TheinfluenceofgreenHRM effecting the environment and community

1. See discussions, stats, and author profiles for this publication at: https://www.researchgate.net/publication/348173875
The influence of green HRM practices on green service behaviors: the
mediating effect of green knowledge sharing
Article in Employee Relations · July 2021
DOI: 10.1108/ER-04-2020-0163
CITATIONS
24
READS
2,142
3 authors:
Some of the authors of this publication are also working on these related projects:
Consumption of Plastic usuage in our life and how will it effect on the World. View project
SMES and Entrepreneurship View project
Mohammad Rabiul Basher Rubel
Bangladesh University of Professionals
32 PUBLICATIONS 360 CITATIONS
SEE PROFILE
Daisy Mui Hung Kee
Universiti Sains Malaysia
265 PUBLICATIONS 2,593 CITATIONS
SEE PROFILE
Nadia Rimi
University of Dhaka
13 PUBLICATIONS 193 CITATIONS
SEE PROFILE
All content following this page was uploaded by Mohammad Rabiul Basher Rubel on 24 May 2021.
The user has requested enhancement of the downloaded file.

2. The influence of green HRM
practices on green service
behaviors: the mediating effect of
green knowledge sharing
Mohammad Rabiul Basher Rubel
Department of Management, Bangladesh University of Professionals,
Dhaka, Bangladesh
Daisy Mui Hung Kee
School of Management, Universiti Sains Malaysia, George Town, Malaysia, and
Nadia Newaz Rimi
Department of Management, Dhaka University, Dhaka, Bangladesh
Abstract
Purpose – The purpose of this study intends to examine the influence of green human resource management
(GHRM) on green service behaviors through the mediating effect of green knowledge sharing based on bank
employees’ perceptions.
Design/methodology/approach – The study analyzes 365 frontline employees’ perceptions from the
banking industry in Bangladesh using partial least square.
Findings – The findings show a significant positive direct influence of GHRM on green in-role, extra-role
service behavior and green knowledge sharing. Green knowledge sharing is also found to have a significant
mediating effect between GHRM and green service behaviors.
Research limitations/implications – This study considers perceptions of employees of the private
commercial banking organizations, and thereby, its findings cannot be generalized for all other service
organizations in the context of Bangladesh.
Practical implications – The study demonstrates that GHRM can influence employees’ green service
behaviors via green knowledge sharing.
Originality/value – Green banking is an emerging trend that deserves more attention. There is growing
recognition that green banking is not an “automatic” process but requires that banking management promote
green service behavior among their employees. This study extends the research on GHRM by focusing on how
it impacts green service behavior through the mediating role of green knowledge sharing. The paper provides
practical insights for organizations looking to improve green service behaviors among employees.
Keywords Green human resource management (GHRM), Green knowledge sharing, Green service behavior,
Green banking
Paper type Research paper
Introduction
The practice of incorporating sustainability in business operations receives more attention
than before, and today, sustainability is one of the mainstream organizational activities
(Lopes et al., 2017; Van Buren, 2020; Chillakuri and Vanka, 2020). One of the most notable
trends in sustainability issues is the growing sensitivity of businesses toward environmental
issues (Severo et al., 2017; Rajala et al., 2016; Nejati et al., 2017; Zawawi and Abd Wahab, 2019).
Organizations investing in environmental management could obtain first-mover advantages,
Influence of
green HRM
practices
The authors are grateful to the anonymous referees of the journal for their extremely useful suggestions
to improve the quality of the article.
Funding: The author(s) received no financial support for the research, authorship and/or publication
of this article.
The current issue and full text archive of this journal is available on Emerald Insight at:
https://www.emerald.com/insight/0142-5455.htm
Received 13 April 2020
Revised 19 September 2020
30 November 2020
10 December 2020
Accepted 10 December 2020
Employee Relations: The
International Journal
© Emerald Publishing Limited
0142-5455
DOI 10.1108/ER-04-2020-0163

3. allowing them to undertake distinctive differentiation strategies, enhance their green images
and secure competitive advantages (Nejati et al., 2017; Wu et al., 2018). Organizations
passionate about green strategies usually benefit from better employee outcomes (Hameed
et al., 2020; Su and Swanson, 2019). Organizations need to stimulate employee outcomes in
green behavior to take advantage of green opportunities in organizations (Zibarras and Coan,
2015). Green behavior is thus receiving increasing attention. It is a fully recognized role for
employees in solving environmental problems (Ortiz-de-Mandojana et al., 2016; Kim et al.,
2019; Luu, 2019). To maintain environmental sustainability, it is necessary for an
organization to explore how green human resource management (GHRM) affects
employees’ pro-environment behavior, which would eventually ensure its overall
environmental performance (Kim et al., 2019).
GHRM is a key enabler of the sustainability of an organization (Yong et al., 2020; Dumont
et al., 2017). GHRM comprises “HRM activities which enhance positive environmental
outcomes” (Kramar, 2014, p. 1075). It refers to the HRM aspects of green management that
aim to encourage pro-environment employee behaviors in the workplace (Renwick et al.,
2013). Though there is evidence of progress being made in GHRM and pro-environment
behaviors of employees in the workplace (Renwick et al., 2013), recent research shows that the
understanding of the influence of GHRM on green service behavior, particularly essential for
empirical studies, is less than satisfactory (Dumont et al., 2017; Su and Swanson, 2019;
Hameed et al., 2020). This is important because organizations need to know how and to what
extent GHRM enhances green service behavior (Saeed et al., 2019).
We suggest that what seems to be lacking in the development of GHRM is that many
organizations implement GHRM to realize corporate green strategies alone, the extent to
which the implemented GHRM enhances employees’ green service behavior is rarely
investigated. We argue that an organization’s environmental performance relies not only on
the implementation of GHRM but also on employees’ pro-environment behavior, such as
green service behavior. We further argue that GHRM may have an indirect effect on
employees’ green service behavior. We propose that this occurs through green knowledge-
sharing. Previous research shows that potential and actual groups of legislators, financial
stakeholders, suppliers, and (more importantly) employee attitudes toward and knowledge of
GHRM influence the implementation of GHRM (Guerci et al., 2016a; Stahl et al., 2020). That
said, GHRM requires at least two important conditions to be met: employees’ attitudes toward
GHRM and their knowledge of it. There is a need to identify the extent to which employees are
aware of GHRM and the advantages of implementing it (Dumont et al., 2017; Saeed et al.,
2019). We heed such research calls by identifying the influence of GHRM on green service
behavior through the mediating effect of green knowledge sharing.
Our study makes significant contributions to GHRM literature. Researchers have called
for a better understanding of how GHRM promotes employees’ green service behavior in the
workplace (Dumont et al., 2017). GHRM is now understood in terms of being an enabler of
soliciting employees’ green service behaviors and, thus, opens a new avenue of research on
GHRM and employee outcomes. Second, this study highlights the mediating role of green
knowledge sharing – the proposed mechanism underlying this relationship. HRM impacts
knowledge sharing (Bhatti et al., 2020; Aklamanu et al., 2016) that further influences positive
employee outcomes (Liao et al., 2018). Considering such a relationship, we further argue that
GHRM might influence green knowledge sharing and affect employee green service behavior,
supporting why we use green knowledge sharing as a mediator. Previous studies also report
mixed mediation effects (partial mediation and no mediation) of knowledge sharing variables
(Zheng et al., 2017; Bhatti et al., 2020). Here, we aim to examine the nature of the mediation
effect of green knowledge sharing on GHRM and green service behavior. We thus present the
research framework in Figure 1.
ER

