The Relationship between University Social Responsibility and Corporate Social Responsibility Concepts: The Comparison of Saudi Arabian and Turkish Cases

Abstract

The concept of university social responsibility (USR) is getting increasingly interrelated with the concept of corporate social responsibility (CSR) because universities are key institutions for promoting private sector businesses, creating social capital, and supporting innovations. Since USR is important in promoting economic development, any CSR program that is supported by USR, the effectiveness of CSR programs gets higher because of its support for the society and environment becomes more sustainable by making the support more ethical, resourceful, and responsible. Furthermore, the incorporation of USR into CSR will lead to more profitable companies because the brand images of these companies will be stronger. This chapter first introduces the concept of USR, and it then explains the relationships between USR and CSR by utilizing the comparative case study method. The case of Saudi Arabia revealed that there is a healthy USR-CSR cooperation in the country, promising a better future for the development in Saudi Arabia. On the other hand, the case for Türkiye depicted that the support for USR-CSR cooperation is decreasing, indicating the possibility of negative impacts on the society in the near future.

1. Introduction

This chapter focuses on the roles of higher education institutions in terms of university social responsibility (USR) and corporate social responsibility (CSR) concepts with a focus on Saudi Arabia and Türkiye cases. The influence of globalization, especially the period starting from the twenty-first century, explicitly showed that universities have begun to implement tasks that could be considered as non-traditional when compared with the nature of these institutions. These tasks were usually inspired by the spirit of university social responsibility aiming to alleviate societal well-being and facilitate industrial development.

Since universities are educational institutions where they behave as centers of creation and dissemination of wisdom and knowledge, universities are dynamic environments that are influenced heavily by the societies to where they belong. This environment has a bilateral influence both on society and the university because societies can be influential in shaping the role of the universities as much as universities’ influence in shaping society [1, 2]. Furthermore, there is also a dynamic bilateral relationship between universities and businesses like the relationship between societies and universities [3]. The dynamic environment depicting the relationship between societies and businesses shows one of the key aspects of university social responsibility is the interconnectedness of universities’ roles with the notion of corporate social responsibility. This indicates that a healthy interaction between USR and CSR is important for the effectiveness of both concepts of society. This means that universities are not isolated institutions solely focusing on the creation of science [4, 5, 6, 7]. In other words, the role, behavior, and responsibilities of the universities are related to economic, cultural, societal, and even political aspects [5, 7]. Given the nature of these aspects, the studies show that the influence of universities on shaping societies can be more nuanced than the influence of society on universities, and the influence of the business environment can be more effective in shaping the roles of universities than the universities shaping the behavior of businesses [8]. In addition, the studies also show that society is the most important aspect that universities feel obliged to serve [9, 10]. Thus, this chapter focuses on the connections between university social responsibility and corporate social responsibility concepts. By examining the level of effectiveness between USR and CSR policies and applications in Saudi Arabia and Türkiye, this chapter explains how universities can benefit businesses to grow and develop by highlighting the support provided to the industries and feedback provided by the businesses in implementing their social responsibilities. Thus, this study aims to answer the following two research questions (RQ):

1. RQ1: How are the concepts of USR and CSR interrelated?

2. RQ2: What is the impact of an effective USR-CSR cooperation on the country?

Given the analyses of the two cases from two similar countries, this chapter shows that a sound understanding of the university social responsibility and corporate social responsibility interaction is important for the societal and economic development of a country. Considering the literature and findings from the comparative case study method, this chapter provided a model depicting the theoretical connection between the concepts of USR and CSR, showcased the four dimensions of USR with respect to CSR, and discussed that Saudi Arabian policymakers implement policies that support both the USR-CSR interaction, unlike the Turkish case, providing a better future for the societal welfare in the country.

1.1 Research gap

The literature on university social responsibility is meager when it comes to depicting the importance of engagement between universities and communities. Vasilescu et al. [11] and Wigmore-Álvarez et al. [12] have discussed that universities are imperative institutions that can establish meaningful engagements with a wide range of entities such as nongovernmental organizations, intergovernmental organizations, businesses, public organizations, local communities, non-profit and charity organizations, shelters, and the like. However, the literature is highly ambiguous when it comes to explaining the relationship between the CRS and USR concepts. This research fills the lacuna by explaining the relationship and using the comparative case study method by using Saudi Arabia and Türkiye countries as case studies in order to better explain the relationships between the USR and CSR concepts. The significance of Times Higher Education (THE) collaboration between universities and corporations is reflected through long-term developments by creating profound partnerships and successful information exchange environments enabling the diffusion of growth and development in many ways [13]. For instance, universities can serve as a catalyst to broker community-based research groups to solve certain societal issues [14], help to create teams with prominent local people to support local development initiatives [15], support individuals and organizations with knowledge transfer programs to prepare them for the tasks needed by the businesses [16], last but not least facilitate the creation of networks at local, regional, country, and global levels [16, 17].

