78 Ijmems Spceom19 P124 5 6 1014 1031 2020

See discussions, stats, and author profiles for this publication at: https://www.researchgate.
net/publication/343935045
Sustainability Adoption through Sustainable Human Resource Management: A

Systematic Literature Review and Conceptual Framework
Article in International Journal of Mathematical Engineering and Management Sciences · August 2020
DOI: 10.33889/IJMEMS.2020.5.6.078
CITATIONS READS
22 3,802
5 authors, including:
Anil Kumar Bandrana Preeti Bhaskar

London Metropolitan University Ibra College of Technology
279 PUBLICATIONS 7,636 CITATIONS 57 PUBLICATIONS 1,114 CITATIONS
SEE PROFILE SEE PROFILE
Simon Peter Nadeem Mrinal Tyagi

University of Derby M8 Infinite
47 PUBLICATIONS 593 CITATIONS 3 PUBLICATIONS 77 CITATIONS
SEE PROFILE SEE PROFILE
All content following this page was uploaded by Preeti Bhaskar on 22 October 2020.
The user has requested enhancement of the downloaded file.

International Journal of Mathematical, Engineering and Management Sciences
Vol. 5, No. 6, 1014-1031, 2020
https://doi.org/10.33889/IJMEMS.2020.5.6.078
Sustainability Adoption through Sustainable Human Resource

Management: A Systematic Literature Review and Conceptual
Framework
Anil Kumar
Guildhall School of Business and Law,
London Metropolitan University, London, UK.
Corresponding author: anilror@gmail.com
Preeti Bhaskar
Department of Business Studies,
Ibra College of Technology, Oman.
E-mail: preeti.bhaskar52@gmail.com
Simon Peter Nadeem

Centre for Supply Chain Improvement, The University of Derby,
Kedleston Road Campus, Derby, DE22 1GB, UK.
E-mail: S.nadeem@derby.ac.uk
Mrinal Tyagi
E-mail: mrinal1tyagi@gmail.com
Jose Arturo Garza-Reyes

E-mail: J.Reyes@derby.ac.uk
(Received May 12, 2020; Accepted August 2, 2020)
Abstract
Sustainability is a key aspiration of most businesses as they face pressure from regulatory authorities as well as consumer
demand for sustainable products. Sustainability discussion often revolves around the areas of raw materials, product and
process design and innovation. However, the role of human resources is least discussed in this regard. This research
utilises a systematic literature review approach to explores the concept of Sustainable Human Resource Management
(SHRM) and identifies the indicators, drivers, barriers, and benefits of SHRM adoption. Based on the findings, an
integrated conceptual framework that can be utilised by organisations for developing a long-lasting sustainability
adoption through SHRM is proposed.
Keywords- Sustainable human resource management, Human resources and sustainability, Green human resource
management, Environmental Human resource management.
1. Introduction
Sustainable development is a very important concept in the business world today, especially with
a focus to enable individuals and companies to meet their current needs without hampering the
environment for future generations (Nadeem et al., 2017; Garza-Reyes et al., 2019) . However, it
1014
Vol. 5, No. 6, 1014-1031, 2020
has been observed that traditional market models focus on the short-termed efficient and effective
utilisation of natural, social, and human resources in organisations rather than focusing on a long-
term multifaceted and dynamic knowledge-based economy. Over the last decades, Sustainability
has been the subject of thought and reflection in the field of management. Ehnert et al. (2014)
defined sustainability as a concept for providing new solutions and making economic systems and
organisations more viable over the long term with less harm to society and the world’s well-being.
While often the sustainability is assumed to be only related to the management of materials and
production techniques, Human resource management (HRM) has a great role to play in its practical
assimilation. Sustainability shifts the focus towards the capability of HRM to sustain the HR base
from within and for organisational viability. Recently, studies related to sustainability and HRM
seem to have captured the interest of researchers. Sustainable human resource management
(SHRM) can be well-thought-out as a design for the employment relationship, and a contribution
to sustainable development (Gollan, 2000; Zaugg et al., 2001; Ehnert, 2009a). Ehnert (2009b)
highlights the need for more SHRM practices and regards sustainability as having a strategic
potential for HRM. Ehnert (2009b) defines SHRM as “the pattern of planned or emerging human
resource deployments and activities intended to enable a balance of organisational goal
achievement and reproduction of the human resource base over a long-lasting calendar time and
to control for negative impact on the human resource base”.
This study contributes to the existing literature on SHRM by providing a systematic review of the
literature on the topic of SHRM and proposing a conceptual framework for sustainability adoption
through SHRM. The paper examines the concept of SHRM through a systematic literature review
and identifies the indicators, drivers, barriers, and benefits of SHRM adoption to benefit
practitioners, academics, and researchers. The rest of the paper is structured in 6 sections. Section
2 presents the systematic literature review; Section 3 discusses the concept of SHRM while Section
4 presents the benefits and barriers to SHRM adoption. On the other hand, Section 5 introduces the
developed conceptual framework developed; finally, Section 6 provides the conclusions,
limitations and future research directions derived from the study
2. Systematic Literature Review Approach

