The current issue and full text archive of this journal is available on Emerald Insight at:

https://www.emerald.com/insight/0959-6119.htm

Green HRM
Developing faithful stewardship
for environment through green
HRM
Umair Ahmed 3115
Arab Open University Kingdom of Bahrain Branch, Manama, Bahrain
Received 21 September 2020
Waheed Ali Umrani Revised 7 December 2020
17 February 2021
Karachi School for Business and Leadership, Karachi, Pakistan 27 February 2021
Accepted 24 March 2021
Amna Yousaf
Department of Management and Marketing, Swinburne University of Technology,
Melbourne, Australia
Muhammad Athar Siddiqui
Karachi School for Business and Leadership, Karachi, Pakistan, and
Munwar Hussain Pahi
PAF KIET, Karachi, Pakistan

Abstract
Purpose – This paper aims to assess the nexus between green human resource management (GHRM)
practices, green culture, environmental responsibility and environmental performance (EP).
Design/methodology/approach – Using a supervisor-subordinated nested design and multi-time data
collection approach through convenience sampling, the authors obtained 330 responses from 15 hotels
operating in the metropolitan cities of Pakistan.
Findings – The study results indicate the prominence of GHRM practices toward enhancing hotels’ EP.
The authors also found green culture and environmental responsibility as potential mediators in the
direct association between GHRM and EP. In addition, the findings suggest that the GHRM and
environmental association can be deeper when individuals exhibit green values and showcase green
responsibility about their environment. Taken together, the findings of the present study found support
for all direct and indirect hypothesized relationships hence, forwarding notable implications for theory
and practice.
Research limitations/implications – This paper forwards both theoretical and practical implications.
Drawing upon ability-motivation-opportunity (AMO) theory, this paper asserts that GHRM practices shall be
used to improve EP through green values and environmental responsibility. The authors specifically suggest
that pro-environment personnel practices can nourish green culture and a pro-environment sense of
responsibility that facilitates in robust pro-environment results.
Originality/value – The study advances and addresses gaps found in prior studies to help support
organizational scholars, practitioners and pro-environment enthusiasts to understand the interplay of GHRM,
culture, responsibility and EP.
Keywords Environmental performance, Environmental responsibility, AMO theory, Green culture,
Green HRM International Journal of
Contemporary Hospitality
Paper type Research paper Management
Vol. 33 No. 10, 2021
pp. 3115-3133
© Emerald Publishing Limited
0959-6119
Conflict of Interest statement: The authors declare no conflict of interest. DOI 10.1108/IJCHM-09-2020-1066
IJCHM Introduction
33,10 Preservation of the environment has emerged as one of the most critical issues over the past
decades. Due to the global awakening of environmental protection, stakeholders are forcing
businesses to have a responsible behavior and outlook (Paillé et al., 2013; Yu and
Ramanathan, 2015). As a result, nearly every industry at present is striving to embrace pro-
environment procedures and practices ranging from manufacturing (Melnyk et al., 2003) to
3116 service (Rawashdeh, 2018). This has also stemmed from studies in the hospitality and
tourism sector (Gürlek and Tuna, 2018; Hsiao and Chuang, 2016; Siyambalapitiya et al.,
2018; Zientara and Zamojska, 2018) both at consumer and employee levels. However, critical
appraisal of hospitality and tourism literature indicates that most of these empirical
attempts toward environmental research have remained consumer inclined. For example, a
study by Kang et al. (2012) investigated how environmental concerns shape consumer
willingness to stay in green hotels. Consequently, little empirical attention hints regarding
employee perspective on issues, behavior and the response of hotel staff toward
environmental prospects (Harris and Crane, 2002; Kim et al., 2019).
Extant literature suggests that personnel-related prospects such as human resource
management (HRM) can play an instrumental role in fostering pro-environment behaviors and
outcomes (Rawashdeh, 2018; Singh et al., 2020; Umrani et al., 2020). Typically, green human
resource management (GHRM) consists of providing eco-friendly staffing, training,
involvement, appraisal, rewards and compensation practices (Jerónimo et al., 2020; Kim et al.,
2019). GHRM practices can be instrumental in harnessing environment management prospects,
thus facilitating the achievement of the pro-environment objectives of the business (Pham et al.,
2019; Paillé et al., 2014). Importantly, the latest studies on the topic have strengthened
arguments highlighting the promising role of GHRM by outlining its role in predicting green
innovative work behavior (Aboramadan, 2020); green commitment (Ren et al., 2020) and
corporate social responsibility (CSR) practices (de Souza Freitas et al., 2020). Nevertheless, only
recently, scholars have realized and thereby underscored the significance of integrating
conventional HRM practices with pro-environment savor (GHRM) (de Souza Freitas et al., 2020;
Gilal et al., 2019; Obeidat et al., 2020; Renwick et al., 2013; Umrani et al., 2020). Typically, this is,
as GHRM practices such as setting green goals for employees, pro-environment learning and
development activities for green values and knowledge, consideration of green behaviors in
performance appraisals, rewards and compensation (Dumont et al., 2017) can proactively equip
employees with needed skills, abilities and motivation through harnessing pro-environment
values and beliefs, i.e. Green culture (Roscoe et al., 2019). These results help to assert how
environment friendly personnel practices can help develop a culture that values and energizes
employees to further the pro-environmental performance. Scholarly evidence supports our
assertion, suggesting that HRM plays a vital role in shaping the right values, beliefs and
behaviors through transforming work practices (Roscoe et al., 2019). Notably, Pellegrini et al.
(2018) pinpointed the eminence of refining HR practices to enhance employee prospects that
lead to cultivating a culture for sustainable development. Accordingly, Tahir et al. (2019), in
their recent review, have emphasized the need for businesses to infuse green culture for
sustainable behaviors and outcomes. This is why culture appears to be one of the most vital
factors affecting employees’ pro-environmental behaviors (Attaianese, 2012). However, a
paucity of research evidence exists on such a relationship in the available literature,
particularly concerning the hospitality industry, thus outlining an important empirical gap.
Notably, scholarly attention in the recent past on the concept of environmental
performance in the hospitality domain signifies its increased realization and strategic
prominence for the operators of this industry, such as hotels (Asadi et al., 2020; Pham et al.,
2019; Umrani et al., 2020). Therein, keeping in view the corporate demand for the hospitality
sector to be sustainable, scholars have started advocating the need for investigating GHRM Green HRM
prospects and their influence on pro-environment outcomes such as environmental
performance (Roscoe et al., 2019; Sainaghi et al., 2018). Thus, we speculate GHRM to enhance
hotels’ environmental performance positively. In addition, GHRM practices may also
engender green culture and environmental responsibility, which later contribute to furthering
environmental performance. For this, we establish the following research questions:

RQ1. What are the antecedents of environmental performance in the context of hotels? 3117
RQ2. Are there any mediating influences that capture the influence of GHRM practices
and manifest in predicting environmental performance?
RQ3. Can the association between GHRM and environmental performance association
be sequentially mediated?
To find possible answers to the above questions, we drew upon ability-motivation-
opportunity (AMO) theory (Appelbaum et al., 2000) to examine GHRM and environmental
outcomes. As a theoretical paradigm, AMO holds an important position in the HRM domain
(Appelbaum et al., 2000). It sheds light on the significance of HR systems on employees and
organizational performance as a whole. Prominent studies have used AMO to examine
similar topics (Pham et al., 2019; Singh et al., 2020). By obtaining multi-level and multi-time
responses from hotels located in the Karachi, Islamabad and Lahore cities of Pakistan, we
confirmed GHRM practices and environmental performance association. Accordingly, the
results also landed support for the mediation of environmental responsibility and green
culture. Notably, empirical findings also endorsed the sequential mediation between in the
GHRM-environmental performance relationship.
The novelty of the study comes from its five key contributions. First is its advancement of
the AMO theory (Appelbaum, 2000) to understand GHRM and environmental performance
associations, thereby offering a novel lens of examination. Second, linking GHRM practices,
green culture, environmental responsibility and environmental performance in the hotel sector,
thus paying scholarly attention to the rarely examined associations in the sector (Shafaei et al.,
2020). Third, enriching literature with empirical evidence on the mediating role of environmental
responsibility and green culture. Fourth, confirming the sequentially mediated association of
GHRM and environmental performance by environmental responsibility and green culture.
Finally, offering substantial implications for practitioners and policymakers in the hospitality
sector in general and hotels in particular on the need for investing to infuse HRM practices in
pro-environmental color to develop a sense of environmental concern among employees and
establish green values and beliefs to further environmental performance.
The proceeding sections discuss the theoretical background and hypotheses in detail.
Following this, the paper talks about the methodology, results and discussion. Finally, the
paper provides implications for theory and practice, concluding with limitations and scope
for future studies (Figure 1).