4. Green banking is an emerging trend that deserves more attention. This is an important issue
for several reasons. First, there is growing recognition that green banking is not an
“automatic” process but instead requires that banking management promote green service
behavior among their employees. Second, it is necessary to account more fully for variations
in the ways banks attend to green service behavior. Third, we argue that employees’ green
service behavior can be affected by various aspects of the information environment.
In this paper, we advance the management literature on green service behavior by examining
how GHRM impacting green service behavior in the Bangladesh banking industry. Besides,
we aim to examine if green knowledge sharing mediates the above relationship.
The paper also responds to the Bangladesh Government’s call urging a green banking
movement in Bangladesh (Bangladesh Bank, 2011). The government has put pressure on the
banks to ensure green practices in banking strategies and operations (Ahmad et al., 2013;
Hoque et al., 2019). The Bangladesh government’s call has influenced its banking industry to
practice green in their internal operations and green lending policies incorporating
environmental and ecological aspects to promote a green investment for sustainable
management (Masukujjaman et al., 2015). The banking industry has high green content in
both in-house and green lending policies compared to other organizations’ business
operations (Masukujjaman et al., 2015). In other words, banking management must find ways
to promote employee green service behavior. In light of these considerations, there is a need to
examine how GHRM practices impact green service behavior in the Bangladesh banking
industry.
Banking management rank green banking as the most imperative for environment
management (Kulsum and Huda, 2018), so green service behavior has significant implications
for the banking organization’s environmental performance. Given that green service
behavior impacts environmental performance, we examine the frontline employees’ (FLEs)
perceptions about the impact of GHRM practices on green performance. We chose private
commercial banks (PCBs) in Bangladesh because PCBs have the highest percentage (73.74%)
of direct green investment than all other state-owned and foreign commercial banks (Hoque
et al., 2019).
Rubel et al. (2016) examine high involvement work practice (HIWP) as involvement-
oriented HRM practices to affect bank FLEs technology adaptation behavior. In another
study, Rubel et al. (2018) assess the effect of high commitment HRM on bank employees’
service behavior in the form of in-role and extra-role. Following Rubel et al. (2016) this paper
focuses on how GHRM influences FLEs’ green service behavior. We chose FLEs as they
provide services to the bank customers through direct verbal and physical interaction. Their
green behavior has a spillover effect on their customers’ green behavior.
Green knowledge-
sharing
Green Human
Resource
Management
In-role Green Service
Behavior
Extra-role Green
Service Behavior
Figure 1.
Research framework
Influence of
green HRM
practices

5. The remainder of this article is structured as follows: first, we discuss the social identity
theory to justify the theoretical grounds of the proposed relationship. Next, the extant
literature on GHRM, green knowledge sharing and green service behaviors are discussed in
detail. This discussion attempts to conceptualize all the study variables that will facilitate a
relationship between them. Then, we develop the hypotheses to represent the interactions
between GHRM, green knowledge sharing and employee green service behaviors.
The methodology is then applied to test the hypotheses. We close the study by discussing
key findings, implications, the limitations of our work and future research scope in the
concluding section.
Social identity theory
Social identity theory (SIT) states that people develop a positive self-concept by first
classifying themselves into groups and then identifying themselves as members of that
particular group (Tajfel and Turner, 1979). Further, membership with positive images
reinforces this self-concept (Ashforth and Mael, 1989). Group members are aware of
similarities in perceptions and actions when they identify with the group (Stets and Burke,
2000). For this reason, organizational studies often use social identity theory to explain
employee identity in an organization’s social setting (Kim et al., 2019). Employees, being
members of an organization, support organizational values, take pride in organizational
activities, and are loyal to the organization (Ashforth and Mael, 1989). Thus, organizational
identity accelerates employee commitment to an organization, especially if that organization
positively influences employee behaviors (O’Reilly and Chatman, 1986).
In the current study, we draw upon social identity theory to argue that working with
employees who support the organization’s green initiatives (GHRM) can help other
employees reduce social uncertainty in their work relationships. This subsequently
influences all employees’ identification with their green knowledge sharing and green
service behavior. We propose that GHRM helps employees reduce social uncertainty by
informing their behaviors, expectations and the extent to which they identify with their
colleagues regarding green knowledge-sharing and green service behavior. Employees
working to perpetuate this organizational culture may also be motivated to engage in green
knowledge-sharing behavior and green service behavior. Such motivations facilitate the link
between GHRM, green knowledge-sharing and green service behavior.
Previous studies explain how social identification is related to employee sustainability
behavior (Carmeli et al., 2017). We posit that GHRM promotes greater employee
encouragement in sustainability behaviors for at least three reasons. First, GHRM signals
the organization’s commitment to sustainability. This commitment reinforces and directs
employee behaviors. Additionally, social psychology research indicates that employee
perceptions of and responses to organizational corporate social responsibility activities
depend on their perceptions of the authenticity of organizational commitment to
sustainability (Carmeli et al., 2017). Second, GHRM targets employees’ green behavior and,
as such, instills a sense of meaningfulness and involvement in them; employees begin to feel
they are part of a more significant effort to make a positive change in the environment
(Spreitzer and Sonenshein, 2004). Finally, GHRM entails an environment in which there is a
high level of participation characterized by the sharing of knowledge on sustainability issues
and greater attention to disseminating environmental information among members.
Literature review and hypotheses
Green HRM
GHRM refers to HRM within the scope of environmental issues (Renwick et al., 2013; Teixeira
et al., 2016; Guerci et al., 2016b). It involves employee recruitment based on green criteria,
ER

6. training and skills in sustainability management; within this context, related performance
assessments measure the sustainability performance of employees and rewards employees
for achieving green targets (Renwick et al., 2016; Yusliza et al., 2017; Yong et al., 2020). In
short, GHRM is an HRM program that is environmentally friendly as it seeks to ensure and
mobilize employee involvement in the form of superior green efficiencies and lower costs to
stimulate an organization to conserve and condense resource use wherever possible. For
example, job sharing, teleconferencing, virtual interviews, recycling, online training and
building energy-efficient office spaces.
Implementing GHRM is implemented by aligning HRM activities with environmental
management. This process indicates that organizations shift their business approaches and
efforts toward a more corporate green strategy (Renwick et al., 2013). In this regard, Paill
e
et al. (2014) examine the link between HRM and environmental management by highlighting
how and at what level employees are involved in “greening” at their organizations. Boudreau
and Ramstad (2005) recommend that the human resource (HR) department must have the
capability to assess and inspire sustainability-allied knowledge, attitudes, motivation and
behaviors among employees. With such capabilities and actions, organizations would find it
easier to use HRM to successfully elicit sustainable, environment-friendly employee
behaviors (Dumont et al., 2017).
Previous studies in this domain often explore how GHRM can be a useful mechanism for
stimulating employees’ pro-environment behaviors in the workplace (Chaudhary, 2020).
Other researchers also recommend that GHRM ensure that firms’ staffing policies aim to
enhance employees’ environmental consciousness, attitudes and behaviors (Guerci et al.,
2016a; Jabbour et al., 2016; Tang et al., 2018).
Green service behavior
Employee green behavior in the workplace is also called pro-social behavior (Chou, 2014).
From a practical viewpoint, such behavior can be considered from in-role and extra-role
perspectives (Ramus and Killmer, 2007), where both types of behavior add value to the
organization and are conducive to enhancing competitive advantage in the industry. In what
manner these behaviors are categorized – that is, in-role or extra-role – largely depends on the
organization and the firm’s expectations (Paill
e and Boiral, 2013). There are many types of
jobs that require employees to inculcate “green” behaviors. For instance, jobs require the
employee to confirm that discarded toxic liquid will not mix with local water or that
hazardous materials are used and treated according to organizational guidelines and
government policies. Therefore, to effectively accomplish the tasks required in these types of
jobs, individuals need to be concerned about the environment, as green behavior is prescribed
according to the job’s nature. Such job-related behaviors might be termed in-role green
behaviors.
However, extra-role, or pro-social, green behavior is more hidden. It could be as easy as
recommendations to increase organizational environmental performance by adequately
shutting down laptops/computers rather than leaving them on standby, turning off lights
when not in use, and disseminating the same information among peers or colleagues in the
workplace (Paill
e and Boiral, 2013). These behaviors are not directly job-required but exhibit
employees’ voluntary, or pro-social, roles in environmental protection. Both types of behavior
are believed to be significant for attaining organizational green goals (Norton et al., 2014).
Hence, achieving such goals might be a function of GHRM (Jabbour et al., 2016).
Green knowledge sharing
Researchers do recognize the role of knowledge management at workplaces (Dezi et al., 2019).
However, how knowledge management affects the organization is less studied (Bhatti et al., 2020).
Influence of
green HRM
practices

