CORPORATE DIGITAL PLATFORM: HOW CAN WE BOOST EMPLOYEE HAPPINESS?

Below is the proposed measurement model to address the various research questions and determine the validity of the hypotheses (Figure 1).

FIGURE 1. PROPOSED MODEL

Source: Own elaboration.

4. MATERIALS AND METHODS

To achieve the objectives, we collaborated with a company that provides a corporate social network as its main service. This service is available in both application and web formats, aimed at enhancing internal communication for medium and large enterprises. The study focuses on the service sector, with a special emphasis on the logistics and healthcare industries. These sectors were selected because they are highly dependent on effective internal communication for operational success. The logistics sector requires constant coordination among multiple actors in the supply chain, where digital communication can significantly enhance efficiency. Meanwhile, the healthcare sector relies on seamless information flow among medical professionals to ensure patient safety and service quality. Additionally, both sectors employ diverse professional profiles, making them ideal for analyzing the impact of digital tools on internal communication.

The target population of the study was considered optimal for conducting the research, as the companies exceeded 250 employees, and all employees implicitly used this corporate social network. Therefore, they were fully familiar with internal communication through this channel, reinforcing their ability to evaluate communication from a digital perspective.

In the healthcare sector, collaboration was established with a company managing multiple hospitals in Spain. One of these hospitals participated in the research, providing access to the questionnaire to approximately 500 employees. The professional profiles included doctors, nurses, nursing assistants, and pharmacists. Meanwhile, in the logistics sector, collaboration took place with a company belonging to an international freight transport logistics holding, with a workforce of approximately 300 employees. Key roles included administrative staff, engineers, and technicians.

Data collection was carried out between May and July 2023 through an anonymous, self-administered online questionnaire, facilitated by the participating companies via the corporate social network. To maximize participation, companies disseminated the questionnaire to their employees through internal posts and periodic reminders during the data collection period. Participation was voluntary, with no financial incentives, ensuring spontaneous and unbiased responses. Consequently, the sample selection followed a non-probabilistic convenience sampling approach. Both companies were considered optimal due to the percentage of participants reached, which was 67 responses in the healthcare company with 22% representativeness and 175 responses in the logistics company with 30% representativeness.

The variables were assessed using various scales drawn from marketing literature, adapting them to the particularities and needs of the research context of this study. This was done in order to analyse the impact of these variables from a broader and more modern perspective, different from the traditional one. The scale developed by To et al. (2015) was employed to evaluate both formal and informal internal communication. This scale included 4 indicators for each communication approach. The happiness at work was measured based on the reduced scale proposed by Salas-Vallina & Alegre (2021), which contained 9 items addressing the three dimensions proposed by Fisher (2010) (work engagement, job satisfaction and emotional engagement with the organisation). Finally, to measure the ICSR variable from the employees' perspective, the multidimensional scale proposed by Turker (2009) was employed, including 5 items for this dimension. All items were measured with a 7-point Likert scale (1 strongly disagree; 7 strongly agree).

To avoid potential common method biases, we applied best practices recommended by Podsakoff et al. (2024). Firstly, we adapted validated scales to the business context and included examples to enhance question comprehension and mitigate potential ambiguities. Additionally, we provided a general description of instructions to address any uncertainties that may arise before starting the questionnaire, as well as at the beginning of each block of questions. At the outset of the questionnaire, we emphasized anonymity to prevent the well-known coherence bias, as many of the questions pertain to attitudes, behaviours, and perceptions in the workplace. Furthermore, we controlled redundant grammar as much as possible to avoid consistent respondent bias (Cortina et al., 2020). Finally, the questionnaire was designed with an appropriate length to reduce fatigue and prevent access to previous responses (Podsakoff et al., 2024).

To ensure that common method bias did not affect the results, we performed the Variance Inflation Factor (VIF) test, as recommended by Kock (2015). The obtained VIF values were all below the critical threshold of 3.3, indicating that common method bias is not a significant issue in this study. This approach follows best practices in statistical analysis, where VIF has been widely accepted as a robust method for assessing bias in self-reported data (Kock 2015; Podsakoff et al., 2024). These results confirm the reliability of the data collected and support the validity of the findings

Table 1 shows the demographic profile of the 242 employees who participated in the study. In order to know if the sample could be analysed as a whole or if it showed differences between the two types of service activity under analysis, a descriptive analysis was carried out beforehand using SPSS version 28 software. A non-parametric Mann-Whitney U-test was perforemed to test the significance of possible differences between the two independent categorical groups. In this way, the 242 responses from the different employees were analysed, segmented between: Company A with 67 responses and Company B with 175. This data indicates that more than one-third of the employees invited to participate in the survey for the healthcare company responded, while nearly one-third of the employees who had access to the survey for the logistics company participated. Therefore, this is a non-probabilistic sample, justifying the exploratory analysis being conducted. The Mann-Whitney U-test revealed statistically significant differences in 3 of the 8 indicators of the Internal Communication variable, in 7 of the 9 indicators of the Happiness at Work variable, and finally in 3 of the 5 indicators of the ICSR variable on employees (see Appendix).