Hypotheses development and literature review

HRM function has a long history of strategic vitality for businesses across all major aspects
(Boselie et al., 2001; Channa et al., 2019; Pereira et al., 2018). In specific, HRM has a more
notable role in organizational performance, as it furthers organizational practice and
business efficiency (Gupta, 2019; Kim et al., 2019; Podgorodnichenko et al., 2020). These
studies have indicated that a robust HR system of a business entity can enhance responsive
working, thus resulting in higher performance. Equally, studies also present its acute role in
improving environmental performance. Work by Guerci et al. (2016), for example, confirmed
IJCHM Environmental
33,10 Responsibility

Hotel’s
Green HRM Environmental
performance
3118

Figure 1. Green Culture

Research framework

the instrumental role of various green HR practices such as green hiring, green training and
green performance management and compensation in boosting environmental performance.
In parallel, review work by Renwick et al. (2013) also confirmed and landed support to HRM
and the firm’s environmental performance link. Generally, pro-environment HR practices
such as green training and green performance energize employees to be more willing to
engage in green initiatives (Pham et al., 2020). This pro-environment HR practice (GHRM) is
a recent research trend attracting organizational scientists enthusiastic about sustainable
development through employee involvement (de Souza Freitas et al., 2020; Jeronimo et al.,
2020; Yong et al., 2019). Therein, studies have empirically confirmed the polygonal
significance of GHRM for employee and organizational outcomes (Islam et al., 2020; Al-Hajri,
2020).
Parallel to this, some shreds of evidence also indicate GHRM and different sustainable
outcomes in the hospitality and tourism industry. For instance, empirical findings of a
recent study conducted in the Malaysian hotel sector confirmed the role of GHRM in
boosting environmental performance (Shafaei et al., 2020). Similarly, a study by Harb and
Ahmed (2019) in Egyptian hospitality sector pinpointed toward the prediction of prospects
such as financial stability via GHRM. Likewise, similar assertions have been forwarded for
the hospitality and tourism sector across various demographics (Pham et al., 2020). Hence, it
can be asserted that GHRM could be vital for organizations aspiring to improve their
environmental performance (Anwar et al., 2020). Alongside this, extant literature underlines
the need to future studies testing with a more robust research design to avoid common
method variance issues (Kim et al., 2019). Accordingly, recent systematic literature reviews
have indicated more scholarly focus of green HR studies on the manufacturing sector
(Benevene and Buonomo, 2020; Singh et al., 2020), hence indicating the need for empirical
attention in the service sector such as hospitality and tourism (Kim et al., 2019; Umrani et al.,
2020). Therefore, the present study adopts a longitudinal approach to understand how
GHRM interacts with the environmental performance by positing the following:

H1. There will be a positive association between GHRM and environmental

performance (EP).
Environmental responsibility is regarded as a moral entity by pro-environment scholars,
suggesting that it caters to underlining what is right and the rights to understand due
responsibility and obligation (Aarnio-Linnanvuori, 2019). Generally, responsive and socially
concerned organizations express environmental responsibility by looking at actions that
may have adverse effects on the environment (Shvarts et al., 2016). Typically, environmental Green HRM
responsibility pushes organizations to review their existing (Aarnio-Linnanvuori, 2019) and
future (Fahlquist, 2009) course of actions to enable employees and the business to
understand the environmental impact of their activities and operations. This, environmental
responsibility, if found unsatisfactory, may even arouse feelings of guilt (Middlemiss, 2010).
Extant literature outlines HRM practices embossed with pro-environment attitude (GHRM)
to help employees learn about environment-friendly work systems; learning about pro-
environment skills and develop a critical insight for environmental issues with the business 3119
and its operations (Paillé et al., 2014). Scholarly traces also hint at how environmental
responsibility can further generate pro-environment results (Poduska et al., 1992). Notably, a
study linked to the hotel sector underlined environmental responsibility being linked with
conventional performance prospects (Rodríguez and Cruz, 2007).
Thus, based on these empirical traces underlining links between GHRM, environmental
responsibility and environmental performance, the current study speculates that
environmentally responsible practices, including those relating to personnel (GHRM), evoke
environmentally responsible behaviors, ultimately resulting in boosting environmental
performance. Typically, an organization’s socially responsible activities are found
translating into furthering moral prospects resulting in organizational outcomes (Farooq
et al., 2014; He et al., 2019). Although there appears to be no prior evidence testing this
mediation effect, particularly in the context of the hotel industry yet still, the association
seems logical to understand. Thus, we posit:

H2. GHRM and environmental performance relationship will be mediated by

environmental responsibility.
For a long, culture has attracted anthropologists as they strive to understand how people and
groups work worldwide. However, only recently, organizational scientists have started
considering its link with organizational performance prospects (Warrick, 2017). In specific
corporate culture has received accelerated attention since the 1980s (Arditi et al., 2017). It is
defined as a pattern of shared values, beliefs and assumptions that shape employee and
organizational work environments (Schein, 2010). Parallel to this definition, extant research
has confirmed its significance in furthering both individual and organizational outcomes
(Hogan and Coote, 2014). In specific, studies such as Nazarian et al. (2017) have indicated how
organizational culture can be instrumental in enhancing an organization’s competitiveness in
the long run. More recently, research pinpointed how a healthy organizational culture can
improve performance outcomes, particularly for service businesses (Jacobs et al., 2013).
Having understood the prominence of organizational culture toward performance
outcomes, it becomes appealing to understand how it is nourished, especially the green
culture, which is one of the focal points of the current study. Extant literature indicates HRM
functions being pivotal in developing a culture of sustainability (Harmon et al., 2010).
Human resource functions serve as custodians to set and develop organizational culture
(Rani and Mishra, 2014). Thus, parallel to the role of GHRM toward environmental
performance discussed in the aforesaid section (Guerci et al., 2016; Renwick et al., 2013;
Shafaei et al., 2020), its contribution toward fostering green culture also appears to be logical
to understand.
Based on the critical links between GHRM, green culture and environmental performance,
the current study speculates GHRM to predict green culture, which results in predicting
environmental performance. In other words, the authors speculate the likeliness of green
culture intervening in the GHRM and environmental performance (EP) relationship.
Generally, prior studies have supported the mediation of organizational culture. For example,
IJCHM Kim and Lee (2012) tested the mediation of eco-environmental culture and confirmed its
33,10 engendering role. Accordingly, Ullah and Ahmad (2017) recently confirmed the mediation of
organizational culture in the internal marketing and organizational performance association.
Likewise, similar empirical confirmations were also forwarded by Burton and Peachey (2014)
for the same. Thus, driving from the conventional engendering of organizational culture, the
current attempts to respond to this scholarly gap by speculating that GHRM will enhance
3120 and flourish green culture, which will result in harnessing EP:

H3. GHRM and EP relationship will be mediated by green culture.

