HOW TO DEVELOP A SUSTAINBLE HUMAN RESOURCE MANAGEMENT IN COMPANY.docx

HOW TO DEVELOPA SUSTAINBLE HUMAN
RESOURCE MANAGEMENT IN COMPANY
Submitted By
Suryansh Verma
Registration Number: C23BC03190
Class and Semester: B.COM 6TH
Semester
Department: Commerce
Dr. Shweta Mishra
Assistant Professor
Christ Church College
Chhatrapati Sahu Ji Maharaj University

LIST OF ABBREVIATIONS
1) HRM HUMAN RESOURCE MANAGEMENT
2) NGOs NON-GOVERMENTAL ORGANISATIONS
3) SHRM SUSTAINABLE HUMAN RESOURCE MANAGEMENT
4) NE NEGATIVE EXTERNALITIES
5) E-R MODEL EFFORT-RECOVERY MODEL
6) OD ORGANISTAION DEPARTMENT
7) SHG SKARABORG HOSPITAL GROUP
8) IDCs INDUSTRIALLY DEVELOPING COUNTRIES
9) SWS SUSTAINBLE WORK SYSTEM
10) JQI JOB QUALITY INDEX
11) ETUI-REHS RESEARCH, EDUCATION, HEALTH AND SAFETY
12) QWS QUALITY OF LIFE
13) WCED WORLD COMMISSION ON ENVIRONMENT AND DEVELOPMENT
14) WWF WORLD WILDLIFE FUND

CONTENT
Part I Introduction into Sustainability and HRM
1 Sustainability and HRM
Part II The Role of HRM in Developing Economically, Socially and Ecologically Sustainable
Organisations
1 Social Sustainability and Quality of Working Life
2 Sowing Seeds for Sustainability in Work Systems
Part III The Role of HRM in Developing Sustainable HRM Systems
1 The Model of Negative Externality for Sustainable HRM
Part IV Sustainability and HRM in Different Areas of the World
1 Sustainable HRM in the US
Part V Conclusions and Prospects for Sustainability and HRM

INTRODUCTION
Contents
1 Introduction
1.1 Limitations of the Traditional Market Model
1.2 Importance of Sustainability for HRM
2 Sustainability and Sustainable Development: An Overview
2.1 Historical Roots of Sustainability and Its Dimensions
2.2 Defining Sustainability for the Business Context
3.1 Key Concepts and Levels of Analysis
3.2 Key Research Areas on Sustainability and HRM
4 The Research Agenda on Sustainability and HRM
4.1 Objectives and Scope of this Volume
4.2 Content and Outline of this Volume
Abstract In this introduction to ‘Sustainability and Human Resource Management: Developing
sustainable business organizations’ we outline the content and structure of the book. In this book, our
academic and practitioner authors explore the potential of sustainability as a new paradigm and
Sustainable HRM as a concept for HRM. We wish to contribute to fruitful debates about the role of HRM
in developing sustainable work and HRM systems and the role of HRM in supporting sustainable business
organizations. Our goal with this book is to advance and bring together conceptual and empirical
research as well as practitioners’ views on the meaning and motifs of sustainability for HRM, on how to
design and evaluate sustainable HRM systems, and on enhancing our understanding for the complex,
non-linear interrelationships, potential paradoxes and tensions between economic, ecological, social and
human sustainability. In this introduction, we elucidate the conceptual underpinnings of sustainability
and HRM embraced in this book, we critically review the historical roots and different areas dealing with
sustainability and HRM, we summarize the limitations and gaps in prior research and finally, this
introduction provides short summaries of the chapters in this volume
1 Introduction
The topic and research area of Sustainable Human Resource Management (Sustainable HRM) is one
which has become increasingly important in the past decade and this book is a contribution in bringing
together ideas and authors from different backgrounds to shed further light on how sustainability can be

integrated in the management of people in organizations. Since 1987, the year of the publication of the
United Nation’s World Commission on Environment and Development. report (WCED 1987), we have
witnessed the notion of ‘sustainability’ becoming a ‘mantra’ of the twenty-first century (Dyllick and
Hockerts 2002). Increasing external pressures have urged more and more organizations, especially
commercial companies worldwide to incorporate sustainability – e.g. Unilever (who announced a
‘Sustainable Living Plan’) – as core activities into their corporate policies and strategies in order to take a
proactive role in controlling the long-term impact of business life on the natural, social and human
environments (e.g., Bansal 2005). Issues raised by this impact are, among others, climate change,
environmental problems, increase of the world population, social inequity and poverty and the problem
that the world population – and in particular industrialized and industrializing countries – consumes
more resources per year than are reproduced although not all people have equal access to resources
and to the same standard of living. If economic growth in industrializing countries continues at its
current speed and with its current impact, we would soon need more than three instead of one planet’s
resources (WWF 2012). These developments have raised considerable criticism of traditional economic
thinking and business practices.
1.1 Limitations of the Traditional Market Model
Slowly but surely, a growing consensus acknowledges that an excessive emphasis on short-term
efficiency, as advocated by the traditional market model, is insufficient for ensuring long-term
organizational viability. This perspective extends beyond merely short-term performance concerns to
underscore the importance of actively engaging in the renewal, regeneration, and reproduction of
resources for sustained survival. While efficient resource utilization is necessary, it alone does not
guarantee long-term corporate viability. Consequently, organizations are urged to reconsider their
approach to resource management, including their human resource base, which we term the 'human
resource base.'
Sustaining the human resource base emerges as a strategic management imperative. Failure to do so
poses significant challenges for organizations, impacting their access to critical resources in three key
scenarios outlined below:
1. Corporate decisions influenced by the traditional market model can affect the willingness and ability
of institutions or individuals to provide critical resources to the organization.
2. Side effects and feedback effects from business activities, known as 'externalities,' can impact
resource quality or regeneration, threatening the organization's long-term supply.
3. Not all resource scarcities or effects are solely caused by organizations, but the prevailing focus on
financial performance often leads to a neglect of these externalities.
Organizations thus face simultaneous challenges, including maintaining social legitimacy, controlling
externalities on resources and organizational environments, and sustaining long-term resource supply.
In conclusion, it's imperative for organizations to broaden their understanding of their resource base and
actively manage its renewal, development, and regeneration. This proactive approach is vital for
ensuring a sustainable resource pool to support future business operations.
1.2 Importance of Sustainability for HRM

The passage underscores the rising significance of sustainability and its implications for Human Resource
Management (HRM) within organizations. While numerous companies globally have embraced
sustainability initiatives, there often exists ambiguity concerning whether these endeavors are genuine
or merely for public relations purposes. Despite a focus on ecological sustainability, insufficient attention
has been accorded to the social and human aspects of business operations.
The relevance of sustainability to strategic HRM is highlighted, as evidenced by many companies linking
sustainability objectives to HRM goals. These objectives include:
- Attracting and retaining talent,
- Ensuring employee health and safety,
- Investing in workforce skills development,
- Supporting work-life balance,
- Managing aging workforces,
- Fostering trust and social responsibility, and
- Promoting quality of life for employees and communities.
The discussion underscores a shift in HRM practices towards valuing employees as human resources to
be developed and sustained, rather than merely as expendable assets. This shift reflects evolving
employer-employee relationships influenced by legislative changes and long-term concerns.
Moving forward, the introduction promises to explore the conceptual foundations of sustainability,
sustainable development, and HRM within the context of the book. It aims to clarify the historical roots
and dimensions of sustainability, define key concepts, and review existing literature on sustainability and
HRM. Additionally, it outlines the research agenda and provides summaries of the chapters included in
the volume.
While the passage lacks explicit bullet points, the enumerated objectives are presented in a list format,
fulfilling the function of bullet points. This format succinctly outlines the various objectives associated
with linking sustainability and HRM, providing clarity and structure to the discussion. The inclusion of
these bullet points aids in highlighting the multifaceted nature of sustainability objectives in relation to
HRM practices within organizations.
In summary, the passage elucidates the growing importance of sustainability in shaping HRM practices,
emphasizing the need for organizations to integrate sustainability goals into their HRM strategies.
Through the enumerated objectives, the passage effectively delineates the diverse ways in which
sustainability objectives intersect with HRM goals, setting the stage for further exploration in the
subsequent sections of the introduction.
2 Sustainability and Sustainable Development:
An Overview Sustainability is a term that has been applied widely, in different disciplines as well as in
everyday language and in political debates. But what is sustainability? How can we define the term in the
business context and how can we define it for HRM? In this section, we examine the roots for the
understanding of sustainability today, we shed light on different definitions and dimensions of
sustainability and we examine the underlying rationalities for sustainability.
2.1 Historical Roots of Sustainability and Its Dimensions

