Cited by 79Job Satisfaction and Organizational BehaviorEthics in Business and EducationWorkplace Spirituality and Leadership

Common good human resource management, ethical employee behaviors, and organizational citizenship behaviors toward the individual

Pham, Nhat Tan, Jabbour, Charbel Jose Chiappetta, Pereira, Vijay, Usman, Muhammad, Ali, Moazzam, Vo‐Thanh, Tan·2023·Human Resource Management Journal

Abstract

What happens to the behaviors of employees when their organizations' human resource management (HRM) systems take into account any challenges to the common good? Despite common good HRM (CGHRM) having recently been raised, the existing literature has not yet investigated the role played by CGHRM in relation to employee behaviors. Drawing on social exchange theory, we addressed this issue by exploring CGHRM and its influences on employee ethical behavior and organizational citizenship behaviors toward the individual (OCBI). We conducted this study in Vietnam, in two subsequent stages. Stage 1 involved a mixed‐method approach to develop and validate four items suited to measure CGHRM. In Stage 2, we examined a mediation‐moderation model showing the relationship between CGHRM and employee behaviors, and investigated the roles played by value commitment and spiritual leadership. We also included a survey using time‐lagged data and different sources. The findings reveal that CGHRM directly and positively influences ethical employee behaviors and OCBI, and indirectly and positively influences these two types of behavior via value commitment. Interestingly, the relationship between CGHRM and ethical employee behaviors was found to be significantly stronger when combined with high levels of spiritual leadership. Unexpectedly, however, spiritual leadership was not found to moderate the CGHRM‐OCBI relationship.

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1111/1748-8583.12493

Cites

6 of 6 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Recomputing p-values needs the paper’s full text.

Claims the paper makes

We couldn’t retrieve this paper’s full text, so its claims and self-check weren’t run. The registry and citation checks still apply.

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

  • HRM departments have increasingly taken a more prominent role in advancing progress toward achieving the SDGs by intentionally implementing and designing HRM practices prioritizing common good HRM values.

    “As such; HRM departments have increasingly taken a more prominent role in advancing progress toward achieving the SDGs by intentionally implementing and designing HRM practices prioritizing common good HRM values (J ¨ arlstr ¨ om et al., 2024; Lu et al., 2023; Pham et al., 2023).”

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Authors
Pham, N. T., Jabbour, C. J. C., Pereira, V., Usman, M., Ali, M., & Vo‐Thanh, T.
Affiliations
  • Vietnam National University Ho Chi Minh City (VN)
  • NEOMA Business School Mont‐Saint‐Aignan France
  • NEOMA Business School (FR)
  • National University of Sciences and Technology (PK)
  • COMSATS University Islamabad (PK)
  • Excelia Business School (FR)
Corresponding author
Pham, Nhat Tan
Venue
Human Resource Management Journal
Publisher
Wiley
Published
2023-02-08
Volume
33
Issue
4
Pages
977-1000
ISSN
  • 0954-5395 (ISSN-L)
  • 1748-8583
OpenAlex
W4319590205
Cited by
79
References
6
Citations by year
2026: 30 · 2025: 15 · 2024: 26 · 2023: 8
FWCI
22.92
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed
Locations
Human Resource Management Journal (publishedVersion)
Topics
  • Social Sciences › Business, Management and Accounting › Organizational Behavior and Human Resource Management › Job Satisfaction and Organizational Behavior
  • Social Sciences › Decision Sciences › Information Systems and Management › Ethics in Business and Education
  • Social Sciences › Demography › Workplace Spirituality and Leadership
Keywords
value commitment, spiritual leadership, social exchange theory, mediating and moderating effects, employee behavior

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review