2. Literature review

The concept of university social responsibility (USR) is a recent research area where researchers have explained that the role of universities should lie beyond the expectations of traditional academic responsibilities related to providing education, dissemination of knowledge, and conducting research [18, 19]. The notion of university social responsibility has a dynamic meaning that includes engagement, development, and growth of society. Since this concept is about increasing social well-being like creating authentic interactions and meaningful relationships through social integration, contribution, and coherence between individuals, university social responsibility is accepted as a concept being part of the evolution of the concept of corporate social responsibility (CSR) [20].

Like corporate social responsibility, the understanding of university social responsibility can be applied to addressing the challenges of social, economic, and cultural challenges aiming to serve societies [21, 22]. However, university social responsibility assumes the key aspects of serving societies are related to the institutional roles with a focus on universities, rather than businesses. On the other hand, as McWilliams and Siegel [23] explained “CSR will depend on its size, level of diversification, research and development, advertising, government sales, consumer income, labor market conditions, and stage in the industry life cycle,” USR depends on the quality of higher education, level of research output, level of student learning outcomes, supporting students’ employment, and efficient communication with the corporations. Since corporations are profit maximizers, the critics of the business system have emphasized the importance of CSR. For example, according to Jones [24], the notion of CSR creates a self-control mechanism for corporations, which is comprised of normative and moral elements. However, this is not the case for the notion of the USR because universities do not prefer capital development, instead they have to utilize surplus funds (not profits), if any, into the reinvestment for educational purposes or facilities.

The notion of university social responsibility reflects societal characteristics by making universities not isolated institutions, but educational institutions considering the broader communal aspects when it comes to the implementation of universities’ tasks and responsibilities. Universities are key institutions rooted in social, economic, and cultural settings. These contexts make these institutions to be mainly responsible for promoting sustainable societal development meaning that they are expected to manage people and social life in a positive way [21]. The literature on social sustainability discusses that, like corporations, universities have the principal responsibility of fostering both social capital and economic capital and promoting ecological sustainability, thereby, fostering environments where individuals have fundamental rights and needs adequately accounted for by increasing the level of well-being not only at the individual level but also at the societal level [22].

Considering the tenets of the literature on socially sustainable societies, we see the implicit recognition of the roles and expectations of university social responsibility [25]. Thus, the concept of university social responsibility has broad dimensions where it is comprised of a wide range of activities that are not only related to their functions to serve as epicenters of knowledge and wisdom but also epicenters of continuous societal progress and economic development [11, 25].

The notion of university social responsibility is also related to depicting the roles of the universities in advancing ethics, morals, and socially responsible behaviors among individuals within these institutions. Thus, the value of this concept is partly related to the role of academic leadership in serving their communities in addition to their traditional university-related tasks and responsibilities [26]. The promotion of social responsibility and ethical behaviors targets not only employees working at these institutions but also it includes students, faculty, staff, and stakeholders affiliated with the universities because of the campus culture [11, 12]. This process of ethical framework promotion as part of the university social responsibility will be reflected in two target points, these are: (a) individual accountability and (b) corporate accountability [27]. Ultimately, by increasing accountability, this process will benefit individuals, corporations, and communities by positively impacting them to complete their civic duties successfully [28]. Moreover, the choices selected by the decision-makers who have higher levels of accountability, honesty, morals, and loyalty provided as part of the university social responsibility programs, those stakeholders will be more inclined to consider the greater benefits of the society as a whole.

Given the increasing importance of globalization and technological innovations, the concept of university social responsibility has additional aspects to consider preparing students for new environments and practices. For example, global trade has required mass production, which impacted nature and caused environmental degradation in an exponential manner making environmental sustainability significantly vulnerable. Thus, consideration of promoting eco-friendly practices at the individual level and pursuit of environmental and sustainability policies at societal, corporate, and governmental levels became necessary elements of the notion of university social responsibility [29]. Implementation of these tasks will lead to technologies preferring energy efficiency and increase awareness and tendency for conservation efforts. As a result, universities have the capacity to reach various segments of society and businesses through their students and faculty and have the potential to encourage individuals, communities, and businesses to demonstrate commitment to reducing harmful activities to the environment because of release of green gases related to mass production, pollution related to overproduction, overconsumption of natural resources, deforestation, and many other harmful practices [30]. Thus, universities are the institutions that play the key role in bringing out the concerns on environmental issues.

Although some scholars mentioned the positive results of globalization on the improvement of societies by making knowledge accessible and development of economies by making international trade more widespread [29], there are also many significant negative corollaries that can be associated with the inextricable characteristic of increasing density of globalization [11, 31, 32]. Some examples of these include increasing global income inequality, poverty, civil wars, economic sanctions, decline of human rights, and the like [33, 34, 35, 36, 37, 38, 39]. Note that these issues are beyond the country borders and require global cooperation to deal with and, thus, it requires international cooperation [12, 30, 40, 41]. It is important to note that university social responsibility can help to alleviate these harmful impacts of globalization because universities are institutions that serve as bridges not only between different individuals, groups, camps, communities, and cultures within a country, but also between different countries and international entities such as military and economic alliances, partnerships, and organizations [42, 43, 44]. For example, universities can serve as a key source for understanding the underlying reasons for the continuing increase in the income gaps between rich and poor segments of society in terms of national and international levels, use scientific resources to appropriately evaluate the pattern of environmental degradation as well as climate change, and prepare prescriptions to alleviate these issues by recognizing the intrinsic nature of global interconnectedness [39]. As a result, the university social responsibility perspective serves as an important determinant of solving transnational problems caused by globalization and aims to account for the well-being of societies worldwide.

