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

net/publication/374947998

Green shared vision: A bridge between responsible leadership and green

behavior under individual green values

Article in Heliyon · October 2023

DOI: 10.1016/j.heliyon.2023.e21511

CITATIONS READS

2 112

7 authors, including:

Md Billal Hossain Aleena Syed

Westminster International University in Tashkent (WIUT) University of Lahore
35 PUBLICATIONS 155 CITATIONS 14 PUBLICATIONS 33 CITATIONS

SEE PROFILE SEE PROFILE

Sarmad Ejaz Faisal Ejaz

University of the Punjab University of the Punjab
6 PUBLICATIONS 3 CITATIONS 14 PUBLICATIONS 46 CITATIONS

SEE PROFILE SEE PROFILE

All content following this page was uploaded by Md Billal Hossain on 08 December 2023.

The user has requested enhancement of the downloaded file.

 Heliyon 9 (2023) e21511

Contents lists available at ScienceDirect

Heliyon
journal homepage: www.cell.com/heliyon

Green shared vision: A bridge between responsible leadership and

green behavior under individual green values
Nimra Younas a, Md Billal Hossain b, Aleena Syed a, Sarmad Ejaz c, *, Faisal Ejaz d,
Tahir Saeed Jagirani e, Anna Dunay f
a
Hailey College of Banking and Finance, University of the Punjab, Lahore, Pakistan
b
Business Management and Marketing Department, School of Business and Economics, Westminster International University in Tashkent (WIUT),
Tashkent, 100047, Uzbekistan
c
Department of Management Sciences, University of Okara, Okara, 56300, Pakistan
d
School of International Relations, Minhaj University, Lahore, 54770, Pakistan
e
School of Economics, Finance and Banking, University Utara Malaysia (UUM), Malaysia
f
John von Neumann University, 1117 Budapest, Hungary

A R T I C L E I N F O A B S T R A C T

Keywords: The pressure on businesses to be environmentally conscious and focus on sustainable develop­
Responsible leadership ment is accruing due to environmental challenges. Companies are adopting ecological practices
Green shared vision and policies to improve their environmentally friendly performance. To achieve this, organiza­
Individual green values
tions must substantiate and change the behavior of workers to align their behavior with the or­
Green behaviors
ganization’s ecological objectives. The study endeavors to integrate research on the responsible
style of leaders and green behaviors of employees (in-role and extra-role green behaviors)
through the mediation of green shared vision and analyze the moderation mechanism of indi­
vidual green values. For collecting the data, a questionnaire-based survey was conducted among
MBA executive program students with at least a year of experience in manufacturing. Out of the
450 questionnaires distributed, only 307 useful responses were obtained. The collected data has
been analyzed using SPSS and AMOS. Ethical standards were followed, and participants were
assured that their responses would be confidential. The study found that responsible leadership
positively impacts green behaviors among employees. This means that when leaders within an
organization demonstrate responsible and environmentally conscious behavior, it tends to
encourage employees to engage in green behaviors. The study also discovered that a “green
shared vision” partially mediates the relationship between responsible leadership and in-role
green behavior. In contrast, green shared vision does not mediate the relation between respon­
sible leadership and extra role green behavior. Moreover, this study also finds that the rela­
tionship between green shared vision and in-role and extra-role green behavior is strengthened
when individual green values moderate it. The study highlights the importance of responsible
leadership and the role of green shared values and individual green values in promoting envi­
ronmentally friendly behavior in the workplace.

* Corresponding author.
E-mail address: Sarmadejaz@uo.edu.pk (S. Ejaz).

https://doi.org/10.1016/j.heliyon.2023.e21511
Received 27 May 2023; Received in revised form 19 October 2023; Accepted 23 October 2023
Available online 24 October 2023
2405-8440/© 2023 The Authors. Published by Elsevier Ltd. This is an open access article under the CC BY license
(http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/).
N. Younas et al. Heliyon 9 (2023) e21511

1. Introduction

Environmental challenges, including climate change and resource depletion, have intensified recently, creating significant pressure
on businesses worldwide [1]. Companies are increasingly expected to develop environmental consciousness and prioritize sustainable
development as part of their corporate responsibility [2]. While regulations and rules are essential, a crucial aspect of an organization’s
green performance relies on its employees’ positive responses and actions concerning environmental concerns. Employees act as the
driving force in implementing environmentally friendly policies and practices within the company [3]. Green behaviors include a wide
range of actions and conduct employees undertake to enhance the organization’s sustainability [4]. These include in-role behaviors,
which are directly related to an employee’s job, and extra-role behaviors, which go beyond job requirements [5].
In contrast, employees’ ecological behavior contribution remains open to discussion [6]. Evidence suggests that such behaviors can
lead to reduced energy costs [7], increased profits [8], improved reputation, competitive advantage, and long-term progress [9].
Recognizing the significant macro-level impact of employee ecological behavior on sustainability, fostering such behavior at various
organizational levels is crucial, with leadership playing a pivotal role [10,11].
There are different predictors at an individual level [12] and business levels [13]. In organizational-level predictors, the role played
by the leaders to enhance the efficiency of ecological initiatives cannot be overlooked [14]. Within the literature, the leadership style
has been considered an important antecedent since the leaders work as the agents of the organization to treat the workers by exerting
significant influence on the personnel employees [15]. Numerous leadership styles have a diverse effect on the consequences based on
the environment [6]. The influence of green transformational leaders, despotic leaders, inclusive leaders, and ethical leaders on the
environmental behaviors of employees has been investigated by research numerous research studies [16].
However, the study highlights that the influence of responsible leadership style on employees’ green behaviors has not been
adequately explored [17]. The responsible style of leader is proposed to be a phenomenon that is ethical, relational, and social,
occurring in the social practices of relations for sustainable value creation [17]. Responsible leaders proactively promote the ecology
within their organization [18]. Numerous research studies explained the direct association between responsible leadership and green
behavior [19], and some researchers propose that moderators and mediators in this relationship are essential [20], warranting further
investigation.
The research on green shared vision [21] is referred to as developing a mutual vision aiming at sustainable and ecological
development. The company engages in ecological conduct by sharing mutual ideas with the workers [22]. Leaders of a company are an
essential element in the development of a vision of an organization. Vision is created by the supervisor’s behavior [23]. Still, the
researchers do not inspect the relationship between the responsible style of leaders and green shared values [24]. Since responsible
leaders consider the different stakeholders’ interests, they also try to balance the business’s and stakeholders’ interests using other
management procedures [25]. The green shared vision of an organization can be fostered by the responsible leadership style [24].
Along with this, responsible leaders emphasize improving the environment [26], which results in cultivating a green shared vision
through making mutual plans to protect the environment. Heedlessly of the significant role of the behavior of employees to improve
environment-related outcomes, there has been seen little empirical evidence of research that associate the approaches of leaders to the
environmentally friendly behaviors of the employees through the mediating role of green shared vision [27].
The joint influence of social and organizational context on individual differences activates ecological behavior [28]. The in­
dividual’s environmentally friendly values positively depict an individual’s behaviors that are also directed toward going green [29].
Employees align their values and identifications by connecting with the company, increasing their commitment to accomplishing the
organization’s objectives [30]. The workers’ ecological beliefs interactively influence the environment-friendly behavior of workers in
the organization [31]. The green shared vision of the company indicates the consequences of the employee judgment about the
ecological values in the presence of which the worker’s green behaviors can be heightened. The literature review provides no evidence
about the moderating mechanism of the green values of individuals in relation to green shared vision and green behaviors (in-role and
extra-role green behaviors).
The study contributes to the existing body of knowledge about the organization’s leaders, individuals, or employees’ ecological
behaviors and values. First, the study is significant from the leadership perspective, as it examines the direct relation among
responsible leaders and in-role ecological behaviors and the employees’ extra role environmental friendly behaviors. Such an
investigation offers valuable understanding and insight into the role of leaders and its importance in encouraging eco-friendly be­
haviors in employees while improving the organization’s environmentalism concept. Secondly, the research focuses on combining the
perspective of the leader, which is considered to be an organizational level predictor, as well as the process that is employee-centered,
taken up as an individual level predictor, in the context of supplies and values fit (S–V fit) theory to more comprehensively examine the
association of responsible leaders and in-role eco-friendly behaviors and extra-role environmental behaviors of personnel. Even extant
literature examined the relationship, but there is a contradiction in the research findings [32]. Thirdly, building on the S–V fit theory
[33], the study will enrich the literature on the employees’ environmental friendly behaviors by adding green shared vision as a
supplementary mechanism, which mediates the relationship between responsible leaders and eco-friendly behaviors of the workers. In
this regard, by exploring the literature, it seems that there is a deficiency of literature providing empirical evidence of the research that
links the leadership approach of responsible leadership with the eco-friendly behavior of employees via the mediating role of green
shared vision [34]. Besides this, the study contributes to the literature by repossessing theoretical provisions from the S–V fit theory for
examining the individual green values as a condition variable among the association of green shared vision and employee ecofriendly
in-role and extra-role green behaviors of the employees. The aim of the present study is to explain responsible leadership and green
behaviors (in-role green behaviors and extra-role both) through the mediator green shared vision and moderator individual green
values. The present study is based on following objectives;

2
N. Younas et al. Heliyon 9 (2023) e21511

RO1. To identify the impact of responsible leaders on employee in-role and extra-role green behaviors.
RO2. To analyze the mediating role of green shared vision among the relationship of responsible leadership and in-role and extra-
role green behaviors.
RO3. To examine the moderating mechanism of individual green values among the link of green shared vision and in-role and extra-
role green behaviors.
The rest of the paper has the following structure. Section 2 describes the literature review of individual variables and hypotheses
development. Theoretical framework and conceptual model have been explained in section 2. In section 3 procedure, sample, and data
collection, and section 4 about results. While section 5 explain discussion about the findings of this study. Section 6 is related to
implications and 7 related to limitation and future directions.