Generally, culture has been reported as one important workplace prospect in the hospitality
sector to understand individual and organizational outcomes (Ali et al., 2019; Gray et al.,
2000). Therefore, in the light of the current study, this concept cannot be ignored. Typically,
a wide array of contemporary empirical research suggests that GHRM practices stimulate
not only green behaviors but also enable organizations to cultivate green cultures, leading
toward boosting organizational performance (Gilal et al., 2019; Saeed et al., 2019). From the
work of Gilal et al. (2019) and Saeed et al. (2019), we assert that green behaviors are a result
of green culture. This, therefore, points toward the vitality of harnessing green culture
before anticipating employees to adopt green behavior. We, hence, argue that it is the green
culture that cultivates responsible employee attitudes; thus, enhancing employees’
environmental responsibility (Aarnio-Linnanvuori, 2019; Tseng et al., 2013), which as a
result, improves environmental performance (Umrani et al., 2020; Saeed et al., 2019; Said
et al., 2003). Therefore, we argue that investigating a sequential link between GHRM and
green culture, leading toward enhanced environmental responsibility that helps develop and
improve environmental performance, would help scholars develop insight into this
mechanic. Unfortunately, past studies have overlooked such a vibrant indirect link that
could largely help explain environmental performance. Based on this, we test the following:

H4. A sequential mediation effect Green Culture and Env. Responsibility will be noticed
in GHRM and the environmental performance association.

Method
Data collection procedure
The recent literature marks serious concerns related to common method bias. Thus, to
forward robust empirical findings, we adopted a supervisor-subordinate nested design and
followed the prominent literature guidelines (Podsakoff et al., 2003, 2012). In this regard, the
data was collected using convenience sampling through multi-level and multi-time
responses. For this purpose, we contacted 25 hotels located in Karachi, Islamabad and
Lahore. While 15 hotels agreed to allow our research team for data collection. The data
regarding the hotel’s environmental performance was collected from supervisors (T1-Level
1); during the same time (in a separate sitting) we asked employees to respond to a
questionnaire related to Green HR practices (T1-Level 2). In time-1 (T1) we distributed 500
employee-supervisor matched questionnaires and received 386 completed responses.
However, out of these 386, only 370 questionnaires were appropriately filled and matched.
It is important to note here that we coded each questionnaire to be matched later on those
questionnaires. At the end of the questionnaire, we asked participants’ willingness to
participate in the second round of data collection.
After an interval of three months, we contacted those participants again for time-2 (T2)
data collection. During this, we requested supervisors to rate employees’ environmental
responsibility (T2-Level 1) and requested employees to provide their ratings related to green Green HRM
culture (T2-Level 2). Out of the 370 supervisor-subordinate matched respondents’ pool, we
received 338 filled questionnaires, out of which 330 were usable. After deleting the codes and
data cleaning the overall supervisor-subordinate matched data set consisted of the 330
records that we used for the final analysis.

Instruments 3121
The current study adapted scales from prior studies for data collection and analysis. To
measure GHRM, six items were adopted from Dumont et al. (2017). Accordingly, the
environmental performance was measured by adopting a seven-item scale by Kim et al.
(2019), whereby green culture was measured by adopting seven items used by Marshall et al.
(2015). Environmental responsibility was measured by adapting the six-item scale from
Turker (2009). To questionnaire used a five-point Likert scale with 5 referring as strongly
agree and 1 as strongly disagree.

Results
We analyzed the data of this study using partial least squares structural equation modeling-
SmartPLS 3 Software (Ringle et al., 2015). As the purpose of this study was to predict the
hypothetical relationships, therefore, we used the CCA method (Hair et al., 2020), which
scholars from the hospitality sector have also advised (Hair et al., 2019; Henseler et al., 2018;
Umrani et al., 2020; Usakli and Kucukergin, 2018). Thus, we used a two-step approach for
our data analysis (Anderson and Gerbing, 1988; Umrani et al., 2019).

Measurement model
We report inter-item reliability by examining factor loadings at a threshold of 0.60 (Hair
et al., 2016). Convergent validity through average variance extracted at a threshold of 0.50
(Chin, 1998; Fornell and Larcker, 1981). Internal consistency reliability through composite
reliability 0.70 thresholds (Chin, 1998; Fornell and Larcker, 1981; Hair et al., 2016). Refer to
Table 1.

Discriminant validity
Following the recommendations of Henseler et al. (2015), Heterotrait-monotrait ratio was
checked to ascertain discriminant validity. As per the suggestions, if Heterotrait-monotrait
(HTMT) value exceeds the value of 0.85 (Kline, 2005) or 0.90 (Gold et al., 2001), discriminant
validity occurs. Table 2 presents results showing all the HTMT values meeting the
recommended value of 0.85.

Hypotheses testing
The study tested the significance of the hypothesized relationships through testing the path
coefficients in the structural model (Anderson and Gerbing, 1988; Henseler et al., 2009).
Herein, we used bootstrapping procedure (Hair et al., 2011) to obtain results. The study
found a significant association between GHRM and environmental performance ( b = 0.16,
t = 2.91, p = 0.05), thus supporting H1. The findings confirm the empirical assertions of
Umrani et al. (2020).
Accordingly, while using Preacher and Hayes’s (2004) criterion, the study tested the
indirect effects for H2–H4 through bootstrapping procures, as these hypotheses involved
mediating variables. Pertaining to H2, the statistical results of the study report a significant
relationship ( b = 0.07, t = 2.00, p = 0.05). In parallel, for H3, the study also found a
IJCHM Constructs Items Loadings Cronbach’s alpha CR AVE
33,10
Green culture GC1 0.650 0.914 0.933 0.667
GC2 0.726
GC3 0.900
GC4 0.905
GC5 0.745
3122 GC6 0.904
GC7 0.849
Green HRM GHRM1 0.750 0.873 0.903 0.571
GHRM2 0.763
GHRM3 0.832
GHRM4 0.704
GHRM5 0.830
GHRM6 0.716
GHRM7 0.680
Env. performance HEP1 0.955 0.938 0.953 0.777
HEP2 0.765
HEP3 0.950
HEP5 0.666
HEP6 0.949
HPE4 0.956
Env. responsibility RP2 0.851 0.855 0.894 0.629
RP3 0.737
RP4 0.796
Table 1. RP5 0.741
Measurement model RP6 0.833

Constructs 1 2 3

Env. responsibility
Table 2. Green culture 0.700
Discriminant Green HRM 0.593 0.784
validity – HTMT Env. performance 0.805 0.737 0.663

significant engendering role of green culture in the GHRM and environmental performance
association ( b = 0.19, t = 4.44, p = 0.00). Finally, H4 four on the sequential indirect effects in
the GHRM and hotel environmental performance by green culture and environmental
responsibility also achieved empirical backing based on Preacher and Hayes’s (2004)
method. Therein, we found indirect effects significant ( b = 0.19, t = 6.14, p = 0.00). These
results are presented in Table 3.

Explanatory power of the model

For the calculation of the model’s explanatory power, the study assessed R2. According to Falk
and Miller (1992), Han R2 value 0.10 is minimally desirable in social science research settings.
Our results indicate in Table 4 that all the R2 values were above that minimum threshold.

Predictive power of the model

The predictive relevance of the research model was established through the blindfolding
procedure (Duarte and Raposo, 2010; Geisser, 1974; Stone, 1974). According to this process,
the cross-validated redundancy (Q2) value of all the dependent variables shall be greater Green HRM
than zero. Our results indicate that the Q2 values for all three dependent variables of the
model are greater than zero. Refer to Table 5.

