05 26_3 Biljana Chroneos:tipska.qxd 47 Management: Journal of Sustainable Business and Management Solutions in Emerging Economies 2021/26(3) Some Aspects of Corporate Social Responsibility and Company Reputation: Evidence from Serbian Business Environment DOI: 10.7595/management.fon.2021.0024 Abstract: 1. Introduction Among the challenges that companies face in the contemporary business world is the pressing need that the corporate sector should pay more attention to the key social, institutional, ecological and other issues in their surroundings, and then suffer consequences if such activities happen to have negative effects upon the said surroundings. Since companies can no longer take care only of themselves, striving towards greater economic prosperity isolated from other actors they directly or indirectly affect, the economic responsibility, although remaining their primary responsibility, is no longer the sole one (Borojevic et al., 2017). * Corresponding author: Ema Karamata, e-mail: ema.karamata@gmail.com Research question: This paper examines some aspects of corporate social responsibility (CSR) and company reputation (CR) in the Serbian business environment during the COVID-19 pandemic. Motivation: The survival, growth and development of companies in the current business environment are conditioned by their capability to reach socially responsible decisions and carry out activities that meet the expectations of different stakeholders. The main motive for this research has stemmed from the current global corona virus pandemic and the way this state of affairs has affected socially responsible behaviour of companies. The research of activities Serbian companies carried out in the time of crisis prompted us to explore the possible relationship between corporate social responsibility and its effects on corporate reputation, and consequently business results. Research idea: An empirical research has been conducted with the view to investigate the position of the public on the importance and impact of CSR on corporate reputation, and also to determine the key factors that guide the decisions of people living in the Republic of Serbia to shop, bearing in mind the socially responsible behaviour of companies. Data: The sample included 173 respondents, the number that allowed valid conclusions. The questionnaire was anonymous; all the respondents were residents of Serbia with access to the internet and willing to fill in the questionnaire, either by following the link advertised on social media or replying to the e-mail. Tools: The gathered data were processed and analysed using descriptive and explorative statistics. Research hypotheses were tested by: Frequency tables, Crosstable procedures, Paired Samples t-test, Spearman`s coefficient of correlation, Chi-square test, and Phi coefficient of correlation, resulting in conclusions and corresponding suggestions. Findings: Respondents perceive companies as social actors driven not only by profit, but by the interest of the community and their business environment. They believe companies can assume their responsibilities through different aspects of doing business, especially by contributing to the improvement of their consumer’s lifestyle. The majority of respondents tend to buy from companies they perceive as socially responsible from the point of view of further development of the society and their ethical behaviour towards the community. Contribution: The findings can encourage the company’s management to direct their financial and organizational resources into the better management of the CSR, especially during the crisis, because solidarity and care for the most vulnerable part of the population lead to an improvement in the reputation and business results of a company. Keywords: corporate social responsibility, corporate reputation, customer shopping behaviour, consumers’ decisions, ethical responsibility, COVID-19 pandemic JEL Classification: M21, M31 Biljana Chroneos-Krasavac, Ema Karamata*, Jasna Soldić-Aleksić, Katica Radosavljević University of Belgrade, Faculty of Economics, Serbia The survival, growth and development of companies in the current business environment are conditioned by their capability of reaching socially responsible decisions and carry out activities that meet the expectations of different stakeholders. Discovering the ways of skillfully communicating positive effects of the corporate social responsibility to the public through marketing activities that directly affect the improvement of a company’s business reputation is gaining in importance, because it is associated, among other things, with the consumers’ decision to buy the products or use the services of socially responsible companies (Gielissen, 2011). Research reveals that corporate social responsibility is also important for a company’s public relations strategy – on the one hand, it defines the company and is a powerful tool for attracting consumers; on the other hand, it is a tool that buyers use to identify renowned companies and develop a relationship with them (Jones and Bartlett, 2009). When the public forms an opinion about a specific company, aspects of its business practices are evaluated based on views regarding how the company should behave relating to specific issues, i.e., based on the degree to which this expectation is met. Companies which possess the skill of transforming a good corporate social responsibility strategy into a successful corporate reputation increase their potential buyer base as a result, which in turn leads to increased sales and profitability (Milisavljevic, 2012). The review of literature reveals that a company’s image, reputation, and the factor of satisfying consumers’ needs, are affected by all dimensions of social responsibility (Jintao et al., 2020). The public support the companies considered to act responsibly and in a fair manner towards their employees, the environment, and the society as a whole, whereas the perceived financial performance of a company sometimes has far less of an impact on the overall assessment of a company’s reputation (Vlastelica, 2016). It has also been noticed that the element of competitiveness, i.e., financial capacity, is affected by environmental and economic social responsibility factors; whereas productivity and work efficiency are mostly related to social, shareholder and philanthropic aspects (Jintao et al., 2020). Consumers think that companies are motivated to act in a socially responsible manner for one of the following reasons: 1. they want to help the society; 2. and/or they want to improve their own business and make financial gains (Mohr et al., 2001). The perception of the motives of a company engaged in socially responsible activities depends on the degree of alignment between the area of social responsibility and the company’s principal business activity, as well as on the information regarding how long the company has been active in this domain. A positive perception of the motives results in a positive outcome regarding the intention to buy (Ellen et al., 2006). With all of the above-mentioned in mind, as well as the results of a relatively small number of studies on the connections between corporate social responsibility and corporate reputation, a study was conducted which looked into the public opinions on the importance of corporate social responsibility and the level of socially responsible business practices in the Republic of Serbia. The study aimed at identifying the expectations which participants have from such companies, as well as the degree of influence of socially responsible business practices on the companies’ corporate reputation and the concomitant effects on the consumers’ decisions to buy. In order to fulfil the purpose of the paper, i.e., to improve the understanding of corporate social responsibility and corporate reputation correlation, the main research questions are as follows: Is there a correlation between corporate social responsibility and corporate reputation? Does the attitude of respondents regarding the impact of corporate social responsibility on corporate reputation influence their buying decisions? Is there a significant difference between the levels of corporate social responsibility towards customers, employees, local community and the environment? In that regard, the authors used descriptive, explorative and inferential statistics to provide answers to the research questions. The paper is organized as follows: the introduction is followed by Section 2, which presents the theoretical background of the paper. Section 3 presents the data and the methodology applied, while Section 4 discusses the main empirical results. The final Section 5 summarizes the main findings of the research, presenting the limitations of the study and offering directions for future research. 