Abstract
Keywords
1 Introduction
Human Resource Management (HRM) is the cornerstone of organizational success, often termed the “soul of business.” In today’s complex business environment, HRM is crucial for addressing challenges related to environmental sustainability [1]. It is vital in guiding companies to balance profitability and minimize their environmental footprint by ensuring employees are trained and motivated for environmentally responsible behaviour.
Additionally, HRM fosters a sustainable culture, attracting and retaining talent aligned with a shared vision. Its significance in promoting environmentally sustainable practices is crucial for long-term success and positive environmental impact. The concept of GHRM is closely tied to sustainable development, emphasizing the balance of economic, social, and environmental objectives in organizational operations [2]. Sustainable development ensures present needs without compromising future generations. Organizations in a fiercely competitive global economy must be enriched and responsible towards the environment [3]. Therefore, organizations are held more accountable for achieving sustainable results, particularly regarding the environmental effects of their actions [4]. It poses a significant challenge in management, impacting broader corporate and strategic issues, including HR practices and policies [5]. GHRM applies HRM techniques to help organizations use assets without harming the environment, significantly benefiting businesses [6, 7]. GHRM enhances the organization’s reputation, attracting eco-conscious talent and customers. Promoting sustainable practices leads to cost savings by improving resource efficiency, reducing operational expenses, and ensuring compliance with environmental regulations. In addition, GHRM fosters innovation by encouraging environmentally friendly solutions, providing a competitive edge. A commitment to GHRM enhances employee morale, job satisfaction, and productivity, reducing turnover rates. GHRM also reduces the company’s environmental footprint, contributing to a healthier environment and securing a better future. Employees’ perceptions of GHRM should foster a sense of affiliation with the organization [8].
Previous research, especially in manufacturing, highlights workplace risks and injuries [9]. The World Health Organization reports that 2.1% of deaths result from non-compliance with health and safety measures, with an additional 2.7% related to this issue [10]. The Health and Safety Executive notes stressed employees cost organizations £3.8 billion annually, contributing to a 3.94% economic burden of global GDP [11]. Therefore, conducting a systematic review to assess past research on GHRM and determine whether these studies have adequately addressed health, safety, and welfare measures within organizations is essential. It aims to shed light on overlooked crucial dimensions and provide an overview of existing GHRM research.
Moreover, this article strategically emphasizes the twin pillars of employee engagement and well-being. The rationale behind this deliberate focus is rooted in the profound impact that GHRM practices exert on the intricate tapestry of the employee experience. Employee engagement is a crucial indicator, reflecting commitment and enthusiasm, and is influenced by GHRM’s ecological consciousness and commitment to sustainability. It plays a vital role in encouraging participation in sustainability initiatives, reflecting commitment to green practices. Examining employee well-being under GHRM reveals how sustainable initiatives affect satisfaction, health, and work-life balance, which are crucial for organizational success. By exploring these aspects, the paper aims to offer actionable insights for fostering sustainable work environments that promote environmental consciousness and holistic employee well-being [12]. While previous research has shown the positive impact of HRM on work engagement, there is a need for more understanding of these connections within the context of GHRM [11, 12].
Therefore, the primary goal of the article is to explore the intersection of HRM and environmental sustainability, particularly through the lens of GHRM. It aims to investigate how GHRM practices can foster environmentally responsible behaviour among employees while enhancing employee engagement and well-being. Additionally, the article seeks to conduct a systematic review to assess past research on GHRM, specifically focusing on health, safety, and welfare measures within organizations. Through this review, the article aims to shed light on overlooked dimensions and provide insights for fostering sustainable work environments that promote both environmental consciousness and holistic employee well-being.
The structure of the current article includes a “Literature Review” section providing an overview of key concepts-GHRM, employee engagement, and employee well-being along with theoretical perspectives explaining the link between GHRM, Employee Engagement, and Employee Well-Being. Following that, the authors detail the methodological approach by describing the article selection process, including the search criteria used for the literature review, the selection process, eligibility and inclusion criteria, and an analysis and synthesis of the findings from the selected articles. The study delves into the theoretical and practical implications of the research, followed by future research recommendations. Finally, the study outlines limitations, further research directions, and concluding remarks.
1.1 Research gap
The study focuses on various critical aspects of GHRM to address research gaps. Firstly, there is a need for more clarity and consistency in defining the framework of GHRM practices instead of a more general overview. This conceptual ambiguity could impede effective implementation and understanding across diverse organizational contexts. Furthermore, there is a need for deeper understanding of evolving trends in the field over time and identifies areas requiring further exploration. The study uses NVivo 14 software to emphasize the importance of transparent cluster formation criteria for reliability. Therefore, addressing these gaps is essential for advancing GHRM strategies to promote employee well-being.
1.2 Research questions
RQ1. How has GHRM been conceptualized? RQ2. What methodologies have been used to study GHRM research? RQ3. How was NVivo software employed to sort and categorize abstracts in analyzing GHRM research? What were the most frequently used words? What are the most and least explored areas within GHRM research? RQ4. How did the Ability-Motivation-Opportunity (AMO) theory align with GHRM research? RQ5. What theoretical model and research propositions indicate the relationship between GHRM practices, well-being, and employee engagement?
The basis for formulating these research questions stems from the need to understand and analyze the current state of GHRM comprehensively. The questions serve as a roadmap for systematically investigating and advancing knowledge in the field of GHRM, fostering a deeper understanding of its intricacies and potential for real-world impact.
1.3 Research objective
This research aims to conduct a comprehensive literature review on GHRM, focusing on its contributions to sustainable practices, employee well-being, and engagement. It will systematically explore the evolution of GHRM research from 1996 to 2023, identify extensively and minimally explored areas, and cluster abstracts using NVivo 14 software. By proposing research areas and examining theoretical models, the study aims to lay the groundwork for future GHRM studies, extracting actionable propositions to guide organizations in enhancing employee well-being and engagement. The study provides an in-depth analysis of GHRM through a rigorous multi-step methodology. It includes a literature review, scoping review, systematic mapping, and systematic review. The literature review synthesizes existing research on GHRM, identifying key themes, trends, and gaps. The scoping review assesses the breadth and depth of research on GHRM to inform the systematic mapping, which categorizes all available published research objectively and comprehensively. Moreover, the systematic review conducts a detailed analysis and synthesis of the identified literature to offer a deeper understanding of GHRM and its implications.