The concept of university social responsibility assumes universities as an integral part of societies making them improve and develop in many aspects as mentioned above. With that said, the critics argue that the primary role of universities should be creation and dissemination of knowledge through scientific processes [45, 46, 47, 48]. According to these analysts, universities must focus on advancing knowledge rather than prioritizing societal aspects and the needs of businesses [47, 48]. Furthermore, critics suggest that the mission of universities in the promotion of scientific research can be restricted because diverting university resources for social responsibilities can put the primary aims of these institutions [46]. Considering these criticisms, the analysts who support the university social responsibility understanding contend that the mission of universities will not be in conflict with the responsibilities prescribed by this perspective because the eventual result of university social responsibility is implemented through informed citizens that require prioritizing scientific initiatives and conducting research [49, 50, 51]. According to these analysts, only informed citizens can serve the greater good of their societies and are capable of addressing the issues of transnational borders, therefore, only informed citizens can contribute to a better understanding of finding ways for development, growth, and welfare of their environments.

This section highlighted the concept of university social responsibility and showed the universities have important roles and responsibilities within a society that serves for the benefit of both the communities and businesses. Considering the economic, social, cultural, and sometimes political dimensions of university social responsibility, it was shown that the understanding of university social responsibility can serve as a catalyst to increase levels of social capital and economic capital by making businesses and societies more effective, engaged, and integrated. Then, it was mentioned that the expectations of the universities did not only include traditional academic responsibilities like institutions solely aiming to teach and learn but also nontraditional responsibilities like providing coherence between society and business world and addressing the challenges of daily lives in terms of economic and social aspects. Further, it was suggested that universities are not isolated institutions meaning that greater communal aspects like creating fruitful relationships can serve the well-being of society. Furthermore, this section explained that universities can provide valuable networks between entities to account for a wide range of issues that require in-depth analyses. Additionally, this section showed that the notion of university social responsibility can explain how universities can help to develop ethical, moral, and socially responsible entities that provide long-term and sustainable solutions to the convoluted problems that can transcend borders. Last but not least, this section discussed that globalization is inevitable and leads to societal problems that require the involvement of university social responsibility to facilitate intranational and international cooperation to solve problems related to environmental degradation. Finally, the opinions of the critics were mentioned and evaluated in terms of what should be the main responsibilities of the universities.

2.1 Theoretical background

Given the general meanings of university social responsibility and corporate social responsibility, these two concepts are very similar. However, the difference between these two concepts lies in the nuances. First and foremost, university social responsibility is the result of the evolution of the understanding of corporate social responsibility over time. Thus, one plausible explanation is that corporate social responsibility is a more comprehensive concept when compared to university social responsibility (see Figure 1). The main differences between these two concepts include two aspects: means and expectations. Since the focus is on higher education institutions for university social responsibility, the main vehicle for addressing societal development is universities for this concept. On the other hand, it is the role and positions of corporations that serve as a means for increasing the level of well-being of society according to the corporate social responsibility perspective.

Figure 1.

Overview of USR and CSR relationship. (Source: Author).

The concept of university social responsibility assumes that there is an intrinsic relationship between corporate social responsibility because it serves as a buffer zone between society and businesses preparing human capital for the businesses [49]. Therefore, the expectations for university social responsibility require the assumption of universities as bridge institutions between society and business world to serve as catalysts to better prepare human capital for corporations [49, 51], which depicts the relationship that universities provide support for the businesses at the individual level (i.e., blue arrow in Figure 2) and receives the corporations’ feedback at the same time to account for the dynamic nature of developments in the industrial world and make technological innovations through using the modern scientific knowledge (i.e., dashed orange arrow in Figure 2).

Figure 2.

Depiction of the concept of USR dimensions vis-à-vis CSR. (Source: Author).

Opening the black box of the relationship between university social responsibility and corporate social responsibility requires understanding the direction of relationships. Moreover, since this chapter focuses on university social responsibility, it is important to examine the dimensions of the relationship from university social responsibility to corporate social responsibility. As can be seen from Figure 2, considering the conventional wisdom in the literature focusing on the dependent nature of the concepts of university social responsibility and corporate social responsibility, it is plausible to assume that there appear four distinct dimensions when it comes universities to preparing human capital appropriately for the corporations, these are (a) knowledge creation, (b) interaction facilitation, (c) integration promotion, and (d) boosting self-efficacy. Note that these categories are obtained from boiling down the literature, and thus, the boundaries between them can sometimes be ambiguous meaning that a factor is under one dimension, but it is possible that it can also be related to another dimension to some extent. For instance, the third factor of the second dimension—integration promotion—is “learning communities and stakeholders.” This factor can also be partially related to the second dimension—interaction facilitation—and to the fourth dimension—boosting self-efficacy. However, the dimensions were determined according to the most appropriate categories, and these factors are not mutually exclusive under each dimension in Figure 2.

