arises: Which personal attributes will demonstrate graduate potential in CSR skills to support graduate employability? Notably, some work has been done to establish CSR‐related skills. However, the associate personal attributes that would support CSR skill competency and indicate employability remains unclear and unresearched (Xing & Starik, 2017). In addition, current employability capital models fail to discuss the requisite CSR employability attributes. Hence, this article seeks to determine which graduate attributes will support employability capability in CSR skills. In commencing the research, organizational CSR skills are explored and identified from existing literature to form a reference base for the empirical determination of the associated employability attributes. | 3 The exploratory study formed part of a broader employability skills study conducted in South Africa's state‐owned electricity provider, Eskom. Kenny et al. (2015, p. 21) remark in their policy paper, ‘Electricity supply is of supreme importance to economic growth and the well‐being of all South Africans’. This is so not only in job creation but also in CSR management. Eskom produces electricity through nuclear, coal and water resources and is the largest emitter of pollutants in South Africa. The company acknowledges that its generation process waste has a dire impact on natural resources and communities' health, while the transmission networks impact bird life and the natural habitats of various animals. In addition, Eskom faces immense financial and production challenges with high debt levels, failing equipment and significant economic disruption through rolling power outages. Despite these challenges, Eskom declared its intent to enhance CSR contribution to support cleaner energy, economic activity, employment and maintaining the health and safety of all stakeholders (Eskom, 2021). CSR is deemed a major priority by the organization making the company most suitable for the investigation. THEORETICAL BACKGROUND In the next section, a brief theoretical background will be offered on employability, its associated graduate capitals, CSR and its related skills. Employability Many scholarly definitions are advanced to describe the concept of employability. For this article, the description of Wilton (2014) is deemed descriptive of the objective. Wilton postulates employability as the knowledge, skills and a set of personal attributes that are positively linked to future performance and relevant to the business requirements. Similarly, Matteson et al. (2016) present employability skills as a constituent of cognitive and noncognitive knowledge, attributes, behaviours and competencies. A broader perspective is offered by Holmes (2015), who equates sustainable employability as an outcome of success in the workplace, which is generated by applying the appropriate skills and displaying the required personal attributes. Personal attributes, in turn, can be described as the personal contributions of the ‘self ’ that makes an individual appealing to a heterogeneous range of employers (Boden & Nedeva, 2010) and create market value for graduates (Tomlinson, 2017). These attributes are referred to as employability capital and are what graduates need to demonstrate to potential employers as employability potential for future performance (Holmes, 2015; Williams et al., 2016). To broaden the understanding of employability capital, the next section will briefly give an overview of the driving concepts and theories that define it. Employability capital Described as a psychosocial construct, employability capital is described as the personal attributes that moderate employability skills (Peeters et al., 2019; Tomlinson, 2017). Both Myers and McCaulley (1985) and Goldberg (1993) drew early attention to the importance of 4 | personality attributes and argued that success in life depends thereupon. This view is supported by several other works, that is, Jackson (2017), Clarke (2018) and Ngo et al. (2017), whose works confirm personal attributes as drivers of employability capital. Drawing from earlier conceptual work, it is indicated that the development of employability capital followed a rather simplistic way where it was first linked to singular concepts and only in later years considered as a comprehensive set of capitals that collectively interact to support employability. Some of the earlier works of Bandura (1986) argued for self‐efficacy, self‐awareness and self‐ management in social set‐ups as important attributes. K. Ryan (1986) expanded on this view and advanced emotional literacy, including the psychological constructs of duty, ethical and moral behaviour and fairness, as crucial organizational performance contributors. In a first attempt to broaden the employability attribute scope, R. M. Ryan and Deci (2000) postulate that self‐determination theory, which articulates human motivation, personality and social skills, is an important facet of employee success. Recognizing that job performance and success include interrelationships with other