Socially Responsible Human Resource Management and Employee Proactive Work Behaviour: A Moderated Serial Mediation Model of Work Meaningfulness,Organizational Pride and Leader Gender
Restricted accessResearch articleFirst published online 2026
Socially Responsible Human Resource Management and Employee Proactive Work Behaviour: A Moderated Serial Mediation Model of Work Meaningfulness,Organizational Pride and Leader Gender
Drawing from sensemaking theory, this study investigates how socially responsible human resource management (SRHRM) influences employee proactive work behaviour (EPWB) through underlying psychological processes and contextual factors. While prior research suggests SRHRM enhances positive employee outcomes, limited attention has been paid to the mechanisms through which employees interpret and internalize SRHRM practices, and how these interpretations drive proactive behaviours. Using a time-lagged survey of 756 employees in multinational companies in Southeast Vietnam, the study tests a serial mediation model where work meaningfulness and organizational pride sequentially transmit the effects of SRHRM to EPWB. Structural equation modelling results reveal that SRHRM does not directly predict EPWB but operates entirely through this psychological chain. Furthermore, multi-group analysis shows that leadership gender moderates the indirect pathway: female leaders amplify the positive effects of SRHRM on employees’ sensemaking and subsequent behaviours, while male leaders weaken them. These findings contribute to human resource management and organizational behaviour literature by advancing sensemaking theory in explaining how socially responsible practices translate into discretionary employee actions and identifying leadership gender as a critical contextual variable. Practical implications suggest organizations should design SRHRM interventions that foster meaningful work experiences and strategically leverage leadership characteristics to enhance employee proactivity.
AguinisH., & GlavasA. (2019). On corporate social responsibility, sensemaking, and the search for meaningfulness through work. Journal of Management, 45(3), 1057–1086. https://doi.org/10.1177/0149206317691575
2.
AntunesA., & FrancoM. (2016). How people in organizations make sense of responsible leadership practices: Multiple case studies. Leadership & Organization Development Journal, 37(1), 126–152. https://doi.org/10.1108/LODJ-04-2014-0084
3.
BjörkmanI., & LervikJ. E. (2007). Transferring HR practices within multinational corporations. Human Resource Management Journal, 17(4), 320–335. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1748-8583.2007.00048.x
4.
ChangY.-Y., ChiangF.-Y., HuQ., & HughesM. (2025). From green HRM to SDG success: Pathways through exploratory innovation and developmental culture. Review of Managerial Science, 19(6), 1711–1741. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11846-024-00805-6
5.
CrantJ. (2000). Proactive behavior in organizations. Journal of Management, 26(3), 435–462. https://doi.org/10.1016/s0149-2063(00)00044-1
6.
DhirA., TalwarS., RajS., SampatB., & NicolauJ. L. (2025). A Time-lagged examination of voluntary and task-related green behavior in the travel industry. Journal of Travel Research, 64(4), 812–834. https://doi.org/10.1177/00472875241230008
7.
EaglyA. H., & CarliL. L. (2003). The female leadership advantage: An evaluation of the evidence. The Leadership Quarterly, 14(6), 807–834. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.leaqua.2003.09.004
8.
EaglyA. H., & KarauS. J. (2002). Role congruity theory of prejudice toward female leaders. Psychological Review, 109(3), 573–598. https://doi.org/10.1037/0033-295X.109.3.573
9.
FarndaleE., PaauweJ., & BoselieP. (2010). An exploratory study of governance in the intra-firm human resources supply chain. Human Resource Management, 49(5), 849–868. https://doi.org/10.1002/hrm.20387
10.
GioiaD. A., & ChittipeddiK. (1991). Sensemaking and sensegiving in strategic change initiation. Strategic Management Journal, 12(6), 433–448. https://doi.org/10.1002/smj.4250120604
11.
GouthierM. H. J., & RheinM. (2011). Organizational pride and its positive effects on employee behavior. Journal of Service Management, 22(5), 633–649. https://doi.org/10.1108/09564231111174988
12.