Understanding these four dimensions in Figure 2 as well as categories explains how university social responsibility can support corporate social responsibility. The first dimension, that is, knowledge creation, includes three factors: (a) universities provide licenses to perform certain professional tasks through education [52], (b) universities provide the necessary toolkit, including knowledge and skills, for conducting research by using scientific sources [53], and (c) universities help individuals make informed decisions by interpreting choices and choose the most rational ones through critical thinking skills obtained through their educational experiences [54, 55].

The second dimension, that is, interaction facilitation, includes five factors. Universities facilitate information exchange between peer-to-peer and student-to-instructor interaction [56]. Through club memberships and organizational activities, universities help students to have a clear understanding of their social belongings [57]. Since universities are institutions, there are regulations and rules that require institutional alignment [58]. Universities are wonderful places for creating networks of all sorts for students, including social, professional, and cultural networks [59, 60]. Through scientific information exchange, it is easy to create connections at local, regional, and global levels with the help of the university education experience [61].

Another dimension of the impact of the concept of university social responsibility on corporation social responsibility is integration promotion, and it has three factors. Universities promote collaboration and create research teams to contribute to the growth of knowledge and accumulation of scientific information [62]. By creating teams and or groups, whether they focus on conducting scientific research or not, universities always facilitate the achievement of greater value and performance leading to operational synergies [63]. Some initiatives and projects may require extensive research and development and, therefore, necessitate engagement with the communities and targeting stakeholders for their support to implement certain tasks [64].

The fourth—and the last—dimension explains the boosting self-efficacy role of universities in terms of four dimensions. Universities encourage individuals to create support systems in achieving an outcome or a goal through referring to their self-belief and self-confidence systems [65]. Universities provide experiences that help an individual to have empathy, self-respect, and develop skills that serve effective communication in professional environments [66]. Given the knowledge, critical thinking skills, and experiences obtained within a formal university education, an individual can become more confident in developing skills and apply certain techniques and formulas for solving problems with a minimal margin of error [67]. The university promotes the emotional intelligence skills of individuals, thereby helping them to manage and control emotions to some extent during difficult situations [68].

The next section delves into the aforementioned four dimensions with detailed narratives, examples, and illustrations from two cases: (a) Saudi Arabia and (b) Turkey. The purpose is to show the relationships between the concepts of USR and CSR by comparing the examples. This further helps the reader to understand how these two concepts are related and have an idea about the direction of the relationships.

3. Methodology

This study uses a qualitative comparative case study approach by using neo-institutionalism as the umbrella paradigm to explain the relationships between the concepts of USR and CSR. The comparative method helps to depict the relations of a phenomenon with another across both space and time [69, 70]. However, there is a trade-off when the number of compared entities increases, the explanatory power of the method decreases [69]. Thus, the optimal number recommended by many practitioners is the comparison of two objects, studies, factors, etc. [69]. Furthermore, the case study approach is important in delving into the examples to understand the underlying dynamics and relations of the concepts. According to Harvey and Purvis [71], the combination of the comparative method and case study approach is important to show the adaptations in policies and practices.

The dyad compared is Saudi Arabia versus Türkiye. These countries were selected because both of them are similar in terms of their economic power, for example, only two Group of Twenty (G20) countries—the United States has the largest economy among G20 ranked countries—in the Middle East region. Besides, both of them are Muslim counties, having similar religious practices, for example, both have a Sunni population (a branch of Islam) of over 85% [72]. Given the economic and social similarities, the picture between Saudi Arabia and Türkiye provides a good match for the method used in this research.

3.1 USR and CSR practices in Saudi Arabia

The kingdom of Saudi Arabia has heavily invested in order to improve the quality of education and economic indicators in the country for many decades. These practices accelerated with the extensive support provided for the Saudi Vision 2030 by the Crown Prince and Prime Minister Mohammed bin Salman starting from April 25th, 2016 [73]. This program has a holistic aspect in transforming the country by achieving three goals, these are (a) promoting economic diversification, (b) enhancing life quality, and (c) increasing international cooperation [74]. Thus, we can assume these goals as the three pillars, two of which focus on improving economic structure and education system in the country. As for the economic aspect, the country’s rank in the G20 increased from 15th to 14th in 2018 in terms of gross domestic product purchasing power parity (GDP PPP), 2 years after the introduction of the Saudi Vision 2030 program. The increase in the rank continued to grow, making Saudi Arabia as the fourth country in the G20 list after the United States, Germany, and Australia. According to the China Economic Information Center Data (CEIC Data) analysts using the International Monetary Fund (IMF) data, the predicted GDP PPP per capita is expected to be around 73,000 Dollars (see Figure 3 for more information). Thus, the successful integration of the improvements in economic and educational settings in Saudi Arabia made the country the fastest developing country among the G20 countries [76].

