Sustainable human resource management - SUM: Sustainability Management Wiki

Authors: Marius Berndt, Jan Niklas Freund, Noemi Jahne-Warrior, Julia Niehage
Last updated: June 22, 2022

1 Definition and relevance

1.1 Definition

In recent years, the definition of Strategic HRM (SHRM) has been broadened to include the concept of sustainability.¹ that is still developing.² One of the first definitions of S-HRM was provided by Ehnert et al.: “Sustainable HRM can be defined as the adoption of HRM strategies and practices that enable the achievement of financial, social, and ecological goals, with an impact inside and outside of the organization and over a long-term time horizon while controlling for unintended side effects and negative feedback”.³ Currently, the scientific literature contains numerous competing S-HRM definitions.¹ Bányai identified several characteristics of S-HRM approaches: long-term orientation, care of environment, profitability, employee development, external partnership, flexibility, compliance beyond labor regulations, employee cooperation, and fairness and equality.¹
Aust et al. distinguished “four types of S-HRM: Socially Responsible HRM (SR-HRM), Green HRM, Triple Bottom Line HRM, and Common Good HRM”.⁴ Figure 1 provides an overview of the four types of S-HRM and their characteristics.

Figure 1: S-HRM types (illustration based on ⁴)

Concrete objectives are the growth of business opportunities, employee motivation, and the public image of the brand, all complemented by environmental awareness.⁵ The implementation of socially responsible measures means that employees are provided with a productive workplace in a natural and socially sustainable manner. Valuable management of human resources involves safeguarding the success of company performance. Rather than being a minor issue, sustainability is essential to the long-term survival of a company and can be considered a strategic component of green recruitment.⁶ Therefore, the basic concept and goal of S-HRM should be for a company to meet the various expectations of its different stakeholders. These expectations can be of an economic, ecological, or social nature⁷: “These outcomes may be economic, social, human, and ecological, and firms often seek them simultaneously even though one or two may be more important to an organisation than the others”⁸.

1.2 Impact

According to Kumar et al., “[S-HRM] will enable organisations to balance conflicting expectations from different stakeholders such as employees, vendors, customers, shareholders, government, and communities by ensuring that they create a positive impact”⁸. Some factors impacted by S-HRM measures are considered below.

Environmental performance

A multisource, questionnaire-based survey of frontline workers, members of top management, and CEOs working in Chinese firms examined the relationship between SHRM, internal environmental concerns, and organizational citizenship behavior toward the environment (OCBE).⁹

The analysis of the data collected during the extensive field study revealed the following four main relationships (see Figure 2):

SHRM has a positive impact on OCBE.
OCBE has a positive impact on environmental performance.
Therefore, OCBE plays a mediating role between SHRM and environmental performance.
The relationship between SHRM and OCBE is positively moderated when internal environmental orientation is high. In cases where internal environmental orientation is low, the relationship between SHRM and OCBE is only slightly moderated.⁹

The study showed that it is crucial to integrate SHRM measures at the strategic level, which involves aligning HR policies with the firm’s overall environmental strategy, because, as the model presented in Figure 2 suggests, a company that does not have a strong human resource management strategy indirectly favors an inferior environmental performance. Strategic anchoring leads to an improvement in OCBE, which, in turn, benefits environmental performance. Firms may increase their environmental performance by choosing employees who are aware of their responsibility to act in an environmentally friendly manner beyond their regular tasks and who agree with the importance of protecting the environment.⁹

Financial performance, innovation, and reputation

Both market and non-market strategies influence business performance.¹⁰ In recent years, the negotiating power of third parties, such as NGOs and the media, has increased. This makes it likely that non-market strategies will gain importance, with corporate social performance (CSP) becoming a central element.¹¹ Orlizky et al. studied the relationship between CSP and corporate financial performance (CFP).¹¹ The findings of their meta-analysis suggest that there are positive relationships between CSP and CFP and that socially responsible activities are likely to pay off. The correlation between accounting-based CFP measures (accounting returns) and CSP seems to be higher than for market-based measures (investor returns). In addition, CSP reputation indices are linked more closely to CFP than other CSP indicators. For organization managers, this implies that market forces generally do not punish companies with high social performance. Therefore, managing directors can afford to act in a socially responsible manner. Top managers should learn to use CSP to leverage reputation and be alert to third-party assessments.¹¹

In the past, the connection between CSR and financial performance was based on a company’s opportunities to reduce its taxable income via corporate philanthropy payments, such as donations to charities. Nowadays, financial benefits are less direct and result from employee involvement. Socially responsible behavior may lead to higher sales and profits by promoting a firm’s products and services, as consumers tend to favor businesses with a good reputation.¹² This connection between reputation and SR-HRM was empirically tested by Ramos-González et al.¹³ (see Figure 3).

Figure 3: SR-HRM, reputation, and innovation (illustration based on ¹³)

The model of the relationship between SR-HRM, reputation, and innovation for small and medium enterprises (SMEs) shows that SR-HRM’s effect on reputation has the highest significance¹³ (represented by the thickness of the arrow). This means that socially responsible activities influence a company’s reputation. The relationship between SR-HRM and innovation in businesses is also positive, which means that businesses with effective SR-HRM measures may achieve a greater number of innovations. Furthermore, innovations also improve firm reputation, but this relationship is not as important.¹³

Employee performance

Research on SR-HRM’s effects on employee behavior suggests that SR-HRM increases employee identification with the company, which, in return, positively influences work behavior concerning task performance as well as the so-called “extra-role helping behavior”.¹⁴ Moreover, SR-HRM practices help attract and retain employees, involve training and continuous development, and foster diversity and equal opportunities.¹⁵ Research on SR-HRM’s effects on employee behavior suggests that SR-HRM increases employees’ identification with the company, which, in return, positively influences work behavior concerning task performance as well as the so-called “extra-role helping behavior”.¹⁴ Moreover, SR-HRM practices help attract and retain employees, involve training and continuous development, and foster diversity and equal opportunities.¹⁵

CASE STUDY: GDF SUEZ Group

Dupont et al. conducted a case study on the GDF SUEZ Group by analyzing the latter’s sustainable development report. The researchers focused on the impact of SR-HRM measures. At GDF SUEZ, communication and open dialogue led to greater fairness, while career development fostered gender equality in the business. Finally, the employee-friendly workplace helped attract talented employees (see Table 1).¹⁶

Table 1: CSR’s impact on GDF SUEZ HRM practices (illustration based on ¹⁶)

2 Measuring the sustainability of HRM

Various frameworks support the development of sustainability strategies to create sustainable workplaces, such as the OECD Guidelines for Multinational Enterprise, the International Standard ISO 26000, SA 8000, and the Global Reporting Initiative (GRI) Framework.¹⁷ The following section focuses on the GRI Framework.
“GRI (Global Reporting Initiative) is the independent, international organization that helps businesses and other organizations take responsibility for their impacts, by providing them with the global common language to communicate those impacts”.¹⁸ The GRI Framework is the most popular framework in sustainability reporting.¹⁷

Figure 4 shows the GRI Framework’s sustainability indicator category, the total number of sustainability indicators, and the sustainability indicators that are directly relevant to HRM. Approximately 31 percent of the 84 indicators are directly relevant to HRM. It is noticeable that indicators with HRM relevance in the Economic and Society categories are underrepresented and that HRM-relevant indicators in the Environment and Product Responsibility categories are not represented. For the Product Responsibility category, this can be explained by the fact that product responsibility is difficult to associate with HRM.