7. It is well established that knowledge management influences various performance outcomes,
such as improved customer relationships, service quality (Tseng, 2016) and innovation
performance (Bhatti et al., 2020). Indeed, knowledge sharing signifies a core element of knowledge
management. The literature examines it at both organizational (Ferraris et al., 2017; Vrontis and
Christofi, 2019) and individual levels (Rubel et al., 2018; Bhatti et al., 2020).
At the individual level, an employee shares their knowledge with other employees and
eventually produces more “collaborative” knowledge in the organization (Teh and Yong,
2011). This type of knowledge encompasses explicit knowledge stored in formal official
documents and implicit knowledge stored in the human brain, although the latter can be
challenging to manifest as actual data (Shah et al., 2007). Knowledge and knowledge diffusion
are considered important bases for organizations to maintain sustainable competitive
advantage (Gope et al., 2018). Lin and Chen (2017) regard green knowledge-sharing as the
magnitude to which knowledge workers share green knowledge with other members. Thus, it
can be postulated that green knowledge sharing is the process of disseminating green-related
information among employees to enhance an organization’s sustainable objectives.
Therefore, effective green knowledge management indicates enhanced knowledge
infrastructure and transmission capabilities with respect to environmental issues among
organizational members (Lin and Chen, 2017).
Green HRM and green service behavior
The literature suggests that HRM affects organizational performance through attitudinal and
behavioral outcomes (Alfes et al., 2013). Hence, GHRM may also conceivably affect employee
workplace green behaviors. For instance, GHRM includes circulating information on the
organization’s green motives and enhancing the green values of employees through actions
such as staffing practices; these strategies are likely to increase employees’ environmental
consciousness and, in turn, behaviors (Renwick et al., 2013). Similarly, employee job
responsibilities need to be linked to environmental obligations, and green training practices
help enhance knowledge, skills and ability to foster employees’ dedication to green
performances (Pless et al., 2012).
Finally, the appraisal of individual green contributions, rewards and promotions based on
green performance could motivate employees to achieve green objectives (Renwick et al.,
2013). It can be argued that employees’ opinions on why organizations adopt different HRM
practices define how and why those practices will affect employees’ behaviors (Rubel et al.,
2018). Similarly, a structured and flexibly communicated set of GHRM practices clearly
expresses to employees the organization’s commitment to be green and is expected to
concomitantly stimulate them to respond in accordance with the organization’s green
policies. Therefore, based on the literature, it could be assumed that GHRM could facilitate
employees’ accomplishment of in-role green behaviors and promote extra-role green
behaviors in service organizations. Thus, the following hypotheses are posited:
H1. Green human resource management will be positively related to in-role green service
behaviors.
H2. Green human resource management will be positively related to extra-role green
service behaviors.
Green HRM and green knowledge sharing
Since HRM focuses on developing employee skills, knowledge and ability, it creates an
opportunity for employees to contribute by effectively reinvesting their developed talents. As
such, HRM is a dominant predictor of how employees mutually exchange their knowledge
(Bhatti et al., 2020). The literature tests the link between HRM practices and knowledge
ER

8. sharing. For example, Fong et al. (2011) reveal a significantly positive relationship between
HRM practices and employee knowledge sharing behavior. It is supported by recent studies
(Aklamanu et al., 2016; Sammarra et al., 2017). Therefore, we propose that if employees view
GHRM positively, the likelihood of sharing green knowledge will increase. Thus, the
following hypothesis is proposed:
H3. Green human resource management will be positively related to green knowledge
sharing.
Green knowledge sharing and green service behavior
Carmeli et al. (2013) conceptualize knowledge sharing as the receipt or dissemination of
essential information, know-how and skills related to work experiences. Knowledge sharing
encompasses interaction and consultation related to creating, sharing and using knowledge
among individuals and teams within an organization (McAdam et al., 2012); it involves the
inherent coordination of knowledge or information about who knows what in the group
(Faraj and Sproull, 2000).
Knowledge sharing is a predictor of employee performance. Kuzu and Ozilhan (2014)
reveal that knowledge sharing is positively related to individual and team performance.
Employee knowledge sharing and creative performance are significantly related (Liao et al.,
2018). Kwahk and Park (2016) show that the concordant orientation of knowledge sharing vis-
a-vis actual knowledge significantly influences employee job performance. As knowledge
sharing involves exchanging information and assistance to others to achieve organizational
goals, it contains an element of identity force that employees would share knowledge to
perform collaboratively in the direction of the organization’s green image. Likewise, we view
knowledge sharing as a positive strength in creating employee green service behavior.
Therefore, the following hypotheses are posited:
H4. Green knowledge sharing will be positively related to in-role green service behaviors.
H5. Green knowledge sharing will be positively related to extra-role green service
behaviors.
Green knowledge sharing as a mediator
We propose that the influence of GHRM on green service behavior is potentially mediated by
green knowledge sharing. We believe that green knowledge sharing is a by-product of
management and employees closely working together on GHRM. Prior research shows that
knowledge sharing serves as a mediator in the relationship between trust and virtual team
effectiveness (Pangil and Moi Chan, 2014), job satisfaction, workplace friendships, service
innovation (Kuo et al., 2014), servant leadership and team performance (Song et al., 2015). In
HRM research, knowledge sharing is also found to be a significant mediating variable in
different relationships, such as the one between organizational culture and job satisfaction
(Tong et al., 2013), high commitment work systems and employee service behavior (Rubel
et al., 2018), as well as between HRM practices and corporate entrepreneurship (Mustafa et al.,
2016). In line with these findings, the sixth hypothesis of this study is posited:
H6. Green knowledge sharing mediates the relationship between green human resource
management and green service behavior.
Methodology
Sample and data collection
The sample frame for this research included FLEs of PCBs of Bangladesh. To test the
hypotheses, we surveyed 365 FLEs from 30 PCBs in Dhaka, Bangladesh. We focused on this
Influence of
green HRM
practices

9. sample for two important reasons: first, the expansion of private banking, along with
customized services, has generated substantial competition in this sector (Rubel et al., 2018).
Hence, bank employees’ service behavior could be an instrument for attaining and
maintaining a competitive advantage. Moreover, as per the order of Bangladesh Bank
(Central Bank of Bangladesh), every bank is directed to adopt green policies to contribute to
green financial services and environmental sustainability (Chen et al., 2018). Without their
employees’ green concerns and awareness, banking organizations cannot achieve green goals
of sustainability. As a result, banks are expected to recruit pro-environment employees with a
grasp of environmental management. They must exhibit a green performance. Thus, the need
to explore the green service behavior of employees is binding on the banking industry.
Second, as FLEs have direct face-to-face interactions with customers, their verbal and
nonverbal behaviors can affect customers’ environmental awareness. Because of the central
role of FLEs in the banking industry, their adaptation of and behavior toward green
strategies and green knowledge sharing could conceivably affect both their own and
organizational environmental management performances as well as bank customers’
ecological consciousness. Therefore, this study is justified using FLEs as the samples chosen
from PCBs.
In this paper, we employed the judgment sampling technique, a nonprobability sampling
design. As there was no list of FLEs, probability sampling could not be possible in this case.
As a part of the non-probability sampling technique, researchers apply judgmental sampling
when they purposively select samples corresponding to some set requirements (Blumberg
et al., 2011). The current sample was drawn with the following conditions referring Rubel et al.
(2016): (1) the respondents are FLEs who have worked in their current organization for at least
one year and (2) the respondents are full-time FLEs who have worked in PCBs in Dhaka. We
considered full-time employees because they are more committed to the organization. It is
supported by Conway and Briner (2002) that work status and the psychological contract may
influence attitudinal differences between full-time and part-time employees. We considered
only full-time employees with a one-year cutoff time for employment because employment
duration is essential in obtaining a more accurate and fair evaluation. FLEs working at least a
year criteria fit into the purpose as they should know how GHRM impacts knowledge sharing
practices and green service behavior.
For the study purposes, we had sent a formal letter to all 57 PCBs with the help of the
respective HR department. The letter included a summary of the study purpose, the
respondents’ criteria, the cover letter and the questionnaire. Only 30 PCBs agreed to
participate in this research. We employed the drop-off/pick up (DOPU) method for
questionnaire distribution and collection. DOPU could minimize the interviewer partiality
effect and permit the respondents to use their own time in completing answers (Langley and
Kypri, 2011). DOPU method has research evidence (Ahmed et al., 2019; Rubel et al., 2020). We
had sent 25 sets of questionnaires to each participating bank after discussing with the HR
department in charge of data collection. Seven hundred and fifty sets of questionnaires were
distributed to the 30 PCBs. The data collection took approximately two months, from October
to November 2019. We did a follow-up through telephone call with the HR department from
time to time to increase the response rate.
Of the 750 questionnaires, 392 were returned, and 365 surveys were found useable. This
gave us a useable response rate of 48.7%, which is slightly higher than the response rates of
recent research, such as Rubel et al. (2016) (33.3%). Table 1 below shows a summary of the
demographic information of the 356 respondents in this study. Over three-quarters, 39% of
the respondents were aged between 31 and 40 years (77.3%). More than two-thirds (74%) of
the respondents were male. The majority (41.1%) of the respondents had served between 6
and 10 years, while 80.8% of them had a master’s degree.
ER

