Cultivating sustainable environmental performance: The role of green talent management,transformational leadership,and employee engagement with green initiatives

Abstract

BACKGROUND:

The success of organizations’ sustainable performance mainly depends on their human resource capital and for this organizations now need to focus on green human capital development programs including green talent management (GTM). GTM entails attracting, nurturing, and retaining those people who can promote the green initiatives of the organization.

OBJECTIVE:

This paper aims to investigate the impact of GTM, transformational leadership, and employee engagement on the sustainable environmental performance of organizations.

METHODS:

The data were collected from both academic and administrative employees in five Omani higher education institutions (HEIs). In total 367 questionnaires were collected using drop-off and pickup methods.

RESULTS:

The results of the study showed that green hard and green soft talent management (TM) and employee engagement with green initiatives are significant predictors of the sustainable environmental performance of HEIs. Moreover, transformational leadership can moderate the influence of green soft TM on employee engagement with green initiatives by strengthening the relationship.

CONCLUSIONS:

For sustainable performance and development, organizations especially HEIs need to actively assume their social responsibilities and implement sustainable environmental management. The present study provides meaningful implications for practitioners, educational policymakers, and leaders to promote GTM and employee engagement for sustainable environmental performance. Supporting green skill development, engaging employees with green initiatives, and promoting staff with green skills can help organizations particularly HEIs to increase their sustainable environmental performance and gain a competitive advantage.

Keywords

Human resource management green talent management leadership employee engagement sustainability sustainable environmental performance

1 Introduction

Around the world, there is a rapid change in the work dynamics and organizational success now relies on sustaining business through people and organizations are depending more and more on talent [1]. Organizations are trying to position themselves as strong employer brands by improving the process of talent management (TM), for this TM is now being considered a crucial strategic domain for the success and survival of the organizations [2]. Especially for learning organizations that turn new ideas into improved performance, where people continuously try to learn new things and technologies [3], and where capabilities are developed regularly to create a better future [4], TM can make a significant effect on the individual as well as organizational outcomes.

TM is known as the integrated organizational HR processes that are designed to attract, develop, motivate, and retain productive and engaged people [5]. In modern human resource management (HRM), green HRM (GHRM) contributes to attracting and developing TM in a way to attain an organization-wide environmental agenda and improves sustainable performance [6]. The success of organizations’ sustainable performance mainly depends on their human resource capital and for this organizations now need to focus on the green human capital development program which is green talent management (GTM) [7]. Where TM involves sourcing the right talent, developing a flexible talent base, and organizing the long-run strategies [2], the GTM, which consists of green hard and soft TM, entails attracting, nurturing, and retaining those people who can promote green initiatives of the organization [8]. Employees who perceive positive organizational support towards green initiatives are considered to be more engaged in organization-wide activities, tend to invest their energy in their jobs, and help to improve the sustainable performance of the organization [9].

The topic of TM has gained increasing attention in the last few years [10, 11] and research has been done in diverse emerging economies including Vietnam [9], India [11], Turkey [1] and Pakistan [12] in different sectors including manufacturing and services industry yet a little attention has been paid on the role of GTM towards organization’s sustainable performance via green hard and soft TM [8, 13], especially in higher education institutes (HEIs). In today’s world, the education sector is expected to face rapid economic, social, political, and technological changes [4] and for this higher education must be flexible enough to adapt to continuously changing situations and contexts. HEIs, which are essentially in the knowledge business because of their activities to create a learning environment and disseminate knowledge [14], are expected to play a key role in adopting new approaches and bringing alternate solutions to existing environmental issues [15]. Being learning organizations, HEIs can play an important role in sustainability by not only educating their students but also by promoting green activities among their employees [16]. This calls for a synergy between the employees and the work environment of HEIs for improvement in innovation and performance. For this reason, around the world, higher education organizations are now trying to make environmental management and green practices a part of their provided services [17]. However, this important sector has been widely neglected when it comes to studying green initiatives and activities [18, 19]. This study aims to provide new empirical evidence that can help policymakers and practitioners for significant development in the field of GTM and the sustainable environmental performance of learning organizations.

Furthermore, it has been observed that the researchers have examined the concept of talent management and its impact on sustainable performance in developed countries however less research has been conducted in developing countries, especially in the Middle East which has recently adopted TM strategies [20]. The Sultanate of Oman has its unique local context, geographical conditions, traditions, and cultural components and as per the Oman National Plan 2040 and its outcomes, the government goals and requirements of sustainability are highly considered [21]. For this Oman represents an interesting case to get insights into how GTM, transformational leadership, and employee engagement can work toward the sustainable performance of an organization.

In this respect, this study aims to investigate the effect of GTM in learning organizations, especially in HEIs on the sustainable environmental performance of an organization. This study mainly contributes to the literature and knowledge of GTM, transformational leadership, and sustainable performance of an organization via four core objectives. First, to empirically examine the role of GTM (hard and soft) on the sustainable performance of an organization. Second, to investigate the effect of GTM (hard and soft) on employee engagement with green initiatives. Third, to investigate the effect of employee engagement with green initiatives on sustainable performance and finally to understand if transformational leadership moderates the relationship between GTM and employee engagement with green initiatives.

The coming section of the paper will discuss the theoretical background and research framework with hypotheses development. After this will come the methodology section which will be followed by the results of the data analysis and implications. Finally, the limitations and suggestions for future research will be provided. The findings of the study will provide evidence-based implications to the stakeholders of HEIs about the importance and contributions of GTM practices, employee engagement, and the leadership role towards sustainable performance. The findings can help policymakers, especially in Oman to shape pro-environmental behavior to attract and manage those people who have an environmental mindset to fulfill their Oman Vision 2040.

