Journal of Cleaner Production 289 (2021) 125720

Contents lists available at ScienceDirect

Journal of Cleaner Production

journal homepage: www.elsevier.com/locate/jclepro

Enhancing the FIRM’S green performance through green HRM: The

moderating role of green innovation culture
Paul Kivinda Muisyo *, Su Qin
Xian Jiaotong University, School of Management, 28 Xian Ning West Road, 710049, PR China

a r t i c l e i n f o a b s t r a c t

Article history: Prior scholarships have documented that green human resource management practices have perfor-
Received 14 July 2020 mance enabling effects on a firm’s green performance. However, there is a dearth of studies that
Received in revised form empirically model the extent to which green innovation culture moderates the relationship between
16 December 2020
green human resource practices and the firm’s green performance. To address this gap, this paper
Accepted 25 December 2020
established two-fold objectives. First, to examine the effects of green human resource practices and
Available online 29 December 2020
green innovation culture on firm green performance. Second, to model the extent to which green
Handling editor: Dr. Govindan Kannan innovation culture moderates the relationship between green human resource management and
manufacturing firms’ green performance in China. This was done using data obtained from an extensive
Keywords: scale survey of 300 employees in Chinese manufacturing firms located in the Jiangsu Province. The study
Green human resource management suggests that green human resource management practices which include recruitment and selection,
Green innovation culture training and development, performance management and appraisal, reward and payment, and employee
Green performance involvement and leadership have a significant effect on green or environmental performance. The study
also suggests that green innovation which includes green product innovation culture and green process
innovation culture enhances firm green performance. Our paper further suggests that firms that inte-
grate green human resource management practices and green innovation culture are associated with
higher green performance than firms that practice green human resource management only.
© 2020 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.

1. Introduction entails activities like green employee involvement and green

leadership (Attaianese, 2012).
Green human resource management (GRHM) refers to the According to the AbilityeMotivationeOpportunity (AMO) the-
practices designed to build pro-environmental values and behav- ory, developing employees’ ability, motivating employees’
iors into the firm’s workforce and can be utilized to build em- engagement, and providing good opportunities for employee
ployees who can promote green performance (Tang et al., 2018). involvement by an organization is key to high employee perfor-
GHRM involves integrating the spirit of environmentalism into the mance (Tang et al., 2018). In this light, GHRM in the organizational
firm through the employees (Kramar, 2014). GHRM includes three context can enhance the green performance of employees and the
key components -; building green abilities among the employee, entire firms through recruiting employees with an awareness of
motivation for employee engagement, and providing green op- environmental sustainability, providing green training, inspiring
portunities for the employees. The development of employees’ the motivation of employee engagement in green activities by
green abilities involves green recruitment & selection and green establishing green performance management and reward systems
training & development (Renwick et al., 2013). The motivation of and making a platform for employee involvement in green initia-
green employees’ passion involves activities like green perfor- tives (Appelbaum et al., 2001). Some researchers have looked into
mance management and green reward & pay systems (Pellegrini the influence of GHRM on the firms’ environmental performance
et al., 2018). The provision of green opportunities to employees (EP) and found that GHRM attributes are positively related to the
firm’s EP (Roscoe et al., 2019; Jabbour, 2015). However, GHRM alone
is not necessarily sufficient to achieve a green competitive advan-
* Corresponding author. tage for firms. The interaction of other organizational contexts may
E-mail addresses: [email protected] (P.K. Muisyo), [email protected] also be necessary for developing employees’ abilities, motivation,
(S. Qin).

https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jclepro.2020.125720
0959-6526/© 2020 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.
P.K. Muisyo and S. Qin Journal of Cleaner Production 289 (2021) 125720

List of abbreviations SD Standard Deviation

DGA developing green abilities
GHRM Green Human Resource Management MGP Motivating green passion
GIC Green Innovation Culture PGO Providing green opportunities
GP Green Performance GRSS Green recruitment and selection system
EP Environmental Performance GTDS Green training and development system
CFA Confirmatory factor analysis GPAS Green performance and appraisal system
TLI Tucker-Lewis Index GRPS Green reward and pay system
CFI Comparative Fit Index GEIS Green employee involvement system
IFI Incremental Fit Index GPDI Green product innovation
RMSEA Root Mean Square Error of Approximation GPRI Green process innovation
AVE Average Variance Extracted SEM Structural Equation Modelling
CR Composite reliability AMOS Analysis of a Moment Structures

and opportunities for green creativity (Zhou and Shalley, 2011). One GHRM practices and green innovation culture on green
such significant organizational context is the green innovation performance?
culture (GIC). As organizations try to scale down their levels of To address these research questions, this study first builds hy-
environmental pollution and address the increased demands from pothetical models that empirically links GHRM Practices, Green
green stakeholders, great attention has been paid to green inno- Innovation Culture (GIC) and Green Performance (GP), to examine
vation, which refers to the tasks relating to the development of the differential green performance of firms that combine GHRM
innovative products and manufacturing processes that scale down with a GIC, from firms that only adopt GHRM without a GIC. To test
environmental impact (Chen et al., 2006). Today, the concept of the empirical model, the paper gathers data from a robust online
green innovation is growing in popularity as the threats of global survey of Chinese manufacturing firms. The Chinese manufacturing
warming and environmental deterioration presents huge global sector is ideal for this study of Green performance because it has a
challenges (Kunapatarawong and Martínez-ros, 2016; Miao et al., notorious record of poor environmental performance and has been
2017). under huge pressure from the government to scale down its toxic
A scrutiny of the management literature indicates a growing emissions (Li and Zhang, 2014). The paper gives a justification as to
interest in green innovation and related concepts like environ- why the research design was adopted and explains how the hy-
mental innovation, sustainable innovation, and eco-innovation potheses were tested. The results are well presented and analyzed,
(Tietze et al., 2011). Green innovation entails product and process and key findings are discussed. The paper then concludes by
innovation. It’s concerned with improving the product design and showing the contribution to theory and practice and giving some
adopting industrial processes that are energy-saving, pollution- potential directions for further research.
reducing, and sensitive to the firms’ pollution level to the envi- This study extends the existing literature of GHRM, Green per-
ronment (Woo et al., 2013). Scholars have demonstrated that formance, and Green innovation culture as the findings have
management can shape the extent to which green innovation practical and theoretical implications. First, the paper has origi-
translates to a firm’s green performance (Przychodzen et al., 2016). nality and utility for improving green organizational issues, as it
However, it is not very clear how green innovation affects green extends the extant empirical literature on the relationship between
performance. The existing literature has either looked (solely) at GHRM and green innovation culture. Prior scholarships have only
green product innovation (Albino and Dangelico, 2012) or green addressed this relation conceptually (Daily and Huang, 2001),
process innovation (Tseng, Shun, Chiu, Tan, & Siriban-manalang, without exploring how the interaction between GHRM and GIC
2013) or even considered green innovation in a general manner result in higher green outcomes and competitive advantages.
without delineating green process and product innovation (Lee and Therefore, this research demonstrates how the firm’s management
Min, 2015). This situation, therefore, calls for further studies to be helps improve its green performance by integrating GIC and GHRM
undertaken. practices. Thus, the study’s originality and utility can be valuable for
A firm without green innovation culture will have problems teaching green innovation culture with in-depth details, which can
implementing employees’ green abilities, motivation, and oppor- stimulate the harvest of more green and environmentally respon-
tunities. The role of green innovation often features a lot in the sible managers in the future.
HRM literature. Nevertheless, there is a lack of scholarship that
attempts to integrate green innovation culture into green human 2. Literature REVIEW and hypotheses development
resource management to assess their combined effect on green
performance. We suggest that research on how ecologically The study draws on the Ability Motivation Opportunity (AMO)
conscious staff implement green initiatives is incomplete in the theory’s arguments to develop an integrated research model that
absence of green innovation culture. Research has indicated a guides our work. The AMO theory can be traced back to the
scarcity of scholarships that focus on the link between organiza- scholarly conversation between industrial psychologists, who posit
tional culture and green performance of the firm (Dubey et al., that performance is a function of recruitment and training, and
2017; Jackson et al., 2014; Renwick et al., 2013). Daily et al. (2012) social psychologists who believe that motivation drives perfor-
demonstrated that the enhancement role that green culture has mance (Maclnnis and Jaworski, 1989). Using this framework, we
on the relationship between GHRM and performance is under- examine how GHRM practices influence the GP of a firm. Grounded
researched. To fill these identified gaps, our study endeavors to on this theory, we view the “Ability” aspect of the theory to
address the following research questions: How does green inno- comprise of green recruitment and training, “Motivation” to
vation culture moderate the relationship between GHRM practices include the green performance management and reward system
and firms’ green performance? What is the combined effect of and “Opportunity” aspect of the theory to incorporate green
2
P.K. Muisyo and S. Qin Journal of Cleaner Production 289 (2021) 125720