10. Survey measures
We adapted 17 items from different recognized scales for determining our exogenous,
endogenous and mediator variables. We used six items from Dumont et al. (2017) to measure
GHRM. We referred to Bissing-Olson et al. (2013) for three in-role and three extra-role green
service behavior items, that is, six items in total. Finally, we developed five items from Wong
(2013) to measure green knowledge sharing. The scale validity for these adopted dimensions
ranged from 0.77 to 0.91; thus, the items were deemed acceptable, based on an acceptability
threshold of 0.7 (Hair et al., 2017).
Results
Data analysis
The SPSS statistical analysis package (version 21) and SEM-PLS (Smart PLS-3.2.7
version) were used for data analysis and hypotheses testing. As the questionnaires were
collected at a single point in time and from the same type of respondents, we resort to
common method variance (CMV). To counter CMV, the techniques suggested by
Podsakoff et al. (2003) were employed. Proximal and methodological separation were used
where the constructs’ measurements would appear separately by different sets of
instructions in the questionnaires. Next, the variables were assessed using different scale
formats, a 5-point scale for measuring the independent and mediator variables, and a
7-point scale for measuring the dependent variable. Finally, for statistical control,
Harman’s single-factor test was employed to measure the extent of CMV. Podsakoff et al.
(2003) argue that CMV is problematic if a single latent factor accounts for the most
Characteristic Respondents (N 5 365) Percentage (%)
Gender
Male 270 74
Female 95 26
Age
31–35 years 142 39
36–40 years 140 38.3
41–45 years 49 13.4
46 years and above 34 9.3
Religion
Muslim 297 81.4
Non-Muslim 68 18.6
Marital status
Married 230 63.0
Unmarried 135 37.0
Academic qualification
Bachelor’s degree 70 19.2
Master’s degree 151 41.4
MBA 144 39.4
Work experience
1–5 years 133 36.5
6–10 years 150 41.1
11–15 years 50 13.7
16 years and above 32 8.7
Table 1.
Profile of respondents
Influence of
green HRM
practices

11. explained variance. The results revealed that the variance explained by the first
component, 33.36%, was significantly less than 50%, which confirmed that CMV was not
a major issue in the dataset.
Measurement model
We used confirmatory factor analysis to test reliability, convergent validity and discriminant
validity. To achieve convergent validity, factor loadings for indicators should exceed 0.708,
and the average variance extracted (AVE) score should exceed 0.50 (Hair et al., 2017). One
item of GHRM was dropped because of a low factor loading of 0.300. Composite reliability
(CR) was also employed to measure internal consistency reliability, as it prioritizes indicators
based on their reliability, and a CR value of more than 0.708 is required (Hair et al., 2017).
Similar to that of Cronbach’s alpha, its values also range from 0 to 1. The results of the
loadings, AVE and CR are presented in Table 2.
Discriminant validity was calculated using the heterotrait–monotrait (HTMT) ratio.
Research suggests that the HTMT ratio, with two distinct cutoff values of 0.85 or 0.90 for
interpreting the ratio, is a better choice to measure discriminant validity than the commonly
used Fornell–Larcker criterion (Henseler et al., 2016). We employed a cutoff value of 0.85 to
determine discriminant validity and found that all values were much lower than this
acceptability benchmark (see Table 3). Therefore, the measurement model exhibited
satisfactory convergent validity, reliability and discriminant validity.
Structural model
Structural model assessment involves examining model goodness-of-fit by calculating the
coefficient of determination (R2
) and the significance of the path coefficient b, effect size (f2
)
Constructs Loading AVE CR
Green HRM 0.566 0.867
My company sets green goals for its employees 0.730
My company provides employees with green training to develop the knowledge
and skills required for green management
0.821
My company considers employees’ workplace green behaviors in performance
appraisals
0.791
My company considers employees’ workplace green behaviors in promotions 0.745
My company considers employees’ workplace green behaviors in allocating
rewards and compensation
0.666
Green knowledge sharing 0.586 0.876
I always share green knowledge obtained from newspapers, magazines, journals,
television and other sources
0.845
I enjoy sharing environment-friendly knowledge with my colleagues 0.780
In my organization, people share expertise from work experience with each other 0.757
Sharing my knowledge with colleagues is pleasurable 0.723
I believe that knowledge sharing can benefit all parties involved 0.716
In-role green behavior 0.732 0.891
I adequately complete assigned duties in environment-friendly ways 0.790
I fulfill the responsibilities specified in my job description in environment-friendly
ways
0.910
I perform tasks that are expected of me in environment-friendly ways 0.863
Extra-role green behavior 0.771 0.909
I took a chance to get actively involved in environmental protection at work 0.911
I took the initiative to act in environment-friendly ways at work 0.803
I did more for the environment at work than I was expected to 0.915
Note(s): AVE 5 Average variance extracted, CR 5 Composite reliability
Table 2.
Result of the
measurement model
ER

12. and cross-validated redundancy (Q2
) (Hair et al., 2017). Intervals for interpreting R2
values
suggested by Cohen (1988) are as follows: 0.02–0.12, weak; 0.13–0.25, moderate; and 0.26 and
above, substantial. However, researchers debate the extent to which R2
is a robust
performance metric across studies that are highly heterogeneous in terms of applications,
degrees of freedom and measurement uncertainties (Hair et al., 2017).
A structural model was configured in which green HRM was considered the exogenous
variable influencing green knowledge sharing of employees in the organization (see Table 4
and Figure 2). Green knowledge-sharing explained 21.3% of the variance in GHRM. In-role
and extra-role green service behaviors were partially explained by GHRM (16.8%) and green
knowledge sharing (18.1%). Therefore, R2
was moderate, according to the guidelines
suggested by Cohen (1988). As presented in Table 4, the following three paths were also
significantly positive: GHRM to green in-role (β 5 0.148, p 0.01) and extra-role service
behavior (β 5 0.168, p 0.01), and GHRM to green knowledge sharing (β 5 0.449, p 0.01).
Again, the paths from green knowledge sharing to both in-role (β 5 0.309, p 0.01) and extra-
role green service behaviors (β 5 0.328, p 0.01) were positively significant. Therefore, the
results supported all the hypotheses proposed in this study.
The mediation effect of green knowledge sharing between GHRM and in-role and extra-
role green service behaviors was assessed based on the guidelines of Preacher and Hayes
(2008). These authors state that if the confidence interval does not straddle at 0, then
significant mediation exists. The mediating effect of green knowledge sharing was found to
be significant and positive in both cases, that is, between GHRM and in-role green service
behavior (β 5 0.147, p 0.01), and GHRM and extra-role green service behavior (β 5 0.139,
p 0.01). The confidence intervals bias-corrected 95% also did not show any interval
straddling at 0, thus confirming the findings. Finally, the blindfolding procedure with a
distance of 7 was used to assess the model’s predictive relevance. The model possesses
predictive relevance for specific endogenous constructs if the Q2
value is greater than 0 (Hair
et al., 2017). Q2
was 0.108 for green knowledge sharing, 0.106 for in-role green service behavior
and 0.125 for extra-role green service behavior, which was greater than 0, indicating that the
predictive relevance was acceptable.
Discussion
This study discusses the recent challenges involved in employees’ sustainable organizational
goals. It contributes to the growing number of GHRM studies in examining the effect of
GHRM on employee involvement in the form of the task assigned and extra-role service
behaviors. The study augments the literature on GHRM, green knowledge-sharing and green
service behavior in a developing economy context by adding insights from FLEs of private
banking organizations in Bangladesh. Little is known about the mediating effect of green
knowledge sharing on GHRM and green service behavior. This study offers additional value
by exploring this ignored issue.
Mean SD ERGB GHRM GKS IRGB
ERGSB 4.80 1.12
GHRM 3.63 0.651 0.384
GKS 3.68 0.892 0.449 0.541
IRGSB 4.77 1.01 0.691 0.356 0.444
Note(s): ERGB 5 Extra-role green behavior, GHRM 5 Green HRM, GKS 5 Green knowledge sharing,
IRGB 5 In-role green behavior
Table 3.
Exploring discriminant
validity (HTMT 0.85)
Influence of
green HRM
practices