To accomplish the aim of this study, the systematic literature review (SLR) approach followed by
Garza-Reyes (2015) was adopted. Table 1 presents the 5 phases that the SLR went through.
Table 1. Systematic literature review phases

Article’s
S. No. SLR Phase Objective and methods used
section
Scope Defining the scope of research to be in the bounds of Sustainable human resource
1. 1
Formulation management
To locate studies, the following criteria were defined:
 Duration: 1984-2018
 Electronic databases such as Elsevier, Science Direct, Sage, JSTOR, Emerald, Taylor
Locating
2. and Francis, Inderscience, IGI, EBSCO, John Willey, and Springer were explored. 2
Studies
 Keywords: sustainable human resource management, Human Resources and
Sustainability, Green Human resource management, and environmental Human
resource management
Study Published research papers with sustainability aspect (environmental, social and economic)
3. 2
Selection and its implementation in HRM, were selected.
Analysis & Identifying the indicators, drivers, barriers, and benefits of SHRM adoption to benefit
4. 3&4
Synthesis practitioners, academics, and researchers.
Drawing the
5 conceptual Developing a conceptual framework for sustainability adoption through SHRM. 5
framework
1015
Vol. 5, No. 6, 1014-1031, 2020
The SLR included papers published in peer-reviewed journals from 1984 to 2018. The year 1984
was considered as the base year as no significant study on SHRM was found before that year.
Nearly all research papers related to SHRM, green HRM, triple-bottom-line, Strategic HRM, HR
& sustainability were acknowledged. Multiple databases such as Elsevier, Science Direct, Sage,
JSTOR, Emerald, Taylor and Francis, Inderscience, IGI, EBSCO, John Willey, and Springer were
used to search for the literature. Only those papers with sustainability aspect (environmental, social
and economic) and its implementation in HRM were selected. The initial search was conducted
using the following keywords: sustainable human resource management, Human Resources and
Sustainability, Green Human resource management, and environmental Human resource
management. Keywords related to sustainability and HRM were used through different
combinations. This search yielded 1,105 papers. After removing duplications, the number of papers
was reduced to 586. A careful reading of abstracts led to the further elimination of 320 papers. 266
papers were then thoroughly assessed to ensure their relevance to the focus of this research, from
which 163 papers were finally selected.
3. Sustainable Human Resource Management

SHRM is an impending subject. Nevertheless, very little research has been conducted on this
subject due to its emerging stage (Sosik et al., 2002; Wehling et al., 2009). As per its definition,
Jarlstrom et al. (2018) characterise that the basic concept underlying the discussion of SHRM is
that firms seek different kinds of outcomes to satisfy their stakeholders' expectations. These
outcomes may be economic, social, human, and ecological, and firms often seek them
simultaneously even though one or two may be more important to an organisation than the others.
Many organisations are willingly to report their economic, social and ecological sustainability
performance (Schaltegger and Wagner, 2006; Sena and Shani, 2008).
3.1 Models of Sustainable Human Resource Management

