See discussions, stats, and author profiles for this publication at: https://www.researchgate.

net/publication/325607919

Developing a sustainable HRM system from a contextual perspective

Article in Corporate Social Responsibility and Environmental Management · June 2018

DOI: 10.1002/csr.1528

CITATIONS READS

9 85

3 authors:

Rosalia Diaz-Carrion Macarena Lopez-Fernandez

Universidad de Sevilla Universidad de Cádiz
11 PUBLICATIONS 28 CITATIONS 31 PUBLICATIONS 180 CITATIONS

SEE PROFILE SEE PROFILE

Pedro M. Romero-Fernandez
Universidad de Cádiz
41 PUBLICATIONS 617 CITATIONS

SEE PROFILE

Some of the authors of this publication are also working on these related projects:

Knowledge management impact on organization & effect on turnover intention View project

Sustainable HRM View project

All content following this page was uploaded by Rosalia Diaz-Carrion on 10 April 2019.

The user has requested enhancement of the downloaded file.

Received: 16 August 2017 Revised: 3 February 2018 Accepted: 26 February 2018
DOI: 10.1002/csr.1528

RESEARCH ARTICLE

Developing a sustainable HRM system from a contextual

perspective
Rosalia Diaz‐Carrion | Macarena López‐Fernández | Pedro M. Romero‐Fernandez

Facultad de Ciencias Económicas y

Empresariales, University of Cadiz, Cádiz,
Spain
Correspondence
Rosalia Diaz‐Carrion, University of Cadiz,
Facultad de Ciencias Económicas y
Empresariales, Universidad de Cádiz, Avenida
Enrique Villegas Vélez 2, 11002 Cádiz, Spain.
Email: rosalia.diaz@uca.es
Abstract
Adopting a sustainability approach in management has become an imperative for
organizations. This article addresses this challenge by establishing the criteria for
the implementation of a human resource management (HRM) system based on an
approach of corporate social responsibility (CSR). It also provides a measurement
scale for CSR in the field of HRM. We analyse the sustainability reports of 194 com-
panies quoted on the main stock exchanges of Germany, Spain, Sweden and the
United Kingdom. Furthermore, we review the main international CSR standards.
Finally, we develop a Delphi study among academic experts. The results have practi-
cal implications. They suggest that human resource managers must play a proactive
role in pushing their organizations to develop employment practices with a CSR ori-
entation. This will have positive effects for companies internally by enhancing
employees' satisfaction and commitment toward the organization, and externally by
improving the image that the company projects to society.

KEY W ORDS

corporate social responsibility, CSR measurement scale, Delphi study, institutional theory,
stakeholder theory, sustainable HRM

1 | I N T RO D U CT I O N literature on sustainable HRM. Sustainable HRM is understood as HR

Corporate social responsibility (CSR) and human resource management
(HRM) have traditionally been conceived as independent fields. How-
ever, the interface between these two areas is relevant for companies
due to the positive organizational outcomes for both internal and
external stakeholders (Jamali, El Dirani, & Harwood, 2015). While the
study of HRM focuses primarily on internal aspects of the company
and CSR has traditionally focused on external elements (the environ-
ment, the local community etc.), the two functions overlap. This is
observed in both the practical and academic spheres. Regarding the
former, the affinities between the two functions are reflected in the
main international standards that organizations rely on to certify their
commitments vis‐a‐vis CSR. The most widespread worldwide standard,
the Global Reporting Initiative (GRI) (Moratis & Brandt, 2017), includes
information related to HRM and CSR – labour practices, decent work
and respect for human rights. In regard to the academic sphere, the
interrelation between CSR and HRM is reflected in the increasing
policies and practices that contribute to improving labour and
employees' quality of life (Dupont, Ferauge, & Giuliano, 2013).
Although the sustainable HRM literature has evolved in recent
years, its translation into actual managerial practices remains a chal-
lenge for many organizations (Jamali et al., 2015). The literature
includes descriptions of efforts to delimit the content of sustainable
HRM systems in terms of the policies and practices they encompass
(e.g. Barrena‐Martínez, López‐Fernández, & Romero‐Fernández,
2017; Bučiūnienė & Kazlauskaitė, 2012; Celma, Garcia‐Martínez, &
Coenders, 2014; Newman, Miao, Hofman, & Zhu, 2016). However,
previous studies present an exclusively national approach, not consid-
ering contextual aspects that shape sustainable HRM. Consideration
of the institutional pressures of the context allows an understanding
of the reasons that companies incorporate CSR into their HRM sys-
tems. The importance of legitimacy for companies' survival in the long
term justifies the relevance of the consideration of institutional theory
in the determination of a sustainable HRM system. This is the