Discussion
Overall, the current study has empirically unveiled relationships that barely received any
scholarly attention in the past. The findings have statistically responded to research questions 3123
posed regarding the direct and mediating interactions between GHRM, environmental
performance, environmental responsibility and green culture in a sequentially mediated model.
In particular, the results support the influence of GHRM on hotels’ environmental performance
in consonance with limited extant literature (Umrani et al., 2020). This implies that the pro-
environment embossed HRM practices can motivate employees to learn about environment-
friendly prospects, skills and work processes that result in furthering the environmental
performance of the business. The finding also confirms that respondents viewed their hotels
practicing GHRM, which facilitated them to become capable of effectively contributing and
harnessing the hotel’s environmental performance. Besides, the results report GHRM and
environmental performance of hotels mediated by environmental responsibility. While
addressing a major scholarly gap, the findings imply that GHRM practices of hotels enhanced
employees’ skills, values and understandability regarding pro-environmental behaviors, thus
boosting environmental responsibility, which later contributes to predicting environmental
performance. The findings support the scholarly argument of Farooq et al. (2014), suggesting
that an organization’s socially responsible activities can translate into furthering moral
prospects, which consequently result in organizational outcomes. Thus, the results educate
us on understanding the engendering role of environmental responsibility that connects

Confidence intervals
Hypotheses Relationship Beta SE t-value 2.5% 97.5%

H1 GHRM -> HEP 0.16 0.05 2.91** 0.068 0.269

H2 GHRM -> ER -> HEP 0.07 0.03 2.00** 0.003 0.137
H3 GHRM -> GC -> HEP 0.19 0.04 4.44* 0.101 0.271
H4 GHRM -> GC -> ER -> HEP 0.19 0.03 6.14* 0.131 0.246
Table 3.
Notes: *P < 0.000; **p < 0.05. Hypotheses testing

Constructs R2 values

Env. responsibility 0.421

Green culture 0.498 Table 4.
Env. performance 0.647 R2

Constructs SSO SSE Q2 (=1-SSE/SSO)

Env. responsibility 1,645.000 1,224.310 0.256

Green culture 2,303.000 1,570.487 0.318 Table 5.
Env. performance 1,974.000 1,039.247 0.474 Blindfolding results
IJCHM employees to work with a pro-environment approach, thus predicting environmental
33,10 performance, particularly in the hotel sector.
Similarly, consistent with our speculation, the results reported green culture engendering
the GHRM and hotels’ environmental performance relationship. While validating the
mediation claims of prior studies for organizational culture (Kim and Lee, 2012; Ullah and
Ahmad, 2017), the finding, first, strengthens assertions highlighting the critical role of
3124 healthy organizational culture (Jacobs et al., 2013) toward performance-based outcomes at
the organizational level (Warrick, 2017). Second, the finding supports the evidence on the
role of HRM practices as custodians of establishing the right organizational culture (Rani
and Mishra, 2014). Hence, the finding implies that GHRM practices induce a pro-
environmental culture that engenders green values with responsible employee attitudes that
later result in the shape of employees performing with an environment-friendly perspective
hence, boosting hotels’ environmental performance. In parallel, the results indicate that
GHRM practices infuse green culture and a pro-environment obligation that motivates
individuals to work with a positive outlook for nature and the surrounding, thus boosting
hotels’ environmental performance. In other words, on the course of GHRM practices
enhancing efficiency and value creation with an environment-friendly blend, it stimulates
green culture and environmental responsibility, which triggers environmental performance.
Hence, the study forwards critical empirical insight on GHRM practices and their role
toward cultivating pro-environment culture and harnessing consciousness toward
environment and community that boost efforts enabling hotels to minimize the deleterious
effects on the environment, thus predicting environmental performance.

Conclusion
The study concludes with empirical support for GHRM and hotels’ environmental
performance. Scholarly evidence of the study also educates on the engendering contribution
of green culture and environmental responsibility in the GHRM and environmental
responsibility. The results conclusively suggest that Green personnel practices and their
association with environmentally friendly outcomes (EP) of the business can be more
profound when employees hold green values, beliefs and a pro-environmental sense of
responsibility. Overall, the study advances and addresses gaps found in prior studies to help
support organizational scholars, practitioners and pro-environment enthusiasts to
understand the interplay of GHRM, culture, responsibility and environmental performance.

Theoretical implications
Results of the study underline important contributions to the literature. Theoretically, the
findings contribute to advancing AMO theory (Appelbaum, 2000) to understand GHRM and
environmental performance links. The outcome of the study implies a substantial role of
GHRM in furthering employee abilities and passion toward a pro-environment performance
at work. The results also infer that providing environment-friendly opportunities at work
can also be instrumental for the same. Thus, we imply hotels to establish thorough GHRM
practices to induce green values and environmental responsibility to boost environmental
performance. Second, despite the acute significance of GHRM practices toward pro-
environment behaviors and outcomes (Guerci et al., 2016), little scholarly efforts were
noticed in the extant literature, particularly in connection to the hospitality industry (Shafaei
et al., 2020). Therefore, the findings of the current study make a notable contribution by
linking GHRM practices, green culture, environmental responsibility and environmental
performance in the hotel sector. Specifically, the findings show that pro-environment
personnel practices can nourish green culture and a pro-environment sense of responsibility Green HRM
that facilitates in robust pro-environment results.
Third, the study has added empirical evidence signifying the intervening contribution of
environmental responsibility in the GHRM and environmental performance association,
wherein no prior empirical attempts were made in this regard. This expresses that effective
GHRM practices can enable and persuade employees to work with a pro-environmental focus
on the job to enhance employees’ green abilities and motivations and provide them with
opportunities to work with pro-environment focus (Singh et al., 2020) to boost environmental 3125
performance (Umrani et al., 2020; Renwick et al., 2013) of hotels. Fourth, significant sequential
mediation of green culture and environmental responsibility has added knowledge of how
they are significant in facilitating responsive environmental performance in the hotel sector.
In a way, the finding has extended the literature with a comprehensive view of engendering
in the GHRM and environmental performance association.

Practical implications
Practically, the findings of the present study offer important suggestions for industry
practitioners. While addressing the research questions, the results objectively educate
corporations, particularly in the hospitality sector, on boosting their environmental
performance. First, the results suggest that investing in GHRM practices can be strategically
beneficial for organizations in general and hotels, in particular, to acquire, develop and
sustain employees who would bring green beliefs, values and norms and strive with a pro-
environment attitude to support in boosting environmental performance. In addition,
following the significant relationship between GHRM and environmental performance, we
imply management authorities in the hotel sector to relook and strive to what Pellegrini et al.
(2018) mentioned as refining HR practices for better pro-environmental outcomes.
Second, the findings imply the need for top management and policymakers to initiate the
integration of hotel’s environmental management and performance targets with GHRM practices to
ensure that the personnel activities are designed to infuse green culture and environmental
responsibility. Following the significance of environmental responsibility and infusion of green
culture because of GHRM practices, the study implies top management to work closely with
individuals overseeing HRM functions to carefully ensure that the pro-environment personnel
practices are duly contributing toward nurturing the two thus, leading to enhanced environmental
performance. For this, hotels may also consider developing rubrics to measure and monitor the
likely impact of the GHRM practices toward furthering green values, beliefs and a sense of concern
and responsibility among employees for promising pro-environment performance in the long run.
Based on the result, we also imply that hotels with a pro-environment outlook require
establishing personnel procedures that would attract and induct environmentally
responsible employees to nurture a pro-environment culture (de Souza Freitas et al., 2020;
Renwick et al., 2013). In line with this, developmental performance appraisal (Kuvaas, 2007)
with a fermentation of environmental prospects may also be used to provide them to
employees on their environmental responsibility and for the purpose of reinforcing right
behaviors and hampering the adverse ones. Third, as the study found mediation of green
culture and environmental responsibility, the study suggests top management to internally
establish prospects that promote green values and motivate employees who showcase
environmental responsibility. For this, hotels may work on highlighting best practices and
rewards and recognize pro-environment behaviors. In addition, department-based targets
may also be set to objectively guide employees to focus on the right behaviors, attitudes and
outcomes. In addition, customized training interventions may also help employees gain
skills in achieving these targets responsively. Furthermore, based on the study findings, we
IJCHM also imply hotels aspiring to pro-environmental performance to design appropriate reward
33,10 and recognition strategies in their compensation plans to help maintain green culture and
employees to continue green behaviors.