involvement and empowerment. The ultimate opportunity can also made for further research on environmental training especially in
be seen in the final goal of enhanced green performance. Blumberg the area of the exploration of the objectives of environmental
and Pringle (1982) also provided the third component of the training.
theory-the “Opportunity” which points at the conditions of work, Training on environmental issues is taken as one of the effective
tools, leadership, and time. They further revealed that individual strategies for developing HR (Jabbour, 2011). It helps create
performance was a reflection of capacity (Abilities), willingness employee awareness on environmental matters, build a positive
(Motivation), and involvement (Opportunity). They noted that the attitude toward the environment, promote a proactive approach in
three elements were critical for the occurrence of performance. Our ecological activities, and strive to minimize waste and energy
literature review therefore is anchored on these proponents where (Zoogah, 2015). Sarkis et al. (2010) re-affirmed that training is
we go beyond individual constructs to build an integrated research necessary for the support of green management systems and per-
model. formance. Additionally, environmental training is a critical aspect
for the successful implementation of the environmental manage-
2.1. GHRM and GP ment system and building of green organizational culture (Teixeira
et al., 2012). Thus, it is hypothesized:
This study takes GHRM as a multidimensional construct that
H1a. Developing employee green abilities through recruitment,
consists of the following three aspects-; developing green abilities,
selection, and training positively influences the green performance
motivating green initiatives, and providing green opportunities.
of manufacturing firms.
The study disentangles GHRM into three distinct aspects and re-
view each one of them against green performance. This makes our
2.1.2. Motivating green employees engagement
study stand out as prior scholarship has taken GHRM as a single
There are two major activities in the practice of motivating
aggregate construct (Dumont et al., 2017; Roscoe et al., 2019).
green employees highlighted in this study: performance manage-
ment/appraisal and green reward and pay. The HR practitioners
2.1.1. Developing green employee abilities
evaluate the performance of employees in relation to the attain-
There are two major activities in the practice of building green
ment of their green targets. They help develop and implement pro-
employees’ abilities highlighted in this study: recruitment/selec-
environmental performance indicators and evaluation systems for
tion and training/development. While the process of green
the entire firm (Marcus and Fremeth, 2009). During performance
recruitment and selection ensures that environmentally conscious
appraisals, the HR practitioners engage the staff on green target
employees are hired, green training and development help improve
realization and brainstorm on ideas for reducing waste and
their skills. In the search for talents, the attraction of quality staff
enhancing performance (Renwick et al., 2013).
remains a key challenge for the HR department. Ehnert (2009)
A green reward system motivates employees and helps bring
posits that employers of big multinational firms are embracing
out the employees’ environmental performance (Teixeira et al.,
GHRM as a way of ‘employer branding’ to boost their recruitment
2012). The reward program help creates, maintain, and motivate
efficiency for the young generation that is environmentally
staff for good performance and acknowledges the need for the
conscious. This has enabled employers to give much more green
protection of the environment (Lindstro€ m and Vanhala, 2011). This
information on the environmental activity of the organization
system should be structured in a way to breed green initiatives as
(Renwick et al., 2013).
well as check on the employees’ carbon footprints (Pillai and
Aiman-Smith et al. (2001) revealed that a green image of the
Sivathanu, 2014). The staff should be rewarded when they show
firm is the most reliable predictor of the firm’s overall selection
the ability to appreciate and develop an eco-friendly culture
attractiveness. Backhaus et al. (2002) also reported that university
(Liebowitz, 2010). Several studies have shown that organizations
students in the US prefer joining firms that portray pro-
can get positive environmental performance by offering various
environmental images. A UK survey data indicates that graduates
types of rewards like praise letters, promotion, career gains,
put into consideration the firm’s green performance in their job
bounces, cash, gifts among others (Opatha and Arulrajah, 2014).
pursuit intentions (CIPD, 2007). 39% of 757 CIPD member survey
Hence, the application of green rewards and compensation (such as
indicated that a policy on environmental management (EM) is key
daily praise and company awards) is viewed to have a significant
in hiring and retaining young workers (Philpott and Davies, 2007).
impact on employee creativity in advancing eco-initiatives and
Past research has shown that a firm’s competitiveness is man-
hence higher green performance. Thus, we hypothesize:
ifested in a set of practices that include recruitment of staff with
green consciousness, internalization of unique processes that H1b. Motivating employees’ green passion through performance
screen and evaluate a job applicant’s coherence and commitment to appraisals and rewards positively influences the green performance
the environment (Saeed et al., 2019), providing training that is of manufacturing firms.
explicit on the firm’s environmental policy and the expected pos-
tures (Gholami et al., 2016; Yong et al., 2019). According to Roscoe 2.1.3. Providing green employee opportunities
et al. (2019), the HR function is at the forefront in training staff on There is one significant activity in the practice of providing
matters concerning the environment about the firm’s green per- green employees opportunities highlighted in this study: employee
formance. Teixeira et al. (2016) further argue that green training involvement (EI). EI in EM should trickle down to the lower cadre
helps organizations to enhance their green supply chain manage- staff as this is viewed as a significant step in EP (Del Brío et al.,
ment in the context of sustainable HRM and management practices, 2007). EI in EM is a crucial driver for most of EM activities like
which eventually enables them to cut costs and enhance their economic use of resources (Florida and Davison, 2001); waste
reputation. This kind of training raises awareness of ecological is- reduction (May and Flannery, 1995); and checking on pollution
sues and develop green abilities to reduce unnecessary waste and (Kitazawa and Sarkis, 2000). EI in EM is anchored on three key
pollution (Simpson and Samson, 2010). Training on environmental processes: First, by capitalizing on staffs’ tacit knowledge gathered
matters raises employee skills in the waste elimination procedures through exposure in the operational procedures of the firm (Boiral,
and checks on wastage of raw materials. This builds their emotional 2002); second, by empowering employees to advance ideas on
attachment on boosting the firms’ EP (Ferna
ndez et al., 2003). In the improving environmental performance (Govindarajulu and Daily,
most recent literature review by (Stefanelli et al., 2019), calls are 2004); and third, by instituting a culture that supports EM. A
3
P.K. Muisyo and S. Qin Journal of Cleaner Production 289 (2021) 125720