SHRM is constantly developing and the literature proposes some useful models. A model by Zaugg
et al. (2001) is academically and empirically validated. In this model, SHRM is related to
employees acting in a self-responsible way and participating in the decision making of the
organisation. The success of SHRM is measured from the organisational and employee
perspectives. Economic value-added, organisational flexibility, and viability contribute to the
organisation's perspective whereas employee employability, well-being, and self-responsibility
contribute to the employee's perspective. Ehnert (2009c) focuses on sustainable resource
management approach, which points out the dependence of organisations on the survival of their
organisational environments. He adopts three theoretical perspectives – the stakeholder theory,
resource-based view, and systems theory. Zaugg (2001) represents the Swiss approach which
depends on empirical research on the understanding of sustainability and HRM in practice. It has
been extended into a systematic conceptualisation of SHRM grounded in conceptual and qualitative
case research. Cohen et al. (2012) recognise three characteristics of equity, well-being and
employee development, and five prerequisites of compliance, governance, ethics, culture and
leadership for SHRM. de Prins et al. (2014) proposed “Respect, Openness and Continuity” (ROC)
model of SHRM. Respect for the internal stakeholders in the organisation i.e. employees, Openness
focuses on environmental awareness in the perspective of HR and Continuity focus on long-term
approach in both economic and societal sustainability terms.
Gollan and Xu (2014) identify external and internal drivers for SHRM. External drivers include
market, technology, changes required by regulations, and internal drivers include culture and
customers, leadership and management style. Likewise, Kramar (2014) focuses on human
1016
Vol. 5, No. 6, 1014-1031, 2020
resources sustainability and identifies external drivers such as market, technology, changes required
by regulations and internal drivers, such as culture and customers, leadership and management
style. Gollan and Xu (2014) explicitly identify outcomes of SHRM in terms of productivity and
profit, employee satisfaction and commitment, employee development, equity and well-being
whereas Kramar (2014) identify four types of outcomes such as organisational, social, individual,
and ecological. He presents SHRM as the pattern of planned or emerging HR strategies/practices
intended to enable the achievement of financial, social and ecological goals while simultaneously
reproducing the HR base over the long term. It seeks to minimise the negative impacts on the natural
environment, people and communities and acknowledges the critical enabling role of CEOs, middle
and line managers, HRM professionals and employees in providing practices which are distinctive,
consistent and reflect the consensus among decision-makers. With increasing pressure from
stakeholders, concerns on the subject of environmental issues are highlighted and companies are
driven to develop policies and programs to conduct environmentally sustainable business activities
and act under the environmental regulations (Yadav et al., 2016). Table 2 shows the dimension of
various SHRM models.
Table 2. Models of sustainable HRM

Author Model Dimensions
Sustainable HRM Model Sustainable HRM within strategic management, Sustainable HRM
Tabatabaei et al. (2017)
based on BSC strategies
Kramar (2014) Sustainable HRM Sustainable work systems negative externalities
Respect for the employees, Environmental awareness in perspective on
Respect, Openness, and
de Prins et al. (2014) HRM, Long-term approach (economic and societal sustainability and
Continuity (ROC) model
individual employability)
Mariappanadar and “Harm” of efficiency-oriented HRM on stakeholders and
Sustainable HRM
Kramar (2014) “externalities”
Practice-Based Model for
Internal and external drivers, Sustainability objectives at the corporate
Ehnert et al. (2014) the Sustainability–HRM
level, HR-related sustainability objectives and HR-related activities
Link
Paradox framework for Human capital, Normative interpretations of sustainability, Efficiency
Ehnert (2009c)
SHRM interpretations of sustainability
Social responsibility, Efficiency, and substance-oriented
Martin-Alcazar et al.
Integrative model understanding of sustainability. Relationship between HRM strategy
(2005)
and corporate strategy
Work-life balance, Personal autonomy in professional development,
Zaugg et al. (2001) The Three Pillars of SHRM
Employability of the workers
3.2 Indicators of Sustainable Human Resource Management