Limitations and way forward

Besides prominent contributions, the study has some limitations worthy of mentioning for
3126 future scholars. Typically, management practices may give varying results from one occupation
setting to another: from one demographics to another (Bloom et al., 2012; Bloom and Van
Reenen, 2010). Accordingly, different organizations may have different levels of implementation
of GHRM with a diverse range of obstacles and challenges (Bangwal and Tiwari, 2015).
Resultantly, the findings of the present term to be limited in their generalizability. Therefore,
future studies are recommended to consider studying a similar framework across diverse
occupational sectors, industries and geographic locations. Therein, research in other emerging
nations could be an ideal choice. Likewise, similar yet different work realities across different
hospitality sectors may also be worthy of investigation. Extant literature suggests that external
entities such as regulatory stakeholders typically play a monumental role in implementing
GHRM practices (Guerci et al., 2016). As the current study sampled internal stakeholders
(organizational members/employees) of the hotels across the three major cities of Pakistan,
future investigations are, therefore, encouraged considering external stakeholders alongside
internal to offer healthy evidence on the implementation and significance of GHRM practices
toward environmental performance. In doing so, scholars may find incorporating other factors
to the model to shed empirical light on how the nexus between the studied variables turns out. A
typical suggestion in this regard would be looking into CSR (de Souza Freitas et al., 2020).
Similarly, the study tested internal factors; thus, considerable scope for investigating external
factors appears to be a rational choice for future studies on the topic. In parallel, various elements
can be seen as prominent in furthering the role of GHRM in further strengthening different
employee behaviors and outcomes (Umrani et al., 2020; Hameed et al., 2020). Hence, future studies
are encouraged to extend the current framework by incorporating moderators to empirically
understand if these associations could be enriched for robust environmental performance. For
instance, in awake of the prominence of leadership role toward GHRM and environmental
performance nexus (Singh et al., 2020), one recommendation is to investigate if leadership styles
could potentially affect the nature of direct associations proposed in the present study. Likewise,
future researchers may also find it worthy of examining if demographic characteristics such as
gender could influence the direct associations investigated in the present study as it has been
termed acute in the HRM and performance associations (Mohammad et al., 2017).
Accordingly, the present study reported GHRM infusing green culture and
environmental responsibility to ultimately result in nurturing environmental performance;
we encourage the development of an extended framework based on the explanations of
resource based view and AMO theories to unveil how green resources could be of value in
predicting environmental performance. In addition, future scholars are also encouraged to
consider pondering upon the theoretical underpinning of conservation of resources theory
(Hobfoll, 1989), which indicates the significance of individual-level resources such as self-
efficacy, the meaningfulness of work, coworker support and job crafting in furthering
behaviors and organizational outcomes. In parallel, we also encourage future scholars to
consider pro-environment behaviors such as green self-efficacy (Chen et al., 2014), green
mindfulness (Zafar et al., 2017) and green work values (Hameed et al., 2020) toward green
culture, environmental responsibility and environmental performance. These prospects will
help broaden the scope of environmental research thus, opening new avenues for research
scholarship and practice.
 In parallel, few scholars have indicated the antecedents of HRM and its relationship with Green HRM
different outcomes, such as leadership styles (Jia et al., 2018; Singh et al., 2020). Accordingly,
Luu (2019) has also encouraged scholars to look into the likeliness of GHRM strengthening
the effects of pro-environment leadership. Similarly, green workplaces, as hinted by Bangwal
and Tiwari (2019) and how it would interact with GHRM may also be an interesting avenue
for investigation. Similarly, the concept of talent management is also gaining much scholarly
attention in the hospitality literature (Baum, 2019; Murillo and King, 2019; Shulga and
Busser, 2019), and therefore, may be interesting to see how green talent management
3127
practices translate into predicting environmental performance. Taken together, future
studies, therefore, may find it interesting to incorporate different factors that could facilitate
the installation and implementation of GHRM policies and practices for better results.
Finally, the ongoing COVID-19 Pandemic has affected all business sectors, especially
hospitality (Jiang and Wen, 2020). Thus, future researchers may also find it worthy of
investigation, for example, the linkages between GHRM practices, perception of customer
safety and hospitality decisions.