2. Literature review

2.1. Variables of research

2.1.1. Responsible leadership

The supervisor must value the company’s goals for sustainable development, which consider recognizing the social responsibility
towards the swelling challenges of the safety of food, pollution, and wastage of resources, which are subject to responsible leadership
[35]. Responsible leadership includes three main elements: effectiveness, ethics, and sustainability. Responsible leaders act ethically
and set examples for their employees [36]. Responsible leaders do things in the right way so that the employees also follow the path of
their leaders [37]. Keeping in view the perspective of [38], responsible leaders constrain the followers’ unethical behaviors.
Responsible leadership emphasizes responsibility matters, such as building trust, making choices for green actions, morally making
decisions, and ecological development [38]. According to Ref. [17] research study, responsible leaders are the one who creates and
maintains trust relations with the stakeholders within and external of the business to fulfill societal obligations. It also includes the
ethical, interactive, and social interfaces established and sustained among individuals who influence and individuals influenced by the
company’s specific practices [39]. Accordingly [25], explained the term responsible leadership as an amalgamation of social con­
sciousness, ethics, commitment of stakeholders in the practices of the organization, and leadership.

2.1.2. Green behaviors

Individual green behaviors are crucial to explaining the company’s sustainability plan in practical results. It is considered the
foundation aimed at the ecological improvement of the business [40]. The primary aim of green behaviors is to protect the envi­
ronment or for minimizing the damage for the environs [41], which consists of both the dimensions of role as well as different roles.
The in-role green behaviors of workers and the extra-role green behaviors collectively create values for business firms [42]. The
classification of green behaviors is based on the expectations of the organizations from their employees [43]. The policies of the
business firm regarding the disposal of hazardous materials or protection of water from venomous constituents, ultimatum for green
behaviors from personnel. The behaviors anticipated by the employees in the organization are usually included in the formal job

Table 1
Review of literature.
Study Context Predictors Outcomes Findings

[47] High Tech Industry Green Human Resource Green Behavior Green human resource management significantly
Management(GHRM) and positivity effect on Green Behavior and psychological
Psychological Mechanism mechanism mediates between them.
[48] services and manufacturing Responsible Leadership, Green Pro environmental The authors of this study proposed two mechanisms
sectors shared Visions, Organizational behavior organizational commitment and a green shared vision to
commitment, explain the connection between ethical management and
eco-friendly actions taken by workers. It was shown that
employees having a higher internal environmental locus
of control were more likely to benefit from the indirect
influence of responsible leadership on pro-
environmental behavior brought about by a green
common vision.
[49] Five star Hotels in China Corporate Social Responsibility, Employees Task Green behavior mediates between corporate social
Green Behavior, Responsible performance responsibility and employees task performance. The
Leadership and GHRM results also suggest that GHRM moderates between CSR-
GHRM. Moreover responsible leadership moderates to
GHRM.
[13] A family holding company RL, Psychological Ownership Employees Green Responsible leadership impact of employee’s green
with eight diversified energy Behavior behavior through psychological ownership.
sectors
[50] Manufacturing Companies Top Management responsible Organization TMT responsible leadership significant impact on green
Leadership, GHRM, Citizenship human resource management and green human resource
Environmental felt responsibility Behavior management and environmental felt responsibility
mediates.

3
N. Younas et al. Heliyon 9 (2023) e21511

descriptions of the workers (that is, in-role green behaviors), however, in the job description of employees, the extra-role behaviors are
not mentioned since these behaviors are considered to be clear as suggestions for the employees for protecting the environment [44].
Extra role behaviors may include switching off computers, lights, and fans when the employees are not using these things or tuning
these off when the employees are supposed to leave the workplace for any engagement [44]. Undeniably, both employee in-role
ecological and extra-role environmentally friendly behaviors are required to align the green strategies of the company with its
green goals [45], nevertheless, the exhibition of green behaviors are subject to different situations as the workers have diverse levels of
discretion [46] (see Table 1).

2.1.3. Green shared vision

The common vision developed in the organization that is directed towards ecological and environmental development is
considered the green shared vision [51]. Shared vision exists in the company when the supervisors communicate the organization’s
aims to their subordinates to accomplish the company’s aims [52]. Whereas green shared vision indicates a direction that is strategic,
common, and clear to accomplish the shared purposes of the business along with accomplishing the aspirations that the company’s
employees have internalized [53]. Green shared vision provides proper guidelines to the organization’s employees to overcome
challenges as well as performing tasks that are related with work [51]. The workers employed in a business firm are usually inclined
towards forming unswerving green vision discernment since they are interacting, communicating, and working in that environs [51].
The companies are engaging themselves in ecological practices by means of sharing a mutual vision with workers [22], along with
giving meaning to the everyday activities of employees at work.

2.1.4. Individual green values

For achieving the aspirations of the business firm, the individuals as employees play a significant role. Likewise, ecological
practices can be effectively implemented when the green values of the individuals are developed [54]. Individual values help explain
the employees’ behaviors and attitudes [55]. Implementing a company’s rules and policies significantly influences employees’
behavior [56]. Similarly, the study of [43] suggested that green values of the individuals are affected by ecological practices. It in­
dicates that the ecological methods and practices of the organization enhance the environmentally friendly values of the individual
[57]. The green values individuals possess as employees are crucial in their understanding of the role of becoming environmentally
conscious and vitality to focus on becoming greener at work [58].

2.2. Theoretical framework

The present study is grounded on the supplies-values fit (S–V fit) theory to retrieve theoretical support from the theory [33]. The
S–V fit theory claims that the company’s individuals value the supplies provided to them by the organization [33]. So the supplies of
the organization and valuing of employees is considered a supplemental fit when the individuals of the organization believe that their
objectives and aims are unswerving with the values and goals of their company [59]. For this reason, relying on the theory of
supply-value fit, the existing study argues that responsible leaders are considered to be the supplies provided to the individuals from
the organization, and the individuals value the behaviors of their leaders. Consequently, the workers imitate the ecological behaviors
of leaders and try to improve the work environment. The research studies also highlight that the style of leadership and the envi­
ronmental friendly behaviors of the employees are closely related conceptions [60]. The eco-friendly behaviors of the supervisor and
subordinates are positively significant [61] since the manager’s behaviors exhibit their beliefs, and their values are passed on to their
employees by role models. In the presence of responsible leadership, the subordinates understand and recognize the prominence of
their ecological behaviors [41]. Responsible leaders pass signals to employees by showing their concerns about social responsibility
and the environment, which creates awareness in the employees to behave responsibly [62]. The study assumes that the responsible

Fig. 1. Conceptual framework: Author’s creation.

4
N. Younas et al. Heliyon 9 (2023) e21511

leadership style unswervingly and positively affects worker in-role environmental behaviors and their extra-role ecological behaviors.
Reclaiming support from the theory of S–V fit [33], the theory presumes that when supplies are provided to the recipients by the
organization, they evaluate these supplies with the values, so when values are overweighing by the supplies, the recipients (employees)
feel fit [33]. The feeling of supplies overweighing the values intensifies the fit perception among the objectives of employees and
business firm [59]. The theory also suggests that when the supplies offered by the company are at the same level or exceed the level of
individual values, a situation of fit arises, leading towards positive employee behaviors and attitudes. So considering the S–V fit theory,
the study assumes that with the help of a green shared vision by the responsible leaders to protect the environment that are considered
to be the supplies by the organization, the followers/employees are in a better position to recognize the need of protecting the
environment which also initiate a strong inner aspiration in employees to safeguard the environment and realizing the of environ­
mental responsibility [59]. The current study argues that green shared vision plays a mediating role among the association of
responsible leadership and green behaviors. Taking into account the S–V fit theory, which discuss that ecological values provision from
the company (e.g. green shared vision) is assumed to be the best fit by the employees who have high level of values to protect
environment (individual green values), resultantly they exhibit high level of environmentally friendly behaviors. When the organi­
zation fails to give provisions for green values (e.g. green shared vision), it is considered to be a negative factor of an organization by
the individuals who have firm eco-friendly beliefs, and these individual react with poor environmental friendly consideration. Hence,
with individual green values, the fill will enhance, and substantial existence will increase the green behaviors of employees (in-role and
extra-role) (see Figs. 1 and 2).