GusmerottiN. M., TodaroN. M., TosiD., & TestaF. (2023). Green work climate, work meaningfulness and supervisor environmental priority: A social exchange perspective on employees’ eco-initiatives. Journal of Cleaner Production, 415, 137889. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jclepro.2023.137889
13.
HairJ. F., RingleC. M., & SarstedtM. (2011). PLS-SEM: Indeed a silver bullet. Journal of Marketing Theory and Practice, 19(2), 139–152.
14.
HarjotoM. A., LaksmanaI., & LeeW. E. (2020). Female leadership in corporate social responsibility reporting: Effects on writing, readability and future social performance. Advances in Accounting, 49, 100475. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.adiac.2020.100475
15.
Helms MillsJ. C., & MillsA. J. (2017). Rules, sensemaking, formative contexts, and discourse in the gendering of organizational culture. In MillsA. J. (Ed.), Insights and research on the study of gender and intersectionality in international airline cultures (pp. 49–69). Emerald Publishing Limited. https://doi.org/10.1108/978-1-78714-545-020171004
16.
HenselerJ., RingleC. M., & SarstedtM. (2015). A new criterion for assessing discriminant validity in variance-based structural equation modeling. Journal of the Academy of Marketing Science, 43(1), 115–135. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11747-014-0403-8
17.
HoangS. D., & HaM.-T. (2025). Can AI truly drive sustainability, or is green intellectual capital the key? Investigating their two-way relationship in the GHRM–performance link. Journal of Intellectual Capital, 26(5), 1122–1145. https://doi.org/10.1108/JIC-10-2024-0321
18.
HydeJ. S., BiglerR. S., JoelD., TateC. C., & Van AndersS. M. (2019). The future of sex and gender in psychology: Five challenges to the gender binary. American Psychologist, 74(2), 171–193. https://doi.org/10.1037/amp0000307
19.
HyunS., KimJ. M., HanJ., & AndersonM. (2022). Female executive leadership and corporate social responsibility. Accounting & Finance, 62(3), 3475–3511. https://doi.org/10.1111/acfi.12894
20.
IqbalK., ShenJ., & DengX. (2024). When does CSR-facilitation human resource management motivate employee job engagement? The contextual effect of job insecurity. Human Resource Management Journal, 34(4), 1063–1079. https://doi.org/10.1111/1748-8583.12544
21.
JiaX., LiaoS., Van Der HeijdenB. I. J. M., & GuoZ. (2019). The effect of socially responsible human resource management (SRHRM) on frontline employees’ knowledge sharing. International Journal of Contemporary Hospitality Management, 31(9), 3646–3663. https://doi.org/10.1108/IJCHM-09-2018-0769
22.
JohnsonS. K., MurphyS. E., ZewdieS., & ReichardR. J. (2008). The strong, sensitive type: Effects of gender stereotypes and leadership prototypes on the evaluation of male and female leaders. Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, 106(1), 39–60. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.obhdp.2007.12.002
23.
JonesD. A. (2010). Does serving the community also serve the company? Using organizational identification and social exchange theories to understand employee responses to a volunteerism programme. Journal of Occupational and Organizational Psychology, 83(4), 857–878. https://doi.org/10.1348/096317909x477495
24.
KacmarK. M., AndrewsM. C., HarrisK. J., & TepperB. J. (2013). Ethical leadership and subordinate outcomes: The mediating role of organizational politics and the moderating role of political skill. Journal of Business Ethics, 115(1), 33–44. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10551-012-1373-8
25.
KoburtayT., SyedJ., & HaloubR. (2019). Congruity between the female gender role and the leader role: A literature review. European Business Review, 31(6), 831–848. https://doi.org/10.1108/ebr-05-2018-0095
26.
KoenigA. M., EaglyA. H., MitchellA. A., & RistikariT. (2011). Are leader stereotypes masculine? A meta-analysis of three research paradigms. Psychological Bulletin, 137(4), 616–642. https://doi.org/10.1037/a0023557
27.
LiaoZ., ChengJ., & ChenQ. (2022). Socially responsible human resource management and employee ethical voice: Roles of employee ethical self-efficacy and organizational identification. Corporate Social Responsibility and Environmental Management, 29(4), 820–829. https://doi.org/10.1002/csr.2236
28.