13. The main findings are as follows: we found empirical support for all six hypotheses. GHRM
was confirmed as a good predictor of both in-role and extra-role of green service behavior of
FLEs working in the Bangladesh banking industry. GHRM and green service behavior’s
significant relationship revealed results consistent with earlier study findings on HRM and
employee service behavior (Rubel et al., 2018) and GHRM and green organizational objectives
through employees’ involvement (Renwick et al., 2013). This significant result may be due to
respondents’ commitment to environmental awareness and the behavioral responses to
GHRM reflected in green responsibilities. In this context, earlier Rubel et al. (2018) have
confirmed that HRM (commitment focused) have significant bearing on bank line managers’
overall service performances including job specific and discretionary performances. Similarly
the present findings have echoed that bank FLEs equally respond to another dimension of
HRM, i.e. GHRM in fulfilling their both assigned and voluntary green responsibilities. Both
Direct path
Std.
beta
Std.
error t-value
p-
value f2
Decision
Green HRM In-role green service behavior 0.142 0.058 2.44** 0.015 0.019 Supported
Green HRM Extra-role green service
behavior
0.192 0.059 3.28** 0.001 0.035 Supported
Green HRM Green knowledge-sharing 0.461 0.033 13.89** 0.000 0.270 Supported
Green knowledge-sharing In-role green
service behavior
0.301 0.048 6.33** 0.000 0.100 Supported
Green knowledge-sharing Extra-role green
service behavior
0.325 0.051 6.31** 0.000 0.087 Supported
Indirect effect
Mediating path
Std.
beta
Std.
error
t
value
p-
value
95%
LL
95%
UL Decision
Green HRM Green knowledge-
sharing In-role green service
behavior
0.150 0.024 5.45** 0.000 0.097 0.203 Supported
Green HRM Green knowledge
sharing Extra-role green service
behavior
0.139 0.027 5.71** 0.000 0.095 0.187 Supported
Note(s): **p 0.01, (based on one-tailed test with 1, 000 bootstrapped replications)
The stars indicate level of significance. **p 0.01 (level of significance at 99%)
Green knowledge-
sharing
Green Human
Resource
Management
In-role Green Service
Behavior
Extra-role Green
Service Behavior
0.301**
0.325**
0.461**
0.142*
0.192**
Table 4.
Hypothesis testing,
direct effect
Figure 2.
Structural model with
green HRM, green
knowledge sharing and
green service behavior
ER

14. studies expedite the general conception that HRM impacts employee responses and
accordingly they perform.
GHRM can be used as an organizational strategy to encourage and facilitate green
information exchange among employees. GHRM is a platform and a useful indicator to the
extent of an organization’s commitment to environmental concerns and eventually helps
employees share their green knowledge to make the organization greener. The literature also
agrees that HRM helps employees enhance their commitment to sharing knowledge among
colleagues (Renwick et al., 2013). Thus, the findings corroborate the belief that, if an
organization demonstrates its responsibility to the environment through GHRM practices,
the consequential outcome will be to green diffusion information through developing green
understanding among employees.
Moreover, the results reveal that employees’ green knowledge sharing in the organization
is positively related to employee green service behavior. This is consistent with previous
research, such as by Ritala et al. (2015), who uncovered a significant positive relationship
between employees’ knowledge sharing and performance. Finally, the current study also
revealed a significantly positive mediating effect of green knowledge sharing between GHRM
and employee green service behavior. This result also corroborates the preceding literature,
where knowledge-sharing shows a significant mediating effect (Carmeli and Paulus, 2015).
Therefore, according to the results, all six of the study’s hypotheses are accepted.
Theoretical implications
Our paper makes several contributions. Our model explains individual employee responses to
GHRM, particularly how GHRM influences individual employee identity, affecting their
responses to green service behavior. The findings align with SIT as a theoretical base of this
study. Earlier studies employed SIT to explain employee identity as an organization member
(Kim et al., 2019). This study shows that GHRM encourages green knowledge sharing to
affect the green behavior of the employees. GHRM makes employees concern about
performing sustainable ways to achieve an organization’s ecological goals, thereby seeing a
clear line of linkage between their behavior and organizational expectation. Such a linkage
would strengthen employee identification with the organization. We highlight the importance
of paying attention to status hierarchy attributes in understanding social categorization. SIT
states that belonging to a higher or a lower status category has a different meaning. We apply
and develop this idea by considering a lower status hierarchy, the FLEs in the banking sector.
Our paper validates the importance of the social identity perspective on the nature of the
status hierarchy and enriches our understanding of the FLEs’ exact role in this social
categorization. Our study also demonstrates that individual employees can perform green
service behavior and realize the informational benefits of knowledge sharing when they
perceive that GHRM is part of the organizational green policies and goals.
Practical implications
The green perspective adopted here is essential for making the concept of HRM more distinct,
robust and inclusive of environmental management issues within the context of
organizational sustainability. In this way, the organization could find its reasoning for
GHRM policy adoption for sustainability purposes. GHRM can challenge the dominant
employee management role by focusing on environmental management issues and, thus,
drawing researchers’ attention. This way, HRM will benefit both organizations and
employees while contributing to social sustainability both in and outside the organizational
context. We further authenticate the mediating role of green knowledge sharing in
strengthening GHRM and employee green service behavior relations. Our findings also
provide some managerial implications for business practitioners. When the top management
Influence of
green HRM
practices

