Interplay Among Responsible Leadership,Corporate Social Responsibility Perspective and Organizational Citizenship Behaviour Towards Environment: A Study of the Indian IT Sector

Abstract

The environmental degradation and consequent scarcity of resources have compelled organizations to implement strategies and policies that prioritize the attainment of a sustainable environment. The significance of employees’ pro-environment behaviour is increasingly recognized and is being promoted by organizations that focus on preserving the environment. Considering the importance of pro-environment behaviour, this study investigates the relationship among responsible leadership, corporate social responsibility (CSR) perspective and organizational citizenship behaviour towards environment (OCBE). This employee-level study adopted social cognitive theory to examine the context–behaviour framework. The data are collected from information technology (IT) professionals using a stratified sampling technique. The analysis of 503 respondents using PLS-SEM concludes that responsible leadership and CSR perspective have a positive relationship with OCBE. The study also confirms the partial mediating role of the CSR perspective in the relationship between responsible leadership and OCBE. The study identifies organizational-level contextual factors such as responsible leadership and CSR perspective that promote an environment-friendly behaviour among employees, i.e., OCBE. The paper extends the context–behaviour framework literature and highlights the benefits of OCBE in the organization.

Keywords

Responsible leadership corporate social responsibility perspective organizational citizenship behaviour towards environment IT professionals social cognitive theory

Introduction

The pro-environment behaviour of employees is gaining enormous importance and is encouraged in many organizations that are inclined to preserve the environment (Baldassari et al., 2023). The environment’s deterioration and resource crisis have forced organizations to adopt strategies and policies focused on a sustainable environment (Biswas et al., 2023; Cheema et al., 2020; Khan et al., 2021; Li et al., 2022). Pro-environmental strategies must be adopted in industries that have high carbon footprints, such as the information technology (IT) industry. The IT industry uses a large amount of energy and disposes of large amounts of e-waste as IT-enabled systems have a short life span, making it crucial to implement pro-environment policies in such an industry (Muñoz-Pascual et al., 2021; Ojo, 2022; Ojo et al., 2019). Big IT giants have shown their commitment to protect the environment by adopting systems that are aimed at waste management, conservation and recycling. The adoption of these sustainable initiatives is highlighted in their annual reports, such as the ‘Dow Jones Sustainability World Index’, the ‘Sustainability Report’ and the ‘Corporate Scial Rsponsibility (CSR) Report’. For the successful implementation of such sustainable strategies, the role of employees is crucial. Thus, the need for promoting employees’ pro-environment behaviour has attracted researchers’ attention from both an academic and industry perspective (Robertson & Barling, 2013, 2017).

The pro-environment behaviour of employees is dependent on one’s values, attitudes, beliefs and life orientation (Baldassari et al., 2023; Norton et al., 2015; Unsworth et al., 2013). This pro-environment behaviour demonstrated at the workplace is termed organizational citizenship behaviour towards environment (OCBE). ‘OCBE refers to the individual and discretionary social actions that are not directly acknowledged by the formal reward system and that lead to more effective environmental management by organizations’ (Boiral and Paille 2012; Daily et al., 2009). Previous research has focused on finding the antecedents of OCBE, which primarily focuses on individual differences (Islam et al., 2021; Molla et al., 2014). Apart from individual differences, OCBE is also affected by organizational factors (Amrutha & Geetha, 2020; Paul et al., 2019). Researchers argued that the CSR perspective plays a crucial role in motivating employees to adopt OCBE (Cheema et al., 2020; He et al., 2021). The CSR perspective refers to the employees’ perspective regarding the organization’s policies and principles aimed at achieving its sustainable goals (Székely & Knirsch, 2005). Existing studies emphasized the independent effect of the CSR perspective on the OCBE of employees (Tian & Robertson, 2019). In practice, CSR’s effect is amplified when organizations adopt environment-friendly strategies that focus on embracing an environment to facilitate OCBE (Sahar et al., 2023). Javed et al. (2021) said that responsible leadership has a positive relationship with CSR. ‘Responsible leadership is defined as a form of leadership that requires a leader to behave morally conscious towards the stakeholders inside and outside of the corporation, manifesting appropriate decision-making, trust building, sustainable development and green action choices’ (Zhao & Zhou, 2019). For developing an environment-friendly environment, leadership plays a very crucial role in an organization (Deb et al., 2022). The literature emphasized the role of responsible leadership as an antecedent of OCBE (Han & Wang, 2019). Although the role of responsible leadership in promoting OCBE is examined, the literature lacks the explanation of how responsible leadership influences OCBE (Tian & Suo, 2021). Thus, there is a need to investigate the underlining mechanism of the CSR perspective that strengthens the impact of responsible leadership on employees’ green behaviour, i.e., OCBE in the present case (He et al., 2021).

There is a need to examine the effect of responsible leadership on OCBE. That is because, first, it will add to the current knowledge on the outcomes of responsible leadership and provide insights for organizations to foster responsible leaders (Zhang et al., 2023). Second, examining the antecedents of OCBE has important practical implications, especially in service industries (Han & Wang, 2019; He et al. 2021; Renwick et al., 2013; Tian & Suo, 2021). Third, the examination of the underlying mechanism of how the relationship among responsible leadership, CSR perspective (contextual factors) and OCBE (behaviour) works in the context–behaviour framework, is limited in developing nations as compared to developed ones (He et al., 2021; Zhang et al., 2023). Therefore, in such a context, it is important to examine the interplay between responsible leadership, CSR perspective and OCBE.

In order to fill these gaps, the study develops a mediation model that will examine what and how OCBE is influenced in an organization. The model uses the social cognitive theory that focuses on the interactional effects among external environmental factors, individual’s cognition and behaviour (Bandura, 1986). According to Bandura (1986), the central proposition in social cognitive theory states that an external environment factor (responsible behaviour) may exert a direct effect on an individual’s cognitive (CSR perspective), which could shape employees’ behaviour (OCBE). Hence, the study argues that responsible leadership may influence employees’ cognition and behaviours (Han et al., 2019; He et al., 2021; Zhang et al., 2023). Given that leaders’ behaviour may affect their followers through daily interaction if these followers are led by a responsible leader, employees’ CSR perspective will be enhanced, which in turn, embraces OCBE. This focuses on investigating what factors impact the behaviour of an employee in an organization. Besides these, the study further explores the boundary condition that has the potential to modify the effect of responsible leadership on OCBE via the CSR perspective as a mediator using a context–behaviour framework in the IT sector. The social cognitive theory emphasizes that individual characteristics may impact the mechanism of how environmental factors (responsible leadership in this case) affect an individual’s behaviour (OCBE) via cognitive process (CSR perspective) (Wood & Bandura, 1989). Therefore, the study investigates how individual perception (CSR perspective) in the organizational context may act as a mediator in the relationship between responsible leadership and OCBE (employees’ behaviour).

