In this qualitative article, the researchers studied how diverse types of corporate social responsibilities would either reduce or increase the magnitude of work output of an employee. The purpose of the research was to prove companies’ employees should also be factored in the corporate social responsibility equation and not just the customers and stakeholders. The researchers conducted a thorough literature review in which the following subject categories were studied. These subject categories encompassed: a) the motivating factor to the external prestige of workers; b) there is no “best way” of carrying out CSR; c) key role in evaluating activities; and d) employees’ calling orientation. From the literature review, the researchers developed four hypotheses and three will be discussed. The first hypothesis tested was, “Perceived external prestige mediates the relationship between external CSR and organizational identification.” (4). The second hypothesis tested was, “Perceived internal respect mediates the relationship between internal CSR and organizational identification” (4). The third hypothesis tested the relationship between external CSR and perceived external prestige is moderated by employees’ calling orientation such that the stronger the calling orientation, the stronger will be the relationship and vice versa” (5). The population studied encompassed of Pakistani citizen (85% male) which worked for five different multinational corporations. These corporations included banking and telecommunication organizations. The method used was questionnaires that were distributed and then returned. The data was analyzed using SPSS 21 and AMOS 21. The results of the study confirmed all three hypotheses. There were three limitations in the research. The first limitation the researchers mainly focused on big organizations that carried out regular CSR but ignored the small one, which does not represent the whole sect of workers across various levels of companies. The second limitation the statistic programs used to calculate the data varied hence the credibility was questionable; it is noted that AMOS 21 was used to validate one hypothesis only and was replaced by PHANTOM. The third limitation the research did not employ the psychological and behavioral part of analysis; in the next research I recommend that one statistical application be used in computing data to give the results a uniformity score.