The Survey of the Effect of Organizational Socialization on Social Responsibility of Employee's in Kermanshah Oil Company

The development of every society and every country is up to the staff in the organizations. Nowadays, most of staff are accused of keeping cold shoulder to responsibilities. Companies producing chemical products, for example, dig their waste material on the environment. Others do not use recycled materials in order to decrease expenses. They may decrease the salaries in the least. Such companies have either positive or negative effects on the modern societies. This study is intended to investigate staff's responsibility and the affective factors in Kermanshah's Oil Company. These people can be logically affective when interconnecting with each other at high level. Studies show that those who can’t accept the internal process of organization well, they will not trust the organization (Walker, 2009: 50), and the individual responsibility will not be conveyed well (Pitts, 2010: 11), and people will not like their jobs (Mitus, 2006: 14), and will not follow their goals in the organization (Walker, 2009: 50). The negative results including disorder, leaving job, absence, and less functional as a whole, will lead to non-functional job in the organization. The socialized organization is an affective factor whose impact has been approved by experts. The socialized organization is a process by which a person learns values, orders, and behaviors that let him be a member of the organization in sharing issues (Pitts, 2010: 11). Experts have examined it from various aspects. Turner’s collective, social responsibility includes logical, friendly, and moral behavior in the job, market and society (Turner, 2004: 5). Memery et al. call it security and improvement in quality of life. (Memery et al, 2005: 399). Sherman et al. considers it as a moral behaviors for social organizations in a wider concept (Sherman et al, 1386: 39). Fredrick knows it as an application of sources for wider, social goals (Falck and Heblich, 2007: 247). Wentzel defines it as a respect for other’s rights, individual competition and moral development (Wentzel, 1991: 2). Mc Aulay knows it as an ability to respond to humans, including being content with responsibility, the group and self values (Mc Aulay, 1996: 225). Juscius and Snieska know it as a dialectical relationship between commerce and society and the roles to improve social relations (Juscius & Snieska, 2008: 35). Castka and Balzarova, consider it as moral responsibility for behaviors oriented towards improving people’s life and their families to improve society (Castka & Balzarova, 2007: 276). Ford also knows it as following social rules to provide people’s expectations (Ford, 1985: 325). Some scientists have also considered social responsibility as commercial sings (Klein & Dawar, 2004: 206), examination of stocks (Lichtenstin et al, 2004: 18), the recognition of customer based companies (Sen & Bhattacharya, 2001: 228), and the customer’s behaviors and their organizational views (Barone et al, 2000: 250). Having said all that, the general goal of this study is to examine the effect of socialized organ on staff’s social responsibility in Kermanshah Oil Company. This Study is descriptive. The means of gathering data is interview and questionnaire. The statistical society is all staff of Kermanshah Oil organization, whose number was 1294 in 1391. Regarding the fact that Kermanshah Oil Company includes three branches: oil products, oil refinement, and pipe lines, the staff were also different: 365 individuals belonged to oil products, 225 staff belonged to pipe lines, and 704 belonged to refinery. Lin table has been used for choosing cases for the sample. Overall, 400 individuals were randomly selected to represent the whole research population.Discussion of Results & The results show that socialized, instructional organization has a meaningful relationship with social responsibility, including its different dimensions as logical (r= 0.32), economic r= 0.23, moral (r = 0.22), and friendly (r= 0.23). The results also show that the socialized, convenient organization has a meaningful relationship with social responsibility in logical aspect r= 0.105, economic r= 0.064, moral r= 0.201, and friendly r= 0.184. The results show that the socialized, supporting organization has a meaningful relationship with social responsibility in logical r= 0.315, economic r= 0.064, moral r= 0.178, and friendly r= 0.278, aspects. The results also show that the socialized organization of future view has a meaningful relationship with social responsibility in logical r= 0.199, economic r= 0.150, moral r= 0.042, and friendly r= 0.094 aspects. These results are aligned with studies of Lovhoren (2009) Pites (2010), Mitus (2006) and others.In conclusion, we need to think and to move in order to plan and to provide for social principles of organizations in different aspects. Every organization should trust the goals, system of values, economic conditions, and socio-cultural values. On the other hand, every organization should consider that good function has positive effects on others. Social responsibility should be voluntary, it could be a program to overcome corruption in the society.