1.4 Need and significance of the study
While numerous reviews have been undertaken on GHRM, employee engagement, and employees’ well-being, a deeper understanding of the relationship between these constructs is needed. The authors aim to contribute to the literature through systematic analysis by documenting current understanding and outlining future research agendas. Synthesizing findings aims to consolidate perspectives and identify pathways for organizations. For managers, the research offers practical insights into integrating environmentally friendly HR strategies, aiding informed decision-making. Identifying explored and unexplored areas in GHRM literature provides a roadmap for innovation. Theoreticians can benefit from the paper’s exploration of the evolution of GHRM research, influential journals, and theoretical models, facilitating advancements in understanding GHRM practices. Educators can enrich HRM curricula with the paper’s systematic exploration of GHRM literature, preparing students for sustainable HR practices. Policymakers can find the paper invaluable in shaping environmentally sustainable HR policies by offering evidence-based guidance to incentivize GHRM strategies. Therefore, aligning policies with research findings fosters a more ecologically conscious and socially responsible business environment.
2 Literature review
This section explores existing research on GHRM through a literature review. Table 1 compares prior studies with current study, while Table 2 presents diverse definitions of GHRM. In addition, the study provides an overview of GHRM, employee engagement, and employee well-being and includes a theoretical lens to explain the relationship between them.
A comparison of prior research studies and the current research study
Definitions of Green Human Resource Management (GHRM) identified in Literature Review
2.1 An Overview of GHRM practices
GHRM can be defined as aligning HRM strategies with an organization’s environmental goals [15]. GHRM practices encompass environmentally friendly HR activities and benefit organizations by reducing costs, improving efficiency, and enhancing employee retention and engagement [16]. GHRM fosters an environment that boosts job satisfaction and engagement, thereby increasing productivity. It helps reduce costs, improve operational efficiency, reduce carbon emissions, improve employee environmental awareness, and promote sustainable well-being [17]. GHRM is a novel HR approach integrating environmental objectives across all HRM sub-domains [18]. It includes top management disseminating ecological policies and strategies, educating employees on eco-friendly procedures, empowering them to participate in initiatives, and offering incentives for environmentally responsible behaviour [19]. GHRM, or sustainable HRM, applies techniques to achieve financial, social, and environmental goals while mitigating unintended consequences [20]. It enhances employee well-being, commitment, and satisfaction, contributing to long-term sustainability across economic, social, and environmental aspects, harmonizing the triple bottom line [21]. GHRM leverages employee interactions to promote sustainable behaviours, enhancing understanding and dedication to sustainability [22]. It entails understanding the relationships between organizational actions impacting the environment and the structure, progression, and impact of HRM systems [23]. GHRM includes policies to safeguard the workforce, retaining knowledge through environmentally sustainable and cost-effective methods [29, 30].
2.2 An Overview of employee engagement
Employee engagement is the emotional commitment and involvement toward organizational goals. It measures dedication, passion, and investment in the company’s success, leading to higher productivity and innovation. Factors influencing engagement include purpose, growth opportunities, a supportive work environment, effective communication, recognition, and alignment with the organization’s mission. Strategies to improve engagement often involve fostering a positive culture, providing meaningful work, offering development opportunities, and ensuring open communication with management. Engaged employees explain diverse cognitive, attitudinal, and behavioural outcomes among individuals [11, 12] and exhibit vitality, enthusiasm, proactivity, adaptability to change, and an inclination to expand their roles [13, 14]. The intricacy of individual green behaviour involves multidisciplinary connections, including social and psychological factors beyond GHRM [28]. Employee engagement is conceptualized as a reciprocal relationship [29], which is shaped by the interplay between individuals’ personality traits and the organizational conditions [30]. Moreover, empirical evidence in the engagement literature highlights specific personality traits as significant precursors to engagement. Positive correlations exist between employee engagement and traits like conscientiousness, positive affect, and proactive attributes [33, 34]. Work engagement, a dynamic cognitive and emotional dimension reflecting personal enthusiasm for one’s work, is considered significant in this study. It is characterized by energy, involvement, and self-efficacy [33] and manifests in three primary dimensions: vigor, dedication, and absorption [35, 36]. Vigor involves high energy and resilience, dedication includes enthusiasm and importance, and absorption is being fully engrossed in one’s work [34]. Work engagement is a multidimensional concept influenced by various factors, including organizational climate, job resources, psychological resources, and a sense of ownership [36]. Moreover, employee work engagement can be improved by a positive work culture [37].
2.3 An Overview of employees’ well-being
GHRM goes beyond traditional environmental management practices to address employee well-being and security concerns. This expanded approach supports the HRM sub-function by incorporating standard environmental practices and health and safety procedures. As a result, businesses are broadening the role of a “health and safety manager” to encompass “health, safety, and environmental management” to provide enhanced protection for employees and their environment. This shift aims to safeguard employees and the surrounding environment by preserving biodiversity and empowering local communities. Thus, integrating green health and safety management is imperative for every organization [38]. GHRM offers numerous advantages for companies, including attracting fresh talent and enhancing employee retention [39], reducing costs, and gaining a competitive edge [40]. It also bolsters a firm’s overall environmental performance [19], improves effectiveness, preserves business sustainability, and enhances employee well-being and productivity. Organizations collaborate with government policies and workers’ associations to ensure comprehensive health and safety for employees in the workplace. Therefore, management formulates policies aimed at minimizing work-related injuries and health risks. Extensive research has focused on diverse strategies for enhancing Occupational Safety and Health (OSH) within the industry. Previous studies have investigated various occupational hazards impacting workers’ health and well-being [46, 47]. Thus, embracing a green approach to OSH can effectively address many work-related injuries caused by stress and job-related illnesses.
2.4 Theoretical perspectives explaining the link between GHRM, employee engagement, and employee well-being
GHRM practices positively impact Employee Engagement by emphasizing environmentally responsible behaviour and sustainability, thereby increasing Job Satisfaction [43]. Engaged employees find fulfilment and accomplishment when their work aligns with values, especially in green initiatives, resulting in increased satisfaction [44]. GHRM aims to foster shared values and employee engagement, promoting sustainability and environmental stewardship [45]. Employees becoming more engaged will likely develop a more substantial commitment to the organization’s objectives and mission. Therefore, GHRM practices, focusing on engagement and environmentally responsible conduct, are poised to enhance employee engagement [46].
Engaged employees actively participate in environmentally friendly practices, contributing to improved environmental performance [47]. Elevated Employee Engagement correlates with enhanced environmental performance, driven by employees’ active involvement in eco-friendly initiatives. Significant contributors to work engagement include human resources practices that enhance motivation [45, 46] and the alignment of values between individuals and the organization [50]. According to social identity theory, individuals’ identification with an organization strengthens when they take pride in its responsible practices [51]. Employees who believe their institution’s reputation has improved due to GHRM will experience increased social identification, likely boosting work engagement [52]. Empirical studies in existing literature provide evidence supporting the positive impact of socially responsible HRM practices on employees’ work engagement [27, 50–53].