humans, the Goleman‐Boyatzis model of emotional competency consolidated the attributes of self‐awareness, self‐management, social awareness and social skills into the concepts of emotional and social intelligence and deemed these intelligences as critical in employability success (Boyatzis et al., 2000). This view was supported by scholarly works like Abdolvahabi et al. (2012), who confirmed an empirical relationship between emotional intelligence and self‐efficacy. Van Dyne et al. (2012) recognized the impact of globalization and diversity on the workplace environment and expanded the intelligence concept to cultural intelligence, which refers to the ability to sense, adjust, reason, and act suitably on social signs. Testing an 11‐factor model of cultural intelligence, Van Dyne et al. (2012) found significant relationships between cultural intelligence, motivation, self‐ efficacy, motivation and awareness. Fugate et al. (2004) attempted to consolidate the various established attributes into sets of capitals that, applied collectively, would interact to support employability. They found that the capitals of career identity, personal adaptability, and social and human capital would support employability. The well‐known theory of psychological capital (Psycap), as established by Luthans et al. (2010), describes what they termed meta‐competencies in employability as hope, self‐efficacy, resilience and optimism. In support, Anglim and Grant (2016) advance that Psycap assist graduates in maximizing their abilities to respond to organizational challenges and adjust proactively to environmental demands during times of stress, change, and adversity. Donald et al. (2019) do not share the Fugate et al. view of separated capitals. They argue that employability capital equates with a single human capital and argue that it holistically incorporates scholastic capital, Psycap, social capital, market‐value capital, cultural capital and the skills associated with realizing employability potential. Peeters et al. (2019) disagree and argue that a single human capital alone is too simplistic and that the two concepts of human capital (individual attributes) and social capital (relational attributes) sufficiently describe employability capital. Contesting both Donald et al. (2019) and Peeters et al.'s (2019) views, Tomlinson (2017) argues that human capital is a separate concept from the other types of capital and cannot be regarded as an umbrella term for all personal capitals. He presents graduate employability as an accumulation and arrangement of several collaborating forms of capital represented by hard and soft skills traits. His derived Graduate Capital Model presents employability capital as a mesosystem that proposes interrelations between the employability capitals of human, social, cultural, identity and PsyCap. It is in this combination of capitals that Tomlinson proposes graduate employability lies. Presenting a brief overview of the Graduate Capital Model, it explains the harder concepts of knowledge, technical skills, qualifications and metacognitive skills like decision‐making and | 5 problem‐solving as Human Capital. Emotional, social and cultural intelligence are consolidated into Social Capital and relates to the relationships, attitudes and values that govern human interactions that support workplace relations and economic and societal interests. In agreement with Van Dyne et al. (2012), the model further proposes the attributes of cultural knowledge, awareness and values as critical elements in cultural capital. True to Cimatti's (2016) understanding that identity capital is the contribution of the ‘self’ to a positive work environment and organizational performance, the Tomlinson model links the concept of Identity Capital to self‐esteem, self‐efficacy, assertiveness, personality, self‐control, locus of control, ethical behaviour, and emotional and entrepreneurial literacy. Tomlinson incorporates the works of Luthans et al. (2010) in the final element of the model, PsyCap, which represents the constructs of personal strengths and qualities of self‐efficacy, optimism, perseverance, hope, willingness and resilience. The critical importance of Psycap is highlighted by Tomlinson (2017) as it acts as the facilitator of a positive attitude and behaviour in the workplace. To bring focus to the development of the various capitals, Tomlinson et al. (2021) recently also developed a scale to measure graduate capability through the elements of the Graduate Capital Model. In a recent Malaysian study, Abbasi et al. (2018) determined that employers require the attributes of interpersonal, listening, problem‐solving, critical thinking, communication, leadership, self‐management, analytical thinking, analytical and adaptability to demonstrate employability. Similarly, an explorative study in Bangladeshi by Hosain et al. (2021) found the attributes of academic performance, technical skills and problem‐solving (human capital), communication (social capital), personality, leadership (identity capital), motivational