SHRM is defined as “those long-term oriented conceptual approaches and activities aimed at a
socially responsible and economically appropriate recruitment and selection, development,
deployment, and release of employees” (Thom and Zaugg, 2004). The Brundtland Commission
asserts that sustainability can achieve objectives at three points including economic, environmental
and social, without risking natural life conditions (Ehnert, 2009b). Several pieces of research have
reported that Environmental, Social, and Economic Sustainability are main indicators and factors
affecting human resource sustainability. Companies are increasingly connecting the dots between
sustainability and its impact on their organisation. As a result, more and more organisations are
seeking ways to transform themselves into a sustainable organisation by making a positive impact
on economic, environmental and social. These impacts are also affecting HR sustainability.
1017
Vol. 5, No. 6, 1014-1031, 2020
3.2.1 Environmental Sustainability

Environmental sustainability focuses on creating a safe environment and seeks to reduce the
negative impact and focus on solving environmental issues. Organisations are concentrating on
practising green management to improve their environmental performance (Jabbour and de-Sousa
Jabbour, 2016; Udokporo et al., 2020). Several studies concentrating on green management and
green HRM practices (Prasad, 2013; Sathyapriya et al., 2013; Mittal and Sangwan, 2014; Opatha
and Arulrajah, 2014; Ahmad, 2015, Masri and Jaaron, 2017) have emphasised the association
between green HR practices such as green recruitment and selection, green training and
development, green performance management, green reward system, green cordial relations, and
positive environmental performance. Guerci et al. (2016) found that green training and
involvement, green performance and green compensation are significantly positive to
environmental performance. Table 3 represents the environmental sustainability indicators for
SHRM.
Table 3. Environmental sustainability indicators of SHRM

Indicators References
Revill (2000), Daily and Huang (2001), Govindarajulu and Daily (2004), Jabbour and Santos
Green job design (2008b), Renwick et al. (2013), Opatha and Arulrajah (2014), Arulrajah et al. (2015), Tooranloo et
al. (2017)
Green employment Prasad (2013), Jackson et al. (2014), Ahmad (2015), Arulrajah et al. (2015), Tooranloo et al. (2017)
Crosbie and Knight (1995), North (1997), Revill (2000), Jabbour and Santos (2008a), Renwick et
Green selection al. (2013), Chan et al. (2014), Opatha and Arulrajah (2014), Arulrajah et al. (2015), Deepak and
Prakash (2015), Jepsen and Grob (2015), Tooranloo et al. (2017), Wehrmeyer (2017)
Green performance Milliman and Clair (1996), Prasad (2013), Renwick et al. (2013), Jackson et al. (2014), Opatha and
evaluation Arulrajah (2014), Ahmad (2015), Arulrajah et al. (2015), Tooranloo et al. (2017), Wehrmeyer (2017)
Cook and Seith (1992), North (1997), Jabbour (2013), Prasad (2013), Renwick et al. (2013), Chan
Green training et al. (2014), Jackson et al. (2014), Opatha and Arulrajah (2014), Arulrajah et al. (2015), Guerci et
al. (2016), Tooranloo et al. (2017)
Bhushan and Mackenzie (1992), Crosbie and Knight (1995), Berry and Randinelli (1998), Ramus
Green reward system (2001), Daily et al. (2003), Govindarajulu and Daily (2004), Prasad (2013), Renwick et al. (2013),
management Jackson et al. (2014), Opatha and Arulrajah (2014), Ahmad (2015), Arulrajah et al. (2015), Jabbour
(2015), Guerci et al. (2016), Tooranloo et al. (2017)
Green compensation system
Ramus (2002), Fernández et al. (2003), Phillips (2007), Tooranloo et al. (2017)
management
Green health and
Ditz et al. (1995), Beard and Hartmann (1997), Ahmad (2015), Arulrajah et al. (2015), Tooranloo et
employees’ safety
al. (2017)
management
Green management of Wright and Mcmahan (2011), Renwick et al. (2013), Jackson et al. (2014), Opatha and Arulrajah
employee discipline (2014), Arulrajah et al. (2015), Tooranloo et al. (2017)
Employee green relations Renwick et al. (2013), Ahmad (2015), Arulrajah et al. (2015), Tooranloo et al. (2017)
Clarke (2006), Chartered Institute of Personnel and Development (2007), Phillips (2007), Stringer
Green recruitment (2010), Jabbour (2013), Renwick et al. (2013), Jackson et al. (2014), Arulrajah et al. (2015), Jepsen
and Grob (2015), Oates (2017), Wehrmeyer (2017)
Crosbie and Knight (1995), North (1997), Revill (2000), Renwick et al. (2013), Opatha and
Green induction
Arulrajah (2014), Arulrajah et al. (2015), Wehrmeyer (2017)
Green HR planning Arulrajah et al. (2015), Tooranloo et al. (2017)
Green policy
Ahmad (2015), Arulrajah et al. (2015), Tooranloo et al. (2017)
implementation
3.2.2 Social Sustainability