2.3. Hypothesis development

2.3.1. Responsible leadership and green behaviors

At present, the leaders confront a dynamic and complex setting of business that presume them to achieve the financial objectives of
the company as well as paying significant consideration to the CSR concerns along with environmental matters [63]. Accordingly, the
research [17] put forward the conception of a responsible style of leaders through mixing up leadership with corporate social re­
sponsibility. Responsible leaders consider three major elements: effectiveness, ethics, and sustainability. Considering the element of
effectiveness, responsible leaders brings encouraging implication for workers and business [64]. Whereas the element of ethics con­
siders that responsible leaders behave ethically and lead by example by acting in the right way and setting an example for their
subordinates [38]. While on the other hand, the sustainability element of responsible leadership emphasizes that responsible lead­
ership emphasizes the environmental, social, and financial performance of the business for achieving sustainability and ecological
advancement [26]. Responsible leadership positively influences business firms and workers [65]. Considering the green behaviors of
employees, is considered a conversation and recycling of resources and includes the behaviors of reducing wastage in the company
[65]. The green behaviors of employees include in-role environmental behaviors and extra-role ecological behavior. The green be­
haviors of workers are potentially influenced by the different contexts of an organization, such as CSR, green HRM as well a responsible
style of leadership [66]. Responsible leaders are likely to affect the behaviors of employees by means of informal relations between
leader and follower, along with this setup, another action of the organization which impacts the place of work [49]. In addition, a
responsible style of leadership can make a transformation in the motivation of workers as well as in their ecological behaviors by the
means of informal as well as personal relations between supervisor and subordinate [67]. Responsible leader pays attention to
environmental-related and ecological concerns, and they also focus on encouraging workers to exhibit eco-friendly behaviors in the

Fig. 2. Graphical representation of Research design.

5
N. Younas et al. Heliyon 9 (2023) e21511

place of work [68]. The supplies and values fit theory claims that the employees of the company value the supplies offered to them
[33]. When there is a fit between the organization’s supplies and the employees’ values, the employees believe that the goal and aims
of the organization must be consistent with their objectives [59]. Similarly, under the direction of the responsible style of leadership,
the workers are going to recognize the significance of eco-friendly behaviors by learning from their leaders and following them [69],
subsequently improving green behaviors) of workers. Considering the above discussion, the potential influence of the responsible style
of leaders on in-role environment friendly and extra-role green behaviors has not been examined empirically so far. For this reason, it is
argued that responsible leadership influences the green behaviors of employees (in-role and extra-role green behaviors). Hence, the
discussed empirical pieces of evidence and theoretical basis, the following hypothesis are proposed:
H1. Responsible leadership positively influences in-role green behaviors of employees.
H2. Responsible leadership positively influences extra-role green behaviors of employees.

2.3.2. Mediation of green shared vision

The concept of green shared vision is known as a strategic, clear, and common direction that focuses on accomplishing the
ecological objectives as well as the environmental aspirations of the business firm, which is internalized by the workers [70]. Business
firms are greening their work environment by sharing a mutual vision with the workers [22]. Leaders’ role in developing the orga­
nization’s vision is one of the significant contextual elements. The vision of organizations is created by the contribution of the leader
and their behavior [23], but the linkage between the green shared vision of the firm and the responsible style of leadership has not been
investigated extensively. A responsible leadership style requires that the supervisors or managers be ethically and morally mindful of
the internal as well as external stakeholders of the organization. Responsible leaders have been conceptualized and inferred as one of
the antecedents of the organizational citizenship behavior of the employees directed towards eco-friendly concerns [71]. Based on this,
a responsible leader can pass on signals to their followers their consciousness about social responsibility so that it creates awareness in
the employees to behave in a similar responsible way [62] by emphasizing the environmental activities [72]. Additionally, prioritizing
the development of workers along with taking into account their long-lasting interests is likely to significantly contribute to employee
commitment and engagement, which, as a result, motivates them to accommodate their interests for the sustainability of the orga­
nization by means of forfeiting their own welfare and resources as a reaction to the practices of the organization regarding sustain­
ability [19]. Considering the belief that environmentally friendly complications are the outcome of dysfunctional behavior [73],
elucidations are associated with the psychology domain along with the tools to change the behavior of individuals [4], particularly the
style of leaders [74]. Leaders are the company’s representatives, providing direction to employees and appraising them. Furthermore,
responsible leaders present a vision for the future created on the ethical orientation that has been imitative from mutual interactions
[75]. Moreover, a responsible style of leadership creates an ecological vision as well as an eco-friendly environment for work in the
company [48]. With the help of a mutual vision shared by the responsible leaders, the followers are better able to identify the
connotation of defending the environs as well as advance a strong inner aspiration to safeguard the environment and encourage the
realization of environmental responsibility [50]. According to Ref. [76], to become a self-adapting organization, employee of the
company must recognize, shares, and encircle a mutual prophecy. The behavioral response of the followers to hearing about the
company vision is crucial since the vision reflects the organization’s basic purpose and goal of the organization, which is helpful for the
followers to determine which behavior is appropriate, important, irrelevant, or insignificant [77]. Responsible leaders try to regard the
environment of the company as one of the main stakeholders [26], which results in advocating for improvements in the natural and
work environment, that prompt behavior from the workers that promote a sustainable environment. The responsible style of the leader
helps in fostering the green shared vision. Alongside, responsible leadership also emphasizes the connotation of considering the
environment [26], and by the means of creating mutual plans for protecting the environment, they promote a green shared vision.
When a common vision directs the companies, the employees consider their contributions to the organization meaningful [78].
Therefore, the employees are at ease to exhibit their views about potential improvements in the environment. The research study of
[53] identified that the green shared vision is linked with the environmental behaviors of the employees. Along with this, the green
shared vision significantly contributes to a firm’s innovation performance, whether green incremental or radical [53]. The mutual
vision offers the employees a strategic and collective path that guides the workers to use a specific tactic. A common vision of
ecological management is critical for improving the green behaviors of employees. According to S–V fit theory [33], when supplies
offered by organization are at the same level or exceeds the individual values. There is going to be a best fit which positively influences
the behaviors and attitude of individuals. At times, while workers have a high degree of value fit, the behaviors and approaches of the
employees towards the company are affirmative [79]. Resultantly, these factors of the organization improve the willingness of the
employees to serve their company as well as the organization’s goal [80]. The research study [81] argues that the green shared vision
of the company improves pro environmental behavior. Considering the discussion, the current study suggests that the relationship
between the responsible style of leadership and green behaviors occurs part because of the mediation of green shared vision.
H3. Green shared vision mediates the positive association between responsible leadership and in-role green behaviors.
H4. Green shared vision mediates the positive association between responsible leadership and extra-role green behaviors.

2.3.3. Moderation of individual green values

The literature review on contemporary values assumes that the values of individuals are depicted by their behaviors and attitudes
[43]. The research study of numerous research scholar [82–84] claimed that the personal ecological values of the individuals are
significantly influencing their ecofriendly behaviors. The common ideology, which is aligning the personal values of the individual

6
N. Younas et al. Heliyon 9 (2023) e21511

with the organizational values increase outcomes of the workers of the organization, such as strengthening the positive behaviors,
identification in the organization, and attitudes [85]. When the employees connect themselves with their organization, by aligning
their identification and values, the likelihood of the employees committing to achieving the goalmouths of the business is high [30]. As
a result, the behavior of employees is an interplay between an employee and the environs [86]. Keeping in view the research of [47],
the workers make obvious and clear sentences regarding the behaviors and policies of the company regarding social responsibility, and
these judgments determine that the employee’s needs are satisfied. Reclaiming from on S–V fit theory [33], when the supplies of
organization are conducive to environment to the values of the employees, it will result in congruent of the ecological values of the
employees with the values of company, so it is assumed that the probability of employees exhibiting environmental friendly behaviors
would be high. On contrary to this, when the values of the employees are not consistent and harmonious with organizational values, or
it may be the case that the environment provided by the organization is not matching with the needs of the employees that leads
towards employees not demonstrating the ecological behaviors at organization. Scilicet, the environmental values of an individual and
the ecological values of the organization interactively impact the ecofriendly actions of the workers in the workplace. The green shared
vision reflects the results of the employees’ judgments about the organizations green values. The theory of supplies and fit proposes
that the provision of an organization with ecofriendly values (e.g., green shared vision) is reflected as the best fit when the employees
own a high degree of value for environment (individual green values), and the workers are likely to demonstrate a high degree of
ecofriendly behavior. At odds with this, when the organization fails to make provisions of its values (e.g., green shared vision), it is
considered to be a negative factor of company by the employees who depicts high level of environmental friendly values, so in return
the response of the individuals are poor and they are less concerned about the environment. Subsequently, in the presence of individual
green values, the fit among supplies (green shared vision) and value (employee green behaviors) will be best that will increase the
employee ecological behavior that includes is in-role as well as extra role. Consequently, the present study perceives that individual
green values plays a moderating role among the association of green shared vision and green behaviors of employees. Accordingly,
based on the theoretical support and past studies, following hypotheses are postulated:
H5. Individual green values play the role of moderator between the positive association of green shared vision and in-role green
behavior.
H6. Individual green values play the role of moderator between the positive association of green shared vision and extra-role green
behavior.