2 Theoretical background & research framework

This section discusses the theoretical background and concepts for the development of the research framework for this study (Fig. 1).

Fig. 1

Research framework.

2.1 GTM and sustainable environmental performance

Researchers in the field of management consider an organization’s performance as an ultimate variable of interest as the performance of organizations can play an important role in the wealth of their countries. Successful managers always try to find new ways to develop, improve, and then sustain their organization for long-term survival. Various approaches have been researched to understand the sustainable performance of an organization including human resources, operations, and strategies [22].

Stakeholder theory is important to understand the structure and dimension of an organization’s social initiatives including environmental concerns and performance [23]. According to this principle [24], stakeholders are the groups, or organizations (internal & external) that are directly or indirectly influenced by the company’s operations and decisions. According to this theory [24], the value and performance of an organization can be determined by its strategic action to satisfy stakeholders’ expectations and interests. Even though stakeholders’ interests are always self-centered, the environment is one concern that is considered most important by all stakeholders. Within organizations leaders and managers along with the motivation of employees towards green activities can help to boost the organization’s work efficiency and environmental performance.

An organization’s competitive advantage comes from the abilities and talent of its internal stakeholders (e.g., employees, managers, directors) [25]. Talent can be considered a main success factor not only for improving but maintaining an organization’s performance. Nowadays organizations build sustainable staff and green organizational skills that help to improve their environmental performance, and sustainability and ultimately organizations gain a competitive edge over others [26]. The green behaviors of employees are vital for the employee’s commitment and the organization’s environmental performance.

Previously it has been observed that there is a positive relationship between TM and an organization’s sustainable performance [20]. However, the empirical research on the concept and role of GTM and its dimensions (green hard and soft TM) is limited and needs significant attention [13]. Green soft TM can be considered as an important aspect of TM that perceives the development and retention of green talent by managing and controlling via effective communication, involvement of the team in the decision-making process, and organizational support from the leaders and managers to boost such practices that not only support talent well-being welfare but also foster environmental sustainability initiatives among the green talented team [7]. On the other hand, green hard TM is a mechanistic, target-market oriented aspect of TM where organizations perceive their green talent as an important resource to manage effectively and efficiently and they control it using rigorous performance appraisal systems, hierarchical organizational culture, and bureaucratic structures to get a competitive advantage and to attain environmental sustainability [13]. Organizations need to attract employees who have suitable qualifications and this will help to attain sustainable organizational performance. Thus, we can assume that when organizations manage green talent, their sustainable environmental performance will increase which will lead them to the sustainability of the organizations. The scarcity of research on how green soft and hard TM guides this research and for this, the present study proposed the following hypotheses.

H1: Green hard TM has a positive relationship with sustainable environmental performance.

H2: Green soft TM has a positive relationship with sustainable environmental performance.

2.2 GTM and employee engagement with green initiatives

Employee engagement can be a positive, motivational mechanism that influences performance outcomes [27]. Individuals will be enthusiastic about their work activities when they are engaged in their work environment. Employee engagement toward green initiatives can be considered as his belief and attitude toward environmental protection [28]. According to the social exchange theory (SET) [29], employees with a greater level of engagement have a quality relationship with their organization which in turn increases their performance. The SET has been used to predict employee-level outcomes of HRM such as employee motivation, employee commitment, and intention to stay [30].

Applying SET for TM implies that when organizations invest in their employees, they feel obliged to the organizations with positive attitudes and better performance. Through TM, organizations try to identify talented employees who may perform very well as well as develop positive attitudes toward the organization, which may show commitment and staying intentions. Previously, it was found that factors including HRM practices and job characteristics are the common antecedents to work engagement [15]. Also, the HR process plays an integral role in transferring green policies into practices, and organizations consider that attracting new talent that is engaged with green activities can increase their reputation of being environmentally friendly [31].

Previous research has reasoned that an organization’s GHRM practices (including GTM) can be viewed as a motivational factor and are positively related to the work engagement of the employees [15]. It has also been argued that the presence of resources (GTM is the case of this study), encourages positive work-related behaviors among employees including engagement with green activities [12]. This helps to increase employees’ motivation to engage in green initiatives of the organization and they try to develop new ideas and alternates at the green level. GTM (hard & soft) practices of an organization can increase employee engagement with green activities. We can assume that through GTM, organizations encourage employees to get engaged in green activities through a series of practices. This helps the employees to continuously enhance their willingness for environment protection and sense of responsibility toward sustainability which eventually leads them to actively engage in green activities. Therefore, this study has the following hypotheses:

H3: Green hard TM is positively related to employee engagement with green initiatives.

H4: Green soft TM is positively related to employee engagement with green initiatives.