study in Belgium on key polluters (as measured by environmental 2.3. Green HRM and green innovation culture interaction
taxes paid) found a link between green leadership and employee
green decisions (Buysse and Verbeke, 2003). Thus, we hypothesize: GHRM may be challenging if firms try to address green issues
using environmental management solutions without necessarily
H1c. Providing Green opportunities through employee involve-
considering organizational green innovation culture. This results in
ment positively influences the green performance of
decimal green performance (Renwick et al., 2013). This is further
manufacturing firms.
supported by the staff’s heightened environmental consciousness
and their subsequent expectation from their employers to integrate
green concerns in the form of corporate social responsibility.
2.2. Organizational culture: green innovation culture (GIC) and GP While the green initiatives of a firm affect the green behavior of
employees beyond their behavioral motivation (Chou, 2014),
A firm’s culture is termed as a green culture if its staff can go embracing environmental culture is determined by both the firm’s
beyond the objectives of making a profit to reduce its adverse ef- policy and strategy towards handling of green concerns (Chou,
fects on the environment (Sroufe et al., 2010). A “green” innovation 2014). To this end (Sweetman, 2007), postulated that regardless
culture is therefore described as the beliefs and behaviors of em- of the firm’s commitment to the environmental policy and laid
ployees related to improving the natural environment. A strong down practices, no much progress can be achieved without the
basis in EM research is that outstanding results can be attained not support of the employees. This has led to the conclusion that no
only by overhauling the process of production, products, or raw firm can become green where its employees lack green compe-
materials but also by working on the corporate culture in a way that tencies and capabilities (Jabbour, 2015) and this has led to much
the firm has sufficient attachment to sustainability. attention been paid to GHRM. To achieve much success in envi-
Green innovation or eco-innovation is concerned with saving ronmental sustainability, past research has proposed for the crea-
energy, preventing pollution and recycling waste, and eco-design. tive fusion of GHRM and green innovative culture (Jabbour, 2015).
Green innovation has grown to be an essential strategy for high Past research has highlighted that professional competencies
tech firms to attain sustainability (Chen, 2008; Chiou et al., 2011) should be made up of personal characteristics, behaviors, skills,
while reacting to current trends of environmental awareness, knowledge, attitudes, self-reflection, personal factors, values, and
pressure from regulatory agencies and consumers that are envi- beliefs. These competencies are more sustained where they inte-
ronmentally aware, and engage extensively on EM (Cai and Zhou, grate with GIC. Thus, we hypothesize as follow;
2014). Today, research has used green innovation to illustrate
H3a. Firms that combine GHRM practices and Green Product
what should be done by businesses to attain sustainability and
Innovation culture have higher green performance than GHRM
remain competitive. Green innovation can be termed as an inno-
firms without Green Product Innovation culture
vation that leads to environmental sustainability, irrespective of
whether the outcome was anticipated (Cai and Zhou, 2014)). Firms H3b. Firms that combine GHRM practices and Green Process
should boost their sustainability quest by respecting international Innovation culture have higher green performance than GHRM
ecological conventions and adopting new ways of technological firms without Green Process Innovation culture
breakthroughs in a manner that supports green innovation (Chiou We proceed to present the hypothesis for our work in the con-
et al., 2011). A recent study by Guo et al. (2020) revealed that green ceptual model shown in Fig. 1.
innovation played a vital role in the organization’s green perfor-
mance. A survey by Saunila et al. (2017) found a positive relation- 3. Research design
ship between sustainability and green innovation. Cai and Li (2018)
argue that both internal resources (HR included) and external This study’s hypotheses were tested through a survey carried
pressures influence a firms’ green innovation. Green innovation out among employees from the Chinese manufacturing sector
entails coming up with green products and green processes that within the Jiangsu Province. Jiangsu Province is a vibrant economic
alter the existing product design to conserve the environment at and industrial zone with a record of high pollution emissions (Li
any stage of a product’s life cycle. Green process innovation is and Zhang, 2014). We chose the Chinese manufacturing sector as
associated with saving energy, pollution prevention, and recycling our study’s context because it has a notorious history of poor
of waste (Chen, 2008). environmental performance. Moreover, the design choice to focus
Innovation is taken as a critical factor that boosts the firms’ on a single industry was to reduce the confounding effects of non-
capacity to maintain a competitive edge (Eisenhardt and Martin, controllable factors such as the economic, legislative, and cultural
2000). Green innovation entails product and process innovation contexts that may affect our research results.
and it’s concerned with improving the product design and adopting
industrial processes that are energy-saving, pollution-reducing, 3.1. Sample selection
and sensitive to the firm’s pollution level to the environment. The
EP factor is a crucial concern for the management of most firms as The population for this study was made up of employees from
they want to comply with the regulation and even appeal to the the Chinese manufacturing sector. A sample of 700 firms located in
public hence attain a competitive edge (Ali et al., 2019). Green Jiangsu Province and with more than 30 employees was randomly
innovation in product and process stems from environmental selected.
degradation as well as brings in the competitive advantage of the
firms (Chiou et al., 2011). Thus, green product innovation and green 3.2. Research instrument
process innovation are positively related to environmental perfor-
mance. We, therefore, hypothesize as follows-: The three primary constructs of the study-; GHRM practices,
GIC, and GP, were covered by our survey tool. A survey method was
H2a. : Green Product Innovation culture enhances the green
ideal for this study because of its versatility in covering a large
performance of manufacturing firms.
geographic area (Cooper and Schindler, 2006). We send hyperlinks
H2b. Green Process Innovation culture enhances the green per- to the questionnaire together with cover letters to 700 firms. We
formance of manufacturing firms. assured the respondents of the utmost anonymity and
4
P.K. Muisyo and S. Qin Journal of Cleaner Production 289 (2021) 125720

Fig. 1. Conceptual model.

confidentiality. They were further confirmed that there was no following the work of (Chen et al., 2006). The GP measures are
wrong or right answer and that their responses would never be based on the study of Montabon et al. (2007) and modified by
leaked. To enhance the response rate, we made follow-up tele- (Roscoe et al., 2019). GP measures include pollution reduction,
phone calls and reminder emails. In total, 321 questionnaires were waste reduction, recycling efficiency, resource consumption
returned. Upon scrutiny, we discarded 21 questionnaires that had reduction, and environmental incident/accident reduction. Each
incomplete and missing data. Finally, 300 useful questionnaires item’s reliability was tested using the Cronbach alpha with accep-
were obtained from the 700 that were administered. This marked a tance of 0.71 (Hair et al., 2010). There were different respondents
response rate of 43% percent, which is in line with previously for each construct to minimize the common method variance
published surveys investigating environmental issues (Pinzone (CMV) (Podsakoff et al., 2003). For instance, respondents for GHRM
et al., 2016; Roscoe et al., 2019). and GP were drawn from the HR and IT departments. Those for GIC
To test the potential for non-response bias, t-test was conducted were from the production and procurement departments. Before
on demographic characteristics of the firm size and level of edu- administering the questionnaire, we piloted it using ten depart-
cation to compare the early respondents (those who returned the mental heads from some selected Chinese manufacturing firms.
completed questionnaires within 10 days) and late respondents Since the respondents were Chinese, a Chinese version of the
(those who returned the completed questionnaires during the last questionnaire was administered by translating it into Chinese using
10 days, Lessler and William, 1992). The findings of the t-test the double translation method.
illustrated no significant statistical differences (p > 0.05) among the The following constructs and measures were used to collect
category means for the demographic characteristic. Thus, results information on the three items of the study.
indicate the absence of nonresponse bias.
The results show that 66.3% of the sampled employees were
4. Data analysis and results
male, and about 33.7% were female. The majority of the employees
were drawn from the production department (48.3%) and the Hu-
In the following data analysis section, we first estimate the
man Resource division (28.3%). Most of the respondents (48%) were
measurement model to assess the constructs’ reliability and val-
in the senior and middle management categories, while (44.7%) of
idity and then estimate the structural model to test the relation-
the respondents were operational employees. The majority of the
ships among the hypothesized constructs. The study utilized
respondents (43.7%) had a working experience of 11e15 years.
Structural Equation Modelling (SEM) to verify the research frame-
Besides, most of the firms had 50-100 employees (76.0%), and a few
work and hypotheses, and applied AMOS 24.0 to obtain the
(18.2%) had less than 49 employees. The details of the samples are
empirical results. SEM of this study examined the two levels of
presented in Table 1 (see Table 2) (see Table 3).
analysis, the direct model and the indirect model, and their results
are well presented. To explore the interaction effects, the direct and
3.3. Measures
indirect paths have been specified simultaneously to estimate
either effect while partialling out the others (Iacobucci et al., 2007).
For enhanced validity of the research instrument, we employed
Thus, we specified SEM model by incorporating the hypothesized
a 5-point Likert scale to measure each item in the three major
effects as well as the direct impact of GHRM on GIC.
constructs with scores ranging from 1 (strongly disagree) to 5
(strongly agree). Following the work of (Jabbour, 2011; Renwick
et al., 2013; Yong and Yusliza, 2016; Yong et al., 2019), the study 4.1. Model specification
identified five factors that comprise GHRM practices, including
recruitment and selection, training and development, performance To test Hypothesis 1a, 1b and 1c, a multivariate regression
appraisal and assessment, reward and pay, and employee involve- model was specified.
ment & leadership. The survey instrument also comprised of
standard, validated statistical scales for measuring the GIC items GP ¼ b0 þ b1GRSS þ b2GTDS þ b3GPAS þ b4GRPS þ b5GEIS þ e(1)
5
P.K. Muisyo and S. Qin Journal of Cleaner Production 289 (2021) 125720

Table 1
Respondents demographic details.