3. Materials and methods

3.1. Procedures, sample, and data collection

The data was collected from the participants using the non-probability convenience sampling due to the less information about
population because probability sampling required a list of population [87]. This method works best when the people are diverse and
can live anywhere [88]. This method expedited the data collection process, enabling us to promptly gather insights without requiring a
substantial financial commitment. As a result, data was gathered from MBA executive program students who had spent at least a year
working in a manufacturing organization. The few reasons were to collect the data from MBA executive programs. Having deep insight
into the manufacturing process helps to collect data and consider suitable respondents. Secondly, since the English language is well
thought-out to be the official language of Pakistan [89], most employees lack the necessary education to complete the questionnaire
[90], that is why the questionnaire was only given to educated respondents [91]. Second, it cannot be easy to obtain permission from
managers to collect data at work [92]. This could be because data collection takes a long time and prevents employees from doing their
jobs. Finally, employees are not at ease discussing their bosses at work.
We collected data using a survey questionnaire, a well-established and reputable instrument in the field of social science research.
This method is known for its reliability in gathering information and viewpoints on prevalent attitudes and behaviors among in­
dividuals [93]. Using a questionnaire based on the survey method, 450 questionnaires were distributed, but only 307 valid responses
were returned. To determine the sample size, a 20 to 1 ratio has been suggested by Ref. [94]. This study has 21 items, and according to
the above described method, our minimum sample size was 420. To adhere to ethical standards, the researcher assured respondents
that their responses would be kept confidential [95]. The researchers took precautions to avoid the problem of common method
variance because the study measured explained and explanatory variables simultaneously [96].

3.2. Measurements of variables

The survey questionnaire of the present study has been adapted from the previous studies, and all the constructs were tested
previously. The respondents were asked to provide their response using the scales of responsible leadership, green behaviors (in-role
green behaviors and extra-role green behaviors), green shared vision, and individual green values, having a “five-point Likert scale
ranging between 1-strongly disagree to 5-strongly agree”.

3.2.1. Responsible leadership

The variable of responsible leadership was measured by adapting the scale developed by Ref. [97]. The scale has five (05) items and
a sample item of the scale: “My immediate supervisor demonstrates awareness of the relevant stakeholder claims.” The reliability of the
scale was 0.914.

7
N. Younas et al. Heliyon 9 (2023) e21511

3.2.2. Green shared vision

To measure the green shared vision, the scale of [21] was used, having four (04) items in the construct. The item reliability of items
on the green shared vision scale was 0.897. The item example of green shared vision consists of “A commonality of environmental goals
exists in the company”.

3.2.3. In-role and extra-role green behaviors

For measuring the green behaviors [43], adopted the scale of in-role and extra-role green behavior of [47]. The scale included a
total of six (06) items, three (03) items were for in-role green behaviors, and three items were for extra-role green behaviors, with the
reliability of the scale as 0.86 and 0.85, respectively. The sample item of in-role green behavior was “Today, I performed tasks that are
expected of me in environmentally friendly ways,” A sample example of extra-role green behaviors includes “Today, I took a chance to
get actively involved in environmental protection at work.”

3.2.4. Individual green values

To measure individual green values, the scale of [96] was adapted. The scale has six (06) items showing a reliability value of 0.84.
The sample scale item was “I feel a personal obligation to do whatever I can to prevent environmental degradation.”

3.2.5. Control variables

In the current study, age, education, work experience, and gender are used as control variables. These variables may affect the
perception of green behavior [97], ethical leadership [98], individual green values [99] and green human resource management
[100].

4. Results

4.1. Preliminary analysis

Before putting the hypotheses to the test, the researchers looked for missing values, outliers, and problems with normality and
correlation [101]. 17 careless or incomplete responses were assumed to be redundant during the second data collection phase. This
meant that 307 final answers did not have a missing value. Both the values of skewness and kurtosis were falling in the acceptable
ranges (between 3 and 1), which shows that the data were evenly spread out [102].
Herman single factor test was performed to check the common method variance. The results show that the first component has an
initial eigenvalue of 9.150, which explains 43.572 % of the variance in the data, which is less than 50 % which indicate that there is no
issue of biases and can go for further analysis. The value of the correlation between constructs is also below 0.90, signifying the
nonexistence of the issue of common method variance [94].

4.2. Reliability and correlation analysis

Table 2 represents the reliability and correlation analysis. Cronbach’s alpha coefficient of 0.70 or higher is acceptable for research
purposes, indicating that the items in a scale or measure are reliable and consistently measure the same underlying construct. All
variables exhibited high levels of internal consistency reliability, with Cronbach’s alpha coefficients ranging from 0.703 to 0.937. The
variable with the highest reliability was responsible leadership (α = 0.937), followed by in-role green behavior (α = 0.866), green
shared value (α = 0.811), extra-role green behavior (α = 0.790), and individual green values (α = 0.703). These coefficients indicate
that the items measuring each variable were highly reliable and consistent in measuring the same construct.
Table 2 shows the correlation coefficients among five variables: responsible leadership, green shared value, in-role green behavior,
extra-role green behavior, and individual green values. The correlation coefficients range from 0 to 1 and represent the strength and
direction of the linear relationship between two variables.
According to Table 2, responsible leadership is significantly correlated with other variables. This suggests that being a responsible
leader necessarily leads to more green behavior or values among employees. There are significant positive correlations among the
other variables. Green shared value is positively correlated with in-role green behavior (r = 0.574, p < 0.01), suggesting that em­
ployees who place more value on environmental sustainability are more likely to engage in environmentally responsible behavior
required by their jobs. In-role green behavior is also positively correlated with extra-role green behavior (r = 0.678, p < 0.01),

Table 2
Reliability and correlation analysis.
Variables Cronbach Alpha 1 2 3 4 5

Responsible leadership(RL) 0.937 1

Green Shared Value(GSV) 0.811 0.574** 1
In role Green Behavior(INGB) 0.866 0.446** 0470** 1
Extra Role of Green Behavior(EXGB) 0.790 0.360** 0.396** 0.678** 1
Individual Green Values(IGV) 0.703 0.450** 0.289** 0.429** 0.421** 1

**p < 0.05.

8
N. Younas et al. Heliyon 9 (2023) e21511

indicating that employees who engage in more environmentally responsible behavior at work are also more likely to engage in such
behavior outside work. Individual green values are positively correlated with both in-role (r = 0.446, p < 0.01) and extra-role (r =
0.396, p < 0.01) green behavior, suggesting that employees who hold stronger environmental values are more likely to engage in
environmentally responsible behavior both within and outside of their work roles.

4.3. Measurement model

4.3.1. Statistics of confirmatory factor analysis

Table 3 depicts factor loadings, composite reliability (CR), and average variance extracted (AVE) of the five variables (EXGB, INGV,
RL, GSV, and INGB) were examined by structural equation modeling in AMOS. The results signpost that all variables had strong factor
loadings ranging from 0.770 to 0.922 for RL, 0.791 to 0.793 for EXGB, 0.818 to 0.842 for INGV and INGB, and 0.876 to 0.892 for GSV.
The CR values ranged from 0.818 to 0.937, indicating good internal consistency. The AVE values ranged from 0.591 to 0.788, meaning
that each variable accounted for a moderate to a high proportion of its variance. The model fitness indices indicated a good fit to the
data, with a chi-square to degrees of freedom ratio (CMIN/DF) of 2.851, a comparative fit index (CFI) of 0.935, a goodness of fit index
(GFI) of 0.876, and a root mean square error of approximation (RMSEA) of 0.078. These results suggest that the model adequately
represented the data and that the variables included in the model were well-defined and distinct from one another [103].

4.4. Discriminant validity

The diagonal values represent the discriminant validity or the extent to which each variable (represented by the rows and columns)
measures a unique construct or factor different from the other variables. These values are relatively high, indicating that each variable
measures a unique construct that is not highly correlated with the other variables (see Table 4). These results suggest that the variables
of current research have good discriminant validity and can be considered distinct and independent measures of the constructs they
represent.