The study has several contributions and enhances the current body of knowledge on responsible leadership and OCBE. First, the study extends the literature on responsible leadership by investigating the relationship of responsible leadership with OCBE. We add to this literature using social cognitive mechanisms. When environment-friendly practices are supported by informal relations between employees and managers, it may strengthen the influence of responsible leadership on OCBE. It is useful in extending the knowledge of the antecedents of OCBE. Second, the study extends the literature on the relationship of the CSR perspective with OCBE. The study examines what employees’ perspectives have to offer in building green behaviour among fellow employees. It will examine how one’s cognitive process affects the other employee’s behaviour and how employees learn from each other. Third, based on social cognitive theory, the study builds a mediation model that elucidates the underlying mechanism of how responsible leadership may influence OCBE via the CSR perspective. According to social cognitive theory, if organizational contextual factors (responsible leadership) and individual cognitive (CSR perspective) are present in an organization, employees may learn pro-environment behaviour (OCBE) from their supervisors and colleagues. It will increase employees’ inclination to participate in pro-environment initiatives (Han et al. 2019; He et al., 2021; Zhang et al., 2023). Therefore, the study identifies the CSR perspective as a potential mediator that strengthens the relationship between responsible leadership and OCBE. This helps in understanding how informal relationships in an organization affect the complexity of policy implementation and organizational formal strategies (Channa et al., 2021; Cheema et al., 2020). Fourth, the study adds to the current body of knowledge by investigating the boundary constraint that responsible leadership may have on one’s behaviour (OCBE) via the CSR perspective using a context–behaviour framework and offers the applicability of the framework beyond developed nations and a few specific sectors.

Thus, the study investigates the interplay among CSR perspective, responsible leadership and OCBE; and the CSR perspective as a mediator on the relationship between responsible leadership and OCBE using a context–behaviour framework. The study tests the framework in an emerging IT sector that remains elusive. The remainder of the paper includes theoretical perspective, literature, methods, analysis and discussion.

Literature Review and Hypothesis Development

Theoretical Perspective

Social cognitive theory, proposed by Albert Bandura, is a comprehensive framework for understanding, predicting and changing human behaviour. The theory postulates that the process of learning takes place within a social framework, characterized by a dynamic and mutually influential interplay between the individual, environment and behaviours (Bandura, 1986). It is based on the idea that individuals learn by observing others in their social environment. This theoretical framework places significant emphasis on the notion of observational learning, whereby individuals acquire knowledge and skills through seeing the behaviours of others and the subsequent consequences of those behaviours. According to this theory, individuals learn behaviours by observing others. The theory emphasizes the importance of observing and modelling the behaviours, attitudes and emotional reactions of others. This observational learning is not a purely imitative process but involves active cognitive processing (Bandura, 2001).

The theory assumes that behaviour, cognitive factors (such as knowledge, perception, expectations and attitudes) and environmental influences have a bidirectional impact on one another (Bandura, 1986). It also assumes that people can adopt behaviour by observing others. It also assumes that the individual’s behaviour is dependent on the consequences that one expects as a result of their behaviour. It also assumes that self-regulation and self-efficacy also play a role in influencing one’s behaviour in the context of social cognitive theory (Bandura, 1991). In an organizational context, employees observe the behaviours of their leaders and peers, and these observations influence their behaviours. When leaders and peers demonstrate behaviours that support environmental sustainability, employees are likely to learn and imitate these behaviours, leading to increased OCBE.

Moreover, the theory suggests that the social environment plays a critical role in influencing behaviour. In an organization, the social environment is shaped by factors such as leadership style, organizational culture and policies. When the social environment is supportive of environmental sustainability (e.g., through responsible leadership and a strong CSR perspective), it can encourage employees to engage in OCBE. In conclusion, the theory provides a useful framework for understanding OCBE (Yadav et al., 2016). It suggests that by shaping the social environment and serving as role models (responsible leaders), it will impact the cognitive process of employees (CSR perspective). This will influence employees to exhibit pro-environment behaviour that supports environmental sustainability.

According to this theory, responsible leaders fulfil their role as exemplars (an external effect) whose behaviours exert an influence on the behaviour of their followers. Individuals who follow leaders tend to observe their actions and subsequently imitate their behaviour (Zhang et al., 2023). The daily interaction of leaders with their followers and their behaviour while making decisions directly affect followers’ perception and behaviour. This suggests that employees acquire knowledge not only through formal communication but also through informal encounters with their colleagues. The influence of responsible leadership extends to an individual’s cognitive processes, hence affecting their CSR perspective (Channa et al., 2021; Javed et al., 2021).

Research also suggests that responsible leadership not only promotes the implementation of environmentally friendly policies but also exerts an informal personal influence on colleagues to demonstrate OCBE (behaviour) (He et al., 2021; Kim et al., 2014; Zhang et al., 2023). The study uses social cognitive theory to support the context–behaviour framework as leadership may be viewed as a vital external environmental factor, that influences followers’ behaviour (He et al., 2021). Therefore, it may be argued that the CSR perspective acts as a mediator in the relationship between responsible behaviour and OCBE.

CSR Perspective and OCBE

CSR perspective refers to the employees’ perspective on policies and principles that an organization adopts in order to achieve its sustainable goals (Székely & Knirsch, 2005). The adoption of CSR policies within an organization reflects the belief that it is focused on attaining sustainable development targets with regard to social, economic and environmental aspects (Afsar et al., 2020; Deb et al., 2022). The CSR initiatives of an organization depict its commitment and values towards the environment and society as a whole. The CSR perspective reflects how an organization perceives its role in society beyond its business operations and profit-making objectives from an employee’s perspective.

To attain sustainable goals, organizations require employees to behave in an environment-friendly way, i.e., OCBE (Su & Swanson, 2019). When organizations implement their comprehensive CSR policies, they demonstrate their strong environmental values and employees’ perspectives of CSR increase. This increased CSR perspective will motivate employees to embrace OCBE more efficiently and effectively. As CSR perspective acts as a benchmark for perceptions of organizational ethics and environmental conservation policy, thus creating an atmosphere that encourages employees to depict OCBE behaviour (Su & Swanson, 2019). As per the social cognitive theory, this CSR perspective will act as a cognitive process that will change the behaviour of employees. It is believed that organizations with high levels of CSR commitment take actions that help conserve the environment, reduce waste and benefit society as a whole (Kim et al., 2019). This commitment of organizations fosters employees to behave in a more sustainable and environment-friendly manner, embracing OCBE within employees (Afsar et al., 2020; Tian & Robertson, 2019). The CSR perspective will act as a context factor in the context–behaviour framework, which will lead to OCBE (behaviour). The CSR perspective can be both positive and negative. A positive CSR perspective implies that an organization actively participates in activities oriented towards society and the environment. The positive activities can be the adoption of sustainable business practices or promoting diversity and inclusion in the workforce. On the other hand, a negative CSR perspective implies that an organization is not fulfilling its social and environmental responsibilities. Few researchers argue that CSR may have a negative effect on OCBE, as it may lead to mental and emotional stress by increasing workload. As per the literature on green behaviour, the CSR perspective is considered to have a positive relationship as it is stimulated by responsible leadership (He et al., 2021). Thus, it is crucial to investigate the relationship between CSR perspective and OCBE.

H₁: CSR perspective has a positive relationship with OCBE.

Responsible Leadership and OCBE

OCBE refers to the discretionary behaviour of employees, which is not explicitly part of the formal reward system. To encourage such behaviour, organizations must adopt the responsible leadership style, as employees with high individualism need intrinsic motivators rather than extrinsic motivators, such as the relationship with their managers or supervisors (Luu, 2019). Responsible leadership assumes that leaders have strong beliefs and values that motivate them to achieve sustainable development goals by taking social responsibility for waste reduction, pollution control and resource management (Han et al., 2019; Tian & Suo, 2021; Xiao et al., 2021; Zhang et al., 2023; Zhao & Zhou, 2019). As per the social cognitive theory, responsible leadership will act as an environmental factor that will have a direct influence on the behaviour of employees within an organization, if followers observe their supervisors to behave responsibly.

Responsible leadership utilizes the informal manager–employee relationship to increase OCBE among employees (Han et al., 2019; Zhang et al., 2023; Zhao & Zhou, 2019). Responsible leaders can use their power to motivate employees to participate in environment-friendly actions (Robertson & Barling, 2013). The study examines responsible leadership as an organizational context factor that will impact the pro-environment behaviour of employees. Responsible leaders align organizational goals with sustainable goals, which depicts their commitment not only to financial goals but also to environmental goals. This environmentally conscious behaviour of leaders compels followers to follow the same path and values (Graves et al., 2019; Priyankara et al., 2018).

H₂: Responsible leadership has a positive relationship with OCBE.

Responsible Leadership and CSR Perspective

Responsible leadership plays a crucial role in effectively embracing CSR guidelines and strategies within an enterprise (Dong & Zhong, 2022). The establishment of a social consciousness environment and the practice of responsible leadership are conducive to enhancing productivity. This environment will help in increasing the business’s active engagement by considering the genuine interests of its stakeholders, including employees and customers. Responsible leaders will set examples by behaving in an environment-friendly manner. As per the social cognitive theory, responsible leadership will act as an external environment factor that will build the cognitive process of employees (CSR perspective) through observation. Responsible leaders are known to establish unambiguous guidelines and ethical principles for their subordinates and encourage socially responsible conduct by incentivizing pro-environmental actions (Afsar et al., 2016).

According to existing literature, a company is more inclined to participate in CSR activities when it has a strong leadership foundation. This is due to the fact that leaders who are committed to such practices are more likely to implement them with conviction and endorse initiatives that improve the CSR perspective and the company’s overall performance (He et al., 2021). Therefore, organizations must ensure that their leaders are responsible for improving the CSR perspective.

H₃: Responsible leadership has a positive relationship with the CSR perspective.

CSR Perspective as a Mediator Between Responsible Leadership and OCBE

CSR outlines policies for sustainable growth and shows commitment to the various stakeholders’ interests. As per the social cognitive theory, when such commitment is portrayed, this will affect the behaviour of employees. According to Cheema et al. (2020), social identity could be a way to understand how the CSR perspective affects people. However, social identity research has mostly focused on how people see themselves and their identities. Kim et al. (2019) found that there is a strong link between behaviour and organizational strategies. Moreover, the CSR perspective also has an indirect effect on how well workers do their jobs (Robertson & Barling, 2013). So, it is important to understand how the CSR perspective affects the environment-friendly behaviour of employees with regard to the context–behaviour framework.

Responsible leaders care about protecting the environment and take steps to do so. According to Kim et al. (2019), organizations and their leaders play a crucial role in promoting environmentally responsible behaviour among employees by serving as exemplars and role models. People think that these organizational settings have a big effect on green behaviour and, in turn, help employees do their jobs better. According to Afsar et al. (2016), responsible leadership offers a framework for fostering environmental-friendly behaviour that is beneficial for the planet. By fulfilling social responsibilities, leaders enhance employees’ CSR perspective. This is supported by Voegtlin et al. (2012), who found that responsible leadership inspires employees to actively engage in CSR activities. As the CSR perspective promotes ‘pro-environmental norms, values and attitudes among employees’ that are endorsed and anticipated by the organization, it has a profound effect on one’s behaviour (Sahar et al., 2023). This perspective inspires employees to actively participate in socially responsible activities, thereby enhancing their OCBEs. Consequently, this fosters a culture of sustainability and motivates employees to participate in environmentally responsible behaviours that are socially acceptable (Norton et al., 2015; Székely & Knirsch, 2005). Thus, the impact of responsible leadership on OCBE via the CSR perspective needs deeper understanding (Han et al., 2019).

The theory states that organizational factors have a direct and indirect effect on the behaviour of employees by providing a controlled environment. This environment is developed by adopting organizational-level strategies and policies that will motivate employees to behaviour in an expected manner. The present discourse is grounded in the context–behaviour theory, which posits that organizational contexts, including the CSR perspective and responsible leadership, exert an influence on the green behaviour of individual employees. Leroy et al. (2018) explained that factors such as CSR perspective and responsible leadership can directly improve how green employees behave at work. Figure 1 represents the conceptual model of the study.

Figure 1.

Note: ––––, direct relationship; -------, mediation relationship.

H₄: The CSR perspective mediates the relationship between responsible leadership and OCBE.

Methodology

The data were collected using a survey questionnaire. The study uses structured measures with high levels of reliability and validity. The questionnaire was distributed between November 2021 and January 2023 among 700 employees working in Hyderabad, Mumbai, Pune, Bangalore and Delhi NCR. The study adopted multistage sampling to collect the data from the representative sample. In stage 1, the stratified sampling technique (Ahmed et al., 2020) was used where employees working in major five IT hubs of India from ‘India’s Top Tech Cities’ were considered (Data Quest, 2020). The employees who are working in IT companies that have employed more than 500 employees and a turnover of more than 50 crore were considered for further selection as these organizations will have the bandwidth to adopt sustainable practices. Names of companies were extracted using prowess and financial reports. The number of companies selected from Hyderabad, Mumbai, Pune, Bangalore and Delhi NCR were 17, 22, 9, 33 and 24, respectively. In stage 2, the purposive sampling technique is used to reach the sample of the study. The HR managers and respondents were contacted through LinkedIn, E-mail and personal connections. The study gathered a total of 540 responses, with 37 of them being excluded due to incomplete responses. This resulted in a final sample size of 503 valid questionnaires.

The IT employees were selected for three reasons. First, the IT sector is among the top organizations to be ranked in the Dow Jones Sustainability Index. The IT sector consumes a huge amount of resources; so this sector holds a large amount of scope for implementing green initiatives. These organizations have invested a huge amount in terms of CSR or sustainable practices, and act as responsible entities in society. Second, the IT sector is expanding at an exponential level, providing employment to a large workforce (Sun, 2022). If this workforce embraces green behaviour, it can lead to an enhanced awareness level regarding the crucial urgency of embracing pro-environment behaviour among individuals. In the long run, the implementation of such pro-environmental practices is expected to yield mutually beneficial outcomes for both the workforce and the company. Third, IT companies, being a part of society, will act as role models for other industries in embracing environment-friendly behaviour.