Organizations are urged to adopt environmentally friendly HR practices to align with environmentally conscious employees. As strategies shift to eco-friendly practices, the HR function evolves by integrating environmental management practices [57], potentially enhancing employee well-being [58]. The focus on individual well-being aligns with the UN Sustainable Development Goal 3, which emphasizes “healthy lives and well-being for all.” Furthermore, subjective well-being, crucial for productivity, is defined by individual assessments of life fulfilment, happiness, and emotions [59]. Governments increasingly focus on promoting societal happiness and well-being by transitioning from traditional economic indicators [60]. Therefore, prioritizing employee welfare before external social responsibility positively influences firm performance [61]. In addition, GHRM practices contribute to social sustainability by emphasizing social equity, health, wellness, and overall well-being [58]. The initiatives encompass volunteering events, allowances for voluntary work, the integration of volunteerism into performance evaluations, and soliciting employee input on social performance initiatives [62].
GHRM practices and environmentally conscious behaviour align with an organization’s social sustainability objectives. Businesses adopting green practices often recognize the importance of promoting social sustainability to enhance environmental quality [63]. Therefore, employees should be aware that their company’s sustainability policies contribute to a healthier emotional and physical lifestyle [64]. The emphasis on corporate social responsibility motivates organizations to implement GHRM programs, encouraging employers to embed green protocols across all divisions, address societal challenges, and transition from morally irresponsible actions [65].
3 Methods
This study employed a multi-step methodology, including a literature review, scoping review, systematic mapping, and systematic review. Each approach is detailed below and mapped to the corresponding sections in the results. The literature review offers a comprehensive overview of existing GHRM. It synthesizes key themes, trends, and gaps, setting the stage for the subsequent scoping review. The scoping review is a preliminary assessment to gauge the potential size and scope of research on GHRM. It aims to identify the nature and extent of research evidence, informing the systematic mapping [66]. Systematic mapping involves a structured process to collate and categorize all published research evidence on GHRM. This mapping is designed to be objective and transparent, ensuring comprehensive coverage of the literature [67]. Building on the systematic mapping, the systematic review conducts a detailed analysis and synthesis of the identified literature. This review follows a rigorous methodology to ensure the reliability and comprehensiveness of findings on GHRM.
The study follows the PRISMA 2020 checklist and the flow diagram [68], summarized in Fig. 1, which shows the methodological approach following the three stages of the PRISMA 2020 protocol. The authors utilize diverse data collection methods, employing tools like NVivo 14 and Excel for cluster analysis, which is particularly significant in navigating the substantial influx of literature. NVivo aids qualitative analysis, categorizing emerging themes, while Excel organizes and visualizes quantitative data. The integration of these tools comprehensively examines evolving GHRM dynamics.
Systematic literature review PRISMA flow chart.
The study used the AMO theory to identify the crucial HRM areas impacting Environmental Sustainability [69]. AMO theory suggests that HRM practices that enhance the firm’s human capital via increased human capabilities translate into performance outcomes, such as higher productivity, reduced waste, higher quality, and profit. According to AMO theory, HRM works through increasing employees’ Ability by attracting and developing high-performing employees, enhancing employees’ Motivation and commitment through practices such as contingent rewards and effective performance management, and providing employees with the opportunity to engage in knowledge-sharing and problem-solving activities through employee engagement programs. AMO theory is chosen for its effectiveness in comprehensively examining the interplay of employees’ abilities, motivation, and opportunities in the context of GHRM practices. Its advantages lie in providing a holistic framework to assess how these factors contribute to well-being outcomes, offering valuable insights for organizations seeking sustainable and employee-centricpractices.
3.1 Inclusion and exclusion criteria
As a first step, titles and abstracts were reviewed to assess the relevance of articles. Articles that appeared irrelevant to this study were eliminated. Next, duplicate articles were removed to avoid double-counting articles in the analysis. The remaining articles were selected based on their importance and rigor to ensure the inclusion of the most impactful studies. Each remaining article was carefully analyzed during the in-depth reading stage. The authors screened the articles based on the following inclusion and exclusion criteria:
3.1.1 Inclusion criteria
3.1.2 Exclusion criteria
The study initiated its focused approach by systematically navigating relevant literature through specific steps:
3.2 Identification: information sources and search strategies
3.2.1 Information sources
The study used Scopus, Web of Science Core Collection, and Google Scholar databases, which are known for gathering high-impact journals in the social sciences and are widely accepted as sources of high-quality research.
3.2.2 Search strategies
To describe the methods, study designs, frameworks, and other theoretical approaches, a systematic scoping review was conducted. This study included articles from 1996 to 2023. The authors chose 1996 as the starting point because Whermeyer coined the GHRM concept in 1996 [70]. The year 2023 was selected as the end-point to include the most recent and impactful publications. The Preliminary state-of-the-art search in Scopus using the term ‘Green Human Resource Management’ retrieved 3085 articles, the Web of Science database retrieved 1332 articles, and Google Scholar retrieved 567 articles. After removing ineligible papers duplicates in MS Excel, 1530 articles remained for further analysis.
3.2.3 Screening: Selection process and eligibility criteria
The identified records in two databases are integrated into a new MS Excel spreadsheet for screening. The study independently screened the titles and abstracts of the collected records and place marks (“Yes” for including the records, “No” for excluding the records, and “Re” for records unsure. After the reviews of the titles and abstracts, the records with the mark “Yes” (n = 1530) were screened in full text, and the records with the mark “No” (n = 921) were excluded. The studies with inconsistent marks or that had been marked with “Re” were assessed again in detail (n = 609) by screening the full texts independently; those within the exclusion criteria were excluded (n = 405).
3.2.4 Included: Data processing and analyzing
For processing the data, the author extracted and collected data from included articles, presenting selected characteristics using MS Excel for categorization (e.g., titles, author names, context, etc.). The organized data were checked for bias, and finally, 204 articles were deemed eligible and included for review and analysis. NVivo 14 and MS Excel were then used for in-depth analysis, enabling meaningful insights and effective presentation of results. This systematic approach bridged the gap from data summaries to conclusive research findings. Table 3 briefly describes some of the recent studies included in the review.
Brief description of analyzed studies on “GHRM”
4 Results and analysis
This section presents a detailed analysis of research results, exploring critical data patterns and trends for further discussion.
4.1 Reviewed publications
Building upon the scoping review, systematic mapping further analyzed the trends in published papers on GHRM. The study reviewed 204 high-quality journal articles on GHRM from 1996 to 2023, as shown in Fig. 2, revealing a rising trend in published papers, highlighting the growing importance of GHRM. Among the 204 articles, 45 papers (22.05%) focused on GHRM from 1996 to 2018, garnering interest in environmental preservation. From 2019 onwards, GHRM gained significance with 17 papers (8.33%) in 2019 and 27 papers in 2020 (13.23%), slightly decreasing to 24 articles (11.76%) in 2021. However, it became inevitable by 2022 and 2023 due to increased awareness of GHRM concerns and a growing focus on environmental sustainability. Figure 2 shows the increasing importance of GHRM, with 42 papers (20.58%) published in 2022 and 49 (24.01%) in 2023.