2. Theoretical Background The theoretical background of the present paper is based upon linkages between the definitions of corporate social responsibility and corporate reputation, and findings of the contemporary studies indicating the existence of causal links between these two phenomena. Defining corporate social responsibility is challenging as it can be seen from a number of standpoints, and as it changes in step with the context, time period, and business culture. The best-known scientific definition of this concept is the one provided by Carroll: corporate social responsibility encompasses the economic, 48 Biljana Chroneos Krasavac, Ema Karamata, Jasna Soldić Aleksić, Katica Radosavljević 2021/26(3) legal, ethical, and discretionary (philanthropic) expectations that society has from an organization at a given time (Carroll, 1979). Based on this definition, Carroll developed a diagram of corporate social responsibility in the form of a four-tier pyramid (Carroll, 1991), with economic responsibility at its base, as only a profitable company can contribute to the development of its community and the society at large. The next is legal responsibility, which is based on obeying the law, i.e., a company should conduct its business in accordance with the expectations of the state and its legislation. What follows is ethical responsibility, according to which a company’s activities should be just and fair, and its business operations in line with the ethical principles and norms of the society and the community. The final responsibility that a company has towards the society and the community in which it conducts its business is philanthropic responsibility. It is the discretionary right of a company to be charitable and donate its resources, thus improving the quality of life in the society, i.e., being a good citizen in line with the society’s expectations. In order for philanthropic responsibility to be sustainable in the long term, it is necessary at the same time to create value for the users and improve the business operations of the company. Socially responsible is only that company which meets all four dimensions of Carroll’s pyramid (Figure 1). Figure 1: The pyramid of corporate social responsibility Source: Carroll, 1991 Although there is no clearly defined and generally accepted set of specific criteria which fully cover the scope of the corporate social responsibility concept, the current meaning of CSR refers to voluntary initiatives that a firm undertakes to champion social and environmental causes and communicate to stakeholders in order to garner their support through transparent, ethical processes (Taghian et al., 2015). What all the definitions of corporate social responsibility have in common is that companies have a moral obligation to the society in which they conduct their business to act ethically, and adhere to all the legal requirements and industry standards, striving to meet the society’s expectations. Unlike corporate social responsibility, reputation is a subjective term, as it is based on other people’s perceptions. Essentially, it is a collection of accumulated experiences, attitudes, emotions, and opinions of target public regarding an organization (Vlastelica, 2016). It was only after it was established that non-financial, i.e., non-material factors have a significant impact on a company’s market success that the concept of corporate reputation management started to become more prevalent in theory and practice (Sabate, 2003). Reputation can be defined in a number of ways: • A set of attributes ascribed to a company, resulting from past activities (Weigelt and Camerer, 1988); • A stakeholder's overall evaluation of a company over time. This evaluation is based on the stakeholder's direct experiences with the company, any other form of communication and symbolism 49 Management: Journal of Sustainable Business and Management Solutions in Emerging Economies 2021/26(3) �������� ��� � � � ������� ������� ���� ������ ������������� �� �� ����������� ��������������� ����� ���� �������� �������� � � � ������� ��� ����������� ������������� ���������������� ���� �������� � ������������� ������ � � � ������� �� � ����������� !�������������������������� ������������������� ����� ��� ����� ����������������� ��������� ��� �� � ���� � � � ������� ��� �������������� �������������� ����� ���������������� ��� ������� that provides information about the firm's actions and/or a comparison with the actions of other leading rivals (Gotsi and Wilson, 2001); • Stakeholders’ perceptions about an organization’s ability to create value relative to competitors (Rindova et al., 2005). Despite the lack of a consensus about the definition of reputation, its basic contributing factors, the methods of systematic reputation management, and even the reputation measurement models, the positive effects of reputation on a company are not disputed (Helm, 2007). The companies whose reputation is good, i.e., those that conduct their business in a socially responsible way, are often less susceptible to the control of state and local authorities, their influence on making specific political decisions is greater, and the negative consequences arising from crisis situations can be eliminated at least partially (Kotler and Lee, 2005). The analysis of the existing studies (Ozdora et al, 2016) in the area of corporate social responsibility revealed very little insight into the connection between corporate social responsibility and corporate reputation. However, some contemporary articles investigate theoretical linkages between corporate social responsibility and corporate reputation, resulting in positive, direct and significant relationship between CSR and CR (Hasan and Yun, 2017). This finding can be supported by a claim of Sanchez, Moran-Alvarez and Perez-Lppez (2020) that those companies with the acceptable level of CSR (workplace, governance, citizenship) also have the acceptable level of CR (Reputation Institute, 2015). Also, studies done by Aguilera-Caracuel and Guerrero-Villegas (2018), Rothenhoefer (2019) and Melo and Garrido-Morgado (2012) show that CSR actions are the most effective in influencing and increasing CR. Additionally, various conceptual investigations conducted so far have mostly been concerned with the conceptual closeness between corporate social responsibility and corporate reputation, with the majority of researchers in agreement that, although these two concepts are different, they are interconnected and mutually enhancing (Hillenbrand and Money, 2007). Even the earliest empirical research in this area demonstrates that the greater the contribution of a company to social well-being, the better its reputation (Fombrun and Shanley, 1990). More recent research has revealed that improving corporate reputation can act as an external motivator for companies to engage in socially responsible business practices, which