*3.1.2 Selecting the group decision makers*

To construct a proposed CSR index that is representative of the priorities of all the stakeholders, the opinions of executive managers from the three service sector categories were sought, i.e. private hospitals, banks and hotels. To remove any industry specific biases and to be able to make 'like with like' comparisons, corporations from one business sector, namely, services, were selected. Furthermore, to remove any potential bias across the three categories within the service sector, it was decided to combine judgments collected from the service executive managers with judgments from another independent CSR expert group. Such external validation is a valuable instrument in constructing a robust CSR index.

This independent CSR expert group was categorized as the wider local community, and it was comprised of purposefully selected individuals including academics, MBA students and managers from other service sectors. These individuals were chosen to represent the local community on the basis that they would be knowledgeable and possess expertise about CSR on par with the executive managers from the service sector organizations.

### *3.1.3 Eliciting expert judgments*

A questionnaire was designed to ascertain the judgments and opinions of the respondents since it is not feasible to have all of the groups in one setting. The questionnaire was based on a Google platform that was adjusted to facilitate the AHP pairwise comparisons. Using Saaty's absolute scale, the following two questions were posed for each element in the AHP hierarchy [18].


Acknowledging the fact that some survey participants may not be familiar with such a questionnaire and/or its format, and to remove potential bias and error, the survey was followed up with personal phone calls to the respondents. Furthermore, face-to-face meetings were conducted with a random sample of participants to ensure judgment reliability.

Of the 400 questionnaires posted, 255 were completed and returned. Of these, 37 were discarded because they were not complete. Thus, the sample comprised 218 completed questionnaires, reflecting a response rate of over 50%. The distribution of the respondents is illustrated in **Table 1**. For illustration, **Figure 2** shows pairwise comparison of Legislation with Social Development with respect to goal (Rank corporate with respect to their CSR performance).

*Measuring Corporate Social Responsibility Performance: A Comprehensive AHP Based Index DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.5772/intechopen.94463*


**Table 1.**

*Distribution of respondents.*


#### **Figure 2.**

*Pairwise comparison of legislation with social development with respect to goal (rank corporate with respect to their CSR performance).*

### *3.1.4 Establishing priorities*

Based on the judgments given by the respondents, priorities of every element were derived mathematically using the principal eigenvector of a matrix of pairwise comparisons of the main criteria and sub-criteria. AHP based software provides the mathematical calculation of the eigenvalue. It analyzes the priorities showing the relationship between the multi-layered stratification of criteria and sub-criteria to demonstrate a multitude of elements that were pairwise compared so as to determine their relative importance to the goal. The prioritization ranking of the five CSR elements that comprise the AHP criteria by the two groups of respondents (i.e., the local community and services corporate sector) are illustrated in **Table 2**. Global priorities for all the sub-criteria of the proposed CSR index are given in **Table 3**. Both corporate priorities and community priorities are combined implementing the geometric mean in **Tables 2** and **3**.

#### **3.2 Implementing the developed CSR index**

An intentional sample of the private sector corporations is selected to represent the alternatives for testing the proposed CSR index. Forty-two corporations were selected mostly from banks, hospitals and hotels. Interviews were conducted to collect information about their CSR practice.

In order to systemize the interviews, a rubric was developed. For each sub-criteria a set of questions was designed to address four levels of performance: leadership,


#### **Table 2.**

*Priorities of the main CSR index criteria by the local community and the services sector.*


#### **Table 3.**

*Global priorities as judged by all stakeholders - corporate sector and local community.*


#### **Table 4.**

*Summary of the rubric and intensity of its levels.*

*Measuring Corporate Social Responsibility Performance: A Comprehensive AHP Based Index DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.5772/intechopen.94463*


#### **Figure 3.**

*Intensity priorities of the level of CSR practiced by an alternative corporation.*

systems, implementation and achievement. A fifth level (None) was added; a value of (0) was assigned wherever a corporation does not address that specific criterion or was not practicing the CSR concept in managing its business, (**Table 4**). The resulting rubric from the interview was converted into numbers and intensity priorities were developed (**Figure 3**). The rating model of the AHP is implemented to rank the performance of the 42 surveyed corporations.