Attributes Items Response Percentage

Age Less than 20 Years 23 7.7

20e30 Years 138 46.0
31e40 Years 75 25.0
41e50 Years 41 13.7
Above 50 Years 23 7.7
Gender Male 199 66.3
Female 101 33.7
Educational Qualification Undergraduate 32 10.7
Graduate 128 42.7
Masters 74 24.7
PhD 46 15.3
Others 20 6.7
Department Human Resource 85 28.3
Production 145 48.3
Purchases and Procurement 31 10.3
Information Technology 36 12.0
Others 3 1.0
Firm ownership status State owned 67 22.4
Privately owned 148 49.3
Foreign owned 40 13.3
Joint Venture 45 15.0
Position in Organization Senior Management level 72 24.0
Middle management level 72 24.0
Operational Employees 134 44.7
Others 22 7.3
Firm size 49 employees 55 18.2
50e100 employees 228 76.0
>100 employees 17 5.8
Years of Experience Less than 5 Years 81 27.0
5e10 Years 43 14.3
11e15 Years 131 43.7
16e20 Years 29 9.7
Above 20 Years 16 5.3

Where:
GP denotes Green performance measures; GRS denotes Green The coefficients H3a and H3b, in the understanding that the
Recruitment and Selection System; GTDS denotes Green Training coefficient of interaction between GHRM practices and GIC di-
and Development System; GPAS denotes Green Performance mensions resulted in higher GP. In other words, b11, b10, b9, b8, b7
Appraisal System; GRPS denotes Green Reward and Payment Sys- >b5, b4, b3, b2, b1 for H3a and H3b tested.
tem; GEIS denotes Green Employee Involvement System.
To test hypotheses 2a and 2b, a multivariate regression equation
was specified. 4.2. Measurement reliability and validity

GP ¼ b0 þ b1GPDI þ b2GPRI þ et (2) Confirmatory factor analysis (CFA) was conducted to evaluate
the construct reliability, convergent validity, and discriminant
Where: validity of the multi-item measurement scales. In this study, Amos
GPDI denotes Green product innovation, GPRI denotes Green 24.0 and SPSS 25.0 software package was used to conduct data
Process Innovation. analysis. The CFA results indicate an acceptable fit between the
To test Hypothesis 3a and 3b, two equations were specified, measurement model and the data set (c2/df ¼ 2.62; CFI ¼ 0.96;
regressing the implications of integrating GHRM practices with GIC IFI ¼ 0.96, TLI ¼ 0.95; RMSEA ¼ 0.04) (see CFA appendix). Cron-
dimensions. bach’s alpha values and composite reliability values are used to
assess the constructs’ reliability (Hair et al., 2010). The Cronbach’s
alpha values for the first-order constructs (GHRM, GIC, GP) range

GP ¼ b0 þ b1GRSS þ b2GTDS þ b3GPAS þ b4GRPS þ b5GEIS þ b6GPDI þ b7GRSS*GPDIþ

b8GTDS*GPDI þ b9GPAS*GPDI þ b10GRPS*GPDI þ b11GEIS*GPDI þ et (3)

GP ¼ b0 þ b1GRSS þ b2GTDS þ b3GPAS þ b4GRPS þ

b5GEIS þ b6GPRI þ b7GRSS*GPRI þ b8GTDS*GPRI þ b9GPAS*GPRI þ b10GRPS*GPRI þ b11GEIS*GPRI þ et (4)

6
P.K. Muisyo and S. Qin Journal of Cleaner Production 289 (2021) 125720

Table 2
Constructs with measures.

Item Construct and Measure Source

GHRM DEVELOPING GREEN EMPLOYEES ABILITIES (Jabbour 2011; Yong Yusla et al., 2019; Renwick et al.,
Employee Recruitment & Selection (GRSS) 2013; Roscoe et al., 2019),
GRSv1: Employees are attracted to the environmental information, activities and reputation of our
company.
GRSv2: Employees with environmental sustainability knowledge have higher likelihood of being hired
by my company.
GRSv3: The HR department selects employees who are willing to engage with EM activities of the firms.
Employee Training & Development (GTDS)
GTDv1: Our Company invests heavily on environmental training of employees.
GTDv2: Training staff about the ecological impact of organisational activities is a significant tool in our
company.
GTDv3: HR department provides continuous, relevant, and effective environmental training programs.
MOTIVATING GREEN EMPLOYEES ENGAGEMENT
Performance Management & Appraisal (GAPS)
GPAv1: HR department of our company establishes clear objectives of green practices for each
employee.
GPAv2: Our company evaluates employee performance based on the achievement of environmental
objectives.
GPAv3: Individual environmental performance is monitored by the HR manager in our company.
Reward & Payment System (GRPS)
GRPv1: Non-monetary rewards such as public recognition, praises, gifts and leaves are given to
employees with high environmental performance.
GRPv2: Monetary rewards such as cash, premiums and bonuses are given to employees for their high
environmental performance.
GRPv3: Employees with eco-initiatives are promoted to motivate other employees.
PROVIDING GREEN EMPLOYEE OPPORTUNITIES
Employee Involvement & Leadership (GPEI)
GILv1: Employees are involved in Environmental Management in our Company.
GILv2: Employees are engaged and empowered to make environmental suggestions.
GILv3: Employees’ tacit knowledge is tapped by management through promoting them to basic level
leadership.
GIC Green Product Innovation Culture (GPDI) (Y. Chen, Lai and Wen, 2006).
GPDv1: Our company uses materials that produce minimal pollution during product design and
development
GPDv2: Our company prefers materials that save energy in product design and development
GPDv3: Our company is very keen to produce products that are easily recyclable, re-useable and bio
degradable
Green Process Innovation Culture (GPRI)
GPRv1: Our company has adopted manufacturing processes that have scaled down the emission of
hazardous wastes.
GPRv2: Our company has adopted manufacturing processes that allow for the re-use of treated wastes
and emissions.
GPRv3: Our company has adopted manufacturing processes that require minimal use of water,
electricity, coal or oil.
GP Our company is very concerned on waste reduction. Montabon, Sroufe, and Narasimhan (2007)
Our company is committed to pollution reduction.
Our company is keen on economic consumption of resources.
Our company is concerned about environmental accidents reduction.
Our company is committed to recycling efficiency.

from 0.975 to 0.981, and their composite reliability values range 4.3. Common method bias analysis
from 0.895 to 0.962. They are all higher than the recommended
threshold value of 0.70 and support Reliability (Hair et al., 2010; Considering the item characteristic effects, common method
Kline, 2015). To evaluate the first order constructs’ convergent bias may be a threat to the validity and need to be considered. To
validity, individual item loading, and average variance extracted test the potential common method bias, Harman’s one-factor test
(AVE) are used (Fornell and Larcker, 1981). was performed. The results indicate that all the measurement items
The CFA results reveal that all items are significantly loaded on can be divided into 3 factors, with eigenvalues greater than 1.0 and
the constructs. The loadings are significant at the p < 0.001 level accounting for 87.9% of the variance. The first factor only explains
and higher than the benchmark value of 0.70 (Hair et al., 2010). The 23.8% of the variance, less than the benchmark value of 50%
AVE values range from 0.588 to 0.657, which are above the (Podsakoff et al., 2003). The results suggest that common method
benchmark value of 0.50 (Fornell and Larcker, 1981). These results bias is unlikely to be a severe problem.
provide strong support for convergent validity. To test the con-
structs’ discriminant validity, the relationships between shared 4.4. Descriptive analysis
variances among constructs and AVE values were compared
(Fornell and Larcker, 1981). All the correlations between the con- This was done to bring out more details about the nature of the
structs are less than the square roots of the AVE values, which data. Table 4 shows the average values, standard deviation, and
supports the discriminant validity of the constructs. Therefore, it correlations for the constructs and sub-constructs of Green Human
can be conclude that the measurement model has adequate reli- Resource Management, Green Innovation Culture, and Green
ability, convergent validity, and discriminant validity. Performance.
7
P.K. Muisyo and S. Qin Journal of Cleaner Production 289 (2021) 125720

Table 3
Confirmatory factor analysis (CFA) results for the measurement model.