LuuT. T. (2023). Reducing unethical pro-organizational behavior in the hospitality sector through socially responsible human resource practices and responsible leadership. Journal of Sustainable Tourism, 31(3), 706–734. https://doi.org/10.1080/09669582.2021.2000994
29.
MaB., ZhuS., & JainK. (2023). The “sense” behind proactive behaviors: Feedback seeking, meaningfulness, and personal initiative. Journal of Vocational Behavior, 144, 103896. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jvb.2023.103896
30.
MaitlisS. (2005). The Social processes of organizational sensemaking. Academy of Management Journal, 48(1), 21–49. https://doi.org/10.5465/amj.2005.15993111
31.
MaitlisS., & ChristiansonM. (2014). Sensemaking in organizations: Taking stock and moving forward. Academy of Management Annals, 8(1), 57–125. https://doi.org/10.5465/19416520.2014.873177
32.
MaitlisS., VogusT. J., & LawrenceT. B. (2013). Sensemaking and emotion in organizations. Organizational Psychology Review, 3(3), 222–247. https://doi.org/10.1177/2041386613489062
33.
NazirO., & IslamJ. U. (2020). Effect of CSR activities on meaningfulness, compassion, and employee engagement: A sense-making theoretical approach. International Journal of Hospitality Management, 90, 102630. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijhm.2020.102630
34.
NewmanA., MiaoQ., HofmanP. S., & ZhuC. J. (2016). The impact of socially responsible human resource management on employees’ organizational citizenship behaviour: The mediating role of organizational identification. International Journal of Human Resource Management27(4), 440–455. https://doi.org/10.1080/09585192.2015.1042895
35.
NunnallyJ. C. (1994). The assessment of reliability. Psychometric Theory, 3, 248–292.
36.
OgbonnayaC., TillmanC. J., & GonzalezK. (2018). Perceived organizational support in health care: The importance of teamwork and training for employee well-being and patient satisfaction. Group & Organization Management, 43(3), 475–503. https://doi.org/10.1177/1059601118767244
37.
ParkerS. K., WilliamsH. M., & TurnerN. (2006). Modeling the antecedents of proactive behavior at work. Journal of Applied Psychology, 91(3), 636–652. https://doi.org/10.1037/0021-9010.91.3.636
38.
PhamN. T., TuanT. H., LeT. D., NguyenP. N. D., UsmanM., & FerreiraG. T. C. (2023). Socially responsible human resources management and employee retention: The roles of shared value, relationship satisfaction, and servant leadership. Journal of Cleaner Production, 414, 137704. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jclepro.2023.137704
39.
PhamN. T., TuanT. H., ThuyV. T. N., HoangH. T., & HoangG. (2023). Improving employee outcomes in the remote working context: A time-lagged study on digital-oriented training, work-to-family conflict and empowering leadership. Asia Pacific Journal of Human Resources, 611008–1038. https://doi.org/10.1111/1744-7941.12374
40.
PimentaS., DuarteA. P., & SimõesE. (2024). How socially responsible human resource management fosters work engagement: The role of perceived organizational support and affective organizational commitment. Social Responsibility Journal, 20(2), 326–343. https://doi.org/10.1108/SRJ-10-2022-0442
41.
PurushothamanD., & AmmermanC. (2025). How women in leadership can shape how others see them. Harvard Business Review. https://hbr.org/2025/05/how-women-in-leadership-can-shape-how-others-see-them
42.
SandbergJ., & TsoukasH. (2015). Making sense of the sensemaking perspective: Its constituents, limitations, and opportunities for further development. Journal of Organizational Behavior, 36(S1), S6–S32. https://doi.org/10.1002/job.1937
43.
SchaeferS. D., CunninghamP., DiehlS., & TerlutterR. (2024). Employees’ positive perceptions of corporate social responsibility create beneficial outcomes for firms and their employees: Organizational pride as a mediator. Corporate Social Responsibility and Environmental Management, 31(3), 2574–2587. https://doi.org/10.1002/csr.2699
44.