5. RESULTS

5.1. Measurement model

Firstly, it was verified through the Kolmogrov-Smirnov test that the data do not show a normal distribution, since all the items had critical values less than 0.05. Given the exploratory nature of this study and the results obtained, the use of the PLS-SEM method through the SmartPLS 4 software was considered appropriate. Additionally, the standardized root mean square residual (SRMR) showed a value of 0.06, below the 0.10 threshold, indicating a good model fit and further supporting the use of PLS-SEM (Hair et al., 2019). The measurement model of the scales used shows good results of reliability and validity. As shown in Table 2, the results confirm that all indicator loadings are adequate and significant (Hair et al., 2019). Only item FIC4 “The company provides us with a performance evaluation survey at least once a year to evaluate the quality of our work” has an external loading slightly lower than 0.7 (0.664). On the other hand, the average variance extracted (hereinafter AVE) for all the factors is above the minimum level of 0.5, which indicates that on average the construct explains more than half of the variance of its indicators. Furthermore, the composite reliability that ranges between 0 and 1 is high in all cases (Hair et al., 2019). In this sense, since the results are above 0.7, it is accepted that the model is consistent. At the same time, Cronbach's Alpha and rho values are also higher than 0.7, once again justifying the consistency of the model presented (Table 2).

Table 3 shows the results of discriminant validity; on the diagonal, the square root of the AVE of each construct is presented, in the lower part the Fornell-Larcker criterion (1981) and in the upper part the heterotrait-monotrait ratio (hereinafter HTMT) (Henseler et al., 2015). The application of both criteria is satisfactory in all cases, which allows us to affirm the discriminant validity of the measurements used.

5.2. Structural model

The structural model was calculated using PLS, analysing the significance of the structural relationships proposed in the model using the bootstrapping algorithm, once the validity and reliability of the measurement instrument was confirmed. The results obtained from the evaluation of the structural model and the hypothesis testing are shown in Table 4. The evaluation of the structural model shows values of the coefficient of determination R² as significant. Happiness at Work (HW) presents a value of (0.581) and finally, Internal Corporate Social Responsibility (ICSR) for employees presents an R² above a value considered moderate (0.580) (Hair et al., 2019).

On the other hand, the Q² cross-validated redundancy index for all endogenous latent dependent variables is positive and greater than 0 (Henseler et al., 2015), which confirms the predictive relevance of the nomogram for a dependent construct.

The calculation results indicate that all hypotheses are accepted except H2 and H4. Firstly, the positive relationship is verified between FIC and HW (β=0.773, p<0.01: H1) and between FIC and ICSR (β=0.738, p<0.01: H3). This means that good FIC in work environments improves the happiness of employees from a professional standpoint, as well as the impact of the ICSR actions that the company makes available to them. On the contrary, the results showing the effect of IIC on HW (β=-0.022, p>0.01: H2) indicate that there is no statistically significant relationship between these variables. This suggests that there is insufficient evidence to confirm that informal internal communication has a direct impact on employees' job happiness. Finally, it is also evident that IIC does not have a positive and significant impact on ICSR (β=0.042, p>0.01: H4). This leads us to reject hypotheses 2 and 4 of this structural model.

6. DISCUSSION AND CONCLUSIONS

The objective of this work was to analyse the impact of internal communication on the perception of internal corporate social responsibility (ICSR) and the happiness of employees in the work environment. This objective was targeted through the framework of service companies that use a corporate social network as a communication tool that facilitates the exchange of information from a dual perspective: formal internal communication and informal internal communication (Lee, 2022). The emergence of new technologies in the management of human relations has made it possible to use this type of application to create a community of people who, as part of the organisation, are linked through a virtual platform. Communication in these corporate social networks (CSN) is bidirectional both vertically and horizontally, facilitating immediacy and closeness in the exchange of information, which improves it according to Wuersch et al. (2024). In this way, new generations of workers transfer to the work environment the use of digital tools that define an important form of communication in the 21st century (Men et al., 2020).

This research focused on the impact of communication in a virtual context and has sought to fill an important research gap as it improves understanding of its role in enhancing communication and integration in the workplace, contributing answers to priority lines of research indicated in the literature (Tkalac Verčič et al., 2024).