2.3 Employee engagement with green initiatives and sustainable environment performance

At present, organizations have shifted their attention from focusing only on product differentiation and productivity to focusing on their most important and reliable asset which is human capital. Organizations are considered to have sustainable organizational performance when they manage their human capital effectively and efficiently [20]. As discussed earlier, from the lens of SET, employees with a greater level of engagement are in quality relationships with their organizations which help to create favorable outcomes including performance. Similarly, when employees are engaged in green initiatives of the organization, they tend to pay attention to their environmental responsibilities within the organization. In terms of sustainable environmental performance, initially, satisfaction with organizational environmental engagement potentially leads employees to higher levels of green work engagement [32]. Next, employees who are highly motivated and are more engaged with the initiatives of an organization give a significant competitive advantage to the organization by increasing performance [33]. To increase sustainable environmental performance, employee engagement towards green initiatives can be vital. It has been found previously that the engagement of employees towards green activities can help to be a responsible organization and positively associate with environmental performance [34]. The success of the environmental performance of an organization depends highly on the employees who are engaged and motivated towards green activities and for this, the GTM is crucial as the employees with higher environmental knowledge and awareness will bring environmental management concepts and thus contribute to the sustainability of the organization [15]. Also, when employees’ values of being involved in green activities are congruent with the green values of organizations, this will have a positive effect on their work attitude, behaviors, performance, and ultimately on the organizational environmental performance [31]. Therefore, engagement of employees with green initiatives can increase the sustainable environmental performance of an organization. Based on these rationales, this study proposes the following hypothesis.

H5: Employee engagement with green initiatives is positively associated with the sustainable environmental performance of an organization.

2.4 The moderating role of transformational leadership between GTM and employee engagement with green initiatives

Organizational leaders are facing a great challenge to develop and retain talented staff for sustainable performance of the organization and global climate change [7]. For this, successful managers always try to explore new ways to develop, improve, and sustain their organizations as successful managers know how to achieve the long-term sustainability of an organization [20]. Within organizations, leadership style can play a crucial role in sharing knowledge, encouraging employees to actively participate in creative initiatives, and deriving work operations [35]. From the employees’ perspective, they need to obtain support and appreciation for their seniors for different work-related activities [26]. Leadership support is important to enabling an environment that cultivates talent and without this support, talent is neither secured nor will thrive [27]. Therefore, we can assume that leadership together with GHRM are involved in managing and engaging employees in green initiatives from their perspectives.

Transformational leadership plays an important role in fostering green engagement of employees at the workplace as such leadership style motivates followers to achieve environmental goals and inspires followers to engage in such initiatives that help to promote the environmental performance of the organization [36]. Drawing on SET [29], we contend that transformational leaders’ fair engagement in green initiatives including GTM motivates followers to reciprocate the positive engagement in green initiatives of the organization. Previously, it has been found that leaders play a positive role in interpreting environmental issues and developing such programs that shape corporate behavior [37]. Also, the green activities of organizations mainly depend on organizational culture and are shared by all the members of an organization. For the sustainable environmental performance of an organization, transformational leaders not only try to provide clear visions, inspiration, and motivation to the employees but they support the employees’ developmental needs toward the achievement of the organization’s environmental goals [38].

Leaders are the ones who can stimulate an employee’s work engagement by creating progressive policies and work practices. When leaders bring in rigorous appraisal systems, empower their employees, foster effective communication, and bring inclusiveness in decision-making and flexible control, they give adequate independence to execute their ideas and initiatives [7]. Thus, the influence of GTM (soft & hard) on employee engagement with green initiatives could be strengthened with transformational leadership. Therefore, this study proposes the following hypotheses:

H6: Transformational leadership moderates the relationship between green hard TM and employee engagement with green initiatives.

H7: Transformational leadership moderates the relationship between green soft TM and employee engagement with green initiatives.

As per the conceptual framework, seven hypotheses were developed based on theories and research gaps. The next section discusses the research methodology of the study.

3 Methods

As teaching and research organizations, HEIs are anticipated to play a vital role in adopting techniques and alternatives to address existing environmental concerns. In recent years, an increasing number of HEIs throughout the world have been inclined to implement green initiatives into their services [39]. Therefore, to advance the literature on GHRM in general and in higher education in particular, the data were collected from the staff working in five Omani HEIs. To reduce potential biased responses, the data were collected from both academic staff and administrative staff with experience of more than 2 years within the organizations. The list of all employees from universities was not available, hence this study employed a non-probability sampling technique, i.e., convenience sampling. In total 400 questionnaires were distributed among the teaching and staff members at the selected HEIs in Oman. Drop-off and pickup methods were used to increase the response rate. The respondents were informed about the main objective of the research and that their personal information would be kept confidential. Participation in the study was completely voluntary and anonymous. The applied procedures involving experiments on human subjects were done under the ethical standards of the Research and Ethics Committee of X (Approval No. UOB/REA/CB/2022-13).

3.1 Survey measurements

To measure independent, dependent, and moderating variables, the validated scales were adapted from the previous research. A five-point Likert scale was used, where “1: being “strongly disagree” and “5” being “strongly agree”. Fifteen faculty members from the targeted universities were involved in the pre-testing of the questionnaire. They checked the content and layout of the questionnaire. After pre-testing, some changes were made according to the comments from the reviewers.

Dimensions of GTM were measured by adapting the scales used by Ogbeibu et al. [13]. Green hard and soft TM were measured separately with seven items for each construct. An example of items for green soft TM is: “My organization offers green training, workshop opportunities, coaching, and courses that advance my knowledge on how to foster environmental sustainability.” Similarly, an example of items for green hard TM is: “Organisational support for developing team members is mainly geared towards increased task efficiency and productivity in green initiatives.” Transformational leadership was measured by adapting a nine-item scale used by Lin et al. [40]. An example of items for transformational leadership is: “Our leader communicates high-performance expectations.” Employee engagement with green initiatives was not measured by adapting a six-item scale from the work of Aboramadan [15]. A sample item was “I am enthusiastic about my environmental tasks at my job.” Finally, sustainable environmental performance was measured by adapting a fourteen-item scale by Anwar et al. [41]. Sustainable environmental performance dimensions included environmental policy and management, reducing energy consumption, reducing water consumption, waste management, reducing pollution, compliance with normative, biodiversity, and, environmental awareness, and research. An example of the items is “In my university, activities to promote environmental awareness are arranged.”