skills (Psycap) and teamwork (social capital) influence graduate employability. The preceding theoretical investigation highlights the lack of a focused CSR capital construct, which, if included, could provide a more robust employability Graduate Capital Model for employers to use when considering graduates for employability. To solicit attention to the gap, the following section will give a brief theoretical overview of CSR, the importance of CSR for the organizations and the skills associated with CSR. Corporate social responsibility The World Business Council for Sustainable Development (1999), in Moir (2001, p. 21), define CSR as ‘[t]he continuing commitment by business to behave ethically and contribute to economic development while improving the quality of life of the workforce and their families as well as of the local community and society at large’. The definition argues that organizations have moved past the historical concept of CSR as a single outcome of regulatory obligations. The modern‐day concept of CSR demands that organizations consider the interest of society and the environment by taking responsibility for the impact of their operational activities on their value chain, communities, and other stakeholders in a holistic manner (Hur et al., 2014). In agreement, Gladwin (2000) in De Witte and Jonker (2006) warns that a stable society should generate sustainability in all four primary constructs, namely ecological, material, human and social. He further advances that these four constructs, while separate in nature, complement each other as ‘one's productive power is dependent on the others' availability’. Carroll (2008) explains through the conceptual Hierarchy of CSR that organizations can successfully apply CSR management in these different constructs through their discretionary effort to be good corporate citizens, ethical decision‐making and practices, legal compliance and economic profitability. 6 | The Hierarchy of CSR and Gladwin CSR Capital Model advance CSR management as a holistic and integrated effort. Jitwasinkul et al. (2016), however, argue that CSR management is not an easy endeavour and warn that the causal relationships and continuous interactions between these CSR subsystems create a complex work environment that subsequently complicates CSR management. This complexity forces employers to recognize the importance of having a composite set of CSR skills to support economic and societal sustainability, reputation and brand management (Hur et al., 2014). CSR skills and personal attributes CSR skills can loosely be described as those skills required to support positive participation and outcomes in corporate organizational responsibility (Yasir et al., 2021). There is no shortage of scholarly evidence regarding what skills can be associated with positive CSR outcomes. Consideration of these works indicates that the skills base can be separated into (i) the skills required for CSR participation, (ii) skills associated with broader and societal responsibility and (iii) CSR system management skills. The individual skills required for CSR participation are advanced by Salminen and Lee (2015) as planning, situation awareness risk assessments, problem identification and solving, risk mitigation, monitoring and management. As early as the 1980s, a study by Drabek (1987) recognized that the effectiveness of safety incident prevention settles predominantly in individuals' interpersonal attributes of self‐regulation and self‐control. In a more recent study, Chen et al. (2017) confirmed the relationship between resilience and successful stress‐ management attributes and highlighted stress‐management skills as important in managing personal safety. An explorative study by Osagie et al. (2016) identified a range of personal attributes that would support individual CSR participation, namely, coordination, personality, self‐regulation, patience and self‐control values, ethics, commitment, reflection, innovation and flexibility. Likewise, Cooper (2018) highlights discretionary effort and persistence as indicators of the potential to go beyond the call of duty in terms of CSR participation. Bringing CSR closer to the employability concept, Saeed et al. (2019) concluded that positive CSR practices' outcome was only achievable when moderated and mediated by environmental knowledge and proenvironmental PsyCap. Recent study findings highlight that a lack of appropriate personal attributes leads to human negligence, unsafe actions and safety incidents (Syamtinningrum et al., 2018). The study result supports the earlier view of Waugh and Streib (2006) that the effectiveness of CSR incident prevention settles predominantly in individuals' interpersonal attributes. Therefore, Yasir et al. (2021) warn that developing the appropriate personal attributes to support efficient CSR management should be an organizational priority. As indicated, CSR skills can also be grouped under the skills required to support collective positive CSR outcomes through social interaction and contribution. Walker et