is why a positive reputation can be considered a relevant result of socially responsible business practices (Garberg and Fombrun, 2006). Findings also reveal that CR mediates the relationship between CSR strategy and economic business value of multinational companies (MNCs) operating in emerging economies, meaning that good corporate reputation significantly influences MNCs strategy in corporate responsibility and economic business value. Thus, management of MNCs can enhance their corporate business objectives through sustainability practices (Abugre and Anlesinya, 2019). Furthermore, empirical results demonstrate that CSR activities have significantly positive influences not only on reputation, but also on customer loyalty and a brand image (Chen-Ying et al., 2017). Corporate abilities play a significant role in strengthening the association between corporate social responsibility initiatives and customer loyalty because high corporate abilities with well-executed corporate social responsibility initiatives lead to high loyalty and high reputation (Islam et al., 2021). In that respect, the significance of CSR actions is mandatory for organizational success and guides the policymakers, managers, and scholars (Islam et al., 2021). Pointing out the strategic importance of the policy of corporate social responsibility, Rettab et al. (2009) look into the potential effect that socially responsible practice has on business results, and discover that corporate social responsibility is positively correlated with corporate reputation, even in emerging economies, where the researchers expected that socially responsible activities would not be efficiently communicated to external actors due to the lack of adequate communication channels and skills. The research considers the connection between corporate social responsibility and corporate reputation from the standpoint of the consumer; it has been found that perceived corporate social responsibility has a significant impact on the perception of corporate reputation, which improves company legitimacy in the eyes of consumers (Vlastelica et al., 2012). Maden et al. (2012) examined the effect that corporate social responsibility has on corporate reputation, as well as how corporate reputation affects the behaviour of various groups of stakeholders. The results of the research indicate that a socially responsible behaviour of companies has a positive effect on reputation, which in turn has positive effects on the behaviour of buyers, employees, and investors. Consumers are more sensitive to negative information on socially responsible business practices, i.e., irresponsible behaviour of companies towards the society and the environment, relative to their response to positive information on socially responsible business practices. In assessing the reputation of a company and making 50 Biljana Chroneos Krasavac, Ema Karamata, Jasna Soldić Aleksić, Katica Radosavljević 2021/26(3) decisions on buying, consumers attach great value to information on companies’ socially responsible practices. Consumers’ expectations tend towards pro-social company practices and increase over time, although they are mostly determined by a specific society’s degree of development (Aguilera, 2007). CSR behaviours are of growing importance which shows the importance of sustainability to younger investors (Jeffrey et al., 2019). There has been much speculation on the future of CSR – it may cease to be regarded as a separate “add-on” to business operations and become fully integrated into all aspects of a company’s activities (Jiang, 2020). According to 2030 Sustainable Development Goals, all corporations have a moral obligation to work towards these goals by means of CSR projects and actions. The crucial year for a practical development of the concept of corporate social responsibility in the Republic of Serbia is 2008, when a company’s social responsibility appeared in the National Strategy of Sustainable Development (Sluzbeni glasnik/Official Gazette of/ RS, 2008), and Smart Kolektiv founded the Business Leader Forum with the support of the Institute for Sustainable Communities (ISC) and USAID. The Business Leader Forum is the first organization in Serbia to gather domestic and international companies, aiming to promote and incentivize the development of socially responsible business practices and the establishment of a long-term stable practice of corporate social responsibility in the business sector (Smart Kolektiv, 2008). In 2010, the Government of Serbia adopted The Strategy of Developing and Promoting Socially Responsible Business in the Republic of Serbia in 2010–2015. Although the Strategy does not contain a unique definition of socially responsible business, it is defined at the following three levels: relating to adhering to the legal requirements and standards adopted by the industry; continued mitigation or removal of negative effects of business practices on the society and the environment, as well as risk management; and increasing the positive effects of business practices and creating values geared towards social development and environment preservation (Sluzbeni glasnik/Official Gazette of/ RS, 2010). The Serbian Chamber of Commerce included in its Corporate Governance Code several principles of corporate social responsibility which should be adopted by all companies and implemented in their business operations. These principles pertain to identifying stakeholders and establishing cooperation with them, understanding their expectations, and establishing a corporate culture which promotes ethical conduct, environmental protection, and transparent business practices and reporting (Radovic & Djulic, 2014). Most companies operating in the Republic of Serbia base their socially responsible activities on ad hoc donations, and humanitarian and philanthropic activities, which means that they implement them without clearly delineated procedures. Only a small number of companies engage in planned socially responsible business practices, drawing up and publishing annual reports on corporate social responsibility (Ivanovic- Djukic, 2010). As stated in the Introduction above, for the purpose of this paper, the research conducted has been based on two main hypotheses. Research Hypothesis No. 1 reads: Ho: There is no significant positive relationship between corporate social responsibility and corporate reputation. H1: There is a significant positive relationship between corporate social responsibility and corporate reputation. Research Hypothesis No. 2 reads: Ho: The attitude of respondents regarding the impact of corporate social responsibility on corporate reputation does not influence their buying decisions. H1: The attitude of respondents regarding the impact of corporate social responsibility on corporate reputation influences their buying decisions. The additional hypothesis regarding the corporate social responsibility has to provide answers to the following questions: To whom companies are responsible – customers, employees, local community or the environment? Is there a difference between the level of responsibilities towards those parties? In which of those cases do we find the highest level of responsibility? Research Hypothesis No. 3 reads: Ho: There is no significant difference between the levels of corporate social responsibility towards customers, employees, local community and the environment. H1: There is a significant difference between the levels of corporate social responsibility towards customers, employees, local community and the environment. 51 Management: Journal of Sustainable Business and Management Solutions in Emerging Economies 2021/26(3) The aim of the above proposed hypotheses is to learn the attitude of the public on the importance of corporate social responsibility and the level of socially responsible business practices in the Republic of Serbia. 