3.2 Common method variance

For the present study, the responses were collected from one single source i-e staff from educational institutes and to avoid unbiased responses, the confidentiality of the responses was assured to all respondents. Also, Harman’s Single Factor Method [42, 43] was used by entering all measurement items in a factor analysis to statistically check if the data was affected by common method bias. This error can impact the correlation among variables. The largest variance explained by the first factor was 27.30% which was less than 40%. The data would have common method bias if a single factor accounted for a large percentage (> 40%) of the variance in the data [44]. Our results indicate that data for the present study was not affected by common method bias.

3.3 Demographics

Initially, 400 questionnaires were distributed. However, 367 were useable after eliminating incomplete questionnaires. Hair et al. [45] suggested that a minimum sample size of 200 is good for quantitative structural equation modeling. The total sample size for the present study was 367 which exceeded the minimum number required by Hair et al. [45].

3.4 Data analysis and results

For the present study, partial least squares structural equation modeling (PLS-SEM) using the SmartPLS (4.0) software was used to test the proposed hypotheses. PLS-SEM was considered a more suitable method of analysis as it can handle complex models and the non-normality of data [44].

3.4.1 Measurement model results

Initially, the measurement model for the reflective items was analyzed. As in Table 2, the Cronbach’s Alphas, and composite reliability of all the constructs was above their threshold value of 0.70 [44]. Convergent validity was assessed with the values of average variance extracted (AVE) and outer loadings [44]. For loading, all loadings were more than the threshold value of 0.70 but five items (GHTM4, TLED1, TLED5, TLED7, TLED9) had values very close to 0.70. As per Rasoolimanesh & Ali [46], reflective items with loadings greater than 0.50 can be retained in the model. Thus, these items were also retained in the model. Table 2 also depicts that AVE values for all the constructs were greater than 0.50 which is the threshold value of AVE [47]. This tells that all the items were relevant to their respective constructs and explained more than 50% variance.

Table 1
Demographics

Demographic profile Frequency Percentage

Gender

Male 235 64

Female 132 36

Age (Years)

20–30 7 1.90

31–40 132 35.97

41–50 185 50.41

51 &above 43 11.72

Education

Master’s degree 202 55.04

Ph.D. 165 44.96

Total 367 100

Demographic profile	Frequency	Percentage
Gender
Male	235	64
Female	132	36
Age (Years)
20–30	7	1.90
31–40	132	35.97
41–50	185	50.41
51 &above	43	11.72
Education
Master’s degree	202	55.04
Ph.D.	165	44.96
Total	367	100

Table 2

Reliability and validity of constructs

Constructs	Item code	Factor loadings	Cronbach’s alpha	Composite reliability	Average variance extracted (AVE)	VIF
Employee engagement with green initiatives
	EWGI1	0.717				1.384
	EWGI2	0.893				4.786
	EWGI3	0.830	0.901	0.923	0.666	3.052
	EWGI4	0.822				3.114
	EWGI5	0.795				2.484
	EWGI6	0.829				2.685
Green Hard TM
	GHTM1	0.740				2.958
	GHTM2	0.748				3.511
	GHTM3	0.740				2.656
	GHTM4	0.684	0.861	0.892	0.543	1.738
	GHTM5	0.761				1.899
	GHTM6	0.758				2.061
	GHTM7	0.722				2.122
Green Soft TM
	GSTM1	0.753				2.262
	GSTM2	0.869				3.799
	GSTM3	0.849				4.170
	GSTM4	0.864	0.931	0.944	0.709	3.573
	GSTM5	0.856				3.453
	GSTM6	0.871				4.623
	GSTM7	0.825				2.627
Sustainable performance
	SPER1	0.836				3.252
	SPER2	0.884				4.375
	SPER3	0.883				4.181
	SPER4	0.870				4.042
	SPER5	0.880				4.759
	SPER6	0.895				4.799
	SPER7	0.854				3.785
	SPER8	0.871	0.975	0.978	0.757	4.333
	SPER9	0.864				3.953
	SPER10	0.887				4.732
	SPER11	0.869				4.148
	SPER12	0.860				3.882
	SPER13	0.861				4.123
	SPER14	0.862				3.970
Transformational leadership
	TLED1	0.617				1.409
	TLED2	0.851				3.962
	TLED3	0.855				4.065
	TLED4	0.855				4.128
	TLED5	0.662	0.9	0.919	0.56	1.946
	TLED6	0.765				2.940
	TLED7	0.616				1.525
	TLED8	0.763				2.316
	TLED9	0.698				2.140

Discriminant validity was assessed using the Heterotrait-Monotrait ratio (HTMT). As in Table 3, the values of the HTMT ratio were < 0.90 which explains the discriminant validity of the constructs [48].