Figure 3.

Saudi Arabia’s GDP PPP forecast [75].

As part of the transformation process of the Saudi Vision 2030 program, there are many Saudi students sent abroad (especially from the United States and the United Kingdom) with generous scholarship opportunities to study for undergraduate and graduate degrees. The fruits of these scholarships have been reflected especially with the students who received graduate degrees from developed Western countries started to work as scholars at Saudi higher education institutions. According to QS World University 2023 ranking, there are 16 universities included in the list, placing Saudi universities the highest in the Arab world before Egypt with 15 higher education institutions [77]. Furthermore, according to Times Higher Education (THE) 2023 institution-based ranking, many Saudi universities are stepping up in the ladder. Although there was no Saudi institution in the top 500 list before, King Abdulaziz University ranked from 190th (ranking of the year 2022) to 101st (ranking of the year 2023), including many similar upward-trending Saudi universities [78]. Similarly, there are 6 Saudi universities listed in the top 10 universities in the Arab World, according to THE 2023 ranking [78].

As seen in the Saudi case, the improvements in the economic sector have been reflected in the lives of the Saudi Arabians with the increase in the purchasing power of the individuals. Similarly, the improvements in the education institutions in the country further accelerated the process of development. The improvements in both economic and educational settings created a self-enforcing mechanism that made the development more effective and promising to continue the effectiveness of the Saudi Vision 2030 program. The main reason for this positive picture in the economy can be seen in the interaction between the application of university social responsibility and corporate social responsibility understandings in the country.

It is easy to see the intrinsic, self-reinforcing, and dynamic relationship between USR and CSR concepts in the Saudi Arabian case because the feedback provided by the corporations in buttressing societal development was reflected by the universities in making the business sector more efficient, productive, and efficient. The efforts for enhancing the education system, research output, and cognitive awareness supported the USR’s knowledge creation dimension that enabled information exchange between Saudi universities and Saudi corporations [79, 80]. The international education experience obtained through study abroad programs supported by the Saudi administration enhanced creation of networks at the regional and international levels, created a higher level of institutional belonging to strive for becoming a globally higher-ranked institution, and promoted student-instructor interaction by role-modeling Western-educated scholars within Saudi scholars facilitated interaction with the Saudi business world because the support-feedback mechanism between Saudi universities and the corporations became better since collecting data, analyzing information, and responding the needs appropriately all served as catalysts in making the communication between them more effective [79, 80]. By the same token, the level of operational synergy between the Saudi universities and corporations increased because the Saudi higher education system adapted to the changes in the global markets given the feedback provided to them from the Saudi business sectors, showing the importance of integration promotion dimension in the relationship between the USR-CSR interaction in Saudi Arabia. Last but not least, those who graduated from Saudi universities were equipped with better skills that have enabled them to develop improved problem-solving skills, making them more successful within workplaces. All in all, the Saudi Arabian case shows that there is a promising future for the development of the country and, thereby, an increase in the level of welfare in the country if the policymakers continue to support the USR and CSR mechanism.

3.2 USR and CSR practices in Türkiye

The Turkish Republic is a country located strategically between two continents (Asia and Europe), three important regions (Balkans, Middle East, and Caucasus) have always been an important hub for tourists, making the country an enticing spot in the Middle East region. The secular system since the late 1920s aimed to separate the education system from religious influence and use the European system as an example [81]. This was also seen in the business realm because Türkiye has been a European Customs Union member since the late 1990s [82], although it is not an official European Union member. The Turkish aspiration to become similar to Western countries has been troublesome especially after the dissolution of the Soviet Union because Türkiye is a country that can be influenced easily not only by international socioeconomic developments but also by the challenges that occur at the regional levels. For example, unlike previous era, the country is getting closer to the Asian culture and prioritizing enhancing relations with the Middle Eastern countries, accepting millions of Syrian refugees (even those sent by the EU countries) under the leadership of Recep Tayyip Erdogan who acts against conventional secularist policies of the country [83, 84].

Although Turkish economy has a huge potential to support its corporations’ international trade given its geostrategic location, the international balances can serve against this goal and lead to long-lasting economic crises in the country [85, 86]. Today, the Turkish economy is suffering because of high consumer price index levels since COVID-19 pandemic. For example, the inflation rate for the year 2022 was 85.51%, and it was 38.21% in 2023. Inflationist environments suffer from corrupted policymakers who do not consider the public needs and welfare in countries where the level of human capital is at lower levels [87]. Further, it is expected to see the negative impacts of inflation in the near future for Türkiye, making its speed of economic growth slower in the future (see Figure 4 for more information). During the last 5 years, the level of foreign direct investments (FDIs) decreased in Türkiye [89, 90], and many firms went bankruptcies because keeping Turkish Lira more valuable than its real value with respect to the United States Dollar due to application of economic policies during two presidential elections, two parliament elections, and a plebiscite to change the constitution and transform the country from parliamentary system into the presidential system [89, 90].