References
Aarnio-Linnanvuori, E. (2019), “How do teachers perceive environmental responsibility?”,
Environmental Education Research, Vol. 25 No. 1, pp. 46-61.
Aboramadan, M. (2020), “The effect of green HRM on employee green behaviors in higher education:
the mediating mechanism of green work engagement”, International Journal of Organizational
Analysis, doi: 10.1108/IJOA-05-2020-2190.
Al-Hajri, S.A. (2020), “Employee retention in the ligter of green hrm practices through the intervening
role of work engagement”, Annals of Contemporary Developments in Management and HR
(ACDMHR), Vol. 2 No. 4, pp. 10-19.
Ali, F., Park, E., Kwon, J. and Chae, B. (2019), “30 Years of contemporary hospitality management:
uncovering the bibliometrics and topical trends”, International Journal of Contemporary
Hospitality Management, Vol. 31 No. 7, pp. 2641-2665, doi: 10.1108/IJCHM-10-2018-0832.
Anderson, J.C. and Gerbing, D.W. (1988), “Structural equation modeling in practice: a review and
recommended two-step approach”, Psychological Bulletin, Vol. 103 No. 3, p. 411.
Anwar, N., Mahmood, N.H.N., Yusliza, M.Y., Ramayah, T., Faezah, J.N. and Khalid, W. (2020), “Green
human resource management for organisational citizenship behaviour towards the environment
and environmental performance on a university campus”, Journal of Cleaner Production,
Vol. 256, p. 120401.
Appelbaum, E., Bailey, T., Berg, P., Kalleberg, A.L. and Bailey, T.A. (2000), Manufacturing Advantage:
Why High-Performance Work Systems Pay off, Cornell University Press, New York, NY.
Arditi, D., Nayak, S. and Damci, A. (2017), “Effect of organizational culture on delay in construction”,
International Journal of Project Management, Vol. 35 No. 2, pp. 136-147.
Asadi, S., Pourhashemi, S. O., Nilashi, M., Abdullah, R., Samad, S., Yadegaridehkordi, E. and Razali, N.
S. (2020). “Investigating influence of green innovation on sustainability performance: a case on
Malaysian hotel industry”, Journal of Cleaner Production, Vol. 258.
Attaianese, E. (2012), “A broader consideration of human factor to enhance sustainable building
design”, Work, Vol. 41 No. 1, pp. 2155-2159.
Bangwal, D. and Tiwari, P. (2015), “Green HRM – a way to greening the environment”, IOSR Journal of
Business and Management, Vol. 17 No. 12, pp. 45-53.
Bangwal, D. and Tiwari, P. (2019), “Workplace environment, employee satisfaction and intent to stay”,
International Journal of Contemporary Hospitality Management, Vol. 31 No. 1, pp. 268-284, doi:
10.1108/IJCHM-04-2017-0230.
IJCHM Baum, T. (2019), “Does the hospitality industry need or deserve talent?”, International Journal of
Contemporary Hospitality Management, Vol. 31 No. 10, pp. 3823-3837, doi: 10.1108/IJCHM-10-
33,10 2018-0805.
Benevene, P. and Buonomo, I. (2020), “Green human resource management: an evidence-based
systematic literature review”, Sustainability, Vol. 12 No. 15, p. 5974.
Bloom, N. and Van Reenen, J. (2010), “Why do management practices differ across firms and
countries?”, Journal of Economic Perspectives, Vol. 24 No. 1, pp. 203-224.
3128
Bloom, N., Genakos, C., Sadun, R. and Van Reenen, J. (2012), “Management practices across firms and
countries”, Academy of Management Perspectives, Vol. 26 No. 1, pp. 12-33.
Boselie, P., Paauwe, J. and Jansen, P. (2001), “Human resource management and performance: lessons
from The Netherlands”, The International Journal of Human Resource Management, Vol. 12
No. 7, pp. 1107-1125.
Burton, L.J. and Peachey, J.W. (2014), “Organizational culture mediates the relationship between
transformational leadership and work outcomes”, Journal of Intercollegiate Sport, Vol. 7 No. 2,
pp. 153-174.
Channa, N.A., Shah, S.M.M. and Ghumro, N.H. (2019), “Uncovering the link between strategic human
resource management and crisis management: mediating role of organizational resilience”,
Annals of Contemporary Developments in Management and HR, Vol. 1 No. 2, pp. 15-27.
Chen, Y.S., Chang, C.H. and Lin, Y.H. (2014), “Green transformational leadership and green
performance: the mediation effects of green mindfulness and green self-efficacy”, Sustainability,
Vol. 6 No. 10, pp. 6604-6621.
Chin, W.W. (1998), “The partial least squares approach to structural equation modeling”, Modern
Methods for Business Research, Vol. 295 No. 2, pp. 295-336.
de Souza Freitas, W.R., Caldeira-Oliveira, J.H., Teixeira, A.A., Stefanelli, N.O. and Teixeira, T.B. (2020),
“Green human resource management and corporate social responsibility”, Benchmarking: An
International Journal, Vol. 27 No. 4, pp. 1551-1569.
Duarte, P.A.O. and Raposo, M. L. B. (2010), “A PLS model to study brand preference: an application to
the mobile phone market”, Handbook of Partial Least Squares. Springer, Berlin, Heidelberg,
pp. 449-485.
Dumont, J., Shen, J. and Deng, X. (2017), “Effects of green hrm practices on employee workplace green
behavior: the role of psychological green climate and employee green values”, Human Resource
Management, Vol. 56 No. 4, pp. 613-627.
Fahlquist, J.N. (2009), “Moral responsibility for environmental problems – individual or institutional?”,
Journal of Agricultural and Environmental Ethics, Vol. 22 No. 2, pp. 109-124.
Falk, R.F. and Miller, N.B. (1992), A primer for Soft Modeling, University of Akron Press. Ohio
Farooq, O., Payaud, M., Merunka, D. and Valette-Florence, P. (2014), “The impact of corporate social
responsibility on organizational commitment: exploring multiple mediation mechanisms”,
Journal of Business Ethics, Vol. 125 No. 4, pp. 563-580.
Fornell, C. and Larcker, D.F. (1981), “Evaluating structural equation models with unobservable
variables and measurement error”, Journal of Marketing Research, Vol. 18 No. 1, pp. 39-50.
Geisser, S. (1974), “A predictive approach to the random effect model”, Biometrika, Vol. 61 No. 1,
pp. 101-107.
Gilal, F.G., Ashraf, Z., Gilal, N.G., Gilal, R. G. and Channa, N.A. (2019), “Promoting environmental
performance through green human resource management practices in higher education
institutions: a moderated mediation model”, Corporate Social Responsibility and Environmental
Management, Vol. 26 No. 6, pp. 1579-1590.
Gold, A.H., Malhotra, A. and Segars, A.H. (2001), “Knowledge management: an organizational
capabilities perspective”, Journal of Management Information Systems, Vol. 18 No. 1,
pp. 185-214.
Gray, B.J., Matear, S.M. and Matheson, P. K. (2000), “Improving the performance of hospitality firms”, Green HRM
International Journal of Contemporary Hospitality Management.
Guerci, M., Longoni, A. and Luzzini, D. (2016), “Translating stakeholder pressures into environmental
performance – the mediating role of green HRM practices”, The International Journal of Human
Resource Management, Vol. 27 No. 2, pp. 262-289.
Gupta, V. (2019), “Talent management dimensions and their relationship with retention of Generation-
Y employees in the hospitality industry”, International Journal of Contemporary Hospitality
Management, Vol. 31 No. 10, pp. 4150-4169, doi: 10.1108/IJCHM-10-2018-0859. 3129
Gürlek, M. and Tuna, M. (2018), “Reinforcing competitive advantage through green organizational
culture and green innovation”, The Service Industries Journal, Vol. 38 Nos 7/8, pp. 467-491.
Hair, J.F. Jr, Howard, M.C. and Nitzl, C. (2020), “Assessing measurement model quality in PLS-SEM
using confirmatory composite analysis”, Journal of Business Research, Vol. 109, pp. 101-110.
Hair, J.F., Ringle, C.M., and Sarstedt, M. (2011), “PLS-SEM: indeed a silver bullet”, Journal of Marketing
Theory and Practice, Vol. 19 No. 2, pp. 139-152.
Hair, J.F., Risher, J.J., Sarstedt, M. and Ringle, C.M. (2019), “When to use and how to report the results of
PLS-SEM”, European Business Review.
Hair, J.F. Jr, Sarstedt, M., Matthews, L.M., and Ringle, C.M. (2016), “Identifying and treating unobserved
heterogeneity with FIMIX-PLS: part I – method”, European Business Review.