This work adopts an internal marketing perspective since it is understood that communication is a variable that drives commitment and happiness in the workplace, particularly relevant in the field of services given the contribution of employees in their delivery process (Lázaro-Marcé et al., 2021). In this sense, the research focused on two companies related to the service sector (health and logistics) with a high level of employee engagement with end customers. The concept of internal marketing, originally proposed by Berry et al. (1976) in the context of services, focuses on satisfying employees first so they can, in turn, satisfy customers. With this objective, it is necessary for organisations to develop active internal communication and at the same time focus on developing all employee potential, as employees will be the ones who will bring to fruition the services at different ‘moments of truth’. This is why happiness at work, understood from the dimensions of work engagement, job satisfaction, and emotional commitment (Salas-Vallina & Alegre, 2021), has been considered the main outcome variable for implementing internal marketing strategies (Ravina-Ripoll et al., 2023).

The results confirmed that internal marketing practices, where internal communication is identified as a central element, have a positive and significant relationship with employee happiness and internal corporate social responsibility (ICSR) initiatives. This finding is consistent with previous research, such as that of To et al. (2015) and Manzanares et al. (2023).

Furthermore, in line with the recent findings of Romero-Rodríguez & Castillo-Abdul (2024), this study expands scientific knowledge on workplace happiness from a digital and innovative perspective. Specifically, it provides evidence of the impact of digital internal communication, facilitated through corporate social networks, on employee happiness, highlighting its key role in fostering a more positive, collaborative, and participatory organisational environment.

Likewise, this research contributes to the existing literature on ICSR and aligns with the studies of Kim et al. (2025), demonstrating that ICSR initiatives influence employees' psychological well-being and can also serve as a driver of organisational innovation. In this regard, internal communication is positioned as a strategic channel that enables employees to better understand, internalise, and engage with corporate social responsibility initiatives. This not only strengthens corporate values but also enhances the alignment between organisational goals and employees’ individual motivations, fostering a more sustainable and innovation-oriented organisational culture.

However, it is essential to analyse the results based on the type of communication generated. While formal internal communication strengthens both the perception of ICSR and workplace happiness, informal communication does not produce the same effect. This finding highlights the need to assess how communication is managed in the digital environment. In particular, the results suggest that corporate social networks should be understood as tools for organisational cohesion and alignment, rather than spaces for informal communication, as the latter may encourage the spread of rumours or information that is not relevant to job performance (Koch & Denner, 2022). Does this mean that there should be no informal communication between professionals? Obviously not, the findings suggest that its impact is not significant in shaping the perception of ICSR or workplace happiness when it takes place through corporate channels.

6.1. Implications for management

Regarding managerial implications, the findings of this study highlight the importance of developing internal communication as a key practice of internal marketing at the organisational level. Strengthening this aspect is essential for enhancing workplace happiness and improving employees' perception of the internal corporate social responsibility (ICSR) initiatives implemented by the company. Furthermore, when formal communication is managed through corporate social networks (CSN), a greater sense of community is fostered, promoted by the interaction facilitated by the platform, which translates into positive organisational outcomes. Therefore, the results suggest that it is crucial to reinforce formal communication channels through CSN. Additionally, it is recommended to implement training and development programmes on the strategic use of these tools to enhance formal communication skills and maximise their impact within the organisation.

However, we must be aware that, as the results obtained reveal, CSN are not the correct channel to convey informal communications, since this type of communication does not affect any variable resulting from the proposals. This finding suggests that, in certain contexts, informal communication may be constrained by the organisational structure and hierarchical dynamics within the platform, affecting the spontaneity and authenticity of interactions (Koch & Denner, 2022). Furthermore, the characteristics of employees in the service sector indicate that, despite digitalization, many still prefer more personal and direct communication rather than relying exclusively on digital media (Ollier-Malaterre & Redston, 2024). This suggests that internal communication strategies should balance the implementation of digital tools with face-to-face interaction spaces, particularly in environments where collaboration and trust are fundamental to job performance.

This finding challenges the common assumption that any type of communication within corporate social networks is beneficial for the company. It demonstrates that only structured formal communication has a positive impact, which has direct implications for the design of internal communication strategies in digital environments.

Moreover, this study reaffirms that internal corporate social responsibility is a key resource within the job demands and resources theory. However, companies must develop more precise indicators to assess the impact of their corporate social responsibility policies on employees. In a work environment where professionals seek organisations aligned with their personal values and social expectations, strengthening communication about these initiatives becomes a crucial factor in enhancing motivation, well-being, and workplace happiness.

