motivating employees towards organizational environmental
Post on 01-Jan-2017
229 Views
Preview:
TRANSCRIPT
MAGNT Research Report (ISSN. 1444-8939) Vol.2 (4). PP: 267-278
(DOI: dx.doi.org/14.9831/1444-8939.2014/2-4/MAGNT.34)
GHRM: Motivating Employees towards Organizational Environmental Performance
Muhammad Hassan Jabbar1, Muhammad Abid
2
1Lecturer, GIFT University, Gujranwala, Pakistan
2Assistant Professor, GIFT University, Gujranwala, Pakistan
Abstract The purpose of this study is to investigate about factors that motivate employees towards
organizations environmental performance. Firms by adopting Green human resource management
practices (GHRM) can play a pivotal role in promoting environment related concerns. In this study
empirical investigation has done to explore the factors that trigger the employees to be involved in green human resource management practices. Data was collected from 178 employees of the firms
that use GHRM practices. Convenient Sampling was employed for data collection. The findings of
the paper suggest that how HRM practices influence employee motivation to become involved in organizational environmental performance. This study elucidates that employees are more
motivated towards eco-initiatives through rewards (monetary & non-monetary). Moreover, this
study proposes that members of staff are more ready to take on environmental initiatives when their supervisors show encouraging behavior in regards to environmental ideas. The only limitation to the
study is inadequate availability of primary data since rare organizations are practicing Green HRM
due to lack of understanding about it.
Key Words: Green HRM, Green practices, Eco-initiatives, Employee motivation, Management
commitment, Environmental Training
Paper type: Research Paper
1. Introduction
In such a today’s competitive world organizations aren’t solely facing economic
but environmental challenges as well. At
present society has become greatly aware and
concerned about environmental issues. To date a lot has been researched regarding Green
Marketing (Peattie, 1992), Green Accounts
(Bebbington, 2001; Owen, 1992), and Green Retailing (Kee-hung et al. 2010) and Green
Management (McDonagh and Prothero, 1997)
but Green Human Resources Management (GHRM) is an aspect of Environmental
Management that has not been explored
sufficient yet (Renwick, Redman and Maguire,
2013). GHRM means to align the HR practices such as recruitment, selection, training,
performance assessment and rewards, to a
company’s green management objectives (Renwick et al., 2008; Jackson et al., 2011;
Teixeira and Jabbour, 2012). The term Green
HR is used to the contribution of people
management practices towards wider corporate
environmental agenda (Pillai and Sivathanu, 2014).There is a positive relationship between
the GHRM practices and the ecological
performance of the corporation’s (Daily,
Bishop and Massoud, 2012).
Since employees are the most valuable asset of the organization and act as players for
organization success; organizations should
ensure that employees are motivated and committed towards organizational goals.
Currently organizations in order to compete
successfully needs to align corporate goals with environmental goals. For achieving
effective organizational environmental
performance employees must be committed
and motivated towards these goals. This study discusses that under highly environmental
aware society, organizations in order to sustain
successfully motivation of employees is considerably important and there must be
some mechanisms in place through which
employees could be committed towards
attaining environmental goals.
MAGNT Research Report (ISSN. 1444-8939) Vol.2 (4). PP: 267-278
(DOI: dx.doi.org/14.9831/1444-8939.2014/2-4/MAGNT.34)
For an organization to strongly support environmental management system,
motivation of employees is of great
significance. Researchers discuss that employees must be motivated, empowered and
environmentally aware of greening in order to
carry out green management initiatives (Suhaimi and Sudin, 2011). Based on the
previous studies factors like administration
commitment, worker empowerment, plunder, and comment and review stood out as key
elements in motivating employees for
enhanced environmental performance
(Govindarajulu and Daily, 2004). Motivating employees for better participation in
environmental development efforts may also
need service teams. The use of team-based employee initiatives (EI) programs is mostly
popular in built-up organizations where
developed strategies, spirited pressures, and higher technology require shop-floor
employees to take more responsibility towards
making the organizations environment green
(Magjuka and Baldwin, 1991). Lack of motivation may outcome in employees who
are reluctant to participate in environmental
management. Employees planning and activities are the key to toxic waste
management if they are strongly motivated
towards environmental management (Denton,
1999). Employees motivated towards green environmental management take on green HR
practices which in long run will contribute to
the effective accomplishment of environmental management system (Jackson, Renwick,
D.W.S, Jabbour and Camen, 2011).