Corp Soc Resp Env Ma. 2018;1–11. wileyonlinelibrary.com/journal/csr Copyright © 2018 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd and ERP Environment 1
2 DIAZ‐CARRION
approach adopted by this research, which pursues two objectives.
First, it aims to develop a system of policies and practices of sustain-
able HRM. Second, it seeks to determine a measurement scale of sus-
tainable HRM.
To meet the first objective, in addition to an exhaustive review of
the literature, an in‐depth analysis of the sustainability reports of a
sample of 194 companies from European countries with significant
institutional differences was performed. Furthermore, the main inter-
national CSR standards in the field of HRM have been analysed. To
meet the second objective, a validation of the measurement scale of
the sustainable HRM system previously developed was carried out.
This was done by a panel of academic experts in the areas of HRM
and CSR from different European countries through a Delphi study.
The paper is structured as follows. First, the main theoretical
foundations on which the research is built are presented (stakeholder
and institutional theories) and the literature on sustainable HRM is
reviewed. Second, the research methods employed for the analysis
are presented. The procedure followed to identify the system of sus-
tainable HRM is detailed, as well as the Delphi study that was devel-
oped to validate the measurement scale. Third, the main findings of
the study are presented. Finally, the paper's main contributions, prac-
tical implications, limitations and future study directions are discussed
in the conclusion section.
2 | T HE O R E T I CA L B A CK GR O U N D
2.1 | The stakeholder and institutional theories as
frameworks for studying sustainable HRM
In stakeholder theory, companies need to respond to stakeholders'
demands and expectations for long‐term success. Therefore, firms
should consider the interests of all stakeholders who can affect or
can be affected by the firm. However, due to the scarcity of resources
that companies face, they must prioritize the satisfaction of the inter-
est groups that are key for business success (Boesso, Favotto, &
Michelon, 2015; Farooq, Payaud, Merunka, & Valette‐Florence,
2014). Employee satisfaction is a fundamental aspect for business suc-
cess, since employees play a central role in business operations
(Albrecht, Bakker, Gruman, Macey, & Saks, 2015; Shen & Benson,
2016). The application of CSR in HRM is likely to improve workers'
satisfaction and commitment to the organization, and consequently
the firm's chances of long‐term survival (Jamali et al., 2015). Under this
assumption, organizations need to pay attention to employees' needs
and expectations in relation to employment policies and practices.
However, external pressures make organizations act to adapt to
their external contexts through isomorphic mechanisms. The response
to these pressures provides the company with social legitimacy, as
indicated by institutional theory. By accepting the institutional pres-
sures, companies transfer the values of the external context to their
organizational structures, strategies and practices, thus generating
institutional isomorphism (Frynas & Stephens, 2015). To the extent
that CSR becomes a relevant issue in a society, companies, in an
attempt to respond to the pressures of the context by adopting iso-
morphism, incorporate CSR in their management practices. Therefore,
ET AL.
institutional theory allows for the advancement in the study of HRM
from a contextual perspective, since it provides a framework for
understanding some reasons that lead companies to incorporate CSR
into their HRM. The application of generally accepted CSR principles
such as equality of opportunity, objectivity, transparency and empow-
erment into HRM is likely to provide the company with social legiti-
macy (Gallego‐Álvarez & Quina‐Custodio, 2017).
Despite the expected similarities in the institutional context
across Europe and the attempt to homogenize CSR through interna-
tional standards such as the GRI, significant differences in CSR among
European countries remain (Maon, Swaen, & Lindgreen, 2017). Given
the distance observed in the institutional context among European
countries and the different HRM systems that exist in Europe, the
consideration of institutional pressures in the determination of a sus-
tainable HRM system becomes fundamental. This consideration will
enable a more accurate view of sustainable HR policies and practices
in the European context in comparison to studies that adopt an exclu-
sively national approach (Barrena‐Martínez et al., 2017).
This paper provides a model of sustainable HRM that, from a con-
textual perspective, takes into consideration the institutional pres-
sures of context and the influence of internationally accepted
standards that drive mimetic isomorphism (Figure 1).
2.2 | Moving to a sustainable approach in HRM
Several authors argue that HRM is the organizational function that
presents the greatest potential for the incorporation of CSR practices
(Jamali et al., 2015; Sharma, Sharma, & Devi, 2011). In addition, a
greater integration of the two areas can produce synergies, generating
a process of co‐creation – a joint creation of value for the different
stakeholders – as indicated by Jamali et al. (2015).
Despite the importance of sustainable HRM, empirical evidence
shows that companies are more focused on implementing strategic
HRM than on developing HRM based on a CSR framework
(Westermann‐Behaylo, Berman, & Van Buren, 2013). This supports
the managerial view of HRM practices, which are primarily aimed at
improving the firm's economic performance (Greenwood, 2013).
However, this thinking leads to several dissonances and tensions
perceived by a firm's different stakeholders, such as employees,
governments and social communities (McWilliams & Siegel, 2011).
Therefore, it is necessary to adopt an approach that considers the
demands of the different stakeholders of the firm – predominantly,
employees – as key players in obtaining a firm's competitive advan-
tage – (Jamali et al., 2015). Hence the importance of the implementa-
tion of sustainable HRM, not only to obtain long‐term competitive
advantages but also to improve the quality of life of society in general
(Ehnert, Harry, & Zink, 2014).
This need to evolve from strategic to sustainable HRM is evi-
denced in the academic literature (Kramar, 2014). A growing body
of research has been focused on sustainable HRM in recent years
(Voegtlin & Greenwood, 2016). Some studies relate sustainable
HRM to organizational performance (e.g. Bučiūnienė & Kazlauskaitė,
2012; De Bussy & Suprawan, 2012). Their main contribution has been
to relate these practices to positive financial performance. Other
studies have tried to advance research by going beyond the
DIAZ‐CARRION ET AL.
FIGURE 1 Research model
consideration of the financial outcome to include the social outcomes
associated with CSR. According to these studies, sustainable HRM
increases employees' motivation and improves their quality of life
(see, e.g., Davies & Crane, 2010; Newman et al., 2016; Shen &
Benson, 2016). Furthermore, the effects of sustainable HRM, not only
on employees but also on their families and the community in which
the company operates, have been explored in recent literature
(Cleveland, Byrne, & Cavanagh, 2015; Mariappanadar, 2014). How-
ever, there is a need to concretize the practices that shape sustain-
able HRM (Jamali et al., 2015). The lack of consensus lies, among
other aspects, in the difficulty of stipulating what specific policies
include CSR, and more specifically how they relate to the field of
HRM (Voegtlin & Greenwood, 2016).
2.3 | Previous research on sustainable HRM
Given the need to define content in terms of policies and practices of
sustainable HRM, several studies have tried to identify a set of sus-
tainable policies and practices in the area of employee management.
For example, Barrena‐Martínez et al. (2017), focused on the Spanish
context, found eight HR policies with a social orientation: employ-
ment, management of labour relations, occupational health and safety,
training, diversity and equal opportunities, equity in remuneration,
working conditions and social protection, and communication and
social dialogue. Jamali et al. (2015), through a literature review,
pointed to the importance of practices related to the recruitment
and retention of employees with an orientation toward CSR, and the
consideration of the sustainable behaviour of companies in the pro-
motion, performance evaluation and remuneration of employees.
Dupont et al. (2013) developed a case study of a Finish company
and found three policies: recruitment and employment access, training
and career development, and wellbeing in the workplace. Bučiūnienė
and Kazlauskaitė (2012) centred their study in Lithuania, finding five
HR policies with a social orientation: participation of minority
employees, flexible management of working time and job rotation,
health and well‐being, ownership shares and communication. Similarly,
Jørgensen, Becker, and Matthews (2011) identified three types of
3
sustainable HR policy in the literature: employee acquisition, develop-
ment, and workforce management. Vuontisjärvi (2006) found 10 per-
sonnel policies linked to CSR in the Finnish context, ranging from
training to work–family balance (Table 1).
From the literature reviewed in this study, it can be observed
that there are policies in the area of HRM that have a strong CSR
content, including those related to occupational safety and health,
employment, labour relations, training and development, diversity,
equal opportunities, remuneration, communication, transparency,
work–family balance, wellbeing, staff involvement etc. Although
these studies make an effort to identify a set of sustainable HR pol-
icies, they adopt an exclusively national approach. However, sustain-
able HR policies and practices are not independent of the external
context in which the organization operates, as CSR is largely deter-
mined by external pressures (Gallego‐Álvarez & Quina‐Custodio,
2017). The institutional context of the firm determines to a large
extent the implementation of a sustainable HRM system. Hence,
adopting a contextual approach in the study of sustainable HRM
becomes crucial.
Due to the relevance of considering the external context and the
scarcity of research adopting a contextual approach in determining
sustainable HRM, this research aims to contributing to the literature
by adopting a contextual perspective in the development of a sustain-
able HRM system and the determination of a measurement scale for
sustainable HRM.
3 | R E S E A RC H M E T HO D S
3.1 | Country sample
In order to have a broad vision of sustainable HRM systems in Europe,
this study selected countries that present marked institutional differ-
ences. Following the literature on varieties of capitalism, specifically
the classification by Midttun, Gautesen, and Gjølberg (2006), a coun-
try from each cluster was chosen: Germany (Central European), Spain
(Latin), Sweden (Nordic) and the United Kingdom (Anglo‐Saxon). The
4 DIAZ‐CARRION ET AL.