Figure 4.

Türkiye’s GDP PPP forecast [88].

Similar to the negative developments in the economic realm in Türkiye, the quality of Turkish educational institutions declined significantly in the last two decades. The Erdogan’s leadership prioritized increasing the number of higher education institutions in the country; however, the educational quality continued to fall [91]. For example, Türkiye’s one of flagship universities—Bogazici University—was ranked 139 in 2015 by THE; however, the same university has been ranked within the 801–1000 category for 2 consecutive years after 2022 [92]. Türkiye had many universities included in the top 500 list for many years, accepted by various ranking agencies. On the other hand, according to the Academic Ranking of World Universities’ (ARWU) ranking, there is only one Turkish university, that is, Istanbul University, included in the top 500 list for the year 2023 [93].

All of these negative economic and educational developments were reflected in the lower levels of communication, cooperation, information exchange, and alignment between higher education institutions and corporations in Türkiye. First, given the lower ranking of research and education quality in the country indicates that the level of knowledge creation dimension of USR in Türkiye has a tendency to decrease. Further, the increased level of Turkish brain drain is reflected most by the universities because quality scholars have preferred moving to countries such as Germany and the United States [94, 95, 96]. This process is also supported by the talent drain where students who graduated from top universities in the country have started to prefer working abroad, especially within European Union countries [95]. The impacts of brain drain and talent drain decreased the level of social belonging, institutional alignment, peer-instructor instruction, and network creation, and, therefore, negatively impacting the interaction facilitation dimension of USR in Türkiye. As a result, the feedback received from the industrial sectors in the country could not be accounted for by the universities, making problem-solving skills of the individuals needed by the business world worse. These examples in Türkiye indicate that the effectiveness of integration promotion and boosting self-efficacy dimensions of USR in Türkiye is getting worse, which also downside the quality and quantity of the interaction between USR and CSR in Türkiye. If the current situation continues similar to this way and policymakers do not take measures, the level of CSR will decrease and corporations might tend to prefer greenwashing [97] explained that chaotic environments can also motivate corporations to prefer socially fake responsible strategies to support their position in the market and acting deceptively rather than acting credibly to buttress the development of the society, to fight against the environmental degradation in the country.

3.3 Comparison of Saudi Arabia with Türkiye in terms of USR and CSR

Both the Saudi and Turkish cases depicted the importance of healthy information exchange mechanisms between higher education institutions and corporations for the development of a country. This relationship can be best explained with the use of university social responsibility and corporate social responsibility concepts because they illustrate the dynamic and complex self-reinforcing mechanism between the educational and economic realms. However, the two case studies also showed that the role of the policymakers, economic power, and developments at domestic, regional, and international levels are also important. The Saudi policymakers pursued policies supporting both USR and CSR efforts in the country, whereas the Turkish policymakers were not as serious about recognizing the role of universities in helping societies and supporting responsible corporations to consider the greater good of society and the environment. Furthermore, the analysis of the four USR dimensions under each case study showed that there is a potential in the Saudi case that the country will accelerate its efforts to develop. On the other hand, the incorporation of the four USR dimensions into the Turkish case revealed that the current picture even gets worse in the near future when it comes to socially responsible universities and corporations, let alone supporting the creation or supporting socially responsible academic institutions or business environment in the country.

4. Findings and discussion

By utilizing the two case studies, the section above showed that the link between the notions of university social responsibility and corporate social responsibility depends on the interaction between education institutions and businesses in having responsibility for shaping societies. This shared role of both higher education institutions of businesses in serving for the alleviation of the well-being of societies has become more noticeable over time. Further, this convergence has created further dependencies between universities and businesses as explained in Figures 1 and 2. Furthermore, this process has become more explicit with increasing the needs of the business environment on scientific knowledge, education, and research. The goal of these two concepts is to bring out positive social changes. The section above explored the dynamics focusing on the university social responsibility aspect and how this goal can be achieved with a focus on the corporate social responsibility aspect. By providing more detailed explanations and insights, this section shows how university social responsibility and corporate social responsibility complement each other to promote sustainable social responsibility at national and international levels.

One of the most important relationships between the two concepts complementing one another lies in the fact that universities provide theoretical knowledge and practical experiences to some extent through teaching and learning processes, which contributes to the level of social capital [98]. As seen in the Saudi Arabian case, with the increase in the educational quality at universities, the level of human capital increased significantly. By the same token, corporations are in need of those equipped with the necessary skills because these entities are known for their economic influence that supplies incomes and jobs to people [98]. As seen in the Turkish case, corporations without a talented labor force are doomed to experience bankruptcy at the end of the day. The societal landscape is shaped by university social responsibility more than the corporate social responsibility aspect, and the economic landscape is shaped by corporate social responsibility than the university social responsibility aspect in this mutually dynamic and dependent relationship. Overall, both of these concepts are important for societal development and for alleviating the level of social capital and economic well-being of individuals [40]. This interconnected nature of these two entities can have other positive consequences—which can be coined as a positive externality of the multiplier effect—that promote mental and physical well-being of individuals within society [30]. On the other hand, if the interplay between these two entities is not well-settled, as seen in the Turkish case study, then there might be negative consequences—which can be coined as the negative externality of the multiplier effect—like discrepancies between the needs of the businesses and human capital support provided to them by the universities for the future as well [30].