3. Methodology The research was conducted during the coronavirus (COVID-19) pandemic, between March and April 2020. The companies’ responses to this crisis reveal, on the one hand, how consistent they are in their promises, and, on the other hand, how the population responds to such company activities, i.e., what the opinions regarding a company are and whether they affect the future intentions of consumers to buy. The methodological framework of the research is based on the assessment of companies’ social responsibility at the individual level, namely, what is investigated is the corporate social responsibility as perceived by the consumers. In addition to the communicated general views on company social responsibility and how it affects their buying-related behaviour, the participants also communicated their views on the socially responsible activities of five companies selected from the list of “100 Top Businesses as Regards Business Success” from the 2018 Report on 100 Top Businesses, published annually by the Serbian Business Registers Agency. The following five companies were selected from the food and beverage industry within the process manufacturing sector, which participated in the fight against the pandemic. The selected companies, which have long histories of socially responsible engagement, include Coca-Cola, Imlek, Sunoko (MK Grupa), IM Matijevic, Marbo Product (PepsiCo Zapadni Balkan), and are shown in Table 1. Table 1: Social responsibility of the selected companies Source: Web-sites of the mentioned companies In designing the questionnaire, the authors opted for a qualitative approach. After reviewing the relevant literature, they used the process expert panel – Delphi method, to produce the satisfactory content of the questionnaire. Three independent experts from different fields of expertise (research, professional associations, and employers) were consulted in the process of questions design. The questions were modified in several iterations, and the final version of the questionnaire, comprising 25 questions divided into three sets, was made available online and used as a research instrument. The first set of questions referred to socio-demographic data of the respondents. The second set of questions was concerned with the level of the participants’ understanding of the corporate social responsibility concept and the attitudes of the consumers in general to the concept. The last set of questions related to the specific five companies and their socially responsible practices, especially the activities carried out in March and April 2020 that had to do with the current epidemiological situation in the country caused by the coronavirus pandemic. 173 anonymous responses were received; all respondents were residents of the Republic of Serbia, who had access to the internet and were willing to answer the questions either by following the link advertised on 52 Biljana Chroneos Krasavac, Ema Karamata, Jasna Soldić Aleksić, Katica Radosavljević 2021/26(3) ������� ���� � �������� ������� ����������� ������� ��������� ������� � ���� ���������� ��� � ������������ �� ������ ������������� ��������� ������ ���������� ����������� ��������� ����� �� ���� ������������ ������ � �� �� �� �� �� �� �������������� � �������� ���� ����� ������� � ����� ���� �� �� ������������ �� �� �� �������������������� ��� ������ � � ���� ��� � ������ � �� � �� ��� ���� ���� ������������ ����� ��� ������ ������� � ���������� !������ �������� � � "#� ���� ����������$��� �� � ����� ��� ���� �� ���� ��� � ������ � �� �� ��������� ������� � ����������� �� ��������������� � � �� �� ����������� � � � �� � �� ���� � � ������������ ����������������� ����� ��� ��� �������� !��� �� "������ ������� � ��������������� ����� �� ���� ������������ ������ � �� �� �� "������� � �� ���� ������ � ���� ����������������$� ��� ��� �������������%������������������������ � ��� ��������� ���� ������ �� ����� ������� ����� ������� � �� ���� ������� �������� �������� � social media or received by e-mail. The sample of 173 respondents was sufficient to draw valid conclusions. The data gathered were processed and analysed using descriptive, explorative and inferential statistics. Statistical techniques used for testing the relationship between variables were: Frequency tables, Crosstable procedures, Friedman test for related samples, Spearman`s correlation coefficient, Chi-square test and Phi coefficient of correlation. 4. Results and Discussion The analysis of the socio-demographic data reveal that the majority of the participants who took part in this research are female 72.1%. A large share of the participants is in their twenties (62.2%) and/or thirties (29.1%), with only a small number of people in other age groups (2.9% of the participants are between 41 and 50, 3.5% of them between 51 and 60, while only 1.7% of them were 60+). When it comes to the educational structure of the research participants, the majority have higher education qualifications – 74.4% graduated from a university (hold either bachelor or master degrees), 4.7% hold a PhD, with the same proportion of them who completed a college of vocational studies. The second part of the questionnaire was focused on discovering how well the participants were familiar with the term “corporate social responsibility”. The results reveal that 34.9% are informed of the basics of the corporate social responsibility concept, with 39% of them having a solid knowledge of the concept, and as much as 8.7% being well versed in the area of socially responsible business operation. Here is another important indicator: 75% of the participants have participated personally in the activities aimed at environmental protection or the improvement of social well-being. The greatest proportion of participants perceive a company as socially responsible if: it is concerned with the environmental protection (89.5%); it takes care of its employees (78.5%); it is involved in the organization of humanitarian campaigns, donates or participates in other philanthropic activities (69%); and it invests in the local community (64%). Only 28.5% of the participants find a company socially responsible if it produces environmentally-friendly and high-quality products. Although almost 90% of the research participants believe that companies do have some sort of responsibility towards the society, which they should assume through different aspects of their business activities, less than 2% of them think that the majority of companies in Serbia are socially responsible. Having in mind the fact that the concept of corporate social responsibility has been present in the Republic of Serbia only in the last 20 years, it comes as no surprise that 78.5% of the participants perceive Serbian companies as socially irresponsible. As the most important reasons for a company to assume socially responsible business practice, the participants list the environmental protection and helping the society (52.3%), followed by the improvement of the company’s reputation (32.6%). Another finding of the research is that a large number of participants are ready to support companies with some social goal, those that contribute to the community or have the environmental protection on their agenda, by opting for their products or services. Exceptionally large proportion of participants are ready to give priority to the products or services of socially responsible companies, even if it means paying more (93.6%) or to go to a longer distance (88%) in order to do the shopping. The encouraging finding is that some consumers are ready to pay even twice the amount for a product or service if it comes from a socially responsible company (6.4%), or to go to a more distant shop to buy such product or service, regardless of how far away it is (13%). The analysis of data on a company’s reputation suggests