Environmental Management (EM) approaches
depend upon still development via employee training (Brio and Junquera, 2007) but lacking
employees’ motivation towards environmental
objectives, organizations cannot address green
issues significantly. The purpose of this study is to address the issue of employees’
motivation towards environmental
performances via Performance assessment, reward practices and supervisory behaviors.
2. Literature review
In the twenty first century organizations are
taking a more strategic approach to
environmental management (Daily, 2004). Green human Resource management is
referred as alignment of HRM practices with
the business’s environmental goals (Jabbour, 2013).Incorporating Human resources with
EM, organizations can address the
environmental issues significantly. Green HR practices result in greater efficiencies and
build an atmosphere of better employee
engagement which helps corporation to
operate in an environmentally sustainable business practices (Meily and Susanti,
2013).Firms are not making use of full range
of GHRM practices, and this may result in limiting their effectiveness in attempts to
improve EM (Renwick, 2013). Following
factors are empirically investigated.
2.1 Organizational Environmental
Performance
Organizational environmental performance refers to performing activities in a way that positively affect the environment.
Environmental management basically has two
major objectives; firstly, to control the level of pollution in an environment, and secondly, to
upgrade the environment to an acceptable level
(Yasamis, 2011). The increase in concerns of
protecting the environment is forcing the companies to adopt the environmental
management practices (Boiral, 2006; Gonza´
lez-Benito and Gonza´ lez- Benito, 2006). One of the arguments given by many researchers
that favor the taking up of environmental
management activities is that it would give the company a competitive advantage (Melynk,
2005). According to Edward (2004), there are
four reasons why organizations should adopt
environmental management practices: ethical; as it’s their duty to protect the world,
economic; conserving resources and energy
means saving cost, legal to avoid the governmental problems, commercial; a large
number of companies are taking
environmental management into account.
MAGNT Research Report (ISSN. 1444-8939) Vol.2 (4). PP: 267-278
(DOI: dx.doi.org/14.9831/1444-8939.2014/2-4/MAGNT.34)
Wilkinson (2001) states that Human Resources
Department is very important for
environmental management. The Human
Resource management support is supposed to be most essential for adopting the EM
activities (Jackson et al., 2011; Govindarajulu
and Daily, 2004; Daily and Huang, 2001; Jabbour and Santos, 2008; Sarkis et al., 2010).
Therefore in this regard carefully recruiting
and selecting the employees, giving them performance based rewards and full fledge
training programs are thought-out as a strong
force for motivating employees and such
programs enhance their knowledge about environmental management. ( Renwick, 2008;
Sudin, 2011).
Some of the big corporations of the world and
particularly big companies in India have set up commercially extensive environmental
performance standards to measure how much
efficiently the companies are working for
greening the environment. The standards include proper on site use of material,
appropriate management of wastage stock,
conducting environmental audits, diminution of waste material. Furthermore standards
include developing such Information system
that proves to be helpful in greening the environment i.e. green systems and audits for
collecting useful data on managerial
performance towards EM. (Mandip, 2012).
2.2 Rewards
Rewards play a crucial role in motivating the employees and help in identifying their
significant performance in job towards
environmental management. (Danish and Usman, 2010). The goal of organizations for
using reward systems is to accomplish, keep
and motivate employees for performing well
and realizing the importance of eco-initiatives. (Kaplan, 2005; Lindstrom, 2011).Well
designed reward system could motivate the
employees to be engaged in environmental endeavors. There is little literature available
that shows that reward system could motivate
the employees to be indulged in environmental activities (Laabs, 1992; Patton and Daley,
1998).Employees are interested in both
monetary and non monetary rewards.
Recognition programs, profit sharing
programs, increase in pay, benefits and
incentives, Awards and suggestion programs could be used to reward the employees for
good environmental performances (Patten and
Daley, 1998; Marks, 2001). The use of environmental rewards and recognition (daily
praise and company awards) have shown that
they have considerable impact on employee motivation to get involved in eco-initiatives
(Rentwick et al, 2013).
Nowadays organizations are taking initiatives towards environmental performance by
practicing reward systems for improving EM performance (Renwick, Redman and Maguire,
2013). Reward system demonstrates respect,
self esteem and recognition for the employees as it motivates them and triggers a
participative problem solving EM (Jabbour
and Santos, 2008). Monetary Rewards seem to
be the strongest pushing force for inspiring employees to play their part in eco initiative
efforts. Research shows that employees’
satisfaction and work motivation are strongly affected by monetary rewards (Lawler, 1973;
Govindarajulu and Dairy, 2004). Some
employees get more motivated by appreciation from supervisors and recognition (non
monetary rewards) than other monetary
factors. There are anecdotal evidences
explaining that most of the businesses are taking initiatives for beneficial environmental
practices through acknowledgment. For
example in some of the countries like USA employees are being rewarded for their
innovative ideas and other beneficial
environmental activities at different levels of organizations. Activities include reducing
waste, proper recycling, attending green events
and afterwards performing community
services (Mandip, 2012). Based on the literature, the proposed hypothesis is as
follows:
H1 Monetary and non-monetary rewards
significantly enhance employee motivation toward eco-initiatives.