Figure 4: Global Reporting Initiative (3.1) indicators and HRM relevance (adapted from ¹⁷)

Economic indicators represent an organization’s economic impact on the local, national, and global economy. According to the GRI Framework, the reporting entity should disclose the nature and extent of its economic indicators. The two economic indicators relevant to S-HRM are as follows:¹⁷

EC5: Range of ratios of standard entry-level wage by gender compared to local minimum wage at significant locations of operation.
EC7: Procedures for local hiring and proportion of senior management hired from the local community at significant locations of operation.¹⁷

GRI labor-practices indicators require companies to disclose employee demographics and adhere to minimum norms. This defines how rights at work should be protected, how equality should be encouraged, and how to foster job creation. The 15 HRM-relevant sustainable labor practice indicators are divided into the following four subcategories: Labor Practices Indicators – Employment (LA1, LA2, LA3, and LA15), Labor Practices Indicators – Labor and Management Relations (LA4, LA5, LA6, LA7, LA8, and LA9), Labor Practices Indicators – Training and Education (LA10, LA11, and LA12), and Labor Practices Indicators – Diversity, Equal Opportunity (LA13 and LA14).¹⁷

CASE STUDY: NOVARTIS

Novartis exhibited best practice behavior in the area of living wages in a project with BSR 17: “In 2000, Novartis was one of the first international companies to implement a commitment to pay a living wage to all of its employees. ‘Living Wage’ is a Novartis initiative and commitment to associates, which usually is above minimum wage requirements. Living Wages are updated annually for Novartis by the non-governmental organization Business for Social Responsibility (BSR), adjusting for changes in inflation, food prices, and other market conditions. Living Wages focus on meeting basic living needs for associates and their families, where legal minimum wages tend to focus on poverty levels for individuals”.¹⁹

Human rights. GRI human rights indicators strengthen international labor conventions concerning the abolition of child labor and forced labor, freedom of association, and non-discrimination. The concept of human rights applies to a company’s entire value chain. Companies have a responsibility to enter into contracts with suppliers of goods and services in such a way that they are encouraged or required to comply with similar human rights standards. The GRI Framework offers eight HRM-relevant human rights indicators (HR1, HR2, HR3, HR4, HR5, HR6, HR7, and HR8).¹⁷

CASE STUDY GS4

In 2011, with 657,000 employees, GS4 was one of the world’s largest private employers²⁰:“G4S employees work on customers’ premises and in a sense represent those customers to external stakeholders. HR policies must take responsibility for ensuring that such workers are employed by G4S with due regard to their basic human rights and that they are fully trained in the ethical requirements of the business. In addition, HR managers in customer companies must ensure that such employees are treated with due care while they perform their duties at customer sites. This care may range from providing suitable, weather-protected work stations or protection from exposure to disease to training in dealing with violence. Both G4S and its customers share a responsibility to protect employees while they carry out their duties”¹⁷.

Society indicators. At the most fundamental level, HR is responsible for ensuring a culture of ethical conduct and for educating all employees about the company’s anti-corruption stance. In most cases, a company’s ethics code of ethics and related practices will cover this stance. Although some employees may be dishonest, HR must establish the foundations for ethically sound companies.¹⁷ The framework contains one HR-relevant indicator: “SO3: Percentage of employees trained in organization’s anticorruption policies and procedures” ¹⁷.

3 Recent developments

The indicators identified in the study by Kumar et al. (2020) are a useful extension of the GRI framework indicators 8. They identified and summarized the following S-HRM indicators: “Environmental, Social, and Economic Sustainability”⁸. These S-HRM indicators are shown in Table 3. These indicators offer the possibility of closing the gap regarding the Economic, Environment, and Society categories found in the GRI framework.

Environmental Sustainability	Green job design²¹²² Green employment ²¹²² Green selection ²¹²² Green performance evaluation ²¹²² Green training ²¹²² Green reward system management ²¹²² Green compensation system management ²² Green health and employees’ safety management ²¹²² Green management of employee discipline ²¹²² Employee green relations ²¹ Green recruitment ²¹ Green induction ²¹ Green HR planning ²¹²² Green policy implementation ²¹²²
Social Sustainability	Social infrastructure ²² The availability of career opportunities ²² Accessibility ²² Ability to fulfil psychological needs ²² Social justice ²² Social sustainability ²²
Economic Sustainability	HR efficiency ²² Re-engineering/ restructuring ²² Cost reduction strategy ²² Senior management commitment ²²²³ Development of facilities ²² Macroeconomic policies ²² Employment guarantee ²³

Table 3: Sustainable human resource management indicators (adapted from ⁸)

Another interesting approach can be found in the study by Hronvá et al., as their S-HRM practices are based on newer GRI Standards, and their S-HRM analytical framework and their S-HRM literature review. However, the study focuses on the Czech Republic and excludes the human rights and dignity at work category and is thus not readily transferable to companies elsewhere or to multinational companies with international supply chains. ²⁴

4 Implementation

The following section deals with S-HRM implementation of . The section considers the basis for successful implementation and the S-HRM processes, measures, and factors that can significantly improve sustainability performance. In Chapters 1–3, S-HRM was defined, developed, and visualized through a literature analysis. Regarding S-HRM integration, Lopez-Cabrales and Valle-Cabrera concluded that this is one of the most complex challenges for future HRM.²⁵ The following section deals with the implementation of S-HRM.

4.1 Implementation approach

Regarding the successful integration of sustainability into HRM practices, following Kaiser and Kozica, Ehnert highlighted the two factors of (1) human resource philosophy and strategy and (2) human resource policy, summarizing these factors in two concrete steps discussed below.²⁶

Personnel philosophy and strategy
The first step is to plan the personnel philosophy and strategy. Personnel philosophy describes the values and principles that guide employees’ individual decision-making principles in everyday business situations. Ehnert emphasized that for a successful implementation, the “basic personnel philosophical assumptions of the top management as well as the personnel management of a company”²⁶ are especially important. Top management has the task of appreciating the value of personnel and their contributions to the company. Furthermore, it is of central importance to establish a uniform understanding of sustainability within a company. The company must clearly position itself regarding its S-HRM goals and must work out what they focus on—for example, the treatment of personnel. In short, the question of what values the company wants to represent is elementary. Consequently, the exemplary behavior of the management level and the superiors is an important factor in anchoring the values in the corporate culture.²⁶

Personnel policy
The second step is to move from personnel philosophy to personnel policy. It is important to consider what human resources are used, where they come from, and how they contribute to the long-term survival of the company. In addition, factors and conditions, such as the maintenance, regeneration, development, and reproduction of the human resource base, should be addressed. Companies must reflect on securing human resources in the long term. This means creating concrete resource links with other companies or educational institutions to have an impact on where and how human resources can be developed. The next step is to discuss how sustainability affects HR functions and specific HR elements (e.g., workforce planning, selection, and development). A company’s sustainability model is critical because it sets the direction for S-HRM and contributes to sustainable business development. Managers, including HR managers, must act as role models to represent the corporate philosophy along with its values and norms and to consciously support employees in sustainable behavior. Finally, it is necessary to monitor short- and long-term effects on the personnel, the company, and its environment during the implementation of S-HRM. Consequently, conclusions about positive and negative behaviors can be drawn and applied in the next step.²⁶

4.2 Design recommendations

Zaugg described the initial approaches to S-HRM implementation based on his design recommendations. These can be illustrated as follows:

Figure 5: Design recommendations for S-HRM (illustration based on ²⁷

Zaugg identified trust as the most important value. Trust is both a prerequisite and the result of S-HRM, as employees and their needs are considered in decision-making processes. This results in a greater commitment to the proposed corporate goals and establishes a connection with them. The advantage is that, in addition to a trusting relationship between employees and their superiors, there is also an appeal to, for example, independence, a sense of responsibility, team development, or job satisfaction.
Some concrete design recommendations by Zaugg are described below in general terms (see Figure 5):²⁷

Trust: trust is the foundation and significantly promotes the implementation of S-HRM.
Strategic positioning: strategic positioning should be integrated at the top management level so that the business process can be steered decisively.
Competence and knowledge management: building an intellectual understanding. Personnel recruitment adopts new knowledge (e.g., personnel with individual sustainability values/competencies), personnel development and deployment rely on this knowledge, personnel retention preserves the knowledge, and personnel control enables the dissemination of knowledge within the company.
Sustainable personnel management: the basis consists in a positive image of people, which entails a participative and transformational management style via suitable incentive systems.
Internal communication: development of a communication concept, mission statement, and instruments.
Coordination in HRM: the structure must be linked to a common culture shared by all HRM actors, superiors, and employees and must include the promotion of participative forms of decision-making.
Flexibilization: flexible work arrangements, work location, and working hours contribute to better work-life balance.

4.3 Classification scheme

Fischer et al. identified 21 HR elements regarding practical S-HRM implementation. A sustainability-oriented contribution can be made to these in the company. According to the literature, particularly relevant HR instruments include personnel selection, personnel development, and personnel management. The S-HRM classification scheme is shown in Figure 6.²⁸

The model is characterized by the following three order registers: governance, organization, and functions. Governance describes the basics of HR management, such as HR policy, HR objectives, HR strategy, HR culture, and HR control. Organization refers to modification possibilities in the HR structure and HR processes via information technology (IT). Finally, functions reflect the so-called “content” of HR management. All of these aspects represent a holistic approach to S-HRM. According to empirical evidence, the specific HR elements that can make significant contributions to sustainability in companies are as follows:²⁸

Personnel and management development
Guidelines, mission, and code of conduct
Employer branding, personnel marketing, and personnel selection
Leadership and management by objectives
Communication and employee information
Motivation and the creation of trust
Employee retention
Change management and value transformation

To give an example, two of the above HR elements, which are of particular importance for sustainable implementation, can be selected and linked to recommendations for action. At the same time, the other HR elements must also be discussed and analyzed to determine the extent to which they can contribute to sustainability in the company.

Shaping personnel and management development

Sustainability should be incorporated as an essential element in personnel and management development. Three target groups are of particular interest here: personnel, managers, and human resources staff. They should all be given competencies related to sustainability. For example, there is “competence of resource conservation,” which deals with the question of resource use, consumption, procurement, or regeneration. This core competence must also be introduced among company personnel. When these kinds of competencies are lacking, their inclusion and consolidation are of central importance. Furthermore, the qualifications of the respective target groups are important. A company must consider its personnel’s sustainability qualifications to address the required social and ecological dimensions in addition to the economic dimension. When it comes to staff and managers, the sustainability topic should be tackled using the triple-bottom-line (TBL) approach. Awareness should be created of the concrete existing measures regarding ecological behavior and of how these measures can be reconciled with employee values and implemented in everyday life. This recommendation for action should be based on a previously created internal mission statement for sustainability that includes a corporate orientation and its goals.²⁸

Designing personnel selection

Personnel selection is key to a sustainable orientation. Attention should be paid to sustainable action already during personnel selection so that the company can transfer its sustainability awareness to future employees. There are three approaches: (1) biography-oriented, (2) construct-oriented, and (3) simulation-oriented procedures.²⁸

The aim is to identify already learned sustainability competencies during, for example, the selection interview. Questions should address private and professional orientations. This ensures that an employee will have both the motivation for individual action and the knowledge to make a personal contribution in the professional environment.
The goal is to inquire about concrete value concepts according to which a person acts. These can be discussed in connection with (1), thus establishing a suitable picture in the conversation.
The goal is to develop and apply, for example, assessment centers or simulated case studies in which sustainable action is tested. Accordingly, it becomes possible to evaluate how a person behaves in practice. The authors described the example of the “Fishbanks” simulation: In a given area, fishing entails a regeneration rate. A person can choose either the economic approach, which runs the risk of overfishing and the destruction of the business, or the ecological approach, which considers the regeneration time and the consumption of resources.

Roadmap to S-HRM and sustainability leadership as a key competency

Finally, Figure 7 represents a practical approach to implementing S-HRM and integrating it into the corporate structure based on the preceding design recommendations:¹⁷

Identify and engage with stakeholders affected by HR policies, processes, and performance.
Select and prioritize key HRM issues relevant to fostering a sustainable organization.
Review and revise all HR policies in line with sustainability principles.
Develop an action plan, a scorecard (see Figure 7), and metrics.
Implement, measure, and report HR impacts.

Figure 7: Sustainable organization roadmap (illustration based on ¹⁷)

S-HRM involves a long-term development process that entails cultural change and is reflected in a new understanding of roles. In the organization, the central, economic decision-makers and players must be addressed. This primarily involves the relationship between committed employees, supervisors, and HRM managers.²⁷ Sustainable leadership is a key instrument for practically implementing S-HRM in a target-oriented manner. Sustainable leaders are the main drivers of sustainable innovation in their organizations. They create an environmental vision by decisively changing the corporate culture and bringing together different internal stakeholders. Consequently, they manage to address environmental issues and achieve environmental goals.²⁹ The proactive approach of sustainable leadership enables organizations to adapt to changing external factors at any time.³⁰ For example, sustainable leadership entails developing a long-term vision for promoting environmental sustainability and dealing with related challenges. Moreover, it innovates new products, services, and solutions based on it. Finally, sustainable leadership creates future opportunities for successful business strategies, continuous improvements, and new competitive advantages, in addition to establishing a healthy human resource structure.²⁹

For a more detailed understanding of implementation approaches, one can apply the HRM-Cockpit ³¹ to S-HRM. The implementation of this is provided here as further reading to not exceed the scope of the elaboration.

5 Drivers and barriers

Sustainable investments, actions, and processes that entail social responsibility bring numerous benefits to companies. Implementing sustainability results in corporate image enhancement and higher public trust in the organization (see Chapter 2). Social commitment, work environment, and employee performance contribute to sustainable business and play a key role in advancing SR-HRM.³² Due to the worldwide green transformation, the relevance of “green human resource management” (GHRM) (see the definition in Chapter 1) has increased. Excessive consumption, exploitation, and degradation of natural resources have a negative impact on the greening of a company.³³ At the same time, regulatory pressure from stakeholders regarding environmental issues positively impacts environmental performance and GHRM practices. Policymakers are among the regulatory stakeholders who can use laws and regulations to influence the way in which companies do business. There is clear empirical evidence that customer pressure directly impacts both companies’ environmental performance and their implementation of GHRM practices.³⁴ Governments, stakeholders, customers, employees, and competitors pressure companies to go green in the long term.⁶ Customers prefer companies that work for the good of society and are against harming the natural environment.⁶ To reconcile customer pressure and environmental performance, these include green hiring, green training, green participation, green performance, and green compensation.³⁴ GHRM strengthens a company’s competitive position and improves overall performance by improving employee morale, employee retention, public image, attractiveness to new employees, productivity, and sustainability. Ultimately, promoting green values impacts customer satisfaction.³⁵
Even though sustainability awareness is increasing, implementing sustainability entails obstacles and challenges. Disagreements in decision-making processes with boards and management teams and the lack of employee acceptance are major obstacles and challenges³⁶³⁷. Green initiatives need to be integrated into all human resource activities, from recruitment to training and remuneration, to create a genuinely sustainable corporate culture.³⁸ However, the process is difficult due to employers’ lack of technical support for and understanding of sustainable measures.³⁷ When employees see that their company has formal policies and practices in place that transparently demonstrate the company’s environmental commitments and goals, they may act in an environmentally friendly manner at the workplace not only due to company obligations but also voluntarily.³⁹⁴⁰ Green HR efforts improve efficiency, cost reduction, employee retention, and productivity, among other tangible benefits. Companies need to be proactive and choose practices that promote growth while giving something back to society.⁴¹ Therefore, fostering green creativity among employees to achieve innovative end results is a major concern for managers.⁴² In the following chapters, some of the main drivers of and barriers to S-HRM are presented.