TABLE 1 Revising the literature on sustainable HR policies

Author/s Sustainable HR policies Methods Study scope

Barrena‐Martínez et al.
(2017)
Jamali et al. (2015)
Celma et al. (2014)
Dupont et al. (2013)
Bučiūnienė and Kazlauskaitė participation of minority employees, flexible management of working time and
(2012)
Jørgensen et al. (2011)
Beaupré, Cloutier, Gendron,
Jiménez, and Morin
(2008)
Orlitzky and Swanson
(2006)
Vuontisjärvi (2006)
Employment, labour management relations, occupational health and safety, Sustainability reports, national (Spain)
training and education, and diversity and equal opportunities GRI and ISO26000
management of employment relationships, prevention, health and safety at work, literature review
training and continuous development, diversity and equal opportunities, fair
remuneration and social benefits, communication, transparency, social
dialogue, attraction and retention of employees and work–family balance
remuneration, training, internal information and communication, health and empirical national (Spain)
safety in the workplace, equal opportunities and non‐discrimination, and
work–life balance
recruitment and employment access, training and career development and empirical case study
wellbeing in the workplace (GDF SUEZ
Group)
empirical national
job rotation, health and well‐being, ownership shares and communication (Lithuania)
recruitment, development and management of employees literature review
management of change, training programs, employee communication systems, empirical national
personal and professional life balance policies and occupational health (France)
prevention
training and development, recruitment and selection, performance appraisal and literature review
compensation
training and staff development, pay and benefits, participation and staff empirical national
involvement, values and principles, employee health and well‐being, (Finland)
employment policy, measurement of policies, security in employment, equal
opportunities and work–life balance

country with the highest gross domestic product (GDP) of each cluster
was selected, with the exception of Spain. Spain was chosen with the
objective of expanding the studies developed in that country, among
which Barrena‐Martínez et al. (2017) set the basis for future research.
The choice of GDP as a selection criterion is justified because, as evi-
denced by Espigares and López (2006), there is a positive relationship
between GDP and CSR practices. Countries with higher levels of GDP
have a greater tendency to develop sustainable practices.
3.2.2 | International CSR standards
In spite of the diversity of practices observed in the sustainability
reports from the organizations in the different countries, there is a
certain degree of homogenization. This is explained, in large part, by
the proliferation of standards, principles and CSR certifications world-
wide (Moratis & Brandt, 2017).
In order to complement the information on sustainable HRM
extracted from the sustainability reports and the literature review, a
comprehensive analysis of the main international CSR initiatives deal-
ing with aspects related to HRM was developed. Following Nikolaeva

3.2 | Data collection procedure
3.2.1 | Sustainability reports
One of the basic aspects of CSR is the visibility that companies give to
the actions they develop in this area. Communicating to the stake-
holders the commitments made to meet their CSR demands becomes
a fundamental issue (Matten & Moon, 2008). Companies use sustain-
ability reports as an essential tool for this communication.
To determine the content of a sustainable HRM system in Europe,
a content analysis of the sustainability reports of 194 companies listed
on the main stock exchanges of Germany (DAX30), Spain (IBEX35),
Sweden (OMX Stockholm 30) and the United Kingdom (FTSE100)
was developed.
Companies listed on the main stock markets were chosen
because, being subject to continuous scrutiny by investors, customers
and other social actors, they have a high degree of commitment to dis-
close information (Dyduch & Krasodomska, 2017). Beyond the
demand of these companies to make public certain financial informa-
tion, they also show a strong tendency to transmit data that, although
not mandatory, have a strategic value, as is the case of information
about CSR (Romolini, Fissi, & Gori, 2014).
and Bicho (2011), the most widespread standards, principles and cer-
tifications worldwide were studied: GRI, International Organization
for Standardization 26000 (ISO26000), Occupation Health and Safety
Assessment Series for Health and Safety Management Systems
(OSHAS18001), Social Accountability 8000 (SA8000) and the United
Nations Global Compact (UNGC).
The analysis of the literature, the sustainability reports and the
CSR standards yielded a total of 98 SHR practices and six policies:
staffing, training, performance appraisal and career management, com-
pensation, work–family balance and diversity promotion, and occupa-
tional health and safety. Table 2 displays the identified policies and the
international CSR indices from which they were extracted.
It can be observed that the policy of occupational health and safety
is covered in all the CSR standards analysed. Staffing policy, which
gathers practices related to selection, dismissal and expatriation, is cov-
ered in all the standards except OSHAS18001, since that standard is
fully dedicated to actions related to health and safety. Training policy
is covered in GRI and ISO26000. Compensation policy, work–family
balance and diversity promotion are present in GRI and SA8000.
Finally, performance appraisal and career management is only covered
in GRI. In view of these data, GRI is the CSR standard that deals more
DIAZ‐CARRION ET AL. 5

TABLE 2 Sustainable HR policies from international CSR standards

Sustainable HR policies GRI ISO26000 OSHAS18001 SA8000 UNGC

Staffing
Training
Performance appraisal and
career management
Compensation
Work–family balance and
diversity promotion
Occupational health and
safety
employment (LA1, LA2, LA3; employment (6.4, 6.4.3, 6.4.4, – – Principle 6
LA5) 6.4.5, 6.3.10)
training and education (LA10, human development and training – – –
LA11, LA12) in the workplace (Issue 5,
Section 6.4, 6.4.7 6.8.5)
training and education (LA11, – – – –
LA12)
diversity and equal – – remuneration ‐
opportunity (LA14) (Section 8)
diversity and equal – – working hours –
opportunity (LA13, LA14) (Section 7)
occupational health and health and safety at work full document* health and safety –
safety (LA6, LA7, LA8, LA9) (Issue 4, Section 6.4, (Section 3)
6.4.6, 6.8.3, 6.8.4, 6.8.8)

*OSHAS18001 is a certification system focused exclusively on the field of occupational health and safety in organizations.