4.5. Regression results

Table 5 depicts the estimated path coefficients. First, the direct effect from RL to INGB (β = 0.391, p < 0.01) and RL to EXGB (β =
0.467, p < 0.01) are found significant. When leaders prioritize and adopt responsible and sustainable practices, it encourages their
team members to adopt green behaviors while performing their job duties, as well as outside their job duties. The first 2 direct hy­
potheses are found significantly evident.
Moreover, the results for the control variables show a non-significant effect on in-role green behavior: gender (β = 0.280, p = 0.77),
age (β = − 0.007, p = 0.872), education (β = − 0.154, p = 0.232), and experience (β = 0.041, p = 0.478) as well as on extra role green
behavior: gender (β = 0.157, p = 0.422), age (β = − 0.003, p = 0.957), education (β = 0.062, p = 0.696), and experience (β = 0.026, p
= 0.720).
For mediation analysis, the bootstrapping technique is used to assess the indirect effect of green shared value as recommended by
Ref. [104]. The direct beta without mediation is 0.115, and this effect is statistically significant at the 0.001 level. The direct beta with
mediation is 0.148, and this effect is also statistically significant at the 0.001 level. The Indirect beta is 0.146, which is statistically
significant at 0.001. Green shared value has been seen as mediated between RL and INGB. Thus, H3 is supported. While checking the
mediating effect of a green shared vision between RL and EXGB, the direct beta without mediation and direct beta with mediation are
0.434,0.448, respectively, and statistically significant at the 0.001 level. However, the indirect effect is 0.046, which is not statistically
significant. Therefore, H3 is not supported as the indirect effect has been seen as insignificant.
For moderation analysis, the interaction between GSV and INGV was computed to see the significant effects on both types of green
behavior. The p-value for INGB is 0.011, below the conventional threshold for statistical significance (i.e., 0.05). The p-value for EXGB
is reported as "***", indicating a highly significant effect. The results suggest that the association between green shared vision and
green behavior (in role and extra role) is moderated by individual green behavior. H5 and H6 are supported as suggested in the
literature.

Table 3
Model fitness indicators.
Variables Factor loadings Range CR AVE

EXGB 0.791–0.793 0.818 0.600

INGV 0.818–0.842 0.896 0.591
RL 0.770–0.922 0.937 0.750
GSV 0.876–0.892 0.918 0.788
INGB 0.818–0.842 0.868 0.687
Model Fitness indices: CMIN/DF = 2.851, CFI = 0.935, GFI = 0.876,RMSEA = 0.078

RL = Responsible Leadership, INGB= In Role Green Behavior, EXGB = Extra Role Green
Behavior, GSV = Green Shared Value, INGV= Individual Green Values

9
N. Younas et al. Heliyon 9 (2023) e21511

Table 4
Discriminant validity.
EXGB INGV RL GSV INGB

EXGB 0.775a
INGV 0.642 0.769a
RL 0.500 0.621 0.866a
GSV 0.329 0.438 0.545 0.888a
INGB 0.524 0.505 0.488 0.316 0.829a

Note(s): a AVE square root in diagonal, RL = Responsible Leadership, INGB= In Role.

Green Behavior, EXGB = Extra Role Green Behavior, GSV = Green Shared Value,
INGV= Individual Green Values

Table 5
Hypotheses results.
Estimates CR P VALUE

RL→ INGB 0.391 7.839 ***

RL→ EXGB 0.467 7.426 ***
Note: ***p < 0.001

Mediation analysis
Direct B W/O Mediation Direct B With Mediation Indirect Effect
RL→ GSV→ INGB 0.115*** 0.148*** 0.146***
RL→ GSV→ EXGB 0.434*** 0.448*** 0.046(NS)
Note: Confidence interval, bootstrap sample size 5000

Moderation analysis
Estimates CR P VALUE
GSV × INGV→ INGB − 0.070 − 2.555 0.011
GSV × INGV→ EXGB − 0.095 − 14.431 ***

Note: RL = Responsible Leadership, INGB= In Role Green Behavior, EXGB = Extra Role Green Behavior.
GSV = Green Shared Value, INGV= Individual Green Values.

5. Discussion and conclusion

The role played by responsible leaders(RL) to promote ecological behaviors within organizations cannot be denied. According to
Ref. [105], RL is conscious of the influence of their activities on the environment by promoting green behavior and initiatives among
employees. This study aimed to investigate the impact of RL on employees’ in-role and extra-role green behaviors, the mediating role of
green shared vision(GSV), and individual green values(IGV) as moderator. The first hypothesis is related to RL, which positively in­
fluences in-role green behaviors of employees(H1). The results of the study support this hypothesis, showing a significant positive
relationship between RL and employees’ in-role green behaviors. The results are consistent with prior research that has found that RL
positively impacts the green behavior of workers [66]. The S–V fit theory [33] suggests that while there is a congruence between the
values of the individual and the organization, the employee is more likely to be committed to the organization and perform better. In
the context of this study, employees who share similar environmental values with their organization are more likely to engage in green
behaviors. Thus, the S–V fit theory can explain the positive relationship between RL and green behaviors, as RL can help create an
organizational culture that aligns with employees’ environmental values. Secondly, this study developed hypothesis which suggested
that RL positively influences extra-role green behaviors of employees (H2). The result of the study also supports this hypothesis,
showing a significant positive relationship between RL and employees’ extra-role green behaviors. The outcomes of current study are
consistent with past studies which examined that RL positively impacts employees’ extra-role green behaviors [68].
This study checks the mediation of GSV among RL and the role of green behavior of employees(H3). The result supported our
hypothesis, and the finding of this study is similar to a previous study [106]. By fostering a shared environmental sustainability vision,
RL can create a culture that values and prioritizes pro-environmental behavior. Our findings extend the supplies-values fit (S–V fit)
theory, which argues that the supplies provided by the RL, the employees behave accordingly (green behavior).
Furthermore, the study examines that RL causes the GSV that ultimately enhances extra role green behavior (i.e., H4). However, the
result is not consistent with previous studies. One possible explanation for the lack of mediation is that the relationship between RL and
extra-role green behavior is more direct than the relationship between RL and GSV. RL may influence extra-role green behavior by
setting environmental goals, providing feedback and incentives, and modeling environmentally responsible behavior. These actions
may be more tangible and observable to employees than the shared vision of environmental sustainability. Another possible expla­
nation is that GSV may be more closely linked to in-role green behavior, which is part of job responsibilities, rather than extra-role
green behavior, which refers to voluntary pro-environmental actions. Extra role green behavior might be influenced by other vari­
ables like green human resource management and ethical leadership [96].
Finally, this study checks the moderating role of INGV in the relationship between GSV and in role and extra role green behavior (i.
e., H5 and H6). The results revealed that INGV significantly moderated in both relationships and supported our hypotheses. The results

10
N. Younas et al. Heliyon 9 (2023) e21511

are also novel as, to the best of our knowledge, no study has yet investigated the moderating role of individual green values between
GSV and in role and extra role green behavior. The supplies-values fit (S–V fit) theory posits that for an organization to effectively
embrace ecofriendly values, such as a green shared vision of environmental sustainability, it is most successful when its employees hold
a strong personal regard for the environment (individual green values). In such cases, employees are more inclined to exhibit a sig­
nificant environmental friendly behavior. Employees with strong individual green values will likely be motivated to engage in
environmentally responsible behavior. Therefore, the effectiveness of the green shared vision in promoting employee green behavior,
including in-role and extra-role green, may depend on the extent to which individual employees hold these values [107]. This
highlights the importance of understanding differences in the values of individuals and how they may intermingle with organizational
initiatives in promoting environmentally responsible behavior [107]. Leaders must recognize and consider these individual differences
while designing and implementing sustainability initiatives in their organizations.

6. Implications

6.1. Theoretical implications

The prevailing research will extend the literature on the organization’s environmentally friendly sustainability differently. Past
research studies indicated that leaders play a crucial part in predicting the ecological behaviors of the employees at the workplace.
Astoundingly, it was known very little about the effect of responsible leadership, emphasizing ecological sustainability, which is likely
to shape the behaviors of employees in the workplace, as the role of leaders in predicting green ecological consequences is rare. Relying
on Supply-Value fit theory, the research proposes that the firm offers responsible leadership to employees. In return, the employee
values the supplies by depicting ecofriendly behaviors. Employees will likely imitate the leaders’ behavior and improve the envi­
ronment. The ecofriendly behaviors of employees are beneficial for the environs as well as for the organization. The study provides the
approach by analyzing the processes of green shared vision, which is triggering the eco-friendly behaviors of workers. It is one of the
important implications of the study that can be helpful for the organization to reach its environmental goals and attain sustainable
development. The study will contribute to the literature of responsible leaders as the research conducted in past was mainly
concentrating on the theoretic evaluation of responsible leadership, while the empirical researches based on the approach of theory-
orientation was comparatively meagre. The study clarifies the underlying mechanism through which responsible leaders are likely to
promote the green behaviors of employees, indicating a different role by analyzing in parallel the indirect effect of the green shared
vision. The results highlighted that the mediating role of a green shared vision among responsible leadership and employee in-role
green behaviors is positive, whereas, with extra-role green behavior, the relation is not significant. The inconsistent findings rec­
ommended that the introduction of a moderator may impact the influences. So, individual green values serve as a conditional factor
among the relationships. The study suggests that responsible leadership is a strategic resource of business that coordinates the green
shared vision of the company to influence employee ecological behaviors by moderating the effect of individual green values. When
the individual has green values, they are more likely to exhibit green behaviors than employees who lack green values.