Social sustainability focuses on the welfare of current and future generations. To achieve these
objectives, organisations focus on providing a good quality standard of life by reducing social
inequality. Social sustainability occurs when the formal and informal processes, systems,
1018
Vol. 5, No. 6, 1014-1031, 2020
structures, and relationships actively support the capacity of current and future generations to create
healthy and liveable communities. Socially sustainable communities are equitable, diverse,
connected, democratic, and provide a good quality of life. Table 4 represents the social
sustainability indicators for SHRM.
Table 4. Social sustainability indicators of SHRM

Social infrastructure Ahmad and Schroeder (2002), Chan and Lee (2008), Tooranloo et al. (2017)
The availability of
Stiglitz (2002), Chan and Lee (2008), Tooranloo et al. (2017)
career opportunities
Accessibility Smith (2000), Tooranloo et al. (2017), Yeh and Ng (2017)
Ability to fulfil the Ahmad and Schroeder (2002), Turkington and Sangster (2006), Chan and Lee (2008), Daily et al. (2012),
psychological needs Mampra (2013), Aragon-Correa et al. (2015), Tooranloo et al. (2017)
Social justice Dempsey et al. (2011), Tooranloo et al. (2017)
Social sustainability
Bramley et al. (2009), Dempsey et al. (2011), Tooranloo et al. (2017)
design
Corporate social
Peneda Saraiva and Serrasqueiro (2007), Crane et al. (2008), Teck Hui (2008), Tooranloo et al. (2017)
responsibility
Social sustainability Griessler and Littig (2005), Bramley et al. (2009), Dempsey et al. (2011), Tooranloo et al. (2017)
3.2.3 Economic Sustainability

Economic sustainability is associated with cost reduction, saving valuable resources for future
generations, and better management of resources (Munasinghe, 1993; Garza-Reyes et al., 2019;
Nadeem et al., 2019). SHRM treats sustainability as a mutual benefit for all stakeholders’ groups
and as a contribution to long economic sustainability. According to Nadeem et al. (2018)
sustainability is the modality of development that enables economic and social progress, without
destroying their environmental resources while making ethically acceptable, morally fair, socially
and economically sound developments. Table 5 represents the economic sustainability indicators
for SHRM.
Table 5. Economic sustainability indicators of SHRM

HR efficiency Copus and Crabtree (1996), Youndt et al. (1996), Tooranloo et al. (2017)
Re-engineering/ restructuring Love and Gunasekaran (1997), Tooranloo et al. (2017)
Cost reduction strategy Hanegraaf and Biewinga (1998), Tooranloo et al. (2017)
Senior management
Tisdell (1996), Glaser and Diele (2004), Tooranloo et al. (2017)
commitment
Development of facilities Tisdell (1996), Vincent (1997), Tooranloo et al. (2017)
Copus and Crabtree (1996), Vincent (1997), Hanegraaf and Biewinga (1998), Epstein (2008),
Macroeconomic policies
Tooranloo et al. (2017)
Employment guarantee Glaser and Diele (2004), Basu et al. (2009), Jha et al. (2013)
4. Benefits of Adopting Sustainable Human Resource Management