The study sample consisted of 67% male participants and 33% female participants. The study found that the participants had a mean age of 27 years, an average job tenure of 3 years, and the majority of them, specifically 455 individuals (90.5%), held a graduation or master’s degree. The sample population consisted of 503 respondents, out of whom 139 (27.6%) lived in Mumbai, 141 (28%) in Delhi NCR, 109 (21.7%) in Bangalore, 69 (13.7%) in Hyderabad and 45 (8.9%) in Pune. More than 50% (65%) of participants were working at the junior level followed by 27.6% at the middle and 7.3% at the senior level. We consider demographic factors such as gender, age, location and tenure as control variables (Singh & Bamel, 2020; Su & Swanson, 2019).

Study Measures

Responsible Leadership

Responsible leadership is measured using the Voegtlin et al. (2012) scale. The items are ‘My direct supervisor demonstrates awareness of the relevant stakeholder claims’, ‘My direct supervisor considers the consequences of decisions for the affected stakeholders’, and ‘My direct supervisor involves the affected stakeholders in the decision-making process’. Participants’ responses were recorded on a seven-point Likert scale.

CSR Perspective

The CSR perspective was measured using the Turker (2009) scale. The sample items are ‘Our company makes investment to create a better life for future generations’, ‘Our company implements special programs to minimize its negative impact on the natural environment’ and ‘Our company policies encourage the employees to develop their skills and careers’. Participants’ responses were recorded on a seven-point Likert scale.

OCBE

OCBE was measured using Boiral and Paille (2012) scale. The items are ‘During work, I weigh my actions before doing something that could affect the environment’, ‘I voluntarily conduct environmental actions and initiatives in my daily activities at work’, and ‘I stay informed about my environmental initiatives of the organization’. Participants’ responses were recorded on a seven-point Likert scale.

Common Method Bias (CBM)

CMB, also known as common method bias, is a significant issue that researchers need to address in survey-based studies (Podsakoff et al., 2003; Schwarz et al., 2017). The concept of CMB pertains to the extent of covariance observed among the measured items in a study, which can be attributed to the fact that the data were obtained from a single source (Hair et al., 2014; Podsakoff et al., 2003). Efforts were implemented to ensure the identity and confidentiality of the participants. The participants were given explicit and comprehensive guidance to assist them in successfully completing the survey (Podsakoff et al., 2003; Reio, 2010; Schwarz et al., 2017). Furthermore, the single-factor test of Harman (1976) was conducted in order to determine CMB. The exploratory phase encompassed the inclusion of all 14 things. The study employed factor analysis, specifically utilizing principal component analysis with varimax rotation, to examine the data. The exploratory endeavour factor analysis procedure yielded three factors, with the first factor explaining 32% of the variance, which is lower than the cut-off of 40% (Babin et al., 2016). Additionally, the variance inflation factor (VIF) test was employed to assess the presence of multicollinearity among the components. According to Hair et al. (2019), a VIF score exceeding 5 may potentially indicate the presence of CBM. Nevertheless, all constructs in our dataset exhibited VIF values below the threshold of 5 (Table 2). Thus, we infer that there were no significant concerns regarding CBM in our dataset.

Data Analysis

The proposed model is analysed in PLS-SEM software as it offers a more comprehensive and accurate measurement of the paths of a model (Hair et al., 2019; Legate et al., 2023). Figure 2 represents the model that is empirically tested.

Figure 2.

Source: Survey data.

Table 1 represents the values of ‘Cronbach alpha (α), composite reliability (CR) and average variance extracted (AVE)’ that are in an acceptable range (Hair et al., 2017) along with the mean, standard deviation and correlation (r). Also, the loading values of all items in Table 2 are above 0.6 (Hair et al., 2019). Thus, the model fulfils the reliability and convergent validity criteria. As the VIF values are below 5, the sample does not have a multicollinearity issue (Hair et al., 2019). To measure the discriminant validity, Fornell–Larcker (FL) criterion is found to be more accurate than HTMT, so the paper has considered FL criteria (Henseler et al., 2015). Table 3 represents that the model fulfils the FL criteria as the highlighted values are maximum in their respective rows and columns. Hence, the measurement model is reliable and validated (Hair et al., 2019).

Table 1.

Construct Reliability, Validity, Mean, Standard Deviation and Correlation.

Constructs	Cronbach’s Alpha	CR (rho_a)	CR (rho_c)	AVE	Mean	SD® CSR Perspecti®(r) OCBE
CSR perspective	0.80	0.80	0.82	0.67	5.32	1.37
OCBE	0.80	0.80	0.83	0.72	5.16	1.40	0.78**
RL	0.84	0.84	0.86	0.76	5.01	1.48	0.82**	0.76**

Source: Survey data.

Note: RL: responsible leadership, CSR: corporate social responsibility, OCBE: organizational citizenship behaviour towards environment (OCBE), r: Pearson correlation. ** significant at the 99% confidence level.

Table 2.

Loading and VIF Values for Each Item.

Items	Loading	VIF
CSR perspective 1	0.82	2.45
CSR perspective 2	0.81	2.32
CSR perspective 3	0.81	2.21
CSR perspective 4	0.81	2.61
CSR perspective 5	0.83	2.90
CSR perspective 6	0.82	2.25
OCBE1	0.82	2.27
OCBE2	0.87	2.77
OCBE3	0.86	2.58
OCBE4	0.86	2.90
OCBE5	0.84	2.54
RL1	0.89	2.12
RL2	0.89	2.30
RL3	0.85	1.81

Source: Survey data.

Table 3.

Fornell–Larcker Criterion and Model Fit Indicator.

Variable	CSR Perspective	OCBE	RL
CSR perspective	0.82
OCBE	0.77	0.85
RL	0.81	0.76	0.87
Model fit indicator
Indices	Model	Cut-off
SRMR	0.07	<0.08
GOF	0.68	>0.36
RMSEA	0.02	<0.05
CMIN/df	1.3	<3

Source: Survey data.

Notes: The bold values satisfy the Fornell-Larcker criteria.

The structural model measures the model fit and performs path coefficient analysis. The model is bootstrapped using 5,000 resamples to measure the coefficient of determination (R²) and effect sizes (f²) from Table 4 (Hair et al., 2019). Table 3 represents the model fit where the SRMR value is close to 0.07 (<0.08) (Hair et al., 2019), the goodness-of-fit (GOF) value is more than 0.68 (>0.36) (Tenenhaus et al., 2004; Wetzels et al., 2009), NFI values lie between 0 and 1 (0.78), RMSEA <0.05 (Browne & Cudeck, 1992), CMIN/df < 3 (Hair et al., 2010), thus concluding that the model is highly fit. The formula for GOF indices is: $GOF = \sqrt{A V E * R^{2}};$ $RMSEA = \sqrt{(Chi-square / df - 1) / (N - 1)}$ and CMIN/df = Chi-square/degree of freedom. As PLS-SEM does not emphasize GOF as compared to CB-SEM (Hair et al., 2019), the study has added a few other popular GOF indices for the model.

Table 4 represents that the R-square (R²) of the CSR perspective is 0.65, i.e., 65% of CSR is explained by responsible leadership. It is inferred that responsible leadership plays a crucial role in shaping the CSR perspective within an organization. Leaders who demonstrate responsible and ethical behaviour and prioritize stakeholder interests can foster a strong CSR perspective by stimulating the cognitive process among employees.