5.1 Recruitment and selection

Recruiting employees with the necessary skills, knowledge, and behaviors required for environmentally sound management is often referred to as “green recruitment”.⁴³ Companies are more willing to hire applicants with environmentally friendly behaviors.⁴⁴ Furthermore, companies need to adopt green hiring practices to improve performance and meet ethical standards. Green hiring practices combined with stronger environmental practices lead to sustainability and increase employees’ pro-business commitments.⁴⁵ An information program for new employees can ensure that information is provided on the organization’s environmental and sustainability policies, values, and green objectives.⁵ Previous studies have found that companies that use green recruitment processes attract a greater proportion of well-qualified applicants.⁴⁶ A company can use green criteria to select candidates whose environmental values match those of the company.⁴⁷ Employees’ green awareness is important for companies in achieving environmental goals and improving cost efficiency.⁵ For example, paying special attention to employees who make eco-friendly contributions to the company can enable the company to gradually become a green employer. A company can assess whether candidates truly want to pursue the company’s green goals by conducting tests.⁶ In addition, there must be green criteria for hiring and evaluating employees.⁴⁸ This leads to attracting new, talented employees.⁴⁹ Finally, the implementation of green culture can be facilitated by employees with green inclinations.⁶

5.2 Participation and acceptance

Participation in the decision-making process motivates employees to develop and implement ideas and gives them influence in their teams or companies.⁵⁰

Numerous studies have shown that green employee engagement is a key factor in improving organizational performance. This includes the reduction of waste and pollution as well as the full use of resources in the workplace.⁵¹ Employees can support companies’ environmental contributions by participating in decisions on environmental sustainability measures. GHRM can motivate employees to engage in practices that are important for the sustainable development of a company (e.g., electronic filing, virtual conferencing, online training, and energy-efficient office management).⁵²⁵³. Therefore, companies should encourage and inspire their employees to become involved and propose green and environmentally friendly ideas. To achieve this goal, it may be necessary to design reward systems that support managers’ greening commitments at a strategic level.⁵⁴⁵⁵

5.3 Training and development

During green training, employees are educated about the significance of environmental management, which encourages them to save energy, reduce waste, and spread environmental awareness in the company.⁵⁶ Green training and employee involvement are crucial aspects of the green hiring process, which should be implemented with due attention. Some employees tend to resist the introduction of new green policies and practices because their routines are interrupted, and they have to get used to additional tasks in the existing process.⁵⁷ A study from India showed that green training established a positive link between hotel employees’ green commitments and corporate social responsibility.⁵⁸ A study from Vietnam also indicated that training is an indicator of environmentally friendly human resource practices.⁵⁹ Competitive pressures have led hotel and tourism management to recognize the value of employees’ pro-environmental behavior (PEB) in pursuing environmental sustainability goals.⁶⁰ Green training increases employees’ PEB and underscores the importance of environmental protection.⁴¹ Task-based learning is particularly related to innovative work behavior.⁶¹ For implementation, employees can be trained in lower consumption of water and energy, reduction of waste, use of renewable materials, and use of recycled materials.⁶²Environmental commitment, green creativity, and environmentally friendly behavior by talented employees should be supported by companies through attractive career opportunities. GHRM components, such as the aforementioned green training, cannot be converted into green actions without offering green career opportunities.⁶²

5.4 Work-life balance

In the interest of social sustainability, companies should train, retain, and care for their employees, as well as protect them from burnout.⁶³ The term “green work-life balance” can be examined within the framework of GHRM. This includes the incorporation of environmentally friendly actions into private and working life.⁶⁴ However, the existing literature provides no evidence that a green work-life balance indicates GHRM.⁶⁴ Employees learn about environmentally friendly activities in their work and leisure time and enrich one another through social exchanges.⁶² From a social perspective, work-life balance implies that professional and extra-professional elements are compatible with life priorities.⁶⁵

5.5 Diversity management

Diversity refers to the degree of difference between people in relation to a specific characteristic.⁶⁶ The literature lists such employee characteristics as age, gender, seniority, educational background, and ethnicity.⁶⁷ Diversity management is driven by demographic shifts in the workforce, differences in educational achievements, and more active participation of women in the world of employment.⁶⁸ Concerning employee age, it is not clear whether age produces significant differences in subjective well-being at work and whether perceptions vary between generations. This concern is a key issue for the sustainable management of human resources, given that companies are in a historically unique situation “in which four generations are in the workplace at the same time”.⁶⁹ As the new generation enters the labor market, there is an increased interest in intergenerational research.⁷⁰

5.6 Digital divide

Integrating heterogeneous ways of working and different levels of technological understanding is a challenge. There should be no blanket devaluation of older employees as more “unruly” or less flexible in relation to digital change.⁷¹ The knowledge and life experience of older generations is useful in mentoring newcomers and supporting them in their development in the best possible way. Younger employees can, in turn, teach older employees how to use new technologies.⁷²⁷³. This cross-generational collaboration can be seen as a learning and development opportunity for the young and old alike and can ensure continuous employee development.⁷¹ It is important to carefully handle heterogeneous employee attitudes to digitalization measures so that everyone feels comfortable in the company. The central message to employees should be that digitalization is meant to simplify processes rather than destroy jobs.⁷¹

5.7 Policies and emerging sectors

Employment is influenced by macroeconomic policies, as jobs must meet the conditions with consideration for environmental pollution. Policymakers can play a crucial role in turning traditional jobs into green jobs by promoting the use of renewable energy. Policies can be developed that enable the retraining of workers and the greening of working methods.⁷⁴ Cooperation between governments, business associations, trade unions, and companies helps raise awareness of environmental issues. Consequently, successful partnerships for green job creation can emerge. The concept of green jobs covers “all jobs that depend on the environment or are created, substituted or redefined in the transition process towards a greener economy”.⁷⁴ By focusing on sectors with the potential for green job creation, tailored training programs can be developed, and public-private partnerships can be established.⁷⁴ Companies can strengthen their positive impacts on the environment by including environmental tasks and responsibilities in job descriptions.⁷⁵ This can lead to the creation of new jobs and positions that are exclusively dedicated to a company’s sustainability work.⁷⁵ Green jobs are particularly relevant in the following sectors:

The renewable energy sector, which provides more jobs than the traditional energy sector.
The construction sector, which can promote sustainable construction methods and materials.
The transport sector, which can foster the switch from fossil fuels to more sustainable options.
The recycling sector, which can help reduce pollution by recycling materials such as paper, iron, steel, and aluminum.
The agricultural sector, which can develop organic farming to create green jobs. ⁷⁵