Table 3

Discriminant validity (HTMT ratio)

Constructs	(1)	(2)	(3)	(4)	(5)
(1) Employee engagement with green initiatives
(2) Green hard talent management	0.480
(3) Green soft talent management	0.353	0.745
(4) Sustainable performance	0.445	0.683	0.738
(5) Transformational leadership	0.318	0.669	0.554	0.725

3.4.2 Structural model results

Next, the structural model was assessed and for this significance of path coefficients was checked. As in Table 4, the five direct relationships were significant. The moderating effect of transformational leadership between green hard TM and employee engagement with green initiatives was not significant but the moderating effect of transformational leadership between green soft TM and employee engagement with green initiatives was significant. This indicates that transformational leadership can strengthen the relationship between green soft TM and employee engagement with green initiatives.

Table 4
Hypothesis testing (Bootstrapping @5000 subsamples)

Hypotheses β SD t P values

H1: Green Hard TM ⟶ Sustainable performance 0.236 0.055 4.251 0.000^*

H2: Green Soft TM ⟶ Sustainable performance 0.493 0.053 9.290 0.000^*

H3: Green Hard TM ⟶ Employee engagement with green initiatives 0.409 0.081 5.075 0.000^*

H4: Green Soft TM ⟶ Employee engagement with green initiatives 0.134 0.070 1.921 0.055^

H5: Employee engagement with green initiatives ⟶ Sustainable performance 0.160 0.049 3.281 0.001^***

H6: Transformational leadership x Green Hard TM ⟶ Employee engagement with green initiatives 0.103 0.072 1.418 0.156^NS

H7: Transformational leadership x Green Soft TM ⟶ Employee engagement with green initiatives 0.193 0.070 2.735 0.006^***

Hypotheses	β	SD	t	P values
H1: Green Hard TM ⟶ Sustainable performance	0.236	0.055	4.251	0.000^***
H2: Green Soft TM ⟶ Sustainable performance	0.493	0.053	9.290	0.000^***
H3: Green Hard TM ⟶ Employee engagement with green initiatives	0.409	0.081	5.075	0.000^***
H4: Green Soft TM ⟶ Employee engagement with green initiatives	0.134	0.070	1.921	0.055^**
H5: Employee engagement with green initiatives ⟶ Sustainable performance	0.160	0.049	3.281	0.001^***
H6: Transformational leadership x Green Hard TM ⟶ Employee engagement with green initiatives	0.103	0.072	1.418	0.156^NS
H7: Transformational leadership x Green Soft TM ⟶ Employee engagement with green initiatives	0.193	0.070	2.735	0.006^***

Notes: ^***, ^**, NS denotes significance level @1%, 5%, and not supported respectively: β, SD, t denotes path coefficients, standard Deviation, and t statistics.

Later, the levels of R² (Coefficient of determination) were assessed. the R² value of 0.571 for sustainable environmental performance indicates that employee engagement accounts for a 57.1% variance in sustainable environmental performance. Similarly, the R² value of 0.273 shows that green hard and soft TM account for a 27.3% variance in employee engagement for green initiatives. The R² values of 0.26, 0.13, and 0.02 are described as substantial, moderate, and weak respectively [49]. Hence, we can assume that the relationships between our endogenous constructs and their respective exogenous constructs are substantial.

The effect size (f²) was used to evaluate the changes in R² values when the exogenous variable is omitted from the structural model. Five exogenous effect sizes on endogenous constructs were calculated based on the f² score interpretation of Cohen [49] which is 0.35 as a large effect, 0.15 as a medium, 0.02 as a small, and < 0.02 as a trivial effect. Green hard TM and green soft TM had a small effect on employees’ engagement with green initiatives. Green hard TM had a small effect of 0.06 on sustainable environmental performance while green soft TM had a medium effect of 0.31. Meanwhile, employee engagement with green initiatives also had a small effect of 0.05 on sustainable performance.

In the end, the predictive relevance (Q²) was assessed for the validity of the model [50]. All the values for the endogenous constructs were more than zero which indicates the predictive relevance and validity of the model.

4 Implications of the study

GTM is important to recruit, develop, and retain a talented green workforce for the improvement of the effectiveness of organizations. The present study has a definite contribution to the research field and has several theoretical and practical contributions which are discussed in this section.

4.1 Theoretical implications

From a theoretical perspective, the present study contributes to the literature by advancing knowledge in GTM which is now becoming a contemporary global concern of organizations. The actualization of the concept of GTM in the literature is minimal and there are quite a few studies that have worked on GTM and its role in organizational performance. The present study has a novel contribution to the literature by developing a new framework on how GTM can be used to increase the sustainable performance of organizations especially learning organizations, the HEIs. There is an emphasis on the implementation of GTM for the sustainable performance of an organization but little attention is given to understanding the relationship between GTM and sustainable performance. The present study extends the research on the conceptualization of GTM (soft & hard) and provides answers on how GTM can be linked to sustainable environmental performance via employee engagement with green initiatives and transformational leadership.

In terms of the relationship between GTM (hard & soft) and sustainable environmental performance, the results found a positive relationship between the two variables. The findings suggest that GTM can be helpful for the organizational sustainable performance of HEIs. Green soft TM can help the employees develop their skills, knowledge, and abilities related to sustainability and thus can help to increase their organizational commitment and ultimately the organizational performance [9]. Similarly, green hard TM deals with the quantitative, calculative, and business-strategic aspect that helps to determine the selection of new employees, financial benefits and structured performance appraisal helps to retain and gain a competitive advantage [51]. Previously, it has been found that TM activities can help organizations achieve sustainable performance [20] as the human workforce is essentially considered a resource for an organization to achieve organizational goals. Thus, both green hard and soft TM can help to increase the sustainable environmental performance of the organizations.