widely with aspects related to HRM because it covers all policies iden-
tified in the literature review and the sustainability reports.
In regard to the specific practices (Table 31), it is important to note
that they were all present in the sustainability reports of the compa-
nies under analysis.
The practices extracted from the previous analyses cover a wide
range of concrete actions in the field of sustainable HRM. All of them
have a clear social orientation since they adjust to one or several CSR
principles (equality of opportunity, objectivity, transparency, empow-
erment etc.). For example, practices related to equal opportunities
can be found: ‘To guarantee the application of the principles of diver-
sity and equal opportunities in all HRM practices’. Regarding objectiv-
ity, ‘To have rigorous and objective assessment procedures to
determine an employee's development plan’ can be observed within
the performance evaluation and career management policy. In regard
to practices related to transparency, the practice ‘To develop transpar-
ent and unbiased selection processes’ is included within the staffing
policy. Finally, there are practices related to empowerment of
employees, such as ‘To take into account employees’ preferences
when determining training’, where the participation of employees
regarding the decisions that affect them is highlighted.
3.3 | Validation technique: A Delphi study
Several authors point to the need to promote sustainable HRM by
establishing mechanisms that objectively and effectively allow its eval-
uation (Jamali et al., 2015; Voegtlin & Greenwood, 2016). In addition,
a scarcity of studies that validate the proposed scales is observed in
the literature (Toliver, 2016). In response to this need, the second
objective of this study is to develop a measurement scale for CSR in
the HRM field.
In order to create a scale of sustainable HRM, a panel of experts
validated and assessed the set of policies and practices identified in
this study. This second stage of research was implemented through
a Delphi study developed among academics from different European
countries who are experts in the area of HRM and CSR. Delphi
1
The 98 practices displayed show the final description of each of the items after
analysis by the panel of experts.
methodology was the most appropriate in this study due to its useful-
ness in exploratory investigations that do not use previously tested
constructs (García‐Martínez, Aquino‐Zú iga, Guzmán‐Salas, &
Medina‐Meléndez, 2012; Okoli & Pawlowski, 2004; Streiner &
Kottner, 2014).
According to Murry and Hammons (1995), the Delphi technique is
a qualitative methodology based on the opinion of a group of experts
on a specific subject that is very useful for studying complex problems.
The experts' assumptions are made in successive rounds, or iterations,
which are developed anonymously, in order to try to achieve consen-
sus but ensuring the autonomy of the participants. The implementa-
tion of several iterations allows the participants to reconsider their
answers to obtain the maximum possible consensus on a topic. Once
a sufficient level of agreement is reached, a new round is not neces-
sary (Linstone & Turoff, 2002). Hsu and Sandford (2007) suggest that
the first iteration should be based on an extensive review of the liter-
ature. From this review, the items should be modified, evaluated and
modified again according to the comments and assessments made by
the panellists.
For the development of the Delphi study, according to the pro-
posal of Astigarraga (2005), four phases were defined: formulation of
the problem, selection of the panel, elaboration and launch of ques-
tionnaires and analysis of the results.
3.3.1 | Formulation of the problem
Taking the practices identified throughout this study (Table 3), we
sought to reach a sufficient degree of consensus about their validity.
The validity refers to the capacity to significantly and adequately mea-
sure the condition of sustainable practices. We also intended to deter-
mine their level of adjustment or importance with respect to CSR.
3.3.2 | Selection of the panel
The experience of the panellists in a Delphi study is an essential aspect
because the validity of the results depends, fundamentally, on their
good judgment (Hsu & Sandford, 2007). For this reason, the main
criteria for their selection were their academic, teaching and research
experience in the fields of HRM and CSR. Many authors have dealt
with the optimum size of the Delphi panel. Astigarraga (2005) points
6 DIAZ‐CARRION ET AL.

TABLE 3 Results of the Delphi study (second iteration): item definition

Staffing

STAF1 To develop transparent and unbiased selection processes. STAF8 To help dismissed employees by implementing actions such
as training, preparation for interviews, support for
entrepreneurship etc.
STAF2 To encourage internal promotion over external contracting as STAF9 To continue to have the support of the most experienced
a mechanism for staff motivation. employees, even once they are retired.
STAF3 To clearly detail the criteria employed in the internal selection STAF10 To advise workers on how to manage their exit from the
processes and appoint the individual in charge of them. organization.
STAF4 To recruit in universities (through internship programmes STAF11 To develop standardized selection processes at an
etc.) to encourage the recruitment of young people. international level.
STAF5 To hire people at risk of social exclusion beyond what is STAF12 To encourage the contracting of local workers and managers
required by law. in the case of internationalization.
STAF6 To implement specific programmes to facilitate the STAF13 In the case of expatriation, to help employees with the
adaptation and integration of new candidates (induction adaptation process.
handbook etc.).
STAF7 In the case of restructuring, to favour the employees' STAF14 To have a repatriation plan so the expatriate's labour
relocation to other areas of the company or their voluntary situation is not altered after the expatriation period.
resignation.
Training

TRAI1 To have skill training programmes and continuous learning TRAI6 To offer mentoring programmes as part of the training of
that support workers' employability. employees.
TRAI2 To provide periodic training to all employees regardless of TRAI7 To help employees to fund educational programmes
their professional category, gender, age etc. (master's degree etc.).
TRAI3 To take into account employees' preferences when TRAI8 To conduct programmes to improve the training of the
determining training. family of employees.
TRAI4 To establish training levels according to the talent, TRAI9 To provide training for host countries' employees.
commitment and performance appraisal of every employee
TRAI5 To have an individual training itinerary for every employee.
Performance evaluation and career management

EVAL1 To have rigorous and objective assessment procedures to EVAL6 To have ‘fast track’ career plans that favour internal
determine an employee's development plan. promotion within a short time.
EVAL2 To set promotions based on employees' merit. EVAL7 To give responsibility to employees for their own
development.
EVAL3 To evaluate performance and decide career plans for all EVAL8 To provide career opportunities for young people.
employees, regardless of their professional category,
gender etc.
EVAL4 To employ different assessment systems depending on the EVAL9 To offer periodic feedback to employees about their
different employee groups. development.
EVAL5 To implement a 360‐degree performance evaluation system. EVAL10 To give workers the opportunity to decide on their careers.
Compensation