Construct Items Standardized Factor Loading Cronbach Alpha CR AVE

Green Human Resource Management (GHRM) GRSv1 0.724*** .979 0.962 0.632
GRSv2 0.863***
GRSv3 0.829***
GTDv1 0.851***
GTDv2 0.714***
GTDv3 0.757***
GPAv1 0.793***
GPAv2 0.802***
GPAv3 0.669***
GRPv1 0.698***
GRPv2 0.855***
GRPv3 0.755***
GIEv1 0.885***
GIEv2 0.778***
GIEv3 0.907***
Green Innovation Culture (GIC) GPDv1 0.752*** .975 0.895 0.588
GPDv2 0.808***
GPDv3 0.813***
GPRv1 0.793***
GPRv2 0.717***
GPRv3 0.711***
Green Performance (GP) WP 0.761*** .977 0.905 0.657
PR 0.869***
RCR 0.787***
EAR 0.764***
RE 0.865***

Notes.
c2/df ¼ 2.62, significant at p ¼ 0.001; TLI ¼ 0.95; CFI ¼ 0.96; IFI ¼ 0.96; RMSEA ¼ 0.04.
Notes: c2 denotes Chi-Square; TLI denotes Tucker-Lewis Index; CFI denotes Comparative Fit Index; IFI denotes Incremental Fit Index; RMSEA denotes Root Mean Square Error;
AVE denotes Average Variance Extracted; CR denotes Composite reliability.
***Significant at p < 0.001.

Table 4
Descriptive statistics and correlations.

Construct Mean SD 1 2 3 4 5 6 7

1 Green Performance 2.46 0.75 0.432

2 Recruitment & Selection 4.50 0.63 .052 0.399
3 Training & Development 4.14 0.75 .022 .282** 0.399
4 Performance Management & Appraisal 3.88 0.76 .057 .270** .231** 0.399
5 Employee Involvement & Leadership 2.29 0.81 .268** .074 .014 .001 0.346
6 Green Product Innovation Culture 2.27 0.84 .267** .043 .002 .034 .136** 0.346
7 Green Process Innovation Culture 2.76 0.94 .224** .012 .038 .006 .172** .240** 0.399
8 Reward & Payment System 3.72 0.83 -.005 .145** .245** .288** .003 .023 .036

Sample size ¼ 300, **p < 0.01, *p < 0.05, SD ¼ Standard Deviation.
The diagonal (in bold) elements are the square roots of AVEs.

Table 5
Direct model 1.

Construct Variables Path Standardised Coefficient P-Value

GHRM on GP DGA GRSS GP 0.120 ***

GTDS GP 0.185 ***
MGP GPAS GP 0.298 ***
GRPS GP 0.082 ***
PGO GEIS GP 0.532 ***
Direct Model (Total) GHRM GHRM GP 0.324 ***

Hypothesis 1 Result Summary

Hypotheses Path P-Value Result

H1a DGA GP *** Supported

H1b MGP GP *** Supported
H1c PGO GP *** Supported

Hint. DGA denotes developing green abilities; MGP denotes motivating green passion; PGO denotes providing green opportunities; GRSS denotes green recruitment and
selection system; GTDS denotes green training and development system; GPAS denotes green performance and appraisal system; GRPS denotes green reward and pay system;
GEIS denotes green employee involvement system.
***significant at 0.01 level.

8
P.K. Muisyo and S. Qin Journal of Cleaner Production 289 (2021) 125720

The results show that there is a significant positive relationship processes, develop new techniques that create savings and prevent
between Green Recruitment & Selection and Employee Training & pollution, enhance energy savings, and increase waste recycling.
Development (r ¼ 0.282, p < 0.001), Performance Management& Our findings, therefore, support hypotheses 2a and 2b (see Table 7).
Appraisal (r ¼ 0.270, p < 0.001) and Reward &Payment System Notably, the test results indicate that there is a full moderating
(r ¼ 0.245, <0.001). There is also a positive and significant rela- effect for the GIC on the relationship between GHRM and GP (H3a;
tionship between Employee Training & Development and Perfor- H3b). The Wald statistic provides the statistical significance for
mance Management & Appraisal (r ¼ 0.231, p < 0.001). each estimated coefficient (Hair et al., 2010). By performing wald
test, the results indicate that the interaction of GHRM practices
with GPDI results in a significant and positive coefficient of 0.597,
4.5. Test of hypothesis and discussion which is 0.273 higher than the effect of GHRM alone on GP. The
interaction of GHRM practices with GPRI results in a significant and
In this section, the results from the models are presented. The positive coefficient of 0.711, which is 0.386 higher than the effect of
first two models are direct. Model 1 links GHRM with GP, model 2 GHRM alone on GP, using wald test of coefficient restriction.
links GIC with GP, while model 3 links the interaction between This paper’s findings indicate that manufacturing firms that
GHRM and GIC with GP. The tables and discussions are shown implement GHRM practices must consider the critical factor of
below. building a green innovation culture in both manufacturing prod-
The direct model results linking GHRM and GP (H1a, H1b, H1c) ucts and manufacturing processes. Green innovation culture (GIC)
are presented in Table 5. The parameter estimates in Table 5 is essential to helping the workforce support implementing the
revealed that all path coefficients are significant at the 0.01 level. green plans and strategies and achieving higher environmental
The results show a significant positive relationship between GHRM performance (wald coefficient 0.285). The findings support the
practices and GP proxies. The positive and significant effects of assertion of (Jabbour, 2015) who postulated that to achieve real and
GHRM practices on GP are 12 percent for GRSS, 18.5 percent for lasting environmental sustainability and better environmental
GTDS, 29.8 percent for GPAS, 8.2 percent for GRPS, and 53.2 percent performance, the innovative fusion of GHRM and green innovative
for GEIS. The results suggest that GHRM practices of recruitment culture is needed. The findings of the study therefore support hy-
and selection, training and development, performance manage- pothesis 3a and 3b.
ment and appraisal, reward and payment, and employee involve-
ment have significant effects on the environmental performance of 5. Contributions and limitations
manufacturing firms in China, with an overall GHRM effect of 32.4
percent on the green performance of manufacturing firms in China. Drawing on the AMO theory to examine the overlooked
The hypotheses 1a, 1b, and 1c are supported in the study that moderating role of GIC in the GHRM e GP relationship, this study
developing employee green abilities, motivating employee green develops an integrated research model in which we investigate the
passion, and providing employee green opportunities have signif- comparative and differential effect of firms that combine GHRM
icant roles in improving environmental performance. The results and GIC on GP and firms that only practice GHRM. The study also
conform with (Renwick et al., 2013; Bombiak and Marciniuk- examines the moderating role of GIC proxies on the GHRM e GP
Kluska, 2018; Roscoe et al., 2019), who found a positive relation- relationship. Our results derived from the manufacturing sector in
ship between GHRM practices and environmental performance. China advance our understanding of how the firm’s GHRM and GIC
The study also found a positive relationship between the GIC jointly improve GP.
and EP (H2a; H2b) in Table 6. The results reveal a significant posi-
tive relationship between GIC proxies and GP. There was a positive 5.1. Theoretical contributions
and significant GIC effect of 51.1 percent on GP. The results suggest
that GIC proxies such as product and process innovation have This paper contributes to the green performance literature in
substantial effects on manufacturing firms’ environmental perfor- the following ways. First, it extend the AMO arguments to green
mance in China. The results confirm the assertions of (Eisenhardt management by examining how firms combine GHRM and GIC to
and Martin, 2000), who posit that innovation culture is consid- reap optimal GP. This makes our paper distinct from other green
ered a critical strategy for enhancing a firm’s ability to maintain a performance research that focus on GHRM- GP relationship
competitive advantage. It also supports the findings of (Chen, 2008) without looking into the moderating role of GIC (Masri and Jaaron,
who highlighted that Green innovation is related to the innovation
et al., 2014; Pinzone et al., 2016; Roscoe et al., 2019).
2017; Paille
of products with environmentally friendly material, environmen- Regarding the Green product and process innovation, the paper
tally friendly packaging, recovery of products, and recycling and reveals a theoretical basis on how firms can adopt GHRM practices
eco-labeling. This helps a firm’s ability to improve existing to attain maximum GP. The study, therefore, posit that firms can
attain an optimal level of GP while at the same time comply with
regulatory authorities by integrating GHRM and GIC. By making
Table 6
Direct model 2. this suggestion, the study extends the applicability of the AMO
theory to green performance. The paper, therefore, uses the AMO as
Construct Path Standardised Coefficient P-Value
a theoretical lens to create the foundation for more insights into the
GIC on GP GPDI GP 0.204 *** environmental performance and give an avenue for firms to
GPRI GP 0.760 *** consider integrating GIC and GHRM.
Direct Model (Total) GIC GP 0.511 ***
Second, study contributes to the green management literature
Hypothesis 2 Result Summary by giving a proposal of an integrated framework within which to
Hypotheses Path P-Value Result examine how firms attain enhanced green performance by way of
H2a GPDI GP *** Supported combining GIC and GHRM. Previous studies (Masri and Jaaron,
H2b GPRI GP *** Supported
et al., 2014; Pinzone et al., 2016; Roscoe et al., 2019)
2017; Paille
Hint. GPDI denotes green product innovation; GPRI denotes green process inno-
have only discussed the GHRM-GP relationship without the
vation. consideration of the moderating effect of GIC. In so doing, the paper
***Significant at 0.01. gives a bigger perspective of the firm’s green performance and
9
P.K. Muisyo and S. Qin Journal of Cleaner Production 289 (2021) 125720