Sustainability embodies fundamental principles deeply rooted in human societies' historical fabric,
characterized by concepts like 'long-term,' 'durable,' and 'self-sustaining.' Derived from the Latin 'sus-
tenere,' meaning 'to sustain,' sustainability epitomizes systems' capacity to maintain and develop
themselves. Early philosophical groundwork for sustainability was laid by Aristotle's notion of the
household as a self-sustaining entity.
Practically, sustainability emphasizes consuming fewer resources than can be reproduced, a principle
foundational in forestry and fishing practices globally. Economic considerations drove the necessity for
sustainability in these industries, understanding prudent resource management as vital for long-term
viability.
The discourse on ecological sustainability expanded with the Club of Rome's 'Limits to Growth' report in
1972, raising awareness about finite resources and unchecked growth's perils. The Brundtland
Commission's report defined sustainable development as meeting present needs without compromising
future generations', integrating sustainability principles into global agendas.
Initially focused on environmental concerns, sustainability discourse has evolved to encompass social
dimensions. 'Human sustainability' recognizes the interplay between environmental, social, and economic
factors, advocating practices that nurture well-being, equity, and resilience.
In business, sustainability transcends environmental management, influencing human resource
management (HRM). Integration of sustainability principles into HRM heralds a paradigm shift, requiring
reassessment of work systems, employee relations, and organizational culture.
Sustainability's diverse interpretations range from economically driven approaches to ethically rooted
imperatives. Acknowledging these complexities is crucial in understanding sustainability's implications for
HRM.
In subsequent discussions, deeper exploration of sustainability's dimensions and its transformative
potential for HRM will be undertaken, recognizing the challenges and opportunities inherent in this
integration.
2.2 Defining Sustainability for the Business Context
Companies play a pivotal role in advancing sustainable development, yet translating this concept into
actionable strategies poses significant challenges. Unlike societies, companies operate on distinct
rationalities, predominantly driven by economic considerations rather than broader societal concerns as
highlighted by the Brundtland Commission. This dichotomy prompts critical questions in sustainability
discourse: Why would companies pursue sustainable practices, and how can sustainability be
operationalized at the business level?
In the discourse, two primary rationalities emerge: social responsibility and economic reasoning. While
often intertwined, they serve as fundamental drivers for sustainable business behavior. The interplay
between these rationalities underscores the complex nature of sustainability initiatives. However,
understanding their nuances and implications is essential for shaping organizational culture and practices
towards sustainability.

In exploring these rationalities, three core alternative lines of thought emerge, each with distinct
underlying motives and implications. These variations in meaning and nature necessitate careful
consideration in organizational decision-making to effectively navigate the complexities of sustainability.
2.2.1 Ethical Interpretations of Sustainability
The normative perspective on sustainability emphasizes social responsibility and ethical values, influenced
by movements like the Brundtland report and corporate sustainability research. It extends beyond
addressing post-2007 financial crisis practices to prioritize societal well-being. The theoretical foundation
lies in business ethics, economic ethics, and stakeholder theory, though implementing these values in HRM
poses challenges. Nevertheless, this perspective highlights businesses' pivotal role in societal welfare,
navigating the tension between social responsibility and economic rationality. Elkington's 'Triple Bottom
Line' concept illustrates this shift by incorporating social and ecological factors into decision-making.
Economic arguments also support sustainable practices beyond the traditional business case. Overall, the
normative discourse stresses the importance of balancing social responsibility with economic rationality
for organizational legitimacy and long-term success.
2.2.2 Economically Rational Interpretations of Sustainability
Traditional economic theory emphasizes efficiency and shareholder value maximization, often overlooking
ecological and societal costs. However, individual rationality based on profit maximization can lead to
collective irrationality, as exemplified by the 'Tragedy of the Commons'. While prioritizing profit may seem
individually rational, it can lead to unsustainable outcomes when many actors behave similarly, causing
systems to collapse or face pressure to adopt cost-efficient yet unsustainable practices.
Criticism of this traditional economic rationale has grown, especially as the global impacts of business
activities, such as climate change and biodiversity reduction, have become apparent. Scholars question
the economic rationality of sustainability, prompting discussions on when sustainable business behavior
becomes economically viable.
Businesses cite various reasons to adopt sustainability practices, including cost reduction, risk mitigation,
and value creation. However, the prevailing 'business case' approach may not fully address the root causes
of sustainability challenges, as it often focuses on extending the availability of resources rather than
generating, regenerating, and renewing them.
A more systematic approach proposed by Müller-Christ and Remer defines sustainability as the long-term
balance between resource consumption and reproduction. This approach operationalizes sustainability by
distinguishing between resource-consuming and resource-regenerating choices. It has been applied in
various contexts, from supply chains to human resource management, emphasizing the importance of
ensuring a supply of critical resources for future business activities.
Integrating an ethical dimension into this approach can enhance its effectiveness, ensuring that supply-
ensuring activities align with moral values. Key questions include assessing future resource access,
necessity, substitutability, origin, and regeneration processes. By addressing these questions,
organizations can analyze their resource usage more effectively and guide decision-making towards
sustainable practices.

In today's global economy, understanding sustainability as an economic principle is complex, requiring
consideration of broader time spans and interrelations. To foster change towards more sustainable
business models, all three rationales for sustainability—economic, social, and environmental—are
essential. This requires the engagement of responsible stakeholders, efficient resource usage, and
investment in resource regeneration and development.
As emerging economies adopt resource-intensive lifestyles, the need to rethink traditional efficiency-
driven approaches becomes even more pressing. Without transitioning beyond traditional economic
rationales, the severe impacts of current business models on the environment and society will persist.
In conclusion, reconciling traditional economic rationality with sustainability requires a shift towards a
more comprehensive understanding of resource usage and regeneration. By integrating ethical
considerations and addressing key questions about resource sustainability, businesses can navigate
towards more sustainable practices and contribute to long-term viability and well-being.
2.2.3 Relationship of Sustainability Rationales and Dimensions
The definition of sustainable development varies, particularly at the business level, leading to differing
perspectives on the relationship between economic, ecological, and social sustainability.
1. Equal Importance of Dimensions: Some views, like that of the Brundtland Report and the Triple Bottom
Line approach, advocate for equal integration of all three dimensions. This view emphasizes achieving win-
win-win situations between economic, ecological, and social aspects.
2.Primacy of Economic Sustainability: Alternatively, some argue that economic sustainability takes
precedence, with ecological and social aspects valued only if they contribute to economic success.
However, this approach may lead to biased decisions favoring economic dimensions and overlooking
potential solutions beneficial from an ecological or social standpoint.
3. Ecological Primacy: A third perspective considers ecological sustainability as the foundation, with social
and economic dimensions nested within it. This sustains centric approach highlights the dependence of
all aspects of human life on functioning natural ecosystems.
Operationalizing sustainability at the firm level remains challenging due to limited awareness of global
implications in daily business practices. Reframing success and performance criteria to include
environmental and social aspects, as suggested by the concept of 'inclusive profitability,' may provide a
solution. This broader perspective shifts the focus from maximizing financial performance to considering
social and ecological performance alongside economic gains.
Incorporating human sustainability alongside economic, ecological, and social dimensions is crucial for
long-term organizational viability. While the ecological dimension sets global boundaries, social and
human sustainability is often overlooked. Therefore, it's essential to consider all dimensions in corporate
decision-making, including HRM practices.
This volume primarily focuses on the interplay between economic, social, and human sustainability.
However, acknowledging the ecological dimension's importance is necessary for holistic corporate
sustainability.

In conclusion, sustainability encompasses economic, ecological, social, and human dimensions, with
interrelations among them requiring careful consideration in organizational decision-making processes.
As people in organizations are one of the most important resources – if not the most important one – and
as human resources can also become scarce or can be exploited in organizations, sustainability has also
become a concern for those interested in people in organizations, in work and in HRM systems. We define
the basic terms used in this book and then we would like to sketch out key research which has an impact
on the development of the Sustainable HRM field
2.1 Key Concepts and Levels of Analysis
Our interdisciplinary approach aims to clarify core concepts in sustainability and HRM, addressing the
confusion surrounding their emergence. Authors explore what needs to be sustained, including individual
capabilities, work systems, and employer-employee relationships, to achieve corporate sustainable
development. They offer insights on operationalizing sustainability and translating it into shared meanings
and measurable outcomes. Shared meanings are crucial for successful implementation, fostering shared
attitudes toward sustainability. Rationalities underlying sustainability, as analyzed by Ehnert (2009b), are
also relevant in applying sustainability to people management. Our interdisciplinary approach aims to
clarify core concepts in sustainability and HRM, addressing the confusion surrounding their emergence.
Authors explore what needs to be sustained, including individual capabilities, work systems, and employer-
employee relationships, to achieve corporate sustainable development. They offer insights on
operationalizing sustainability and translating it into shared meanings and measurable outcomes. Shared
meanings are crucial for successful implementation, fostering shared attitudes toward sustainability.
Rationalities underlying sustainability, as analyzed by Ehnert (2009b), are also relevant in applying
sustainability to people management.
Defining Human Resources, Human Factors, HRM and Work Systems
In the realm of Human Resource Management (HRM), the traditional view treated human resources as
mere production factors, subject to exploitation and disposal based solely on organizational goals.
However, a shift has occurred towards recognizing the unique needs, wants, and mobility of individuals
within organizations. This perspective acknowledges that human resources are valuable assets requiring
development and consideration beyond their immediate financial contributions. Successful organizations
leverage HR capabilities to align business opportunities with employee abilities and preferences,
emphasizing the importance of viewing people as more than just means to an end.
In Sustainable HRM, individuals are regarded as subjects with their own lives beyond the organization,
acknowledging their intrinsic value and well-being. While still contributing to organizational goals
voluntarily, people are seen as having needs and desires that extend beyond immediate financial
usefulness. This perspective aligns with a broader definition of human resources, encompassing those who
currently or potentially contribute to organizational work. Additionally, insights from ergonomics or
human factors highlight the importance of optimizing human well-being and system performance,
emphasizing collaboration and integration across disciplinary boundaries.