More than ever, managers are actively searching for professionals capable of making a difference when carrying out their work. It is no longer so much about hiring employees with only hard skills, or technical competencies, but rather, soft skills, the interpersonal competencies that the employee can offer to their field of work, are increasingly valued (the ability to work as part of a team, communicate properly, create a good work environment, know how to lead, etc.). Simultaneously, employees look for companies that, in addition to a decent salary, offer a wide portfolio of benefits (excellent working conditions, flexible schedules, work-life balance, etc.) and the possibility of cultivating creativity, enthusiasm, and participation. The development of corporate social responsibility programmes specifically aimed at workers can represent an attractive incentive.

Companies continue to aim to bring together qualified and committed personnel capable of helping them achieve greater success. To do this, they must offer happier environments, where making an extra effort and facing adversity is not a sacrifice, but on the contrary, is challenging and valuable for the employee.

6.2. Limitations and future research perspectives

The size of the sample and the restriction of the study to two types of services are significant limitations that at the same time generate new research opportunities.

Understanding informal communication in the business environment channelled through CSN is an important challenge, as it is still difficult to find a single, universally accepted scale to measure this impact. Unlike other platforms like WhatsApp, for which we have a more precise understanding of its impact on employees (Sakib, 2016), it is still challenging to comprehend the impact of specialised social media networks in this field available in the market in this field, as finding a single, universally accepted scale to measure the impact of internal communication through corporate social networks. Therefore, a communication scale applied to a sample that uses communication through a corporate social network has been used as a reference.

However, it is premature to consider that it does not affect the hypothesised relationships since factors that determine both the profile of the company and that of human resources may be affecting the results. Identifying these types of factors and incorporating them into relationship models will improve understanding of their role.

Although a robust chain of effects of formal communication has been evidenced both on happiness at work and on ICSR, the role of driver or mediator of this last variable, comparing the proposed model with another rival, would perhaps improve the understanding of its role, along with that of communication, on work-related happiness.

Finally, although happiness at work has been understood as a multidimensional variable that has allowed the testing of a parsimonious model, future research could analyse whether the effects detected are homogeneous on the separate dimensions of happiness at work, that is, on work engagement, job satisfaction, and commitment to the company.

FUNDING

This research has been developed within the work scheme of the project with reference PID2020-112660RB-I00 funded by MCIN/AEI/10.13039/501100011033 and the consolidated research group AICO/2021/144 and CIAICO/2023/069 funded by the Conselleria d'Innovació, Universitats, Ciència i Sociedad Digital of the Generalitat Valenciana. In addition, it has been supported by the Department of Education, Culture, Universities and Occupation of the Generalitat Valenciana, with co-financing from the European Social Fund Plus (ESF+).

CONTRIBUTION OF THE AUTHORS

Conceptualization: Alexandra Soler-Sanchis, Irene Gil-Saura and Gloria Berenguer-Contri. Methodology: Alexandra Soler-Sanchis and Gloria Berenguer-Contri. Data collection: Alexandra Soler-Sanchis. Data analysis: Alexandra Soler-Sanchis, Irene Gil-Saura and Gloria Berenguer-Contri. Writing - Preparation of the original draft: Alexandra Soler-Sanchis and Irene Gil-Saura. Writing - Review and editing: Alexandra Soler-Sanchis, Irene Gil-Saura and Gloria Berenguer-Contri. Supervision: Irene Gil-Saura and Gloria Berenguer-Contri.”

REFERENCES

Al-Edenat, M., & Hawamdeh, N. A. (2024). Revisiting happiness at work within the hospitality sector: Revealing the power of ethical leadership and group diversity. Journal of Organizational Effectiveness: People and Performance. https://doi.org/10.1108/JOEPP-04-2024-0153

Bakker, A. B. (2022). The social psychology of work engagement: State of the field. Career Development International, 27(1), 36-53. https://doi.org/10.1108/CDI-08-2021-0213

Barkay, T. (2024). Internal CSR and the decline of organised labour: A possible elective affinity? Social Responsibility Journal. https://doi.org/10.1108/SRJ-01-2024-0013

Berry, L. L., Hensel, J. S., & Burke, M. C. (1976). Improving retailer capability for effective consumerism Reponse. Journal of retailing, 52.