Table 4.

Direct, Indirect Effects, PLS Predict, R-square and F-square.

Path	Beta	SD	P Values		Findings
CSR perspective → OCBE	0.44	0.06	0.00		H₁ Supported
RL → OCBE	0.40	0.06	0.00		H₂ Supported
RL → CSR perspective	0.80	0.02	0.00		H₃ Supported
Mediating effect
	Direct Effect	Indirect Effect	Total Effect	P Values
RL → CSR perspective → OCBE	0.40	0.36	0.758	0.00	H₄ Supported (partially)
PLS predict Q² predict	0.57
R-square	CSR perspective: 0.65; OCBE: 0.64
Adjusted R-square	CSR perspective: 0.65; OCBE: 0.64
F-square	RL-CSR perspective: 1.84; CSR perspective–OCBE: 0.20; RL-OCBE: 0.16

Source: Survey data.

Similarly, the R² of OCBE is 0.64, representing that 64% of OCBE is explained by CSR perspective and responsible leadership together. This infers that both responsible leadership and a strong CSR perspective play a crucial role in promoting pro-environmental behaviours among employees. Leaders who act responsibly and foster a strong CSR perspective among their followers can significantly enhance employees’ engagement in discretionary behaviours that support environmental sustainability.

Table 4 represents the effect size of dependent variables. The effect size of responsible leadership on the CSR perspective is highest and very large (>0.35). In addition, the effect size of the CSR perspective and responsible leadership on OCBE is moderate as it lies between 0.15 and 0.35. It is inferred that responsible leadership (environmental factors) has a larger effect on the CSR perspective (cognitive process) when compared to the OCBE (behaviour).

Table 4 demonstrates the path coefficients for direct and specific indirect effects. It is concluded that the CSR perspective has a positive relationship with OCBE (β = 0.44, p < 0.05), responsible leadership has a positive relationship with the CSR perspective (β = 0.80, p < 0.05), and responsible leadership has a positive relationship with OCBE (β = 0.40, p < 0.05), therefore supporting H₁, H₂ and H₃. These results highlight the critical role of responsible leadership in fostering a strong CSR perspective. Also, it can be inferred that both responsible leadership and the CSR perspective have a positive influence on OCBE.

In addition, to measure the mediating effect of the CSR perspective on the relationship between responsible leadership and OCBE, the conditions of mediation are studied. The conditions of mediation include a significant relationship between the independent variable (responsible leadership) and dependent variable (OCBE) (β = 0.40, p < 0.05), a significant relationship between the responsible leadership and mediating variable (CSR perspective) (β = 0.80, p < 0.05), a significant relationship between the CSR perspective) and dependent variable (OCBE) (β = 0.44, p < 0.05) and a significant indirect effect of responsible leadership on OCBE via the CSR perspective (β = 0.36, p < 0.05). Thus, since our study fulfils all the conditions of mediation, we may conclude that the CSR perspective partially mediates the relationship between responsible leadership and OCBE. It is inferred that the effect of responsible leadership on OCBE is via the CSR perspective. This explains how the environmental factor–cognitive process–behaviour is linked with responsible leadership–CSR perspective–OCBE. When the CSR perspective acts as a mediator, the total effect of responsible leadership on OCBE is around 0.76 (addition of direct and indirect effects). It can be inferred that the impact of responsible leadership on OCBE is stronger in the presence of the CSR perspective as a mediator than in responsible leadership alone.

The Q² reflects the predictive relevance of a particular construct. The blindfolding procedure provides the construct’s cross-validated redundancy values that are used as a measure of Q². ‘The value of Q² larger than zero for a particular reflective endogenous construct indicates the path model’s predictive relevance for the particular construct’ (Hair et al., 2014, p. 178). The Q² of the OCBE is 0.57, which shows an acceptable degree of predictive relevance for responsible leadership and the CSR perspective on OCBE (Table 4). Thus, it can be concluded that responsible leadership and the CSR perspective are significant contributors to OCBE and enable pro-environment behaviour among employees in an organization.

Discussion and Implications

The study examines the relationship between responsible leadership and the CSR perspective with OCBE within context–behaviour framework and social cognitive theory. This framework suggests that the context (responsible leadership and the CSR perspective) of an organization has a direct effect on the behaviour (OCBE) of an employee. Responsible leadership is important for building an organizational context that promotes OCBE. Similarly, CSR policies and their awareness among employees also play a crucial role in encouraging pro-environment behaviour among employees. The result confirms De Roeck and Farooq’s (2018) findings, i.e., the CSR perspective and leadership have a positive interactive effect on employee socially responsible behaviour (Channa et al., 2021; Han et al., 2019; He et al., 2021; Javed et al., 2021).

In addition, the study adds to the social cognitive theory literature by highlighting the underlining mechanism of how the CSR perspective acts as a mediator in the relationship between responsible leadership and OCBE using a context–behaviour framework. This partial mediation may be a result of the linkage of social cognitive theory, i.e., the environment factor–cognitive process–behaviour with context–behaviour framework. When a responsible environment builds a strong cognitive CSR perspective of employees, it will lead to green behaviour among employees through observation and learning from their surroundings. The CSR perspective does not operate alone; it also requires support and commitment from top management, which can be viewed in the form of responsible leadership. So, both responsible leadership and the CSR perspective are found to be significant contributors to the green behaviour of IT professionals. The social cognitive theory explains that individuals learn from one another, and if a leader portrays responsible behaviour, the followers are more inclined to learn from their respective leaders through observation depict pro-environmental behaviour. Similarly, a team member with a high CSR perspective communicates with other team members, eventually exerting an effect on other team members’ CSR perspective. In this situation, responsible leaders will stimulate and synergize the influence of the CSR perspective on the other team members, and the whole team will be more inclined to embrace OCBE. Thus, the study highlights the combined and synergistic effect of both responsible leadership and the CSR perspective on OCBE, i.e., the relationship between responsible leadership and OCBE strengthens in the presence of the CSR perspective as a mediator. Our results confirm partial mediation that may occur due to organizational context factors such as shared green vision, employees’ green attitude or social green norms that may influence the OCBE in an organization.