In this volume, we advocate for a holistic view of human resources, recognizing their multifaceted nature
and the necessity of considering their well-being alongside organizational objectives. By bridging
traditional HRM perspectives with insights from ergonomics and sustainability, we pave the way for a more
comprehensive understanding of people within organizations and the imperative for sustainable human
resource management practices.
3.1.2 Sustainable HRM as an Umbrella Concept and Levels of Analysis
Sustainable HRM encompasses various definitions and conceptualizations, reflecting the diverse
perspectives and contexts within which it operates. Despite this diversity, the common thread among
these definitions is the aim to make HRM systems themselves sustainable, rooted in the principles of
long-term organizational success and responsible management of human resources.
Examples of Sustainable HRM definitions include Thom and Zaugg's focus on socially responsible and
economically appropriate HR practices, Mu¨ller-Christ and Remer's emphasis on ensuring durable access
to skilled human resources, and Ehnert's broader view of HR strategies aimed at organizational goal
achievement while reproducing the HR base over time.
In this volume, we adopt an inclusive understanding of Sustainable HRM as a holistic approach to the
employment relationship, integrating corporate and societal goals of ecological, social, human, and
economic sustainability. By considering sustainability in HRM design and implementation, organizations
can contribute to both their own sustainable development and the broader societal well-being.
2.2 Key Research Areas on Sustainability and HRM
We see several academic roots for the emerging work on sustainability in HRM and a variety of research
areas and disciplines contributing to the topic. These roots can be found firstly in corporate sustainability
(CS) research (e.g. Colbert and Kurucz 2010; Mu¨ller-Christ and Remer 1999; Sroufe et al. 2010;
Wirtenberg et al. 2010), second in Corporate Social Responsibility (CSR) research (e.g. Preuss et al. 2009),
third in Sustainable Works Systems research (e.g. Docherty et al. 2002, 2009; Kira 2003; Kira and Forslin
2008), fourth in articles with a critical stance towards traditional (Strategic) HRM concepts and practices
(e.g. Mariappanadar 2003; Gollan 2005; Paauwe 2004; Pfeffer 2010; Wilkinson et al. 2001; Wilkinson
2005), and fifth in ergonomics and human factors research (e.g. Zink 2008). Today, research is emerging
under the labels ‘Sustainable HRM’ (e.g. Ehnert 2009a; Guerci 2011; Zaugg 2009), ‘Socially responsible
HRM’ (e.g. Cohen 2010; Cohen et al. 2012; Hartog and colleagues 2008), or ‘Green HRM’ (Renwick et al.
2008; Jackson et al. 2011; Jabbour and Santos 2008) depending on the key focus of the approach.

Part II The Role of HRM in Developing Economically, Socially and
Ecologically Sustainable Organisations
Social Sustainability and Quality of Working Life
A Human Factors Perspective on Sustainable HRM
Contents
1 Importance of a Human Factors Perspective for Sustainable HRM
2 Background on Social Sustainability, Human Resource Management and Human Factors
3 Recent Changes and Future Challenges for Social Sustainability
4 Quality of Working Life
5 Social Sustainability at Work: Does It Exist?
6 Sustainable Work Systems
6.1 Understanding Sustainable Work Systems
6.2 Designing a Framework for Sustainable Work Systems from a Human Factors Perspective
7 Summary and Outlook

Abstract
This chapter explores the human dimension of social sustainability in the context of work, focusing on
the discipline of Human Factors and its relationship to Sustainable HRM. It discusses recent changes and
future challenges in Sustainable HRM, introduces the concept of Quality of Working Life, and examines
the state of the human dimension of social sustainability. By defining sustainable work systems and
analyzing examples of their elements, the chapter underscores the need for further research to advance
this field.
1 Importance of a Human Factors Perspective for Sustainable HRM
The integration of sustainability into Human Resource Management (HRM) and Human Factors (HF)
fields is relatively recent despite its inclusion in sustainable development frameworks since 1987. HRM
and HF, focusing on health and productivity in economic settings, operate somewhat independently.
Bridging these disciplines requires defining key concepts and exploring the historic discourse on Quality
of Working Life. Despite shared goals, HRM and HF have distinct trajectories, necessitating a closer
alignment to address social sustainability effectively.
2 Background on Social Sustainability, Human Resource Management and Human Factors
The discussion on social sustainability within the framework of sustainability research often revolves
around its definition as one of the three pillars of sustainability. This perspective suggests that
sustainable development is reliant on living off the income generated from investing in various forms of
capital rather than consuming the capital itself. Specifically, human and social capital play crucial roles in
this context. Human capital encompasses investments in education, training, and health, emphasizing
both individual and societal returns. Social capital, on the other hand, arises from the relationships and
interactions among individuals, contributing to overall well-being and productivity.
In the realm of Human Resource Management (HRM) and Human Factors (HF), which focus on health,
productivity, and economic goals in organizational settings, there has been a slow adoption of
sustainability principles. HRM traditionally views human resources as production factors to achieve
economic objectives, while HF takes a broader approach, integrating social, economic, and
environmental objectives to optimize human well-being and system performance. Both fields recognize
the duality of goals, balancing productivity with employee well-being, similar to early Human Factors
approaches. While HF has historically emphasized the unique characteristics of humans and integrated
social and environmental considerations, HRM has primarily focused on economic goals. However,
recent trends suggest a potential convergence between the two disciplines, with HF showing a stronger
affinity towards sustainability principles. Despite some differences, such as time perspectives, both HRM
and HF play essential roles in shaping sustainable work systems and contributing to social sustainability
within organizations.
3 Recent Changes and Future Challenges for Social Sustainability
The discussion on social sustainability intersects with significant mega-trends shaping the working world,
particularly in Western societies and economies. Six key trends include globalization, market dynamics,
demographic shifts, evolving values, technological advancements, and urbanization. These trends exert
profound influence on society, companies, and individual employees alike. Globalization has transformed

labor division across borders, impacting both low and high-skilled jobs. Market dynamics necessitate
heightened flexibility and adaptability in work structures. Technological advancements enable remote
and flexible work arrangements, intensifying work demands. Precarious job conditions, especially in the
service sector, highlight shifts in the labor market. Demographic changes, including an aging workforce,
underscore the importance of "workability" and "employability" for organizational competitiveness.
Urbanization trends drive migration from rural to urban areas in search of economic opportunities.
In response to these challenges, Human Resource Management (HRM) faces the imperative to revise
traditional strategies. An emphasis on permanent change underscores the need to reassess past change
management approaches, given the high failure rates of change projects. Layoffs, often pursued to
enhance shareholder value, raise concerns about the health and well-being of affected employees, both
those laid off and the survivors. Employment insecurity can lead to diminished trust, commitment, and
health risks among employees, ultimately impacting organizational productivity and competitiveness.
Jeffrey Pfeffer's work emphasizes the importance of employment security within high-performance
management systems, highlighting its role in fostering trust and commitment. The Quality of Working
Life emerges as a critical concept, reflecting individuals' perspectives on work and its implications for
motivation and satisfaction. Integrating these insights into HRM strategies becomes imperative for
fostering organizational success amid evolving socio-economic dynamics.
4 Quality of Working Life
5 Social Sustainability at Work: Does It Exist?
Jeffrey Pfeffer's analysis sheds light on social sustainability within organizations, focusing on the
American context but also applicable to Europe. He addresses various aspects impacting workplace
sustainability, including health, layoffs, work hours, work-family conflicts, job stress, and inequality.
Pfeffer highlights how layoffs, often imitated by other firms, can have detrimental effects on health, even
leading to mortality and suicide. Additionally, he discusses the adverse health effects of long working
hours, intense workloads, work-family conflicts, and poor job design, emphasizing the importance of job
control and its impact on stress and health outcomes. Furthermore, Pfeffer underscores the role of
inequality in health disparities, attributing some of these inequalities to organizational factors. He argues
for a more prominent focus on the human dimension of social sustainability, emphasizing the
interconnectedness of well-being, financial aspects, and corporate health management. While Pfeffer's
analysis predominantly reflects the Western perspective, it raises broader questions about global
implications, particularly concerning industrially developing countries (IDCs) affected by globalization.
Despite globalization's potential benefits, negative consequences, often stemming from Western
corporate practices, must be addressed in the pursuit of sustainable work systems. Integrating these
considerations into a comprehensive concept of sustainable work systems is essential for enhancing
social sustainability while promoting economic success and environmental conservation. Therefore, a
holistic approach is needed to ensure that social sustainability efforts encompass diverse global contexts
and contribute positively to organizational, societal, and environmental well-being.
6 Sustainable Work Systems
6.1 Understanding Sustainable Work System
Assessing Job Quality and Social Sustainability