COMP1 Remuneration practices are transparent for all members of COMP10 To revise salaries yearly in order to adjust them both to
the organization. performance and to external indicators, such as the CPI
(consumer price index).
COMP2 The salary gap between the highest and the lowest wage COMP11 To perform audits of salary review processes to ensure that
(including managers) is agreed between employees and they are not discriminatory, and use them to improve the
managers of the company. remuneration system.
COMP3 The reward policy does not discriminate by gender, type of COMP12 To link part of the compensation to employees' compliance
contract etc. with CSR goals.
COMP4 The compensation system considers the employee's skills, job COMP13 To provide non‐monetary compensation to employees.
position and performance.
COMP5 To link rewards to both individual and collective performance. COMP14 To reward employees for giving suggestions about quality or
organizational health and safety improvements.
COMP6 To provide social benefits as motivation and a retention COMP15 To offer compensation above the minimal pay required by
mechanism (retirement plan, health insurance etc.). the host country national laws.
COMP7 To offer rewards by way of company shares. COMP16 Pensions, health insurance etc. are better than the
legislation of the host country.
COMP8 To take into consideration employees' expectations when COMP17 To set wages above collective agreements of each country.
establishing compensation
COMP9 To have a flexible compensation plan in which employees can decide which parts of their salary are monetary and which are social benefits.
DIAZ‐CARRION ET AL.
Work–family balance and diversity promotion
DIV1 To conduct climate surveys to achieve a comfortable working
environment in which the dignity of employees is
respected and their needs are considered.
DIV2 To facilitate the free interaction between employees and
their representatives.
DIV3 To involve workers' representatives in relevant decisions
(collective agreements, the percentage of temporary staff
etc.).
DIV4 To ensure that most of the workers are covered by collective
agreements.
DIV5 To communicate to employees the changes that might affect
their contractual relationship with the company ahead of
the minimum period required by law.
DIV6 To encourage decentralization and employee autonomy for
making decisions.
DIV7 To perform audits of suppliers and subcontractors to assure
that they treat their employees in a responsible manner.
DIV8 To encourage employees' engagement in social projects as
part of their working week.
DIV9 To report on the performance of the company in economic,
social and environmental issues.
DIV10 To implement formal and informal mechanisms for
communication with employees.
DIV11 To try to improve communication among employees.
DIV12 To encourage communication between employees and line
managers.
DIV13 To encourage participation and ideas exchange at both
horizontal and vertical levels.
DIV14 To have formal mechanisms for workers to anonymously
express their concerns about unethical or illegal actions.
DIV15 To guarantee the application of the principles of diversity and
equal opportunities in all HRM practices.
DIV16 To have a formal equal opportunities policy.
DIV17 To create an environment in which groups of workers in a
minority (e.g. of colour, with mobility challenges etc.) feel
integrated in the organization.
DIV18 To aim to increase the presence of workers in a minority (e.g.
of colour, with mobility challenges etc.) in management
positions.
DIV19 To facilitate employees affected by a disability to remain in
their job position by adjusting working hours etc.
DIV20 HR policies are always aimed at assessing the merit of the worker.
Occupational health and safety
SAF1 To accredit an appropriate level of health and safety with
standards and certifications such as OSHAS, ISOS etc.
SAF2 To have formal health and safety committees that carry out
monitoring and control activities beyond those required by
law.
SAF3 To involve employees in the establishment of a plan for
prevention of occupational risks.
SAF4 To minimize psychological and physical work risks.
SAF5 To provide training to improve accident prevention/health
and safety beyond what is required by law.
out that a sample of between 7 and 30 experts is considered sufficient
for the methodology. In the present research 60 European academic
experts were selected, with 24 finally participating. This was consid-
ered an adequate size for achieving the study's objectives.
7
DIV21 To provide training on ethical codes of conduct, respect for
human rights, environmental sustainability etc.
DIV22 To provide training for both workers and managers on the
importance of diversity.
DIV23 To register incidents related to discrimination and carry out
corrective actions.
DIV24 To have a person or team responsible for managing diversity
in the organization.
DIV25 To favour the existence of a proper work–family balance for
employees.
DIV26 To allow modifications of the workday and shifts according
to workers' personal needs
DIV27 To be flexible when authorizing paternity/maternity,
breastfeeding leave and unpaid leave for family reasons.
DIV28 To give the possibility of extending maternity/paternity
leave when the child is affected by a disability.
DIV29 To facilitate the transfer to other locations for personal or
professional reasons (family, health etc.).
DIV30 To guarantee the employee the possibility of returning to
the same position after the maternity/paternity leave.
DIV31 To provide monetary compensation during the maternity/
paternity leave beyond what is required by law.
DIV32 To provide workers with childcare facilities, both during
working hours and outside work.
DIV33 To subsidize and advise about childcare services and
assistance to dependant family members.
DIV34 To organize educational play activities for employees'
families.
DIV35 To offer employees holiday destinations at lower prices.
DIV36 To carry out regular audits to verify the company's
compliance with the work–family balance policy.
DIV37 To have a formalized code of conduct based on the main
international sustainability standards (Global Compact,
Equator Principles etc.).
DIV38 To present reports verified by independent consulting
companies according to internationally accepted
standards such as GRI, ISO26000 etc.
DIV39 To publish any progress, gaps and challenges in the field of