Hameed, Z., Khan, I.U., Islam, T., Sheikh, Z. and Naeem, R.M. (2020), “Do green HRM practices influence
employees’ environmental performance?”, International Journal of Manpower, Vol. 41 No. 7,
pp. 1061-1079.
Harb, T.H. and Ahmed, S. (2019), “Perceived financial sustainability of tourism enterprises: do green
human resource management practices really matter?”, Journal of Tourism and Hospitality
Management, Vol. 7 No. 2, pp. 173-185.
Harmon, J., Fairfield, K.D. and Wirtenberg, J. (2010), “Missing an opportunity: HR leadership and
sustainability”, People and Strategy, Vol. 33 No. 1, pp. 16-21.
Harris, L.C. and Crane, A. (2002), “The greening of organizational culture”, Journal of Organizational
Change Management, Vol. 15 No. 3, pp. 214 -234.
He, J., Zhang, H. and Morrison, A.M. (2019), “The impacts of corporate social responsibility on
organization citizenship behavior and task performance in hospitality: a sequential mediation
model”, International Journal of Contemporary Hospitality Management, Vol. 31 No. 6,
pp. 2582-2598, doi: 10.1108/IJCHM-05-2018-0378.
Henseler, J. (2018), “Partial least squares path modeling: Quo vadis?”, Quality & Quantity, Vol. 52 No. 1, pp. 1-8.
Henseler, J., Ringle, C.M. and Sarstedt, M. (2015), “A new criterion for assessing discriminant validity in
variance-based structural equation modeling” Journal of the Academy of Marketing Science,
Vol. 43 No. 1, pp. 115-135.
Henseler, J., Ringle, C.M. and Sinkovics, R.R. (2009), “The use of partial least squares path modeling in
international marketing”, New Challenges to International Marketing, Emerald Group
Publishing Limited, Bingley.
Hobfoll, S.E. (1989), “Conservation of resources: a new attempt at conceptualizing stress”, American
Psychologist, Vol. 44 No. 3, p. 513.
Hogan, S.J. and Coote, L.V. (2014), “Organizational culture, innovation, and performance: a test of
schein’s model”, Journal of Business Research, Vol. 67 No. 8, pp. 1609-1621.
Hsiao, T.Y. and Chuang, C.M. (2016), “Creating shared value through implementing green practices for
star hotels”, Asia Pacific Journal of Tourism Research, Vol. 21 No. 6, pp. 678-696.
Islam, M.A., Jantan, A.H., Yusoff, Y.M., Chong, C.W. and Hossain, M.S. (2020), “Green human resource
management (GHRM) practices and millennial employees’ turnover intentions in tourism industry in
Malaysia: Moderating role of work environment”, Global Business Review, doi: 0972150920907000.
IJCHM Jacobs, R., Mannion, R., Davies, H.T., Harrison, S., Konteh, F. and Walshe, K. (2013), “The relationship
between organizational culture and performance in acute hospitals”, Social Science and
33,10 Medicine, Vol. 76, pp. 115-125.
Jeronimo, H.M., Henriques, P.L., de Lacerda, T.C., da Silva, F.P. and Vieira, P.R. (2020), “Going green
and sustainable: the influence of green hr practices on the organizational rationale for
sustainability”, Journal of Business Research, Vol. 112, pp. 413-421.
Jia, J., Liu, H., Chin, T. and Hu, D. (2018), “The continuous mediating effects of ghrm on employees’ green
3130 passion via transformational leadership and green creativity”, Sustainability, Vol. 10 No. 9, p. 3237.
Jiang, Y. and Wen, J. (2020), “Effects of COVID-19 on hotel marketing and management: a perspective
article”, International Journal of Contemporary Hospitality Management, Vol. 32 No. 8,
pp. 2563-2573, doi: 10.1108/IJCHM-03-2020-0237.
Kang, K.H., Stein, L., Heo, C.Y. and Lee, S. (2012), “Consumers’ willingness to pay for green initiatives of
the hotel industry”, International Journal of Hospitality Management, Vol. 31 No. 2, pp. 564-572.
Kim, S. and Lee, S. (2012), “Stakeholder pressure and the adoption of environmental logistics practices”,
The International Journal of Logistics Management, Vol. 23 No. 2, pp. 238-258.
Kim, Y.J., Kim, W.G., Choi, H.M. and Phetvaroon, K. (2019), “The effect of green human resource
management on hotel employees’ eco-friendly behavior and environmental performance”,
International Journal of Hospitality Management, Vol. 76, pp. 83-93.
Kline, R.B. (2005), Principles and Practice of Structural Equation Modeling, 2nd ed., Guilford, New York, p. 3.
Kuvaas, B. (2007), “Different relationships between perceptions of developmental performance
appraisal and work performance”, Personnel Review, Vol. 36 No. 3, pp. 378-397.
Luu, T.T. (2019), “Building employees’ organizational citizenship behavior for the environment: the role
of environmentally-specific servant leadership and a moderated mediation mechanism”,
International Journal of Contemporary Hospitality Management, Vol. 31 No. 1, pp. 406-426,
doi: 10.1108/IJCHM-07-2017-0425.
Marshall, D., McCarthy, L., McGrath, P. and Claudy, M. (2015), “Going above and beyond: how
sustainability culture and entrepreneurial orientation drive social sustainability supply chain
practice adoption”, Supply Chain Management: An International Journal.
Melnyk, S.A., Sroufe, R P. and Calantone, R. (2003), “Assessing the impact of environmental
management systems on corporate and environmental performance”, Journal of Operations
Management, Vol. 21 No. 3, pp. 329-351.
Middlemiss, L. (2010), “Reframing individual responsibility for sustainable consumption: lessons
from environmental justice and ecological citizenship”, Environmental Values, Vol. 19 No. 2,
pp. 147-167.
Mohammad, J.U., Miah, M.A.S., Rahman, M.M. and Rahaman, M.S. (2017), “Mediation role of job
satisfaction on HRM-operational performance relationship: a three-way moderation effect by
gender”, The Journal of Developing Areas, Vol. 51 No. 3, pp. 437-452.
Murillo, E. and King, C. (2019), “Why do employees respond to hospitality talent management: an
examination of a Latin American restaurant chain”, International Journal of Contemporary
Hospitality Management, Vol. 31 No. 10, pp. 4021-4042, doi: 10.1108/IJCHM-10-2018-0871.
Nazarian, A., Atkinson, P. and Foroudi, P. (2017), “Influence of national culture and balanced
organizational culture on the hotel industry’s performance”, International Journal of Hospitality
Management, Vol. 63, pp. 22-32.
Obeidat, S.M., Al Bakri, A.A. and Elbanna, S. (2020), “‘Leveraging green’ human resource practices to
enable environmental and organizational performance: evidence from the qatari oil and gas
industry”, Journal of Business Ethics, Vol. 164 No. 2, pp. 371-388.
Paillé, P., Boiral, O. and Chen, Y. (2013), “Linking environmental management practices and
organizational citizenship behaviour for the environment: a social exchange perspective”, The
International Journal of Human Resource Management, Vol. 24 No. 18, pp. 3552-3575.
Paillé, P., Chen, Y., Boiral, O. and Jin, J. (2014), “The impact of human resource management on environmental Green HRM
performance: an employee-level study”, Journal of Business Ethics, Vol. 121 No. 3, pp. 451-466.
Pellegrini, C., Rizzi, F. and Frey, M. (2018), “The role of sustainable human resource practices in
influencing employee behavior for corporate sustainability”, Business Strategy and the
Environment, Vol. 27 No. 8, pp. 1221-1232.
Pereira, V.E., Fontinha, R., Budhwar, P. and Arora, B. (2018), “Human resource management and
performance at the indian railways”, Journal of Organizational Change Management, Vol. 31
No. 1, pp. 47-61. 3131
Pham, N.T., Tuckova, Z. and Jabbour, C.J.C. (2019), “Greening the hospitality industry: how do green
human resource management practices influence organizational citizenship behavior in hotels?
A mixed-methods study”, Tourism Management, Vol. 72, pp. 386-399.
Pham, N.T., Thanh, T.V., Tuckova, Z. and Thuy, V.T.N. (2020), “The role of green human resource
management in driving hotel’s environmental performance: interaction and mediation analysis”,
International Journal of Hospitality Management, Vol. 88, p. 102392.
Podgorodnichenko, N., Edgar, F. and McAndrew, I. (2020), “The role of HRM in developing sustainable