that only 3.5% of the participants think that a socially responsible business operation does not affect the reputation of a company, while 95.3% of the participants agree that socially responsible business operation has positive impact on a company’s reputation. This result is in line with the already pronounced opinion of almost the third of the participants – that companies opt for socially responsible actions so as to enhance their public image. When it comes to the reputation from the point of view of consumers, the research findings indicate that the reputation of a company does affect a consumer’s decision to buy a product or service: 19.2% of the participants feel the maximum impact, while 5.6% find the impact less prevailing but still existent. Accordingly, as many as 93.6% of the participants would desist from buying from a socially irresponsible company if proper substitutes are available. To conclude, people strongly react to negative information on companies, as a large number of conducted research show (Sen and Bhattacharya, 2001). The largest number of the participants (43.6%) rather choose to buy from companies they perceive as socially responsible, based on the company’s commercials and social campaigns. A somewhat smaller proportion of the participants do not pay much attention to the social responsibility of companies but still, if 53 Management: Journal of Sustainable Business and Management Solutions in Emerging Economies 2021/26(3) they have a choice, rather turn to the products or services of socially responsible companies. The number of participants at the either end of extreme is almost the same – almost identical number of consumers either do not pay attention at all to the social responsibility of a company when shopping, or do find it extremely important that the companies they buy from be socially responsible. The last part of the research was concerned with the analysis of the consumers’ attitudes towards the social responsibility of the five selected companies and their recent activities caused by coronavirus pandemic in our country. The first two companies from the list themed “100 Top Businesses as Regards Business Success”, published by the Serbian Business Registers Agency in the previous year, namely Coca-Cola and Imlek, are mostly perceived as socially responsible. When it comes to the social responsibility of Sunoko (MK Grupa) and Marbo Products, opinions differ, especially about the latter, while a slightly larger number of consumers is yet of the opinion that Sunoko is not a socially responsible company. IM Matijevic has the poorest reputation, since the majority of participants see it as socially irresponsible. Such a result is interesting, since this company does tend to protect the environment from the negative impacts of the industrial production, takes care of the safety and health of its employees, and frequently donates money to charity (see Table 1). This raises the question of reasons behind such findings and why a company carrying out socially responsible activities does not manage to establish a better reputation (Figure 2). Figure 2: Perceived social responsibilities of companies All the five companies answered the call of the Serbian Chamber of Commerce and found the way to join in the fight against the current coronavirus, either by procuring the necessary medical equipment or donating their products or goods. Although those activities were in the news across the media and internet portals more than once and for several days, a relatively small number of the participants (14% at the most, and when it comes to Imlek) are aware of such activities. The information that certain companies donated money, ventilators, personal protective equipment and medical safety supplies, goods or other products necessary for the fight against coronavirus (COVID-19) positively affected 92.5% of the participants. As much as 79.1% of consumers declare that they will take into account the fact that some companies acted socially responsibly during the coronavirus pandemic the next time they consider buying their products. Such findings directly point to the benefits the companies have when doing business in a socially responsible way, which indirectly strengthens their corporate image and reputation, and consequently generate sales. By analysing the relationship between the impact of a company’s reputation on a consumer’s decision to buy its products and the extent to which a consumer pays attention to CSR, the authors tried to determine the importance of CSR:CR relation to a customer when deciding which product to buy. In order to examine the previous relationship, correlation analysis, i.e., Spearman`s correlation coefficient, was applied. The results have showed that there is a statistically significant but relatively low positive correlation between the mentioned variables (rs=0.391, n=173, p=0.000). Therefore, the Research Hypothesis No. 1 was accepted. If the correlation is examined separately for men and women, it can be concluded that in the male population this correlation bears no statistical significance (rs=0.219, n=48, p=0.135), unlike the female population (rs=0.454, n=125, p=0.000). The same correlation examined in the context of the age of respondents points to the statistical significance of this correlation in the population under 30 years of age (rs=0.313, n=108, 54 Biljana Chroneos Krasavac, Ema Karamata, Jasna Soldić Aleksić, Katica Radosavljević 2021/26(3) 64% 67% 46% 14% 51% 36% 33% 54% 86% 49% �� ��� ��� ��� ��� �� �� ��� ��� �� ���� Socially responsible Socially irresponsible 55 Management: Journal of Sustainable Business and Management Solutions in Emerging Economies 2021/26(3) �������� ���� �� ���� �������� ���� ���� ��� ��� ����� ��������� ������� ������� ������ ������� �������� ���� ���� ��� ��� ����� ��������� ��������� ����� ������ �� ���� �������� ���� ���� ��� ��� ����� ��������� ������ �� � � ��� ���� ������ ������� �������� ���� ���� ��� ��� ����� ��������� ���������� � !�� �� �� ��"#�� �� ���� � p=0.001), and even more pronounced significance in the population over 30, i.e., the analysis produced a statistically significant positive correlation coefficient of 0.5 (rs=0.5, n=65, p=0.000). In order to prove the Research Hypothesis No. 2, the relationship between the attitude of respondents towards socially responsible business operations on the reputation of a company and the respondents’ decision to buy that company’s products, was examined. By applying Chi-square test, it has been concluded that between the above variables, there is a statistically significant correlation (Chi-square=14.362, df=2, sig=0.001; Phi correlation coefficient 0.288, p=0.001), i.e., that the attitude of the respondents towards socially responsible business operations and the reputation of a company affects their decision to buy that company’s products. This confirms Research Hypothesis No. 2. The Research Hypothesis No. 3 was aimed at providing the answer to the following questions: To whom companies are responsible – customers, employees, local community or the environment? Is there a difference between the level of responsibilities towards those parties? In which of those cases do we find the highest level of responsibility? Mean values and standard deviations of responses to the extent to which the companies in Serbia are responsible towards consumers, employees, local community and the environment (on the scale of 1 to 5) are presented in Table 2. Table 2: Mean values and standard deviations of variables (on the scale of 1 to 5) The results of the Friedman test show statistically significant differences between the average attitude towards customers, employees, local community and the environment (N=173, Chi-Square=112.210, df=3, p=0.000). This confirms our Research Hypothesis No. 3. Conclusion The intention of this paper is to