The present study provides evidence of the positive influence of green hard TM and green soft TM on employee engagement with green initiatives. The findings are similar to the findings of another study [7]. Importantly, that study demonstrated the significance of green hard and soft TM towards innovative work behavior. Engagement with green initiatives is one such work behavior that is not common in every employee. Hence, these two dimensions of the GTM contribute significantly to employee engagement with green initiatives. Considering the contribution of employee engagement with green initiatives towards the sustainable environmental performance of the HEIs, this study found that employee engagement significantly influences sustainable environmental performance. The findings are according to the findings of Anwar et al. [41] who found that with organizational support, employees get engaged in formal and informal environmental activities of the organizations that enable them to achieve the environmental objectives of the HEIs.

The moderating role of transformational leadership was found to strengthen the positive influence of green soft TM on employee engagement with green initiatives. However importantly, the moderating role of transformational leadership between green hard TM and employee engagement with green initiatives was insignificant. Previously, it was found that transformational leadership weakens the relationship between green hard TM and employees’ innovative work behavior in HEIs [7]. From the results of this study, we can assume that in organizations with formal and rigid work environments, it is important to understand the influence of transformational leadership towards green hard TM. The moderating effect of transformational leadership between green soft TM and employee engagement with green initiatives was significant. Odugbesan et al. [7] found that in HEIs, transformational leadership cannot moderate the relationship between green soft TM and employee engagement with innovative work behaviors. We can assume that with transformational leadership the leaders exhibit effective communication, flexible control, and inclusiveness in decision-making [2] which helps the employees to get engaged in green activities and other such activities that support sustainable performance of the organization for a competitive advantage.

4.2 Practical implications

For sustainable performance and development, organizations especially HEIs need to actively assume their social responsibilities and implement sustainable environmental management. For this, the role of the human resource department towards GTM can be crucial. The present study provides meaningful implications for practitioners, educational policymakers, and leaders to promote green hard and soft TM within educational institutes. The GTM process strongly exhibits an organization’s commitment to the environment.

For promoting environmental sustainability, it is central for organizations like HEIs to ensure that the talents are adequately nurtured and retained. Leaders need to support and recognize the significance of green values and competencies among their employees as a part of the long-term development process of their academic staff. Based on the significant moderating role of transformational leadership towards green soft TM and employee engagement towards green initiatives, the implication is that the universities in Oman need to develop more intensive leadership patterns to increase the green engagement of employees. The focus of the policies should be on establishing effective communication, decentralized decision-making, employee well-being, and welfare to capture green soft TM practices within the organizations and to neutralize the green hard TM. Also, leaders need to provide the necessary technological and financial resources to improve sustainable organizational performance.

Hiring new employees is quite tedious for managers. Selecting employees who are concerned about green activities can help to promote a green culture within the organizations. Similarly training to implement environmental initiatives can help to increase the motivation of the employees to voluntarily participate in the organization’s greening efforts beyond their job duties employees [41]. It is important to manage the ‘work-life’ balance of the employees along with their physical, emotional, and psychological wellness [2]. There is also a need to offer financial incentives, rewards, and recognition to motivate the employees intrinsically. Organizations can organize discussion forums and motivational workgroups for their employees. Nowadays the conventional approach of competitive compensation is not a viable solution instead organizations need to offer training, workshops, development programs, reward systems, and professional opportunities to retain employees. Organizations need to convey properly their environmental culture and green policies to engage them in green initiatives. By using performance evaluations, employee authorization, and salary management, the employees should be encouraged to exhibit their engagement with the green policies of the organizations. The organizations can link their engagement in green activities with their performance and salary. Also, by empowering employees, the employees can realize their beliefs and role towards environment protection within the organizational agenda and can also provide suggestions for the improvement of sustainable environmental performance. Finally, supporting green skill development, engaging employees with green initiatives, and promoting staff with green skills can help organizations particularly HEIs to increase their sustainable environmental performance and gain competitive advantage.

4.3 Limitations and future research suggestions

The present study has proven that green hard and green soft TM and employee engagement with green initiatives can be significant predictors of the sustainable environmental performance of HEIs. In addition, transformational leadership was found to moderate the influence of green soft TM on employee engagement with green initiatives. The model developed can open opportunities for further use by researchers and HR practitioners to develop a more complex and comprehensive model by adding other relevant indicators to this model. Future research can separately study the impact of green recruitment, green training, and green performance of employees toward sustainable performance. Also, a multilevel approach can be used to broaden the scope of the participants within the HEIs. The primary aim of the research was to examine the direct and moderating relationship between dependent and independent variables without introducing potentially confounding factors. For this, we did not include control variables as part of our research design. Future studies can use job categories (academic and administrative staff) or demographic variables as control variables to make findings more generalizable. The limitation of the study lies in the nonprobability sampling technique and focus on a single industry in a single country. Deeper insights into the present model could be obtained from the other sectors as different sectors adopt different ways to get engaged in sustainable development.

Ethical approval

The participation was anonymous, all participants were adults, no intrusive measures were used, and no deception of participants was used. A detailed explanation of the procedure is given in the methods section.

Informed consent

The data have been collected anonymously. The participants have consented to the use of the anonymized data for scientific purposes. A detailed explanation of the procedure is given in the methods section.

Conflict of interest

The authors declare that they have no conflict of interest.

Footnotes

Acknowledgments

The authors have no acknowledgments.

Funding

This research was funded by Poznan University of Technology, grant number 0811/SBAD/1071.

