RETRACTED: Employees’ Perceptions of Green HRM and Non-Green Employee Work Outcomes: The Social Identity and Stakeholder Perspectives
Abstract
Green human resource management (green HRM) refers to a set of HRM practices that organizations adopt to improve employee workplace green performance. While the effect of perceived green HRM on employee workplace green performance has received some empirical support, its relationship with employee non-green workplace outcomes remains unexplored and, therefore, unknown. This research tests an integrative moderated-mediation model related to the relationship between perceived green HRM and non-green workplace outcomes including employee task performance, organizational citizenship behavior toward the organization (OCBO) and intention to quit, and the underlying mechanisms. Analyses of the multisourced data reveal that perceived green HRM influences these three non-green employee workplace outcomes through a motivational social and psychological process (i.e., organizational identification). Perceived organizational support (POS) moderates the effect of perceived green HRM on organizational identification and the indirect effect of perceived green HRM on the three employee workplace outcomes, via the mediation of organizational identification. This research advances our knowledge about the relationship between perceived green HRM and non-green employee workplace outcomes.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Claims the paper makes
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?
The first effect of Green HRM implementation is image benefit.
“The first effect is image benefit [60].”
From Green Human Resource Management as a Tool for the Sustainable Development of Enterprises: Polish Young Company Experience (2018) · cites this paper as [60]
Cites
Back-translation for cross-cultural research.
Brislin, R. W. (1970) · Journal of Cross-Cultural Psychology · doi:10.1177/135910457000100301 · Cited by 14,091 · see citing works
Perceived organizational support.
Eisenberger, R., Huntington, R., Hutchison, S., & Sowa, D. (1986) · Journal of Applied Psychology · doi:10.1037/0021-9010.71.3.500 · Cited by 6,982 · see citing works
Understanding HRM–Firm Performance Linkages: The Role of the “Strength” of the HRM System
Bowen, D. E., & Ostroff, C. (2004) · Academy of Management Review · doi:10.5465/amr.2004.12736076 · Cited by 2,996 · cited 2× · see citing works
“According to Bowen and Ostroff (2004), it is not good enough for an organization to have good HRM practices that are not effectively implemented.”
BackgroundLack of method variance in self-reported affect and perceptions at work: reality or artifact?
Williams, L. J., Cote, J. A., & Buckley, M. R. (1989) · Journal of Applied Psychology · doi:10.1037/0021-9010.74.3.462 · Cited by 1,616 · see citing works
NISHII, L. H., LEPAK, D. P., & SCHNEIDER, B. (2008) · Personnel Psychology · doi:10.1111/j.1744-6570.2008.00121.x · Cited by 1,410 · see citing works
The greening of strategic HRM scholarship
Jackson, S. E., & Seo, J. (2010) · Organization Management Journal · doi:10.1057/omj.2010.37 · Cited by 421 · see citing works
Ehnert, I., & Harry, W. (2012) · management revu · doi:10.5771/0935-9915-2012-3-221 · Cited by 279 · see citing works
Flagged first, then by citations
Cited by
Sorted by citations
Bombiak, E., & Marciniuk-Kluska, A. (2018) · Sustainability · doi:10.3390/su10061739 · Cited by 329 · see citing works
“The first effect is image benefit [60].”
Usman, M., Rofcanin, Y., Ali, M., Ogbonnaya, C., & Babalola, M. T. (2023) · Human Resource Management · doi:10.1002/hrm.22148 · Cited by 151 · see citing works
Das, A. K., Biswas, S. R., Abdul Kader Jilani, M. M., & Uddin, M. A. (2019) · Sustainability · doi:10.3390/su11113123 · Cited by 91 · see citing works
Green operational performance in a high-tech industry: Role of green HRM and green knowledge
Wang, Z., Cai, S. A., Ren, S., & Singh, S. K. (2023) · Journal of Business Research · doi:10.1016/j.jbusres.2023.113761 · Cited by 54 · see citing works
- Authors
- Shen, J., Dumont, J., & Deng, X.
- Affiliations
- Shenzhen University (CN)
- University of South Australia (AU)
- Corresponding author
- Shen, Jie
- Venue
- Group & Organization Management
- Publisher
- SAGE Publications
- Published
- 2016-08-18
- Volume
- 43
- Issue
- 4
- Pages
- 594-622
- ISSN
- 1059-6011 (ISSN-L)
- 1552-3993
- OpenAlex
- W2512317779
- Cited by
- 251
- References
- 7
- Citations by year
- 2026: 10 · 2025: 32 · 2024: 42 · 2023: 47 · 2022: 48 · 2021: 28 · 2020: 20 · 2019: 16 · 2018: 6 · 2017: 2
- FWCI
- 16.65
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Status
- Retracted
- Update notices
- retraction (2022-08-26)
- Open access
- closed
- Locations
- Group & Organization Management (publishedVersion)
- UniSA Research Outputs Repository (University of South Australia) (submittedVersion)
- Adelaide Research & Scholarship (AR&S) (University of Adelaide) (submittedVersion)
- Topics
- Social Sciences › Business, Management and Accounting › Marketing › Environmental Sustainability in Business
- Social Sciences › Business, Management and Accounting › Organizational Behavior and Human Resource Management › Job Satisfaction and Organizational Behavior
- Social Sciences › Human Factors and Ergonomics › Employee Performance and Management
- Keywords
- green human resource management, employee task performance, turnover intention, organizational identification, perceived organizational support, social identity, stakeholder perspectives, moderated mediation
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