ShenJ., & BensonJ. (2016). When CSR is a social norm: How socially responsible human resource management affects employee work behavior. Journal of Management, 42(6), 1723–1746. https://doi.org/10.1177/0149206314522300
45.
ShenW., & JosephD. L. (2021). Gender and leadership: A criterion-focused review and research agenda. Human Resource Management Review, 31(2), 100765. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.hrmr.2020.100765
46.
ShenJ., & ZhuC. J. (2011). Effects of socially responsible human resource management on employee organizational commitment. International Journal of Human Resource Management, 22(15), 3020–3035. https://doi.org/10.1080/09585192.2011.599951
47.
ShmueliG., SarstedtM., HairJ. F., CheahJ.-H., TingH., VaithilingamS., & RingleC. M. (2019). Predictive model assessment in PLS-SEM: Guidelines for using PLSpredict. European Journal of Marketing, 53(11), 2322–2347. https://doi.org/10.1108/EJM-02-2019-0189
48.
Simga-MuganC., DalyB. A., OnkalD., & KavutL. (2005). The Influence of nationality and gender on ethical sensitivity: An application of the issue-contingent model. Journal of Business Ethics, 57(2), 139–159. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10551-004-4601-z
49.
SinaikoH. W., & BrislinR. W. (1973). Evaluating language translations: Experiments on three assessment methods. Journal of Applied Psychology, 57(3), 328–334. https://doi.org/10.1037/h0034677
50.
StegerM. F., DikB. J., & DuffyR. D. (2012). Measuring meaningful work: The work and meaning inventory (WAMI). Journal of Career Assessment, 20(3), 322–337. https://doi.org/10.1177/1069072711436160
51.
WangA.-C., ChiangJ. T.-J., TsaiC.-Y., LinT.-T., & ChengB.-S. (2013). Gender makes the difference: The moderating role of leader gender on the relationship between leadership styles and subordinate performance. Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, 122(2), 101–113. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.obhdp.2013.06.001
52.
WangJ., ZhangZ., & JiaM. (2023a). Doing good or looking good: How socially responsible human resource management practices influence employees’ CSR-specific performance. Journal of Managerial Psychology, 38(3), 225–244. https://doi.org/10.1108/JMP-08-2022-0423
53.
WangJ., ZhangZ., & JiaM. (2023b). Redemption from SRHRM under COVID-19: How business threat due to COVID-19 affects employee insomnia via hope and workplace anxiety. Journal of Occupational and Organizational Psychology, 96(2), 429–456. https://doi.org/10.1111/joop.12425
54.
WeberK., & GlynnM. A. (2006). Making sense with institutions: Context, thought and action in Karl Weick’s theory. Organization Studies, 27(11), 1639–1660. https://doi.org/10.1177/0170840606068343
55.
WeickK. E. (1995). Sensemaking in organizations. Sage Publications. https://www.torrossa.com/gs/resourceProxy?an=5564159&publisher=FZO137#page=545
56.
WeigeltO., SyrekC. J., SchmittA., & UrbachT. (2019). Finding peace of mind when there still is so much left undone—A diary study on how job stress, competence need satisfaction, and proactive work behavior contribute to work-related rumination during the weekend. Journal of Occupational Health Psychology, 24(3), 373–386. https://doi.org/10.1037/ocp0000117
57.
ZhaoH., ZhouQ., HeP., & JiangC. (2019). How and when does socially responsible HRM affect employees’ organizational citizenship behaviors toward the environment? Journal of Business Ethics, 169, 371–385.
58.
ZhouQ., SacramentoC., & MartinaityteI. (2023). Work meaningfulness and performance among healthcare professionals: The role of professional respect and participative management. Journal of Business Research, 163, 113908. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jbusres.2023.113908
59.
ZhouQ., & ZhengX. (2024). Socially responsible human resource management and employee green behavior at work: The role of learning goal orientation and moral identity. The International Journal of Human Resource Management, 35(1), 1–35. https://doi.org/10.1080/09585192.2023.2192358