MAGNT Research Report (ISSN. 1444-8939) Vol.2 (4). PP: 267-278
(DOI: dx.doi.org/14.9831/1444-8939.2014/2-4/MAGNT.34)
2.3 Assessment
According to Nasud (1999), performance
assessment is thought of as a crucial factor in
managing human capital of an organization and this criterion is the most important tool
that helps in bringing out an employee’s extent
of performance. In order to keep the employees motivated towards the
environmental management of an organization
it is essential that the way the employees performance be assessed. Govindrajulu and
Daily (2004) suggest that employees must be
provided with feedback regarding their efforts
for improving the environment or else their efforts may come to a standstill. The feedback
may be provided to employees only if the
organization has a good performance assessment structure (Govindrajulu and Daily,
2004). Chinander (2001) also emphasizes that
performance assessment of the employees ensures that the employees are conscious about
their tasks and such consciousness leads to
improved performance regarding EM.
Employees will do better if they receive feedback on how well they are making
progress towards their environmental
objectives since feedback helps recognize divergences between what they have done and
what they want to do. Verbal as well as written
feedback may motivate the employees to be
engaged in environmental responsibilities (Govindarajulu and Daily, 2004).
An example of performance assessment program is, asking employees to come up with
innovative green ideas, after having
brainstormed the ideas and includes them in objectives. When the objectives pertaining to
green ideas have been achieved, make it a
criterion for the assessment of performance of
employees (Mandip, 2012). Performance assessment concerns the need for managers to
monitor EM performance in order to wider
environmental protective behaviors (Milliman and Clair, 1996; Renwick, Redman and
Maguire, 2013). This research hence proposes
the following.
H2 Performance assessment significantly enhances employees’ motivation
toward organizations eco-initiatives.
2.4 Supervisory Behavior According to Ramus and Steger’s (2000)
supervisor’s supporting behaviors are crucial
for motivating employee towards environmental management. Results of their
study indicated that supervisor’s behavior
supporting environmental management motivated employees towards eco initiative.
Their study also discussed that supervisor
supportive behavior promotes environmental innovation. Supervisors if behave fairly their
behavior leads to proficiency building in
employees. Communication between top to
lower management should be flattened so that environmental goals are properly
communicated to all the management levels
and these factors altogether has a significant effect on employees own willingness to
participate in eco initiatives (Ramus and
Steger, 2000). An empirical study conducted by Ramus (2001) showed that supervisors who
incorporated daily praises in their
organizations were graded as amongst the
most significant factor for employees’ environmental initiatives.
The proposed hypothesis therefore is as
follows.
H3 Supervisory behavior has a positive
impact on employee motivation
towards eco-initiatives.
2.5 Management Commitment Management commitment means creating
human energy that actually activates human mind since activation of energy and mind is a
source of implementing green ideas and
without these, green goals cannot be accomplished (Arygris, 1998). Studies have
suggested that employees participate more
willingly when their supervisors adopt
democratic style of decision making towards environmental performance, showing
management is strongly committed (Ramus,
2001; Govindarajulu and Daily, 2004). Management commitment allows employees
to take time for experimentation towards
environmental performance which would ultimately increase their motivation towards
MAGNT Research Report (ISSN. 1444-8939) Vol.2 (4). PP: 267-278
(DOI: dx.doi.org/14.9831/1444-8939.2014/2-4/MAGNT.34)
EM (Woods, 1993; Govindarajulu and Daily,
2004).The following hypothesis is proposed.
H4 Management commitment significantly
moderates the positive impact of
supervisory behavior with employee
motivation towards eco-initiatives.
2.6 Environmental Training of the
Employees
The agenda concerning what basically motivates employees towards organizational
positive activities has become of great
importance since the beginning of the
industrial revolution (Haslam, Powell and Turner, 2000). According to Baron (1991)
motivation is considered to be a fundamental
concern of the modern organizational world of research. Motivating employees for
environmental management not only makes
the company focus on negative environmental affects but also guarantees that responsibility
has been allotted for acquiring credible
environmental reputation ( Morrow and
Rondinelli, 2002).If employees are motivated toward eco-initiatives but they don’t have
sufficient skills and competencies to perform
green activities, they wouldn’t be able to significantly increase the organizational
environmental performance. Training is
considered to have a positive impact on organization’s environmental performance
since training performs a basic role to teach
employees new skills to work in an innovative
environment that will positively influence the environmental performance of the organization
(Cole, 2008).
