Segmenting Latvian consumers by corporate social responsibility perceptions: a cluster analysis approach
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.3846/bm.2026.1564Abstract
Corporate social responsibility (CSR) affects consumer assessments of companies; however, many CSR studies are variable-centred, which may obscure variation in perceptions, especially in post-transition economies. This study utilises a validated consumer CSR perception scale and employs a person-centred approach to identify CSR perception profiles among Latvian consumers. Survey data from N = 453 respondents were analysed across four CSR dimensions: economic, legal, ethical, and philanthropic responsibility. A two-stage clustering procedure was employed, integrating hierarchical Ward’s method and k-means clustering, with variables standardised before segmentation. Three segments were identified: 1) CSR high, 2) CSR moderate, and 3) CSR low, showing consistently ordered differences across all CSR dimensions. Demographic profiling using chi-square tests, Cramer’s V, and an exhaustive CHAID classification tree indicates that education is the most salient differentiator of cluster membership; gender is statistically significant but small in magnitude, while age group is not significant and is not selected by CHAID. The findings demonstrate substantial heterogeneity in CSR perceptions and indicate that segmentation-sensitive CSR positioning may be relevant in Latvia and similar post-transition contexts.
Keywords:
corporate social responsibility, consumer segmentation, cluster analysis, Latvia, consumer behaviourHow to Cite
Agresti, A. (2019). An introduction to categorical data analysis (3rd ed.). Wiley.
Aguinis, H., & Glavas, A. (2019). On corporate social responsibility, sensemaking, and the search for meaningfulness through work. Journal of Management, 45(3), 1057–1086. https://doi.org/10.1177/0149206317691575
Aramburu, I. A., & Gómez Pescador, I. (2019). The effects of corporate social responsibility on customer loyalty: The mediating effect of reputation in cooperative banks versus commercial banks in the Basque Country. Journal of Business Ethics, 154(3), 701–719. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10551-017-3438-1
Carrillat, F. A., Plewa, C., Pupovac, L., Vanasse, C., Willmott, T., Legoux, R., & Napolova, E. (2025). Can consumers’ altruistic inferences solve the CSR initiative puzzle? A meta-analytic investigation. Journal of Business Ethics, 196, 639–658. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10551-024-05704-0
Carroll, A. B. (1979). A three-dimensional conceptual model of corporate performance. Academy of Management Review, 4(4), 497–505. https://doi.org/10.5465/amr.1979.4498296
Carroll, A. B. (1991). The pyramid of corporate social responsibility: Toward the moral management of organizational stakeholders. Business Horizons, 34(4), 39–48. https://doi.org/10.1016/0007-6813(91)90005-G
Coelho do Vale, R., Verga Matos, P., & de Almeida, F. (2026). Meta-analysis on the impact of corporate social responsibility initiatives on consumer attitudes and behavior. BRQ Business Research Quarterly, 29, 1–22. https://doi.org/10.1177/23409444251368391
Currás-Pérez, R., Alvarado-Herrera, A., & Vera-Martínez, J. (2023). Comparing the effects of consumers’ perceptions of companies’ corporate social responsibility initiatives in emerging and developed markets. Asia Pacific Journal of Marketing and Logistics, 35(11), 2748–2764. https://doi.org/10.1108/APJML-09-2022-0761
Dai, L., & Guo, Y. (2024). Perceived CSR impact on purchase intention: The roles of perceived effectiveness, altruistic attribution, and CSR-CA belief. Acta Psychologica, 248, Article 104414. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.actpsy.2024.104414
Deng, X., & Xu, Y. (2017). Consumers’ responses to corporate social responsibility initiatives: The mediating role of consumer–company identification. Journal of Business Ethics, 142, 515–526. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10551-015-2742-x
Elkington, J. (1997). Cannibals with forks: The triple bottom line of 21st century business. Capstone.