Carlini, J., & Grace, D. (2021). The corporate social responsibility (CSR) internal branding model: Aligning employees’ CSR awareness, knowledge, and experience to deliver positive employee performance outcomes. Journal of Marketing Management, 37(7-8), 732-760. https://doi.org/10.1080/0267257X.2020.1860113

Chew, X., Alharbi, R., Khaw, K. W., & Alnoor, A. (2023). How information technology influences organizational communication: The mediating role of organizational structure. PSU Research Review, 8(3), 633-647. https://doi.org/10.1108/PRR-08-2021-0041

Chou, E. Y., Liang, H. Y., & Lin, J. S. C. (2021). Believe to go the extra mile: The influence of internal CSR initiatives on service employee organizational citizenship behaviors. Journal of Service Theory and Practice, 31(6), 845-867. https://doi.org/10.1108/JSTP-08-2019-0178

Cortina, J. M., Sheng, Z., Keener, S. K., Keeler, K. R., Grubb, L. K., Schmitt, N., Tonidandel, S., Summerville, K. M., Heggestad, E. D., & Banks, G. C. (2020). From alpha to omega and beyond! A look at the past, present, and (possible) future of psychometric soundness in the Journal of Applied Psychology. Journal of Applied Psychology, 105(12), 1351-1381. https://doi.org/10.1037/apl0000815

Demerouti, E., Bakker, A. B., Nachreiner, F., & Schaufeli, W. B. (2001). The job demands-resources model of burnout. Journal of Applied Psychology, 86(3), 499-512. https://doi.org/10.1037/0021-9010.86.3.499

Estrada, J. M. C., & Sánchez-Bayón, A. (2024). Estudio bibliométrico de Economía Digital y sus tendencias. Revista de Estudios Empresariales. Segunda Época, 195-209. https://doi.org/10.17561/ree.n1.2024.8229

Fisher, C. D. (2010). Happiness at Work. International Journal of Management Reviews, 12(4), 384-412. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1468-2370.2009.00270.x

Fitriana, N., Hutagalung, F. D., Awang, Z., & Zaid, S. M. (2022). Happiness at work: A cross-cultural validation of happiness at work scale. PLOS ONE, 17(1), e0261617. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0261617

Fornell, C., & Larcker, D. F. (1981). Evaluating Structural Equation Models with Unobservable Variables and Measurement Error. Journal of Marketing Research, 18(1). https://doi.org/10.1177/002224378101800104

González-Álvarez, K., López-Arceiz, F. J., & Bellostas Pérezgrueso, A. J. (2023). El modelo de empresa social y las entidades sin fines lucrativos: Un análisis bibliométrico. Revista de Estudios Empresariales. Segunda Época, 5-30. https://doi.org/10.17561/ree.n1.2023.7404

Guo, Z., & Xie, Y. (2024). Impact of internal and external corporate social responsibility on internationalization speed: Evidence from Chinese multinational enterprises. Corporate Social Responsibility and Environmental Management. https://doi.org/10.1002/csr.2964

Hair, J. F., Hult, G. T. M., Ringle, C. M., Sarstedt, M., Castillo Apraiz, J., Cepeda Carrión, G., & Roldán, J. L. (2019). Manual de partial least squares structural equation modeling (PLS-SEM). OmniaScience Scholar. http://hdl.handle.net/11420/5279

Hansen, J. R., Løkke, A. K., & Sørensen, K. L. (2019). Long-Term Absenteeism From Work: Disentangling the Impact of Sector, Occupational Groups and Gender. International Journal of Public Administration, 42(8), 628-641. https://doi.org/10.1080/01900692.2018.1498104

Henseler, J., Ringle, C. M., & Sarstedt, M. (2015). A new criterion for assessing discriminant validity in variance-based structural equation modeling. Journal of the Academy of Marketing Science, 43(1), 115-135. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11747-014-0403-8

Huang, X., Wang, P., & Wu, L. (2024). Well-being Through Transformation: An Integrative Framework of Transformative Tourism Experiences and Hedonic Versus Eudaimonic Well-being. Journal of Travel Research, 63(4), 974-994. https://doi.org/10.1177/00472875231171670

Jaswal, N., Sharma, D., Bhardwaj, B., & Kraus, S. (2024). Promoting well-being through happiness at work: A systematic literature review and future research agenda. Management Decision, 62(13), 332-369. https://doi.org/10.1108/MD-08-2023-1492

Kim, B. J., Quaquebeke, N. V., Chang, Y., & Kim, T. H. (2025). When and how corporate social responsibility promotes innovation: A multi‐level moderated mediation model. https://doi.org/10.1002/csr.2984

Koch, T., & Denner, N. (2022). Informal communication in organizations: Work time wasted at the water-cooler or crucial exchange among co-workers? Corporate Communications: An International Journal, 27(3), 494-508. https://doi.org/10.1108/CCIJ-08-2021-0087

Kock, N. (2015). Common method bias in PLS-SEM: A full collinearity assessment approach. International Journal of e-Collaboration (ijec), 11(4), 1-10. https://doi.org/10.4018/ijec.2015100101

Kocollari, U., Cavicchioli, M., & Demaria, F. (2024). The 5 E(lements) of employee-centric corporate social responsibility and their stimulus on happiness at work: An empirical investigation. Corporate Social Responsibility and Environmental Management, 31(3), 1959-1976. https://doi.org/10.1002/csr.2667