As stated by the experts environmental
training serves two main purposes. First properly educate the employees with the
company’s environmental policies, secondly
by altering the activities of employees through
training to built a more deliberate and stable relationship of employees towards
environment ( Sammalisto and Brorson, 2008).
Following the practices of green environmental training, benefits the company
to attain the cost minimization and corporate
image (Marshall and Mayer, 1992).
Nowadays progress in environmental
management is seen to be people oriented and
it is factual that skills of employees are
improved through thorough training (Brio, 2007).Based on this, the research proposes the
following hypothesis.
H5 Environmental training of employees
mediates between employee motivation towards eco-initiatives and
environmental performance of
organization.
3. Conceptual Framework
4. Research Design
4.1 Instrument Development
The questionnaire was developed through
extensive literature review and with the help of academic experts. Seven variables were shown
in model including one moderator and
mediating variable i.e. rewards, performance assessment, supervisory behavior, employee
motivation towards eco-initiatives,
management commitment, environmental training and organizational environmental
performance.
With the help of domain experts’ content and face validity was done and questionnaire was
tailored regarding recommendations given by
them. Instrument was finalized after pilot testing. At final stage, questionnaire comprised
of 46 items including three demographic
MAGNT Research Report (ISSN. 1444-8939) Vol.2 (4). PP: 267-278
(DOI: dx.doi.org/14.9831/1444-8939.2014/2-4/MAGNT.34)
questions. Except demographics, all items
were measured on seven point likert scale
(1=Strongly Disagree, 2= Moderately disagree,
3=Disagree, 4= Neutral, 5= Agree, 6= Moderately Agree, 7=Strongly Agree).
Rewards is measured with six items,
performance assessment with six, supervisory behavior with five, management commitment
with seven, employee motivation towards eco-
initiatives with nine, environmental training with six and organizational environmental
performance with four items.
4.2 Data Collection
The questionnaires were distributed among
300 respondents and out of them 178 were obtained; as a result response rate was 59.3%.
Fewer responses were obtained due to
unavailability of primary data as rare organizations are employing GHRM practices.
Data was collected from three firms who were
employing green practices. Convenient
sampling was used for this study. The demographics of employees are given in
Appendix.
5. Data Analysis and Result
5.1 Reliability Cronbach’s alpha is applied to check the
internal consistency of the items for a
particular construct. The intimated value of Cronbach’s alpha should be more than 0.70
but if the value is greater than 0.60 it would
also be considered reasonably good
(Nunnally,1978). In Table 1 values of all variables are greater than 0.80 which shows
exceptional reliability among items of a
particular construct except employee motivation and environmental training that is
.779 and .754.
Table 1
Reliability analysis (Internal
consistency)
Serial name Variable name
Cronbach’s
alpha no of items
1 R 0.899 6
2 PA 0.894 6
3 MC 0.862 5
4 SB 0.895 7
5 EM 0.779 9
6 ET 0.754 7
7 OEP 0.868 3
5.2 Exploratory Factor Analysis
Exploratory factor analysis was carried out to determine either all items are properly loaded
or not. Before formally conducting EFA, two
assumptions of factor analysis must be fulfilled i.e. KMO and Bartlet test. The value
of KMO should be greater than 0.60 and
Bartlett test’s value must be significant at 5%
(Pallant, 2001). Loading scores of each item must be greater than 0.40. Factor analysis was
carried out through extraction method of
principal component analysis with verimax rotation. Factors are loaded on the basis of
Eigen values. Forty two items of seven
constructs are presented in the table 2. Loading scores of all items are greater than
suggested value. The explained variance from
all the given components is more than 0.50
which is sensibly good. These results are on the basis of fixed number of values.
Table2 Factor analysis
Ser
ial no
R PA M
C
SB E
M
ET OE
P
1 .82 .83 .82 .78 .83 .80 .90
2 .83 .83 .85 .80 .83 - .88
3 .83 .84 .81 .79 .77 .78 .87
4 .77 .81 .76 .79 .82 .77
5 .80 .81 .76 .77 .79 .78
6 .83 .74 .78 .80 .71
7 .77 .78 .79
8 .80
9 -
VE 65 65 65. 61 59. 53. 79.