responsible personnel management.
SAF6 To promote sport and healthy living inside and outside
work; for example, developing sports activities, raising
awareness of the benefits of healthy living etc.
SAF7 To be concerned about both workers' and their families'
health by providing free medical reviews, psychological
support services etc.
SAF8 To keep a record of job accidents, illnesses and workers at
risk of suffering occupational diseases with the goal of
improving health and safety at work.
SAF9 To agree with trade unions with regard to improving health
and safety.
3.3.3 | Elaboration and launch of questionnaires
Once the problem was defined and the experts selected, the third
stage consisted of the elaboration and the launch of the questionnaire,
8 DIAZ‐CARRION
which was sent electronically through the Survey Monkey platform.
Panellists were asked: (i) whether they considered a certain practice
to be sustainable; and (ii) to assess the degree to which this practice
was in accord with CSR. For their valuation they were asked on a
Likert scale from 0 to 8 about the importance of the practice for
CSR (0, not important; 1, low importance; 8, high importance). Two
rounds of the Delphi study were conducted, reaching sufficient levels
of consensus on the reliability and assessment of SHR practices.
After the first round, the data were tabulated and the reliability
of the results was analysed. The definition of each practice was
reviewed according to the suggestions provided by the experts in
the section titled for that purpose in the questionnaire. Subse-
quently, the average value given by the panellists for each practice
was calculated.
Next, in order to study the deviation in the answers of each
expert for each practice with respect to the average valuation for that
item, the confidence interval was calculated for each practice. This
allowed discerning whether such differences were significant, in which
case panellists whose answers were outside the confidence interval
were asked to reconsider their answers in a second round.
The 24 academics involved in the first stage participated in the
second round. A customized questionnaire was sent to each panellist
asking them to reconsider their responses to those practices in
which their responses had deviated significantly from the panel's
average value.
3.3.4 | Analysis of the results
The reliability of the responses was analysed by employing Cronbach's
alpha (Cronbach, 1951). Although this value depends on the context,
Bland and Altman (1997) suggest that it should be above 0.90. In
the present study, high levels of consensus are observed for all poli-
cies – calculated as the average of all practices – as can be seen in
Table 4. This justifies the validity of their content and their degree
of importance for CSR.
Regarding the results shown by Cronbach's alpha, all policies have
a high internal consistency (values between 0.8 and 0.9), increasing for
all policies from the first to the second iteration. High levels of con-
sensus are also observed in the first and second iterations when con-
sidering the aggregate data for all the practices (0.985 and 0.987,
respectively).
In view of the high levels of consensus reached in the second
round of the Delphi study, a third round was not necessary. The
TABLE 4 Cronbach's alpha for the two iterations
Sustainable HR policies 1st iteration 2nd iteration
Staffing 0.872 0.896
Training 0.922 0.927
Performance appraisal and career 0.954 0.973
management
Compensation 0.901 0.918
Work–family balance and diversity 0.832 0.853
promotion
Occupational health and safety 0.894 0.905
ET AL.
results of the Delphi study were then analysed and the main
findings extracted.
4 | MAIN FINDINGS
The present research points to the importance of the policies identi-
fied in the previous literature. CSR literature shows a high degree of
consensus on the identification of policies related to training, work–
family balance and diversity promotion, and occupational health and
safety, as sustainable (Table 5).
The results of the second iteration show that, for most practices,
relatively high data agreements are obtained regarding the importance
of the CSR according to the group of experts (Figure 2).
In particular, 99% of the practices are above the midpoint of the
measurement scale. The fact that the average of all practices tends
to be on the upper levels of the scale shows that academics bestow
high importance to these items and, consequently, that these practices
are clearly oriented toward CSR. The results can be considered logical
since all the practices evaluated by the panellists were considered
actions that the literature emphasizes as sustainable, as well as sus-
tainability reports of benchmark companies and the main CSR
standards.
Hence, this research provides a higher degree of detail by adding
a wide range of specific practices of sustainable HRM in comparison
to the previous literature. Furthermore, it provides a ranking of SHR
practices according to their adjustment to the CSR principles.
Table 6 shows the 10 most relevant practices according to the results
of our analysis.
The most sustainable practices are related, first, to the establish-
ment of rewards that do not discriminate by gender, type of contract
TABLE 5 Consensus in the literature on sustainable HR policies
Sustainable HR policies Source
Staffing Vuontisjärvi (2006); Orlitzky and Swanson
(2006); Jørgensen et al. (2011); Dupont
et al. (2013); Barrena‐Martínez et al.
(2017)
Training Orlitzky and Swanson (2006); Vuontisjärvi
(2006); Beaupré et al. (2008); Jørgensen
et al. (2011); Dupont et al. (2013);
Celma et al. (2014); Jamali et al. (2015);
Barrena‐Martínez et al. (2017)
Performance appraisal and Orlitzky and Swanson (2006); Vuontisjärvi
career management (2006); Jørgensen et al. (2011); Dupont
et al. (2013)
Compensation Orlitzky and Swanson (2006); Vuontisjärvi
(2006); Celma et al. (2014); Jamali et al.
(2015)
Work–family balance and Orlitzky and Swanson (2006); Vuontisjärvi
diversity promotion (2006); Beaupré et al. (2008); Jørgensen
et al. (2011); Bučiūnienė and
Kazlauskaitė (2012); Celma et al. (2014);
Jamali et al. (2015); Barrena‐Martínez
et al. (2017)
Occupational health and Vuontisjärvi (2006); Beaupré et al. (2008);
safety Jørgensen et al. (2011); Bučiūnienė and
Kazlauskaitė (2012); Celma et al. (2014);
Jamali et al. (2015); Barrena‐Martínez
et al. (2017)
DIAZ‐CARRION ET AL. 9