References

Glaister

, Karacay

, Demirbag

, Tatoglu

HRM and performance-The role of talent management as a transmission mechanism in an emerging market context, Human Resource Management Journal 2017;28(1):148–66.

Gardas

, Mangla

, Raut

, Narkhede

, Luthra

Green talent management to unlock sustainability in the oil and gas sector, Journal of Cleaner Production 2019;229:850–62.

Lewis

, Benjamin

, Juda

, Marcella

Universities as learning organizations: Implications and challenges. Educational Research and Review. 2008:289-93.

Purwanto

Effect of hard skills, soft skills, organizational learning and innovation capability on Islamic University lecturers’ performance. Systematic Reviews in Pharmacy. 2020.

Martin

Talent management: Preparing a “ready” agile workforce, International Journal of Pediatrics and Adolescent Medicine 2015;2(3–4):112–6.

Islam

, Hack-Polay

, Haque

, Rahman

, Hossain

Moderating role of psychological empowerment on the relationship between green HRM practices and millennial employee retention in the hotel industry of Bangladesh, Business Strategy and Development. 2022;5(1):17–29.

Odugbesan

, Aghazadeh

, Al Qaralleh

, Sogeke

Green talent management and employees’ innovative work behavior: the roles of artificial intelligence and transformational leadershiJournal of Knowledge Management

2023;27(3):696–716.

Umair

, Waqas

, Mrugalska

, Al Shamsi

Environmental Corporate Social Responsibility, Green Talent Management, and Organization’s Sustainable Performance in the Banking Sector of Oman: The Role of Innovative Work Behavior and Green Performance, Sustainability 2023;15(19):14303.

Bui

LTT

, Chang

Talent management and turnover intention: focus on Danang city government in Vietnam, International Review of Public Administration 2018;23(4):219–36.

10.

Al Ariss

, Cascio

, Paauwe

Talent management: Current theories and future research directions, Journal of World Business 2014;49(2):173–9.

11.

Chaudhary

Can green human resource management attract young talent? An empirical analysis, Evidence-based HRM: a Global Forum for Empirical Scholarshi 2018;6(3):305–19.

12.

Ali

, Bashir

, Mehreen

Managing organizational effectiveness through talent management and career development: The mediating role of employee engagement, Journal of Management Sciences 2019;6(1):62–78.

13.

Ogbeibu

, Chiappetta Jabbour

, Burgess

, Gaskin

, Renwick

DWS

Green talent management and turnover intention: the roles of leader STARA competence and digital task interdependence, Journal of Intellectual Capital 2022;23(1):27–55.

14.

Asiedu

, Anyigba

, Ofori

, Ampong

GOA

, Addae

Factors influencing innovation performance in higher education institutions, The Learning Organization 2020;27(4):365–78.

15.

Aboramadan

The effect of green HRM on employee green behaviors in higher education: the mediating mechanism of green work engagement, International Journal of Organizational Analysis 2020;30(1):7–23.

16.

Jam

, Jamal

Impact of green human resources management practices on organizational sustainability and employee retention: An empirical study related to educational institutions, iRASD Journal of Management 2020;2(1):38–48.

17.

Fawehinmi

, Yusliza

, Mohamad

, Noor Faezah

, Muhammad

Assessing the green behaviour of academics: The role of green human resource management and environmental knowledge, International Journal of Manpower 2020;41(7):879–900.

18.

Ababneh

OMA

How do green HRM practices affect employees’ green behaviors? The role of employee engagement and personality attributes, Journal of Environmental Planning and Management 2021;64(7):1–23.

19.

Salih

The Impact of Green Human Resources Management Practices on Organizational Excellence: an Empirical Study, Management and Economics Research Journal 2020;6(3).

20.

Al Aina

, Atan

The Impact of Implementing Talent Management Practices on Sustainable Organizational Performance, Sustainability 2020;12(20):8372.

21.

Muhannad Al-Jebouri

, Mohamed Saleh

, Sudharshan Raman

, Riza Atiq Abdullah Bin Rahmat

O.K.

, Awni Shaaban

Toward a national sustainable building assessment system in Oman: Assessment categories and their performance indicators, Sustainable Cities and Society 2017;31:122–35.

22.

Richard

, Devinney

, Yip

, Johnson

Measuring Organizational Performance: Towards Methodological Best Practice, Journal of Management. 2009;35(3):718–804.

23.

Yoon

, Chung

The effects of corporate social responsibility on firm performance: A stakeholder approach, Journal of Hospitality and Tourism Management 2018;37:89–96.

24.

Freeman

Strategic management: A stakeholder approach. Boston, Pitman. 1984.

25.

Kravariti

, Johnston

Talent management: a critical literature review and research agenda for public sector human resource management, Public Management Review 2020;22(1):75–95.

26.

Zhao

, Kusi

, Chen

, Hu

, Ahmed

, Sukamani

Influencing Mechanism of Green Human Resource Management and Corporate Social Responsibility on Organizational Sustainable Performance, Sustainability 2021;13(16):8875.

27.

Smit

, Schultz

, van Hoek

The relationship between talent management, transformational leadership and work engagement: An automotive artisan perspective. SA Journal of Human Resource Management. 2021;19.

28.

Zhu

, Tang

, Wang

, Chen

The Influence of Green Human Resource Management on Employee Green Behavior— A Study on the Mediating Effect of Environmental Belief and Green Organizational Identity, Sustainability 2021;13(8):4544.

29.

Blau

Exchange and power in social life. Wiley, New York, NY. 1964.

30.