K
MO
0.9
1
0.8
9
0.8
5
0.9
1
0.9
5
0.8
9
0.7
3
Brt .00 .00 .00 .00 .00 .00 .00
MAGNT Research Report (ISSN. 1444-8939) Vol.2 (4). PP: 267-278
(DOI: dx.doi.org/14.9831/1444-8939.2014/2-4/MAGNT.34)
5.3 Correlation Analysis
Correlation tells the strength and direction of
the relationship. The relationship of PA with R
is strongly positive and all other variables are moderately positive with each other (See table
3). All variables are significantly correlated
with each other.
Table 3
Correlation Analysis
Varia
bles
R PA MC SB EM ET OEP
R 1
PA .88 1
MC .76 .80 1
SB .80 .82 .80 1
EM .77 .75 .75 .76 1
ET .75 .79 .78 .76 .75 1
OEP .74 .76 .79 .80 .75 .74 1
All results are significant at 1%
5.4 Regression Analysis
The regression model was run in this study in
three different phases i.e. without the impact
of moderation, with the impact of moderation and then the mediation impact. In the first
phase the regression test without the impact of
moderation was run on SPSS 19.00 as shown below in the table 5. R is significantly
enhancing EM that supports the first
hypothesis (β = 0.343, p-value < 0.05). PA is not significantly enhancing the EM (β =0.159,
p-value > 0.05). As per the results the second
hypothesis is not supported. EM is
significantly enhanced by SB (β =0.417, p-value > 0.05) that accept the third hypothesis
of this study.
Table 3
Regression Analysis
Variable
Β
S.E
t-valu
e
p-valu
e
Hypothesis
Cons. .58 .24 2.35 .020 R .34 .10 3.39 .001 Accepted
PA .16 .11 1.43 .154 Rejected
SB .42
7
.09
0
4.61 .000 Accepted
The below analysis shown in Table 5 is
regression with the impact of moderator.
Management commitment is significantly moderating the impact of supervisory behavior
on EM. According to given results MC is
significantly moderating the impact of SB on EM (β =0.112, p-value < 0.05) that supports
the fourth hypothesis of this study.
Table 5
Regression Analysis
Variable
Β
S.
E
t-valu
e
p-valu
e
Hypothesis
Cons. 1.62
.25 6.34 .000
R .32 .10 3.25 .001 Accepted
PA .09 .11 .85 .397 Rejected
MCSB .11 .02 5.2 .000 Accepted
The three-equation test of Baron and Kenny
(1986) is used, with the results shown in Table 6. Step 1 of the approach requires that the
independent variable (Employee motivation)
statistically affects the mediating variable
(employee training). This condition is met, as shown in Table 6. Step 2 of the approach
requires that the independent variable directly
and statistically affects organizational environmental performance, the dependent
variable. This condition is met as shown in
Table 6. Step 3 allows both the mediator and independent variables to influence the
dependent variable and with an emphasis on
the mediator variable (employee training) that
statistically influences the dependent variable. This condition is met as shown in Table 6.
Step 4 compares these conditions and third
step of regression. The requirement is that the influence of the independent variable declines
substantially.
MAGNT Research Report (ISSN. 1444-8939) Vol.2 (4). PP: 267-278
(DOI: dx.doi.org/14.9831/1444-8939.2014/2-4/MAGNT.34)
This condition is met because there is a
halving of the beta coefficients for independent
variable; employee motivation beta drops from
0.734 to 0.437. All four conditions are met, indicating that employee training mediates the
influence of employee motivation and
organizational environmental performance.
Three-equation test of Baron Kenny
Step 1
Environmental training = .694 Employees
Motivation
Step 2
Organizational Environmental Performance =.734 Employees Motivation
Step 3 Organizational Environmental Performance
=.694 Employees Motivation + .734 Employees
Motivation
6. Discussion First hypothesis of the study is accepted i.e.
rewards significantly impact the employees
motivation towards eco-initiatives. According to the literature it is supported that with the
good reward system the employees motivation
can be enhanced towards eco-initiatives. To increase performance of employees and their
satisfaction level, they should be recognized in
terms of monetary and non-monetary rewards.