FIGURE 2 Average value of sustainable HR practices (second iteration of the Delphi study) [Colour figure can be viewed at wileyonlinelibrary.
com]

TABLE 6 Ranking of sustainable HR practices diversity and equal opportunities, and to favour the existence of a

Average
Items Sustainable HR practices value
COMP3 The reward policy does not discriminate 7.74
by gender, type of contract etc.
SAF4 To minimize psychological and physical 7.58
work risks.
DIV28 To give the possibility of extending 7.54
maternity/paternity leave when the
child is affected by a disability.
DIV9 To report on the performance of the 7.46
company in economic, social and
environmental issues.
SAF8 To keep a record of job accidents, 7.42
illnesses and workers at risk of
suffering occupational diseases
with the goal of improving health
and safety at work.
DIV15 To guarantee the application of the 7.38
principles of diversity and equal
opportunities in all HRM practices.
DIV25 To favour the existence of a proper 7.33
work–family balance for employees.
DIV23 To register incidents related to 7.25
discrimination and carry out corrective
actions.
DIV16 To have a formal equal opportunities 7.17
policy.
DIV19 To facilitate employees affected by a 7.17
disability to remain in their job position
by adjusting working hours etc.
etc. Second, the importance of minimizing psychological and physical
work risks is highlighted by our study. Third, practices related to
work–family balance, such as the possibility of extending maternity/
paternity leave when the child is affected by a disability, become espe-
cially relevant. Next, our results point to the importance of practices
related to transparent communication with employees, followed by
those aimed at guaranteeing the application of the principles of
proper work–family balance.
5 | CO NC LUSIO NS
In order to meet the objectives of the research, we have developed a
process of analysis of the literature on sustainability in HRM, the main
international CSR standards in the field of employee management and
the sustainability reports of a sample of 194 European companies.
This analysis has revealed a system of sustainable HRM formed by
six policies and 98 practices. These policies and practices were submit-
ted to a validation and evaluation process by a group of academic
experts through a Delphi study to develop a measurement scale of
sustainable HRM. Next, statistical tests were performed that offered
robust indicators of reliability concerning the items under analysis.
5.1 | Contributions
The present study creates value in several ways. First, it provides a
common theoretical framework between two traditionally indepen-
dent areas of research, CSR and HRM, making an important contribu-
tion to the literature that integrates them: sustainable HRM. This is a
relatively young field and, thus, is at an early stage of development
(Jamali et al., 2015). The identification of a wide range of practices
implies specifying and detailing in a comprehensive manner what a
sustainable HRM system encompasses. The sources from which the
information was extracted offer distinctive signs with respect to high
performance work systems. The practices identified in this research
incorporate an ethical commitment in the relations established
between the company and its employees, moving from a strategic to
a sustainable approach in the management of employees.
Second, the study adopts a contextual perspective by considering
countries that differ in their institutional contexts in Europe and the
mimetic pressures exerted by the main international CSR standards.
10
Due to the differences observed in the institutional context among
European countries, the consideration of the institutional context
has provided a wide vision of the activities that shape a sustainable
HRM system in Europe. This responds to a call in the literature that
speaks to the need to develop research on sustainable HRM configu-
rations and their interrelation to institutional aspects (Voegtlin &
Greenwood, 2016). In the same vein, Barrena‐Martínez et al. (2017)
point to the need to extend the study of sustainable HRM systems
to the European context in view of the discrepancies in CSR among
European countries.
Third, recent studies in the literature point to the need to promote
the sustainable HRM discipline by establishing mechanisms that objec-
tively and effectively allow its evaluation and comparison in a system-
atic way (Toliver, 2016). The present research makes a qualitative
validation of a measurement scale of the sustainable HRM system by
identifying numerical values and a ranking of practices in terms of their
importance for CSR.
Finally, this attempt to provide a consensual framework of specific
actions in the field of sustainable HRM is one of the first proposals
that, through a variety of sources including both academic (panel of
experts) and business perspectives (sustainability reports of bench-
mark companies), details the content of a sustainable HRM system
and the importance of the actions that it encompasses.
5.2 | Practical implications
The study has implications for practice. The results show actions that
add a social nuance to the management of employees that goes
beyond economic objectives. These actions pursue not only greater
performance at the individual level, but also the satisfaction of
employees' personal and professional expectations in a balanced
way. This can improve employees' wellbeing and commitment to the
organization, and consequently improve the organization's chances
for success in the long term. Therefore, our results recommend that
HR managers play a proactive role in pushing the organization to
develop employment practices with a CSR orientation that is based
on the principles of equality of opportunity, objectivity, transparency,
empowerment etc. In addition to the internal effects generated by a
responsible HRM, the company projects a more favourable image to
society. An HRM system based on CSR is likely to improve the
organization's employer branding, helping the firm to attract new
employees with high levels of competence and skills (Klimkiewicz &
Oltra, 2017).
Taking into account the advantages that a sustainable HRM gen-
erates at the organizational level, HR professional associations, busi-
ness schools and universities should focus on supporting current and
future HR managers in developing skills related to sustainable HRM.
Regarding professional associations, current practices are more ori-
ented to the diffusion of the traditional paradigm of strategic HRM
instead of sustainable HRM (Westermann‐Behaylo et al., 2013). We
emphasize a need to change the culture of these associations from
an approach exclusively focused on financial performance to a para-
digm centred on sustainability. In regard to management education,
we encourage universities and business schools to incorporate sus-
tainability as a core aspect in HRM instruction.
DIAZ‐CARRION ET AL.
5.3 | Limitations and future study directions
Along with the value of the qualitative validation of the scale provided
by the Delphi study developed in this research, future investigations
could include a quantitative validation of the scale. This could be done
by implementing statistical techniques useful for studies in early
stages of development such as factorial analysis or structural equation
models. Furthermore, based on the scale developed, future research
could explore the synergies that might exist between the practices in
order to develop configurations of sustainable HRM.
ORCID
Rosalia Diaz‐Carrion http://orcid.org/0000-0001-8420-2387
Macarena López‐Fernández http://orcid.org/0000-0003-4542-2445
Pedro M. Romero‐Fernandez http://orcid.org/0000-0002-7648-
9522
RE FE RE NC ES
Albrecht, S. L., Bakker, A. B., Gruman, J. A., Macey, W. H., & Saks, A. M.
(2015). Employee engagement, human resource management practices
and competitive advantage: An integrated approach. Journal of Organi-
zational Effectiveness: People and Performance, 2(1), 7–35. https://doi.
org/10.1108/JOEPP‐08‐2014‐0042
Astigarraga, E. (2005). El método Delphi. San Sebastián, Spain: Universidad
de Deusto, Facultad de CC. EE. y Empresariales.
Barrena‐Martínez, J., López‐Fernández, M., & Romero‐Fernández, P. M.
(2017). Towards a configuration of sustainable human resource man-
agement policies and practices: Findings from an academic
consensus. International Journal of Human Resource Management..
https://doi.org/10.1080/09585192.2017.1332669
Beaupré, D., Cloutier, J., Gendron, C., Jiménez, A., & Morin, D. (2008).
Gestion des ressources humaines, développement durable et
responsabilité sociale. Revue internationale de psychosociologie, 14(33),
77–140. https://doi.org/10.3917/rips.033.0077
Bland, J. M., & Altman, D. G. (1997). Statistics notes: Cronbach's alpha.
British Medical Journal, 314(7080), 572. https://doi.org/10.1136/
bmj.314.7080.572
Boesso, G., Favotto, F., & Michelon, G. (2015). Stakeholder prioritization,
strategic corporate social responsibility and company performance:
Further evidence. Corporate Social Responsibility and Environmental
Management, 22(6), 424–440. https://doi.org/10.1002/csr.1356