SHRM will enable organisations to balance conflicting expectations from different stakeholders
such as employees, vendors, customers, shareholders, government, and communities by ensuring
that they create a positive impact on organisational, environmental and financial performance.
SHRM benefits can be measured by evaluating organisational, social, individual and ecological
performance. Measures would need to evaluate outcomes such as quality of the employment
1019
Vol. 5, No. 6, 1014-1031, 2020
relationship, health, and wellbeing of the workforce, employee productivity, quality of

relationships at work, potential employer, being recognised among a range of potential sources of
labour (social), job satisfaction, employee motivation, work-life balance (individual), use of
resources, such as energy, paper, water, production of green products and services and costs
associated with work travel (ecological).
Business stakeholders such as employees, creditors, investors, shareholders, consumers, regulators,

and the public are further aware and put pressure on companies' environmental performance
(Ilinitch et al., 1998; Molina-Azorín et al., 2009). Several measurement systems were introduced
by the companies namely, environmental rating matrices, the corporate environmental scorecard,
and corporate environmental reports to evaluate environmental performance (Ilinitch et al., 1998),
but relatively they ensure their financial growth (Molina-Azorínet al., 2009). Companies with good
social/human and ecological/environmental practices have a positive impact on their financial
performance (Orlitzky et al., 2003; Branco and Rodrigues, 2006). Further, companies involved in
ethical investments are also shown to have better financial performance compared to other
companies (Collinson et al., 2008). Several studies have found the positive effect of green HRM
practices on organisational and environmental performance. Green HRM practices in the form of
green recruitment, green training, and green rewards can improve and support organisations’
environmental performance and create competitive advantage (Renwick et al., 2013; Paille et al.,
2014; Ahmad, 2015; Roy and Khastagir, 2016; Masri and Jaaron, 2017). Table 6 represents the
benefits of adopting SHRM.
Table 6. Benefits of adopting SHRM

Dimension References
Berry and Rondinelli (1998), Zaugg and Thom (2001), Gonzalez-Benito and Gonzalez-Benito
Organisational performance
(2005), Chen et al. (2006), Driessen et al. (2013), Sawang and Kivits (2014)
Gill et al. (1986), Banerjee (2002), Erdogan and Baris (2007), Crane et al. (2008), Jabbour and
Environmental performance Santos (2008a), Teixeira et al. (2012), Paille et al. (2013), Rawashdeh (2018), Yusoff and Nejati
(2019)
Financial Performance Bansal and Gao (2006), Yusoff and Nejati (2019)
4.1 Drivers of Sustainable HRM Adoption

To satisfy stakeholders demand and meeting market pressures, companies have started to
implement sustainable business practices (Carmona-Moreno et al., 2004; Laudal, 2011; Kesidou
and Demirel, 2012; Aguilera-Caracuel and Ortiz-de-Mandojana, 2013). Managers are increasing
pressure on environmental performance programmes due to the number of environmental laws
(Jones and Felps, 2013). These concerns and pressures are very crucial for the successful
implementation of Green HRM practices. Seidel et al. (2010) emphasise that information
technology, strategy, organisational support, traceability through information systems and
motivation are a critical enabler for SHRM adoption. The human aspect is also identified as a
critical enabler for adopting SHRM (Jabbour, 2013; Govindan et al., 2014; Longoni et al., 2014;
Paille et al., 2014). Undoubtedly, investment in sustainability and socially responsible practices can
produce several benefits for businesses. Sustainability adoption help in improving the reputation of
businesses, increase their visibility, establish public trust, and help in becoming a socially
responsible organisation. Laudal (2011) revealed that welfare activities, organisational work
environment, and employee’s performance contribute to sustainable practices and play a critical
role in driving SHRM. Strict environmental laws also encourage companies to participate in
1020
Vol. 5, No. 6, 1014-1031, 2020
sustainable practices (Laudal, 2011; Jones et al., 2014). Bansal and Gao (2006) highlighted that
environmental performance programs are one of the most significant factors affecting quality of
life, environmental sustainability, and the financial growth of the company. Table 7 represents
drivers for SHRM adoption.
Table 7. Drivers for sustainable human resource management adoption