The more the reward system will be better; the employees will be more motivated to take eco-
initiatives and more inclined towards the
betterment of the OEP. The second hypothesis of this study is Performance Assessment
insignificantly impacts EM. There is no
significant influence of green performance
assessment on employees motivation towards eco-initiatives. Motivation level of employees
will be decreased if performance will not be
assessed in a better way. If employees are not motivated the environmental performance of
the organization will decrease. The in-efficient
performance assessment is due to the biased decisions of the managers or the immediate
supervisors. It effectively discriminates
between the good and the poor performers
(NitinNohria, 2008). If supervisors are not
assessing the performance effectively, the
good performers will be demotivated as they
are not getting the distinction. This results in
less motivation and they will not take the eco-initiatives because they are not getting for
what they have done in a better way. The third
hypothesis supervisory behavior significantly impacts the employees motivation. It is found
that the better the behavior of the immediate
supervisor with the employees, the more the employees will be motivated. The association
between potency of guidance from employees'
supervisors and organizations regarding
protection and betterment of the natural environment has a direct impact on the
motivation of employees to take
environmental initiatives ( Steger, 2013). With a better support of the immediate supervisor,
the employees will be more able to perform in
an effective manner and with the better performance; the motivation level of the
employees can be enhanced. Prior studies have
found that the supervisory behavior and their
direct contact with the employees are positively associated with the employees’
motivation and performance of the employees
. Fourth hypothesis of this study is the moderating impact of MC on SB and then on
EM. With the moderating impact of
management commitment on supervisors’
behavior the hypothesis still gives the positive results and is still accepted. If the management
is not committed for betterment of the
environment, supervisory behavior will not influence positively towards employee
motivation since supervisor plays a key role to
enhance the performance of the employees as he/she is the disseminator of the management
orders. The fifth hypothesis of this study is the
mediating impact of environmental training
between employees motivation towards organizational environmental performance and
showed the significant results and is partially
mediating the influence of employee’s motivation. If the employees are more
motivated and encouraged for adopting the
best practices to make the environment green, more will be the environmental performance
of the organization. Better know how of the
employees regarding environmental practices
for the sustainability of the environment and
MAGNT Research Report (ISSN. 1444-8939) Vol.2 (4). PP: 267-278
(DOI: dx.doi.org/14.9831/1444-8939.2014/2-4/MAGNT.34)
the environmental standards, better will be
organization’s environmental performance.
Literature has suggested that better
environmental performance helps the organization to go green. The motivated
workforce means the better organizational
environmental performance.
7. Implications Effective
implementation of GHRM practices addresses environmental issues of organizations
successfully. With the help of this study,
managers can employ GHRM practices
effectively in organizations. This research can give direction to the managers that how
successfully employees could be motivated to
address environmental issues significantly. In order to attain environmental performance, it
is vital for organizations to be supported by
motivated members of staff. Consequently, motivated staff ready to go the extra mile
could be a source of competitive advantage for
organizations engaged in environmental
protection. All staff should be engaged from top management to frontline employees in
addressing environmental issues. If the firm
wishes not to harm the natural environment, it is important to involve people by taking on
GHRM practices at strategic level. Firms may
arrange specialized training programs to educate employees regarding environmental
concerns. This study also provides novel areas
of research for researchers who want to work
in context of under developed countries.
8. Conclusion
This study is a first step towards recognizing the validated relationship between employees
motivation toward eco-initiatives through
rewards, performance assessment and supervisory behavior and organizational
environmental performance. Using a sample of
employees working in environmental
conscious companies, it is revealed that employees are more motivated towards EM
through rewards and supervisor’s supportive
behavior. In addition, employees are motivated if management is also committed towards the
implementation of environmental policies in
the organization. Moreover, this study has
shown that even if the employees are
motivated towards organizational
environmental performance, training would be
required in order to implement those policies.
Organizational environmental performance would not be achieved significantly,
if employees are motivated towards
environmental acts but have no knowledge about implementing GHRM practices or
organization doesn’t have environmental
policies.
9. Limitations and Future Research
The only limitation to this study is insufficient
availability of primary data as rare organizations are practicing Green HRM due
to lack of information about it. Profuse
opportunities are available to extend this research further. This study describes only
three factors for Employee motivation i.e.
rewards, performance assessment and supervisory behavior. Further factors can also
be investigated like organization green culture,
environment friendly solutions etc.
Additionally, it is essential that practitioners and researches keep on observing ways that
employees are motivated and committed to
improve environmental conditions. Examining why the companies are hesitant to use reward
management in incentivizing employee
involvement in Environmental management would be a useful attempt. Reasons can be
explored that why top management does not
show commitment towards implementing
GHRM practices in their organizations. Comparison of Green HR practices across
developed and under-developed countries can
also be scrutinized through future research.
References
1. Argyris, C. (1998), Empowerment: The Emperor’s
New Clothes, Harvard Business Review, pp. 98-
105.
