Purpose This study investigates how work engagement, work meaningfulness and job satisfaction differ within company volunteers depending on four corporate volunteering (CV) program characteristics – namely type of employee competencies involved in volunteering, type of beneficiary, type of employee contact with beneficiaries and role in volunteering program. Design/methodology/approach We collected data using an online, self-administered questionnaire targeting employees at companies in Poland that implement CV programs. A total of 983 completed questionnaires were collected. Findings The t-test results indicate that certain CV characteristics significantly influence work engagement, work meaningfulness and job satisfaction. Among these, the type of employee competencies used in volunteering consistently influenced all three outcomes. Beneficiary type had a significant effect only on work meaningfulness, while type of contact with beneficiaries and role played in CV program showed no significant effects on any outcome. Originality/value This study contributes to the broader organizational behaviour literature by providing empirical evidence of how specific CV program characteristics relate to important work-related outcomes. The results are valuable for managers seeking to create more satisfying, engaging and meaningful workplaces for their employees and, at the same time, to respond to the growing demand for companies to contribute to sustainable development by addressing social and environmental issues. The paper demonstrates the potential of CV programs to drive such workplace transformation, yielding positive effects inside and outside the company. It shows how organizations can transform their CV programs from traditional charity-based activities into strategic tools for developing employees, driving organizational change and achieving broader, positive social impact.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Brzustewicz et al. (2026) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: