Hostname: page-component-586b7cd67f-l7hp2 Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-21T23:33:24.395Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false

Exploring the impact of green human resource management on firm sustainable performance: roles of green supply chain management and firm size

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  26 August 2022

Mehwish Jawaad*
Affiliation:
Business Administration Department, Lahore School of Economics, Lahore, Pakistan
Tania Hasan
Affiliation:
Business Administration Department, Lahore School of Economics, Lahore, Pakistan
Abeera Amir
Affiliation:
Lahore University of Management Sciences, Lahore, Pakistan
Hassan Imam
Affiliation:
University of Education, Lahore, Pakistan Graduate School of Management, Kyoto University, Kyoto, Japan
*
*Correspondence to author: Mehwish Jawaad, E-mail: [email protected], [email protected]
Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

This study examined the impact of green human resource management (GHRM) and green supply chain management (GSCM) on the economic, social, and environmental performance of 272 (ISO-certified) textile firms in Pakistan. It investigated how a firm's size and the number of years since adopting GSCM practices influence performance. Survey data were collected from these firms through a cluster sampling approach and then analyzed through structural equation modeling. Results highlighted that GHRM positively influences a firm's environmental and social performance. Results further indicated that inbound and outbound GSCM activities mediate between GHRM and a firm's environmental and social performance. The moderation results revealed that a firm's size is crucial for improving performance. From an emerging economy perspective, this study draws the attention of policymakers and managers, concluding that implementing GHRM improves the green orientation of all the departments within a firm and helps organizations achieve sustainability goals.

Type
Research Article
Copyright
Copyright © The Author(s), 2022. Published by Cambridge University Press in association with the Australian and New Zealand Academy of Management

Introduction

Sustainability is progressively becoming an extensive discipline for greening the environment and corporate social responsibility-related projects carried out by firms. Sustainable development is important in proficiently planning and managing a firm's intra- and inter-activities. Practices such as green human resource management (GHRM) and green supply chain management (GSCM) have emerged as critical approaches to firms. Firms in emerging countries, in particular, aim to use these approaches to achieve higher profits and market share by reducing ecological hazards and their impacts (Mardani, Kannan, Hooker, Ozkul, Alrasheedi, & Tirkolaee, Reference Mardani, Kannan, Hooker, Ozkul, Alrasheedi and Tirkolaee2020).

Conserving and safeguarding the natural environment's resources is a key goal for practitioners and top management in several business fields. Firms today are involved in stiff competition, compelling management to find new techniques to optimize their resources and performance levels. It is one of the critical concerns of top management – to strike a healthy balance between resource consumption and sustainable development. Such objectives persuade the organization to implement ecologically friendly operations that elevate economic, social, and environmental performance (Mousa & Othman, Reference Mousa and Othman2020). Upsurge in pollution from industrial practices and the decline in natural resources have driven stakeholders like governments, environmental agencies, customers, society, and above all, employees to encourage organizations to comply with green practices. Applying such practices assists in achieving cost-effectiveness, social acceptance, operational development, sustainability, and competitive advantage (El-Kassar & Singh, Reference El-Kassar and Singh2019).

The greening of corporations and conservational sustainability has become a central agenda for decision-makers in the 21st century, resulting in the development of new alternatives to traditional human resource management termed green human resource management. This is because only dedicated staff – knowledgeable about the environment – can ingrain the green culture into a firm in the most effective manner (Graves & Sarkis, Reference Graves and Sarkis2018; Mousa & Othman, Reference Mousa and Othman2020).

Developing countries need support from green human resources, which is still in its infancy (Jabbour & Jabbour, Reference Jabbour and Jabbour2016; Jain & D'lima, Reference Jain and D'lima2018). It ranges from recruitment, selection, evaluation, appraisals, training, and rewards based on consistently applying green practices (Saeed, Jun, Nubuor, Priyankara, & Jayasuriya, Reference Saeed, Jun, Nubuor, Priyankara and Jayasuriya2018; Yong, Yusliza, Ramayah, & Fawehinmi, Reference Yong, Yusliza, Ramayah and Fawehinmi2019). GHRM has recently enticed a lot of contemplation from academia and practitioners worldwide as it establishes a pivotal change in the operations and processes in the manufacturing industry, further encouraging green behavior among the employees (Yong et al., Reference Yong, Yusliza, Ramayah and Fawehinmi2019). It amalgamates ecologically aware companies and their employees with a firm's environmental goals to generate financial success and enhance environmental performance (Úbeda-García, Marco-Lajara, Zaragoza-Sáez, Manresa-Marhuenda, & Poveda-Pareja, Reference Úbeda-García, Marco-Lajara, Zaragoza-Sáez, Manresa-Marhuenda and Poveda-Pareja2022). Due to today's cut-throat market, competition, and dynamic business environment, organizations are paying more attention than ever and reinforcing sustainable practices to remain socially accepted.

Moreover, firms today vigorously engage themselves in conforming to environmental objectives by implementing GHRM as a fundamental element followed by GSCM practices for fruitful sustainability development (Daily & Huang, Reference Daily and Huang2001; Renwick, Redman, & Maguire, Reference Renwick, Redman and Maguire2008). Extant academic research has revealed that GHRM plays a significant role in developing a sustainable and eco-friendly organization. This is because it has become a key business strategy for the human resource departments for such organizations to play an active part in going green at the managerial level (Zaid, Jaaron, & Bon, Reference Zaid, Jaaron and Bon2018). Many organizations are going green by actively formulating guidelines that strategically implement green HR practices and systems (Sudin, Saad, & Kamaluddin, Reference Sudin, Saad and Kamaluddin2018). An array of well-designed green HR practices within a company encourages significant waste reduction, energy preservation, and lower carbon footfall, further enabling firms to reap high-profit margins while attaining sustainable performance (Al-Swidi, Gelaidan, & Saleh, Reference Al-Swidi, Gelaidan and Saleh2021). Employing ecologically aware human resources at a firm, reinforces a wide range of internal business activities such as green marketing, green operations, and green accounting (Chaudhary, Reference Chaudhary2019; Haldorai, Kim, & Garcia, Reference Haldorai, Kim and Garcia2022; Yusliza, Norazmi, Jabbour, Fernando, Fawehinmi, & Seles, Reference Yusliza, Norazmi, Jabbour, Fernando, Fawehinmi and Seles2019).

Human resource management is a key department at any firm, dealing with the most valued resource of the organization, which is its personnel (Ahmad, Reference Ahmad2015; Kim, Kim, Choi, & Phetvaroon, Reference Kim, Kim, Choi and Phetvaroon2019; Tang, Chen, Jiang, Paille, & Jia, Reference Tang, Chen, Jiang, Paille and Jia2018). An ecologically conscious human resource department is not only valuable and inimitable, but it also serves to be the most powerful weapon for a firm to achieve a sustainable competitive edge in the market (Malik, Cao, Mughal, Kundi, Mughal, & Ramayah, Reference Malik, Cao, Mughal, Kundi, Mughal and Ramayah2020). According to Wehrmeyer (Reference Wehrmeyer1996), if a firm adopts an environmentally aware approach to its activities, its employees are key to its success. A firm can benefit from GHRM by planning, coordinating, and designing sustainable procedures within a firm's operations, resulting in environmental performance, cost-effectiveness, and social recognition (Daily & Huang, Reference Daily and Huang2001; Renwick, Redman, & Maguire, Reference Renwick, Redman and Maguire2008).

An organization can only become environmentally friendly when forward-thinking top management pledges to take up green initiatives and wishes to modify the existing corporate strategy into an environment-friendly corporate strategy. Moreover, it re-allocates the resources to better both the organization and environment (Latan, Jabbour, Jabbour, Wamba, & Shahbaz, Reference Latan, Jabbour, Jabbour, Wamba and Shahbaz2018).

GHRM behaves as a central element in achieving environmental sustainability only by promoting and introducing GSCM practices into a firm (Cohen & Roussel, Reference Cohen and Roussel2013). GSCM practices require integrating business processes and strategic alliances with all stakeholders to gratify end customers. It mainly aims to reduce waste and preserve product quality along with conserving natural resources, which is impossible to accomplish without a dedicated workforce (Srivastava, Reference Srivastava2007). Moreover, the manufacturing industry needs to reap significant performance gains from synchronizing both internal GSCM (such as management support and eco-design) with external GSCM (such as cooperation with suppliers and customers) (Jabbour & Jabbour, Reference Jabbour and Jabbour2016; Sarkis, Reference Sarkis2006).

Environmental challenges prevailing worldwide lead to increased pressure from stakeholders on firms to consider ways of reducing the impact of carbon footprint created through business operations (Adomako, Reference Adomako2020; Carter & Rogers, Reference Carter and Rogers2008). Previous researchers have established that firms involved in creating and promoting a green supply chain grow faster than those who do not. A green supply chain has gained increasing attention within both academia and industry, along with GHRM. However, the extent to which environmental collaboration drives growth in small and medium firms is still considered to be a lacuna in academic research (Sarkis, Zhu, & Lai, Reference Sarkis, Zhu and Lai2011; Seuring, Aman, Hettiarachchi, Lima, Schilling, & Sudusinghe, Reference Seuring, Aman, Hettiarachchi, Lima, Schilling and Sudusinghe2022).

An effective GHRM directs managers to enhance their organizations' sense of green identity and encourage green creativity, as this will not only make the internal (inbound GSCM practices) and external (outbound GSCM practices) firm operations eco-friendlier, but also enrich their firm's capability of sustainable development (Song & Yu, Reference Song and Yu2018). Inbound green practices range from cost reduction, to integrating suppliers in a participative decision-making process that promotes environmental innovation (Bowen, Cousins, Lamming, & Farukt, Reference Bowen, Cousins, Lamming and Farukt2001). It also incorporates green purchasing strategies adopted by organizations in response to growing global environmental sustainability concerns. Moreover, outbound green supply chain practices refer to activities such as green marketing, environment-friendly distribution, and customer cooperation, leading to improvement in an organization's environmental performance at multiple levels (Sarkis, Reference Sarkis1999).