1. Historical Perspective: The concept of Quality of Working Life (QWL) dates back to the 1970s, with
continued relevance in modern discussions on social sustainability (Davis and Cherns, 1975; Lawler and
O’Toole, 2006; O’Toole and Lawler, 2006).
2. Perception and Practice: QWL is perceived either as a set of organizational conditions and practices or
as employees’ perception of their physical and mental well-being at work, with little change in
understanding over time.
3. Instrumental Initiatives: The European Trade Union Institute for Research, Education, Health and
Safety (ETUI-REHS) spearheads efforts to assess job quality in Europe through initiatives like the "Job
Quality in Europe" index, evaluating the impact of employment policies on job quality.
4. Job Quality Index (JQI): The JQI encompasses six sub-indices, including wages, non-standard forms of
employment, working time and work-life balance, working conditions and job security, skills and career
development, and collective interest representation and voice.
Conclusion: Efforts to evaluate and enhance job quality are crucial for fostering social sustainability. Led
by organizations like ETUI-REHS and supported by trade unions, universities, and international bodies,
these initiatives aim to ensure that employment policies prioritize not only increased employment but
also improved job quality, contributing to long-term societal well-being.
In recent years, there has been a growing discourse among researchers and practitioners
concerning alternative business concepts such as sustainability, stakeholder-oriented
management, and corporate social responsibility. Sustainability, encompassing economic,
ecological, and social goals, has transitioned from a societal to an organizational level, forming
the basis of "corporate sustainability." Focusing on the human and social capital aspect,
attention is now directed towards sustainability related to employees and the design of
sustainable work systems.
A work system is defined as a structure in which human participants and/or machines perform
business processes to produce products or services. Traditionally, ergonomics reduced work
systems to inputs, outputs, and transformation processes. However, the socio-technical systems
approach acknowledges the interaction between technological, personnel, and environmental
subsystems. This approach is fundamental to macro-ergonomics, incorporating economic and
ecological considerations explicitly.
Discussions on sustainable work systems involve the relationship between work system design
and HRM policies. Sustainable work systems must function in their environment, achieve
operational goals, and promote the growth of human and social resources. Docherty et al.
defined sustainable work systems as those capable of regeneration, fostering employee well-
being and collaboration among stakeholders while safeguarding ecological resources.
These systems aim for a fair balance between short-term productivity and long-term learning
and innovation. However, traditional work system concepts may not adequately address societal
impacts and stakeholder needs. Conflicts between stakeholders may arise, necessitating
strategies for managing paradoxes.

While traditional ergonomics inherently considers economic, social, and ecological goals,
questions remain about the concurrent realization of sustainability dimensions within human
factors disciplines. Concerns include the exploitation of external resources in value chains,
adaptation to changing conditions such as short-term orientation and work intensification, and
the need for holistic sustainability approaches in work system design.
In conclusion, the integration of sustainability principles into work system design requires a
comprehensive understanding of economic, social, and ecological dimensions. Human factors
disciplines must address these challenges to ensure the creation of sustainable work systems
that benefit employees, stakeholders, and the environment.
General work system model sees Schlick et al. 2010
6.2 Designing a Framework for Sustainable Work Systems from a Human Factors Perspective
Designing sustainable work systems (SWS) from a Human Factors perspective necessitates
consideration of various elements:
1. Human and Social Capital: Including skills, knowledge, health, motivation, participation,
trustworthiness, and common mental models.
2. Changed Basic Conditions: Such as increasing short-term orientation, work intensification,
demographic changes, globalization, and permanent change as the norm.
3. Systemic and Holistic Approach: Considering whole value creation chains, especially in
industrially developing countries (IDCs), and precarious work situations in Western countries.
4. Life-cycle Perspective: From design to disposal, incorporating tasks such as manufacturing,
assembly, maintenance, repair, disassembly, reuse, and recycling.
5.Learning and Capacity Building: Fostering individual and collective development within work
systems.

6.Dealing with Change: Addressing growing complexity and uncertainty in a socially responsible
manner.
7. Soft Factors: Including leadership style, corporate culture, and creating sustainable work
environments.
8.Designing for Sustainability: Ensuring work systems support sustainable actions regarding
human, economic, and ecological resources.
These considerations are encapsulated in a proposed model for sustainable work systems.
Concepts like workability and employability are crucial, focusing on health, skills, attitudes, and
the ability to adapt in changing work environments. Corporate Health Management and holistic
approaches to workability encompass physical, mental, and social well-being.
Additionally, collective learning and adaptation to demographic changes are essential.
Sustainable work organizations must continuously evolve, supporting employees' mental
models, actions, and sense of meaningfulness at work.
Addressing societal impacts, sustainable work systems contribute to individuals' attitudes
toward sustainability. They also align with principles of decent work and quality of life,
promoting fairness and well-being. Leadership training and participatory problem-solving
approaches are essential for implementing these concepts effectively.
However, the realization of sustainability involves managing contradictions and tensions.
Transparency and acknowledgment of these challenges are vital for stakeholders to navigate the
transition toward sustainable work systems effectively.
In summary, developing sustainable work systems requires a multifaceted approach, integrating
human factors principles with broader organizational and societal goals.

7 Summary and Outlook
This chapter focuses on the intersection of sustainable work systems and Human Factors, particularly
within the context of social sustainability. It begins by defining relevant terms and considering recent and
future challenges. The concept of Quality of Working Life is explored as a measure of the social pillar of
sustainability.
A discussion on whether social sustainability exists in corporate realities, drawing from Jeffrey Pfeffer's
work, highlights varying degrees of acknowledgment of human value. The chapter then delves into
elements of sustainable work systems, proposing a framework that addresses recent challenges such as
demographic shifts and globalization.
Traditional Human Factors instruments like workability and employability are discussed, alongside the
need for new or redeveloped tools. A call is made for a social life cycle analysis from a Human Factors
perspective to be incorporated into international value creation chains, considering issues of social
justice in labor market inclusion.
Overall, the discussion on sustainable work systems is deemed to be in its early stages, with further
conceptual and empirical research required to advance the field.

Sowing Seeds for Sustainability in Work Systems
Contents
1 Introduction
1.1 Case Illustration: The Skaraborg Hospital Group
1.2 Outline of the Chapter
2 Starting Points for Sustainable Work Systems
2.1 Sustainability and Resources
2.2 Sustainability and Worldviews
2.3 Sustainability and Upstream Thinking
2.4 Sustainability and Knowledge Domains
2.5 Sustainability and Stakeholders
3 Work System Sustainability: Actors, Responsibilities, and Processes
3.1 Attractors and Leadership
3.2 Team Learning as a Pathway for Sustainability
3.3 Sustainability and Organizational Identity
3.4 Sustainable Work: Well-Being and Development at Work
4 An Illustrative Case: The Laughing Gas Project
5 Discussion and Conclusion

Abstract
The aim of this chapter is to suggest some ways in which the promotion of social and human
sustainability at work may contribute positively to a work system’s ecological and economic
sustainability. We also explore conceptual and practical ways to encourage the sustainability of social
and human resources in contemporary working life. Throughout the chapter, we exemplify our
arguments with case illustrations from the Skaraborg Hospital Group in Sweden. We discuss how the
unwavering goals of protecting and regenerating various resources in work-system operations are critical
hallmarks of a sustainable work system. We also outline some worldviews and ways of thinking that
seem to underlie the operations of sustainable work systems. We then delineate the implications of the
resource regeneration goals and sustainability-minded ways of thinking for work system actors. Most
importantly, we propose that sowing seeds for sustainability involves engaging co-workers with different
knowledge and professional backgrounds in on-going learning dialogues concerning the actual
development of the whole system.
1 Introduction
The sustainability paradigm in working life aims to enhance work systems' adaptive capacities
and well-being while contributing to the sustainability of global social, economic, and natural
environments. This involves fulfilling present needs without compromising the ability of future
generations to meet their own needs. Sustainability encompasses economic, ecological, human,
and social dimensions, promoting growth and well-being within organizations while considering
wider impacts.
However, there's a concern that the sustainability discourse has prioritized natural resources
over the well-being of employees. There's a circular relationship between employees' well-
being and sustainability, where employees' cognitive development and well-being contribute to
work-system sustainability, and sustainable work systems foster employee well-being and
development.
In sustainable organizations, individuals find meaning in their work and feel part of a virtuous
organization. This chapter draws on existing literature and ongoing research to explore ways to
promote social and human sustainability in working life, considering their positive influence on
a work system's ecological and economic sustainability.
1.1 Case Illustration: The Skaraborg Hospital Group
Case illustrations from the healthcare sector at Skaraborg Hospital Group (SHG) in Sweden are used
throughout the chapter. SHG, comprising four hospitals, prioritizes sustainability to address healthcare
challenges. Their long-term goals emphasize continual improvement of care processes from a patient's
perspective, focusing on quality service provision and patient safety. To achieve this, SHG has established
a competence structure for sustainable development since 2000, with ongoing programs like Six Sigma
and Lean, involving staff at all levels. Action research is employed, engaging both researchers and
practitioners to improve systems iteratively. The second author, acting as an internal action researcher,
facilitates, supports, and documents improvement activities, fostering dialogue between internal and
external perspectives to enhance local practices.