15. with a green orientation supports GHRM, it can create and nurture internal competencies that
further enhance environmental performance (Singh et al., 2020). If an organization seeks
sustainability as an organizational goal, it must involve its HR by adopting GHRM at the
strategic level and implementing corresponding practices to ensure green behaviors at the
employee level. Therefore, employees are more likely to experience greater clarity with
regards to how they are expected to interact with one another and thus, identify more and
perform better in their green service behavior.
Given organizational sustainability responsibilities (Lopes et al., 2017), organizations
cannot achieve environmental management goals without green employees’ support. Thus,
green employees willing to accept green responsibilities can be a source of competitive
advantage for firms involved in protecting the environment. This highlights the importance
of considering green service behaviors at work. As reported, adopting HRM practices at a
strategic level enhances environmental performance via employee performance. As
suggested by our findings, under GHRM, employees are likely to gain greater clarity of
their behavior and expectations and their effects and identify more with green knowledge
sharing and service behaviors. This transformation should mobilize all staff members – from
top management to FLEs. Organizations must be aware of the importance of aligning
environmental objectives with their personnel environmental concerns. Hence, the support of
top management and environmental commitment should be recognized in GHRM policies.
Consistent with the literature (Norton et al., 2014; Paill
e et al., 2014; Dumont et al., 2017),
organizations may practice GHRM to build environmental awareness through information-
sharing assuring green service behaviors by employees.
Limitations and future research directions
In common with applied research, this study is not without its limitations. First, the cross-
sectional data employed are not optimal from the perspective of establishing causality, and
future research in this domain could use panel or pooled data to navigate this problem.
Second, we considered knowledge sharing as a unidimensional construct. Hence, future
research is recommended to extend it into a multidimensional construct. Culture may play a
role in this study. We collected data in Bangladesh, which has a high score for uncertainty
avoidance (60) and power distance (80) (Hofstede Insights, 2019). Future studies may examine
how its cultural difference may impact employee green service behavior. Third, these results
may not be transferred to other case study contexts beyond the banking sector and
Bangladesh, although similar to empirical findings from other research on the HRM–
behavior relationship. In the future, researchers could address the limitations of the
current study in exploring further empirical evidence of GHRM’s impact on employees’ green
behaviors. Researchers might classify GHRM using ability-motivation-opportunity
enhancing practices to examine their impact on green service behavior. Other mediating
variables such as employees’ green attitudes, employee environment commitment and green
psychological climate could be introduced. Besides, our model could be applied to other
service organizations to validate their findings.
Conclusion
Organizations should design HRM practices to support green policy attainment through the
green behavior of employees. Such GHRM practices serve multiple purposes. First, they
integrate HRM goals with organizational environmental management goals. Second, they
equip employees with the necessary skills, values and expertise to implement green
management goals successfully. Third, they increase employee awareness and cognition of
pro-environmental performance at the individual and organizational levels. Fourth, they
ER

16. enhance the extent to which promotion and reward practices are based on green performance.
Besides promoting employees’ green service behavior, we suggest cultivating a green
knowledge sharing culture via mentoring, coaching and facilitation of related projects,
schemes or strategies. We suggest that GHRM alone is insufficient to influence employees’
green service behavior, but the blending of GHRM and green knowledge sharing could be
more effective. Organizations should encourage green knowledge sharing among employees
to continuously look for green information and exchange this to enhance their environmental
consciousness. For this to be effective, organizations need to identify factors that motivate
employees to demonstrate green knowledge sharing. Here, the factor is GHRM.
References
Ahmad, F., Zayed, M.N. and Harun, A.M. (2013), “Factors behind the adoption of green banking by
Bangladeshi commercial banks”, ASA University Review, Vol. 7 No. 2, pp. 241-255.
Ahmed, A., Arshad, M.A., Mahmood, A. and Akhtar, S. (2019), “The influence of spiritual values on
employee’s helping behavior: the moderating role of Islamic work ethic”, Journal of
Management, Spirituality and Religion, Vol. 16 No. 3, pp. 235-263.
Aklamanu, A., Degbey, W.Y. and Tarba, S.Y. (2016), “The role of HRM and social capital
configuration for knowledge sharing in post-MA integration: a framework for future
empirical investigation”, The International Journal of Human Resource Management, Vol. 27
No. 22, pp. 2790-2822.
Alfes, K., Shantz, A., Truss, C. and Soane, E. (2013), “The link between perceived human resource
management practices, engagement and employee behavior: a moderated mediation model”,
The International Journal of Human Resource Management, Vol. 24 No. 2, pp. 330-351.
Ashforth, B.E. and Mael, F. (1989), “Social identity theory and the organization”, Academy of
Management Review, Vol. 14 No. 1, pp. 20-39.
Bangladesh Bank (2011), “Policy guidelines for green banking”, Circular, No. 2, Banking Regulation
and Policy Department, Bangladesh Bank, available at: www.bangladesh-bank.org.
Bhatti, S.H., Zakariya, R., Vrontis, D., Santoro, G. and Christofi, M. (2020), “High-performance work
systems, innovation and knowledge sharing”, Employee Relations: The International Journal,
Vol. ahead-of-print No. ahead-of-print, doi: 10.1108/ER-10-2019-0403.
Bissing-Olson, M.J., Iyer, A., Fielding, K.S. and Zacher, H. (2013), “Relationships between daily affect
and pro-environmental behavior at work: the moderating role of pro-environmental attitude”,
Journal of Organizational Behavior, Vol. 34 No. 2, pp. 156-175.
Blumberg, B., Cooper, D. and Schindler, P. (2011), Business Research Methods, 3rd ed., McGraw-Hill
Education, Berkshire.
Boudreau, J.W. and Ramstad, P.M. (2005), “Talentship, talent segmentation, and sustainability: a new
HR decision science paradigm for a new strategy definition”, Human Resource Management,
Vol. 44 No. 2, pp. 129-136.
Carmeli, A. and Paulus, P.B. (2015), “CEO ideational facilitation leadership and team creativity: the
mediating role of knowledge sharing”, The Journal of Creative Behavior, Vol. 49 No. 1, pp. 53-75.
Carmeli, A., Brammer, S., Gomes, E. and Tarba, S.Y. (2017), “An organizational ethic of care and
employee involvement in sustainability-related behaviors: a social identity perspective”, Journal
of Organizational Behavior, Vol. 38 No. 9, pp. 1380-1395.
Carmeli, A., Gelbard, R. and Reiter-Palmon, R. (2013), “Leadership, creative problem-solving capacity,
and creative performance: the importance of knowledge sharing”, Human Resource
Management, Vol. 52 No. 1, pp. 95-121.
Chaudhary, R. (2020), “Green human resource management and employee green behavior: an
empirical analysis”, Corporate Social Responsibility and Environmental Management, Vol. 27
No. 2, pp. 630-641.
Influence of
green HRM
practices

17. Chen, Z., Hossen, M.M., Muzafary, S.S. and Begum, M. (2018), “Green banking for environmental
sustainability-present status and future agenda: experience from Bangladesh”, Asian Economic
and Financial Review, Vol. 8 No. 5, pp. 571-585.
Chillakuri, B. and Vanka, S. (2020), “Understanding the effects of perceived organizational support
and high-performance work systems on health harm through sustainable HRM lens: a
moderated mediated examination”, Employee Relations: The International Journal. Vol. ahead-
of-print No. ahead-of-print, doi: 10.1108/ER-01-2019-0046.
Chou, C.J. (2014), “Hotels’ environmental policies and employee personal environmental beliefs:
interactions and outcomes”, Tourism Management, Vol. 40, pp. 436-446.
Cohen, S. (1988), “Psychosocial models of the role of social support in the etiology of physical disease”,
Health Psychology, Vol. 7 No. 3, pp. 269-297.
Conway, N. and Briner, R.B. (2002), “Full-time versus part-time employees: understanding the links
between work status, the psychological contract, and attitudes”, Journal of Vocational Behavior,
Vol. 61 No. 2, pp. 279-301.
Dezi, L., Ferraris, A., Papa, A. and Vrontis, D. (2019), “The role of external embeddedness and
knowledge management as antecedents of ambidexterity and performances in Italian SMEs”,
IEEE Transactions on Engineering Management, pp. 1-10, doi: 10.1109/TEM.2019.2916378.
Dumont, J., Shen, J. and Deng, X. (2017), “Effects of green HRM practices on employee workplace
green behavior: the role of psychological green climate and employee green values”, Human
Resource Management, Vol. 56 No. 4, pp. 613-627.
Faraj, S. and Sproull, L. (2000), “Coordinating expertise in software development teams”, Management
Science, Vol. 46 No. 12, pp. 1554-1568.
Ferraris, A., Santoro, G. and Bresciani, S. (2017), “Open innovation in multinational companies’
subsidiaries: the role of internal and external knowledge”, European Journal of International
Management, Vol. 11 No. 4, pp. 452-468.
Fong, C.-Y., Ooi, K.-B., Tan, B.-I., Lee, V.-H. and Yee-Loong Chong, A. (2011), “HRM practices and
knowledge sharing: an empirical study”, International Journal of Manpower, Vol. 32 Nos 5/6,
pp. 704-723.
Gope, S., Elia, G. and Passiante, G. (2018), “The effect of HRM practices on knowledge management
capacity: a comparative study in Indian IT industry”, Journal of Knowledge Management,
Vol. 22 No. 3, pp. 649-677.
Guerci, M., Longoni, A. and Luzzini, D. (2016a), “Translating stakeholder pressures into
environmental performance–the mediating role of green HRM practices”, The International
Journal of Human Resource Management, Vol. 27 No. 2, pp. 262-289.
Guerci, M., Montanari, F., Scapolan, A. and Epifanio, A. (2016b), “Green and nongreen recruitment
practices for attracting job applicants: exploring independent and interactive effects”, The
International Journal of Human Resource Management, Vol. 27 No. 2, pp. 129-150.
Hair, J., Hult, T., Ringle, C. and Sarstedt, M. (2017), A Primer on Partial Least Squares Structural
Equation Modeling, 2nd ed., Sage, Thousand Oakes, CA.
Hameed, Z., Khan, I.U., Islam, T., Sheikh, Z. and Naeem, R.M. (2020), “Do green HRM practices
influence employees’ environmental performance?”, International Journal of Manpower, Vol. 41
No. 7, pp. 1061-1079, doi: 10.1108/IJM-08-2019-0407.
Henseler, J., Ringle, C.M. and Sarstedt, M. (2016), “Testing measurement invariance of composites
using partial least squares”, International Marketing Review, Vol. 33 No. 3, pp. 405-431.
Hofstede Insights (2019), available at: https://www.hofstede-insights.com.
Hoque, N., Mowla, M., Uddin, M.S., Mamun, A. and Uddin, M.R. (2019), “Green banking practices in
Bangladesh: a critical investigation”, International Journal of Economics and Finance, Vol. 11
No. 3, pp. 58-68.
ER