6.2. Practical implications

The research indicates that responsible leadership is one of the essential triggers of ecological behaviors in the workplace. For this
reason, the organizations must give extra attention to selecting, appraising, and advancing the leaders that can cultivate the skills and
abilities of responsible leaders. The international service-learning program indicated that a responsible leader must have a series of
capabilities, including culture-based intellect, ethics-related literacy, a responsible approach, and a social development perspective.
Subsequently, the firms should consider the socially responsible actions of the leaders. Consequently, the firm should consider its green
shared vision that includes the ecological behaviors of the employees while they work. Responsible leadership can transfer signals to
the firm about its sustainable and ecological beliefs and values to improve the employees’ awareness level about social responsibility
and ethical concerns, which influence the ecological practices and behaviors of the workers. Hence, improving the supervisor’s ca­
pabilities of responsible leaders and strengthening the interaction of managers with subordinates are advantageous to encourage the
protection practices of environment at the workplace. The human resources practices of an organization should also focus on reflecting
a desire for recruiting and hiring candidates who demonstrate the characteristics and norms of being a responsible leader. To
strengthen the green behaviors of employees, it should be ensured that the managers are selected, promoted, trained, and developed
according to responsible leaders’ values as employees intimate the behaviors of their leaders. Business organizations are focusing on
greening their setting and situations through a green shared vision that is a mutual vision of the company and its workers. The leader’s
role is a substantial contextual factor in developing the firm’s vision. To develop the firm’s vision, the leaders’ behavior contributes
together. The association of responsible leaders and green employee behavior with the indirect path of the green shared vision has been
examined parochially. Moreover, there is a need to focus on creating the organizations’ culture based on a green shared vision, as the
organization’s green shared vision is important in stimulating the ecological behaviors of employees through enacting the policies and
practices related to environment.

11
N. Younas et al. Heliyon 9 (2023) e21511

7. Limitations and future research directions

7.1. Limitations

The present study has some limitations that should be addressed in future research. This study is cross-sectional; thus, causality
cannot be established. This study relied on self-reported green behavior measures, which may be subject to social desirability bias. This
study considers a single industry, and thus, the generalizability of the findings may be limited. One limitation of this study is that the
data collected were self-reported by the employees, which may introduce response bias and limit the reliability of the results.
Alternative methodologies could be explored to mitigate this limitation and enhance the robustness of the findings. Incorporating
objective measures or third-party assessments could provide a more comprehensive view of the variables under investigation. This
approach could help reduce the influence of response bias and enhance the reliability of the results. It is important to recognize that
this study was conducted within a specific culture. Other cultural factors can significantly impact individuals’ behaviors. Therefore, the
findings of this study may not necessarily generalize to other cultures. Conducting similar research in other cultural contexts can gain
valuable insights. This study is quantitative; further qualitative or mixed method research can be conducted. It is not possible to
include all the variables in one study; other variables might influence the relationship.

7.2. Future research directions

Future research should use longitudinal designs to examine the causal relationship between responsible leadership and employees’
green behaviors. Future research should use objective measures of green behavior, such as energy consumption data. Future research
should replicate the study in different sectors. To overcome the limitations of the study, future research could use multiple data
sources, such as supervisor ratings or objective measures, to provide a more comprehensive and accurate assessment of employees’
green behaviors. Another possible future direction could be investigating the mediating mechanisms between responsible leadership
and employees’ green behaviors using the S–V fit theory [33]. Our research investigates the mediating role of green shared vision in the
link between responsible leadership and green behavior. Future research could consider alternative intermediary variables, such as
environmental awareness, the ecological climate, and employees’ goal orientation [106]. This theory also suggests that individuals are
more likely to engage in behaviors that align with their values. Thus, responsible leadership may influence employees’ green behaviors
by promoting a values-based culture that prioritizes sustainability. Responsible leadership is a relatively new concept; its impact on
other employee behaviors like organizational citizenship behavior, task performance, and innovative work behavior should be
explored in future research. Future research could explore the part of individual values and values congruence in the association
between responsible leadership and employees’ green behaviors.

8. Conclusion

The focus on employees’ green behaviors as a significant aspect of achieving organizational sustainability has gained considerable
attention from both scholars and practitioners. Within this domain of research, our efforts have been dedicated to explain the
mechanisms that foster employees’ green behavior. To address this, we have adopted the Social-Values Fit (S–V fit) theory as a
foundational framework for the development of our conceptual research model. This model incorporates key variables that serve as
antecedents to employees’ green behaviors including responsible leader, green shared vision and individual green values. The study
found that the more responsible leadership will be, the greener behavior will be in the employees. Secondly, mediation effect of green
shared vision mediates between responsible leadership and in role green behavior. While it has also seen that green shared vision does
not mediates between responsible leadership and extra role green behavior. Testing the moderation mechanism of green values in­
dividuals on a green shared vision and green behavior revealed that INGV significantly moderated in both relationships.

Data availability statement

Data will be made available on request.

Funding

This research received no external funding.

CRediT authorship contribution statement

Nimra Younas: Conceptualization, Visualization, Writing – original draft. Md Billal Hossain: Validation, Conceptualization,
Funding acquisition, Writing – review & editing. Aleena Syed: Validation, Methodology. Sarmad Ejaz: Software, Conceptualization,
Writing – original draft. Faisal Ejaz: Methodology, Data curation, Writing – review & editing. Tahir Saeed Jagirani: Validation,
Investigation. Anna Dunay: Resources, Conceptualization, Methodology, Supervision.

12
N. Younas et al. Heliyon 9 (2023) e21511

Declaration of competing interest

The authors declare that they have no known competing financial interests or personal relationships that could have appeared to
influence the work reported in this paper.