Year-wise reviewed publication of Articles on Green Human Resource Management.
4.2 Journal publications
The distribution of GHRM publications across different journals is shown in Fig. 3. Notable contributions were observed from journals such as the International Journal of Manpower, with 32 publications (15.68%), Business Strategy and the Environment, with 18 publications (8.82%). Moreover, the International Journal of Human Resource Management and Benchmarking published thirteen papers (6.37%). The Asia Pacific Journal of Human Resources and Sustainability contributed eleven articles (5.39%). At the same time, the International Journal of Hospitality Management, Journal of Business Research, and the Journal of Sustainable Tourism each published nine articles (4.41%). The Journal of Environmental Management and HRM Review comprised seven papers (3.43%). Several journals contributed five papers (2.45%) and four papers (1.96%), and others had three (1.47%) or two publications (0.98%). The remaining articles were sourced from diverse journals, each contributing only one publication.
Evaluation of the reviewed journal articles from 1996 to 2023. Note: All journals with less than two published papers were classified as “other.”
4.3 Theoretical context
A systematic review examined the theoretical underpinnings of GHRM research through systematic mapping, as represented in Fig. 4. Sixty-seven of the 204 articles have not applied any theory; thus, the number of papers included in this step is 137, of which some mobilized multiple theories. Twenty-two theories were highlighted in the study. In line with Ren et al. [23], the current study also observed the most frequently applied theory as the AMO theory (n = 29, 14.21%). It illustrates why and how strategic HRM practices can promote organizational performance by influencing employees’ abilities, motivations, and opportunities to increase their contribution [71]. Another popular theory adopted in GHRM research is the resource-based view (RBV) (n = 11, 5.39%), stating that valuable resources can assist organizations in gaining sustainable competitive advantages [71]. Recently, researchers have found the theory of natural resource-based view (n = 10, 4.9%), derived from the RBV, provides a more specific explanation for GHRM from the perspective of creating competitive advantage through environmental management (71]. In addition to these, social exchange theory [71] (n = 17, 8.33%), social identity theory [71] (n = 15, 7.35%), Conservation of Resources Theory (COR) (n = 13, 6.37%), Self-determination theory (n = 10, 4.9%) theories have been applied. Other theories are also shown in Fig. 5, highlighting diverse perspectives in GHRM research.
Theoretical background.
Types of Paper.
4.4 Research paper categorization: conceptual/empirical analysis
Expanding on the systematic review, an analysis of research methodologies considered paper type, research approach, research design, target population, and depth of analysis. This evaluation revealed several methodological shortcomings that could be investigated in future research endeavours. As depicted in Fig. 5, 19 papers (9.31%) were theoretical or conceptual, while 163 papers (89.56%) were empirical.
4.5 Research approach
Moreover, the systematic review scrutinized the research approaches adopted in GHRM studies. Regarding empirical research, Fig. 6 shows that the majority, 145 papers (71.07%), adopted a quantitative approach. In contrast, 45 papers (22.05%) utilized a qualitative approach, and 14 articles (6.86%) employed a mixed-method approach. Quantitative studies predominantly used survey strategies and questionnaires for data collection, occasionally relying on secondary sources and the Delphitechnique.
Research Approach.
Qualitative studies mainly employed case study strategies, occasionally using a single case study or phenomenological approaches. Few studies utilized multiple qualitative methods. Interviews were common, while comparative case studies were rare. Mixed-method studies often used surveys, guided interviews, and group discussions. The limited number of qualitative and mixed methods may hinder the development of comprehensive theories like grounded theory, which is crucial for an in-depth understanding of real-world phenomena.
4.6 Research design
The systematic review examined research designs utilized in GHRM studies to explore methodological intricacies further. Most articles, 89.56%, utilized a cross-sectional research design, while only a minority, 10.43%, used a longitudinal design. Longitudinal designs, exclusive to the quantitative group, often took the form of delayed surveys and alternative panel data formats (as depicted in Fig. 7), contributing to this imbalance. This disproportion can significantly impact results as concluding solely from snapshot data may pose challenges and lead to erroneous findings, neglecting fluctuations in the examined phenomenon over time.
Research Design.
4.7 Research methodologies and modeling
The systematic review delved into specific research methodologies and modeling techniques utilized in GHRM research. Some studies used Intraclass Correlation Coefficients (ICC) to detect variance, fixed-effect models to remove heterogeneity, and the Sobel test for mediation [72]. Another study proposed a multi-stakeholder approach to sustainable HRM, considering the triple bottom line [73]. A separate research study applied the SSO model to understand technostress causes, nature, and outcomes, and the RED model was used to understand individual experiences [74]. A study utilized the Variable-Order Bayesian Network (VOBN) model to identify context-based patterns for organizational recruitment [75]. Studies employed a multi-level model, integrating individual, organizational, and relational factors to unveil complex relationships in Employee pro-environmental behaviour (E-PEB) [76]. Two studies employed the Gioia methodology for coding, known for bringing qualitative rigor to inductive research [49,50, 49,50]. Many studies used Structural Equation Modeling (SEM), a statistical technique combining multiple regression and confirmatory factor analysis (CFA) with measurement and structural models.
One study introduced the SHRM_SC model [79], positively impacting organizations and supply chains for sustainability. The SRHM_SC model encourages stakeholder prioritization, enhancing efficiency and competitiveness. A study applied the Price–Mueller turnover model, exploring factors affecting employee turnover and offering theoretical guidelines for companies to address high turnover rates [80]. A study uses the triadic reciprocity model, indicating that individual behaviour is influenced by cognitive factors, the external environment, and overt behaviour, with reciprocal impacts. This model suggests that valuing the impact of personal actions on the environment leads to better pro-environmental behaviour [81]. Six studies applied the job demands-resources (JD-R) model to analyze how job resources and demands affect work engagement [54–58]. One study used the ULMC approach, finding negligible forecast impact regardless of method bias [87]. Two studies applied fsQCA, which was preferred for its ability to capture complex causal relationships in management research [88]. The reason is that it balances a qualitative with a quantitative approach to analyze the combined effect of the variables on a specific outcome. A study applied Hayes PROCESS Macros to analyze direct and indirect effects in diverse models, including mediation and moderation scenarios [89]. A study uses Hierarchical Models (HLM) to understand causal factors between employees and companies, enhancing accuracy by matching employees based on organizational grouping with the nested-model approach [90].