Due to limited research on internal and external GSCM – particularly in emerging economies – attention is required to study the relationship between these two in performance nexus (Feng, Yu, Wang, Wong, Xu, & Xiao, Reference Feng, Yu, Wang, Wong, Xu and Xiao2018). Therefore, the motivation to study the GHRM–GSCM–performance nexus is to understand how a workforce with green objectives can assist a firm in attaining sustainability goals in terms of production as well as waste management (Ashraf, Khan, Sarfraz, & Ahmad, Reference Ashraf, Khan, Sarfraz and Ahmad2015; Renwick, Jabbour, Muller-Camen, Redman, & Wilkinson, Reference Renwick, Jabbour, Muller-Camen, Redman and Wilkinson2016).

This study emphasizes the adoption of green practices in manufacturing small- and medium-sized enterprises (SMEs) of emerging economies with performance nexus, since there is a dearth of academic research that empirically models the magnitude to which GHRM can lift a firm's performance levels (Muisyo & Qin, Reference Muisyo and Qin2021). This study focuses on the textile industry and discusses the case of Pakistan – one of the largest global textile manufacturers as ranked by the World Trade Organization (Ikram & Siddiqui, Reference Ikram and Siddiqui2019). The motivation to study textile firms in Pakistan is because industries within this niche apply green initiatives and adopt eco-friendly practices. However, it is still unknown how these practices help to increase their competitive advantage and improve their sustainable development (Pervez, Reference Pervez2020).

Due to the shortage of resources and hazardous ecological issues, the government of Pakistan has enforced environmental regulations that may result in better environmental performance, if adapted. The manufacturing industry, especially the textile sector of Pakistan, faces critical issues regarding deteriorating sustainable development. All the stakeholders, including employees, customers, suppliers, and government, are concerned about greening of products, global warming, and the hazardous impact of elevated carbon footfall. Therefore, manufacturing firms are under intense pressure to conform to eco-friendly operations, resulting in a fruitful impact on the environment and firm performance (Mitchell & Walinga, Reference Mitchell and Walinga2017). Thus, in terms of HR and the supply chain, green initiatives may unleash the possibility of sustainability in manufacturing SMEs in developing countries (Mitchell & Walinga, Reference Mitchell and Walinga2017). However, firms can lose their competitiveness since a major risk associated with adopting a green approach is utilizing resources on non-traditional (green) practices that may increase costs. Therefore, firms are apprehensive about adopting such practices (D'Netto, Shen, Chelliah, & Monga, Reference D'Netto, Shen, Chelliah and Monga2014; Jayaraman & Luo, Reference Jayaraman and Luo2007; Peloza, Reference Peloza2005).

Here is a lacuna in academic literature about how developing nations are trying to adapt and accept GHRM and GSCM ethics (Ikram & Siddiqui, Reference Ikram and Siddiqui2019). The last decade has been acknowledged as ‘the decade of environment.’ In Pakistan, the influence of the textile industry on the economy is overwhelming as it is the largest industry in the country. It needs an in-depth research study that explicitly centers on adopting green practices and their impact on a firm's performance levels (Sabir, Ariwa, & Taylor, Reference Sabir, Ariwa and Taylor2013).

This study makes six primary contributions to literature. First, the study explores the under-researched concepts of greening the human resource and supply chain, providing clearer insights for researchers and professionals (Jackson, Renwick, Jabbour, & Muller-Camen, Reference Jackson, Renwick, Jabbour and Muller-Camen2011). The relationship between HRM and supply chain management has been discussed in the literature (Lengnick-Hall, Lengnick-Hall, & Rigsbee, Reference Lengnick-Hall, Lengnick-Hall and Rigsbee2013). However, extending the ‘Green’ idea in organizational practices, particularly HRM and supply chain management, does require more consideration by recent and forthcoming researchers.

Second, from a practical standpoint, this study takes a more holistic approach and divides GSCM into two levels, inter- and intra-organizational as inbound and outbound GSCM activities, to better understand the role of GSCM in a firm's performance in three areas, namely environmental, social, and economical.

Third, due to mixed results, the extant literature is still uncertain about the relationship between GHRM and GSCM practices and different performance metrics, especially in the context of emerging countries (Pinzone, Guerci, Lettieri, & Redman, Reference Pinzone, Guerci, Lettieri and Redman2016; Saeed et al., Reference Saeed, Jun, Nubuor, Priyankara and Jayasuriya2018). According to past researchers, only a few studies have acknowledged the effect of GHRM and GSCM (internal and external factors) practices on environmental performance (Adomako, Reference Adomako2020; Carter & Rogers, Reference Carter and Rogers2008; Haldorai, Kim, & Garcia, Reference Haldorai, Kim and Garcia2022; Sarkis, Zhu, & Lai, Reference Sarkis, Zhu and Lai2011; Seuring et al., Reference Seuring, Aman, Hettiarachchi, Lima, Schilling and Sudusinghe2022). There are rare empirical studies that have explored these two systems together while focusing on multiple performance metrics (Jabbour & Jabbour, Reference Jabbour and Jabbour2016; Song & Yu, Reference Song and Yu2018). In line with Hart and Dowell (Reference Hart and Dowell2011), this study covered the sustainable development concept by examining the organization's triple bottom line; that is, economic, social, and environmental performance. In addition, the current study responded to the recent call for research conducted by Zaid, Jaaron, and Bon (Reference Zaid, Jaaron and Bon2018), linking two emerging research agendas with the different performance metrics from the perspective of an emerging economy (Acquah, Agyabeng-Mensah, & Afum, Reference Acquah, Agyabeng-Mensah and Afum2020).

Fourth, the literature lacks evidence from emerging economies, particularly regarding GSCM and performance nexus (Acquah, Agyabeng-Mensah, & Afum, Reference Acquah, Agyabeng-Mensah and Afum2020; Dubey, Gunasekaran, Papadopoulos, Childe, Shibin, & Wamba, Reference Dubey, Gunasekaran, Papadopoulos, Childe, Shibin and Wamba2017). Thus, the current study systematically assessed emerging research agendas (Ren, Tang, & Jackson, Reference Ren, Tang and Jackson2020).

Fifth, as this study discusses arguments surrounding the natural resource-based view (NRBV), it highlights how the textile industry can utilize human resource and supply chain practices, resulting in the most inimitable competitive edge by adopting preventive measures related to pollution (Hart & Dowell, Reference Hart and Dowell2011).

Lastly, the current study also examines the GHRM–GSCM relationship based on the number of years since a firm started adopting GSCM activities and the size of a firm (Jawaad, Amir, Bashir, & Hasan, Reference Jawaad, Amir, Bashir and Hasan2019; Jichao, Ruyin, Hong, & Wenbo, Reference Jichao, Ruyin, Hong and Wenbo2017). This extends our understanding of the link between organizational ‘resources, capabilities and strategic outcomes.’

Theory and hypotheses development

Natural resource-based view

Pollution prevention, product stewardship, and sustainable development are three vital pillars of the NRBV (Hart, Reference Hart1995). Each has a different position to utilize key resources and achieve a competitive advantage. Pollution prevention in terms of inbound green practices (eco-design, green purchasing, and sustainable procedures) seeks to prevent unnecessary emissions. It is associated with lower costs, enhancing economic and environmental performance. Product stewardship in terms of GHRM (hiring dedicated personnel with a common goal of reducing carbon footprint, introducing green rewards, and reinforcing green training) creates the potential for a competitive advantage. This can be accomplished through strategic preemption and establishing standards that are advantageous to the focal company, ultimately making a firm more socially acceptable. Finally, the sustainable development strategy does not simply seek to run into less ecological losses and eco-friendly product design, but also focuses on economic performance and social concerns (Hart, Reference Hart1995; Hart & Dowell, Reference Hart and Dowell2011). The current study takes inspiration from NRBV and makes it the overarching theory to support the hypotheses mentioned below.

GHRM and performance metrics

GHRM is considered a synergistic outcome between human resource management and a firm's ecological objectives (Jabbour & Jabbour, Reference Jabbour and Jabbour2016). Instead of only relying on strategic goals as in conventional HRM, GHRM particularly focuses on extensive skill training programs that encourage actions required to green the environment and improve a firm's performance (Sun, Aryee, & Law, Reference Sun, Aryee and Law2007).

This study discusses three major organizational performance types: economic, environmental, and social performance. The economic performance focuses on a firm's aptitude to reduce costs related to effluent discharge, fines/penalties, and accidental incidents (Zhu, Sarkis, & Lai, Reference Zhu, Sarkis and Lai2008a). Environmental performance is a firm's efforts to reduce carbon footprint, toxic air emissions, solid waste, compliance with environmental certifications, and usage of hazardous materials (Rao & Holt, Reference Rao and Holt2005; Zhu, Sarkis, & Lai, Reference Zhu, Sarkis and Lai2008a). Manufacturing firms adopt initiatives such as green logistics, green procurement, green manufacturing processes, and green hiring to significantly improve environmental performance (Green, Zelbst, Meacham, & Bhadauria, Reference Green, Zelbst, Meacham and Bhadauria2012). Social performance exemplifies a firm's humanitarian orientation, focusing more on presenting a greener and sustainable impression to the minds of customers and suppliers (Aggerholm, Andersen, & Thomsen, Reference Aggerholm, Andersen and Thomsen2011).

GHRM – through training, workshops, and recruitment with environmental objectives – encourages a firm to achieve sustainable goals in all three performance metrics (Jawaad et al., Reference Jawaad, Amir, Bashir and Hasan2019). This is because the implementation of GHRM encourages employees to be ecologically conscious and cognizant of the significance of greening the environment. Consequently, they can efficiently help to reduce carbon footprint throughout a firm's operations and processes, leading to higher performance (Aragon-Correa, Martin-Tapia, & de la Torre-Ruiz, Reference Aragon-Correa, Martin-Tapia and de la Torre-Ruiz2015; Ashraf et al., Reference Ashraf, Khan, Sarfraz and Ahmad2015). Firms nowadays are progressively anxious to implement systems that foster both sustainability as well as HR functionality (Misha, Reference Misha2019). Thus, a realization exists that humans play a pivotal role in establishing and formulating successful environmental management (Jackson et al., Reference Jackson, Renwick, Jabbour and Muller-Camen2011; Paillé, Chen, Boiral, & Jin, Reference Paillé, Chen, Boiral and Jin2014).

GHRM spurs a sense of belongingness and pride for the employees by elevating employees' commitment and involvement in environmental protection. The approach compels them to work even harder to achieve the organization's economic, environmental, and social goals. This ultimately reduces pressure from external stakeholders and leads to higher revenue through cost reductions and environmental development. From the stakeholder perspective, it helps to gain a reputable position in the eyes of the customers and suppliers, considering the organization's social performance (Collins & Smith, Reference Collins and Smith2006; Delery & Doty, Reference Delery and Doty1996).

Hence, GHRM spurs employees to engage in product and/or process innovation to efficiently utilize resources that could increase a firm's economic, social, and environmental performance (Longoni, Luzzini, & Guerci, Reference Longoni, Luzzini and Guerci2018).

Based on the discussion above, this study proposes the following hypotheses:

Green human resource management will positively influence (hypothesis 1a) economic performance, (hypothesis 1b) environmental performance, and (hypothesis 1c) social performance.

GSCM activities as mediators

Green distribution, eco-design, internal environmental management systems, cooperation with customers, and green purchasing are the main facets of GSCM. The concept of greening the supply chain is a recent notion in an effort to materialize the social, economic, and environmental requirements of any firm (Baofeng, Desheng, Liang, & L., Reference Zhang, Wu, Liang and Olson2015). It allows a manufacturing firm achieve its sustainable goals, reduce ecological risks (minimize effluent wastes and hazardous chemicals), and improve environmental efficiency throughout the supply chain (Chin, Tat, & Sulaiman, Reference Chin, Tat and Sulaiman2015; Luo, Chen, Chen, & Wang, Reference Luo, Chen, Chen and Wang2017; Zhu, Sarkis, & Lai, Reference Zhu, Sarkis and Lai2008a). The ‘3Rs’ (Recovery, Recycle, and Reuse) are important in a green supply chain, particularly for a manufacturing firm, because it enables a firm to sell excess materials and byproducts into the market, further leveraging economic gains (Jawaad et al., Reference Jawaad, Amir, Bashir and Hasan2019).

Inbound and outbound green activities

GSCM can be categorized into two activities based on supply chain operations. First, inbound GSCM practices incorporate intra-organizational green activities such as eco-design and green distribution. Second, outbound GSCM practices include inter-organizational green practices such as cooperation with suppliers and relationships with the customer (Longoni, Luzzini, & Guerci, Reference Longoni, Luzzini and Guerci2018).

Eco-design refers to biodegradable packaging and green production with minimal energy usage, environmental pollution, and reduced use of polystyrene. Whereas, green distribution focuses on managing green logistics, fuel consumption, and carbon footprint due to transportation operations (Gao, Xu, Ruan, & Lu, Reference Gao, Xu, Ruan and Lu2017).

Green purchasing, an inter-organizational activity, deals with the procurement of raw materials that affects a firm's production. Therefore, choice of supplier is crucial in achieving firm's sustainable goals. Strong relationships with suppliers aid in adopting advanced environmental technologies, which are vital to the manufacturing industry (Vachon & Klassen, Reference Vachon and Klassen2006).

Green packaging, eco-friendly marketing, and sustainable distribution methods are perennial pillars of outbound green supply chain activities. Together, they aid in improving a firm's performance levels, especially environmentally (Rao, Reference Rao2002; Sarkis, Reference Sarkis1999). Efficient supervision of waste in the outbound function such as reverse logistics, recycling, and waste exchange can lead to immense savings and enhanced competitiveness (Rao, Reference Rao2002).

The governments in developing countries are now addressing eco-friendly concerns and their remedies, and, at the same time, customers are also becoming knowledgeable about environmental challenges (Vachon & Klassen, Reference Vachon and Klassen2006). Customers prefer a business with a feasible ecological image when finalizing their purchase decisions. Jawaad et al., (Reference Jawaad, Amir, Bashir and Hasan2019) reported that relationships with customers have a significant positive impact on a firm's economic and environmental gains.

A highly committed GHRM system helps other units in a firm to implement green operations and strives to maintain positive standards in a sustainable supply chain (inbound and outbound) that contribute to a firm's reputation and performance (Jabbour & Jabbour, Reference Jabbour and Jabbour2016; Mishra, Sarkar, & Kiranmai, Reference Mishra, Sarkar and Kiranmai2014). Research highlights that HRM is fundamental for effectively executing GSCM. This is because it deploys a selection of the appropriate and well-trained personnel who can deliver what is expected to attain sustainability along with advances in performance levels (Aragon-Correa, Martin-Tapia, & de la Torre-Ruiz, Reference Aragon-Correa, Martin-Tapia and de la Torre-Ruiz2015; Ashraf et al., Reference Ashraf, Khan, Sarfraz and Ahmad2015; Cantor, Morrow, & Montabon, Reference Cantor, Morrow and Montabon2012).

Supporting NRBV, extant literature affirms a positive relationship between GHRM and GSCM and its nexus with a firm's performance and cost-effectiveness (Geng, Long, Chen, & Li, Reference Geng, Long, Chen and Li2017). Taking a step ahead, this study segments GSCM into two categories and proposes that GHRM helps a firm to initiate inbound and outbound GSCM practices, further culminating in higher performance levels. Thus, this study proposes the following hypotheses:

A firm's green inbound SCM activities positively mediates the relationship between GHRM and (hypothesis 2a) economic performance, (hypothesis 2b) environmental performance, and (hypothesis 2c) social performance.

A firm's green outbound SCM activities positively mediates the relationship between GHRM and (hypothesis 3a) economic performance, (hypothesis 3b) environmental performance, and (hypothesis 3c) social performance.

Moderating role of the number of years since a firm adopted GSCM practices and a firm's size

Studies revealed a positive effect of adopting GHRM and GSCM practices on a firm's performance. However, organizations are still reluctant to adopt these practices – not because they are ineffective but due to a firm's size, which reduces the viability of adopting these GHRM and GSCM practices. In particular, if small size firms were to adopt such practices, they may increase the final cost of their product (Abbasnejad, Khaksar, Gashtasbi, & Darabi, Reference Abbasnejad, Khaksar, Gashtasbi and Darabi2015; Acquah, Agyabeng-Mensah, & Afum, Reference Acquah, Agyabeng-Mensah and Afum2020). For example, green transportation, green product development, hiring skillful personnel with environmental orientation, and green operations require significant investment, reducing motivation for small firms to adopt GHRM and GSCM (Green et al., Reference Green, Zelbst, Meacham and Bhadauria2012; Hollos, Blome, & Foerstl, Reference Hollos, Blome and Foerstl2012). This cost-related apprehension should be considered for further investigation because such cost-related internal fears are bigger barriers for small firms compared to lack of government support in taking up green initiatives (Jayant & Azhar, Reference Jayant and Azhar2014; Mathiyazhagan, Govindan, NoorulHaq, & Geng, Reference Mathiyazhagan, Govindan, NoorulHaq and Geng2013). Even large firms may be reluctant to adopt GHRM and GSCM practices due to the increase in product cost, and consequently, achieving their economies of scale might take time. A significantly large investment is required to install and maintain operations, which may not be a motivator for small firms to opt for green practices. However, large firms are still in a better position due to fewer budgetary constraints and the desire to keep their competitive position in the market.

Previous studies confirmed that a firm's size and the number of years since a firm adopted sustainable SCM practices are critical for a firm to remain competitive (Fawcett & Waller, Reference Fawcett and Waller2011; Goldsby & Autry, Reference Goldsby and Autry2011; Markman & Krause, Reference Markman and Krause2016). Results of these studies highlighted that the GHRM–GSCM relationship might get stronger if a firm is an old GHRM practitioner and has established itself in GSCM practices for over 5 years. In the same vein, a firm's size can also impact the GHRM–GSCM relationship due to the access to supplementary resources and possession of increased funds available to a firm. This considerably influences the adoption and execution of environmental management systems better compared to small and medium firms (Zhu, Sarkis, & Lai, Reference Zhu, Sarkis and Lai2008b).

In light of the above, the current study hypothesizes that:

A firm's size moderates the relationship between GHRM and outbound GSCM (hypothesis 4a) and inbound GSCM (hypothesis 4b) such that this relationship will be stronger for the larger firms and vice versa.

Number of years since a firm has adopted GSCM practices moderates the relationship between GHRM and outbound GSCM (hypothesis 5a) and inbound GSCM (hypothesis 5b) such that this relationship will be stronger for firms that adopted green practices earlier and vice versa.

Figure 1 shows the hypothesized model incorporating independent, mediating, moderating, and dependent variables.

Figure 1. Theoretical model.

Research method and design

Sampling frame and respondent firm profile

The textile industry in Pakistan was selected to test the hypothesized framework because Pakistan is one of the major players – along with China, India, and Bangladesh – that exports textile products across the globe. To determine the population, the first author consulted the online database of the Chamber of Commerce, All Pakistan Textile Mills Association, All Pakistan Textile Processing Mills Association, and referred firms chosen by Guanxi networks (Geng et al., Reference Geng, Long, Chen and Li2017). When conducting the study, a total of 423 textile industries were registered according to the Board of Investment, Pakistan database (Investments, 2020).

Data from all the databases were compiled. One of the authors of this study prepared city-wide clusters to extract a homogenous sample from the population. Using this approach was important to identify where most of the firms were located because the majority of the textile firms were only authorized to operate in industrial zones within specific cities. Later, a filter was applied to screen out only ISO (International Organization for Standardization) certified textile firms to test the hypothesized model. The reason behind this is because ISO-certified firms are expected to implement green practices due to the requirements set by the ISO. Three cities (Lahore, Faisalabad, and Karachi) were chosen as a sampling frame due to the existence of over 73% of the total population in these (three) cities.

A total of 300 firms were approached in three cities for data collection purposes through (a) web-based survey, (b) telephone survey (computer-assisted telephone interview), and (c) pen-and-paper survey. Prior to collecting data, each respondent was confirmed to have at least 5 years of working experience in the same firm to ensure they are knowledgeable about the issues under investigation and can answer the survey honestly with no response bias (Cousins, Lawson, Petersen, & Fugate, Reference Cousins, Lawson, Petersen and Fugate2019). The characteristics mentioned above determined the pool of respondents. Directors, general managers, compliance managers, human resource managers, quality assurance managers, and supply chain officers were chosen as respondents to ensure the eminence of responses regarding the concerned firms.

Participation in the study was voluntary; however, an incentive was given to all the participants as a token of appreciation. To achieve the maximum response rate, the first author sent reminders to participants. This data collection process took 3 months, and a total of 275 complete responses were received at the end. Three responses were discarded due to unengaged responses and/or missing important information. This led to a total sample of 272 textile firms' responses, appropriate to test the hypothesized framework (Bartlett, Kotrlik, & Higgins, Reference Bartlett, Kotrlik and Higgins2001).

Construction of instrument and pilot test

Pre-established scales were used from literature to measure all the constructs presented in the hypothesized model shown in Figure 1.

GHRM was measured by an 11-item scale adopted from Zaid, Jaaron, and Bon, (Reference Zaid, Jaaron and Bon2018). Measures of both mediators, inbound GSCM practices (6-items scale) and outbound GSCM practices (4-items scale), were adapted from Rao and Holt (Reference Rao and Holt2005). Economic, environmental, and social performance were measured using a 5-item scale and adapted from previous research (Laosirihongthong, Adebanjo, & Tan, Reference Laosirihongthong, Adebanjo and Tan2013; Paulraj, Reference Paulraj2011; Zhu, Sarkis, & Lai, Reference Zhu, Sarkis and Lai2008a). The moderating variable, a firm's size, was measured based on the number of employees who worked in a firm. Since the number of employees is a better proxy measure of the organization's firm size than assets or sales, a question was added to the questionnaire to inquire about the approximate number of employees hired by each respondent firm (Becker-Blease, Kaen, Etebari, & Baumann, Reference Becker-Blease, Kaen, Etebari and Baumann2010). Likewise, a question referring to the number of years since a firm has been practicing green activities was also added to the questionnaire.

All constructs were measured on a 5-point Likert scale (where 1 = not considering it, and 5 = implementing successfully). Few statements were reworded to better fit with the context of the textile industry.

The survey was translated into Urdu language (Pakistan's national language) with the back-translation protocol for respondents' better understanding (Brislin, Reference Brislin1970). Therefore, a pilot test was conducted with data from 39 firms (13 firms from each city) to ensure the validity and reliability of the survey. Researchers agreed that a sample of 10–30 is adequate for a pilot study more precisely to test the initial survey (Hertzog, Reference Hertzog2008; Stephen & William, Reference Stephen and William1995). The pilot testing results established the instrument's validity and reliability. All factors were satisfactory and exceeded the threshold value of .70 for Cronbach alpha, while the convergent validity of all the constructs also met the threshold of ⩽.5 (Nunnally & Bernstein, Reference Nunnally and Bernstein1994).

Data analysis and results

Descriptive analysis

Table 1 shows the results of descriptive statistics and exhibits the firms' age, sales/revenue, location, and respondents' job designation. Respondents' titles ranged from the policymakers such as General Manager (42%), Director (8%), and Supply Chain Officer/Human Resource Managers (11%). The majority of the participating firms were large, with the number of employees ranging from 3,001 to 6,000. In total, 53% of the companies in the sample were situated in Lahore, followed by Karachi (30%) and Faisalabad (17%).

Table 1. Demographic characteristics of respondent firms

Table 2 showcases the mean and standard deviation (sd) of all the latent variables incorporated in the theoretical model, along with correlation statistics. The descriptive statistics analysis in Table 2 shows that most firms adapt GHRM showing the largest mean value of 4.16. It also shows that somehow they cannot curb their costs indicated by a much smaller value of mean (3.0). This could be because green activities are still either under consideration or getting initiated by the manufacturers in emerging economies. On the contrary, the mean values of environmental performance and social performance indicated a higher mean value of 3.69 and 3.79, respectively, indicating a positive initiative toward a greener environment and social acceptance level.

Table 2. Means, sd, correlations

sd = standard deviation.

**p ⩽ .01.

The results of Table 2 also reveal the correlations between the variables. It can be deduced that GHRM has positive and significant relationship with environmental performance (r = .493, p-value ⩽ .01), social performance (r = .362, p-value ⩽ .01), economic performance (r = .302, p-value ⩽ .01), inbound green activities (r = .382, p-value ⩽ .01), and outbound green activities (r = .505, p-value ⩽ .01). Similarly, green inbound activities are positively and significantly related to environmental (r = .624, p-value ⩽ .01), social (r = .637, p-value ⩽ .01), and economic performance (r = .384, p-value ⩽ .01). Complete results of correlations can be seen in Table 2.

Table 3 shows the results of the confirmatory factor analysis (CFA) conducted using Smart PLS 3 software. CFA was conducted to evaluate the effectiveness of the proposed structural model in Figure 1. The items with loadings .7 or more were considered for the final analysis of hypotheses testing. Overall, the model shows a good fit: SRMR = .08 and NFI = .85 (Hu & Bentler, Reference Hu and Bentler1999).

Table 3. Summary statistics of CFA

Table 4 shows the validity and reliability of the construct through Cronbach alpha values and composite reliability values. In addition, Table 4 also confirms the convergent validity through the extracted average variance. All the constructs established reliability and values met the recommended level of the composite reliability as well as a Cronbach alpha value of ⩽.70 (Hair, Black, Babin, Anderson, & Tatham, Reference Hair, Black, Babin, Anderson and Tatham2006; Jawaad et al., Reference Jawaad, Amir, Bashir and Hasan2019). The extent to which construct converges to elaborate the variance of the factors is called convergent validity. The convergent validity of all the constructs meets the threshold of ⩽.5, which was used to measure convergent validity (Bashir, Amir, Jawaad, & Hasan, Reference Bashir, Amir, Jawaad and Hasan2020; Chin, Tat, & Sulaiman, Reference Chin, Tat and Sulaiman2015).

Table 4. Construct reliability and validity

Discriminant validity was tested through the hetero-trait-mono-trait (HTMT) ratio, which is the geometric mean of the correlations of observed items within the same constructs and the correlations of observed items with every other construct. The reason for investigating the HTMT ratio is to confirm if the explained variance is greater than the unexplained variance in the model. Table 5 shows that the HTMT ratio of each construct is less than .9, indicating that they are distinct from each other (Henseler, Ringle, & Sarstedt, Reference Henseler, Ringle and Sarstedt2015).

Table 5. HTMT ratio (discriminant validity)

Hypotheses testing

Finally, the hypothesized framework was tested with 5,000 iterations in bootstrapping. The results show that although GHRM positively impacts a firm's economic performance, this relationship is insignificant (β = .372, p-value = .10), lending no support to hypothesis 1a. The results of GHRM's influence on environmental performance showed a positive association with a firm's environmental performance (β = .514, p-value = .000), lending support to hypothesis 1b. Likewise, results of the third direct hypothesized relationship also revealed a positive and significant impact of GHRM on a firm's social performance (β = .440, p-value = .000), lending support to hypothesis 1c.

Table 6 shows the results of direct hypotheses. These findings align with previous studies (Acquah, Agyabeng-Mensah, & Afum, Reference Acquah, Agyabeng-Mensah and Afum2020; Barney, Ketchen, & Wright, Reference Barney, Ketchen and Wright2011) and support that employees with environmental awareness and commitment to run the business more strategically will improve productivity and reduce carbon footprints. However, results for hypothesis 1a indicate that GHRM does not lead to cost-effectiveness. A plausible reason for this might be the belief that adopting green practices may not reduce a firm's operations cost in the short term, but firms may reap the economic benefits in the long term (Green et al., Reference Green, Zelbst, Meacham and Bhadauria2012). Therefore, future researchers should conduct a study with panel data of firms, which may bring better insight into this relationship.

Table 6. Direct effects: relationship of GHRM with firm performance

Note: ** indicates significance at the .05 level, β, path coefficient.

Table 7 illustrates the results of the mediation analysis. The path results of GHRM to economic performance via inbound GSCM activities were insignificant (β = .498, p-value = .11), lending no support to hypothesis 2a. However, results show that when we entered inbound GSCM between GHRM and environmental performance, the direct relationship became insignificant, while mediation results of inbound GSCM activities between GHRM and environmental performance were significant and showed full mediation, hence hypothesis 2b was supported (β = .366, p-value = .005). For hypothesis 2c, results indicated that the inbound GSCM practices complimentarily mediates between GHRM and social performance (β = .317, p-value = .001). Hence, the data supported hypothesis 2c.

Table 7. Mediation analysis: GHRM → inbound/outbound GSCM → performance outcomes

Note: ** indicates significance at the .05 level, indicates marginally significant, β, path coefficient.

The path results of GHRM to economic performance via outbound green supply chain activities were positive, but not significant (β = .341, p-value = .159). Therefore, hypothesis 3a was not supported. Mediation results of outbound GSCM activities between GHRM and environmental performance showed positive and significant results (β = .277, p-value = .069). Therefore, hypothesis 3b was supported and indicated complimentary mediation. However, for hypothesis 3c, the path of GHRM to social performance via outbound green supply chain activities indicated indirect only mediation by showing significant results (β = .398, p-value = .037). Complementary mediation (hypotheses 2c and 3b) reflects that other variables influence this relationship not captured in the current model (Zhao, Lynch, & Chen, Reference Zhao, Lynch and Chen2010). On the contrary, indirect only mediation (hypotheses 2b and 3c) indicates that the chosen mediator (inbound GSCM practices) takes up the major load of the relationship.

Table 8 showcases the effect of a firm's size and the number of years since adopting GSCM practices as a moderator between GHRM and green inbound/outbound GSCM activities. The results indicate that a firm's size does moderate the relationship between GHRM and outbound GSCM practices (hypothesis 4a; p-value = .046) and inbound GSCM (hypothesis 4b; p-value = .000). Therefore, it can be concluded that large firms can better implement intra- and inter-organizational green activities in the supply chain due to having more resources compared to small firms. However, results also indicate that the number of years since a firm started adopting GSCM practices does not moderate the relationship between GHRM–GSCM outbound activities (hypothesis 5a; p-value = .707) and GHRM–GSCM inbound activities (hypothesis 5b; p-value = .120).

Table 8. First stage moderation results

Note: ** indicates significance at the .05 level, *** indicates significance at the .01 level, * indicates significance at the .1 level; β, path coefficient.

This indicated that the relationship between ecologically conscious human resource management and GSCM activities is not affected by the number of years since a firm started adopting sustainable measures. Thus, the results are contrary to previous studies (Green et al., Reference Green, Zelbst, Meacham and Bhadauria2012; Hollos, Blome, & Foerstl, Reference Hollos, Blome and Foerstl2012). This might be contextual and/or individual practices because the textile industry in Pakistan is majorly involved in exports, and they are obliged to follow the standards, including environmental concerns. However, future researchers are encouraged to further investigate this aspect for better insights.

Discussion

Overall, results reveal that hiring environmentally conscious employees and adopting green training has a significant and positive impact on a firm's environmental and social performance. Most hypotheses were supported, including direct, mediating, and even for moderating effects. Multiple intriguing insights can be extracted regarding the implementation of GHRM and GSCM practices and their effects on performance levels, particularly in the textile sector of an emerging economy like Pakistan. They are as follows.

First, human resource management practices are a way of transmuting employees into beneficial assets, aiding organizations in achieving their objectives, consequently resulting in higher returns (Barney, Reference Barney1999). Consistent with previous studies, the findings of hypotheses 1b and 1c highlighted that GHRM increases a firm's environmental and social performance, further improving sustainability efforts by the business (Hameed, Khan, Islam, Sheikh, & Naeem, Reference Hameed, Khan, Islam, Sheikh and Naeem2020). For emerging economies, it should be mandatory for a firm to focus more on improving the green knowledge, skills, and abilities among employees since most developing economies are still in the early stages of implementing sustainable practices in their operations (Linton, Klassen, & Jayaraman, Reference Linton, Klassen and Jayaraman2007; Zhu, Sarkis, & Lai, Reference Zhu, Sarkis and Lai2008b). The most suitable candidates can be screened out by adopting formalized and environment-centered hiring techniques, conserving costs in the long term. The insignificance of hypothesis 1a might be related to the assumption that environmentally conscious employee-related practices are costly for firms, therefore creating an imbalance for firms to achieve economies of scale (O'Donohue & Torugsa, Reference O'Donohue and Torugsa2016). The majority of the respondent firms are aged between 11 and 20 years, with 10 years since they started GSCM practices. This might be one of the main reasons why these practices are not cost-efficient.

Indeed, extant literature suggests that HR practices such as streamlined staffing and training, positively correlates to performance outcomes, further suggesting that investment in training procedures has beneficial outcomes at the firm level in the longer run. Our results confirm that a firm is likely to receive investment recovery by adopting sustainable HR practices and end up being socially accepted and environmentally friendlier. The results also indicate that close observation by a firm's internal environmental management systems on the entire supply chain, stimulates favorable environmental steps taken within the enterprise by maintaining both intra- and inter-organizational activities. If not taken seriously, organizations may develop a system that can raise the cost of their product(s) due to poor decision-making by the management and ineffective policies (Jawaad et al., Reference Jawaad, Amir, Bashir and Hasan2019). Results reveal that Pakistan's textile industry workforce is committed to maintaining environmental measures that help firms attain their environmental goals. This further helps a company attract quality candidates with a green mindset and may provide a competitive advantage leading to sustainable performance.

The results of hypotheses 2b, 2c, 3a, 3b, and 3c indicate that emerging economies have the potential to implement green practices that can improve the environmental health of the country and a firm's reputation. The green philosophy should be reinforced in the workforce and among supply chain partners involving outbound green activities such as procurement and logistics. Raw material suppliers should also be motivated to take such green initiatives to reduce their overall carbon footprint and make the world ecologically friendly (Ahmed, Najmi, Arif, & Younus, Reference Ahmed, Najmi, Arif and Younus2019).

The results also reinforce that implementing GHRM has a profound effect on inbound and outbound GSCM activities such as green distribution, eco-design, and customer relations, significantly contributing to better firm performance (Comoglio & Botta, Reference Comoglio and Botta2012; Iraldo, Testa, & Frey, Reference Iraldo, Testa and Frey2009). Considering the emerging economy context, results reveal that Pakistan's textile firms comply with environmentally friendly policies in collaboration with suppliers and customers. A clear job description with green objectives is crucial from an HR perspective.

Based on the survey results, it can be concluded that most of the ISO-14000 certified firms in Pakistan comply with environmentally friendly policies. Evidence from the textile industry also showcases the acceptance of GHRM practices and environmental management in emerging economies. This indicates that firms are making profits while also adopting environmental responsibilities within and outside a firm by involving inbound and outbound activities. It can be further deduced that green awareness and training not only encourage employees to find ways to reduce paper and energy consumption, but also mitigates the usage of ecologically detrimental materials in products that diminish economic performance as a result. Moreover, mediation analysis revealed, along with internal green activities, well-trained staff members keep a close check on at least the external green supply chain activities, further leading to improved operational outcomes.

In the sustainability context, business success is not determined by financial gains alone, but also accounts for environmental and social dimensions (Gardberg & Fombrun, Reference Gardberg and Fombrun2006). The results indicated that GHRM practices increase a firm's social performance via green intra- and inter-organizational green supply chain activities (Zaid, Jaaron, & Bon, Reference Zaid, Jaaron and Bon2018). Since Pakistan is one of the major players in the Asian textile industry that exports textile products across the globe, creating awareness of environmental issues among employees and complying with sustainability practices are imperative to promote leaner supply chain networks, thus allowing firms to hold a progressive and socially responsible image in the eyes of customers and the society.

Since many firms in developing economies are in the early phase of implementing green practices, there is a possibility that the cost of adoption of these practices has not recovered yet (Linton, Klassen, & Jayaraman, Reference Linton, Klassen and Jayaraman2007; Zhu, Sarkis, & Lai, Reference Zhu, Sarkis and Lai2008b). This is a plausible reason why the greening of personnel and operations does not result in economic performance. Implementing GHRM and GSCM calls for high compensations and a huge initial investment, respectively. Firms should offer monetary and non-monetary rewards to incentivize the workforce to contribute to a firm's environmental initiatives. This may result in higher performance, but can take time to achieve cost-effectiveness (Kittisak, Thanaporn, Jutamat, & Ayoruethai, Reference Kittisak, Thanaporn, Jutamat and Ayoruethai2019).

The results of moderation analysis (hypotheses 4a, 4b, 5a, and 5b) indicate that a firm's size is important and strengthens GHRM–GSCM relationship for large firms, while ‘time of adoption’ of green activities does not affect the relationship as mentioned above. Various complexities and instabilities, particularly cost and regulatory aspects, are significant barriers due to the huge investment involved in restructuring departments and implementing sustainable practices. This can potentially decrease a firm's profit, at least in the beginning phase of implementing sustainability practices (Faisal, Reference Faisal2015; Rasool, Ahmad, & Nazam, Reference Rasool, Ahmad and Nazam2016). Since textile in Pakistan is in the initial phase of implementing green activities, only those firms that successfully achieve their sustainability goals have larger resources.

Research contribution

Based on the NRBV, this study established that GHRM practices positively influence a firm's sustainable performance. The results confirmed the managerial framework of NRBV and emphasized that green practices (GHRM and GSCM) aim to achieve pollution prevention, product stewardship, and sustainable development (Barney, Reference Barney1999).

The current empirical study on GHRM and GSCM adds to the body of literature by concluding that reinforcing a green mindset in the employees leads to efficiently engaging firms in ecological activities. GHRM keeps a close check on green design, green logistics, reuse of spare parts, green procurement, making sure the supplier has adopted green practices and actively attracts green customers. This evidence is one of the earliest from emerging economies in the field of green development with a distinctive and comprehensive approach on many grounds. Some of the key contributions are: first, serving as a building block that formally tested GHRM–GSCM–performance relationship, which is still thought to be under-researched (Dubey et al., Reference Dubey, Gunasekaran, Papadopoulos, Childe, Shibin and Wamba2017; Jackson et al., Reference Jackson, Renwick, Jabbour and Muller-Camen2011). Second, GSCM was divided and measured into two crucial facets, inter- and intra-organizational green activities, while firm performance was measured with three different performance metrics, namely economic, social, and environmental. Third, evidence was collected from an emerging economy data set from a top textile firm in Asia and global industry using an appropriate sample and quantitative approach (Geng et al., Reference Geng, Long, Chen and Li2017). This study is timely because there is not much literature on emerging economies related to sustainable practices and performance metrics. Fourth, the present study considers social performance as a performance dimension – a relatively new concept covering the business approach to stakeholders. Lastly, this shows how a firm's size and tenure of adopting green practices (GHRM and GSCM) plays a role in improving firm performance.

Managerial implications

This study elaborates some key managerial implications for policymakers and practitioners along with the research contribution. Our theoretical model lends a guide to improving the efficiency and progress of manufacturing firms in terms of cost efficiency, reducing carbon footprint, and gaining respect and reputation in the eyes of external stakeholders. It highlights that adapting GHRM is the key to implementing a firm's green intra- and inter-organizational supply chain activities. This is critical because hiring the right employees to improve a firm's strategies helps attain sustainability goals.

In light of these findings, another implication is that managers should focus on outbound GSCM practices to improve a firm's performance. Managers relatively emphasize inbound GSCM practices because it deals with the quality of finished products in time. However, attention to the storage of finished products, logistics, and transportation of products (i.e., last mile delivery) improves a firm's overall outbound logistics capability, resulting in higher profitability. This becomes more important for companies operating in emerging economies.

Asia's textile industry has become a rising star in the global sphere, Pakistan ranks as one of the top textile producers on the continent, and the textile industry is one of the core contributors to its economy (Ali et al., Reference Ali, Khan, Ishaq, Hussain, Rehman, Khan and Shah2020; Kanat, Abbasi, Peerzada, & Atilgan, Reference Kanat, Abbasi, Peerzada and Atilgan2018; Memon, Aziz, & Qayyum, Reference Memon, Aziz and Qayyum2020). Pakistan recently reached 108th position from 136th in ease of doing business index due to the continuous planned improvements in regulations related to business activities. Implementing outbound supply chain practices was one of the core contributing factors to this favorable change in market share (Bank, Reference Bank2020).

From the NRBV perspective, this study highlighted that HR and supply chain managers should consider social and environmental aspects to achieve a firm's competitive advantage and sustainable development (Hart, Reference Hart1995). HR managers can achieve sustainable goals by focusing on the internal resources (employees) and analyzing the performance concerning the external context, while supply chain managers should take care of the internal as well as external context. Lastly, top management responsible for setting a firm's economic, ecological, and social objectives should track HR department performance. Here, they should assess how their personnel planning and practices align with a firm's sustainable objectives because human involvement is the main driver to achieving a firm's overall objectives.

Limitations and future research directions

The current research findings are widely applicable and will serve as a stepping stone for future researchers who wish to study the GHRM practices and sustainability nexus. However, there are some limitations. First, the selected constructs for the conceptual framework were holistic for GHRM practices. Future researchers can measure GHRM with more depth by inculcating second-order factor model to measure – a more robust approach to GHRM. Second, data from the textile sector were gathered through a cluster approach, and the results may not be generalized to other industries (such as pharmaceutical, healthcare, fast-moving consumer goods, and others). Therefore, replication of this study in other industries can bring greater insights. Third, this research brought a deeper understanding of green supply chain practices by dividing GSCM into inbound and outbound green activities that other researchers did not consider thus far (Acquah, Agyabeng-Mensah, & Afum, Reference Acquah, Agyabeng-Mensah and Afum2020; Zaid, Jaaron, & Bon, Reference Zaid, Jaaron and Bon2018). However, future researchers can examine different green inbound and outbound activities separately according to firms. For example, eco-design, green procurement, green distribution, and customer cooperation can be investigated individually.

Conclusion

Practitioners, and even customers, are now emphasizing that firms should transcend profitability by taking social and environmental responsibilities. However, this study explored that firms achieve cost-effectiveness and contribute to environmental sustainability at the same time by adopting GHRM and GSCM practices. By doing this, firms also improve social acceptance in the eyes of stakeholders. This empirical evidence from the Asian region – the most populated region in the world – typifies that sustainability is equally important for all sectors irrespective of geographical region. However, firms need to go the extra mile to adopt sustainable practices due to weak political and social institutions in emerging economies. Therefore, we conclude that firms should develop a social mission that transcends profitability, and adopting green practices can help firms to balance profitability and contribute to society.

Acknowledgements

The authors would like to acknowledge support from the Lahore School of Economics, Pakistan for providing the grant to gather data from an outsourced firm by the name of AS&B Associates, IPSOS, Rawalpindi, Pakistan through CATI (computer-assisted telephonic interviews). All authors contributed equally.

Conflict of interest

The authors declare no potential conflicts of interest concerning the research, authorship, and/or publication of this article. Moreover, the submitted work was not carried out in the presence of any personal, professional, or financial relationships that could potentially be construed as a conflict of interest.

Mehwish Jawaad is a senior teaching fellow at the Lahore School of Economics, Lahore, Pakistan. She holds an MPhil degree in Business Administration Research from the Lahore School of Economics in 2017; MBA from the Lahore School of Economics (2004); and BSc from Kinnaird College, Lahore, Pakistan (2002). Her teaching experience includes teaching at the Lahore School of Economics and Kingdom University of Bahrain, Bahrain to graduate and undergraduate degree programs. She teaches analysis of financial statement and reporting, financial accounting, investment and portfolio analysis, research methods, services marketing and introduction of principles of marketing her research interests include green supply chain management, human resource management and organizational behavior and sustainability. Her research has been published in Sustainable Development, Sustainability, and Cogent Business and Management journals.

Tania Hasan is a senior teaching fellow in Business Administration Department at the Lahore School of Economics, Lahore, Pakistan. She obtained her MPhil in Business Administration Research from the Lahore School of Economics, Pakistan in 2018, MBA (Marketing) from the Institute of Business Administration, Karachi, Pakistan in 2002, and BA from Karachi University, Pakistan in 1995. Her prior teaching experience includes teaching at the Institute of Business Administration, Karachi, Pakistan, Bahria University, Karachi, Pakistan, Griffith College Dublin (Karachi Campus), Pakistan, and SZABIST (Shaheed Zulfiqar Ali Bhutto Institute of Science & Technology), Karachi, Pakistan. She teaches strategic management, supply chain management, entrepreneurship management, advertising, consumer behavior and research methods to undergraduate and graduate students. Her major research interest includes consumer behavior, human resource management, marketing to children/adolescents, and social network addiction. Her research has been published in Sustainability, Journal of Organizational Studies and Innovation, The Marketing Review, and Cogent Business & Management.

Abeera Amir obtained MPhil in accounting and finance from the University of Central Punjab. She has completed her bachelor in double majors in accounting and finance from the Lahore School of Economics. Currently she is a research associate at the Lahore University of Management Sciences and a permanent faculty member at the University of South Asia, Lahore. Her major interests include business management, marketing, operations, and human resource management.

Hassan Imam is currently a postdoctoral researcher at the Graduate School of Management, Kyoto University, Kyoto, Japan. He is a recipient of JSPS fellowship. He has obtained his PhD in Management from the Department of Management, Ca' Foscari University of Venice, Italy. His research interests focus on employee behaviors, team functioning, leadership, employability, and conflict management. His research has been published in The International Journal of Human Resource Management, International Journal of Project Management, Employee Relations, Baltic Journal of Management, and Leadership and Organizational Development Journal.