2. Baron, R. and Kenny, D. (1986), The moderator–mediator variable distinction in social
psychological research: conceptual, strategic and
statistical considerations, Journal of Personality and
Social Psychology, Vol. 51, pp. 1173−1182.
3. Barnes, P.E. (1996), Green Standards, B& E
Review, pp. 24-28.
4. Bonnie F. Daily, John W. Bishop and Jacob A.
Massoud. (2012), The role of training and
MAGNT Research Report (ISSN. 1444-8939) Vol.2 (4). PP: 267-278
(DOI: dx.doi.org/14.9831/1444-8939.2014/2-4/MAGNT.34)
empowerment in environmental performance: A
study of the Mexican maquiladora industry,
International Journal of Operations & Production
Management, Vo.l 32, pp.631 – 647.
5. Bebbington, J. (2001), Sustainable development: a
review of the international development, business
and accounting literature, Accounting Forum, Vol.
25, pp. 128-157.
6. Brio, J. and Junquera, B. (2007), Management and
employee involvement in achieving an
environmental action based competitive advantage, International Journal Of Human Resource
Management, Vol. 18, pp. 491-522.
7. Chaudhary,N. and Sharma. (2012), Impact of
employee motivation on performance
(productivity) In private organization, International
Journal of Business Trends And Technology, Vol.
2 No. 4.
8. Chinander, K.R. (2001), Aligning accountability
and awareness for environmental performance in
operations, Production and Operations
Management ,Vol, 10 No. 3, pp.276-291 9. Cole, M.A. Elliott, R.J.R. and Strobl, E. (2008),
The environmental performance of firms: the role
of of foreign ownership, training and experience,
Ecological Economics ,Vol. 65, pp.538-546.
10. Danish,R. (2012), Impact of rewards and
recognition on job satisfaction and motivation: An
empirical study from Pakistan, International
Journal Of Business Management ,Vol. 5 No. 2.
11. Denton, D.K. (1999), Employee involvement,
pollution control and pieces to the puzzle,
Environmental Management and Health, Vol.10,
pp.105-111 12. Devadaas,R.(2011), Employees Motivation in
Organization: An integrative literature review,
International Journal of Sociality and Economics
Development ,Vol. 10.
13. Flejszman, A. (2009), Benefits of environmental
management system in polish companies compliant
with IS0 14001, Journal of Environmental Studies,
Vol. 18, pp. 411-419
14. Govindarajulu, N., and Daily, B. (2004),
Motivating employees for environmental
improvement, Journal of Industrial Management and Data Systems, Vol. 104, pp. 364-372.
15. Gonzalez-Benito, J. (2006), Environmental pro-
activity and business performance: an empirical
analysis Omega, The International Journal of
Management Science, Vol. 33, pp. 1-15
16. Jabbour, C., and Santos, A. (2008), The central role
of human resource management in the search for
sustainable organizations, The Journal of Human
Resource Management, Vol. 9, pp. 2133-2154.
17. Jabbour,C.(2013), Environmental Training in
Organizations: From a literature Review to
theoretical framework, Resources, Conservation
and Recycling, Vol. 12.
18. Jackson, S.E., Renwick, D.W.S., Jabbour, J.C. and
Muller-Camen, M. (2011), State-of-the art and
future directions for green human resource
management: introduction to the special issue,
German Journal of Research in Human Resource
Management, Vol. 25, pp. 99-116.
19. Jabbour, C., Jabbour, L. and Freitas, S. (2012),
Environmental development in Brazilian
companies: The role of human resource management, Journal of Environmental
Development, Vol.3, pp. 137-147.
20. Kee-hung, L.,Cheng, T. and Tang, A. (2010),
Green retailing: factors for success, California
Management Review, Vol.52, pp.6-31.
21. Laabs, J.J. (1992), The greening of HR, Personnel
Journal, pp. 61-71.
22. Mandip, G. (2012), Green HRM: people
management commitment to environmental
sustainability, Research Journal of Recent Sciences,
Vol. 1, pp. 244-252. 23. Milliman, J., and Clair, J. (1996),Best
environmental HRM practices in the U.S In
Wehrmeyer, Journal of Green Leaf Management,
pp. 49-73
24. McDonagh, P. and Prothero, A. (1997), Green
Management: A Reader, London: Dryden Press.
25. Marshall, M. E., and Mayer, D. (1992),
Environmental training: its good business, Business
Horizons, pp. 54–57.