4.8 National context distribution
The study categorized the examined literature into four national groupings: “Developed Country,” “Developing Country,” “Cross Country,” and “Not Applicable,” as mapped in Fig. 8. The “Not Applicable” classification was assigned to articles that did not pertain to any particular nation, comprising 17 identified articles. Among these, 60 articles were published in developed countries, 114 in developing countries, and 13 in cross-country contexts, indicating significant contributions and emphasis on GHRM performance outcomes.
National context distribution.
4.9 Industrial context
Further analysis focused on the industrial context represented in the literature, as shown in Fig. 9, the manufacturing sector leads with 59 articles (28.92%), followed by IT/ITES companies with 55 studies (26.96%) and the Hospitality industry with 41 studies (20.09%), while the banking sector had twenty studies (9.8%). The education sector accounted for 19 studies (9.31%). The Hospitals/Healthcare sector had the least representation, with only ten studies (4.9%).
The industrial context of GHRM research.
4.10 Word cloud analysis
The study utilized NVivo 14 software to conduct the word cloud analysis of the abstracts from the core publications on GHRM. The study used the software’s word frequency query tool to identify the top one hundred words in the 204 core publications on GHRM, and it generated the outputs in the form of word clouds. Figure 10 displays word clouds representing frequent words such as “green,” “environmental,” “management,” “employee,” “human,” “engagement,” “performance,” “practices,” “sustainability,” “organizational,” “behaviour,” and “resource.” These themes were manually classified into sub-codes and used as a basis for cluster classification.
Word cloud of GHRM literature review.
4.11 Cluster analysis
In addition, the study conducted a cluster analysis to categorize GHRM research into distinct clusters based on coding similarities. The data was extracted, arranged, and assessed using NVivo 14, relying on coding resemblances. Subsequently, manual analysis was conducted to establish a substantial groundwork for developing a theoretical model. The cluster analysis tool in NVivo 14 generated a distance tree, as shown in Fig. 11. Cluster analysis classifies object similarities based on user-selected characteristics. The NVivo 14 conducted the cluster analysis, identifying four primary categories clustered by coding similarity.
Classes identified in Cluster Analysis – NVivo 14 Software.
The dendrogram, also known as the distance tree as presented in Fig. 11, displayed that factors such as Green Behavioural Intention, Green Creativity, Green Health and Safety, and Green Innovation were grouped to form the first cluster, renamed “Green Synergy Dynamics.” The second cluster included Green Intellectual Capital, Green Organisational Culture, Green Recruitment, and Green Work-life Balance, categorized as a “Green Human Capital Paradigm.” The third cluster, which contained mental and physical health, organisational performance, pro-environmental behaviour, and workplace well-being, was named “Holistic Workplace Vitality.” The final cluster was labelled “Sustainable Human Resource Practices,” which included a sub-cluster with Green Employee Involvement, Green Training and Development, Employee Engagement, Employee Well-Being, Environmental Performance, Green Human Resource Management, Employee Green Behaviour, and Environmental Sustainability.
4.12 Relationship of AMO Theory with Four Primary Categories of GHRM Research
The AMO framework aligns closely with the four primary categories identified in the GHRM literature: “Green Synergy Dynamics,” “Green Human Capital Paradigm,” “Holistic Workplace Vitality,” and “Sustainable Human Resource Practices.” The AMO theory emphasizes the relationship between an individual’s abilities, motivation, and the opportunities presented to them within an organizational context. In the context of GHRM, these categories likely intersect with AMO as follows: “Green Synergy Dynamics” could reflect the interaction between employees’ abilities to engage in eco-friendly practices, their motivation to participate in such initiatives, and the opportunities provided by the organization to collaborate and synergize these efforts. “Green Human Capital Paradigm” might relate to how employees’ abilities, motivation, and opportunities contribute to building an eco-conscious workforce, nurturing skills and values aligned with environmental sustainability. “Holistic Workplace Vitality” likely involves how the AMO elements influence the overall well-being of employees in a green workplace, emphasizing a holistic approach to employee health, satisfaction, and engagement in eco-friendly practices. Lastly, “Sustainable Human Resource Practices” could highlight how organizations facilitate and sustain eco-friendly HR strategies by aligning employees’ abilities, motivations, and opportunities with long-term environmental goals.
4.13 Content analysis
The study conducted content analysis to identify gaps in GHRM literature and pinpoint the most and least explored research areas. The study revealed that Green Human Resource Management, Employees’ Well-Being, Employee Engagement, Green Health and Safety, Environmental Sustainability Performance, and Corporate Social Responsibility were more explored than Green Innovation, Pro-environmental Behaviour, Employees’ Green Behaviour, Green Organisational Culture, Green Intellectual Capital, Social Sustainability, and Green Creativity. To further analyse this gap and overcome the discrepancies in auto coding and clustering procedure, the authors manually reassigned and classified the 204 GHRM articles using Microsoft Excel, which are graphically presented in Fig. 12.
Green Human Resource Management linkage to Employee Engagement and Employee Well- Being.
The analysis of titles and abstracts from the selected dataset identified GHRM in almost every paper out of 204 articles. Notably, 185 papers (90.68%) addressed Employees’ Well-Being, and 183 (89.7%) discussed Employee Engagement. Other topics included Green Health and Safety (165 articles; 80.88%), Environmental Sustainability Performance (146 articles; 71.56%), Green Innovation (86 articles; 42.15%), Pro-environmental Behaviour (65 articles; 31.86%), Employees’ Green Behaviour (64 articles; 31.37%), Green Organisational Culture (44 articles; 21.56%), Green Intellectual Capital (35 articles; 17.15%), and Social Sustainability (32 articles; 15.68%). The least contribution was found in articles related to Green Creativity (24 papers; 11.76%).
5 Discussion
5.1 Propositions on GHRM
GHRM literature supports a positive correlation between eco-conscious employee behavior and performance [91]. For instance, empowered workers show motivation and eagerness to accomplish tasks [92]. GHRM is associated with job performance [91], eco-friendly recovery [93], and responsible actions [94]. Considering this, the study proposes a model (Fig. 13) demonstrating how GHRM positively influences employees, enhancing engagement and improving well-being.
Proposed model linking Work-life Balance and Work Engagement.
GHRM is recognized as a crucial source of competitive advantage [95], integrating ecological and human sustainability [96]. Successful implementation relies on broad workforce acceptance. Employee engagement, a positive work-related psychological condition [97], establishes a link between adopting GHRM and green employee engagement. GHRM practices include eco-friendly HR activities, reducing costs, improving efficiency, and enhancing employee retention and engagement [16].
GHRM and Green intellectual capital positively impact corporate environmental citizenship, leading to long-term competitive advantage [98]. There’s a critical need for widespread GHRM adoption, redefining HR executives as ‘environmental executives’ driving policy implementation [99]. GHRM practices form a foundational framework for effective environmental management, including initiatives for employee adoption of sustainability methods. These practices enhance operational efficiency, reduce costs, and promote environmental responsibility [100]. GHRM involves eco-conscious initiatives driving operational efficiency, cost reduction, and increased employee involvement and loyalty. These initiatives range from eco-friendly recruitment to green rewards systems, minimizing the carbon footprint through practices like video conferencing and digital storage [101].