1.2 Outline of the Chapter
In exploring Human Resource Management (HRM), we prioritize the sustainable management of a work
system's human resources, aiming for their positive contribution to wider work-system sustainability. Our
approach, outlined in Figure 1, acknowledges the complexity of work system sustainability, viewing it as
a dynamic process emerging from various interacting elements and values. We propose that sustainable
work-system management leads to ongoing processes of adaptive capacities, well-being, and positive
impacts on employees and environments.
To delve into work-system sustainability, we identify three fundamental starting points: resources,
worldviews, and the stakeholder approach. These starting points are crucial as they underpin
sustainability within various work systems and have been recognized in previous research. Additionally,
definitions of sustainability often tie it to particular worldviews and emphasize resource regeneration
and stakeholder involvement.
After establishing these starting points, our focus shifts to the internal dynamics of work systems,
exploring the responsibilities and actions required from individuals, teams, and leadership to promote
sustainability. This inward examination is essential for understanding how sustainability can be
effectively integrated into work systems, fostering adaptive responses and positive outcomes.
In essence, our approach to HRM emphasizes the importance of managing human resources sustainably
within work systems to foster broader sustainability goals. By recognizing the interconnected nature of
sustainability and addressing key starting points, we aim to provide insights into promoting sustainable
practices within work environments.
2 Starting Points for Sustainable Work Systems
In this section, we distinguish and discuss three types of starting points for sustainability in work
systems. These intertwined elements – resources, worldviews, and stakeholders – are depicted in the
left-hand side of the outer circle of Fig. 1.

2.1 Sustainability and Resources
Sustainability entails a value-oriented perspective focused on preserving non-renewable resources and
regenerating renewable ones. A sustainable work system prioritizes the development and regeneration
of its human resources, recognizing their role in promoting ecological, social, and economic
sustainability. While the triple-bottom line approach emphasizes economic, ecological, and social
perspectives, we advocate for a quadruple-bottom line approach, incorporating the human dimension.
At the Skaraborg Hospital Group (SHG) in Sweden, patient safety exemplifies this holistic perspective.
SHG's patient safety strategy targets reducing care-related infections, which can lead to severe
consequences. Assessing bloodstream infections revealed instances of prolonged intravenous line
presence causing harm and significant costs. These adverse outcomes highlight the interconnectedness
of human, social, clinical, economic, and ecological aspects within the work system. Inspired by these
insights, SHG visualized a "positive" sustainability spiral, illustrating how engaging co-workers in
continuous improvement fosters well-being, preserves resources, and enhances patient care while
minimizing ecological impact and economic costs. For instance, involving co-workers in improving care
processes reduces the occurrence of infections, thus reducing costs and ecological waste while
enhancing employee well-being and patient outcomes. This approach underscores the interplay between
sustainability dimensions and the potential for synergistic benefits across the organization.

2.2 Sustainability and Worldviews
The second starting point for considering sustainability in work systems revolves around worldviews,
which are essential for grappling with the complexities of achieving sustainability across multiple
dimensions. Bartunek and colleagues emphasize that a sophisticated understanding of contemporary
work challenges requires complex cognition. Similarly, Starik and Rands suggest that comprehending
work dynamics enables individuals to positively influence their environment. Riedy and Laszlo et al.
propose a developmental trajectory from egocentric to socio-centric and eventually to eco- or world-
centric thinking, wherein individuals prioritize broader socio-ecological concerns over personal benefits.
A sustainable work system, therefore, necessitates adopting a complex worldview that considers its own
sustainability while also contributing to the well-being of the broader socio-ecological environment. This
interconnectedness underscores the importance of integrating diverse perspectives and approaches to
address sustainability challenges effectively.
2.3 Sustainability and Upstream Thinking
Upstream thinking involves detecting and addressing potential problems at their root, rather than
waiting for them to manifest downstream. It is a proactive approach aimed at reducing complexity and
resource waste by anticipating and mitigating issues beforehand. In the context of human sustainability,
this means creating conducive working conditions that support employee well-being, rather than merely
addressing stress and burnout after they occur. For instance, at SHG, adopting upstream thinking in
addressing bloodstream infections involved developing standards to reduce the prevalence of
intravenous lines present for extended periods. Through collaborative efforts and developmental
dialogues, co-workers contributed to improved care practices, leading to reduced variations and,
consequently, no severe bloodstream infections in 2009. This approach exemplifies how upstream
thinking fosters social, human, economic, and ecological sustainability within the organization.
2.4 Sustainability and Knowledge Domains
In this context, knowledge domains refer to specific areas of actionable knowledge where
academics and practitioners collaborate to define and refine theories and practices within a
particular field. In healthcare processes, which are inherently complex, numerous knowledge
domains are essential for patient care. For instance, in ensuring patient safety, upstream
considerations involve expertise in hygiene, infection prevention, technology development, and
research. Downstream, managing patient infections requires knowledge spanning infectious
diseases, care practices, logistics, quality improvement, and laboratory processes. Integrating
insights from these diverse domains is crucial for developing sustainable care processes that
effectively address patient needs while ensuring safety and quality.
2.5 Sustainability and Stakeholders
The third starting point for work-system sustainability studies emphasizes the stakeholder approach.
Sustainable work systems prioritize the needs of all actors impacted by their operations, rather than
solely focusing on specific groups like customers or shareholders. These systems are meticulous in
selecting suppliers, recognizing that sustainability cannot be achieved if upstream or downstream
organizations do not prioritize resource development. Furthermore, sustainable work systems view

NGOs and other interest organizations as collaborators rather than threats, engaging them to ensure the
sustainability of production or service chains.
Collaboration with various stakeholders is crucial for gaining new perspectives on sustainability and
ensuring the sustainability of operations. For example, in the healthcare sector, a sustainable system
must involve stakeholders from the entire care chain. To prevent infections from a societal perspective,
this approach entails the involvement of numerous stakeholders, including local education systems
teaching hygiene practices, municipalities providing infrastructure for sanitation, families promoting
health education, and both for-profit and NGOs implementing health-promoting procedures. Each
stakeholder brings unique knowledge domains to the table, contributing to the creation of more
sustainable operations and processes.
In essence, sustainable work systems recognize the interconnectedness of various stakeholders and
engage them collaboratively to address sustainability challenges comprehensively. This inclusive
approach not only ensures the sustainability of individual systems but also contributes to broader
societal and environmental sustainability goals.
3 Work System Sustainability: Actors, Responsibilities, and Processes
Above, we have recognized and discussed several starting points of sustainable work systems. We now
turn our attention to the inner circle of our model. The circle focuses on leadership, team learning, and
human sustainability in a sustainable work system (see Fig. 1). This section therefore takes a look at what
actually happens inside sustainable work systems and what the roles and responsibilities of
organizational stakeholders are – individuals, teams, and leaders – in promoting sustainability. We will
discuss how the elements of sustainability recognized above translate into organizational actions and
practices, and what implications they have for the promotion of sustainability in human resources.
3.1 Attractors and Leadership
Leadership in work systems plays a crucial role in establishing sustainability as a goal, emphasizing not
only the achievement of operational and business objectives but also the manner in which these goals
are pursued. This entails recognizing complexity as a predominant feature of organizational life and
acknowledging that cause-and-effect relationships are not always linear. Management decisions may
lead to unforeseen consequences, requiring continuous adaptation and engagement with co-workers.
Work systems are dynamic entities where interactions between co-workers shape organizational culture
and practices. From a complexity perspective, change emerges from these interactions, often beyond
detailed planning. Therefore, sustainable leadership involves promoting small-scale improvements and
fostering everyone's involvement to reduce complexity while stimulating individual growth.
Creating sustainability-conducive organizational practices is a participative process where employees
embrace sustainability alongside leadership. Transitioning towards sustainability requires deep-rooted
commitment, with work systems taking responsibility for their impact on stakeholders, including society,
future generations, and nature.
From a complexity perspective, sustainability serves as a vital attractor in ongoing conversations among
co-workers, shaping their worldview from egocentric to world-centric considerations. While the attractor

of the system is unpredictable, healthcare systems exhibit a tendency to identify with long-term,
sustainable perspectives.
In practice, sustainable leadership facilitates meaningful dialogues concerning sustainability, allowing
new thoughts and proposals to emerge unpredictably. By broadening co-workers' views beyond profit-
focused considerations to encompass the impact on various stakeholders, work systems can align their
actions with sustainable principles.
3.2 Team Learning as a Pathway for Sustainability
Teams, referred to as "microsystems" within healthcare contexts, serve as fundamental units for
fostering work-system sustainability. These microsystems, integral components of larger organizational
structures, function as complex adaptive systems, continuously evolving over time. Effective team
learning hinges on various factors, including access to performance data, iterative improvement
dialogues, alignment with long-term goals, cross-professional collaboration, and a foundation of shared
values among team members. Communication plays a central role in facilitating this collaborative
learning process, spanning across different organizational levels.
The "4 I" framework proposed by Crossan et al. delineates the stages of individual and collective
learning, ultimately leading to organizational learning. This framework underscores the importance of
ongoing interactions and dialogue within and between teams for fostering learning and adaptation.
Embracing a complexity perspective challenges conventional notions of systems transformation and
redesign, emphasizing the emergence of change beyond detailed planning and highlighting the role of
organizational dynamics in shaping outcomes.
3.3 Sustainability and Organizational Identity
The transition towards sustainability necessitates a profound shift in organizational identity, as
highlighted by scholars such as Amodeo, Alvesson, Empson, Hamilton, and Gioia. Organizational identity,
defined as the shared understanding of who the organization is, embodies distinctive and enduring
features that set it apart from others. As sustainability becomes integrated into this identity, it emerges
as a central, distinctive, and enduring characteristic for organizational members. Sustainable practices
require deep-seated changes in organizational behavior, which, in turn, demand a transformation in how
organizations perceive themselves.
Organizational identity not only shapes the collective identity of the organization but also influences the
individual identities of its members. According to social identity theory, individuals derive significant
aspects of their self-concept from the social groups they belong to, including their organizational
memberships. Organizational identification, or the extent to which members align themselves with the
attributes defining the organization, can have both positive and negative consequences for individuals.
When members appreciate and value the central, distinctive, and enduring features of the organization,
they can positively identify with something valuable, enhancing their sense of self.
A sustainable organizational identity, characterized by a generative value orientation often supported by
ethical reasons, enables members to align themselves positively with the organization's sustainable
values. This alignment fosters a sense of connection and belonging among members, promoting a