Morrow, D., and Rondinelli, D. (2002), Adopting
Corporate Management Systems: Motivating and
Results of ISO 14001 and EMAS Certification, European Management Journal, Vol. 20, pp. 159-
171
26. Majuka, J., and Baldwin, T. (2006), Team –Based
Employee Involvement Programs: Effects of
Design and Administration, Personnel Psychology,
Vol.44, pp. 793-812.
27. Nasud, K. (1999), Performance Evaluation System
on Behzisti Organization in Iran.
28. Nunnally, J.C.(1977), Psychometric Methods.
NewYork: McGraw Hill.
29. Owen, D. (1992), Green Reporting: Accountancy and the Challenge of the Nineties, London:
Chapman & Hall.
30. Pallant, J. (2001), The SPSS survival manual: A
step-by-step guide to data analysis using SPSS for
Windows (version 10), St Leonards, NSW: Allen &
Unwin.
Peattie, K. (1992), Green Marketing, London:
Pitman
31. Perron,G.(2006),Improving environmental
awareness training in business, The Journal of
Cleaner Production, Vol. 16, pp. 551-562
MAGNT Research Report (ISSN. 1444-8939) Vol.2 (4). PP: 267-278
(DOI: dx.doi.org/14.9831/1444-8939.2014/2-4/MAGNT.34)
32. Ramus,C.(2002), Organizational support for
employees: Encouraging Creative ideas for
environmental sustainability, California
Management Review, Vol.43, pp. 151-164
33. Ramus,C., and Steger, U. (2000), The role of
supervisory support behaviors and
environmental policy in employee
Eco.Initiatives at leading-edge European
Companies, Journal of academy of
Management, Vol. 43, pp. 605-643.
34. Renwick,C. and Camen,M. (2011), State-of-the-Art and Future Directions for Green Human
Resource Management: An Introduction to the
Special Issue, German Journal of Research in
Human Resource Management, Vol. 25, pp. 99-
116.
35. Renwick, D., Redman, T. and Maguire, S.
(2013), Green human resource management a
research and review agenda, International Journal
of Management, Vol. 5, pp. 1-14.
36. Russo. (2005), Organizational Design and
environmental performance: clues from Electronics industry, Academy Of Management of Journal,
Vol. 48, pp. 583-593.
37. Russel, S. (2008), The role of emotions in driving
pro-environmental behaviors, Journal Of Managing
Emotions In Workplace, pp. 83-107.
38. Margaretha, M. and Saragih, S. (2013), Developing
New corporate culture through green human
resource practice, International conference on
Business, Economics, and Accounting.Bangkok-
Thailand.’
39. Pillai, R. and Sivathanu, B. (2014), Green Human
Resource Management, International Journal of multidisciplinary research, Vol.4, pp.
40. Savely, S. and Delclos, G. (2006), An
environmental management system implementation
model for U.S colleges and universities, Journal of
Cleaner Productions, Vol.15, pp. 660-670.
41. Sammalisto, K. and Brorson, T. (2008), Training
and communication in the implementation of environmental management systems (ISO 14001):
a case study at university of Gavle,
Sweden”Journal of Cleaner Production, Vol. 16
No. 3, pp. 299-309.
42. Sudin, S. (2011), Fairness of and satisfaction with
Performance Appraisal Process, Journal of Global
Management, Vol. 2.
43. Teixeira,A, Jaboour,C. and Jabbour,A. (2012),
Relationship between green management and
environmental training in companies located in
Brazil: A theoretical framework and case studies,
Journal of Career, Vol. 140, pp. 318-329. 44. Theyel, G. (2000), Management practices for
environmental innovation and performance,
International Journal of Production And Operation
Management, Vol. 20, pp. 249-266.
45. Wilkinson, A., Hill, M. and Gollan, P. (2011), The
sustainability debate. International Journal of
Operations and Production Management, Vol. 21,
pp. 1492-1502.
46. Yasamis, F. (2011), Economic instruments of
environmental management, Journal of academy
and ecology of environmental sciences, Vol. 2, pp.
97-111.
47. Zutshi, A. and Sohal, A. (2000), Adoption and
maintenance of environmental management system
(critical success factors, Journal of Human
Resource Management, pp. 399-419.
10. Appendix
Demographic Analysis
Category %
Variable Category
(years) %
Gender
Male 69.7
Work
Experience < 5 59
Female 30.3 5-10 34
Age Below 30 65.7 10-15 4.5
30 – 40 27.5 > 15 2.5
40 – 50 6.2
Above 50 0.6
MAGNT Research Report (ISSN. 1444-8939) Vol.2 (4). PP: 267-278
(DOI: dx.doi.org/14.9831/1444-8939.2014/2-4/MAGNT.34)
top related