Elkington, J. (2018, June 25). 25 years ago I coined the phrase “Triple bottom line.” Here’s why it’s time to rethink it. Harvard Business Review. https://hbr.org/2018/06/25-years-ago-i-coined-the-phrase-triple-bottom-line-heres-why-im-giving-up-on-it
Everitt, B. S., Landau, S., Leese, M., & Stahl, D. (2011). Cluster analysis (5th ed.). Wiley. https://doi.org/10.1002/9780470977811
Frederick, W. C. (1994). From CSR1 to CSR2: The maturing of business-and-society thought. Business & Society, 33(2), 150–164. https://doi.org/10.1177/000765039403300202
Frederick, W. C. (1998). Moving to CSR4: What to pack for the trip. Business & Society, 37(1), 40–59. https://doi.org/10.1177/000765039803700103
Freeman, R. E. (1984). Strategic management: A stakeholder approach. Pitman.
Furman, A., Maison, D., & Sekścińska, K. (2020). Segmentation based on attitudes toward corporate social responsibility in relation to demographical variables and personal values – Quantitative and qualitative study of Polish consumers. Frontiers in Psychology, 11, Article 450. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2020.00450
Gond, J.-P., El Akremi, A., Swaen, V., & Babu, N. (2017). The psychological microfoundations of corporate social responsibility: A person-centric systematic review. Journal of Organizational Behavior, 38(2), 225–246. https://doi.org/10.1002/job.2170
Hair, J. F., Black, W. C., Babin, B. J., & Anderson, R. E. (2019). Multivariate data analysis (8th ed.). Cengage.
Kass, G. V. (1980). An exploratory technique for investigating large quantities of categorical data. Journal of the Royal Statistical Society. Series C (Applied Statistics), 29(2), 119–127. https://doi.org/10.2307/2986296
Louis, D., & Lombart, C. (2024). Impact of a corporate social responsibility message on consumers’ sustainable behaviours and purchase intentions. Corporate Social Responsibility and Environmental Management, 31(1), 579–599. https://doi.org/10.1002/csr.2587
MacQueen, J. (1967). Some methods for classification and analysis of multivariate observations. In L. M. Le Cam & J. Neyman (Eds.), Proceedings of the Fifth Berkeley Symposium on Mathematical Statistics and Probability, Volume 1: Statistics (pp. 281–297). University of California Press. http://projecteuclid.org/euclid.bsmsp/1200512992
Matten, D., & Moon, J. (2008). “Implicit” and “Explicit” CSR: A conceptual framework for a comparative understanding of corporate social responsibility. Academy of Management Review, 33(2), 404–424. https://doi.org/10.5465/AMR.2008.31193458
Nguyen, N., Priporas, C.-V., McPherson, M., & Manyiwa, S. (2023). CSR-related consumer scepticism: A review of the literature and future research directions. Journal of Business Research, 169, Article 114294. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jbusres.2023.114294
Ņikadimovs, O. (2025). Consumers’ perceptions of corporate social responsibility: Scale development, validation, and reliability testing. In 15th International Scientific Conference “Business and Management 2025” – New Trends in Contemporary Economics, Business and Management. Vilnius Gediminas Technical University. https://doi.org/10.3846/bm.2025.1468
Palihawadana, D., Oghazi, P., & Liu, Y. (2016). Effects of ethical ideologies and perceptions of CSR on consumer behavior. Journal of Business Research, 69(11), 4964–4969. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jbusres.2016.04.060
Ward, J. H., Jr. (1963). Hierarchical grouping to optimize an objective function. Journal of the American Statistical Association, 58(301), 236–244. https://doi.org/10.1080/01621459.1963.10500845
Wartick, S. L., & Cochran, P. L. (1985). The evolution of the corporate social performance model. Academy of Management Review, 10(4), 758–769. https://doi.org/10.2307/258044
Woo, S. E., Hofmans, J., Wille, B., & Tay, L. (2024). Person-centered modeling: Techniques for studying associations between people rather than variables. Annual Review of Organizational Psychology and Organizational Behavior, 11(1), 453–480. https://doi.org/10.1146/annurev-orgpsych-110721-045646
Wood, D. J. (1991). Corporate social performance revisited. Academy of Management Review, 16(4), 691–718. https://doi.org/10.5465/amr.1991.4279616
Downloads
Published
Conference Event
Section
Copyright
License

This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License.