cohesive organizational culture centered around sustainability. Ultimately, the cultivation of a sustainable
identity within the organization empowers individuals to embrace and embody the organization's
commitment to sustainability, contributing to its long-term success and impact.
3.4 Sustainable Work: Well-Being and Development at Work
Sustainability in the context of employee resources involves engaging personal and professional
capacities while nurturing their development. Defined by Kira et al. (2010), sustainable work entails
utilizing personal and professional resources to create desired outcomes while enhancing these
resources over time. Such resources, including energy and competencies, not only promote optimal
functioning but also bolster resilience, thus supporting momentary well-being and human sustainability.
Identity emerges as a pivotal concept in fostering human resource sustainability. Alignment with an
organization that embodies sustainability allows individuals to positively identify with a socially
responsible entity, enhancing their own sense of identity and self-esteem. Moreover, work roles
congruent with individuals' identities facilitate the development of personal and professional resources,
enabling them to leverage their unique strengths and competencies. This alignment fosters a sense of
meaningfulness at work, positively impacting psychological well-being and emotional vitality.
Participation and engagement in work systems also contribute to both individual and organizational
sustainability. By involving employees' identities in workplace activities, organizations harness their
unique resources and emotional energies, fostering collaborative problem-solving and supporting
sustainable solutions. Moreover, work design approaches, such as job crafting, empower employees to
shape their roles in alignment with their identities and needs, further enhancing their engagement and
well-being.
At SHG, the complexity of healthcare processes presents opportunities for collaborative work crafting. By
involving employees in identifying and developing new knowledge domains relevant to their interests
and identities, organizations can enrich traditional roles and enhance employee engagement. For
example, medical secretaries at SHG embarked on a process to identify and develop new knowledge
domains, resulting in expanded roles and enriched identities that align with organizational goals. This
process not only fosters individual development but also contributes to the sustainability of the
healthcare system by aligning work roles with organizational needs and goals.
In summary, sustainability in employee resources involves leveraging personal and professional
capacities while nurturing their development through alignment with organizational values, meaningful
work roles, and participatory work systems. By recognizing and supporting employees' identities and
needs, organizations can enhance both individual well-being and organizational sustainability.
3 An Illustrative Case: The Laughing Gas Project
procedures; alternative methods to relieve pain had decreased; the face mask distributing the gas was
not used properly causing gas leakage; and instructions on how to use laughing gas, to minimize leakage,
were absent. The technical construction of the gas mask was also considered. Based on these factors,
several solutions were designed and implemented; e.g. new instructions for laughing gas administration
during birth and improved information to mothers about alternative pain-relieving methods, to mention
a few. The improvements have so far resulted in a 20 % decrease in laughing gas usage, and repeated air
analyses have shown that gas leakage has diminished significantly. Experiences of pain as assessed by

mothers during birth have not increased but have tended to decrease, probably due to improved and
more efficient pain-relieving procedures. During 2011, SHG will invest in a laughing gas destruction
facility with the intention to further reduce leakage by 85 %. We believe that the project illustrates some
key points referred to earlier on in the chapter. The ambition of the project reflected upstream thinking:
of improving practices upstream in the care processes and thereby reducing the system’s waste
downstream. The domains of the ‘quadruple’ bottom-line were interconnected in a “sustainability spiral”
(see Fig. 2), where reducing waste from the ecological perspective led to improvements in the clinical,
social/human and economic perspectives. Co-workers were engaged in recurring learning dialogues at
their workplaces to solve an important problem in the daily operations. From a team learning
perspective, they constituted a learning microsystem – a community of practices for sustainability. The
project team had continuous access to measurements and results, which were fed back into iterative
dialogues, the purpose of which were to learn and to improve. Co-workers from different knowledge
domains were represented in the team and, thus, each was able to contribute to the joint work from the
perspective that confirmed and strengthened his/her identity. After-project reflections with project
members disclosed that they appreciated the project as being meaningful; they “felt good” being able to
contribute to the overall environmental goals of the organization. The reflections could be interpreted as
“identity-work”, where the organizational and individual identities mutually reinforced one another.
From a managerial perspective, the clinical manager at OD secured meeting places for discussions
concerning sustainability. In this sense, the clinical manager adopted a complexity view to leadership. He
appreciated the expertise of the co-workers and left room for creative and surprising solutions – seeds –
emerging from the dialogues between co-workers. The conversations among co-workers led to new
thoughts and proposals that produced creative and fruitful solutions to the problem.
In this chapter, we explored the concept of work-system sustainability, identifying starting points and
implications for organizational operations and human resources. We proposed that sustainable work
systems adopt complex views of reality, engage in upstream thinking, and hone various knowledge
domains to protect and regenerate resources. Emphasizing the importance of management paradigms
that accept operational complexity, we suggested that sowing seeds for sustainability involves engaging
employees in discussions rather than imposing directives.
Furthermore, we discussed how work-system sustainability may foster positive collective and individual
identities, contributing to the regeneration and development of human resources. While we did not
delve into traditional HRM practices, insights from our discussion may inform training efforts and
compensation practices. We emphasized the role of team-level learning and dialogues in promoting
work-system sustainability, suggesting that compensation systems should align with intrinsic motivation
rather than solely relying on extrinsic motivators. Finally, we highlighted the importance of establishing
alignments between work and employees' identities to support their personal and professional
development.
Part III The Role of HRM in Developing Sustainable HRM Systems

The Model of Negative Externality for Sustainable HRM
Contents
1 Introduction
2 Theoretical
2.1 Externality
2.2 Sustainable HRM Strategy
3 A Conceptual Model of Negative Externality for Sustainable HRM
3.1 HRM Practices with Potential Negative Externality
3.2 A Framework of Attributes of Negative Externality of HRM Practices
3.3 Moderating Effects of External and Internal Resources for Coping with Negative Externality
3.4 Harm Indicators of NE of HRM
4 Analysis of the Link Between NE of Downsizing and Harm Indicators
5 Conclusion
Abstract
Although human resource management (HRM) literature has provided abundant insight into strategies
used to improve employee effectiveness for company performance, relatively limited research exists on
the harm or negative externality that those HRM practices can have on employees and the community.
This article explores the negative externality of HRM practices that is imposed by organizations on
employees, their families and communities. A conceptual model of negative externality for Sustainable
HRM is proposed to provide a framework for HRM practitioners and researchers to understand the
resulting harm of some HRM practices on employees, their families and communities. To highlight the
practical implications of the model, downsizing, a widely used business turnaround strategy to improve
business efficiency, is analyzed for its negative externality. Subsequently, the role of Sustainable HRM
practices which can minimize such harm is examined. Practical and empirical implications of the negative
externality of HRM practices are explored.
1 Introduction
This chapter examines the negative externality (NE) perspective of human resource management (HRM)
practices, focusing on the impact of downsizing on third parties such as employees, their families, and
communities. Downsizing, often driven by myths of increased productivity and profit, can lead to long-
term harm on employees' mental and physical health, as well as on wider communities. However, there
is limited research on the NE of HRM practices from an institutional economics perspective.
Understanding these externalities can help organizations adopt Sustainable HRM practices to reduce

harm on employees and the community while still maximizing profit. The chapter develops a conceptual
framework for understanding NE in HRM practices and evaluates the effectiveness of Sustainable HRM
practices in mitigating these negative impacts, particularly in the context of organizational downsizing.
2 Theoretical Background
2.1 Externality
In essence, externality refers to the impact of certain actions or practices that affect third parties, either
positively or negatively, without proper accountability by the initiating organization. Positive externality
benefits society but may not maximize profits for the organization, while negative externality (NE) results
in actions that cost the organization less than the harm they cause to society. Kapp's theory of social
costs offers an alternative perspective, defining social costs as the losses sustained by third parties due
to unrestricted economic activities. These costs, which include damages to health, property, and natural
resources, disproportionately affect vulnerable individuals who cannot defend themselves. Kapp
advocates for organizations to consider and mitigate social costs to create a more humane society and
improve real income for employees. He emphasizes the need for a combination of public and private
controls to address social costs arising from economic decision-making.
2.3 Sustainable HRM Strategy
Sustainable HRM practices aim to achieve business objectives while minimizing the negative impact of
these practices on employees and the community. However, strategies such as overworking valued
employees or retrenching them can be unsustainable, leading to post-organizational costs for employees
and communities. Ehnert (2009) expanded on sustainability by introducing a paradox framework that
balances traditional economic reasoning with substance-oriented decision-making for organizational
sustainability. Traditional approaches focus on maximizing output or minimizing input, while substance-
oriented sustainability emphasizes balancing resource consumption with regeneration and development.
Sustainable HRM, according to Ehnert, involves planned strategies and practices that enable
organizational goal achievement while ensuring the long-term reproduction of the human resource base
and controlling for negative effects on both the workforce and the company itself. Overall, the literature
examines HRM sustainability from negative externality and strategic management perspectives, aiming
to develop models that prioritize human sustainability.
3 A Conceptual Model of Negative Externality for Sustainable HRM
There is evidence available in the Strategic HRM literature (see Delaney and Huselid 1996; Laursen and
Foss 2003) highlighting the effectiveness of HRM practices in achieving internally referenced efficiency
for organizations. Those HRM practices that are capable of achieving internal referenced effectiveness
may also contribute to NE. In this chapter a conceptual model of the NE for Sustainable HRM practices
(Fig. 1) is proposed to examine the impact of the NE on employees and third parties (e.g. employees,
their family members and communities), and the effectiveness of Sustainable HRM practices and
employee individual differences to reduce those NE.
3.1 HRM Practices with Potential Negative Externality