Table 7
Interacting model 3.

Construct Moderating Variable Path Standardised Coefficient P-Value

GHRM, GIC on GP GPDI GHRM*GPDI GP 0.597 ***

GHRM GP 0.325 ***
Wald Test: Diference 0.273 ***
GPRI GHRM*GPRI GP 0.711 ***
GHRM GP 0.324 ***
Wald Test: Diference 0.386 ***
Total GIC GHRM*GIC GP 0.609 ***
GHRM GP 0.324 ***
Wald Test: Diference 0.285 ***

Hypothesis 3 Result Summary

Hypotheses Path P-Value Result

H3a GHRM*GPDI GP *** Supported

H3b GHRM*GPRI GP *** Supported

***Significant at 0.01.

extend previous research that failed to take these considerations on green management in universities and business schools. The
(Masri and Jaaron, 2017; Paille
et al., 2014; Pinzone et al., 2016; Academic staff responsible for developing coarse outlines and syl-
Roscoe et al., 2019). labuses will find our work useful when drafting these documents.
Third, this paper in its original form provides great insight into These propositions are in line with the requirements for education
the phenomena of green human resource management and green for the next generation of managers (Marcus and Fremeth 2009).
innovation culture, which can improve organizational operations The study also offers valuable knowledge that is evidence-based
and performance. The data of this research provides insight into the to the top management on how the different aspects of GHRM
empirical evidence of the relationship between GHRM and GP. affect the firms GP and the influence of the combined effect of
Despite the attention given to this link, scholars are yet to empir- GHRM and green innovation culture on the firms GP. The demon-
ically investigate the moderating role that GIC plays in enhancing stration of this enables them to prioritize the allocation of resources
this relationship. This study, therefore, provides original empirical for the sake of green performance. The findings also provide a pro-
insight into this moderated relationship and makes a strong active strategy for firms to have enhanced green performance while
contribution in this area. This paper to the best of our knowledge is at the same time, comply with regulatory authorities.
the first to consider green innovation culture as a moderating
variable in the relationship between GHRM practices and Green 5.3. Limitations and future research direction
performance proxies such as waste reduction, pollution reduction,
environmental accidents reduction, resource utilization reduction, This study however is not without limitations. These limitations
and recycling efficiency. provide researchers with future research directions. First, despite
using a sample size of 300 in the study, the generalizability of the
5.2. Managerial implications and academic implications for results to the entire Chinese Manufacturing company may be
teaching green culture limited. This is because the population of Chinese manufacturing
employees is too large to permit such generalization.
The study also has implications for the top management and the Second, the study recommends that future researchers who
world of academia. The findings show that human resource man- wish to extend our work can do so using an alternate source of data.
agers can develop green abilities through selection and recruitment To evaluate the direction of causality, they may consider using
as well as training and developing employees for greater green longitudinal data to get a clear understanding of how various firm’s
performance. They can also motivate green passion in employees GHRM attributes and GIC relate to GP. It is our suggestion that
through the use of performance appraisals, as well as designing future studies can consider the use of secondary data that can be
reward and pay systems for employees with higher green initia- derived from the public available corporate information and annual
tives. They can further provide green opportunities by involving reports.
employees in green planning by tapping into their tacit knowledge Finally, our work is based on a single industry in a particular
and enabling them to undertake basic green leadership roles. The country. This might present cultural and industrial constraints and
findings also will enable firm managers to develop a green inno- hence challenge the generalizability of our findings. Although we
vation process and product culture. This will provide higher green believe that organizations in other countries and industries may
performance and environmental sustainability. produce similar results, researchers may consider replicating our
The paper is particularly useful in advancing the research and study in different backgrounds and contexts to verify our
study on green innovation culture. Academia will use the findings speculations.
of the study in teaching the power of green innovation culture to
students and future managers, as well as the interactional effect of 6. Conclusion
GIC and GHRM on environmental performance. The lack of
empirical evidence, must-know guidelines, and best practices has Our study makes a significant contribution to the green man-
made teaching on green culture a huge challenge. Although avail- agement research by examining the ability motivation and oppor-
able literature has depicted green organizational culture as a tunity aspects of GHRM and how they contribute to the firm’s green
paramount topical issue, it has failed to offer adequate empirical performance. The study further suggests the novel concept of
evidence (Survey and Case studies) to support its teaching in combining GHRM and GIC for optimal green performance. In this
schools. Our paper will be of great use in promoting the scholarship circumstance therefore, the findings of this study advances a
10
P.K. Muisyo and S. Qin Journal of Cleaner Production 289 (2021) 125720

