**4. Data analysis**

Findings show that corporations from the service sector give top priority to employment (**Table 2**). This may reflect the companies' response to the current drive towards job nationalization by the government. Currently, companies are under pressure to develop tangible policies to attract the indigenous population to join the private sector. It is worth noting that traditionally Saudis prefer to work for the public sector. Statistics show that less than 15% of Saudis work in the private sector and almost 85% are employed in the public sector, while the underlying unemployment exceeds 10% [25]. Not surprisingly, employment is a top priority for the local community. This conclusion is reinforced when the combined priorities of the two groups of CSR experts, corporate and community, are taken into account. The combined results also rank employment as the first CSR priority. The second top criterion is Production Efficiency as it is vital for corporate sustainability. It is worth pointing out that since the community sample was mostly drawn from the faculty and students in the School of Business, it is only natural to see Production Efficiency come first in the community priorities and second when their priorities are combined with the corporate priorities.

Global priorities of all sub-criteria in **Table 3** show that Occupational Health and Safety, Intelligent Giving, Product Quality and Integrity and Anti-corruption Strategies rank high and when combined score slightly over 33% of the global priorities. When examining the global priorities for all of the CSR index sub-criteria, it is interesting to observe that although priorities vary between community and corporate judgments, the ranking of the CSR criteria does not change dramatically. This makes a compelling case for the corporate sector to meet its CSR commitments as determined by its own judgments.

#### *Corporate Social Responsibility*

The resulting index was implemented on 42 local corporations mostly from the service sector. Members of top management or CSR managers were interviewed. The interview rubric that resulted was converted into numbers according to **Table 4**. A summary of corporate performance is given in **Figure 4**, where Series 1 stands for level 4 i.e. complete CSR performance and Series 5 stands for no performance at all. **Figure 5** exhibits the corporate performance with respect to the top two criteria, namely, Employment and Product Efficiency. Results shows that 75% of the surveyed corporations are at levels beyond merely intention, 53% of the total 42 corporations are fully committed to the Employment criterion and 44% are fully committed to the Production Efficiency criterion. These results emphasize that corporations are committed to their own judgments when their judgments are elicited to prioritize index criteria and when preferences of other stakeholders (community) are taken into account. Meanwhile, it reflects the robust design of the proposed index. **Figure 6** presents the ranking of the surveyed corporations with respect to their CSR performance reported by the interviews and rated against the criteria prioritized by the stakeholders. Names of surveyed corporations are hidden for confidentiality purpose.

**Figure 4.** *CSR corporate performance.*

#### **Figure 5.**

*Percentage of corporate performance with respect to employment and productivity.*

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


#### **Figure 6.**

*Ranking the surveyed corporations according to their CSR performance as measured by the proposed AHP based index.*