al. (2002) argue that CSR is a collective duty and that the skills of influence, risk and diversity management, protection and care for others, collaboration and network building will support CSR management. Walker's view is supported by Crichton et al. (2013), who list the attribute of care (being my brother's keeper) as an essential element in safety incident prevention. In line with the employability capital framework, scholars also recognize the vital role of emotional intelligence and interpersonal skills in safety performance (Sunindijo & Zou, 2013), leadership skills, situational awareness and sharing of lessons learned for continuous improvement | 7 (Salminen & Lee, 2015) listening, facilitation, persuasion, communication, negotiation respect, social intelligence and willingness to learn and adapt as well as teamwork (Osagie et al., 2016) and reflection and continuous group learning (Serou et al., 2021) for the proactive CSR management Peeters et al. (2019) argue that the attributes of systems thinking offer dimensional and value‐added approaches to problem‐solving, decision‐making, risk management and continu- ous improvement to manage CSR systems. This view supports Kontogiannis et al. (2017), who, in addition, also advance system management skills and compliance with legislation and governance requirements as important. While a theoretical link between personal attributes and CSR skills is clear, it remains uncertain which attributes the graduate would require to show potential to employers to ensure employability in CSR skills. This consideration then raised the research question: Which personal attributes demonstrate graduate potential in CSR skills to support graduate employability? RESEARCH METHODOLOGY Research design A mixed‐method research strategy was deemed the most suitable strategy to employ as it allows the combination of a single study's quantitative and qualitative data collection (Creswell & Plano Clark, 2011). By mixing these approaches, a more integrated and deeper understanding of the research problem can be obtained (Tashakkori & Teddlie, 2010). To execute the research, a concurrent transformative mixed method design was selected to conduct the empirical research in a two‐step process. The concurrent transformative design considers all data as of equal value, provides methodological flexibility and allows for comparing quantitative and qualitative data during the analysis and interpretation phase (Creswell & Plano Clark, 2011). During the first data‐collection process (Phase 1), a single questionnaire was used to collect the primary quantitative data concurrently with close‐ended questions. Respondents were also asked to complete an open‐ended question at the end of the questionnaire to give opinions and/ or add additional attributes with a rank of importance. In the second data collection process (Phase 2), a qualitative Delphi method was employed to determine if (i) the manager's and supervisor's views of the required organizational attributes to support the CSR skills correlate to the Human Resource Development (HRD) experts' views and, (ii) if the HRD experts agree with the importance ranking and (iii) if the attributes support their associated CSR skills. Sampling For Phase 1, simple random sampling methods were used to invite 1063 managers and supervisors from a population of 1323, to participate in the study. Three hundred and two (302) responded, representing a response rate of 28.4%. The population was deemed fit based on their responsibility for appointing graduates, management of intern programs and their develop- ment. For Phase 2, purposive and snow‐balling sampling methods were employed to recruit 8 | eight subject matter experts within the HRD environment, of which only three participated in the study. RESULTS Phase 1: Quantitative research To comply with the requirements of a stable set of factors that would reflect the construct under investigation, existing theoretical works were consulted to develop a measurement scale. Using the identified CSR skills in the preceding literature review, the researcher selected the nine skills of Situation Awareness, Personal Safety (individual skills required for CSR participation), Continuous Learning, Care, Influence (social interaction and contribution skills), Risk Management, Systems Approach, Continuous Improvement and Governance (system management skills). These skills have already been linked to employability through scholarly research (OECD, 2015; Osmani et al., 2015; UKCES, 2014). Hence, the selected skills were deemed sufficient to present a holistic CSR skill base to determine the associated personal employability attributes. Permission could not be obtained from the study subject to conduct a pretest on the validity of the developed scale. To enhance the probability of scale validity and reliability, researched attributes from the works and/or existing scales of Osmani et al. (2015), OECD (2015), UKCES (2014), Coetzee (2014) and Caballero et al. (2011) were selected to derive questions that would test opinions