These jobs promote green economic growth as part of the greening of production and consumption, which increases the well-being and quality of life of present and future generations.⁷⁵

References

1
Bányai, T. Sustainable Human Resource Management (MDPI, Basel, Switzerland, 2019).
2
Anlesinya, A. & Susomrith, P. Sustainable human resource management: A systematic review of a developing field. Journal of Global Responsibility 11, 295–324 (2020).
3
Ehnert, I., Parsa, S., Roper, I., Wagner, M. & Muller-Camen, M. Reporting on sustainability and HRM: A comparative study of sustainability reporting practices by the world’s largest companies. International Journal of Human Resource Management 27, 88–108 (2016).
4
Aust, I., Matthews, B. & Muller-Camen, M. Common Good HRM: A paradigm shift in Sustainable HRM? Human Resource Management Review 30, 1–11 (2020).
5
Jamal, T. et al. Perceived Green Human Resource Management Practices and Corporate Sustainability: Multigroup Analysis and Major Industries Perspectives. Sustainability 13, 3045 (2021).
6
Martins, J. M. et al. Assessing the Impact of Green Hiring on Sustainable Performance: Mediating Role of Green Performance Management and Compensation. International Journal of Environmental Research and Public Health 18, 5654 (2021).
7
Järlström, M., Saru, E. & Vanhala, S. Sustainable Human Resource Management with Salience of Stakeholders: A Top Management Perspective. J Bus Ethics 152, 703–724 (2018).
8
Kumar, A., Bashkar, P., Nadeem, S., P., Tyagi, M. & Garza-Reyes, J., A. Sustainability Adoption through Sustainable Human Resource Management: A Systematic Literature Review and Conceptual Framework. International Journal of Mathematical, Engineering and Management Sciences 5, 1014–1031 (2020).
9
Paillé, P., Chen, Y., Boiral, O. & Jin, J. The Impact of Human Resource Management on Environmental Performance: An Employee-Level Study. Journal of Business Ethics 33, 451–466 (2014).
10
Baron, D. P. Business and its environment. 3rd ed. (Prentice Hall, New Jersey, USA, 2000).
11
Orlitzky, M., Schmidt, F. L. & Rynes, S. L. Corporate Social and Financial Performance: A Meta-Analysis. Organization Studies 24, 403–441 (2003).
12
Branco, M. C. & Rodrigues, L., L. Corporate Social Responsibility and Resource-Based Perspectives. Journal of Business Ethics 25, 111–132 (2006).
13
Ramos-González, M. d. M., Rubio-Andrés, M. & Sastre-Castillo, M. Á. Effects of socially responsible human resource management (SR-HRM) on innovation and reputation in entrepreneurial SMEs. International Entrepreneurship and Management Journal, 1–29 (2021).
14
Shen, J. & Benson, J. When CSR Is a Social Norm. Journal of Management 40, 1723–1746 (2014).
15
Barrena-Martínez, J., López-Fernández, M. & Romero-Fernández, P. M. Socially responsible human resource policies and practices: Academic and professional validation. European Research on Management and Business Economics 23, 55–61 (2017).
16
Dupont, C., Ferauge, P. & Giuliano, R. The Impact of Corporate Social Responsibility on Human Resource Management: GDF SUEZ’s Case. International Business Research 6, 145-155 (2013).
17
Cohen, E., Taylor, S. & Muller-Camen, M. SHRM Foundation’s Effective Practice Guidelines Series. HRM´s Role in Corporate Social and Environmental Sustainability (SHRM Foundation, Alexandria, Virginia, USA, 2012).
18
Global Reporting Initiative. About GRI. Available at https://www.globalreporting.org/about-gri/ (2021).
19
Novartis. Living Wage. Available at https://www.novartis.com/our-company/corporate-responsibility/reporting-disclosure/transparency-disclosure/living-wage (2021).
20
GS4. Corporate Social Responsibility Report 2011. Securing Your World. Available at https://www.g4s.com/-/media/g4s/global/files/csr-reports/g4s_csr_report_2011.ashx (2011).
21
Arulrajah, A., A., Opatha, H. & Nawaratne, N. Green Human Resource Management Practices: A Review. Sri Lankan Journal of Human Resource Management 5, 1–16 (2015).
22
Tooranloo, H., S., Azadi, M. H. & Sayyahpoor, A. Analyzing factors affecting implementation success of sustainable human resource management (SHRM) using a hybrid approach of FAHP and Type-2 fuzzy DEMATEL. Journal of Cleaner Production 25, 1252–1265 (2017).
23
Glaser, M. & Diele, K. Asymmetric outcomes: assessing central aspects of the biological, economic and social sustainability of a mangrove crab fishery, Ucides cordatus (Ocypodidae), in North Brazil. Ecological Economics 49, 361–373 (2004).
24
Hronová, Š. & Špaček, M. Sustainable HRM Practices in Corporate Reporting. Economies 9, 1–34 (2021).
25
Lopez-Cabrales, A. & Valle-Cabrera, R. Sustainable HRM strategies and employment relationships as drivers of the triple bottom line. Human Resource Management Review 30, 1–11 (2020).
26
Kaiser, S. & Kozica, A. Ethik im Personalmanagement. Zentrale Konzepte, Ansätze und Fragestellungen (Rainer Hampp Verlag, Augsburg, Germany, 2012).
27
Zaugg, R., J. Nachhaltiges Personalmanagement. Eine neue Perspektive und empirische Exploration des Human Resource Management (Gabler, Wiesbaden, Germany, 2009).
28
Fischer, S., Eireiner, C. & Weber, S. Nachhaltiges HR-Management. Konzepte – Rollen – Handlungsempfehlungen (Schäffer-Poeschel Verlag für Wirtschaft Steuern Recht GmbH, Stuttgart, Germany, 2019).
29
Al-Zawahreh, A., Khasawneh, S. & Al-Jaradat, M. Green management practices in higher education: The status of sustainable leadership. Tertiary Education and Management 25, 53–63 (2019).
30
Lambert, S. Sustainable leadership and the implication for the general further education college sector. Journal of Further and Higher Education 35, 131–148 (2011).
31
Vanderstraeten, A. The HRM Cockpit: an instrument for developing and evaluating sustainable HRM in an organization. In Sustainable HRM and Employee Well-Being, Proceedings (2015), pp. 1–27.
32
Laudlal, T. Drivers and Barriers of CSR and the size and internationalization of firms. Social Responsibility Journal 7, 234–256 (2011).
33
Islam, M. A., Hunt, A., Jantan, A. H., Hashim, H. & Chong, C. W. Exploring Challenges and Solutions in Applying GHRM Practices for the SustainableWorkplace in the Ready-Made Garment Industry in Bangladesh. Business Strategy and Delevopment 3, 332–343 (2020).
34
Guerci, M. & Pedrini, M. The consensus between Italian HR and sustainability managers on HR management for sustainability-driven change–towards a “strong” HR management system. The International Journal of Human Resource Management 25, 1787–1814 (2014).
35
Cherian, J. & Jacob, J. A Study of Green HR Practices and Its Effective Implementation in the Organization: A Review. International Journal of Business and Management 7, 25–33 (2012).
36
Gollan, P. J. Human resources, capabilities and sustainability. In Sustainability: The corporate challenge of the 21st century, edited by Dunphy D., J. Benveniste, A. Griffiths & Sutton, P. (Eds.) (Allen & Unwin, Sydney, Australia), pp. 55–77.
37
Jafri, S. Green HR practices. An empirical study of certain automobile organizations of India. Human Resource Management, 6193–6198 (2012).
38