Lázaro-Marcé, J., Gutiérrez-Aragón, Ó., & Fondevila-Gascón, J. F. (2021). Influencia de la colaboración entre las áreas de ventas y marketing en los resultados de las empresas en un entorno de orientación al mercado. Revista de Estudios Empresariales. Segunda Época, 2, 44-63. https://doi.org/10.17561/ree.n2.2021.6507

Lee, Y. (2022). Dynamics of millennial employees’ communicative behaviors in the workplace: The role of inclusive leadership and symmetrical organizational communication. Personnel Review, 51(6), 1629-1650. https://doi.org/10.1108/PR-09-2020-0676

Lee, Y. (2023). ICT use, internal communication satisfaction, and engagement of working-from-home employees: The moderating role of affiliative tendency. Computers in Human Behavior, 138, 107472. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.chb.2022.107472

Madsen, V. T. (2020). Crossing hierarchies in organizations: Making sense of employee dissent and circumvention on internal social media. Globe: A Journal of Language, Culture and Communication, 9. https://doi.org/10.5278/ojs.globe.v9i.3521

Manzanares, F. V., García-Segura, T., & Pellicer, E. (2023). Effective communication in BIM as a driver of CSR under the happiness management approach. Management Decision, 62(2), 685-701. https://doi.org/10.1108/MD-02-2023-0284

Marujo, H. A. (2023). The nexus between peace and mental well-being: Contributions for public happiness. Mental Health and Social Inclusion, 27(4), 355-379. https://doi.org/10.1108/MHSI-07-2023-0077

Masood, A., Zhang, Q., Ali, M., Cappiello, G., & Dhir, A. (2023). Linking enterprise social media use, trust and knowledge sharing: Paradoxical roles of communication transparency and personal blogging. Journal of Knowledge Management, 27(4), 1056-1085. https://doi.org/10.1108/JKM-11-2021-0880

Meirinhos, G., Cardoso, A., Silva, R., Rêgo, R., & Oliveira, M. (2022). Employee Involvement and Commitment in Internal Communication. Social Sciences, 11(9), 423. https://doi.org/10.3390/socsci11090423

Men, L. R., O’Neil, J., & Ewing, M. (2020). Examining the effects of internal social media usage on employee engagement. Public Relations Review, 46(2), 101880. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.pubrev.2020.101880

Miller, K. E. (2023). Employee sensemaking of CSR: On micro-discourses of corporate social responsibility. Corporate Communications: An International Journal, 28(3), 469-488. https://doi.org/10.1108/CCIJ-07-2022-0075

O’Brien, I. M., Ouschan, R., Jarvis, W., & Soutar, G. N. (2020). Drivers and relationship benefits of customer willingness to engage in CSR initiatives. Journal of Service Theory and Practice, 30(1), 5-29. https://doi.org/10.1108/JSTP-08-2018-0186

Ollier-Malaterre, A., & Redston, M. (2024). Enterprise social networks and the work context: A case study of mandated use. Information Technology & People, ahead-of-print(ahead-of-print). https://doi.org/10.1108/ITP-05-2023-0411

Olorunsola, V. O., Saydam, M. B., Ogunmokun, O. A., & Ozturen, A. (2022). Service beyond the status quo: The ripple effect of corporate social responsibility and internal marketing on employee’s customer-oriented behavior. International Journal of Bank Marketing, 40(4), 820-841. https://doi.org/10.1108/IJBM-07-2021-0321

Omidvar, M., Ghasemi, V., & Frau, M. (2024). Exploring the impact of environmental dimension in corporate social responsibility on restaurants’ customer retention. British Food Journal, ahead-of-print(ahead-of-print). https://doi.org/10.1108/BFJ-01-2024-0030

Podsakoff, P. M., Podsakoff, N. P., Williams, L. J., Huang, C., & Yang, J. (2024). Common Method Bias: It’s Bad, It’s Complex, It’s Widespread, and It’s Not Easy to Fix. Annual Review of Organizational Psychology and Organizational Behavior, 11, 17-61. https://doi.org/10.1146/annurev-orgpsych-110721-040030

Pradhan, R. K., & Hati, L. (2022). The Measurement of Employee Well-being: Development and Validation of a Scale. Global Business Review, 23(2), 385-407. https://doi.org/10.1177/0972150919859101

Qamar, F., Soomro, S. A., & Kundi, Y. M. (2023). Linking high-performance work systems and happiness at work: Role of career aspiration and thriving. Career Development International, 28(5), 536-553. https://doi.org/10.1108/CDI-02-2023-0047