Bučiūnienė, I., & Kazlauskaitė, R. (2012). The linkage between HRM, CSR
and performance outcomes. Baltic Journal of Management, 7(1), 5–24.
https://doi.org/10.1108/17465261211195856
Celma, D., Garcia‐Martínez, E., & Coenders, G. (2014). Corporate social
responsibility in human resource management: An analysis of common
practices and their determinants in Spain. Corporate Social Responsibility
and Environmental Management, 21(2), 82–99. https://doi.org/
10.1002/csr.1301
Cleveland, J. N., Byrne, Z. S., & Cavanagh, T. M. (2015). The future of HR is
RH: Respect for humanity at work. Human Resource Management
Review, 25, 146–161. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.hrmr.2015.01.005
Cronbach, L. J. (1951). Coefficient alpha and the internal structure of tests.
Psychometrika, 16(3), 297–334. https://doi.org/10.1007/BF02310555
Davies, I. A., & Crane, A. (2010). Corporate social responsibility in small‐
and medium‐size enterprises: Investigating employee engagement in
fair trade companies. Business Ethics, 19(2), 126–139. https://doi.org/
10.1111/j.1467‐8608.2010.01586.x
De Bussy, N. M., & Suprawan, L. (2012). Most valuable stakeholders: The
impact of employee orientation on corporate financial performance.
Public Relations Review, 38(2), 280–287. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.
pubrev.2011.11.006
DIAZ‐CARRION ET AL.
Dupont, C., Ferauge, P., & Giuliano, R. (2013). The impact of corporate
social responsibility on human resource management: GDF SUEZ's
case. International Business Research, 6(12), 145–155. https://doi.org/
10.5539/ibr.v6n12p145
Dyduch, J., & Krasodomska, J. (2017). Determinants of corporate social
responsibility disclosure: An empirical study of Polish listed companies.
Sustainability, 9(11), 19–34. https://doi.org/10.3390/su9111934
Ehnert, I., Harry, W., & Zink, K. J. (2014). Sustainability and HRM. Sustain-
ability and Human Resource Management, 6, 3–32.
Espigares, J. L. N., & López, J. M. G. (2006). Corporate social responsibility
and economic growth. Estudios de Economía Aplicada, 24(2), 637–665.
Farooq, O., Payaud, M., Merunka, D., & Valette‐Florence, P. (2014). The
impact of corporate social responsibility on organizational commit-
ment: Exploring multiple mediation mechanisms. Journal of Business
Ethics, 125(4), 563–580.
Frynas, J. G., & Stephens, S. (2015). Political corporate social responsibility:
Reviewing theories and setting new agendas. International Journal of
Management Reviews, 17(4), 483–509.
Gallego‐Álvarez, I., & Quina‐Custodio, I. A. (2017). Corporate social
responsibility reporting and varieties of capitalism: An international
analysis of state‐led and liberal market economies. Corporate Social
Responsibility and Environmental Management, 24(6), 478–495.
García‐Martínez, V., Aquino‐Zú iga, S. P., Guzmán‐Salas, A., & Medina‐
Meléndez, A. (2012). Using the Delphi method as a strategy for the
assessment of quality indicators in distance education programs.
Revista Electrónica Calidad en la Educación Superior, 3(1), 200–222.
https://doi.org/10.22458/caes.v3i1.439
Greenwood, M. (2013). Ethical analyses of HRM: A review and research
agenda. Journal of Business Ethics, 114(2), 355–366. https://doi.org/
10.1007/s10551‐012‐1354‐y
Hsu, C. C., & Sandford, B. A. (2007). The Delphi technique: Making
sense of consensus. Practical Assessment, Research and Evaluation,
12(10), 1–8.
Jamali, D. R., El Dirani, A. M., & Harwood, I. A. (2015). Exploring human
resource management roles in corporate social responsibility: The
CSR–HRM co‐creation model. Business Ethics, 24(2), 125–143.
https://doi.org/10.1111/beer.12085
Jørgensen, F., Becker, K., & Matthews, J. (2011). The HRM practices of
innovative knowledge‐intensive firms. International Journal of
Technology Management, 56(2–4), 123–137. https://doi.org/10.1504/
IJTM.2011.042978
Klimkiewicz, K., & Oltra, V. (2017). Does CSR enhance employer attractive-
ness? The role of millennial job seekers' attitudes. Corporate Social
Responsibility and Environmental Management, 24, 449–463. https://
doi.org/10.1002/csr.1419
Kramar, R. (2014). Beyond strategic human resource management: Is
sustainable human resource management the next approach? Interna-
tional Journal of Human Resource Management, 25(8), 1069–1089.
https://doi.org/10.1080/09585192.2013.816863
Linstone, H. A., & Turoff, M. (2002). The Delphi method. Techniques and
applications. New York: Corporate Social Responsibility and Environ-
mental Management.
Maon, F., Swaen, V., & Lindgreen, A. (2017). One vision, different paths: An
investigation of corporate social responsibility initiatives in Europe.
Journal of Business Ethics, 143(2), 405–422. https://doi.org/10.1007/
s10551‐015‐2810‐2
Mariappanadar, S. (2014). Stakeholder harm index: A framework to review
work intensification from the critical HRM perspective. Human
Resource Management Review, 24(4), 313–329. https://doi.org/
10.1016/j.hrmr.2014.03.009
Matten, D., & Moon, J. (2008). ‘Implicit’ and ‘explicit’ CSR: A conceptual
framework for a comparative understanding of corporate social
responsibility. Academy of Management Review, 33(2), 404–424.
https://doi.org/10.5465/AMR.2008.31193458
View publication stats
11
McWilliams, A., & Siegel, D. S. (2011). Creating and capturing value:
Strategic corporate social responsibility, resource‐based theory, and
sustainable competitive advantage. Journal of Management, 37(5),
1480–1495. https://doi.org/10.1177/0149206310385696
Midttun, A., Gautesen, K., & Gjølberg, M. (2006). The political economy of
CSR in Western Europe. Corporate Governance, 6(4), 369–385. https://
doi.org/10.1108/14720700610689496
Moratis, L., & Brandt, S. (2017). Corporate stakeholder responsiveness? Explor-
ing the state and quality of GRI‐based stakeholder engagement disclosures
of European firms. Corporate Social Responsibility and Environmental
Management, 24(4), 312–325. https://doi.org/10.1002/csr.1408
Murry, J. W., & Hammons, J. O. (1995). Delphi: A versatile methodology
for conducting qualitative research. Review of Higher Education, 18(4),
423–436. https://doi.org/10.1353/rhe.1995.0008
Newman, A., Miao, Q., Hofman, P. S., & Zhu, C. J. (2016). The impact of
sustainable human resource management on employees' organizational
citizenship behaviour: The mediating role of organizational identifica-
tion. International Journal of Human Resource Management, 27(4),
440–455. https://doi.org/10.1080/09585192.2015.1042895
Nikolaeva, R., & Bicho, M. (2011). The role of institutional and reputational
factors in the voluntary adoption of corporate social responsibility
reporting standards. Journal of the Academy of Marketing Science,
39(1), 136–157. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11747‐010‐0214‐5
Okoli, C., & Pawlowski, S. D. (2004). The Delphi method as a research tool:
An example, design considerations and applications. Information
Management, 42(1), 15–29. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.im.2003.11.002
Orlitzky, M., & Swanson, D. L. (2006). Sustainable human resource manage-
ment: Charting new territory. Greenwich, CT: Human Resource
Management Ethics.
Romolini, A., Fissi, S., & Gori, E. (2014). Scoring CSR reporting in listed
companies – Evidence from Italian best practices. Corporate Social
Responsibility and Environmental Management, 21(2), 65–81. https://
doi.org/10.1002/csr.1299
Sharma, S., Sharma, J., & Devi, A. (2011). Corporate social responsibility:
The key role of human resources management. In Prof. Richard
Welford, Human resource management: Issues, challenges and opportuni-
ties. (p. 9) University of Technology, Sydney.
Shen, J., & Benson, J. (2016). When CSR is a social norm: How sustainable
human resource management affects employee work behavior. Journal
of Management, 42(6), 1723–1746. https://doi.org/10.1177/
0149206314522300
Streiner, D. L., & Kottner, J. (2014). Recommendations for reporting the
results of studies of instrument and scale development and testing.
Journal of Advanced Nursing, 70(9), 1970–1979. https://doi.org/
10.1111/jan.12402
Toliver, A. D. (2016). Measuring corporate social responsibility through organiza-
tional values: A scale validation study. Sydney, USA: University of Texas.
Voegtlin, C., & Greenwood, M. (2016). Corporate social responsibility and
human resource management: A systematic review and conceptual
analysis. Human Resource Management Review, 26(3), 181–197.
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.hrmr.2015.12.003
Vuontisjärvi, T. (2006). Corporate social reporting in the European context
and human resource disclosures: An analysis of Finnish companies.
Journal of Business Ethics, 69(4), 331–354. https://doi.org/10.1007/
s10551‐006‐9094‐5
Westermann‐Behaylo, M., Berman, S. L., & Van Buren, H. J. (2013). The
influence of institutional logics on corporate responsibility toward
employees. Business and Society, 53(5), 714–746. https://doi.org/
10.1177/0007650313476934
How to cite this article: Diaz‐Carrion R, López‐Fernández M,
Romero‐Fernandez PM. Developing a sustainable HRM system
from a contextual perspective. Corp Soc Resp Env Ma.
2018;1–11. https://doi.org/10.1002/csr.1528