organizations: contemporary challenges and contradictions”, Human Resource Management
Review, Vol. 30 No. 3, p. 100685.
Podsakoff, P.M., MacKenzie, S.B. and Podsakoff, N.P. (2012), “Sources of method bias in social science
research and recommendations on how to control it”, Annual Review of Psychology, Vol. 63,
pp. 539-569.
Podsakoff, P.M., MacKenzie, S.B., Lee, J.Y. and Podsakoff, N.P. (2003), Common method biases in
behavioral research: a critical review of the literature and recommended remedies”, Journal of
applied Psychology, Vol. 88 No. 5, p. 879.
Poduska, R., Forbes, R. and Bober, M. (1992), “The challenge of sustainable development”, The
Columbia Journal of World Business, Vol. 27. pp. 286-286.
Preacher, K.J. and Hayes, A.F. (2004), “SPSS and SAS procedures for estimating indirect effects in
simple mediation models”, Behavior Research Methods, Instruments, & computers, Vol. 36 No. 4,
pp. 717-731.
Rani, S. and Mishra, K. (2014), “Green HRM: practices and strategic implementation in the
organizations”, International Journal on Recent and Innovation Trends in Computing and
Communication, Vol. 2 No. 11, pp. 3633-3639.
Rawashdeh, A. (2018), “The impact of green human resource management on organizational
environmental performance in jordanian health service organizations”, Management Science
Letters, Vol. 8 No No. 10, pp. 1049-1058.
Ren, S., Tang, G. and Jackson, S.E. (2020), “Effects of green HRM and CEO ethical leadership on
organizations’ environmental performance”, International Journal of Manpower, Vol. 42 No. 6,
pp. 1-23.
Renwick, D.W., Redman, T. and Maguire, S. (2013), “Green human resource management: a review and
research agenda”, International Journal of Management Reviews, Vol. 15 No. 1, pp. 1-14.
Ringle, C.M., Wende, S. and Becker, J.M. (2015), SmartPLS 3, SmartPLS GmbH, Boenningstedt
Rodríguez, F.J.G. and Cruz, Y.D.M.A. (2007), “Relation between social-environmental responsibility and
performance in hotel firms”, International Journal of Hospitality Management, Vol. 26 No. 4,
pp. 824-839.
Roscoe, S., Subramanian, N., Jabbour, C.J. and Chong, T. (2019), “Green human resource management
and the enablers of green organisational culture: enhancing a firm’s environmental performance
for sustainable development”, Business Strategy and the Environment, Vol. 28 No. 5, pp. 737-749.
Saeed, B.B., Afsar, B., Hafeez, S., Khan, I., Tahir, M. and Afridi, M.A. (2019), “Promoting employee's
proenvironmental behavior through green human resource management practices”, Corporate
Social Responsibility and Environmental Management, Vol. 26 No. 2, pp. 424-438.
IJCHM Said, A.M., Paim, L.H. and Masud, J. (2003), “”Environmental concerns, knowledge and practices gap
among Malaysian teachers”, International Journal of Sustainability in Higher Education.
33,10
Sainaghi, R., Baggio, R., Phillips, P. and Mauri, A.G. (2018), “Hotel performance and research streams: a
network cluster analysis”, International Journal of Contemporary Hospitality Management,
Vol. 32 No. 2, pp. 425-462.
Schein, E.H. (2010), Organizational Culture and Leadership, John Wiley and Sons, New York, NY, Vol. 2.
3132 Shafaei, A., Nejati, M. and Yusoff, Y.M. (2020), “Green human resource management”, International
Journal of Manpower, Vol. 41 No. 7, pp. 1041-1060.
Shulga, L.V. and Busser, J.A. (2019), “Talent management meta review: a validity network schema
approach”, International Journal of Contemporary Hospitality Management, Vol. 31 No. 10,
pp. 3943-3969, doi: 10.1108/IJCHM-10-2018-0876.
Shvarts, E.A., Pakhalov, A.M. and Knizhnikov, A.Y. (2016), “Assessment of environmental
responsibility of oil and gas companies in russia: the rating method”, Journal of Cleaner
Production, Vol. 127, pp. 143-151.
Singh, S.K., Del Giudice, M., Chierici, R. and Graziano, D. (2020), “Green innovation and environmental
performance: the role of green transformational leadership and green human resource
management”, Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Vol. 150, p. 119762.
Siyambalapitiya, J., Zhang, X. and Liu, X. (2018), “Green human resource management: a proposed
model in the context of Sri Lanka’s tourism industry”, Journal of Cleaner Production, Vol. 201
No. 2, pp. 542-555.
Stone, M. (1974), “Cross-validatory choice and assessment of statistical predictions”, Journal of The
Royal Statistical Society: Series B (Methodological), Vol. 36 No. 2, pp. 111-133.
Tahir, R., Athar, M.R., Faisal, F., Shahani, N.U. and Solangi, B. (2019), “Green organizational culture: a
review of literature and future research agenda”, Annals of Contemporary Developments in
Management and HR, Vol. 1 No. 1, pp. 23-38.
Tseng, M.L., Tan, R.R. and Siriban-Manalang, A.B. (2013), “Sustainable consumption and production
for Asia: sustainability through green design and practice”, Journal of Cleaner Production,
Vol. 40, pp. 1-5.
Turker, D. (2009), “Measuring corporate social responsibility: A scale development study”, Journal of
Business Ethics, Vol. 85 No. 4, pp. 411-427.
Ullah, M. and Ahmad, H.M. (2017), “The impact of internal marketing on the organizational
performance through organizational culture mediation”. Abasyn Journal of Social Sciences,
Vol. 10 No. 1, pp. 129-148.
Umrani, W.A., Channa, N.A., Yousaf, A., Ahmed, U., Pahi, M.H. and Ramayah, T. (2020), “Greening the
workforce to achieve environmental performance in hotel industry: a serial mediation model”,
Journal of Hospitality and Tourism Management, Vol. 44, pp. 50-60.
Umrani, W.A., Siyal, I.A., Ahmed, U., Arain, G.A., Sayed, H. and Umrani, S. (2019), “Does family come
first? Family motivation-individual’s OCB assessment via self-efficacy”, Personnel Review.
Usakli, A. and Kucukergin, K.G. (2018), “Using partial least squares structural equation modeling in
hospitality and tourism: do researchers follow practical guidelines?”, International Journal of
Contemporary Hospitality Management.
Warrick, D.D. (2017), “What leaders need to know about organizational culture”, Business Horizons,
Vol. 60 No. 3, pp. 395-404.
Yong, J.Y., Yusliza, M.Y. and Fawehinmi, O.O. (2019), “Green human resource management: a
systematic literature review from 2007 to 2019”, Benchmarking: An International Journal,
Vol. 27 No. 7, pp. 1-24.
Yu, W. and Ramanathan, R. (2015), ” “An empirical examination of stakeholder pressures, green
operations practices and environmental performance”, International Journal of Production
Research, Vol. 53 No. 21, pp. 6390-6407.
Zafar, A., Nisar, Q.A., Shoukat, M. and Ikram, M. (2017), “Green transformational leadership and green Green HRM
performance: the mediating role of green mindfulness and green self-efficacy”, International
Journal of Management Excellence, Vol. 9 No. 2, pp. 1059-1066.
Zientara, P. and Zamojska, A. (2018), “Green organizational climates and employee pro-environmental
behaviour in the hotel industry”, Journal of Sustainable Tourism, Vol. 26 No. 7, pp. 1142-1159.

Further reading
Chen, Y.S., Chang, C.H., Yeh, S.L. and Cheng, H.I. (2015), “Green shared vision and green creativity: the
3133
mediation roles of green mindfulness and green self-efficacy”, Quality and Quantity, Vol. 49
No. 3, pp. 1169-1184.
GHRM (2021), “GHRM is instrumental in environmental management since the HR function plays an
important role in accomplishing environment-friendly corporate goals (bohdanowicz et al., 2011;
jabbour and santos, 2008; paillé et al., 2014)”.
Kim, S.H. and Choi, Y. (2013), “Hotel employees’ perception of green practices”, International Journal of
Hospitality and Tourism Administration, Vol. 14 No. 2, pp. 157-178.

Corresponding author
Waheed Ali Umrani can be contacted at: Waheedumrani947@gmail.com

For instructions on how to order reprints of this article, please visit our website:
www.emeraldgrouppublishing.com/licensing/reprints.htm
Or contact us for further details: permissions@emeraldinsight.com