18. Jabbour, C.J.C. and de Sousa Jabbour, A.B.L. (2016), “Green human resource management and green
supply chain management: linking two emerging agendas”, Journal of Cleaner Production,
Vol. 112, pp. 1824-1833.
Kim, Y.J., Kim, W.G., Choi, H.M. and Phetvaroon, K. (2019), “The effect of green human resource
management on hotel employees’ eco-friendly behavior and environmental performance”,
International Journal of Hospitality Management, Vol. 76, pp. 83-93.
Kramar, R. (2014), “Beyond strategic human resource management: is sustainable human resource
management the next approach?”, The International Journal of Human Resource Management,
Vol. 25 No. 8, pp. 1069-1089.
Kulsum, R. and Huda, S.S. (2018), “Re-thinking about the green banking model in the context of
Bangladesh”, The Journal of Developing Areas, Vol. 52 No. 2, pp. 197-214.
Kuo, Y.-K., Kuo, T.-H. and Ho, L.-A. (2014), “Enabling innovative ability: knowledge sharing as a
mediator”, Industrial Management and Data Systems, Vol. 114 No. 5, pp. 696-710.
Kuzu, €
O.H. and €
Ozilhan, D. (2014), “The effect of employee relationships and knowledge sharing on
employees’ performance: an empirical research on service industry”, Procedia-Social and
Behavioral Sciences, Vol. 109 No. 1, pp. 1370-1374.
Kwahk, K.Y. and Park, D.H. (2016), “The effects of network sharing on knowledge-sharing activities
and job performance in enterprise social media environments”, Computers in Human Behavior,
Vol. 55 No. Part-B, pp. 826-839.
Langley, B.M.J. and Kypri, K. (2011), “Distributing surveys: postal versus drop-and – collect”,
Epidemiology, Vol. 22 No. 3, pp. 443-444.
Liao, S.H., Chen, C.C. and Hu, D.C. (2018), “The role of knowledge sharing and LMX to enhance
employee creativity in theme park work team”, International Journal of Contemporary
Hospitality Management, Vol. 30 No. 5, pp. 2343-2359.
Lin, Y.H. and Chen, Y.S. (2017), “Determinants of green competitive advantage: the roles of green
knowledge sharing, green dynamic capabilities, and green service innovation”, Quality and
Quantity, Vol. 51 No. 4, pp. 1663-1685.
Lopes, C.M., Scavarda, A., Hofmeister, L.F., Thom
e, A.M.T. and Vaccaro, G.L.R. (2017), “An analysis of
the interplay between organizational sustainability, knowledge management, and open
innovation”, Journal of Cleaner Production, Vol. 142, pp. 476-488.
Luu, T.T. (2019), “Building employees’ organizational citizenship behavior for the environment”,
International Journal of Contemporary Hospitality Management, Vol. 31 No. 1, pp. 406-426.
Masukujjaman, M., Siwar, C., Mahmud, M. and Alam, S.S. (2015), “Banker’s perception on green
banking-an empirical study on Islamic banks in Bangladesh”, Management and Marketing
Journal, Vol. 13 No. 2, pp. 295-310.
McAdam, R., Moffett, S. and Peng, J. (2012), “Knowledge sharing in Chinese service organizations: a
multi case cultural perspective”, Journal of Knowledge Management, Vol. 16 No. 1, pp. 129-147.
Mustafa, M., Lundmark, E. and Ramos, H.M. (2016), “Untangling the relationship between human
resource management and corporate entrepreneurship: the mediating effect of middle
managers’ knowledge sharing”, Entrepreneurship Research Journal, Vol. 6 No. 3, pp. 273-295.
Nejati, M., Rabiei, S. and Jabbour, C.J.C. (2017), “Envisioning the invisible: understanding the synergy
between green human resource management and green supply chain management in
manufacturing firms in Iran in light of the moderating effect of employees’ resistance to
change”, Journal of Cleaner Production, Vol. 168, pp. 163-172.
Norton, T.A., Zacher, H. and Ashkanasy, N.M. (2014), “Organisational sustainability policies and
employee green behaviour: the mediating role of work climate perceptions”, Journal of
Environmental Psychology, Vol. 38, pp. 49-54.
O’Reilly, C.A. and Chatman, J. (1986), “Organizational commitment and psychological attachment: the
effects of compliance, identification, and internalization on pro-social behavior”, Journal of
Applied Psychology, Vol. 71 No. 3, pp. 492-499.
Influence of
green HRM
practices