Theoretical Implications

The findings of this study have the potential for both theory and practice. First, the study examined the relationship between responsible leadership and OCBE. This relationship confirms that responsible leadership (organizational factor) is one of the major antecedents of OCBE (behaviour). This shows that the interaction between the manager and follower plays a crucial role in building the behaviour of followers. According to the social cognitive theory, followers tend to imitate their supervisor’s behaviour through observation, i.e., if a supervisor tends to behave in a responsible manner, the follower’s inclination to depict responsible behaviour is high. Second, the CSR perspective (cognitive process) influences OCBE (behaviour). If employees’ mindset is trained for a pro-environment attitude or perception, it has a high probability that these employees will happily adopt environment-friendly behaviour. As per the social cognitive theory, the cognitive process has a direct influence on behaviour. The impact of aforementioned organizational context has a direct impact on the behaviour of employees. As the study explores the interrelation between CSR perspective, responsible leadership and OCBE, the analysis investigates the combined effect of key organizational contexts (the CSR perspective and responsible leadership) on OCBE (employees’ green behaviour). As per the social cognitive theory, the environmental factor (responsible leadership in this case) influences the cognitive process of employees by building strong perspective towards organizational CSR policies. This ultimately impacts the behaviour of employees and stimulates pro-environment behaviour among them (OCBE). The study concludes that there is a significant relationship between environmental factors and cognitive process; cognitive process and behaviour. The relationship of the CSR perspective with the environmentally conscious behaviour of employees was found to be contingent upon the presence of responsible leadership practices within the organization. The results offer a thorough comprehension of how intricate organizational contexts facilitate the adoption of environment-friendly behaviours among employees. This adds to the body of knowledge by validating the social cognitive theory in context–behaviour framework, especially in the IT sector of a developing nation. The results are consistent with prior research indicating positive outcomes with CSR (Ahmed et al., 2020; Sahar et al., 2023; Tian & Robertson, 2019) and responsible leadership (Afsar et al., 2016; Robertson & Barling, 2013) on OCBE. The combined effect of CSR perspective and responsible leadership has a synergistic effect on promoting OCBE, i.e., environmentally responsible behaviour among employees. The study adds to the existing literature on what contextual factors influence the behaviour of employees in organizations.

Third, this study delved into the fundamental ‘psychological mechanisms’ of how organizational contexts influence OCBE (green behaviour), drawing on ‘social cognitive theory’. The finding adds to the advancement of the context–behaviour framework. The proposal posits the role of responsible leadership on OCBE in the presence of the CSR perspective as a partial mediator, especially in the IT sector. The followers are expected to learn from their leaders and imitate them in the workplace. The study highlights the role of cognitive process in the linkage between environmental factors and behaviour, which explain how these factors may influence the behaviour of an employee. Numerous prior researchers have examined the effect of individual and organizational variables on green behaviour through the lens of other theories like ‘social identification theory and social exchange theory’ (Amrutha & Geetha, 2020; Cheema et al., 2020; Su & Swanson, 2019). This underlying mechanism of how cognitive process facilitates the relationship remained elusive. Thus, the study adds to the social cognitive theory literature by validating the linkage between the environmental factors, cognitive process and behaviour of an individual for embracing OCBE in an organization. Fourth, the study extends the boundary condition of social cognitive theory by applying the context–behaviour framework in a developing nation and emerging IT industry. This enlightens that there is a direct influence of various contextual factors (leadership, policies, perception) of an organization on the behaviour of the workforce in the service and consulting industry. As there is a linkage between these environmental factors, cognitive process and behaviour, further research is required to explore other contextual factors that may help in a deeper understanding of the cognitive mechanism that stimulates the change in behaviour of employees working in the IT industry. Thus, the study adds to the literature on how organizational contexts influence the behaviour of employees using the social cognitive theory in the IT industry with respect to the context–behaviour framework.

Managerial Implications

It is recommended that organizations allocate resources towards the CSR perspective and responsible leadership in order to motivate employees to adopt environmentally sustainable practices. The CSR perspective encompasses the employees’ perspective towards the policies and practices adopted by corporations to advance environmental protection and resource conservation (Székely & Knirsch, 2005). The CSR perspective also has a direct influence on the green behaviour of employees. For example, organizations may run campaigns that exhibit a strong responsible orientation towards the environment, thus strengthening a high CSR perspective. On the other side, informal interpersonal connections between leaders and followers have a positive effect on employees’ conduct. When followers observe their leaders as responsible, their perspective towards CSR is influenced, ultimately modifying employees’ behaviour. For instance, organizations can train their leaders to depict responsible behaviour within and outside organization while interacting with their followers. This external factor (responsible leadership) will stimulate the cognitive process of employees, developing their strong CSR perspective. Thereafter, this will promote green behaviour among employees (OCBE) which helps in achieving sustainable development goals. Thus, the effective implementation of CSR initiatives is contingent upon the endorsement of responsible leadership. Encouraging environmentally friendly behaviours among employees is a crucial objective for managers. The implementation of pro-environmental actions holds significant importance for both organizational advancement and the development of society in the long run.

Improving the eco-friendly conduct of employees has the potential to serve as a significant resource-efficient and cost-effective approach. Furthermore, this study proposes that adopting environment-friendly practices will result in green behaviour among employees, which eventually will help in attaining the environmental targets of the organization. For example, organizations may include verbal recognition of employees that display green behaviour by their responsible leaders, which will motivate employees to attain organizational environmental goals. This verbal recognition is cost-effective and resource-efficient. The CSR perspective may be seen as a means by which organizations communicate their commitment to their employees, society and sustainable development. According to Cheema et al. (2020), there is potential for the enhancement of organizational and individual transformation through the promotion of certain norms and values. Upon effective implementation, a high CSR perspective incentivizes employees to internalize the pro-environmental values and norms of an enterprise, leading to the effective embracement of OCBE. Consequently, it is imperative for enterprises to wholeheartedly embrace their responsibility towards the environment and society, and promote elevated levels of environmentally conscious conduct.

Limitations and Future Research

The present study acknowledges the existence of various limitations. Initially, the study focused on the perception of CSR and responsible leadership among employees at a specific moment in time and within particular cities in India. As a result, the research employed a cross-sectional design, which has limitations in elucidating causal relationships. Further investigation through longitudinal research is necessary to delve deeper into the causal relationships between contextual factors within organizations and environmentally friendly behaviours.

Second, the data utilized in this study were obtained solely from IT professionals, which unavoidably results in common variance. To mitigate the impact of common variance bias, the questionnaire items were randomized and subsequently evaluated to determine if the common variance bias was within acceptable limits.

The present study focused on examining the relationship of responsible leadership and the CSR perspective with OCBE. While CSR perspective research is valuable, it is imperative to develop a more comprehensive model that encompasses both organizational and individual outcomes. This will serve as a crucial step towards bridging the research gap on responsible leadership and negative aspects of the CSR perspective and should be considered a significant direction for future research. Further exploration of these mediating effects is necessary.

Conclusion

The primary objective of this study was to examine the interplay between organizational contextual factors, namely, CSR perspective and responsible leadership and their relationship with OCBE (green behaviours) among IT professionals. Drawing upon social cognitive theory, it was suggested that the combination of CSR perspective and responsible leadership would collectively and synergistically affect employee green behaviour.

The present study investigated the mechanism of the context–behaviour framework, with a specific focus on the interactive influence of these two organizational contextual factors. This study concludes that responsible leadership and the CSR perspective (context) have a positive relationship with OCBE (behaviour). This part answers what influences the behaviour of an employee in the context–behaviour framework. Furthermore, the study concludes that the effect of responsible leadership on OCBE is enhanced via the CSR perspective (mediator). The model demonstrates the underlying mechanism of how responsible leadership encourages employees to depict green behaviour in the presence of the CSR perspective as a mediator. This is particularly evident when the CSR perspective is combined with responsible leadership, it has the ability to gain a competitive edge in the IT industry, particularly by developing employees’ green behaviour. In other words, the linkage between environmental factors, cognitive process and behaviour is evident under the lens of social cognitive theory for this underlying mechanism. Additionally, antecedents of employee green behaviour include both organizational environmental factors and cognitive factors. Further research is necessary to gain a deeper understanding of other organizational contexts that may influence OCBE and help organizations achieve their environmental goals.