Chang, T.-W. & Hung, C.-Z. How to Shape the Employees’ Organization Sustainable Green Knowledge Sharing: Cross-Level Effect of Green Organizational Identity Effect on Green Management Behavior and Performance of Members. Sustainability 13, 626 (2021).
39
Kim, Y., Kim, W. G., Choi, H. M. & Phetvaroon, K. The effect of green human resource management on hotel employees’ eco-friendly behavior and environmental performance. International Journal of Hospitality Management 76, 83–93 (2019).
40
Chen, S., Jiang, W. & Li, X. Effect of Employees’ Perceived Green HRM on Their Workplace Green Behaviors in Oil and Mining Industries: Based on Cognitive-Affective System Theory. International Journal of Environmental Research and Public Health 18, 4056 (2021).
41
Ahmad, S. Green human resource management: Policies and practices. Cogent Business & Management 2, 1030817 (2015).
42
Chen, Y. S. & Chang, C. H. The determinants of green product development performance: Green dynamic capabilities, green transformational leadership, and green creativity. Journal of Business Ethics 32, 107–119 (2013).
43
Yong, J. Y. et al. Pathways towards Sustainability in Manufacturing Organizations: Empirical Evidence on the Role of Green Human Resource Management. Business Strategy and the Environment 29, 212–228 (2020).
44
Gully, S. M., Philips, J. M., Castellano, W. G., Han, K. & Kim, A. A Mediated Moderation Model of Recruiting Socially and Environmentally Responsible Job Applicants. Personnel Psychology 66, 935–973 (2013).
45
Masri, H. A. & Jaaron, A. A. Assessing green human resources management practices in Palestinian manufacturing context: An empirical study. Journal of Cleaner Production 25, 474–489 (2017).
46
Mousa, S. K. & Othman, M. The impact of GHRM Practices on Sustainable Performance in Healthcare Organizations: A conceptual Framework. Journal of Cleaner Production 28, 118595 (2020).
47
Zhao, J., Liu, H., Sun, W. How proactive environmental strategy facilitates environmental reputation: Roles of green human resource management and discretionary slack. Sustainability 12, 763 (2020).
48
Colwell, S. R. & Joshi, A. W. Corporate Ecological Responsiveness. Antecedent Effects of Institutional Pressure and Top Management Commitment and Their Impact on Organizational Performance. Business Strategy and the Environment 22, 73–91 (2011).
49
Luu, T. T. Driving employees to serve customers beyond their roles in the Vietnamese hospitality: The roles of paternalistic leadership and discretionary HR practices industry. Tourism Management 69, 132–144 (2018).
50
Jong, J. de & Hartog, D. den. Measuring innovative work behavior. Creativity and Innovation Management 19, 23–36 (2010).
51
Alhaddi, H. Triple Bottom Line and Sustainability. A Literature Review. Business and Management Studies 1, 6–10 (2015).
52
Gayathri, N. & Karthikeyan, P. A review on green human resource management with exclusive allusion to green work life balance. Research Journal of Business Management 7, 40–45 (2013).
53
Mandip, G. Green HRM: People management commitment to environmental sustainability. Research Journal of Recent Sciences 1, 244–252 (2012).
54
Tahir, M., Safwan, N., Usman, A. & Adnan, A. Green HRM as predictor of firms’ environmental performance and role of emplyees’ environmental organizational citizenship behavior as a mediator. Journal of Research & Reviews in Social Sciences Pakistan 3, 699–715 (2020).
55
Meyer, K. E., Estrin, S., Bhaumik, S. K. & Peng, M. W. Institutions, resources, and entry strategies in emerging economies. Strategic Management Journal 30, 61–80 (2008).
56
Pinzone, M., Guerci, M., Lettieri, E. & Huisingh, D. Effects of ’Green’Training on pro-Environmental Behaviors and Job Satisfaction: Evidence from the Italian Healthcare Sector. Journal of Cleaner Production 27, 221–232 (2019).
57
Aboramadan, M. The Effect of Green HRM on Employee Green Behaviors in Higher Education: The Mediating Mechanism of Green Work Engagement. International Journal of Organizational Analysis ahead-of-print (2020).
58
Srivastava, A. P. & Shree, S. Examining the effect of employee green involvement on perception of corporate social responsibility: Moderating role of green training. Management of Environmental Quality 30, 197–210 (2019).
59
Luu, T. T. Employees’ green recovery performance: The role of green HR practices and serving culture. Journal of Sustainable Tourism 26, 1308–1324 (2018).
60
Chung, K. C. Green marketing orientation: Achieving sustainable development in green hotel management. Journal of Hospitality Marketing & Management 29, 722–738 (2020).
61
Battistelli, A., Odoardi, C., Vandenberghe, C., Di Napoli, G. & Piccione, L. Information sharing and innovative work behavior: The role of work-based learning, challenging tasks, and organizational commitment. Human Resource Development Quarterly 30, 361–381 (2019).
62
Ari, E., Karatepe, O. M., Rezapouraghdam, H. & Avci, T. A. A Conceptual Model for Green Human Resource Management: Indicators, Differential Pathways, and Multiple Pro-Environmental Outcomes. Sustainability 12, 1–18 (2020
63
Lee, H. W. How Does Sustainability-Oriented Human Resource Management Work? Examining Mediators on Organizational Performance. International Journal of Public Administration 42, 974–984 (2019).
64
Muster, V. & Schrader, U. Green work-life balance: A new perspective for green HRM. German Journal of Human Resource Management 25, 140–156 (2011).
65
Alegre, J. & Pasamar, S. Firm innovativeness and work-life balance. Technology Analysis & Strategic Management 30, 421–433 (2018).
66
Korzilius, H., Bücker, J. J. & Beerlage, S. Multiculturalism and innovative work behavior: The mediating role of cultural intelligence. International Journal of Intercultural Relations 56, 13–24 (2017).
67
Janssens, M. & Zanoni, P. Many diversities for many services: Theorizing diversity (management) in service companies. Human Relations 58, 311–340 (2005).
68
Stankevičiūtė, Ž., Staniškienė, E. & Ciganė, U. Sustainable HRM as a Driver for Innovative Work behaviour: Do Respect, Openness, and Continuity Matter? The Case of Lithuania. Sustainability 12, 5511 (2020).
69
Maloni, M., Hiatt, M. S. & Campbell, S. Understanding the work values of Gen Z business students. The International Journal of Management Education 17, 100320 (2019).
70
Smaliukiene, R. & Bekesiene, S. Towards Sustainable Human Resources: How Generational Differences Impact Subjective Wellbeing in the Military? Sustainability 12, 10016 (2020).
71
Majkovic, A.-L. et al. IAP Studie 2017- Teil 2. Der Mensch in der Arbeitswelt 4.0: Ergebnisse der qualitativen Interviews. IAP Institut für Angewandte Psychologie, (2018).
72
Beaver, G. & Hutchings, K. Training and developing an age diverse workforce in SMEs: The need for a strategic approach. Education & Training 47, 592–604 (2005).
73
Wilson, M., George, A. S. & Vegas, A. M. Prospective trends in HRM of generation Z (2017).
74
Pociovălișteanu, D., Novo-Corti, I., Aceleanu, M. I., Șerban, A. C. & Grecu, E. Employment Policies for a Green Economy at the European Union Level. Sustainability 7, 9231–9250 (2015).
75
Calia, R. C., Guerrini, F. M. & Castro, M. de. The impact of Six Sigma in the performance of a Pollution Prevention program. Journal of Cleaner Production 17, 1303–1310 (2009).