improve the understanding of the relationship between corporate social responsibility and corporate reputation. To this day, there has not been a comprehensive definition of corporate social responsibility, since the concept keeps changing depending on the context, the point of view, the era and the business culture. What is common to all the definitions is that corporate social responsibility includes the moral obligation of companies towards the society around them to do business in the ethical way, fully abiding by the laws and maintaining the industry standards, and to contribute to the reduction and the elimination of negative and/or the increase of positive effects of their operation on the society and the environment. The research findings indicate that the participants perceive the companies as social actors which should not care for profit only, but also for the interest of the community and their business environment. They believe that companies should prove their responsibility in different aspects of their business operation and that it would positively affect people’s quality of life. The participants’ views of the responsibility of companies operating in the Serbian market to consumers, local community, employees and the environment, are distinctly negative – as much as 78.5% of them hold that the majority of companies do not do business in the socially responsible way. This can be partly explained by the fact that until 20 years ago the companies in this market were not seriously involved in socially responsible activities, and partly by the fact that the majority of companies in Serbia are micro-businesses – even 87% of the total number, which mostly have not adopted a socially responsible practice. All three hypotheses presented in this article are confirmed by the conducted research, meaning that practicing social responsibility builds positive views of the participants on a company, i.e., positively affects its reputation. In assessing a REFERENCES [1] Abugre, J. B., & Anlesinya, A. (2020). Corporate social responsibility strategy and economic business value of multinational companies in emerging economies: The mediating role of corporate reputation. Business Strategy & Development, 3, 4–15. DOI: 10.1002/bsd2.70 [2] Aguilera, R., Rupp, D., Williams, C., and Ganapathi, J. (2007). Putting the S Back in Corporate Social Responsibility: A Multilevel Theory of Social Change in Organizations. The Academy of Management Review, 32(3), 836863. DOI: 10.2307/20159338 [3] Aguilera-Caracuel, J., & Guerrero-Villegas, J. (2018). How corporate social responsibility helps MNEs to improve their reputation. The moderating effects of geographical diversification and operating in developing regions. Corporate Social Responsibility and Environmental Management, 25(4), 355–372. DOI: 10.1002/csr.1465 [4] Borojevic, K., Nestorovic, O. and Borojevic, N. (2017). Koncept korporativnog upravljanja i drustvene odgovornosti u cilju unapredjenja poslovanja preduzeca, Svarog, 15, 108–119. DOI: 10.7251/SVR1715108B [5] Carroll, A. B. (1979). A three-dimensional conceptual model of corporate social performance. Academy of Management Review, 4, 497–505. DOI: 10.2307/257850 [6] Carroll, A. B. (1991). The pyramid of corporate social responsibility: toward the moral management of organizational stakeholders. Business Horizons, 34(4), 39–48. DOI: 10.1016/0007-6813(91)90005-G [7] Chen-Ying L., Wei-Chen C., and Hsin-Ching L. (2017). An investigation of the effects of corporate social responsibility on corporate reputation and customer loyalty – evidence from the Taiwan non-life insurance industry. Social Responsibility Journal, 13(2), 355–369. DOI: 10.1108/SRJ-01-2016-0006 56 Biljana Chroneos Krasavac, Ema Karamata, Jasna Soldić Aleksić, Katica Radosavljević 2021/26(3) company’s reputation, consumers consider the level of corporate social responsibility of a company, where the largest proportion of consumers tend to buy from businesses they perceive as socially responsible, based on their commercials and social campaigns, and if faced with a choice, prefer to buy the products or services from the companies that behave ethically towards the community and contribute to further development of the society. Although each of the five selected companies has carried out certain socially responsible activities, the research shows that the public is not really aware of such activities. Although two out of five companies, as the research suggests, enjoy the reputation of socially responsible companies, only one of them (Coca-Cola) is good at presenting its socially responsible practice, since the public is familiar with its socially responsible actions. If they are to build the reputation of socially responsible companies, the other companies should improve their marketing capabilities and adapt their public relations strategies in order to properly present their involvement in the ecological, social and institutional issues of the society. Although few participants are abreast of the latest activities of the socially responsible companies, the discovery of the fact that the companies have been involved in solving the current national health issue leaves exceptionally positive impression, which also positively affects the consumers’ intention to buy. The study has a few limitations, hence several suggestions for future studies are thereby proposed. As non-probability sampling is used in the research, the results may only be applied to the sample of the study and cannot be generalized to include the whole population of the Republic of Serbia. Next, the study sample was limited only to the Serbian citizens with the access to the Internet (aged 20 to 50, with very small number of participants over 50), since the researchers used an online survey. It is advisable to conduct the same research offline as well, so the results of the research can be generalized to the whole population of the Republic of Serbia. Future researchers are also encouraged to conduct a longitudinal study to capture the actual attitude of the population towards social responsibility of companies in non-challenging times (since this survey was conducted during COVID-19 pandemic). Corporate social responsibility has become an important part of the operation of contemporary companies, and in the future, it will surely only grow in relevance, so the obtained results can be of help to the management of companies to direct their financial and organizational resources in the better management of the corporate social responsibility and the reputation, which positively impacts the companies’ performance. The findings of this study can also serve the government to stimulate the development of business policies and culture where corporate social responsibility would be imprinted in companies’ environmentally-friendly products. When it comes to the level of trust among the citizens of Serbia that companies do operate in the interest of the society, the Smart Kolektiv research (2014) suggests that the trust has evidently grown in recent years. The findings of our research point to the fact that the increase of trust in the international companies is greater compared to the local ones. This finding indicates that large international companies have managed to adopt and put into practice in Serbia the modern business practice, while there is still a lot of space for local companies to adopt a socially responsible business practice. [8] Ellen, P. S., Webb, D., J., and Mohr, L., A. (2006). Building Corporate Associations: Consumer Attributions for Corporate Socially Responsible Programs. Journal of the Academy of Marketing Science, 34(2), 147–157. DOI: 10.1177/0092070305284976 [9] Fombrun, C., and Shanley, M. (1990). What’s in a name? Reputation building and corporate strategy. Academy of Management Journal, 33(2), 233–258. DOI: 10.2307/256324 [10] Garberg, N. A. and Fombrun, C. (2006). Corporate citizenship: Creating intangible assets across institutional environment. Academy of Management Review, 31, 329–346. DOI: 10.5465/amr.2006.20208684 [11] Gielissen, R. (2011). Why do consumers buy socially responsible products? International Journal of Business and Social Science, 2, 21–35. [12] Gotsi, M., Wilson and A. M. (2001). Corporate reputation: seeking a definition. Corporate Communications: An International Journal, 6(1), 24–30. DOI: 10.1108/13563280110381189 [13] Hasan, R. and Yun, T. M. (2017). Theoretical Linkage between Corporate Social Responsibility and Corporate Reputation. Indonesian Journal of Sustainability Accounting and Management, 1(2), 80–89. DOI: 10.28992/ijsam.v1i2.32 [14] Helm, S. (2007). One reputation or many? Comparing stakeholders’ perceptions of corporate reputation. Corporate Communications: An International Journal, 12(3), 238–254. DOI: 10.1108/13563280710776842 [15] Hillenbrand, C. and Money, K. (2007). Corporate responsibility and corporate reputation: Two separate concepts or two sides of the same coin. Corporate Reputation Review, 10 (4), 261–277. DOI: 10.1057/palgrave.crr.1550057 [16] Islam, T., Islam, R., Pitafi, AH., Xiaobei, L., Rehmani, M., Irfan, M., &Mubarak, MS., (2021). The impact of corporate social responsibility on customer loyalty: The mediating role of corporate reputation, customer satisfaction, and trust. Sustainable Production and Consumption, 25, 123–135. DOI: 10.1016/j.spc.2020.07.019 [17] Ivanovic-Djukic, M. (2010). Promovisanje drustveno odgovornog poslovanja preduzeca u Srbiji. Sociologija, 53(1), 21–42. DOI:10.2298/SOC1101021I [18] Jeffrey, S., Rosenberg, S. and McCabe, B. (2019). Corporate social responsibility behaviors and corporate reputation. Social Responsibility Journal, 15(3), 395–408. DOI:10.1108/SRJ-11-2017-0255 [19] Jiang L. (2020). Definitions of Corporate Social Responsibility. In: Crowther D., Seifi S. (eds) The Palgrave Handbook of Corporate Social Responsibility (1–20). Palgrave Macmillan, Cham. DOI: 10.1007/978-3-030-22438-7_1-1 [20] Jintao L., Licheng R., Siqin Y., Jiayuan Q., Asta M. and Justas S. (2020). Exploring the relationship between corporate social responsibility and firm competitiveness. Economic Research – Ekonomska istrazivanja, 33(1), 1621–1646. DOI: 10.1080/1331677X.2020.1761419 [21] Jones, K., and Bartlett, J. L. (2009). The strategic value of corporate social responsibility: a relationship management framework for public relationship practice. PRism 6(1) Retrieved from: https://www.prismjournal.org/uploads/1/2/5/6/125661607/v6-no1-a5.pdf [22] Kotler, P., and Lee, N. (2005). Corporate social responsibility: Doing the most good for your company and your cause. Hoboken, New Jersey: John Wiley & Sons, Inc. [23] Maden, C., Arikan, E., Telci, E. E., and Kantur, D. (2012). Linking corporate social responsibility to corporate reputation: A study on understanding behavioral consequences. Social and Behavioral Sciences, 58, 655–664. DOI: 10.1016/j.sbspro.2012.09.1043 [24] Melo, T., & Garrido-Morgado, A. (2012). Corporate reputation: A combination of social responsibility and industry. Corporate Social Responsibility and Environmental Management, 19(1), 11–31. DOI: 10. 1002/csr.260 [25] Milisavljevic, M. (2012). Drustvena odgovornost preduzeca. Marketing, 43(3), 173–180. [26] Mohr, L. A., Webb, D. J., and Harris, K. E. (2001). Do Consumers Expect Companies to be Socially Responsible? The Impact of Corporate Social Responsibility on Buying Behavior. Journal of Consumer Affairs, 35(1), 45–72. DOI: 10.1111/j.1745-6606.2001.tb00102.x [27] Ozdora Aksak, E., Ferguson, M. A., and Atakan Duman, S. (2016). Corporate social responsibility and CSR fit as predictors of corporate reputation: A global perspective. Public Relations Review, 42(1), 79– 81. DOI: 10.1016/j.pubrev.2015.11.004 [28] Radovic, V., Djulic, K. (Eds), (2014). Zbornik radova: Korporativno upravljanje za clanove uprave privrednog drustva, Beograd, Srbija: Privredna komora Srbije, Međunarodna finansijska korporacija, Pravni fakultet Univerziteta u Beogradu. [29] Reputation Institute (2015). The Global RepTrak® 100: The World's Most Reputable Companies 2015. Retrieved from: https://www.rankingthebrands.com/PDF/RepTrak%20Global%202015,%20Reputation%20Institute.pdf [30] Rettab, B., Ben Brik, A., and Mellahi, K. (2009). A Study of Management Perceptions of the Impact of Corporate Social Responsibility on Organisational Performance in Emerging Economies: The Case of Dubai. Journal of Business Ethics, 89, 371–390. DOI: 10.1007/s10551-008-0005-9 57 Management: Journal of Sustainable Business and Management Solutions in Emerging Economies 2021/26(3) [31] Rindova, V. P., Williamson, I. O., Petkova, A. P. and Sever, J. M. (2005). Being good or being known: An empirical examination of the dimensions, antecedents, and consequences of organizational reputation. Academy of Management Journal, 48(6), 1033–1049. DOI: 10.2307/20159728 [32] Rothenhoefer, L. M. (2019). The impact of CSR on corporate reputation perceptions of the public – A configurational multi-time, multi-source perspective. Business Ethics: A European Review, 28(2), 141– 155. DOI: 10.1111/beer.12207 [33] Sabate, J. M. D. L. F., and Puente, E. D. Q. (2003). Empirical analysis of the relationship between corporate reputation and financial performance: A survey of the literature. Corporate Reputation Review, 6(2), 161–177. DOI: 10.1057/palgrave.crr.1540197 [34] Sanchez Torne, I., Moran Alvarez, JC., &Perez Lopez, JA. (2020). The importance of corporate social responsibility in achieving high corporate reputation. Corporate Social Responsibility and Environmental Management, 27(6), 2692–2700. DOI: 10.1002/csr.1993 [35] Sen, S. and Bhattacharya, C.B. (2001). Does doing good always lead to doing better? Consumer reactions to corporate social responsibility. Journal of Marketing Research, 38(2), 225–243. DOI: 10.1509/jmkr.38.2.225.18838 [36] Sluzbeni glasnik RS (2008). Nacionalna strategija odrzivog razvoja. Sluzbeni glasnik RS,. 57/2008. Retrieved from: http://www.zzps.rs/wp/pdf/sodrzivog%20razvoja.pdf [37] Sluzbeni glasnik RS (2010). Strategija razvoja i promocije drustveno odgovornog poslovanja u Republici Srbiji za period od 2010. do 2015. godine. Sluzbeni glasnik RS, 55/05. Retrieved from: https://www.minrzs.gov.rs/sr/dokumenti/predlozi-i-nacrti/sektor-za-zastitu-osoba-sa- invaliditetom/strategije [38] Smart Kolektiv (2008). BLF newsletter. Retrieved from: http://novi.smartkolektiv.org/wp- content/uploads/2018/03/FPL-2008.pdf [39] Smart Kolektiv (2014). CSR u Srbiji – Analiza stanja i primeri dobre prakse. Beograd: Smart kolektiv [40] Taghian, M., D’Souza, C., and Polonsky, M. (2015). A stakeholder approach to corporate social responsibility, reputation and business performance. Social Responsibility Journal, 11(2), 340–363. DOI: 10.1108/SRJ-06-2012-0068 [41] Vlastelica, T. (2016). Korporativna reputacija i drustvena odgovornost. Beograd: Zaduzbina Andrejevic [42] Vlastelica, T., Krstovic, J. and Cicvaric Kostic, S. (2012). Poslovna opravdanost drustveno odgovornog poslovanja. Marketing, 43(3), 191–198. DOI: 10.5937/markt1203191V [43] Weigelt, K. and Camerer, C. (1988). Reputation and corporate strategy: A review of recent theory and applications. Strategic Management Journal, 9(5), 443–454. DOI: 10.1002/smj.4250090505 Received: 2020-09-21 Revisions requested: 2020-10-26 Revised: 2021-06-06 (3 times) Accepted: 2021-06-11 Biljana Chroneos Krasavac University of Belgrade, Faculty of Economics, Serbia biljanak@ekof.bg.ac.rs Chroneos Krasavac Biljana, a PhD in Business Administration, was born in 1964 in Novi Sad. Ms. Chroneos Krasavac worked in numerous projects funded by the US Government, and/or the USAID. In August 2006, she was appointed by the Government of the Republic of Serbia as Serbia's Representative with the World Bank in Washington. In