The impact of corporate social responsibility in technological innovation on sustainable competitive performance

The study addresses how corporate social responsibility in technological innovation (CTR) relates to sustainable competitive performance (SCP), a long-term, stakeholder-oriented performance outcome. Grounded in stakeholder theory, the paper argues that CTR, which emphasizes innovating to meet stakeholder demands beyond profit motives, can build unique, valuable resources and stakeholder support that underpin sustainable competitive advantage. Despite indications that CTR can open new markets (e.g., base of the pyramid) and strengthen stakeholder approval, the mechanisms linking CTR to SCP remain underexplored. In the digital era, digital transformation—organizational changes driven by digital technologies—may be a key pathway by which CTR translates into SCP. The study further posits that organizational context matters: a mastery climate that values learning, cooperation, and development can amplify how CTR fosters digital transformation. The research model proposes digital transformation as mediator between CTR and SCP and mastery climate as moderator of the CTR–digital transformation relationship.

CTR is framed as a CSR form focused on innovation for stakeholders—employees, partners, customers (including underserved markets), governments, NGOs, and communities—rather than solely profit. Prior work highlights: (1) CTR features: innovation intention over immediate results; stakeholder-driven; potential to expand core or create new businesses. (2) Manifestations: addressing base-of-the-pyramid needs and environmental challenges via eco-efficient technologies. (3) Effects: mixed views; while some cite financial pressures of green innovation, others find CTR/CSR improves employee commitment and environmental performance; emerging evidence suggests CTR helps identify opportunities and gain stakeholder support, potentially enhancing performance. The paper develops two hypotheses. H1: Digital transformation mediates the CTR–SCP relationship. CTR can secure stakeholder recognition and resources (including financing) that facilitate digital investments and capabilities, improving decision efficiency, transparency, communication, and agility—drivers of SCP. H2: Mastery climate moderates the CTR–digital transformation relationship such that the relationship is stronger under a high mastery climate. A mastery climate encourages learning, cooperation, experimentation, and adaptability, enhancing firms’ ability to meet stakeholder demands via innovation and to pursue digital initiatives effectively.

Design and sample: Cross-sectional survey of multi-industry firms in China. Instrument translation used translation–back-translation. A pretest with nine senior managers and five researchers refined items. To mitigate common method bias, the questionnaire had two parts and two separate top-executive informants per firm: Part I (mastery climate, SCP, demographics) and Part II (CTR, digital transformation). Items were mixed by topic and anonymity assured. Data collection in 2022 yielded 356 firm responses (effective rate 71.2%). Industry composition: 59.8% manufacturing; 17.7% farming/forestry/animal husbandry/fishery; 6.5% energy; 4.5% transportation; 11.5% other. Analyses used Stata 15.0 and SPSS 25.0. Measures: SCP (Waheed and Zhang, 2022): 10 items, 7-point comparative Likert scale; alpha = 0.936. CTR: 12 items across six stakeholder dimensions (employees, partners, customers, government, NGOs, communities), 7-point Likert; alpha = 0.971. Digital transformation (Nasiri et al., 2020): 5 items, 7-point Likert; alpha = 0.880. Mastery climate (Nerstad et al., 2018): 6 items, 7-point Likert; alpha = 0.932. Controls: state ownership, firm size (employees), age, sales, and industry dummies. Validity and bias checks: CFA showed good fit (X² = 1533.769, p < 0.001; X²/df = 3.137; TLI = 0.900; CFI = 0.907; IFI = 0.907; RMSEA = 0.078). Convergent validity supported (CR > 0.60; AVE > 0.50). Discriminant validity supported via chi-square difference tests between constrained and unconstrained CFA models. Common method bias assessed via Harman’s single-factor test (largest factor 39.886%) and marker variable (respondent shoe size), indicating no severe bias. Multicollinearity was low (VIF < 2). Durbin–Wu–Hausman tests suggested endogeneity not a major concern. Analysis approach: Baron and Kenny (1986) three-step regressions tested mediation; interaction terms tested moderation; bootstrapping estimated conditional indirect effects.

- CTR positively relates to SCP (Model 4: β = 0.193, p = 0.000). When digital transformation is included (Model 6), CTR remains significant but reduced (β = 0.131, p = 0.001), indicating partial mediation. Digital transformation positively relates to SCP (Model 5: β = 0.370, p = 0.000; Model 6: β = 0.290, p = 0.000). - CTR positively relates to digital transformation (Model 2: β = 0.330, p = 0.000). - Mastery climate moderates the CTR–digital transformation relationship (Model 3 interaction: CTR × Mastery climate β = 0.284, p = 0.000), strengthening the positive slope under higher mastery climate. - Conditional indirect effects (bootstrapping) of CTR on SCP via digital transformation are significant across mastery climate levels: Low: b = 0.0523, SE = 0.0267, 95% CI [0.0002, 0.1059]; Middle: b = 0.1298, SE = 0.0276, 95% CI [0.0800, 0.1875]; High: b = 0.1907, SE = 0.0396, 95% CI [0.1196, 0.2749]. - Model fit and explanatory power: R² values were 0.201–0.254 for digital transformation models and 0.123–0.292 for SCP models; all relevant F-tests significant (p < 0.01). Overall, results support H1 (partial mediation by digital transformation) and H2 (positive moderation by mastery climate).

Findings demonstrate that innovating for stakeholders (CTR) enhances firms’ sustainable competitive performance partly by enabling digital transformation that improves decision efficiency, information quality, communication, and agility. This clarifies a key mechanism linking socially responsible innovation to sustained competitive advantage. The positive moderation by mastery climate indicates organizational context matters: environments emphasizing learning and cooperation amplify how CTR translates into digital initiatives, strengthening the mediated pathway to SCP. The results extend stakeholder theory by identifying CTR as a strategic route to stakeholder support and resource acquisition, and they enrich the innovation–performance literature by specifying digital transformation as a mediating organizational behavior in the digital era. While some prior work notes potential unintended effects of CTR and digital initiatives, this study’s evidence suggests that, in aggregate, CTR and digital transformation positively contribute to SCP, particularly in mastery-oriented climates.

The study contributes by: (1) extending stakeholder theory to show how CTR aimed at stakeholder needs can build sustained competitive advantage; (2) identifying digital transformation as a key mediating mechanism in the innovation–performance relationship; and (3) revealing mastery climate as a boundary condition strengthening CTR’s effect on digital transformation and, consequently, SCP. Managerially, firms should align innovation strategies with stakeholder needs (CTR), invest in digital transformation capabilities and cross-functional collaboration, and cultivate mastery climates that promote learning, cooperation, and experimentation. Future research should broaden contexts, deepen causal inference, test additional contingencies and theoretical lenses, and assess potential downsides of CTR and digital initiatives.

- Generalizability: Evidence is based on Chinese firms; cross-country and sectoral comparisons are needed. - Causality: Cross-sectional design limits causal inference; longitudinal or experimental designs are recommended. - Boundary conditions: Only mastery climate was examined; future studies could test other moderators (e.g., transparency). - Controls: Additional controls (e.g., competitive position) could further reduce omitted variable concerns. - Theoretical scope: The model is framed in stakeholder theory; alternative lenses (resource-based view, transaction cost theory) could offer complementary insights. - Potential downsides: The study does not deeply examine negative outcomes of CTR or digital transformation; future work should assess risks and trade-offs.