on the attributes. Reliability and validity were tested on receipt of the completed questionnaires. Respondents were asked to rate the 44 selected personal attributes associated with behaviours on the self‐administered six‐point Likert‐type scale in terms of importance on a scale irrelevant to the employer to a critical employer requirement. Three hundred and two responses were received. Most (75%) of the respondents were 40 years and older, indicating sufficient work experience. In total, 72% were male and 28% female. A high percentage of the respondents (76%) reported degree qualifications (47%), of which 53% held postgraduate degrees. This provided confidence that the respondents had a high level of insight into the problem to identify the personal attributes representing the theoretical, predetermined CSR skill categories. While no new skill attributes were added to the open‐ended questions, the opinions provided highlighted the organization's challenges experienced when dealing with inexperienced graduate interns in a high‐safety risk environment. The construct validity of the measuring instrument was established by conducting a confirmatory factor analysis (CFA). A Spearman correlation analysis confirmed the reliability (correlation) of the selected CSR skill categories and their associated attributes. Scale reliability was confirmed with a Cronbach α coefficient of 0.998. The Pearson product–moment correlation coefficient indicated relationships between the attributes tested as 0.992 < α< 0.995 (p< 0.05), which signifies that both the scale and the attribute items have high internal consistency and that errors will not offset the measures. Once the survey data had been received, cleaned, evaluated, and the demographics analysed, the list of the rated attributes (see Table 1) was restated in terms of the allocated modes, ranked and presented in a Delphi process to the HRD experts. | 9 TABLE 1 CSR skills and their associated personal attributes (critical deemed attributes indicated by **) CSR skills Associated Attributes Personal safety Practice self‐control **Take care of personal safety Capability to manage stress and fatigue **Is drug‐free Governance **Comply with legislation **Comply with policies and procedures **Raises compliance, ethical or other issues **Uphold the ethics and values of the company and the workplace Risk management Practice risk identification and management Hazard mitigation approach Situational awareness Evaluate, consider and act, if necessary Communicates effectively Identify problems Involve specialist knowledge Systems approach Involve stakeholders Solve problems Do system‐orientated planning Can make decisions Apply systems thinking Collaborate Continuous improvement **Preventative orientation Review current behaviours and processes Proactively evaluate systems and processes Continuously seek ways to limit potential incidents and hazards Influence Lead by example Offer social support Do networking Participate positively in teams **Practice personal integrity and values Continuous learning Collective learning through sharing of personal experiences Keep abreast of current events and practices Sharing of lessons learned Demonstrate organizational awareness Care Influence others positively Has a preventative orientation 10 | Phase 2: Qualitative research—Delphi process Only three of the eight experts eventually participated in the process. Two of the members had postgraduate degrees in the human development field with a minimum of 20 years of experience. A training instructor had a technical diploma with a minimum of 30 years of experience in developing technical skills in students. All three‐panel members were older than 50 years of age. These demographics confirm their suitability to participate in the process. After two Delphi rounds, concordance was reached between the panel members at a high degree with a W coefficient equal to 0.762. The agreement confirmed survey content validity (Schmidt, 1997). A triangulation process was conducted to identify variances in the views of CSR critical attributes between the quantitative survey results and those of the HRD expert panel members. Of the 10 critical identified survey attributes, the experts did not agree with one attribute's ranking (is proactive) as critical but also deemed three ‘very‐important’ survey ranked attributes as critical: governance, ethical behaviour and holistic systems decision‐making. There were no significant differences observed between the views of the respondents and the panel. No skills or attributes were removed from the final list. The triangulation process was completed, and the 44 attributes were allocated to the nine identified skills based on the panel's final confirmed skills and attribute list, as indicated in Table 1. The derived conceptual model was then subjected to descriptive and inferential statistical analysis. INTERPRETATION OF PHASE 1 AND PHASE 2 Based on the mean, all nine CSR skills were determined as very important to the organization's CSR performance and success (with 4.55