addition to the experience gained at the World Bank, she has also gained several years long experience by working for the Government in the capacity of Special Advisor to the Minister of Finance and Advisor to the Director of the Flood Affected Areas Assistance and Rehabilitation Office. Currently, she is holding the position of the Director of the World Bank project “Inclusion and Early Childhood Development“ 58 Biljana Chroneos Krasavac, Ema Karamata, Jasna Soldić Aleksić, Katica Radosavljević 2021/26(3) About the Authors Ema Karamata University of Belgrade, Faculty of Economics, Serbia ema.karamata@gmail.com Karamata Ema had graduated from the University of Belgrade, Faculty of Economics, where she has also gained her Master's Degree, and where she is currently enrolled as a PhD student at the Business Management department. The main areas of Ema's interests and expertise are: business management, information technologies, digital marketing, data analysis. She has participated in a number of projects in a domain of business management, and conducted several surveys. Jasna Soldić-Aleksić University of Belgrade, Faculty of Economics, Serbia jasna.soldic@ekof.bg.ac.rs Soldić-Aleksić Jasna holds a position of Full professor at the Department of Mathematics and Statistics, Faculty of Economics, University of Belgrade. Her main subjects of research are: applied data analysis, business data management and applications. She has gained research experience at the London School of Economics and Political Science, Central European University in Budapest, Limburg Business School, Belgium; Faculty of Management Science and Information Systems, State University of New York. She is a member of the following professional bodies: International Association of Statistical Computing, Serbian Association of Economists, Serbian Marketing Association SEMA. She has published a a number books on the subject of the applied data analysis and over 100 articles in the relevant scientific and professional journals. Katica Radosavljević University of Belgrade, Faculty of Economics, Serbia katica.radosavljevic@ekof.bg.ac.rs Katica Radosavljević was born on 16 July, 1975 in Gothenburg, Sweden. Since 2000, Katica Radosavljević has been employed at the Faculty of Economics University of Belgrade, as a Research Associate. She defended her PhD dissertation on the following subject “The strategy of marketing channel development in agribusiness of the Republic of Serbia”. She was a manager of two projects related to the valuation of corporate capital. She also assisted on numerous projects. 59 Management: Journal of Sustainable Business and Management Solutions in Emerging Economies 2021/26(3) << /ASCII85EncodePages false /AllowTransparency false /AutoPositionEPSFiles true /AutoRotatePages /All /Binding /Left /CalGrayProfile (Dot Gain 20%) /CalRGBProfile (sRGB IEC61966-2.1) /CalCMYKProfile (U.S. Web Coated \050SWOP\051 v2) /sRGBProfile (sRGB IEC61966-2.1) /CannotEmbedFontPolicy /Warning /CompatibilityLevel 1.4 /CompressObjects /Tags /CompressPages true /ConvertImagesToIndexed true /PassThroughJPEGImages true /CreateJobTicket false /DefaultRenderingIntent /Default /DetectBlends true /DetectCurves 0.0000 /ColorConversionStrategy /LeaveColorUnchanged /DoThumbnails false /EmbedAllFonts true /EmbedOpenType false /ParseICCProfilesInComments true /EmbedJobOptions true /DSCReportingLevel 0 /EmitDSCWarnings false /EndPage -1 /ImageMemory 1048576 /LockDistillerParams false /MaxSubsetPct 100 /Optimize true /OPM 1 /ParseDSCComments true /ParseDSCCommentsForDocInfo true /PreserveCopyPage true /PreserveDICMYKValues true /PreserveEPSInfo true /PreserveFlatness true /PreserveHalftoneInfo false /PreserveOPIComments false /PreserveOverprintSettings true /StartPage 1 /SubsetFonts true /TransferFunctionInfo /Apply /UCRandBGInfo /Preserve /UsePrologue false /ColorSettingsFile () /AlwaysEmbed [ true ] /NeverEmbed [ true ] /AntiAliasColorImages false /CropColorImages true /ColorImageMinResolution 300 /ColorImageMinResolutionPolicy /OK /DownsampleColorImages true /ColorImageDownsampleType /Bicubic /ColorImageResolution 300 /ColorImageDepth -1 /ColorImageMinDownsampleDepth 1 /ColorImageDownsampleThreshold 1.50000 /EncodeColorImages true /ColorImageFilter /DCTEncode /AutoFilterColorImages true /ColorImageAutoFilterStrategy /JPEG /ColorACSImageDict << /QFactor 0.15 /HSamples [1 1 1 1] /VSamples [1 1 1 1] >> /ColorImageDict << /QFactor 0.15 /HSamples [1 1 1 1] /VSamples [1 1 1 1] >> /JPEG2000ColorACSImageDict << /TileWidth 256 /TileHeight 256 /Quality 30 >> /JPEG2000ColorImageDict << /TileWidth 256 /TileHeight 256 /Quality 30 >> /AntiAliasGrayImages false /CropGrayImages true /GrayImageMinResolution 300 /GrayImageMinResolutionPolicy /OK /DownsampleGrayImages true /GrayImageDownsampleType /Bicubic /GrayImageResolution 300 /GrayImageDepth -1 /GrayImageMinDownsampleDepth 2 /GrayImageDownsampleThreshold 1.50000 /EncodeGrayImages true /GrayImageFilter /DCTEncode /AutoFilterGrayImages true /GrayImageAutoFilterStrategy /JPEG /GrayACSImageDict << /QFactor 0.15 /HSamples [1 1 1 1] /VSamples [1 1 1 1] >> /GrayImageDict << /QFactor 0.15 /HSamples [1 1 1 1] /VSamples [1 1 1 1] >> /JPEG2000GrayACSImageDict << /TileWidth 256 /TileHeight 256 /Quality 30 >> /JPEG2000GrayImageDict << /TileWidth 256 /TileHeight 256 /Quality 30 >> /AntiAliasMonoImages false /CropMonoImages true /MonoImageMinResolution 1200 /MonoImageMinResolutionPolicy /OK /DownsampleMonoImages true /MonoImageDownsampleType /Bicubic /MonoImageResolution 1200 /MonoImageDepth -1 /MonoImageDownsampleThreshold 1.50000 /EncodeMonoImages true /MonoImageFilter /CCITTFaxEncode /MonoImageDict << /K -1 >> /AllowPSXObjects false /CheckCompliance [ /None ] /PDFX1aCheck false /PDFX3Check false /PDFXCompliantPDFOnly false /PDFXNoTrimBoxError true /PDFXTrimBoxToMediaBoxOffset [ 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 ] /PDFXSetBleedBoxToMediaBox true /PDFXBleedBoxToTrimBoxOffset [ 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 ] /PDFXOutputIntentProfile (None) /PDFXOutputConditionIdentifier () /PDFXOutputCondition () /PDFXRegistryName () /PDFXTrapped /False /CreateJDFFile false /Description << /ARA /BGR /CHS /CHT /CZE /DAN /DEU /ESP /ETI /FRA /GRE /HEB /HRV /HUN /ITA /JPN /KOR /LTH /LVI /NLD (Gebruik deze instellingen om Adobe PDF-documenten te maken voor kwaliteitsafdrukken op desktopprinters en proofers. De gemaakte PDF-documenten kunnen worden geopend met Acrobat en Adobe Reader 5.0 en hoger.) /NOR /POL /PTB /RUM /RUS /SKY /SLV /SUO /SVE /TUR /UKR /ENU (Use these settings to create Adobe PDF documents for quality printing on desktop printers and proofers. Created PDF documents can be opened with Acrobat and Adobe Reader 5.0 and later.) >> /Namespace [ (Adobe) (Common) (1.0) ] /OtherNamespaces [ << /AsReaderSpreads false /CropImagesToFrames true /ErrorControl /WarnAndContinue /FlattenerIgnoreSpreadOverrides false /IncludeGuidesGrids false /IncludeNonPrinting false /IncludeSlug false /Namespace [ (Adobe) (InDesign) (4.0) ] /OmitPlacedBitmaps false /OmitPlacedEPS false /OmitPlacedPDF false /SimulateOverprint /Legacy >> << /AddBleedMarks false /AddColorBars false /AddCropMarks false /AddPageInfo false /AddRegMarks false /ConvertColors /NoConversion /DestinationProfileName () /DestinationProfileSelector /NA /Downsample16BitImages true /FlattenerPreset << /PresetSelector /MediumResolution >> /FormElements false /GenerateStructure true /IncludeBookmarks false /IncludeHyperlinks false /IncludeInteractive false /IncludeLayers false /IncludeProfiles true /MultimediaHandling /UseObjectSettings /Namespace [ (Adobe) (CreativeSuite) (2.0) ] /PDFXOutputIntentProfileSelector /NA /PreserveEditing true /UntaggedCMYKHandling /LeaveUntagged /UntaggedRGBHandling /LeaveUntagged /UseDocumentBleed false >> ] >> setdistillerparams << /HWResolution [2400 2400] /PageSize [623.622 850.394] >> setpagedevice