One of the examples that can be considered at the core of the link between the concepts of university social responsibility and corporate social responsibility is the importance of the promotion of the commitment of moral, ethical, and socially responsible individuals. The examples of brain and talent drains show what could happen to a country (i.e., Türkiye in the case studies) if the individuals are not committed to feel responsible for their own societies. For a corporate social responsibility perspective, corporations should not prioritize the amounts of profits and costs through profit-maximizing behaviors, but these entities should prioritize positive impacts on society, which can include diverting investments for the greater good of the communities such as focusing on increasing the number of employees in different industrial sectors and areas in order to decrease the unemployment rates rather than making investments to exploit cheap labor force and keep wages at the minimal levels [99]. In a similar vein, the understanding of university social responsibility prescribes the importance of ethical and moral values and their impacts on the betterment of society [99, 100]. In sum, the convergence between these two concepts necessitates the ethical business thorough individuals instilled with moral values which are either gained. Developed or instilled during students’ higher education experiences [101].

As can be seen from the ways how the concepts of university social responsibility and corporate social responsibility are coined, the common denominator of the emphasis should be on communal engagement and commitment prioritization [101, 102] between the universities and corporations with respect to the greater good of the social as a whole. For example, Saudi Arabian policymakers acted in a way that prioritized social welfare with the introduction of the Saudi Vision 2030 program, which promoted USR-CSR interaction by emphasizing the importance of Western-educated individuals in the country.

Although these two concepts address different contexts stemming from business environments and educational settings, another shared emphasis is on the creation of successful social outcomes [101]. This means that both of these concepts’ success level can be measured from the same metrics, such as considering the amount of positive change that occurred over time after prescriptions of university social responsibility and corporate social responsibility applied to society in general [103]. Furthermore, the understanding of corporate social responsibility expects the pursuit of eco-friendly policies by corporations as much as possible. This is also in similar lines with the expectations of university social responsibility where universities aim to instill consciousness for environmental degradation, climate change, and sustainability and how to take measures to slow down the global process that transcends the borders at the individual level [103, 104]. These common denominators of engagement, aims, and outcomes depict the intrinsic nature of interplay and interconnectedness between higher education institutions and businesses in a society [104].

Another important aspect of the link between university social responsibility and corporate social responsibility necessitates the consideration of the changing nature of the world markets [41, 105]. For example, countries strive to promote (a) selling more products at the international markets and (b) keep the continuation of innovations to address international trade competition. Note that although the logic of competition in trade is against the expectations of corporate social responsibility at the global level, the environment of competition can promote the emphasis on the need for universities for their scientific solutions to technological improvements (as assumed by the theorists from the liberalist school of thought). Selling more products in the international markets requires the regulative role of intergovernmental organizations, such as the International Monetary Fund and the World Bank [12, 41]. However, these institutions require an understanding of international cooperation both from the multinational corporations and individuals because this perspective is mainly obtained through the higher education process [12, 105] showing the importance of university social responsibility.

5. Making university social responsibility more effective

Although university social responsibility was conceptualized during the evolution process of the concept of corporate social responsibility over time, it became one of the core elements of understanding the success of corporate social responsibility [106, 107]. Therefore, it is essential to examine the elements of the effectiveness of university social responsibility. Higher education institutions that purport to improve their implementation of university social responsibility might need to adopt certain policies that incorporate this concept into their core functions similar to traditional teaching and learning responsibilities [106, 107]. This section explains what types of key measures can be taken by higher education institutions to make their responsibilities under the light of the university social responsibility understanding more effective and applicable to the corporation social responsibility context.

Alignment of university responsibilities together with the expectations of the university social responsibility approach can lead to more effective outcomes [108]. This can be promoted through the incorporation of university social responsibility into the mission of the universities making institutional values of the entity consistent with the expectations that aim to serve for the enhancement of the social well-being of the society [11, 108]. This will also result in making the universities strategic goals aligned with the university social responsibility understanding. Furthermore, it is also highly recommended by the literature both on university social responsibility and corporate social responsibility that integration of university social responsibility logic into academic curricula ensures accounting for preparing students according to the themes related to real-world issues [100].