Proposition 1: GHRM practices like green recruitment, green training & development, Green performance management, Green compensation & rewards, Green employee involvement & empowerment, Green health and safety, and Green Work-life balance have a positive effect on employee engagement.
GHRM encompasses HRM practices that are geared toward a company’s internal assets and the natural environment. Within this framework, organizations employ business methodologies to preserve environmental health while fostering a corporate culture that encouraging employees to embrace these practices. Companies must be adaptable in response to changes that impact the well-being of their human resources and establish objectives and strategies grounded in past experiences to preempt potential issues. GHRM integrates environmental consciousness and considers the broader social and environmental well-being scope for the organization and its workforce [102]. A workplace characterized by an environmentally conscious learning environment and an array of communication networks aids in educating employees about ecological concerns. Various formal and informal communication channels can propagate a culture of environmental responsibility among employees, creating a supportive atmosphere conducive to cultivating green behaviours and awareness [103]. Numerous academics have suggested that GHRM has a beneficial impact on both organizational performance and the well-being of employees [81,82,83]. GHRM fosters environmentally conscious employees through its various components, such as eco-friendly recruitment and selection, sustainable training, green compensation structures, and environmentally-focused performance management. Moreover, GHRM lays out a framework for environmental performance by establishing policies and strategies. Implementing GHRM offers competitive advantages and yields several other benefits, including heightened employee motivation, stronger engagement based on ethical principles, improved productivity, and greater employee retention within the organization, thereby reducing turnover rates [107].
Proposition 2: GHRM Practices such as green recruitment, green training & development, Green performance management, Green compensation & rewards, Green employee involvement & empowerment, Green health and safety, and Green Work-life balance positively impact Employees’ Well-Being.
The research suggests a notable gap in understanding how employees perceive their well-being concerning their engagement levels. Exploring differences between high and low engagement levels could reveal variations in positive emotions, with higher engagement linked to heightened positive emotions and lower engagement associated with lower positive emotions. Highly engaged employees tended to work harder and to experience positive emotional states, influencing their overall performance, such as demonstrating kindness and helpfulness. The studies showed that those reporting greater engagement levels were also likely to report higher positive emotional states. At the same time, the converse appeared probable- that lower engagement correlated with lower positive affectivity [108].
Employee engagement, as defined in this context, represents a set of mental states encompassing cognitive, emotional, and behavioral aspects, ultimately reflecting a motivation to act, distinct from related constructs like job satisfaction and organizational commitment [108,109] as well as contrary states like burnout [110]. Studies support the notion that the psychological climate in the workplace significantly influences the development and eventual behavioral display of employee engagement [111]. Additionally, research has furnished evidence supporting a connection between employee engagement and well-being [112].
Initial investigations suggest that, depending on the intensity of engagement, employees may undergo distinct emotional states [43,44]. Nevertheless, the question remains: “Do engaged employees exhibit meaningful distinctions from non-engaged employees, and if so, what are these distinctions?”. The following proposition proposes to explore the framework postulated in the context of engagement further:
Proposition 3: There is a significant difference between individuals who indicate strong employee engagement and those with minimal employee engagement concerning the well-being of employees.
Employees actively engaging in these environmental initiatives demonstrate more eco-friendly behaviour [115]. Numerous studies have identified a connection between incentives promoting ecological consciousness and employee participation in eco-friendly activities [116]. Employee involvement is consistently elevated through implementing eco-friendly incentives and retirement plans [30, 48]. The green team and their environmentally responsible practices assist organizations in mitigating activities that harm the environment, reaping the rewards of environmental preservation, and contributing to the long-term well-being of all organizational stakeholders [119]. When an organization adopts eco-friendly behaviours and practices and facilitates the exchange of these concepts across different departments, it enhances employee welfare, significantly influences corporate reputation, and enhances employer branding, enabling companies to attract the most qualified individuals. The studies offered empirical evidence indicating that employee engagement mediated the connection between HRM practices, organizational citizenship behaviour, and turnover intentions. Employees demonstrating high levels of engagement act as emotional and cognitive attachments between GHRM practices and employee behaviours [8, 93]. Previous research has consistently shown the mediating role of employee engagement across various contexts [94–97]. Consequently, when employees perceive GHRM practices as supportive, they tend to stimulate their attitudes, manifesting as employee engagement reflected in their attitudes and actions. Therefore, considering the diversity in employee attitudes, it is hypothesized that:
Proposition 4: Employee Engagement mediates GHRM Practices and Employees’ Well-Being.
5.2 Influencers and Barriers
GHRM practices profoundly impact employees’ well-being and are driven by various influencers and barriers. Regulations and Legislation establish the legal framework for eco-friendly workplace practices, while Health and Safety initiatives safeguard employees’ physical and mental health within sustainable environments [8]. Work-Life Balance and Wellness Programs contribute to a healthier work atmosphere, further complemented by Green Workspaces fostering sustainability [126]. However, these positive influences face formidable barriers such as Lack of Awareness, where employees may not fully grasp the significance of green practices, and Resistance to Change as individuals often resist altering established routines. Resource Constraints that limit the implementation of eco-friendly initiatives, Workload and Stress that can intensify due to additional responsibilities and Communication Challenges hindering the effective dissemination of information about these practices, collectively shaping the interplay between GHRM and employee well-being [127].
5.3 Findings of the study
5.3.1 Conceptualisation of GHRM
Regarding RQ1, the article outlines various definitions of GHRM provided by several authors, as presented in Table 2. The literature review examined what constitutes GHRM in each definition. The analysis found that one of the most frequently used terms is “Green HRM,” which denotes integrating environmental sustainability principles into HRM strategies and practices. This term signifies a strategic approach to reduce organizations’ environmental footprint while enhancing their performance and sustainability. Another common phrase is “eco-friendly HR activities,” which refers to HR practices and initiatives designed to minimize environmental impact. These activities may include promoting recycling, reducing energy consumption, and implementing sustainable procurement practices within the organization.
Additionally, “environmental objectives” is a recurring term highlighting the importance of aligning HRM strategies with broader environmental goals. Organizations adopting GHRM seek to incorporate environmental considerations into their decision-making processes, setting specific objectives to reduce their carbon footprint, conserve natural resources, and mitigate environmental risks. The conceptualization of GHRM centers on its role in achieving organizational sustainability through strategically integrating environmental considerations into HRM practices. GHRM is a holistic framework encompassing various HRM aspects, including recruitment, training, performance management, and employee engagement. At its core, GHRM seeks to balance the organization’s needs with those of the environment and society. It involves minimizing the negative environmental impact of organizational activities and maximizing positive contributions to environmental sustainability.