Ranjan, S., & Dash, S. (2022). Impact of internal corporate social responsibility: A parallel mediation analysis. Personnel Review, 53(1), 119-135. https://doi.org/10.1108/PR-05-2020-0354

Ravina-Ripoll, R., Galvan-Vela, E., Sorzano-Rodríguez, D. M., & Ruíz-Corrales, M. (2023). Mapping intrapreneurship through the dimensions of happiness at work and internal communication. Corporate Communications: An International Journal, 28(2), 230-248. https://doi.org/10.1108/CCIJ-03-2022-0037

Reimer, M., Haensse, L., & Lin-Hi, N. (2024). Internal change through external actions: The impact of external corporate social responsibility on employee readiness for change. Journal of Organizational Change Management. https://doi.org/10.1108/JOCM-03-2024-0125

Romero-Rodríguez, L. M., & Castillo-Abdul, B. (2024). Internal communication from a happiness management perspective: State-of-the-art and theoretical construction of a guide for its development. BMC Psychology, 12(1), 644. https://doi.org/10.1186/s40359-024-02140-7

Sakib, S. M. (2016). Influence of WhatsApp on communication in internal organizational. Social Science Research Network. https://doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.3934409

Salas-Vallina, A., & Alegre, J. (2021). Happiness at work: Developing a shorter measure. Journal of Management & Organization, 27(3), 460-480. https://doi.org/10.1017/jmo.2018.24

Santana-Martins, M., Sánchez-Hernández, M. I., Nascimento, J. L., & Stinglhamber, F. (2024). Connecting leaders and employees’ affective commitment: A multilevel analysis. Leadership & Organization Development Journal, 45(6), 1048-1062. https://doi.org/10.1108/LODJ-09-2023-0502

Singh, S., & Aggarwal, Y. (2018). Happiness at Work Scale: Construction and Psychometric Validation of a Measure Using Mixed Method Approach. Journal of Happiness Studies, 19(5), 1439-1463. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10902-017-9882-x

Sinitsyna, E. (2024). Connected digitally and dedicated loyally: The features and impact of internal online events on employee outcomes. Management Research Review, 47(10), 1520-1551. https://doi.org/10.1108/MRR-11-2023-0866

Sitarević, A., Nešić Tomašević, A., Sofić, A., Banjac, N., & Novaković, N. (2023). The Psychosocial Model of Absenteeism: Transition from 4.0 to 5.0. Behavioral Sciences, 13(4), 332. https://doi.org/10.3390/bs13040332

Srivastava, S., Mendiratta, A., Pankaj, P., Misra, R., & Mendiratta, R. (2022). Happiness at work through spiritual leadership: A self-determination perspective. Employee Relations: The International Journal, 44(4), 972-992. https://doi.org/10.1108/ER-08-2021-0342

Stranzl, J., Ruppel, C., & Einwiller, S. (2024). Staying emotionally connected while being physically apart – exploring what teleworkers need to stay committed and how internal communication can contribute. Journal of Communication Management, 28(2), 272-293. https://doi.org/10.1108/JCOM-02-2023-0023

Sutton, L. B. M., & Le Roux, T. (2024). Sustainable internal communication and digital trends amidst an energy crisis: Can a middle ground be found in South Africa?. Journal of Communication Management. https://doi.org/10.1108/JCOM-04-2024-0060

Tabala, A., Munene, J. C., Kagaari, J., Mafabi, S., & Kyogabiirwe, J. (2023). Psychological well-being of small enterprise employees: A multi-theoretical perspective. International Journal of Organizational Analysis, 32(6), 1042-1059. https://doi.org/10.1108/IJOA-03-2023-3673

Tkalac Verčič, A., Verčič, D., Čož, S., & Špoljarić, A. (2024). A systematic review of digital internal communication. Public Relations Review, 50(1), 102400. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.pubrev.2023.102400

To, W. M., Martin, E. F., & Yu, B. T. W. (2015). Effect of management commitment to internal marketing on employee work attitude. International Journal of Hospitality Management, 45, 14-21. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijhm.2014.11.002

Turker, D. (2009). Measuring Corporate Social Responsibility: A Scale Development Study. Journal of Business Ethics, 85(4), 411-427. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10551-008-9780-6

Üngüren, E., Onur, N., Demirel, H., & Tekin, Ö. A. (2024). The Effects of Job Stress on Burnout and Turnover Intention: The Moderating Effects of Job Security and Financial Dependency. Behavioral Sciences, 14(4), 322. https://doi.org/10.3390/bs14040322

Viererbl, B., Denner, N., & Koch, T. (2022). “You don’t meet anybody when walking from the living room to the kitchen”: Informal communication during remote work. Journal of Communication Management, 26(3), 331-348. https://doi.org/10.1108/JCOM-10-2021-0117