Narayanan

, Rajithakumar

, Menon

Talent management and employee retention: An integrative research framework, Human Resource Development Review 2019;18(2):228–47.

31.

Gilal

, Ashraf

, Gilal

, Chaana

Promoting environmental performance through green human resource management practices in higher education institutions: A moderated mediation model, Corporate Social Responsibility and Environmental Management 2019;26(6):1579–90.

32.

Frare

, Colombo

, Beuren

Performance measurement systems, environmental satisfaction, and green work engagement. Revista Contabilidade & Finanças. 2022;33.

33.

Yuniati

, Soetjipto

, Wardoyo

, Sudarmiatin

, Nikmah

Talent management and organizational performance: The mediating role of employee engagement, Management Science Letters 2021;11(9):2341–6.

34.

Saeed

, Afsar

, Hafeez

, Khan

, Tahir

, Afridi

Promoting employee’s proenvironmental behavior through green human resource management practices, Corporate Social Responsibility and Environmental Management 2018;26(2):424–38.

35.

, Makhdoom

HUR

, Asim

Impact of Entrepreneurial Leadership on Innovative Work Behavior: Examining Mediation and Moderation Mechanisms, Psychology Research and Behavior Management 2020;13:105–18.

36.

Kura

Linking environmentally specific transformational leadership and environmental concern to green behaviour at work, Global Business Review 2016;17(3_suppl):1S–4S.

37.

Chou

Hotels’ environmental policies and employee personal environmental beliefs: Interactions and outcomes, Tourism Management 2014;40:436–46.

38.

Singh

, Del Giudice

, Chierici

, Graziano

Green innovation and environmental performance: The role of green transformational leadership and green human resource management, Technological forecasting and social change 2020;150:119762.

39.

Gill

, Ahmad

, Kazmi

The effect of green human resource management on environmental performance: The mediating role of employee eco-friendly behavior, Management Science Letters 2021;11(6):1725–36.

40.

Lin

, Dang

TTH

, Liu

CEO transformational leadership and firm performance: A moderated mediation model of TMT trust climate and environmental dynamism, Asia Pacific Journal of Management 2016;33(4):981–1008.

41.

Anwar

, Nik Mahmood

, Yusliza

, Ramayah

, NoorFaezah

, Khalid

Green Human Resource Management for organisational citizenship behaviour towards the environment and environmental performance on a university campus, Journal of Cleaner Production 2020;256:120401.

42.

Podsakoff

, Organ

Self-reports in organizational research: Problems and prospects, Journal of management 1986;12(4):531–44.

43.

Podsakoff

, MacKenzie

, Lee

, Podsakoff

Common method biases in behavioral research: a critical review of the literature and recommended remedies, Journal of applied psychology 2003;88(5):879–903.

44.

Hair

Jr , Sarstedt

, Hopkins

, Kuppelwieser

Partial least squares structural equation modeling (PLS-SEM): An emerging tool in business research, European business review 2014;26(2):106–21.

45.

Hair

, Black

, Babin

Multivariate Data Analysis. New Jersey, Pearson Prentice Hall. 2010.

46.

Rasoolimanesh

, Ali

Guest editorial, Journal of Hospitality and Tourism Technology 2018;9(3):238–48.

47.

Hair

, Hult

GTM

, Ringle

, Sarstedt

A Primer on Partial Least Squares Structural Equation Modeling (PLSSEM), 2nd Ed., Sage, Thousand Oaks, 2017.

48.

Henseler

, Hubona

, Ray

Using PLS path modeling in new technology research: updated guidelines, Industrial Management & Data Systems 2016;116(1):2–20.

49.

Cohen

Statistical power analysis for the behavioral sciences. 2nd ed. Hillsdale, N.J.: L. Erlbaum Associates; 1988.

50.

Geisser

A predictive approach to the random effect model, Biometrika 1974;61(1):101–7.

51.

Macfarlane

, Duberley

, Fewtrell

, Powell

Talent management for NHS managers: human resources or resourceful humans? Public Money & Management

2012;32(6):445–52.

Cultivating sustainable environmental performance: The role of green talent management,transformational leadership,and employee engagement with green initiatives

Abstract

BACKGROUND:

OBJECTIVE:

METHODS:

RESULTS:

CONCLUSIONS:

Keywords

1 Introduction

2 Theoretical background & research framework

2.2 GTM and employee engagement with green initiatives

2.3 Employee engagement with green initiatives and sustainable environment performance

2.4 The moderating role of transformational leadership between GTM and employee engagement with green initiatives

3 Methods

3.1 Survey measurements

3.2 Common method variance

3.3 Demographics

3.4 Data analysis and results

3.4.1 Measurement model results

Table 1 Demographics Demographic profile Frequency Percentage Gender Male 235 64 Female 132 36 Age (Years) 20–30 7 1.90 31–40 132 35.97 41–50 185 50.41 51 &above 43 11.72 Education Master’s degree 202 55.04 Ph.D. 165 44.96 Total 367 100

4.1 Theoretical implications

4.2 Practical implications

4.3 Limitations and future research suggestions

Ethical approval

Informed consent

Conflict of interest

Footnotes

Acknowledgments

Funding

References

Table 1
Demographics

Demographic profile Frequency Percentage

Gender

Male 235 64

Female 132 36

Age (Years)

20–30 7 1.90

31–40 132 35.97

41–50 185 50.41

51 &above 43 11.72

Education

Master’s degree 202 55.04

Ph.D. 165 44.96

Total 367 100