1
Bányai, T. Sustainable Human Resource Management (MDPI, Basel, Switzerland, 2019).
2
Anlesinya, A. & Susomrith, P. Sustainable human resource management: A systematic review of a developing field. Journal of Global Responsibility 11, 295–324 (2020).
3
Ehnert, I., Parsa, S., Roper, I., Wagner, M. & Muller-Camen, M. Reporting on sustainability and HRM: A comparative study of sustainability reporting practices by the world’s largest companies. International Journal of Human Resource Management 27, 88–108 (2016).
4
Aust, I., Matthews, B. & Muller-Camen, M. Common Good HRM: A paradigm shift in Sustainable HRM? Human Resource Management Review 30, 1–11 (2020).
5
Jamal, T. et al. Perceived Green Human Resource Management Practices and Corporate Sustainability: Multigroup Analysis and Major Industries Perspectives. Sustainability 13, 3045 (2021).
6
Martins, J. M. et al. Assessing the Impact of Green Hiring on Sustainable Performance: Mediating Role of Green Performance Management and Compensation. International Journal of Environmental Research and Public Health 18, 5654 (2021).
7
Järlström, M., Saru, E. & Vanhala, S. Sustainable Human Resource Management with Salience of Stakeholders: A Top Management Perspective. J Bus Ethics 152, 703–724 (2018).
8
Kumar, A., Bashkar, P., Nadeem, S., P., Tyagi, M. & Garza-Reyes, J., A. Sustainability Adoption through Sustainable Human Resource Management: A Systematic Literature Review and Conceptual Framework. International Journal of Mathematical, Engineering and Management Sciences 5, 1014–1031 (2020).
9
Paillé, P., Chen, Y., Boiral, O. & Jin, J. The Impact of Human Resource Management on Environmental Performance: An Employee-Level Study. Journal of Business Ethics 33, 451–466 (2014).
10
Baron, D. P. Business and its environment. 3rd ed. (Prentice Hall, New Jersey, USA, 2000).
11
Orlitzky, M., Schmidt, F. L. & Rynes, S. L. Corporate Social and Financial Performance: A Meta-Analysis. Organization Studies 24, 403–441 (2003).
12
Branco, M. C. & Rodrigues, L., L. Corporate Social Responsibility and Resource-Based Perspectives. Journal of Business Ethics 25, 111–132 (2006).
13
Ramos-González, M. d. M., Rubio-Andrés, M. & Sastre-Castillo, M. Á. Effects of socially responsible human resource management (SR-HRM) on innovation and reputation in entrepreneurial SMEs. International Entrepreneurship and Management Journal, 1–29 (2021).
14
Shen, J. & Benson, J. When CSR Is a Social Norm. Journal of Management 40, 1723–1746 (2014).
15
Barrena-Martínez, J., López-Fernández, M. & Romero-Fernández, P. M. Socially responsible human resource policies and practices: Academic and professional validation. European Research on Management and Business Economics 23, 55–61 (2017).
16
Dupont, C., Ferauge, P. & Giuliano, R. The Impact of Corporate Social Responsibility on Human Resource Management: GDF SUEZ’s Case. International Business Research 6, 145-155 (2013).
17
Cohen, E., Taylor, S. & Muller-Camen, M. SHRM Foundation’s Effective Practice Guidelines Series. HRM´s Role in Corporate Social and Environmental Sustainability (SHRM Foundation, Alexandria, Virginia, USA, 2012).
18
Global Reporting Initiative. About GRI. Available at https://www.globalreporting.org/about-gri/ (2021).
19
Novartis. Living Wage. Available at https://www.novartis.com/our-company/corporate-responsibility/reporting-disclosure/transparency-disclosure/living-wage (2021).
20
GS4. Corporate Social Responsibility Report 2011. Securing Your World. Available at https://www.g4s.com/-/media/g4s/global/files/csr-reports/g4s_csr_report_2011.ashx (2011).
21
Arulrajah, A., A., Opatha, H. & Nawaratne, N. Green Human Resource Management Practices: A Review. Sri Lankan Journal of Human Resource Management 5, 1–16 (2015).
22
Tooranloo, H., S., Azadi, M. H. & Sayyahpoor, A. Analyzing factors affecting implementation success of sustainable human resource management (SHRM) using a hybrid approach of FAHP and Type-2 fuzzy DEMATEL. Journal of Cleaner Production 25, 1252–1265 (2017).
23
Glaser, M. & Diele, K. Asymmetric outcomes: assessing central aspects of the biological, economic and social sustainability of a mangrove crab fishery, Ucides cordatus (Ocypodidae), in North Brazil. Ecological Economics 49, 361–373 (2004).
24
Hronová, Š. & Špaček, M. Sustainable HRM Practices in Corporate Reporting. Economies 9, 1–34 (2021).
25
Lopez-Cabrales, A. & Valle-Cabrera, R. Sustainable HRM strategies and employment relationships as drivers of the triple bottom line. Human Resource Management Review 30, 1–11 (2020).
26
Kaiser, S. & Kozica, A. Ethik im Personalmanagement. Zentrale Konzepte, Ansätze und Fragestellungen (Rainer Hampp Verlag, Augsburg, Germany, 2012).
27
Zaugg, R., J. Nachhaltiges Personalmanagement. Eine neue Perspektive und empirische Exploration des Human Resource Management (Gabler, Wiesbaden, Germany, 2009).
28
Fischer, S., Eireiner, C. & Weber, S. Nachhaltiges HR-Management. Konzepte – Rollen – Handlungsempfehlungen (Schäffer-Poeschel Verlag für Wirtschaft Steuern Recht GmbH, Stuttgart, Germany, 2019).
29
Al-Zawahreh, A., Khasawneh, S. & Al-Jaradat, M. Green management practices in higher education: The status of sustainable leadership. Tertiary Education and Management 25, 53–63 (2019).
30
Lambert, S. Sustainable leadership and the implication for the general further education college sector. Journal of Further and Higher Education 35, 131–148 (2011).
31
Vanderstraeten, A. The HRM Cockpit: an instrument for developing and evaluating sustainable HRM in an organization. In Sustainable HRM and Employee Well-Being, Proceedings (2015), pp. 1–27.
32
Laudlal, T. Drivers and Barriers of CSR and the size and internationalization of firms. Social Responsibility Journal 7, 234–256 (2011).
33
Islam, M. A., Hunt, A., Jantan, A. H., Hashim, H. & Chong, C. W. Exploring Challenges and Solutions in Applying GHRM Practices for the SustainableWorkplace in the Ready-Made Garment Industry in Bangladesh. Business Strategy and Delevopment 3, 332–343 (2020).
34
Guerci, M. & Pedrini, M. The consensus between Italian HR and sustainability managers on HR management for sustainability-driven change–towards a “strong” HR management system. The International Journal of Human Resource Management 25, 1787–1814 (2014).
35
Cherian, J. & Jacob, J. A Study of Green HR Practices and Its Effective Implementation in the Organization: A Review. International Journal of Business and Management 7, 25–33 (2012).
36
Gollan, P. J. Human resources, capabilities and sustainability. In Sustainability: The corporate challenge of the 21st century, edited by Dunphy D., J. Benveniste, A. Griffiths & Sutton, P. (Eds.) (Allen & Unwin, Sydney, Australia), pp. 55–77.
37
Jafri, S. Green HR practices. An empirical study of certain automobile organizations of India. Human Resource Management, 6193–6198 (2012).
38
Chang, T.-W. & Hung, C.-Z. How to Shape the Employees’ Organization Sustainable Green Knowledge Sharing: Cross-Level Effect of Green Organizational Identity Effect on Green Management Behavior and Performance of Members. Sustainability 13, 626 (2021).