References

Abbasnejad, T., Khaksar, E., Gashtasbi, M., & Darabi, S. A. (2015). Prioritizing barriers to implement green supply chain in Shiraz Oil Refining Company by FAHP method. Journal UMP Social Sciences Technology Management, 3(3), 824833.Google Scholar
Acquah, I. S. K., Agyabeng-Mensah, Y., & Afum, E. (2020). Examining the link among green human resource management practices, green supply chain management practices and performance. Benchmarking: An International Journal, 28(1), 267290.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Adomako, S. (2020). Environmental collaboration, sustainable innovation, and small and medium-sized enterprise growth in sub-Saharan Africa: Evidence from Ghana. Sustainable Development, 28(6), 16091619.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Aggerholm, H. K., Andersen, S. E., & Thomsen, C. (2011). Conceptualising employer branding in sustainable organisations. Corporate Communications: An International Journal of Operations, 16(2), 105123.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Ahmad, S. (2015). Green human resource management: Policies and practices. Cogent Business & Management, 2(1), 1030817.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Ahmed, W., Najmi, A., Arif, M., & Younus, M. (2019). Exploring firm performance by institutional pressures driven green supply chain management practices. Smart and Sustainable Built Environment, 8(5), 415437.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Al-Swidi, A. K., Gelaidan, H. M., & Saleh, R. M. (2021). The joint impact of green human resource management, leadership and organizational culture on employees’ green behaviour and organisational environmental performance. Journal of Cleaner Production, 316, 128112.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Ali, A., Khan, M., Ishaq, A., Hussain, A., Rehman, S. U., Khan, I. A., & Shah, S. F. A. (2020). Pakistan textiles can bounce back vigorously. International Review of Management Marketing, 10(2), 3040.Google Scholar
Aragon-Correa, J. A., Martin-Tapia, I., & de la Torre-Ruiz, J. (2015). Sustainability issues and hospitality and tourism firms’ strategies: Analytical review and future directions. International Journal of Contemporary Hospitality Management, 27(3), 498522.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Ashraf, M. A., Khan, A. M., Sarfraz, M., & Ahmad, M. (2015). Effectiveness of silica based sol-gel microencapsulation method for odorants and flavors leading to sustainable environment. Frontiers in Chemistry, 3, 115.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Bank, W. (2020). Doing Business 2020: Accelerated Business Climate Reform Agenda Puts Pakistan among Top 10 Improvers. Retrieved from https://www.worldbank.org/en/news/press-release/2019/10/24/doing-business-2020-accelerated-business-climate-reform-agenda-puts-pakistan-among-top-10-improvers.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Barney, J. B. (1999). How a firm's capabilities affect boundary decisions. MIT Sloan Management Review, 40(3), 137145.Google Scholar
Barney, J. B., Ketchen, D. J., & Wright, M. (2011). The future of resource-based theory: Revitalization or decline? Journal of Management, 37(5), 12991315.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Bartlett, J. E., Kotrlik, J. W., & Higgins, C. C. (2001). Organizational research: Determining appropriate sample size in survey research appropriate sample size in survey research. Information Technology, Learning, and Performance Journal, 19(1), 4350.Google Scholar
Bashir, A., Amir, A., Jawaad, M., & Hasan, T. (2020). Work conditions and job performance: An indirect conditional effect of motivation. Cogent Business Management, 7(1), 1801961.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Becker-Blease, J. R., Kaen, F. R., Etebari, A., & Baumann, H. (2010). Employees, firm size and profitability of US manufacturing industries. Investment Management and Financial Innovations, 7(2), 723.Google Scholar
Bowen, F. E., Cousins, P. D., Lamming, R. C., & Farukt, A. (2001). The role of supply management capabilities in green supply. Production and Operations Management, 10(2), 174189.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Brislin, R. W. (1970). Back-translation for cross-cultural research. Journal of Cross-Cultural Psychology, 1(3), 185216.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Cantor, D. E., Morrow, P. C., & Montabon, F. (2012). Engagement in environmental behaviors among supply chain management employees: An organizational support theoretical perspective. Journal of Supply Chain Management, 48(3), 3351.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Carter, C. R., & Rogers, D. S. (2008). A framework of sustainable supply chain management: Moving toward new theory. International Journal of Physical Distribution & Logistics Management, 38(5), 360387.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Chaudhary, R. (2019). Green human resource management and employee green behavior: An empirical analysis. Corporate Social Responsibility and Environmental Management, 27(2), 630641.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Chin, T. A., Tat, H. H., & Sulaiman, Z. (2015). Green supply chain management, environmental collaboration and sustainability performance. Procedia CIRP, 26, 695699.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Cohen, S., & Roussel, J. (2013). Strategic supply chain management: The five disciplines for top performance. New York: McGraw-Hill Education.Google Scholar
Collins, C. J., & Smith, K. G. (2006). Knowledge exchange and combination: The role of human resource practices in the performance of high-technology firms. Academy of Management Journal, 49(3), 544560.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Comoglio, C., & Botta, S. (2012). The use of indicators and the role of environmental management systems for environmental performances improvement: A survey on ISO 14001 certified companies in the automotive sector. Journal of Cleaner Production, 20(1), 92102.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Cousins, P. D., Lawson, B., Petersen, K., & Fugate, B. (2019). Investigating green supply chain management practices and performance: The moderating roles of supply chain ecocentricity and traceability. International Journal of Operations Production Management, 39(5), 767786.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Daily, B. F., & Huang, S.-C. (2001). Achieving sustainability through attention to human resource factors in environmental management. International Journal of Operations & Production Management, 21(12), 15391552.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Delery, J. E., & Doty, D. H. (1996). Modes of theorizing in strategic human resource management: Tests of universalistic, contingency, and configurational performance predictions. Academy of Management Journal, 39(4), 802835.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
D'Netto, B., Shen, J., Chelliah, J., & Monga, M. (2014). Human resource diversity management practices in the Australian manufacturing sector. The International Journal of Human Resource Management, 25(9), 12431266.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Dubey, R., Gunasekaran, A., Papadopoulos, T., Childe, S. J., Shibin, K., & Wamba, S. F. (2017). Sustainable supply chain management: Framework and further research directions. Journal of Cleaner Production, 142, 11191130.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
El-Kassar, A.-N., & Singh, S. K. (2019). Green innovation and organizational performance: The influence of big data and the moderating role of management commitment and HR practices. Technological Forecasting & Social Change, 144, 483498.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Faisal, M. (2015). Research analysis on barriers to green supply chain management in pharmaceutical industries. Review of Public Administration and Management, 3(01), 15.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Fawcett, S. E., & Waller, M. A. (2011). Making sense out of chaos: Why theory is relevant to supply chain research. Journal of Business Logistics, 32(1), 15.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Feng, M., Yu, W., Wang, X., Wong, C. Y., Xu, M., & Xiao, Z. (2018). Green supply chain management and financial performance: The mediating roles of operational and environmental performance. Business Strategy and the Environment, 27(7), 811824.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Gao, D., Xu, Z., Ruan, Y. Z., & Lu, H. (2017). From a systematic literature review to integrated definition for sustainable supply chain innovation (SSCI). Journal of Cleaner Production, 142, 15181538.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Gardberg, N. A., & Fombrun, C. J. (2006). Corporate citizenship: Creating intangible assets across institutional environments. Academy of Management Review, 31(2), 329346.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Geng, J., Long, R., Chen, H., & Li, W. (2017). Exploring the motivation-behavior gap in urban residents’ green travel behavior: A theoretical and empirical study. Resources, Conservation and Recycling, 125, 282292.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Goldsby, T. J., & Autry, C. W. (2011). Toward greater validation of supply chain management theory and concepts: The roles of research replication and meta-analysis. Journal of Business Logistics, 32(4), 324331.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Graves, L. M., & Sarkis, J. (2018). The role of employees' leadership perceptions, values, and motivation in employees' provenvironmental behaviors. Journal of Cleaner Production, 196, 576587.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Green, K. W., Zelbst, P. J., Meacham, J., & Bhadauria, V. S. (2012). Green supply chain management practices: Impact on performance. Supply Chain Management: An International Journal, 17(3), 290305.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hair, J. F., Black, W. C., Babin, B. J., Anderson, R. E., & Tatham, R. (2006). Multivariate data analysis. Upper Saddle River, NJ: Pearson Prentice Hall.Google Scholar
Haldorai, K., Kim, W. G., & Garcia, R. F. (2022). Top management green commitment and green intellectual capital as enablers of hotel environmental performance: The mediating role of green human resource management. Tourism Management, 88, 104431.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hameed, Z., Khan, I. U., Islam, T., Sheikh, Z., & Naeem, R. M. J. I. J. O. M. (2020). Do green HRM practices influence employees' environmental performance?.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hart, S. L. (1995). A natural-resource-based view of the firm. Academy of Management Review, 20(4), 9861014.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hart, S. L., & Dowell, G. (2011). Invited editorial: A natural-resource-based view of the firm: Fifteen years after. Journal of Management, 37(5), 14641479.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Henseler, J., Ringle, C. M., & Sarstedt, M. (2015). A new criterion for assessing discriminant validity in variance-based structural equation modeling. Journal of the Academy of Marketing Science, 43(1), 115135.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hertzog, M. A. (2008). Considerations in determining sample size for pilot studies. Research in Nursing Health, 31(2), 180191.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Hollos, D., Blome, C., & Foerstl, K. (2012). Does sustainable supplier co-operation affect performance? Examining implications for the triple bottom line. International Journal of Production Research, 50(11), 29682986.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hu, L. T., & Bentler, P. M. (1999). Cutoff criteria for fit indexes in covariance structure analysis: Conventional criteria versus new alternatives. Structural Equation Modeling: A Multidisciplinary Journal, 6(1), 155.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Ikram, M. N., & Siddiqui, D. A. (2019). Effect of green supply chain management on environmental performance and export performance: A case study of textile industries in Pakistan. Social Science and Humanities Journal, 3(4), 10061019.Google Scholar
Investments. (2020). Board of investment. Retrieved from https://invest.gov.pk/.Google Scholar
Iraldo, F., Testa, F., & Frey, M. (2009). Is an environmental management system able to influence environmental and competitive performance? The case of the eco-management and audit scheme (EMAS) in the European Union. Journal of Cleaner Production, 17(16), 14441452.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Jabbour, C. J. C., & Jabbour, A. B. L. D. S. (2016). Green human resource management and green supply chain management: Linking two emerging agendas. Journal of Cleaner Production, 112, 18241833.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Jackson, S. E., Renwick, D. W., Jabbour, C. J., & Muller-Camen, M. (2011). State-of-the-art and future directions for green human resource management: Introduction to the special issue. German Journal of Human Resource Management, 25(2), 99116.Google Scholar
Jain, N., & D'lima, C. (2018). Green HRM – A study on the perception of generation Y as prospective internal customers. International Journal of Business Excellence, 15(2), 199208.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Jawaad, M., Amir, A., Bashir, A., & Hasan, T. (2019). Human resource practices and organizational commitment: The mediating role of job satisfaction in emerging economy. Cogent Business & Management, 6(1), 1608668.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Jayant, A., & Azhar, M. (2014). Analysis of the barriers for implementing green supply chain management (GSCM) practices: An interpretive structural modeling (ISM) approach. Procedia Engineering, 97, 21572166.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Jayaraman, V., & Luo, Y. (2007). Creating competitive advantages through new value creation: A reverse logistics perspective. Academy of Management Perspectives, 21(2), 5673.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Jichao, G., Ruyin, L., Hong, C., & Wenbo, L. (2017). Exploring the motivation-behavior gap in urban residents’ green travel behavior: A theoretical and empirical study. Resources, Conservation and Recycling, 125, 282292.Google Scholar