3.2 A Framework of Attributes of Negative Externality of HRM Practices
The proposed framework outlines attributes of negative externality (NE) of HRM practices, aiming to
understand the harmful impact on employees and their families. These attributes include the level of
risk or severity of harm, manifestation of harm, impact of harm, and avoidability of harm. Drawing
inspiration from social indicators, which provide statistics to assess societal conditions, the framework
aims to inform HRM policies and practices to enhance quality of life and community health. Each
attribute has polarity, with characteristics such as low or high risk of harm, avoidable or unavoidable
harm, temporary or enduring impact, and temporary or instantaneous manifestation. These attributes
influence employee behavior, subsequently affecting their health and well-being. For instance, if
employees perceive high risk or severity of harm from HRM practices, leading to disengagement, it can
result in negative health and work-life balance consequences, prompting the need for corrective action
by organizations.
3.2.1 Level of Harm of Negative Externality
The level of risk or severity of harm of negative externality (NE) of HRM practices refers to employees'
evaluation of the potential harm posed to themselves, their families, or the community by their
company's HRM practices. If an employee perceives a high risk or severity of harm from NE, they may be

less inclined to engage in high organizational performance. However, organizational pressure to prioritize
efficiency might still push employees to strive for high performance despite their concerns about NE.
This tension can lead to stress, presenteeism, dissatisfaction with life, and increased health risks among
employees. Conversely, a low level of harm of NE is perceived as posing minimal risk to health or well-
being. Therefore, assessing the level of harm helps measure the impact of NE and prompts organizations
to take action to minimize its effects when perceived as high by employees and the community.
3.2.2 Manifestation of Harm of Negative Externality
The manifestation of harm from negative externality (NE) of HRM practices can occur either
instantaneously or with a time lag after the implementation of a particular HRM practice. Immediate NE
outcomes often receive immediate attention within the community and from policymakers. For instance,
after the privatization of energy companies in Victoria, Australia, there was a significant increase in
alcohol-related domestic violence, family conflict, and suicide in the affected community due to job loss.
This immediate harm prompted the introduction of welfare measures to mitigate its impact.
However, the harm from NE can also manifest over a longer period of time, such as employee depression
and work-related psychosomatic disorders resulting from retrenchment. Identifying the HRM practices
causing this time-lagged harm is challenging. Unlike immediate NE impacts, addressing time-lagged NE
requires a different strategy to minimize negative consequences. Currently, there is limited research in
the work stress literature identifying specific HRM practices causing time-lagged manifestations of harm
like depression and psychosomatic disorders in employees.
3.2.3 Impact of Harm of Negative Externality
The harm caused by negative externality (NE) of HRM practices can have either a temporary or enduring
impact on employees and the community. Temporary psychosocial impacts of NE are those that result in
no permanent harm for employees. For example, headaches experienced by nursing staff in Taiwan due
to work stress are temporary and can be managed with rest or medication. Employees experiencing
temporary NE impacts may not feel a need for immediate action to minimize the externality's effects.
In contrast, enduring harm from NE has a lasting and often more severe impact on employees, their
families, and the community. For instance, increased workload resulting from downsizing can lead to
strain in family relationships, potentially causing permanent damage such as breakdowns in partnerships
or behavioral issues in children. These enduring effects cause sustained discomfort and distress for
employees and their families, significantly impacting their well-being (Brannen and Moss, 1998).
3.2.4 Avoidability of Harm of Negative Externality
The attribute of avoidability in negative externality (NE) of HRM practices determines whether the harm
caused by these practices is due to avoidable or unavoidable internal or external environmental
conditions. If an organization implements HRM practices in a context where harm could have been
avoided, employees and the community may perceive the externality as harmful and unacceptable. In
such cases, corrective actions are necessary to mitigate the harm and enhance the organization's
Corporate Social Responsibility reputation.
For example, if a company (A) merges with another company (B) to capitalize on its assets and
subsequently lays off employees from company B to cut costs, employees may perceive this action as

avoidable and driven by self-interest. However, if company B is struggling due to a prolonged recession
and layoffs are deemed necessary for survival, employees and the community may view the layoffs as
unavoidable and more acceptable.
In summary, the attributes of NE in HRM practices—level of harm, impact, manifestation, and
avoidability—shed light on employees' perceptions of harm severity, its permanence, temporal aspects,
and the environmental factors contributing to it. HR managers must navigate conflicting appraisals and
tensions related to these attributes when making business decisions. Understanding these polarities of
harm can inform managers about the paradoxes and tensions inherent in decision-making processes,
prompting them to explore new strategic directions like Sustainable HRM to minimize harm to
employees and the community.
3.3 Moderating Effects of External and Internal Resources for Coping with Negative Externality
In the proposed model, employees utilize coping strategies based on both their individual
characteristics and organizational practices, such as Sustainable HRM practices, to mitigate the negative
effects of negative externality (NE) in HRM. Coping strategies, whether problem-focused or emotion-
focused, are employed by employees when facing challenges like downsizing, aiming to reduce the
detrimental impact on work-related outcomes (Lazarus, 2000; Wilk and Moynihan, 2005).
Sustainable HRM practices play a crucial role in this coping process. Organizations, upon evaluating the
types of NE affecting employees, can introduce appropriate HRM practices to counteract these negative
effects. Empowerment and job enrichment are examples of such practices used to help employees cope
with downsizing and foster loyalty to the organization (Mishra and Spreitzer, 1998; Niehoff et al., 2001).
Ehnert's (2009) concept of Sustainable HRM aligns with Mariappanadar's (2003) HR conservation
strategy, which focuses on developing the human resource base within the organization to mitigate the
harmful impacts of downsizing.
Additionally, individual employee differences, such as personality, gender, cultural values, and abilities,
serve as internal coping mechanisms that moderate the effects of NE and its harm indicators. Factors like
self-efficacy, conscientiousness, and cultural dimensions influence how employees perceive and respond
to stressful work contexts (Bennett et al., 1995; Bowling and Eschleman, 2010; Bhagat et al., 2010).
In summary, both Sustainable HRM practices and individual differences contribute to employees' coping
strategies, helping them navigate the challenges posed by NE in HRM and minimize its negative impact
on their well-being and work outcomes.
3.4 Harm Indicators of NE of HRM
Negative externality (NE) in Human Resource Management (HRM) practices often leads to profound and
multifaceted harm on employees, their families, and communities. These harmful effects manifest in
various aspects, including psychological, social, and work-related health issues. Psychological harm may
result in negative wellbeing, job-related suicide, and substance abuse as coping mechanisms. Social
harm can manifest as family breakdown, child neglect, and increased instances of domestic violence.
Work-related health issues may include depression, neurotic disorders, and alcohol or drug rehabilitation
needs.

These harm indicators are influenced by theoretical frameworks such as the effort-recovery (E-R) model
and the spillover model. The E-R model suggests that when employees face increased workload and
stress due to HRM practices like downsizing, insufficient opportunities for recovery lead to prolonged
fatigue and negative wellbeing. This contributes to the psychological manifestation of harm. Similarly,
the spillover model explains how tensions and satisfactions at work spill over into an employee's home
life, affecting family dynamics and potentially leading to social harm indicators like child neglect and
domestic violence.
Additionally, work-related health issues may arise due to physiological recovery mechanisms being
disrupted by prolonged stress or lifestyle factors like unhealthy habits. Physiological disturbances can
lead to physical health complaints, while unhealthy behaviors like smoking and poor diet contribute to
adverse health outcomes.
Understanding these harm indicators is essential for developing interventions to mitigate the negative
effects of NE in HRM practices. By addressing these issues, organizations can create healthier work
environments, support employee wellbeing, and foster stronger relationships within communities.
Implementing sustainable HRM practices, such as empowerment and job enrichment, can help mitigate
the harmful effects of NE and promote employee resilience and wellbeing in the face of organizational
changes.
4 Analysis of the Link Between NE of Downsizing and Harm Indicators
This section delves into the theoretical analysis of the relationship between negative externality (NE)
resulting from employee downsizing and its associated harm indicators. While much research on
downsizing has focused on its organizational impact, little attention has been given to the victims of
downsizing. However, studies like the European HIRES project have shown that downsizing significantly
affects the health of both those directly affected and the survivors.
The exploration of downsizing's psychological, social, and health-related impacts on employees and their
families aims to provide a comprehensive understanding of the issue. By analyzing the theoretical
relationships between NE characteristics and harm indicators across these aspects, the chapter sheds
light on the diverse effects of downsizing on victims and survivors.
Research indicates that downsizing outcomes differ for victims and survivors, with both experiencing
negative consequences. Victims often face high levels of stress, leading to strained family relationships,
while survivors may also experience reduced subjective wellbeing. These stressors contribute to various
psychological, social, and health-related harms among employees and former employees.
Although downsizing is used as a case study for NE in HRM practices, work stress serves as a proxy
variable due to limited literature specifically addressing downsizing's NE. The section also discusses the
costs incurred by employees and the community to mitigate the harms of NE. However, due to limited
available data, the presented costs are indicative rather than exhaustive, highlighting the potential
economic implications of NE in HRM practices.
5 Conclusion
The chapter emphasizes the importance of identifying and addressing the negative externalities (NE) of
Human Resource Management (HRM) practices, which can harm employees, their families, and