Furthermore, GHRM is seen as a dynamic and evolving field, with organizations continuously seeking innovative ways to integrate environmental considerations into their HRM practices. It includes fostering a culture of environmental responsibility among employees, promoting sustainability-oriented behaviors, and leveraging HRM tools and techniques to support environmental goals. Overall, the conceptualization of GHRM underscores its significance as a strategic approach to HRM that not only enhances organizational performance but also contributes to the broader goals of environmental sustainability and corporate social responsibility.
5.3.2 Research Methodology
RQ2 review of 204 articles revealed a significant increase in GHRM research, emphasizing its growing importance. Between 1996 and 2018, 45 papers (22.05%) focused on GHRM. From 2019, GHRM gained significance, with interest surging in 2022 and 2023, reaching 42 papers (20.58%) and 49 (24.01%), respectively. It indicates an increasing awareness of GHRM, particularly in environmental sustainability. In addition, the study found a diverse distribution across various journals through systematic mapping, with the International Journal of Manpower leading, Business Strategy and the Environment, and the International Journal of Human Resource Management and Benchmarking accounting for some of the highest contributions reflecting widespread interest in GHRM research across academic platforms. The AMO theory (14.21%), (RBV) theory (5.39%), NRBV (4.9%) derived from RBV, social exchange theory (8.33%), social identity theory (7.35%) were prominently employed in GHRM research. Diverse theoretical frameworks highlight the multidimensional nature of GHRM issues, emphasizing the importance of considering various perspectives, etc.
The analysis revealed (89.56%) empirical and (9.31%) theoretical studies, highlighting a predominant focus on empirical research in understanding GHRM. Thus, balancing both approaches is crucial for a comprehensive understanding, emphasizing the need for increased theoretical exploration in GHRM research. Quantitative methods were found (71.07%), followed by qualitative approaches (22.05%) and mixed methods (6.86%). This distribution emphasizes a predominant reliance on quantitative strategies, potentially indicating a stronger inclination toward numerical data and prompting a need to assess their impact on theoretical depth and richness.
The research design analysis revealed a substantial preference for cross-sectional studies (89.56%) over longitudinal designs (10.43%). This prevalence highlights a potential gap in capturing longitudinal shifts, possibly impacting the depth of insights drawn from the research. An imbalance in design choices might affect the accuracy of findings due to a lack of consideration for temporal fluctuations. Thus, understanding this imbalance is crucial to assessing potential implications for capturing temporal changes within GHRM contexts. The analysis showed diverse conceptual models, including ICC, Sobel test, RED model, SEM, Gioia methodology, fsQCA, Hayes PROCESS Macros, and HLM. It shows the varied methodological approaches applied in GHRM research. This diversity serves the purpose of understanding the various tools and techniques researchers employ to investigate GHRM-related phenomena, enriching the methodological toolkit available for future studies.
In response to RQ3, the study identified research gaps and thematic clusters in GHRM research through systematic mapping. Word frequency indicates prevalent themes, while clustering identifies distinct groups and their relationships, showcasing the core focus areas in GHRM research. Word Frequency tool identified commonly used terms in GHRM articles, including “green,” “environmental,” “management,” “employee,” “human,” “engagement,” “performance,” “practices,” “sustainability,” “organizational,” “behaviour,” and “resource.” Four primary categories were identified through cluster analysis: Green Synergy Dynamics, Green Human Capital Paradigm, Holistic Workplace Vitality, and Sustainable Human Resource Practices elucidating thematic clusters. The content analysis highlighted variations in exploration depth, with greater attention to GHRM, Employees’ Well-Being, Employee Engagement, and Green Health and Safety. However, it revealed a notable gap in the literature on factors like Green Innovation, Pro-environmental Behaviour, Employees’ Green Behaviour, Green Organisational Culture, Green Intellectual Capital, Social Sustainability, and Green Creativity. Content analysis is crucial in distilling patterns within GHRM literature, identifying extensively researched topics, and highlighting gaps for deeper exploration.
Regarding RQ4, a systematic review synthesized the findings and classified the research articles into four primary categories using cluster analysis. The relationship between the AMO framework and the four primary categories of GHRM research exhibits a positive alignment. The AMO framework provides a structured approach to understanding how individual abilities, motivation, and opportunities within organizations contribute to the success of eco-friendly practices, workforce development, employee well-being, and the implementation of sustainable strategies. This alignment suggests that when organizations optimize these elements in line with the AMO framework, they are more likely to achieve positive outcomes in their green HRM initiatives, fostering a culture of environmental sustainability and organizational success.
5.3.3 Research model and propositions
Research model and propositions explore the link between GHRM practices, employee engagement, and well-being, emphasizing their significance for organizational sustainability in RQ5. The conceptual framework development addresses the need to identify gaps in GHRM literature and propose a structured framework linking GHRM practices to employee outcomes. It offers a structured framework for organizations to comprehend and address factors impacting GHRM and engagement levels, guiding interventions and policies for sustained environment and overall well-being.
5.4 Theoretical implications for employees’ well-being
The study identified “Holistic Workplace Vitality,” emphasizing both mental and physical aspects of employee well-being. This perspective broadens traditional notions to include environmental sustainability, reflecting a deeper understanding of factors contributing to workplace health. In addition, the theoretical frameworks provide conceptual clarity, aiding researchers and practitioners in understanding principles driving employee well-being initiatives. This framework enables HR practitioners to develop targeted interventions and policies, fostering more effective employee satisfaction, engagement, and health outcomes. Furthermore, the study underscores interconnected factors influencing employee well-being, including organizational practices, environmental concerns, and individual traits, integrating environmental sustainability into HRM practices. Organizations adopting such a framework can foster a supportive work environment for enhanced satisfaction, productivity, and retention.
Moreover, identifying themes like green health and safety and work-life balance guides organizations in prioritizing GHRM initiatives for employee well-being. HR practitioners can develop targeted interventions based on these insights. Policymakers and governments can use the findings to shape regulations promoting GHRM practices for healthier work environments. The AMO theory aligns with GHRM’s four primary categories, fostering a green workplace culture that enhances employee well-being, engagement, and organizational commitment. This alignment empowers HR practitioners to develop tailored strategies while policymakers benefit from a healthier, more engaged workforce, promoting economic stability and environmental sustainability.