Kanat, S., Abbasi, S. A., Peerzada, M. H., & Atilgan, T. (2018). SWOT analysis of Pakistan's textile and clothing industry. Industria Textila, 69(6), 502510.Google Scholar
Kim, Y. J., Kim, W. G., Choi, H.-M., & Phetvaroon, K. (2019). The effect of green human resource management on hotel employees’ eco-friendly behavior and environmental performance. International Journal of Hospitality Management, 76, 8393.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Kittisak, J., Thanaporn, S., Jutamat, S., & Ayoruethai, S. (2019). Determinants of supply chain employees safety behaviours. Journal of Computational Theoretical Nanoscience, 16(7), 29592966.Google Scholar
Laosirihongthong, T., Adebanjo, D., & Tan, K. C. (2013). Green supply chain management practices and performance. Industrial Management Data Systems, 113(8), 10881109.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Latan, H., Jabbour, C. J. C., Jabbour, D. S. A. B. L., Wamba, S. F., & Shahbaz, M. (2018). Effects of environmental strategy, environmental uncertainty and top management's commitment on corporate environmental performance: The role of environmental management accounting. Journal of Cleaner Production, 180, 297306.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Lengnick-Hall, M. L., Lengnick-Hall, C. A., & Rigsbee, C. M. (2013). Strategic human resource management and supply chain orientation. Human Resource Management Review, 23(4), 366377.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Linton, J. D., Klassen, R., & Jayaraman, V. (2007). Sustainable supply chains: An introduction. Journal of Operations Management, 25(6), 10751082.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Longoni, A., Luzzini, D., & Guerci, M. (2018). Deploying environmental management across functions: The relationship between green human resource management and green supply chain management. Journal of Business Ethics, 151(4), 10811095.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Luo, Z., Chen, X., Chen, J., & Wang, X. (2017). Optimal pricing policies for differentiated brands under different supply chain power structures. European Journal of Operational Research, 259(2), 437451.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Malik, S. Y., Cao, Y., Mughal, Y. H., Kundi, G. M., Mughal, M. H., & Ramayah, T. (2020). Pathways towards sustainability in organizations: Empirical evidence on the role of green human resource management practices and green intellectual capital. Sustainability, 12(8), 3228.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Mardani, A., Kannan, D., Hooker, R. E., Ozkul, S., Alrasheedi, M., & Tirkolaee, E. B. (2020). Evaluation of green and sustainable supply chain management using structural equation modelling: A systematic review of the state of the art literature and recommendations for future research. Journal of Cleaner Production, 249, 119383.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Markman, G. D., & Krause, D. (2016). Theory building surrounding sustainable supply chain management: Assessing what we know, exploring where to go. Journal of Supply Chain Management, 52(2), 310.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Mathiyazhagan, K., Govindan, K., NoorulHaq, A., & Geng, Y. (2013). An ISM approach for the barrier analysis in implementing green supply chain management. Journal of Cleaner Production, 47, 283297.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Memon, J. A., Aziz, A., & Qayyum, M. (2020). The rise and fall of Pakistan's textile industry: An analytical view. European Journal of Business and Management, 12, 136142.Google Scholar
Misha, T. A. (2019). Supply chain model of mobile financial industries (internship report), BRAC University, Retrieved from http://dspace.bracu.ac.bd/xmlui/bitstream/handle/10361/12142/15104070_BBA.pdf?sequence=1.Google Scholar
Mishra, R., Sarkar, S., & Kiranmai, J. (2014). Green HRM: Innovative approach in Indian public enterprises. World Review of Science, Technology and Sustainable Development, 11(1), 2642.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Mitchell, I. K., & Walinga, J. (2017). The creative imperative: The role of creativity, creative problem solving and insight as key drivers for sustainability. Journal of Cleaner Production, 140, 18721884.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Mousa, S. K., & Othman, M. (2020). The impact of green human resource management practices on sustainable performance in healthcare organisations: A conceptual framework. Journal of Cleaner Production, 243, 118595.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Muisyo, P. K., & Qin, S. (2021). Enhancing the firm's green performance through green HRM: The moderating role of green innovation culture. Journal of Cleaner Production, 289, 125720.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Nunnally, J. C., & Bernstein, I. H. (1994). Psychological theory. New York: McGraw-Hill.Google Scholar
O'Donohue, W., & Torugsa, N. (2016). The moderating effect of ‘Green’ HRM on the association between proactive environmental management and financial performance in small firms. The International Journal of Human Resource Management, 27(2), 239261.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Paillé, P., Chen, Y., Boiral, O., & Jin, J. (2014). The impact of human resource management on environmental performance: An employee-level study. Journal of Business Ethics, 121(3), 451466.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Paulraj, A. (2011). Understanding the relationships between internal resources and capabilities, sustainable supply management and organizational sustainability. Journal of Supply Chain Management, 47(1), 1937.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Peloza, J. (2005). Corporate social responsibility as reputation insurance. UC Berkeley: Center for Responsible Business. Retrieved from https://escholarship.org/uc/item/7258w42x.Google Scholar
Pervez, S. (2020). Defining green business ethics and exploring its adoption within the textile industry of Pakistan. Abasyn University Journal of Social Sciences, 13(1), 90105.Google Scholar
Pinzone, M., Guerci, M., Lettieri, E., & Redman, T. (2016). Progressing in the change journey towards sustainability in healthcare: The role of ‘Green’ HRM. Journal of Cleaner Production, 122, 201211.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Rao, P. (2002). Greening the supply chain: A new initiative in South East Asia. International Journal of Operations & Production Management, 22(6), 632655.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Rao, P., & Holt, D. (2005). Do green supply chains lead to competitiveness and economic performance? International Journal of Operations & Production Management, 25(9), 898916.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Rasool, Y., Ahmad, W., & Nazam, M. (2016). Empirical study on implementation of sustainable supply chain management: A case of textile sector. International Journal of Sustainability Management and Information Technologies, 2(4), 2127.Google Scholar
Ren, S., Tang, G., & Jackson, S. E. (2020). Effects of green HRM and CEO ethical leadership on organizations' environmental performance. International Journal of Manpower, 42(6), 961983.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Renwick, D. W., Jabbour, C. J., Muller-Camen, M., Redman, T., & Wilkinson, A. (2016). Contemporary developments in Green (environmental) HRM scholarship. The International Journal of Human Resource Management, 27(2), 114128.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Renwick, , Redman, T., & Maguire, S. (2008). Green HRM: A review, process model, and research agenda. (1, 1). University of Sheffield Management School.Google Scholar
Sabir, U., Ariwa, E., & Taylor, A. (2013). Green technology and energy management systems in developing countries: A case study of Pakistan textile industry. Paper presented at the Third International Conference on Innovative Computing Technology (INTECH 2013).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Saeed, A., Jun, Y., Nubuor, S. A., Priyankara, H. P. R., & Jayasuriya, M. P. F. (2018). Institutional pressures, green supply chain management practices on environmental and economic performance: A two theory view. Sustainability, 10(5), 1517.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Sarkis, J. (1999). How Green is the Supply Chain? Practice and Research. Retrieved from https://ssrn.com/abstract=956620CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Sarkis, J. (2006). Greening the supply chain. London: Springer.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Sarkis, J., Zhu, Q., & Lai, K.-H. (2011). An organizational theoretic review of green supply chain management literature. International Journal of Production Economics, 130(1), 115.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Seuring, S., Aman, S., Hettiarachchi, B. D., Lima, F. A. D., Schilling, L., & Sudusinghe, J. I. (2022). Reflecting on theory development in sustainable supply chain management. Cleaner Logistics Supply Chain, 3, 100016.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Song, W., & Yu, H. (2018). Green innovation strategy and green innovation: The roles of green creativity and green organizational identity. Corporate Social Responsibility Environmental Management, 25(2), 135150.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Srivastava, S. K. (2007). Green supply-chain management: A state-of-the-art literature review. International Journal of Management Reviews, 9(1), 5380.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Stephen, I., & William, B. M. (1995). Handbook in research and evaluation: A collection of principles, methods, and strategies useful in the planning, design, and evaluation of studies in education and the behavioral sciences. San Diego, CA: Edits Publishers.Google Scholar
Sudin, S., Saad, Z. M., & Kamaluddin, N. R. (2018). Conceptualization of green human resource management: A qualitative study of Malaysian companies. Advanced Science Letters, 24(7), 51495152.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Sun, L.-Y., Aryee, S., & Law, K. (2007). High-performance human resource practices, citizenship behavior, and organizational performance: A relational perspective. Academy of Management Journal, 50(3), 558577.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Tang, G., Chen, Y., Jiang, Y., Paille, P., & Jia, J. (2018). Green human resource management practices: Scale development and validity. Asia Pacific Journal of Human Resources, 56(1), 3155.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Úbeda-García, M., Marco-Lajara, B., Zaragoza-Sáez, P. C., Manresa-Marhuenda, E., & Poveda-Pareja, E. (2022). Green ambidexterity and environmental performance: The role of green human resources. Corporate Social Responsibility and Environmental Management, 29(1), 3245.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Vachon, S., & Klassen, R. D. (2006). Extending green practices across the supply chain: The impact of upstream and downstream integration. International Journal of Operations & Production Management, 26(7), 795821.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Wehrmeyer, W. (1996). Green policies can help to bear fruit. People Management, 2(4), 3842.Google Scholar
Yong, J. Y., Yusliza, M., Ramayah, T., & Fawehinmi, O. (2019). Nexus between green intellectual capital and green human resource management. Journal of Cleaner Production, 215, 364374.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Yusliza, M.-Y., Norazmi, N. A., Jabbour, C. J. C., Fernando, Y., Fawehinmi, O., & Seles, B. M. R. P. (2019). Top management commitment, corporate social responsibility and green human resource management: A Malaysian study. Benchmarking: An International Journal, 26(6), 20512078.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Zaid, A. A., Jaaron, A. A., & Bon, A. T. (2018). The impact of green human resource management and green supply chain management practices on sustainable performance: An empirical study. Journal of Cleaner Production, 204, 965979.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Zhang, B., Wu, D., Liang, L., & Olson, D. L. (2015). Supply chain loss averse newsboy model with capital constraint. IEEE Transactions on Systems, Man, and Cybernetics: Systems, 46(5), 646658.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Zhao, X., Lynch, J. G. Jr, & Chen, Q. (2010). Reconsidering Baron and Kenny: Myths and truths about mediation analysis. Journal of Consumer Research, 37(2), 197206.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Zhu, Q., Sarkis, J., & Lai, K.-H. (2008a). Confirmation of a measurement model for green supply chain management practices implementation. International Journal of Production Economics, 111(2), 261273.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Zhu, Q., Sarkis, J., & Lai, K.-H. (2008b). Green supply chain management implications for ‘closing the loop’. Transportation Research Part E: Logistics Transportation Review, 44(1), 118.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Figure 0

Figure 1. Theoretical model.

Figure 1

Table 1. Demographic characteristics of respondent firms

Figure 2

Table 2. Means, sd, correlations

Figure 3

Table 3. Summary statistics of CFA

Figure 4

Table 4. Construct reliability and validity

Figure 5

Table 5. HTMT ratio (discriminant validity)

Figure 6

Table 6. Direct effects: relationship of GHRM with firm performance

Figure 7

Table 7. Mediation analysis: GHRM → inbound/outbound GSCM → performance outcomes

Figure 8

Table 8. First stage moderation results