Walden, J. A. (2021). Enhancing employee well‐being through internalcommunication, in L. R. Men, & A. Tkalac Verčič (eds.), Current trends and issues in internal communication theory and practice (pp. 149–163). Palgrave Macmillan. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-78213-9_9

Wuersch, L., Neher, A., Maley, J. F., & Peter, M. K. (2024). Using a Digital Internal Communication Strategy for Digital Capability Development. International Journal of Strategic Communication, 18(3), 167-188. https://doi.org/10.1080/1553118X.2024.2330405

APPENDIX

TABLE A1. DESCRIPTIVE STATISTICS AND MANN-WHITNEY U TEST: INTERNAL COMMUNICATION, HAPPINESS AT WORK AND INTERNAL CORPORATE SOCIAL RESPONSIBILITY

Scale	Total n=242		Company A n=67		Company B n=175		U Test, Company A vs B, p
	M	SD	M	SD	M	SD
INTERNAL COMMUNICATION (To et al., 2015)
FIC1 The company has regular staff appraisals in which people discuss what employees want.	4.50	1.82	5.51	1.33	4.11	1.84	0.001**
FIC2 Managers interact formally and directly with employees to find out how to make employees more satisfied.	4.74	1.74	5.88	1.02	4.30	1.77	0.001**
FIC3 Managers meet with employees regularly to find out what expectations they have of their jobs.	4.64	1.73	5.51	1.27	6.59	1.77	0.001**
FIC4 The company surveys employees at least once a year to assess the quality of employment.	5.18	1.68	5.46	1.53	5.07	1.72	0.132n/s
IIC5 When at work, our manager regularly talks to us to find out about our work.	5.33	1.58	5.60	1.43	5.23	1.62	0.121n/s
IIC6 When at work, when our manager notices that one of us is acting differently than normal, he will try to find out why.	5.26	1.68	5.30	1.97	5.25	1.57	0.200n/s
IIC7 When at work, our manager tries to find out what we want from the company.	5.13	1.66	5.19	1.90	5.10	1.57	0.217n/s
IIC8 When at work, our manager tries to find out our real feelings about jobs.	5.18	1.68	5.18	1.92	5.18	1.59	0.502n/s
HAPPINESS AT WORK (Salas-Vallina & Alegre, 2021)
HW1 At my job, I feel strong and vigorous	5.53	1.37	5.82	1.05	5.42	1.47	0.110n/s
HW2 I am enthusiastic about my job.	5.81	1.31	6.30	1.08	5.63	1.35	0.001**
HW3 I get carried away when I am working.	5.63	1.30	5.88	1.05	5.54	1.38	0.111n/s
HW4 How satisfied are you with the nature of the work you perform?	5.82	1.28	6.27	1.00	5.65	1.34	0.001**
HW5 How satisfied are you with the pay you receive for your job?	4.55	1.81	5.25	1.46	4.29	1.86	0.001**
HW6 How satisfied are you with the opportunities which exist in this organization for advancement [promotion]?	5.23	1.65	6.01	1.05	4.93	1.74	0.001**
HW7 I would be very happy to spend the rest of my career with this organization.	5.42	1.66	6.12	1.22	5.15	1.73	0.001**
HW8 I feel emotionally attached’ to this organization.	5.38	1.72	6.48	0.85	4.97	1.78	0.001**
HW9 I feel a strong sense of belonging to my organization.	5.26	1.80	6.48	0.97	4.79	1.83	0.001**
INTERNAL CORPORATE SOCIAL RESPONSIBILITY (Turker, 2009)
ICSR1 Our company supports employees who want to acquire additional education.	5.26	1.60	5.27	1.61	5.26	1.60	0.994n/s
ICSR2 Our company policies encourage the employees to develop their skills and careers.	5.28	1.56	5.73	1.22	5.11	1.64	0.009*
ICSR3 Our company implements flexible policies to provide a good work & life balance for its employees.	5.19	1.56	5.55	1.17	5.05	1.67	0.064n/s
ICSR4 The management of our company is primarily concerned with employees’ needs and wants.	4.80	1.72	5.46	1.29	4.54	1.79	0.001**
ICSR5 The managerial decisions related with the employees are usually fair.	4.83	1.66	5.45	1.24	4.60	1.74	0.001**

Note: M: media, SD: standard deviation. ^** p<0.01, ^* p<0.05, n/s – not significant.
Source: Own elaboration.

_______________________________

^* Autora de correspondencia: asosan3@alumni.uv.es

¹ ORCID: https://orcid.org/0000-0003-1425-4602

² ORCID: https://orcid.org/0000-0002-5758-0806

³ ORCID: https://orcid.org/0000-0002-8063-6791