Footnotes

Declaration of Conflicting Interests

The authors declared no potential conflicts of interest with respect to the research, authorship and/or publication of this article.

Funding

The authors received no financial support for the research, authorship and/or publication of this article.

References

Afsar

, Al-Ghazali

B. M.

, Rehman

Z. U.

, & Umrani

W. A.

(2020). The moderating effects of employee corporate social responsibility motive attributions (substantive and symbolic) between corporate social responsibility perceptions and voluntary pro-environmental behavior. Corporate Social Responsibility and Environmental Management, 27(2), 769–785.

Afsar

, Badir

, & Kiani

U. S.

(2016). Linking spiritual leadership and employee pro-environmental behavior: The influence of workplace spirituality, intrinsic motivation, and environmental passion. Journal of Environmental Psychology, 45, 79–88.

Ahmed

, Zehou

, Raza

S. A.

, Qureshi

M. A.

, & Yousufi

S. Q.

(2020). Impact of CSR and environmental triggers on employee green behavior: The mediating effect of employee well-being. Corporate Social Responsibility and Environmental Management, 27, 2225–2239.

Amrutha

V. N.

, & Geetha

S. N.

(2020). A systematic review on green human resource management: Implications for social sustainability. Journal of Cleaner Production, 247, 119131.

Babin

B. J.

, Griffin

, & Hair

J. F.

(2016). Heresies and sacred cows in scholarly marketing publications. Journal of Business Research, 69, 3133–3138.

Baldassari

, Eberhard

, Jiang

, Muller-Camen

, Obereder

, Schiffinger

, & Thiele

(2023). Looking up and fitting in: Team leaders’ and members’ behaviors and attitudes toward the environment in an MNC. Human Resource Management, 62(3), 267–282.

Bandura

(1986). Social foundations of thought and action: A social cognitive theory. Journal of Applied Psychology, 12(1), 169.

Bandura

(1991). Social cognitive theory of self-regulation. Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, 50(2), 248–287.

Bandura

(2001). Social cognitive theory: An agentic perspective. Annual Review of Psychology, 52(1), 1–26.

10.

Biswas

, Manna

, & Pahari

(2023). Technology management (TM) on corporate sustainability performance (CSP): The moderating role of total quality management (TQM). FIIB Business Review, 23197145231168726.

11.

Boiral

, & Paillé

(2012). Organizational citizenship behaviour for the environment: measurement and validation. Journal of Business Ethics, 109(4), 431–445.

12.

Browne

M. W.

, & Cudeck

(1992). Alternative ways of assessing model fit. Sociological Methods and Research, 21, 230–258.

13.

Channa

N. A.

, Hussain

, Casali

G. L.

, Dakhan

S. A.

, & Aisha

(2021). Promoting environmental performance through corporate social responsibility in controversial industry sectors. Environmental Science and Pollution Research, 28, 23273–23286.

14.

Cheema

, Afsar

, & Javed

(2020). Employees’ corporate social responsibility perceptions and organizational citizenship behaviors for the environment: The mediating roles of organizational identification and environmental orientation fit. Corporate Social Responsibility and Environmental Management, 27(1), 9–21.

15.

Daily

B. F.

, Bishop

J. W.

, & Govindarajulu

(2009). A conceptual model for organizational citizenship behavior directed toward the environment. Business & Society, 48(2), 243–256.

16.

Data Quest. (2020). DQI Bureau, India’s top tech cities. https://www.dqindia.com/india-s-top-tech-cities/

17.

De Roeck

, & Farooq

(2018). Corporate social responsibility and ethical leadership: Investigating their interactive effect on employees’ socially responsible behaviors. Journal of Business Ethics, 151, 923–939.

18.

Deb

, Gillet

, Bernard

, & De

(2022). Examining the impact of corporate social responsibility on the financial performance of Indian companies. FIIB Business Review, 23197145221099682.

19.

Dong

, & Zhong

(2022). How and when responsible leadership facilitates work engagement: A moderated mediation model. Journal of Managerial Psychology, 37(6), 545–558.

20.

Graves

L. M.

, Sarkis

, & Gold

(2019). Employee pro-environmental behavior in Russia: The roles of top management commitment, managerial leadership, and employee motives. Resources, Conservation and Recycling, 140, 54–64.

21.

Hair

Jr , Black

, Babin

, & Anderson

(2010). Multivariate data analysis; multivariate data analysis: A global perspective (7th ed.). Pearson Education.

22.

Hair

J. F.

, Hult

G. T. M.

, Ringle

C. M.

, & Sarstedt

(2014). A primer on partial least squares structural equation modeling (PLS-SEM). Sage.

23.

Hair

J. F.

, Risher

J. J.

, Sarstedt

, & Ringle

C. M.

(2019). When to use and how to report the results of PLS-SEM. European Business Review, 31(1), 2–24.

24.

Han

, Wang

, & Yan

(2019). How responsible leadership motivates employees to engage in organizational citizenship behavior for the environment: A double-mediation model. Sustainability, 11(3), 605.

25.

Han

, & Wang

(2019). How responsible leadership predicts organizational citizenship behavior for the environment in China. Leadership & Organization Development Journal, 40(3), 305–318.

26.

Harman

H. H.

(1976). Modern factor analysis (2nd ed.). University of Chicago Press.

27.

, Morrison

A. M.

, & Zhang

(2021). Being sustainable: The three-way interactive effects of CSR, green human resource management, and responsible leadership on employee green behavior and task performance. Corporate Social Responsibility and Environmental Management, 28(3), 1043–1054.

28.

Islam

, Hussain

, Ahmed

, & Sadiq

(2021). Ethical leadership and environment specific discretionary behaviour: The mediating role of green human resource management and moderating role of individual green values. Canadian Journal of Administrative Sciences-Revue Canadienne Des Sciences De L Administration. 10.1002/cjas.1637

29.

Javed

, Akhtar

M. W.

, Hussain

, Junaid

, & Syed

(2021). “Being true to oneself”: The interplay of responsible leadership and authenticity on multi-level outcomes. Leadership and Organization Development Journal, 42(3), 408–433.

30.

Khan

N. U.

, Irshad

A.U.R.

, Ahmed

, & Khattak

(2021). Do organizational citizenship behavior for the environment predict triple bottom line performance in manufacturing firms? Business Process Management Journal, 27(4), 1033–1053.

31.

Kim

, Kim

, Jackson

S. E.

, & Ployhart

R. E.

(2014). Multilevel influences on voluntary workplace green behavior: Individual differences, leader behavior, and coworker advocacy. Journal of Management, 20(10), 1–24.

32.

Kim

Y. J.

, Kim

W. G.

, Choi

H. M.

, & Phetvaroon

(2019). The effect of green human resource management on hotel employees’ eco-friendly behavior and environmental performance. International Journal of Hospitality Management, 76(August 2017), 83–93.

33.

Legate

A. E.

, Hair

J. F.

Jr , Chretien

J. L.

, & Risher

J. J.

(2023). PLS-SEM: Prediction-oriented solutions for HRD researchers. Human Resource Development Quarterly, 34(1), 91–109.