References

[1] S.M. Lee, S.T. Kim, D. Choi, Green supply chain management and organizational performance, Ind. Manag. Data Syst. 112 (8) (2012) 1148–1180.
[2] L. Ardito, R.M. Dangelico, Firm environmental performance under scrutiny: the role of strategic and organizational orientations, Corp. Soc. Responsib.
Environ. Manag. 25 (4) (2018) 426–440.
[3] K.L. Unsworth, I.M. McNeill, Increasing pro-environmental behaviors by increasing self-concordance: testing an intervention, J. Appl. Psychol. 102 (1) (2017)
88.
[4] D.S. Ones, S. Dilchert, Environmental sustainability at work: a call to action, Industrial and Organizational Psychology 5 (4) (2012) 444–466.
[5] Y.W. Leung, S. Rosenthal, Explicating perceived sustainability-related climate: a situational motivator of pro-environmental behavior, Sustainability 11 (1)
(2019) 231.
[6] T.A. Norton, et al., Employee green behavior: a theoretical framework, multilevel review, and future research agenda, Organ. Environ. 28 (1) (2015) 103–125.
[7] A.R. Carrico, M. Riemer, Motivating energy conservation in the workplace: an evaluation of the use of group-level feedback and peer education, J. Environ.
Psychol. 31 (1) (2011) 1–13.
[8] H. Abdullah, F.W. Ibrahim, M.R.M. Jali, Green economy: evaluation of Malaysian company environmental sustainability, Int. J. Energy Econ. Pol. 7 (2) (2017)
139–143.
[9] N. Arora, T. Henderson, Embedded premium promotion: why it works and how to make it more effective, Market. Sci. 26 (4) (2007) 514–531.
[10] R. Geyer, J.R. Jambeck, K.L. Law, Production, use, and fate of all plastics ever made, Sci. Adv. 3 (7) (2017), e1700782.
[11] Z. Fields, S.O. Atiku, Collective green creativity and eco-innovation as key drivers of sustainable business solutions in organizations, in: Green Business:
Concepts, Methodologies, Tools, and Applications, IGI Global, 2019, pp. 415–439.
[12] B. Khalid, et al., Predicting required and voluntary employee green behavior using the theory of planned behavior, Corp. Soc. Responsib. Environ. Manag. 29
(5) (2022) 1300–1314.
[13] S.S.M. Ismail, O.A. Hilal, Behaving green.. who takes the lead? The role of responsible leadership, psychological ownership, and green moral identity in
motivating employees green behaviors, Global Business and Organizational Excellence (2022).
[14] P.K. Muisyo, et al., The role of green HRM in driving hotels’ green creativity, Int. J. Contemp. Hospit. Manag. (2022).
[15] B. Afsar, A. Shahjehan, S.I. Shah, Frontline Employees’ High-Performance Work Practices, Trust in Supervisor, Job-Embeddedness and Turnover Intentions in
Hospitality Industry, International Journal of Contemporary Hospitality Management, 2018.
[16] R. Farooq, et al., Do green human resource management and self-efficacy facilitate green creativity? A study of luxury hotels and resorts, J. Sustain. Tourism 30
(4) (2022) 824–845.
[17] T. Maak, N.M. Pless, Responsible leadership in a stakeholder society–a relational perspective, J. Bus. Ethics 66 (2006) 99–115.
[18] H.Ş. Kılıç, et al., Third order nonlinear optical properties of copper indium gallium selenide (CIGS) nanocrystal thin films, Appl. Phys. B 128 (6) (2022) 105.
[19] O. Boiral, C. Baron, O. Gunnlaugson, Environmental leadership and consciousness development: a case study among Canadian SMEs, J. Bus. Ethics 123 (2014)
363–383.
[20] S.-H. Han, et al., Organizational support on knowledge sharing: a moderated mediation model of job characteristics and organizational citizenship behavior,
J. Knowl. Manag. 23 (4) (2019) 687–704.
[21] T.-W. Chang, et al., Effect of green organizational identity, green shared vision, and organizational citizenship behavior for the environment on green product
development performance, Sustainability 11 (3) (2019) 617.
[22] N.A. Torugsa, W. O’Donohue, R. Hecker, Capabilities, proactive CSR and financial performance in SMEs: empirical evidence from an Australian manufacturing
industry sector, J. Bus. Ethics 109 (2012) 483–500.
[23] D. Wang, D.A. Waldman, Z. Zhang, A meta-analysis of shared leadership and team effectiveness, J. Appl. Psychol. 99 (2) (2014) 181.
[24] A.R. Bilal, T. Fatima, M.K. Imran, Does Shared Leadership Fosters Taking Charge Behaviors? A Post-heroic Leadership Perspective in the Public Sector Higher
Educational Institutes, International Journal of Public Leadership, 2019.
[25] M.A. Witt, G.K. Stahl, Foundations of responsible leadership: asian versus Western executive responsibility orientations toward key stakeholders, J. Bus. Ethics
136 (3) (2016) 623–638.
[26] C. Miska, C. Hilbe, S. Mayer, Reconciling different views on responsible leadership: a rationality-based approach, J. Bus. Ethics 125 (2014) 349–360.
[27] T. Jie, W. Wei, L. Jiang, A sustainability-oriented optimal allocation strategy of sharing bicycles: evidence from ofo usage in Shanghai. Resources, Conserv. Recycl. 153
(2020), 104510.
[28] A. Kim, et al., Multilevel influences on voluntary workplace green behavior: individual differences, leader behavior, and coworker advocacy, J. Manag. 43 (5)
(2017) 1335–1358.
[29] M.-F. Chen, P.-J. Tung, Developing an extended theory of planned behavior model to predict consumers’ intention to visit green hotels, Int. J. Hospit. Manag.
36 (2014) 221–230.
[30] A. Cohen, Y. Liu, Relationships between in-role performance and individual values, commitment, and organizational citizenship behavior among Israeli
teachers, Int. J. Psychol. 46 (4) (2011) 271–287.
[31] T. Islam, et al., Understanding knowledgeable workers’ behavior toward COVID-19 information sharing through WhatsApp in Pakistan, Front. Psychol. 11
(2020), 572526.
[32] X. Zhu, et al., Measuring the efficiency and driving factors of urban land use based on the DEA method and the PLS-SEM model—a case study of 35 large and
medium-sized cities in China, Sustain. Cities Soc. 50 (2019), 101646.
[33] J.R. Edwards, An examination of competing versions of the person-environment fit approach to stress, Acad. Manag. J. 39 (2) (1996) 292–339.
[34] X. Liu, X. Jie, Can manager’s environmentally specific transformational leadership improve environmental performance?, in: Proceedings of the Thirteenth
International Conference on Management Science and Engineering Management, 2 13 Springer, 2020.
[35] Z. Liao, M. Zhang, The influence of responsible leadership on environmental innovation and environmental performance: the moderating role of managerial
discretion, Corp. Soc. Responsib. Environ. Manag. 27 (5) (2020) 2016–2027.
[36] Y. Xing, M. Starik, Taoist leadership and employee green behaviour: a cultural and philosophical microfoundation of sustainability, J. Organ. Behav. 38 (9)
(2017) 1302–1319.
[37] R.E. Freeman, E.R. Auster, Values, Authenticity, and Responsible Leadership, Responsible leadership, 2012, pp. 15–23.
[38] C. Voegtlin, Development of a Scale Measuring Discursive Responsible Leadership, Responsible leadership, 2012, pp. 57–73.
[39] M. Wang, et al., Context, socialization, and newcomer learning, Organizational Psychology Review 5 (1) (2015) 3–25.
[40] T. Galpin, J. Lee Whittington, Sustainability leadership: from strategy to results, J. Bus. Strat. 33 (4) (2012) 40–48.
[41] L. Steg, C. Vlek, Encouraging pro-environmental behaviour: an integrative review and research agenda, J. Environ. Psychol. 29 (3) (2009) 309–317.
[42] C.A. Ramus, A.B. Killmer, Corporate greening through prosocial extrarole behaviours–a conceptual framework for employee motivation, Bus. Strat. Environ.
16 (8) (2007) 554–570.
[43] J. Dumont, J. Shen, X. Deng, Effects of green HRM practices on employee workplace green behavior: the role of psychological green climate and employee
green values, Hum. Resour. Manag. 56 (4) (2017) 613–627.