39
Kim, Y., Kim, W. G., Choi, H. M. & Phetvaroon, K. The effect of green human resource management on hotel employees’ eco-friendly behavior and environmental performance. International Journal of Hospitality Management 76, 83–93 (2019).
40
Chen, S., Jiang, W. & Li, X. Effect of Employees’ Perceived Green HRM on Their Workplace Green Behaviors in Oil and Mining Industries: Based on Cognitive-Affective System Theory. International Journal of Environmental Research and Public Health 18, 4056 (2021).
41
Ahmad, S. Green human resource management: Policies and practices. Cogent Business & Management 2, 1030817 (2015).
42
Chen, Y. S. & Chang, C. H. The determinants of green product development performance: Green dynamic capabilities, green transformational leadership, and green creativity. Journal of Business Ethics 32, 107–119 (2013).
43
Yong, J. Y. et al. Pathways towards Sustainability in Manufacturing Organizations: Empirical Evidence on the Role of Green Human Resource Management. Business Strategy and the Environment 29, 212–228 (2020).
44
Gully, S. M., Philips, J. M., Castellano, W. G., Han, K. & Kim, A. A Mediated Moderation Model of Recruiting Socially and Environmentally Responsible Job Applicants. Personnel Psychology 66, 935–973 (2013).
45
Masri, H. A. & Jaaron, A. A. Assessing green human resources management practices in Palestinian manufacturing context: An empirical study. Journal of Cleaner Production 25, 474–489 (2017).
46
Mousa, S. K. & Othman, M. The impact of GHRM Practices on Sustainable Performance in Healthcare Organizations: A conceptual Framework. Journal of Cleaner Production 28, 118595 (2020).
47
Zhao, J., Liu, H., Sun, W. How proactive environmental strategy facilitates environmental reputation: Roles of green human resource management and discretionary slack. Sustainability 12, 763 (2020).
48
Colwell, S. R. & Joshi, A. W. Corporate Ecological Responsiveness. Antecedent Effects of Institutional Pressure and Top Management Commitment and Their Impact on Organizational Performance. Business Strategy and the Environment 22, 73–91 (2011).
49
Luu, T. T. Driving employees to serve customers beyond their roles in the Vietnamese hospitality: The roles of paternalistic leadership and discretionary HR practices industry. Tourism Management 69, 132–144 (2018).
50
Jong, J. de & Hartog, D. den. Measuring innovative work behavior. Creativity and Innovation Management 19, 23–36 (2010).
51
Alhaddi, H. Triple Bottom Line and Sustainability. A Literature Review. Business and Management Studies 1, 6–10 (2015).
52
Gayathri, N. & Karthikeyan, P. A review on green human resource management with exclusive allusion to green work life balance. Research Journal of Business Management 7, 40–45 (2013).
53
Mandip, G. Green HRM: People management commitment to environmental sustainability. Research Journal of Recent Sciences 1, 244–252 (2012).
54
Tahir, M., Safwan, N., Usman, A. & Adnan, A. Green HRM as predictor of firms’ environmental performance and role of emplyees’ environmental organizational citizenship behavior as a mediator. Journal of Research & Reviews in Social Sciences Pakistan 3, 699–715 (2020).
55
Meyer, K. E., Estrin, S., Bhaumik, S. K. & Peng, M. W. Institutions, resources, and entry strategies in emerging economies. Strategic Management Journal 30, 61–80 (2008).
56
Pinzone, M., Guerci, M., Lettieri, E. & Huisingh, D. Effects of ’Green’Training on pro-Environmental Behaviors and Job Satisfaction: Evidence from the Italian Healthcare Sector. Journal of Cleaner Production 27, 221–232 (2019).
57
Aboramadan, M. The Effect of Green HRM on Employee Green Behaviors in Higher Education: The Mediating Mechanism of Green Work Engagement. International Journal of Organizational Analysis ahead-of-print (2020).
58
Srivastava, A. P. & Shree, S. Examining the effect of employee green involvement on perception of corporate social responsibility: Moderating role of green training. Management of Environmental Quality 30, 197–210 (2019).
59
Luu, T. T. Employees’ green recovery performance: The role of green HR practices and serving culture. Journal of Sustainable Tourism 26, 1308–1324 (2018).
60
Chung, K. C. Green marketing orientation: Achieving sustainable development in green hotel management. Journal of Hospitality Marketing & Management 29, 722–738 (2020).
61
Battistelli, A., Odoardi, C., Vandenberghe, C., Di Napoli, G. & Piccione, L. Information sharing and innovative work behavior: The role of work-based learning, challenging tasks, and organizational commitment. Human Resource Development Quarterly 30, 361–381 (2019).
62
Ari, E., Karatepe, O. M., Rezapouraghdam, H. & Avci, T. A. A Conceptual Model for Green Human Resource Management: Indicators, Differential Pathways, and Multiple Pro-Environmental Outcomes. Sustainability 12, 1–18 (2020
63
Lee, H. W. How Does Sustainability-Oriented Human Resource Management Work? Examining Mediators on Organizational Performance. International Journal of Public Administration 42, 974–984 (2019).
64
Muster, V. & Schrader, U. Green work-life balance: A new perspective for green HRM. German Journal of Human Resource Management 25, 140–156 (2011).
65
Alegre, J. & Pasamar, S. Firm innovativeness and work-life balance. Technology Analysis & Strategic Management 30, 421–433 (2018).
66
Korzilius, H., Bücker, J. J. & Beerlage, S. Multiculturalism and innovative work behavior: The mediating role of cultural intelligence. International Journal of Intercultural Relations 56, 13–24 (2017).
67
Janssens, M. & Zanoni, P. Many diversities for many services: Theorizing diversity (management) in service companies. Human Relations 58, 311–340 (2005).
68
Stankevičiūtė, Ž., Staniškienė, E. & Ciganė, U. Sustainable HRM as a Driver for Innovative Work behaviour: Do Respect, Openness, and Continuity Matter? The Case of Lithuania. Sustainability 12, 5511 (2020).
69
Maloni, M., Hiatt, M. S. & Campbell, S. Understanding the work values of Gen Z business students. The International Journal of Management Education 17, 100320 (2019).
70
Smaliukiene, R. & Bekesiene, S. Towards Sustainable Human Resources: How Generational Differences Impact Subjective Wellbeing in the Military? Sustainability 12, 10016 (2020).
71
Majkovic, A.-L. et al. IAP Studie 2017- Teil 2. Der Mensch in der Arbeitswelt 4.0: Ergebnisse der qualitativen Interviews. IAP Institut für Angewandte Psychologie, (2018).
72
Beaver, G. & Hutchings, K. Training and developing an age diverse workforce in SMEs: The need for a strategic approach. Education & Training 47, 592–604 (2005).
73
Wilson, M., George, A. S. & Vegas, A. M. Prospective trends in HRM of generation Z (2017).
74
Pociovălișteanu, D., Novo-Corti, I., Aceleanu, M. I., Șerban, A. C. & Grecu, E. Employment Policies for a Green Economy at the European Union Level. Sustainability 7, 9231–9250 (2015).
75
Calia, R. C., Guerrini, F. M. & Castro, M. de. The impact of Six Sigma in the performance of a Pollution Prevention program. Journal of Cleaner Production 17, 1303–1310 (2009).