34.

Leroy

, Segers

, Dierendonck

D. V.

, & Hartog

D. D.

(2018). Managing people in organizations: Integrating the study of HRM and leadership. Human Resource Management Review, 28(3), 249–257.

35.

, Liang

, Zhang

, & Li

(2022). Impact of environmentally specific transformational leadership on organizational citizenship behavior for the environment: The role of moral reflectiveness and leader group prototypicality. Journal of Environmental Planning and Management. 10.1080/09640568.2022.2027748

36.

Luu

T. T.

(2019). Building employees’ organizational citizenship behavior for the environment. International Journal of Contemporary Hospitality Management, 31(1), 406–426.

37.

Molla

, Abareshi

, & Cooper

(2014). Green IT beliefs and pro-environmental IT practices among IT professionals. Information Technology and People, 27(2), 129–154. 10.1108/ITP-10-2012-0109

38.

Muñoz-Pascual

, Curado

, & Galende

(2021). How does the use of information technologies affect the adoption of environmental practices in SMEs? A mixed-methods approach. Review of Managerial Science, 15(1), 75–102. 10.1007/s11846-019-00371-2

39.

Norton

T. A.

, Parker

S. L.

, Zacher

, & Ashkanasy

N. M.

(2015). Employee green behavior: A theoretical framework, multilevel review, and future research agenda. Organization and Environment, 28(1), 103–125. 10.1177/1086026615575773

40.

Ojo

A. O.

(2022). Motivational factors of pro-environmental behaviors among information technology professionals. Review of Managerial Science, 16(6), 1853–1876. 10.1007/s11846-021-00497-2

41.

Ojo

A. O.

, Raman

, & Downe

A. G.

(2019). Toward green computing practices: A Malaysian study of green belief and attitude among information technology professionals. Journal of Cleaner Production, 224, 246–255. 10.1016/j.jclepro.2019.03.237

42.

Paul

, Bamel

, Ashta

, & Stokes

(2019). Examining an integrative model of resilience, subjective well-being and commitment as predictors of organizational citizenship behaviours. International Journal of Organizational Analysis, 27(5), 1274–1297.

43.

Podsakoff

P. M.

, MacKenzie

, Lee

, & Podsakoff

N. P.

(2003). Common method biases in behavioural research. MIS Quarterly, 30(1), 115–141.

44.

Priyankara

H. P. R.

, Luo

, Saeed

, Nubuor

S. A.

, & Jayasuriya

M. P. F.

(2018). How does leader’s support for environment promote organizational citizenship behaviour for environment? A multi-theory perspective. Sustainability, 10(1), 271.

45.

Reio

T. G.

Jr. (2010). The threat of common method variance bias to theory building. Human Resource Development Review, 9(4), 405–411.

46.

Renwick

D. W. S.

, Redman

, & Maguire

(2013). Green Human Resource Management: A Review and Research Agenda. International Journal of Management Reviews, 15(1), 1–14. 10.1111/(ISSN)1468-2370/homepage/teaching

47.

Robertson

J. L.

, & Barling

(2013). Greening organizations through leaders ’ influence on employees ’ pro-environmental behaviors. Journal of Organizational Behaviour, 194, 176–194. 10.1002/job

48.

Robertson

J. L.

, & Barling

(2017). Toward a new measure of organizational environmental citizenship behavior. Journal of Business Research, 75, 57–66. 10.1016/j.jbusres.2017.02.007

49.

Sahar

N. E.

, Zawawi

, Jaharuddin

N. S.

, & Abbasi

M. A.

(2023). Responsible leadership and organisational citizenship behaviour for the environment: Mediated by environmental corporate social responsibility. International Journal of Ethics and Systems.

50.

Schwarz

, Rizzuto

, Carraher-Wolverton

, Roldán

J. L.

, & Barrera-Barrera

(2017). Examining the impact and detection of the ‘urban legend’ of common method bias. Data Base for Advances in Information Systems, 48(1), 93–119.

51.

Singh

, & Bamel

(2020). Can transcendence be attained through mindfulness? The mediating role of meaningful work. Journal of Organizational Effectiveness: People and Performance, 7(3), 257–273.

52.

, & Swanson

S. R.

(2019). Perceived corporate social responsibility’s impact on the well-being and supportive green behaviors of hotel employees: The mediating role of the employee–corporate relationship. Tourism Management, 72, 437–450.

53.

Sun

(2022, August 17). India: Employment in IT-BPM industry 2022. Statista. https://www.statista.com/statistics/320729/india-it-industry-direct-indirect-employment/

54.

Székely

, & Knirsch

(2005). Responsible leadership and corporate social responsibility: Metrics for sustainable performance. European Management Journal, 23(6), 628–647.

55.

Tenenhaus

, Amato

, & Esposito Vinzi

(2004, June). A global goodness-of-fit index for PLS structural equation modelling. In Proceedings of the XLII SIS Scientific Meeting, 1(2), 739–742.

56.

Tian

, & Robertson

J. L.

(2019). How and when does perceived CSR affect employees’ engagement in voluntary pro-environmental behavior? Journal of Business Ethics, 155(4), 399–412.

57.

Tian

, & Suo

(2021). The trickle-down effect of responsible leadership on employees’ pro-environmental behaviors: Evidence from the hotel industry in China. International Journal of Environmental Research and Public Health, 18(21), 11677.

58.

Turker

(2009). Measuring corporate social responsibility: A scale development study. Journal of Business Ethics, 85, 411–427

59.

Unsworth

K. L.

, Dmitrieva

, & Adriasola

(2013). Changing behaviour: Increasing the effectiveness of workplace interventions in creating pro-environmental behaviour change. Journal of Organizational Behavior, 34, 211–229.

60.

Voegtlin

, Patzer

, & Scherer

A. G.

(2012). Responsible leadership in global business: A new approach to leadership and its multi-level outcomes. Journal of Business Ethics, 105, 1–16.

61.

Wetzels

, Odekerken-Schröder

, & Van Oppen

(2009). Using PLS path modeling for assessing hierarchical construct models: Guidelines and empirical illustration. MIS Quarterly, 177–195.

62.

Wood

, & Bandura

(1989). Social cognitive theory of organizational management. Academy of Management Review, 14(3), 361–384.

63.

Xiao

, Zhou

, Yang

, & Qi

(2021). Embracing responsible leadership and enhancing organizational citizenship behavior for the environment: A social identity perspective. Frontiers in Psychology, 12, 632629.

64.

Yadav

, Rangnekar

, & Bamel

(2016). Workplace flexibility dimensions as enablers of organizational citizenship behavior. Global Journal of Flexible Systems Management, 17, 41–56.

65.

Zhang

, Liu

, & Zhang

(2023). How responsible leadership shapes followers’ low-carbon behavior: A dual-mediation model. Frontiers in Psychology, 13, 1086504. 10.3389/fpsyg.2022.1086504

66.

Zhao

, & Zhou

(2019). Exploring the impact of responsible leadership on organizational citizenship behavior for the environment: A leadership identity perspective. Sustainability, 11, 944–959. 10.3390/su11040944