deeper understanding of how firms can attain an optimal green Cooper, Schindler, P.S., 2006. Business Research Methods. McGraw-Hill Irwin, New
York.
performance. The study further provides an integrated research
Daily, B.F., Huang, S., 2001. Achieving sustainability through attention to human
framework through which organizations can take effective stra- resource factors in environmental management. Int. J. Oper. Prod. Manag. 21
tegic green decisions regarding green management, and hence (12), 1539e1552. https://doi.org/10.1108/01443570110410892.
uncovering new avenues for future green management research. Daily, B.F., Bishop, J.W., Massoud, J.A., 2012. The role of training and empowerment
in environmental performance: a study of the Mexican maquiladora industry.
Int. J. Oper. Prod. Manag. 32 (5), 631e647. https://doi.org/10.1108/
CRediT authorship contribution statement 01443571211226524.
Del Brío, J.A.,
Fern
andez, E., Junquera, B., 2007. Management and employee
involvement in achieving an environmental action-based competitive advanr-
Paul Kivinda Muisyo: Conceptualization, Methodology, Data age: an empirical study. Int. J. Hum. Resour. Manag. 18 https://doi.org/10.1080/
curation, Writing - original draft, Writing - review & editing. Su 09585190601178687.
Dubey, R., Gunasekaran, A., Childe, S.J., Papadopoulos, T., Hazen, B., Giannakis, M.,
Qin: Conceptualization, Supervision.
Roubaud, D., 2017. Examining the effect of external pressures and organiza-
tional culture on shaping performance measurement systems (PMS) for sus-
Declaration of competing interest tainability benchmarking: some empirical findings. Int. J. Prod. Econ. 193,
63e76. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijpe.2017.06.029.
Dumont, J., Shen, J., Deng, X., 2017. Effects of green HRM practices on employee
The authors declare that they have no known competing workplace green behavior: the role of psychological green climate and
financial interests or personal relationships that could have employee green values. Hum. Resour. Manag. 56 (4), 613e627. https://doi.org/
10.1002/hrm.21792.
appeared to influence the work reported in this paper.
Ehnert, I., 2009. Sustainable Human Resource Management - A Conceptual and
Exploratory Analysis from a Paradox Perspective. Springer, London.
Appendix A. Supplementary data Eisenhardt, K.M., Martin, J.A., 2000. Dynamic capabilities: what are they? Strat.
Manag. J. 21 (10/11), 105e1121. https://doi.org/10.1108/ebr-03-2018-0060.
Ferna
ndez, E., Junquera, B., Ordiz, M., 2003. Organizational culture and human re-
Supplementary data to this article can be found online at sources in the environmental issue: a review of the literature. Int. J. Hum.
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jclepro.2020.125720. Resour. Manag. 14 (4), 634e656. https://doi.org/10.1080/
0958519032000057628.
Florida, R., Davison, D., 2001. Gaining from green management. Calif. Manag. Rev. 43
References (3), 63e84.
Fornell, C., Larcker, D.F., 1981. Evaluation of structural equation models using the
Aiman-Smith, L., Bauer, T.N., Cable, D.M., 2001. Are you attracted? Do you intend to partial least squares (PLS) approach. In: Handbook of Partial Least Squares.
pursue? A recruiting policy- capturing study. J. Bus. Psychol. 16 (2), 219e237. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-540-32827-8.
https://doi.org/10.1136/bmjopen-2014-007409. Gholami, H., Rezaei, G., Saman, M.Z.M., Sharif, S., Zakuan, N., 2016. State-of-the-art
Albino, V., Dangelico, R.M., 2012. The effect of the adoption of environmental Green HRM System: sustainability in the sports center in Malaysia using a
strategies on green product development : a study of companies on world multi-methods approach and opportunities for future research. J. Clean. Prod.
sustainability indices 7KH ( IIHFW RI WKH $ GRSWLRQ RI ( QYLURQPHQWDO 124, 142e163. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jclepro.2016.02.105.
6WUDWHJLHV RQ * UHHQ 3URGXFW’ HYHORSPHQW $ 6WXG \ RI & Govindarajulu, N., Daily, B.F., 2004. Motivating employees for environmental
RPSDQLHV RQ. Int. J. Manag. (525e538). improvement. Ind. Manag. Data Syst. 104 (3), 364e372. https://doi.org/10.1108/
Ali, A., Wang, G., Jiang, X., Ali, A., 2019. How do firms adopt green strategies in 02635570410530775.
emerging economies? An information processing perspective. Acad. Manag. Guo, Y., Wang, L., Chen, Y., 2020. Green Entrepreneurial Orientation and Green
Proc. 2019 (1), 16577. https://doi.org/10.5465/ambpp.2019.16577abstract. Innovation : the Mediating Effect of Supply Chain Learning. Sage Open. https://
Appelbaum, E., Bailey, T., Berg, P., Kalleberg, A.L., 2001. Manufacturing advantage: doi.org/10.1177/2158244019898798.
why high-performance work systems pay off. Acad. Manag. Rev. 26 (3), Hair, J.F., Black, W.C., Babin, B.J., Rolph, E., Tatham, R.L., 2010. Multivariate Data
459e462. https://doi.org/10.2307/3094834. Analysis, seventh ed. PrenticeHall, Upper Saddle, NJ.
Attaianese, E., 2012. A broader consideration of human factor to enhance sustain- Iacobucci, D., Saldanha, N., Deng, X., 2007. A meditation on Mediation : evidence
able building design. Work 41 (Suppl. 1), 2155e2159. https://doi.org/10.3233/ that structural equations models perform better than regressions. J. Consum.
WOR-2012-1020-2155. Psychol. 17 (2), 139e153.
Backhaus, K.B., Stone, B.A., Heiner, K., 2002. Exploringthe relationship between Jabbour, Charbel Jose Chiappetta, 2011. How green are HRM practices, organiza-
corporate social performance and employer attractiveness. Bus. Soc. 41 (3), tional culture, learning and teamwork? A Brazilian study. Ind. Commerc. Train.
292e318. https://doi.org/10.1177/0007650302041003003. 43 (2), 98e105. https://doi.org/10.1108/00197851111108926.
Blumberg, M., Pringle, C.D., 1982. The missing opportunity in organizational Jabbour, Charbel Jose
Chiappetta, 2015. Environmental training and environmental
research: some implications for a theory of work performance. Acad. Manag. management maturity of Brazilian companies with ISO14001: empirical evi-
Rev. 7 (4), 560e569. https://doi.org/10.5465/amr.1982.4285240. dence. J. Clean. Prod. 96, 331e338. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jclepro.2013.10.039.
Boiral, O., 2002. Tacit knowledge and environmental management. Long. Range Jackson, S.E., Schuler, R.S., Jiang, K., 2014. An aspirational framework for strategic
Plan. 35, 291e317. human resource management. Acad. Manag. Ann. 8 (1), 1e56. https://doi.org/
Bombiak, E., Marciniuk-Kluska, A., 2018. Green human resource management as a 10.1080/19416520.2014.872335.
tool for the sustainable development of enterprises: polish young company Kitazawa, S., Sarkis, J., 2000. The relationship between ISO 14001 and continuous
experience. Sustainability 10 (6). https://doi.org/10.3390/su10061739. source reduction programs. Int. J. Oper. Prod. Manag. 20 (2), 225e248. https://
Buysse, K., Verbeke, A., 2003. Proactive environmental strategies: a stakeholder doi.org/10.1108/01443570010304279.
management perspective. Strat. Manag. J. 24 (5), 453e470. https://doi.org/ Kline, R., 2015. Principles and Practice of Structural Equation Modeling. Guilford
10.1002/smj.299. Publications, New York.
Cai, W., Li, G., 2018. The drivers of eco-innovation and its impact on performance : Kramar, R., 2014. Beyond strategic human resource management: is sustainable
evidence from China. J. Clean. Prod. 176 (110e118), 2008e2010. human resource management the next approach? Int. J. Hum. Resour. Manag.
Cai, W.G., Zhou, X.L., 2014. On the drivers of eco-innovation: empirical evidence 25 (8), 1069e1089. https://doi.org/10.1080/09585192.2013.816863.
from China. J. Clean. Prod. 79, 239e248. https://doi.org/10.1016/ Kunapatarawong, R., Martínez-ros, E., 2016. Towards green growth : how does
j.jclepro.2014.05.035. green innovation affect employment ? Res. Pol. 45 (6), 1218e1232. https://
Chen, Y.S., 2008. The driver of green innovation and green image - green core doi.org/10.1016/j.respol.2016.03.013.
competence. J. Bus. Ethics 81 (3), 531e543. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10551-007- Lee, K., Min, B., 2015. Green R & D for eco-innovation and its impact on carbon
9522-1. emissions and fi rm performance. J. Clean. Prod. https://doi.org/10.1016/
Chen, Y., Lai, S., Wen, C., 2006. The influence of green innovation performance on j.jclepro.2015.05.114.
corporate advantage in Taiwan. J. Bus. Ethics 331e339. https://doi.org/10.1007/ Lessler, J.T., William, D., 1992. Nonsampling Error in Surveys. John Wiley & Sons,
s10551-006-9025-5. New York, 0.
Chiou, T.Y., Chan, H.K., Lettice, F., Chung, S.H., 2011. The influence of greening the Li, M., Zhang, L., 2014. Haze in China: current and future challenges. Environ. Pollut.
suppliers and green innovation on environmental performance and competitive 189, 85e86. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.envpol.2014.02.024, 2014.
advantage in Taiwan. Transport. Res. E Logist. Transport. Rev. 47 (6), 822e836. Liebowitz, J., 2010. The role of HR in achieving a sustainability culture. J. Sustain.
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tre.2011.05.016. Dev. 3 (4), 50e57. https://doi.org/10.5539/jsd.v3n4p50.
Chou, C.J., 2014. Hotels’ environmental policies and employee personal environ- Lindstro € m, S., Vanhala, S., 2011. Divergence in HR functional roles in local govern-
mental beliefs: interactions and outcomes. Tourism Manag. 40, 436e446. ment. Publ. Manag. Rev. 13 (7), 1023e1040. https://doi.org/10.1080/
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tourman.2013.08.001. 14719037.2011.589620.
Chartered Institute of Personnel and Development, 2007. The environment and Maclnnis, D.J., Jaworski, B.J., 1989. Information processing from advertisements:
people management. Retrieved from. http://www.cipd.co.uk/subjets/ toward an integrative framework. J. Market. 53 (4), 1. https://doi.org/10.2307/
corpstrategy/corpspcres/envirnpm%0A%0A. 1251376.