Since the overall goal of the logic of university social responsibility is to focus on the needs of local communities and serve as a catalyst role between members of society and businesses [106, 107, 108], it is extremely important for higher education institutions to engage with the local entities that can include various communities, nongovernmental organizations, charity organizations, and the like to establish long-term partnerships [67, 100]. Furthermore, collaboration with local governments and businesses will strengthen the sustainability of this partnership derived from communal engagement [109]. Universities considering these aspects will also be inclined to conduct academic research addressing the challenges faced by not only local entities but also global entities [11, 29, 51, 105]. At the end of the day, this research is conducted with the application of scientific approaches, inspired by the engagement with local communities, and addressed to the challenges [110, 111], thus, making the application of the understanding of university social responsibility logic more effective and leading to more successful outcomes [40, 110].

As mentioned in Figure 2, the quality of communication plays an important role in the effectiveness of university social responsibility because it helps to establish various channels to create connections between various stakeholders [112]. However, this requires transparency to some extent because transparent organizations tend to be more responsible when it comes to implementing their tasks [113]. Since these tasks can be related to both enhancement of the societies and development of the businesses, it is important to communicate social responsibility efforts clearly, transparently, and responsibly [112, 113, 114]. This will ultimately result in accountable higher education institutions considering the expectations of social university responsibility adequately. For example, universities can provide transparent reporting systems on tasks implemented for the greater good of society and improvement of the social capital that can serve for the advantage of the businesses. This can include keeping stakeholders updated through websites and public events. According to Clements [64] and Latif [110], celebrating achievements of university social responsibility tasks implemented by higher education institutions ensures the transparency of the reporting system about outcomes of the tasks and motivates the various to keep the cooperation serving for societal well-being.

Given the four dimensions and the underlying factors as mentioned in Figure 2, it is important to enhance all of those points as much as possible by the universities in order to increase the level of effectiveness of the application of university social responsibility understanding. In this regard, promoting opportunities for the student’s involvement and development in projects focused on the needs of the communities. This can include service-learning through volunteering; for example, initiatives that include student volunteering activities can provide a wide range of opportunities to understand expectations of communal needs and experience communal engagement processes in the field will convey the very meaning of service-learning to the students. These opportunities will prepare students for the challenges that can be faced after graduation and advance a sense of civic engagement that prioritizes contributing to the communities. These types of experiences will also bring about the creation of organizations within the higher education environment focusing on socially responsible projects. As a result of student involvement, the universities will be able to foster confident individuals who are confident and prepared to take action to serve societal advantages whenever possible. In sum, service-learning as a result of student volunteering has many multiplier effects paving the way for positive externalities that promote the creation of student organizations, better preparedness for challenges, and obtaining a sense of civic engagement, thereby, increasing the level of effectiveness of university social responsibility.

6. Conclusions

This chapter delved into the notion concept of university social responsibility (USR) and explained its relationship with corporate social responsibility (CSR) by using a comparative case study method. The two cases used were (a) Saudi Arabia and (b) Türkiye. By using institutionalism as the basis for evaluation the role of university social responsibility, this chapter showed that there are many dynamics that explain the role of university social responsibility as an approach that can be applied by higher education institutions to enhance the societal well-being and accounting for the needs of the businesses. Considering the literature on corporate social responsibility and university social responsibility, four dimensions were obtained (which are knowledge creation, interaction facilitation, integration promotion, and boosting self-efficacy) specified in this chapter. These dimensions included 15 factors (see Figure 2 for the detailed illustration) that explain the function of universities under the light of the university social responsibility expectations. Given the Saudi Arabian case, this study found that Saudi policymakers tend to behave more responsibly to support USR-CSR cooperation when compared with the Turkish case study where the policymakers, whether on purpose or inadvertently, did not value the role of universities in interacting with the corporations to alleviate societal well-being. This chapter also laid out the mutual directions of the relationship between the two concepts and showcased that tasks implemented by the universities under the light of university social responsibility served as a catalyst to support businesses by increasing the levels of human capital and enhancing the society through a wide range of corollaries such as decreasing the unemployment rates, promote moral values, and create a sense of civic engagements (as seen in the case study for Saudi Arabia). Furthermore, this chapter provided several prescriptions that can be pursued by higher education institutions to increase the level of effectiveness when it comes to implementing tasks related to the university social responsibility understanding.

6.1 Future research directions

The literature on the links between university social responsibility and corporate social responsibility is meager. Since most studies tend to consider university social responsibility as part of corporate social responsibility, the researchers tend to abstain from solely examining the concept of university social responsibility. Thus, future researchers are recommended to focus on discovering the differences and similarities between these two concepts, thereby they are recommended to contribute to cumulative knowledge. Furthermore, scholars tend to prefer either qualitative approaches or scoping reviews in their published studies. There needs to be methodological variations in understanding the roles of university social responsibility logic over universities and the functions of these universities incorporating the expectations of university social responsibility into their behaviors when it comes to engagement with both communities and businesses. Thus, a dataset specifically focusing on the outcomes of implementing university social responsibility tasks can lead to methodological variation in the literature and enable scholars to utilize quantitative analyses by employing empirical approaches. This will provide tangible evidence depicting the interplay between the concepts of university social responsibility and corporate social responsibility and the effectiveness of initiatives consistent with the university social responsibility logic.

Conflict of interest

The author declares no conflict of interest.