communities. A model of NE for Sustainable HRM is proposed, comprising attributes of NE (level,
manifestation, impact, avoidability) and harm indicators (psychological, social, work-related health). This
model aids HRM practitioners and researchers in understanding and mitigating harmful consequences.
Key findings highlight the costs associated with NE, particularly in downsizing scenarios, impacting
victims, survivors, and communities. The costs include treating work-related health issues, social
repercussions like divorce, and career changes resulting in lower salaries for victims. Sustainable HRM
practices and individual differences may mitigate harm, though further empirical validation is needed.
Limitations include extrapolation from occupational stress literature and estimation of costs based on
available data. Nonetheless, the chapter underscores the need for interdisciplinary research to advance
Sustainable HRM perspectives and address the harmful impacts of HRM practices comprehensively.
Part IV Sustainability and HRM in Different Areas of the World
Sustainable HRM in the US
The Influence of National Context
Contents
1 Introduction
2 Underlying Assumptions of the US Worldview: Approach to Business and Sustainable HRM
3 Influence of US HRM Assumptions on US Sustainable HRM
Abstract
This chapter examines the US research on Sustainable HRM and explores the extent to which it is shaped
by its national context. The authors argue that the fundamental worldview that underpins US business
models and conduct have resulted in three major impacts on US HRM research and practice, which
influenced the subcategory of US Sustainable HRM: privileging the firm’s financial bottom line in
evaluating effectiveness; the supremacy of managerial autonomy in decision making regarding HR
matters; and the belief that what is positive for the firm is equally positive for its employees. The authors
use Sustainable HRM research published in top-level US based management journals to illustrate these
arguments. In conclusion, the authors discuss how by identifying these assumptions there is a clear path
to re-evaluating the basic assumptions of US Sustainable HRM
1 Introduction
The chapter explores the emergence and development of Sustainable Human Resource Management
(HRM) in the context of US academic literature. It begins by tracing the evolution of the US capitalist
worldview and its influence on the dominant perspective of HRM in academic writings. This perspective

has been shaped by notable corporate scandals, such as Enron, which underscored the importance of
ethical HRM practices.
Examining recent literature in leading US management journals, the chapter delves into how Sustainable
HRM issues are addressed, particularly focusing on environmental goals. It also discusses the preference
for certain management theories in US Sustainable HRM research.
The chapter highlights the distinct features of US-focused Sustainable HRM and discusses its benefits and
limitations. It concludes by considering alternative approaches and their potential implications.
Importantly, the scope of the chapter is limited to the US academic literature on Sustainable HRM and
does not encompass the broader North American region, acknowledging the significant historical and
cultural differences among the US, Canada, and Mexico in terms of business systems and societal
expectations.
2 Underlying Assumptions of the US Worldview: Approach to Business and Sustainable HRM
3 Influence of US HRM Assumptions on US Sustainable HRM
The US-focused literature on Sustainable HRM predominantly emphasizes the role of HRM
practices in contributing to a firm's overall performance, competitive advantage, and efficiency,
particularly through environmental sustainability initiatives. Managerially oriented publications,
such as People & Strategy, often frame sustainability as a business opportunity, suggesting that
pursuing sustainability can lower costs, raise revenue, and drive growth through innovation.

Articles in US management journals frequently argue that sustainability initiatives should be
aligned with the firm's strategy to enhance shareholder interests, improve company image,
attract quality employees, and increase customer loyalty. For instance, studies have linked
better environmental performance to increased social legitimacy, organizational survival
capabilities, and recruitment advantages.
Additionally, research highlights the relationship between a firm's sustainability reputation and
its ability to attract and retain high-quality employees, ultimately leading to competitive
advantage. However, recent discussions by Boudreau and Ramstad suggest a departure from
this perspective, proposing that firms aiming for non-financial outcomes, such as addressing
social issues like hunger in Africa, may require transformative changes in HRM systems to align
with sustainability strategies.
Overall, the US literature underscores the importance of integrating sustainability goals into
HRM practices to achieve both economic and social objectives, while also acknowledging the
potential for more profound shifts in HRM paradigms to fully embrace sustainability strategies.
4 Discussion and Conclusions
In this chapter, the US-focused literature on Sustainable HRM is critically examined, highlighting the
underlying assumptions and suggesting avenues for re-evaluation. The chapter argues that mainstream
US-based journals reflect a worldview infused with distinct US assumptions regarding the role of
business in society, managerial autonomy, and the employer-employee relationship.
The discussion centers on three key assumptions prevalent in US HRM: first, the belief that HRM should
primarily enhance the firm's financial bottom line; second, the emphasis on managerial autonomy in
HRM decisions; and third, the promotion of a unitarist view of the employer-employee relationship.
To challenge these assumptions, the chapter proposes a re-evaluation of HRM practices towards a more
collective approach that prioritizes the common good over individual gains. This involves shifting towards
stakeholder-oriented evaluations of firm performance, acknowledging the wider social and ecological
benefits of Sustainable HRM, and recognizing employees as citizens with a stake in environmental issues.
Furthermore, the chapter suggests re-evaluating the emphasis on managerial autonomy by incorporating
collective voices and external stakeholder engagement into HRM systems. This would require a
departure from the unitarist perspective towards a more balanced view of the employer-employee
relationship.
The chapter acknowledges the slow process of institutional change but identifies indicators of growing
discontent with the current paradigm, particularly among younger generations and marginalized
segments of the workforce. Emerging research in specialized journals and changing workforce attitudes
signify a potential shift towards a more sustainable HRM model in the US.
Overall, the chapter emphasizes the importance of questioning and re-evaluating dominant assumptions
in US Sustainable HRM to pave the way for a more sustainable economic model. While substantial
change may take time, ongoing efforts to challenge the prevailing worldview are seen as crucial steps
towards achieving sustainability.

Part V Conclusions and Prospects for Sustainability and HRM
In their conclusion on the future of Sustainable HRM, Ina Ehnert, Wes Harry, and Klaus J. Zink emphasize
the evolving nature of this field and the critical role it will play in shaping the future of organizations.
They highlight several key points to consider:
1. Integration of Sustainability into HRM: The authors stress the importance of integrating sustainability
principles into HRM practices at all levels of an organization. This involves aligning HR strategies with
sustainability goals to ensure that environmental, social, and economic objectives are pursued
simultaneously.
2. Collaboration and Partnerships: They underscore the need for collaboration and partnerships both
within and outside organizations. This includes working closely with other functional areas such as
operations, marketing, and finance to embed sustainability throughout the organization. Additionally,
partnerships with external stakeholders such as NGOs, government agencies, and local communities are
essential for addressing broader sustainability challenges.
3. Employee Engagement and Development: Ehnert, Harry, and Zink highlight the significance of
employee engagement and development in driving sustainable practices. They emphasize the role of
HRM in fostering a culture of sustainability, where employees are empowered to contribute their ideas
and participate in sustainability initiatives. Furthermore, continuous learning and development
opportunities are crucial for building the skills and competencies needed to support sustainability
efforts.
4. Metrics and Measurement: The authors stress the importance of developing robust metrics and
measurement tools to assess the impact of Sustainable HRM practices. By tracking key performance
indicators related to sustainability, organizations can monitor progress, identify areas for improvement,
and demonstrate accountability to stakeholders.
5. Adaptation to Changing Contexts: Finally, Ehnert, Harry, and Zink recognize the need for organizations
to adapt their Sustainable HRM strategies to changing internal and external contexts. This includes
responding to emerging sustainability trends, technological advancements, regulatory changes, and
shifting stakeholder expectations.
In conclusion, the authors envision a future where Sustainable HRM becomes an integral part of
organizational strategy, driving positive outcomes for both businesses and society. By embracing
sustainability principles, fostering collaboration, empowering employees, measuring impact, and
remaining adaptable, organizations can navigate the complex challenges of the future while contributing
to a more sustainable world.

HOW TO DEVELOP A SUSTAINBLE HUMAN RESOURCE MANAGEMENT IN COMPANY.docx

Recommended

Recommended

More Related Content

Similar to HOW TO DEVELOP A SUSTAINBLE HUMAN RESOURCE MANAGEMENT IN COMPANY.docx

Similar to HOW TO DEVELOP A SUSTAINBLE HUMAN RESOURCE MANAGEMENT IN COMPANY.docx (20)

Recently uploaded

Recently uploaded (20)

HOW TO DEVELOP A SUSTAINBLE HUMAN RESOURCE MANAGEMENT IN COMPANY.docx