5.5 Practical implications for employees’ well-being
GHRM practices related to green health and safety contribute directly to employees’ physical well-being by creating safer and healthier work environments. Initiatives such as ergonomic improvements, safety training, and promoting sustainable practices minimize workplace hazards and enhance employees’ physical health. The proposition on green work-life balance ensures that employees have adequate time for personal pursuits, relaxation, and family, contributing to their overall well-being. Flexible work arrangements, telecommuting options, and policies promoting work-life harmony alleviate stress and improve employees’ mental health. However, cluster analysis offers actionable insights for policymakers and government agencies to create evidence-based policies promoting GHRM practices for employee well-being. These policies incentivize sustainable HRM strategies, fostering engagement and productivity while addressing environmental and social challenges like climate change and workforce well-being. Thus, organizations can use the study’s findings to strategically align their HRM practices with identified clusters strategically, tailoring interventions to address specific employee well-being needs. This alignment ensures that GHRM initiatives meet organizational goals, enhancing satisfaction, retention, and performance while fostering sustainability and innovation for increased agility and resilience. So, understanding the theoretical underpinnings of GHRM practices enables HR practitioners to design targeted training and development programs. This investment enhances employees’ abilities, motivations, and opportunities for eco-friendly behaviors, promoting sustainability and fostering employee fulfillment. It boosts morale, engagement, and productivity, leading to higher job satisfaction, organizational commitment, and reduced turnover and absenteeism rates. Therefore, understanding the theoretical underpinnings of GHRM enables organizations to tailor HR strategies to their goals, fostering a conducive workplace for employee well-being. Customized HR strategies boost morale, productivity, and retention, contributing to organizational success and competitiveness. Policymakers can use study insights to develop legislation that promotes sustainable HR practices and prioritizes employee well-being. Well-designed policies encourage organizations to invest in initiatives that enhance employee health and happiness, resulting in societal benefits like lower healthcare costs and improved quality of life. Governments can use the findings to drive public initiatives promoting employee well-being, economic growth, and environmental sustainability. Such initiatives create opportunities for businesses to adopt sustainable practices, attract talent, drive innovation, and enable social responsibility for societal well-being.
5.6 Future research recommendations
Future studies should examine the role of virtual reality (VR) and augmented reality (AR) in immersive training programs for GHRM, enhancing employees’ understanding and adoption of green practices. In addition to the above, there is a need to
6 Conclusion, direction for further research and limitations
In conclusion, the literature review provided insights into various definitions and dimensions of GHRM, emphasizing its role in integrating environmental sustainability principles into HRM strategies and practices. Common terms such as “Green HRM,” “eco-friendly HR activities,” and “environmental objectives” highlight the strategic approach organizations take to reduce their environmental footprint while enhancing performance and sustainability. GHRM encompasses various HRM aspects and seeks to balance organizational needs with environmental and societal concerns, fostering a culture of environmental responsibility among employees. In terms of research methodology, there is a notable increase in GHRM research, indicating a growing interest in environmental sustainability within HRM. The study employs diverse theoretical frameworks and research methods, focusing predominantly on empirical research. However, there is a need for increased theoretical exploration to complement empirical findings. The analysis also reveals a preference for quantitative methods and cross-sectional studies, indicating a potential gap in capturing longitudinal shifts and temporal fluctuations within GHRM contexts. Meanwhile, systematic mapping techniques revealed research gaps and thematic clusters in GHRM research, emphasizing the increasing importance of GHRM in organizational sustainability and employee well-being. Word frequency and clustering analysis identified themes in GHRM research, emphasizing green synergy dynamics, green human capital paradigm, and sustainable HR practices. While some areas like GHRM, employee well-being, and engagement receive considerable attention, there are notable gaps in the literature concerning factors like green innovation and pro-environmental behavior, highlighting areas for further exploration. The relationship between the AMO framework and primary categories of GHRM research suggests a positive alignment, indicating that optimizing individual abilities, motivation, and opportunities within organizations can contribute to the success of eco-friendly practices and sustainable strategies. Finally, the systematic review’s theoretical model and research propositions highlight the positive correlation between GHRM practices, employee well-being, and engagement. Eco-conscious HR activities and green incentives enhance both, contributing to organizational competitiveness, environmental sustainability, and long-term advantage. Organizations can improve operational efficiency, reduce costs, and strengthen employee loyalty by fostering environmentally conscious employees. This model provides a roadmap for organizations to integrate GHRM practices effectively, leading to improved employee well-being, satisfaction, and commitment while fostering a more engaged and productive workforce. However, the study has several limitations that should be considered. Firstly, the review only included journal articles, excluding other sources like books, conference papers, or non-refereed sources, potentially limiting the scope of the analysis. Future research could adopt a more comprehensive approach by including a wider range of sources for a holistic understanding. Secondly, the study relied on specific parameters and keywords that may introduce biases and restrict the inclusion of relevant studies. Expanding the search strategy to include additional keywords or employing alternative search methods could provide a more comprehensive overview of the research scope.
Moreover, the study relied on the NVivo 14 for data analysis and clustering. While NVivo is a powerful tool, its limitations include the potential subjective interpretation during manual classification and coding. The clustering results were validated through a dendrogram, but it’s crucial to acknowledge the process involves subjectivity and may not fully capture underlying complexities. While the software aids qualitative analysis, human judgment remains essential. Future research could explore inter-rater reliability techniques for validity and reliability.
Additionally, the manual reassessment of articles using Microsoft Excel, while intended to address potential biases from automated coding, introduces subjectivity into the classification process. Individual researchers may have different interpretations of the data, leading to inconsistencies in classification and potentially biasing the results toward specific perspectives or themes.
Next, it excluded the works that did not mention the greening of organisational human capital, such as big data analytics, biofuels, medicines, etc. Then, the articles reviewed and analyzed in this study proposed a model based on AMO theory, which remained suitable to the context. Other theories, such as social identity theory, institutional theory, stakeholder theory, and respect openness continuity theory, were not considered in this domain. Although the author adopted the PRISMA approach and tried to have a comprehensive scope of the documents, the main limitation of this study turns out to be the searching and screening criteria, such as having a limited database, form, subject area, and language of empirical studies, which might exclude some critical information on GHRM research. Additionally, while the proposed models and propositions offer theoretical frameworks for understanding the relationship between GHRM practices and organizational outcomes, the lack of empirical validation limits the robustness and applicability of these findings in real-world settings. Future research should address these limitations by conducting empirical studies in diverse organizational contexts and providing actionable recommendations for organizations to adopt GHRM practices.
Footnotes
Acknowledgments
The authors have no acknowledgment.
Author contributions
CONCEPTION: Jyoti Kamboj
INTERPRETATION OR ANALYSIS OF DATA: Jyoti Kamboj
PREPARATION OF THE MANUSCRIPT: Jyoti Kamboj
REVISION OF IMPORTANT INTELECTUAL CONTENTS: Jyoti Kamboj and Dr. Eronimus Anthonysamy
SUPERVISION: Dr. Eronimus Anthonysamy
Funding
This research received no external funding.
Conflict of interest
No potential conflict of interest was reported by the authors.