19. Ortiz-de-Mandojana, N., Aguilera-Caracuel, J. and Morales-Raya, M. (2016), “Corporate governance and
environmental sustainability: the moderating role of the national institutional context”,
Corporate Social Responsibility and Environmental Management, Vol. 23 No. 3, pp. 150-164.
Paill
e, P. and Boiral, O. (2013), “Pro-environmental behavior at work: construct validity and
determinants”, Journal of Environmental Psychology, Vol. 36, pp. 118-128.
Paill
e, P., Chen, Y., Boiral, O. and Jin, J.F. (2014), “The impact of human resource management on
environmental performance: an employee-level study”, Journal of Business Ethics, Vol. 121
No. 3, pp. 451-466.
Pangil, F. and Moi Chan, J. (2014), “The mediating effect of knowledge sharing on the relationship
between trust and virtual team effectiveness”, Journal of Knowledge Management, Vol. 18 No. 1,
pp. 92-106.
Pless, N.M., Maak, T. and Stahl, G.K. (2012), “Promoting corporate social responsibility and
sustainable development through management development: what can be learned from
international service learning programs?”, Human Resource Management, Vol. 51 No. 6,
pp. 873-903.
Podsakoff, P.M., MacKenzie, S.B., Lee, J.Y. and Podsakoff, N.P. (2003), “Common method biases in
behavioral research: a critical review of the literature and recommended remedies”, Journal of
Applied Psychology, Vol. 88 No. 5, pp. 879-903.
Preacher, K.J. and Hayes, A.F. (2008), “Asymptotic and resampling strategies for assessing and
comparing indirect effects in multiple mediator models”, Behavior Research Methods, Vol. 40
No. 3, pp. 879-891.
Rajala, R., Westerlund, M. and Lampikoski, T. (2016), “Environmental sustainability in industrial
manufacturing: re-examining the greening of interface’s business model”, Journal of Cleaner
Production, Vol. 115, pp. 52-61.
Ramus, C.A. and Killmer, A.B. (2007), “Corporate greening through pro-social extrarole behaviours–a
conceptual framework for employee motivation”, Business Strategy and the Environment,
Vol. 16 No. 8, pp. 554-570.
Renwick, D.W., Redman, T. and Maguire, S. (2013), “Green human resource management: a review
and research agenda”, International Journal of Management Reviews, Vol. 15 No. 1, pp. 1-14.
Renwick, D.W.S., Jabbour, C.J.C., Muller-Camen, M., Redman, T. and Wilkinson, A. (2016),
“Contemporary developments in green (environmental) HRM scholarship”, The International
Journal of Human Resource Management, Vol. 27 No. 2, pp. 114-128.
Ritala, P., Olander, H., Michailova, S. and Husted, K. (2015), “Knowledge sharing, knowledge leaking
and relative innovation performance: an empirical study”, Technovation, Vol. 35, pp. 22-31.
Rubel, M.R.B., Kee, D.M.H., Rimi, N.N. and Yusoff, Y.M. (2016), “Adapting technology: effect of high-
involvement HRM and organisational trust”, Behaviour and Information Technology, Vol. 36
No. 3, pp. 281-293.
Rubel, M.R.B., Rimi, N.N., Yusliza, M.Y. and Kee, D.M.H. (2018), “High commitment human resource
management practices and employee service behaviour: trust in management as mediator”,
IIMB Management Review, Vol. 30 No. 4, pp. 316-329.
Rubel, M.R.B., Kee, D.M.H. and Rimi, N.N. (2020), “High-performance work practices and medical
professionals’ work outcomes: the mediating effect of perceived organizational support”,
Journal of Advances in Management Research, Vol. ahead-of-print No. ahead-of-print, doi: 10.
1108/JAMR-05-2020-0076.
Saeed, B.B., Afsar, B., Hafeez, S., Khan, I., Tahir, M. and Afridi, M.A. (2019), “Promoting employee’s
pro-environmental behavior through green human resource management practices”, Corporate
Social Responsibility and Environmental Management, Vol. 26 No. 2, pp. 424-438.
Sammarra, A., Profili, S., Maimone, F. and Gabrielli, G. (2017), “Enhancing knowledge sharing in age-
diverse organizations: the role of HRM practices”, in Age Diversity in the Workplace: An
Organizational Perspective, Emerald Publishing, pp. 161-187.
ER

20. Severo, E.A., de Guimar~
aes, J.C.F. and Dorion, E.C.H. (2017), “Cleaner production and environmental
management as sustainable product innovation antecedents: a survey in Brazilian industries”,
Journal of Cleaner Production, Vol. 142, pp. 87-97.
Shah, H., Eardley, A. and Wood-Harper, T. (2007), “ALTAR in action: knowledge management”,
European Journal of Information Systems, Vol. 16 No. 6, pp. 771-779.
Singh, S.K., Del Giudice, M., Chierici, R. and Graziano, D. (2020), “Green innovation and environmental
performance: the role of green transformational leadership and green human resource
management”, Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Vol. 150, 119762.
Song, C., Park, K.R. and Kang, S.-W. (2015), “Servant leadership and team performance: the mediating
role of knowledge-sharing climate”, Social Behavior and Personality: An International Journal,
Vol. 43 No. 10, pp. 1749-1760.
Spreitzer, G.M. and Sonenshein, S. (2004), “Toward the construct definition of positive deviance”,
American Behavioral Scientist, Vol. 7 No. 6, pp. 828-847.
Stahl, G.K., Brewster, C.J., Collings, D.G. and Hajro, A. (2020), “Enhancing the role of human resource
management in corporate sustainability and social responsibility: a multi-stakeholder,
multidimensional approach to HRM”, Human Resource Management Review, Vol. 30 No. 3,
In Press, doi: 10.1016/j.hrmr.2019.
Stets, J.E. and Burke, P.J. (2000), “Identity theory and social identity theory”, Social Psychology
Quarterly, Vol. 63 No. 3, pp. 224-237.
Su, L. and Swanson, S.R. (2019), “Perceived corporate social responsibility’s impact on the well-being
and supportive green behaviors of hotel employees: the mediating role of the employee-
corporate relationship”, Tourism Management, Vol. 72, pp. 437-450.
Tajfel, H. and Turner, J.C. (1979), “Social psychology and intergroup relationship”, in Austin, W.G. and
Worchel, S. (Eds), An Integrative Theory of Intergroup Conflict, Monterey, pp. 33-47.
Tang, G., Chen, Y., Jiang, Y., Paill
e, P. and Jia, J. (2018), “Green human resource management practices:
scale development and validity”, Asia Pacific Journal of Human Resources, Vol. 56 No. 1,
pp. 31-55.
Teh, P.-L. and Yong, C.-C. (2011), “Knowledge sharing in IS perspective organizational behavior’s
perspective”, Journal of Computer Information Systems, Vol. 51 No. 4, pp. 11-21.
Teixeira, A.A., Jabbour, C.J.C., Jabbour, A.B.L.D.S., Latan, H. and de Oliveira, J.H.C. (2016), “Green
training and green supply chain management: evidence from Brazilian firms”, Journal of
Cleaner Production, Vol. 116, pp. 170-176.
Tong, C., Tak, W.I.W. and Wong, A. (2013), “The impact of knowledge sharing on the relationship
between organizational culture and job satisfaction: the perception of information
communication and technology (ICT) practitioners in Hong Kong”, International Journal of
Human Resource Studies, Vol. 5 No. 1, pp. 9-37.
Tseng, S.M. (2016), “Knowledge management capability, customer relationship management, and
service quality”, Journal of Enterprise Information Management, Vol. 29 No. 2, pp. 202-221.
Van Buren, H.J. (2020), “The value of including employees: a pluralist perspective on sustainable
HRM”, Employee Relations: The International Journal, Vol. ahead-of-print No. ahead-of-print,
doi: 10.1108/ER-01-2019-0041.
Vrontis, D. and Christofi, M. (2019), “RD internationalization and innovation: a systematic review,
integrative framework and future research directions”, Journal of Business Research. doi: 10.
1016/j.jbusres.2019.03.031.
Wong, S.K.S. (2013), “Environmental requirements, knowledge sharing and green innovation:
empirical evidence from the electronics industry in China”, Business Strategy and the
Environment, Vol. 22 No. 5, pp. 321-338.
Wu, H.C., Wei, C.F., Tseng, L.Y. and Cheng, C.C. (2018), “What drives green brand switching behavior?
”, Marketing Intelligence and Planning, Vol. 36 No. 6, pp. 694-708.
Influence of
green HRM
practices

21. Yong, J.Y., Yusliza, M.Y., Ramayah, T., Chiappetta Jabbour, C.J., Sehnem, S. and Mani, V. (2020),
“Pathways towards sustainability in manufacturing organizations: empirical evidence on the
role of green human resource management”, Business Strategy and the Environment, Vol. 29
No. 1, pp. 212-228.
Yusliza, M.Y., Othman, N.Z. and Jabbour, C.J.C. (2017), “Deciphering the implementation of green
human resource management in an emerging economy”, The Journal of Management
Development, Vol. 36 No. 10, pp. 1230-1246.
Zawawi, N.F.M. and Abd Wahab, S. (2019), “Organizational sustainability: a redefinition?”, Journal of
Strategy and Management, Vol. 12 No. 3, pp. 397-408.
Zheng, J., Wu, G. and Xie, H. (2017), “Impacts of leadership on project-based organizational innovation
performance: the mediator of knowledge sharing and moderator of social capital”,
Sustainability, Vol. 9 No. 10, pp. 1-22.
Zibarras, L.D. and Coan, P. (2015), “HRM practices used to promote pro-environmental behavior: a UK
survey”, The International Journal of Human Resource Management, Vol. 26 No. 16,
pp. 2121-2142.
Corresponding author
Mohammad Rabiul Basher Rubel can be contacted at: asstprof_sub@yahoo.com
For instructions on how to order reprints of this article, please visit our website:
www.emeraldgrouppublishing.com/licensing/reprints.htm
Or contact us for further details: permissions@emeraldinsight.com
ER
View publication stats
View publication stats