13
N. Younas et al. Heliyon 9 (2023) e21511

[44] P. Paillé, O. Boiral, Pro-environmental behavior at work: construct validity and determinants, J. Environ. Psychol. 36 (2013) 118–128.
[45] A. Yuriev, et al., Pro-environmental behaviors through the lens of the theory of planned behavior: a scoping review, Resour. Conserv. Recycl. 155 (2020),
104660.
[46] F.G. Gilal, et al., The role of self-determination theory in marketing science: an integrative review and agenda for research, Eur. Manag. J. 37 (1) (2019) 29–44.
[47] D.E. Rupp, et al., Employee reactions to corporate social responsibility: an organizational justice framework, J. Organ. Behav.: The International Journal of
Industrial, Occupational and Organizational Psychology and Behavior 27 (4) (2006) 537–543.
[48] B. Afsar, et al., Responsible leadership and employee’s proenvironmental behavior: the role of organizational commitment, green shared vision, and internal
environmental locus of control, Corp. Soc. Responsib. Environ. Manag. 27 (1) (2020) 297–312.
[49] J. He, A.M. Morrison, H. Zhang, Being sustainable: the three-way interactive effects of CSR, green human resource management, and responsible leadership on
employee green behavior and task performance, Corp. Soc. Responsib. Environ. Manag. 28 (3) (2021) 1043–1054.
[50] H. Lu, et al., Does top management team responsible leadership help employees go green? The role of green human resource management and environmental
felt-responsibility, Corp. Soc. Responsib. Environ. Manag. 29 (4) (2022) 843–859.
[51] Y.-S. Chen, C.-H. Chang, Y.-H. Lin, The determinants of green radical and incremental innovation performance: green shared vision, green absorptive capacity,
and green organizational ambidexterity, Sustainability 6 (11) (2014) 7787–7806.
[52] J.A. Aragón-Correa, et al., Environmental strategy and performance in small firms: a resource-based perspective, J. Environ. Manag. 86 (1) (2008) 88–103.
[53] T.-W. Chang, Corporate sustainable development strategy: effect of green shared vision on organization members’ behavior, Int. J. Environ. Res. Publ. Health
17 (7) (2020) 2446.
[54] J.R. Edwards, A.J. Shipp, The Relationship between Person-Environment Fit and Outcomes: an Integrative Theoretical Framework, 2007.
[55] S. Low, D. Espelage, Differentiating cyber bullying perpetration from non-physical bullying: commonalities across race, individual, and family predictors,
Psychology of Violence 3 (1) (2013) 39.
[56] M.J. Bissing-Olson, et al., Relationships between daily affect and pro-environmental behavior at work: the moderating role of pro-environmental attitude,
J. Organ. Behav. 34 (2) (2013) 156–175.
[57] L. He, J. Shen, Y. Zhang, Ecological vulnerability assessment for ecological conservation and environmental management, J. Environ. Manag. 206 (2018)
1115–1125.
[58] J.Y. Yong, M.-Y. Yusliza, O.O. Fawehinmi, Green human resource management: a systematic literature review from 2007 to 2019, Benchmark Int. J. 27 (7)
(2020) 2005–2027.
[59] P.M. Muchinsky, C.J. Monahan, What is person-environment congruence? Supplementary versus complementary models of fit, J. Vocat. Behav. 31 (3) (1987)
268–277.
[60] Y.A. Soomro, et al., What influences consumers to recycle solid waste? An application of the extended theory of planned behavior in the Kingdom of Saudi
Arabia, Sustainability 14 (2) (2022) 998.
[61] J.L. Robertson, J. Barling, Greening organizations through leaders’ influence on employees’ pro-environmental behaviors, J. Organ. Behav. 34 (2) (2013)
176–194.
[62] H. Zhao, Q. Zhou, Exploring the impact of responsible leadership on organizational citizenship behavior for the environment: a leadership identity perspective,
Sustainability 11 (4) (2019) 944.
[63] C. Voegtlin, M. Patzer, A.G. Scherer, Responsible leadership in global business: a new approach to leadership and its multi-level outcomes, J. Bus. Ethics 105
(2012) 1–16.
[64] C. Voegtlin, et al., Theoretical development and empirical examination of a three-roles model of responsible leadership, J. Bus. Ethics 167 (2020) 411–431.
[65] S. Wang, et al., Can socially responsible leaders drive Chinese firm performance? Leader. Organ. Dev. J. 36 (4) (2015) 435–450.
[66] L. Su, S.R. Swanson, Perceived corporate social responsibility’s impact on the well-being and supportive green behaviors of hotel employees: the mediating
role of the employee-corporate relationship, Tourism Manag. 72 (2019) 437–450.
[67] I. Inceoglu, et al., Leadership behavior and employee well-being: an integrated review and a future research agenda, Leader. Q. 29 (1) (2018) 179–202.
[68] J.S. Han, et al., Lead-free all-inorganic cesium tin iodide perovskite for filamentary and interface-type resistive switching toward environment-friendly and
temperature-tolerant nonvolatile memories, ACS Appl. Mater. Interfaces 11 (8) (2019) 8155–8163.
[69] W. Young, et al., Changing behaviour: successful environmental programmes in the workplace, Bus. Strat. Environ. 24 (8) (2015) 689–703.
[70] Y. Chen, et al., Linking market orientation and environmental performance: the influence of environmental strategy, employee’s environmental involvement,
and environmental product quality, J. Bus. Ethics 127 (2015) 479–500.
[71] T. Maak, Responsible leadership, stakeholder engagement, and the emergence of social capital, J. Bus. Ethics 74 (2007) 329–343.
[72] A.A. Al Mousa, et al., Chicken Feathers Waste Management by Microbial as a Sustainable and Tool Environmental Friendly, 2021.
[73] M.P. Maloney, M.P. Ward, Ecology: let’s hear from the people: an objective scale for the measurement of ecological attitudes and knowledge, Am. Psychol. 28
(7) (1973) 583.
[74] O. Khassawneh, T. Mohammad, R. Ben-Abdallah, The impact of leadership on boosting employee creativity: the role of knowledge sharing as a mediator, Adm.
Sci. 12 (4) (2022) 175.
[75] X. Yang, The impact of responsible leadership on employee green behavior: mediating effect of moral reflectiveness and moderating effect of empathy, in: IOP
Conference Series: Materials Science and Engineering, IOP Publishing, 2019.
[76] E. Goodfellow, The potential of improved leadership sustainability within the new leadership paradigm, Can. J. Respir. Ther. 43 (3) (2007) 29.
[77] S. Kantabutra, G.C. Avery, The power of vision: statements that resonate, J. Bus. Strat. 31 (1) (2010) 37–45.
[78] S.L. Oswald, K.W. Mossholder, S.G. Harris, Vision salience and strategic involvement: implications for psychological attachment to organization and job, Strat.
Manag. J. 15 (6) (1994) 477–489.
[79] I. Ahmad, W.A. Umrani, The Impact of Ethical Leadership Style on Job Satisfaction: Mediating Role of Perception of Green HRM and Psychological Safety,
Leadership & Organization Development Journal, 2019.
[80] I. Ahmad, et al., Do as I say and do as I do? The mediating role of psychological contract fulfillment in the relationship between ethical leadership and
employee extra-role performance, Person. Rev. 48 (1) (2019) 98–117.
[81] B. Latif, N. Gunarathne, J. Gaskin, T. San Ong, M. Ali, Environmental corporate social responsibility and pro-environmental behavior: The effect of green
shared vision and personal ties, Resour. Conserv. Recycl. 186 (2022), 106572.
[82] L. Andersson, S. Shivarajan, G. Blau, Enacting ecological sustainability in the MNC: a test of an adapted value-belief-norm framework, J. Bus. Ethics 59 (2005)
295–305.
[83] C.-J. Chou, Hotels’ environmental policies and employee personal environmental beliefs: interactions and outcomes, Tourism Manag. 40 (2014) 436–446.
[84] T. Hedlund, The impact of values, environmental concern, and willingness to accept economic sacrifices to protect the environment on tourists’ intentions to
buy ecologically sustainable tourism alternatives, Tourism Hospit. Res. 11 (4) (2011) 278–288.
[85] J.R. Edwards, D.M. Cable, The value of value congruence, J. Appl. Psychol. 94 (3) (2009) 654.
[86] D.V. Day, A.G. Bedeian, Predicting job performance across organizations: the interaction of work orientation and psychological climate, J. Manag. 17 (3)
(1991) 589–600.
[87] U. Sekaran, R. Bougie, Research Methods for Business: A Skill Building Approach, john wiley & sons, 2016.
[88] M. Alvi, A Manual for Selecting Sampling Techniques in Research, 2016.
[89] U. Raja, G. Johns, F. Ntalianis, The impact of personality on psychological contracts, Acad. Manag. J. 47 (3) (2004) 350–367.
[90] T. Islam, et al., Police work-family nexus, work engagement and turnover intention: moderating role of person-job-fit, Policing: Int. J. 42 (5) (2019) 739–750.
[91] T. Islam, et al., Abusive supervision and knowledge sharing: moderating roles of Islamic work ethic and learning goal orientation, Manag. Decis. 59 (2) (2021)
205–222.

14
N. Younas et al. Heliyon 9 (2023) e21511

[92] T. Islam, I. Ahmed, Mechanism between perceived organizational support and transfer of training: explanatory role of self-efficacy and job satisfaction,
Management Research Review 41 (3) (2018) 296–313.
[93] M. Bulmer, Questionnaires, in: M. Bulmer (Ed.), Sage Benchmarks in Social Science Research Methods, first ed., Sage Publications, London, 2004, p. 354.
[94] J.F. Hair Jr., et al., PLS-SEM or CB-SEM: updated guidelines on which method to use, International Journal of Multivariate Data Analysis 1 (2) (2017) 107–123.
[95] T. Islam, et al., Work-family conflict and job dissatisfaction among police officers: mediation of threat to family role and moderation of role segmentation
enhancement, Policing: Int. J. 43 (2) (2020) 403–415.
[96] P.M. Podsakoff, S.B. MacKenzie, N.P. Podsakoff, Sources of method bias in social science research and recommendations on how to control it, Annu. Rev.
Psychol. 63 (2012) 539–569.
[97] C. Voegtlin, What does it mean to be responsible? Addressing the missing responsibility dimension in ethical leadership research, Leadership 12 (5) (2016)
581–608.
[98] T. Islam, et al., Promoting in-role and extra-role green behavior through ethical leadership: mediating role of green HRM and moderating role of individual
green values, Int. J. Manpow. 42 (6) (2021) 1102–1123.
[99] Y. Gao, W. He, Corporate social responsibility and employee organizational citizenship behavior: the pivotal roles of ethical leadership and organizational
justice, Manag. Decis. 55 (2) (2017) 294–309.
[100] S. Arqawi, et al., Green Human Resource Management Practices Among Palestinian Manufacturing Firms-An Exploratory Study, 2019.
[101] A.S. Butt, A.B. Ahmad, Personal relationship and conflicts in supply chains: exploration of buyers and suppliers in Australian manufacturing and service sector,
Benchmark Int. J. 26 (7) (2019) 2225–2241.
[102] E. Kline, et al., Trauma and psychosis symptoms in a sample of help-seeking youth, Schizophr. Res. 175 (1–3) (2016) 174–179.
[103] J.F. Hair, et al., When to use and how to report the results of PLS-SEM, Eur. Bus. Rev. 31 (1) (2019) 2–24.
[104] R.M. Baron, D.A. Kenny, The moderator–mediator variable distinction in social psychological research: conceptual, strategic, and statistical considerations,
J. Pers. Soc. Psychol. 51 (6) (1986) 1173.
[105] B. Diheneščiková, Krizová Komunikace Během Pandemie Ve Vybraném Podniku, Masaryk University, Faculty of Economics and Administration, 2023.
[106] B. Afsar, Y. Badir, U.S. Kiani, Linking spiritual leadership and employee’s pro-environmental behavior: the influence of workplace spirituality, intrinsic
motivation, and environmental passion, J. Environ. Psychol. 45 (2016) 79–88.
[107] H. Lu, et al., Who contributed to “corporation green” in China? A view of public-and private-sphere pro-environmental behavior among employees, Resour.
Conserv. Recycl. 120 (2017) 166–175.

15

View publication stats