11
P.K. Muisyo and S. Qin Journal of Cleaner Production 289 (2021) 125720

Marcus, A.A., Fremeth, A.R., 2009. Green management matters regardless. Acad. Manag. 28 (2), 163e176. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jom.2009.10.001.
Manag. Perspect. 23 (3), 17e26. https://doi.org/10.2307/27747523. Saunila, M., Ukko, J., Rantala, T., 2017. Sustainability as a driver of green innovation
Masri, H.A., Jaaron, A.A.M., 2017. Assessing green human resources management investment and exploitation. J. Clean. Prod. https://doi.org/10.1016/
practices in Palestinian manufacturing context: an empirical study. J. Clean. j.jclepro.2017.11.211.
Prod. 143, 474e489. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jclepro.2016.12.087. Simpson, D., Samson, D., 2010. Environmental strategy and low waste operations:
May, D.R., Flannery, B.L., 1995. Cutting waste with employee involvement teams. exploring complementarities. Bus. Strat. Environ. 19 (2), 104e118. https://
Bus. Horiz. 38 (5), 28e38. https://doi.org/10.1016/0007-6813(95)90033-0. doi.org/10.1002/bse.626.
Miao, C., Fang, D., Sun, L., Luo, Q., 2017. Natural resources utilization efficiency under Sroufe, R.P., Liebowitz, J., Sivasubramaniam, N., 2010. Are you a leader or a laggard?
the influence of green technological innovation. Resour. Conserv. Recycl. 126 HR’s role in creating a sustainability culture. People and Strategy 33 (1), 34e42.
(July), 153e161. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.resconrec.2017.07.019. Retrieved from. https://tradingeconomics.comsri-lankamalnutrition-
Montabon, F., Sroufe, R., Narasimhan, R., 2007. An examination of corporate prevalence-weight-for-age-percent-of-children-under-5-wb-data.html.
reporting, environmental management practices and firm performance. J. Oper. Stefanelli, N.O., Teixeira, A.A., Paulo, U.D.S., Paulo, S., Ferreira, M.A., Sehnem, S., 2019.
Manag. 25 (5), 998e1014. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jom.2006.10.003. Environmental training : a systematic review of the state of the art of the
Opatha, H.H.D.N.P., Arulrajah, A.A., 2014. Green human resource management: theme. Benchmark Int. J. https://doi.org/10.1108/BIJ-12-2018-0449.
simplified general reflections. Int. Bus. Res. 7 (8), 101e112. https://doi.org/ Sweetman, P., 2007. Engage employees in green issues. People Manag. 42e43.
10.5539/ibr.v7n8p101. https://doi.org/10.1080/09585192.2015.1047394.

, P., Chen, Y., Boiral, O., Jin, J., 2014. The impact of human resource manage-
Paille
, P., Jia, J., 2018. Green human resource management
Tang, G., Chen, Y., Jiang, Y., Paille
ment on environmental performance: an employee-level study. J. Bus. Ethics practices: scale development and validity. Asia Pac. J. Hum. Resour. 56 (1),
121 (3), 451e466. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10551-013-1732-0. 31e55. https://doi.org/10.1111/1744-7941.12147.
Pellegrini, C., Rizzi, F., Frey, M., 2018. The role of sustainable human resource Teixeira, A.A., Jabbour, C.J.C., Jabbour, A.B.L.D.S., 2012. Relationship between green
practices in influencing employee behavior for corporate sustainability. Bus. management and environmental training in companies located in Brazil: a
Strat. Environ. 27 (8), 1221e1232. https://doi.org/10.1002/bse.2064. theoretical framework and case studies. Int. J. Prod. Econ. 140 (1), 318e329.
Philpott, J., Davies, G., 2007. Labour Market Outlook. . (Quarterly Survey Report, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijpe.2012.01.009.
Summer). CIPD/KPMG, London. Teixeira, A.A., Jose, C., Jabbour, C., Beatriz, A., Sousa, L., Latan, H., Henrique, Jorge
Pillai, R., Sivathanu, B., 2014. Green human resource management. Zenith Int. J. Oliveira, C. De, 2016. Green training and green supply chain management: ev-
Multidiscip. Res. 4 (1). idence from Brazilian firms. J. Clean. Prod. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jcle-
Pinzone, M., Guerci, M., Lettieri, E., Redman, T., 2016. Progressing in the change pro.2015.12.061, 2016.
journey towards sustainability in healthcare: the role of "Green" HRM. J. Clean. Tietze, F., Schiederig, T., Engineering, C.H.P., 2011. What is green Innovation ? e a
Prod. 122, 201e211. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jclepro.2016.02.031. quantitative literature review. Engineering  Sustainable Technology EJournal
Podsakoff, P.M., MacKenzie, S.B., Lee, J.Y., Podsakoff, N.P., 2003. Common method 8e10. https://doi.org/10.15480/882.1002.
biases in behavioral research: a critical review of the literature and recom- Tseng, M., Shun, A., Chiu, F., Tan, R.R., Siriban-manalang, A.B., 2013. Sustainable
mended remedies. J. Appl. Psychol. 88 (5), 879e903. https://doi.org/10.1037/ consumption and production for Asia : sustainability through green design and
0021-9010.88.5.879. practice. J. Clean. Prod. 40, 1e5. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jclepro.2012.07.015.
Przychodzen, W., Przychodzen, J., Lerner, D.A., 2016. Critical factors for Trans- Woo, C., Chung, Y., Chun, D., Han, S., Lee, D., 2013. Impact of Green Innovation on
forming creativity into sustainability. J. Clean. Prod. https://doi.org/10.1016/ Labor Productivity and its Determinants: an Analysis of the Korean
j.jclepro.2016.04.102. Manufacturing Industry. https://doi.org/10.1002/bse.1807. Business St.
Renwick, Douglas, Redman, T., Maguire, S., 2013. Green human resource manage- Yong, J.Y., Yusliza, M.Y., 2016. Studying the influence of strategic Human Resource
ment: a review and research agenda*. Int. J. Manag. Rev. 15 (1), 1e14. https:// Competencies on the adoption of green human resource practices. Ind. Com-
doi.org/10.1111/j.1468-2370.2011.00328.x. merc. Train. 48 (8) https://doi.org/10.1108/ICT-03-2016-0017.
Roscoe, S., Subramanian, N., Jabbour, C.J.C., Chong, T., 2019. Green human resource Yong, J.Y., Yusliza, M.Y., Ramayah, T., Fawehinmi, O., 2019. Nexus between green
management and the enablers of green organisational culture: enhancing a intellectual capital and green human resource management. J. Clean. Prod. 215,
firm’s environmental performance for sustainable development. Bus. Strat. 364e374. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jclepro.2018.12.306.
Environ. 28 (5), 737e749. https://doi.org/10.1002/bse.2277. Zhou, J., Shalley, C.E., 2011. Deepening our understanding of creativity in the
Saeed, B. Bin, Afsar, B., Hafeez, S., Khan, I., Tahir, M., Afridi, M.A., 2019. Promoting workplace: a review of different approaches to creativity research. In: APA
employee’s proenvironmental behavior through green human resource man- Handbook of Industrial and Organizational Psychology, vol. 1. Building and
agement practices. Corp. Soc. Responsib. Environ. Manag. 26 (2), 424e438. developing the organization. https://doi.org/10.1037/12169-009.
https://doi.org/10.1002/csr.1694. Zoogah, B., 2015. The Dynamics of Green HRM Behaviors : A Cognitive Social In-
Sarkis, J., Gonzalez-Torre, P., Adenso-Diaz, B., 2010. Stakeholder pressure and the formation Processing Approach, pp. 117e139, 2011.
adoption of environmental practices: the mediating effect of training. J. Oper.

12