Dimension References
Environmental performance Ilinitch et al. (1998), Brockhoff et al. (1999), Mostafa (2006), Jabbour and Santos (2008a),
programs Gadenne et al. (2009), Teixeira et al. (2012), Paillé et al. (2013), Wagner (2013)
Ilinitch et al. (1998), Carmona-Moreno et al. (2004), Williamson et al. (2006), Kesidou and
Stakeholders
Demirel (2012), Aguilera-Caracuelet and Ortiz-de-Mandojana (2013), Guerci and Shani (2013)
Green HRM practices Russo and Fouts (1997), Mehta and Chugan (2015), Mahmood et al. (2016)
Ramus (2001), Ramus (2002), Jabbour and Santos (2008a), Ehnert (2009d), Jabbour et al. (2010),
Human aspects Boiral and Paille (2012), Graves et al. (2013), Jabbour (2013), Wolf (2013), Govindan et al. (2014),
Longoni et al. (2014), Paille et al. (2014)
Environmental laws Laudal (2011), Jones et al. (2014)
Welfare and employee
Laudal (2011)
satisfaction
Meet market pressures Laudal (2011)
Employee performance Laudal (2011)
Working environment Laudal (2011)
4.2 Barriers in Adopting Sustainable Human Resource Management

While the importance of and awareness for a move toward sustainability is increasing, its adoption
faces some barriers and challenges. Conflicts in decisions with boards and/or management teams
and the lack of employees' acceptance are major barriers/challenges (Gollan, 2000; Jafri, 2012).
Seidel et al. (2010) identified that a lack of organisational support and lack of transparency
negatively impact the adoption of sustainable practices. Organisations are also constrained on time
and resources as well as lack of employee acceptance for implementing SHRM (Sweeney, 2009;
Seidel et al., 2010; Fayyazi et al., 2015). Depending on the size of the company, implementation
expenses become another major concern (Sweeney, 2009). Due to the absence of technical support
and zero understanding of green policies among the employees, the organisation finds it difficult
to implement SHRM (Rompa, 2011; Jafri, 2012; Fayyazi et al., 2015). Table 8 presents the barriers
to SHRM adoption.
Table 8. Barriers to SHRM adoption

Dimension Reference
Lack of support from middle
Seidel et al. (2010), Paille et al. (2013), Harvey et al. (2013)
management
Lack of time Sweeney (2009), Seidel et al. (2010), Fayyazi et al. (2015)
Lack of resources Sweeney (2009), Fayyazi et al. (2015)
Company size Sweeney (2009)
Board management decision Sweeney (2009), Paille et al. (2013), Fayyazi et al. (2015)
Manager decision Sweeney (2009), Paille et al. (2013), Fayyazi et al. (2015)
Harris and Ogbonna (1998), Hillary (2004), Murillo-Luna et al. (2007), Chan and Lee (2008),
Lack of employee acceptance
Sweeney (2009), Linnenluecke and Griffiths (2010), Fayyazi et al. (2015)
Lack of technical support Rompa (2011), Fayyazi et al. (2015)
Lack of understanding of green
Rompa (2011), Fayyazi et al. (2015)
policies
Implementation expenses Rompa (2011), Jafri (2012), Fayyazi et al. (2015)
Lack of comprehensive planning Fayyazi et al. (2015)
Staff pressure and resistance Peng and Lin (2008)
1021
Vol. 5, No. 6, 1014-1031, 2020
5. Sustainable Human Resource Management Framework for Sustainability

Adoption
With the identification of drivers, barriers, and benefits of SHRM, this section presents an
integrated framework of SHRM. A conceptual model for SHRM framework for sustainability
adoption is presented in Figure 1. This framework captures the Environmental, Social, and
Economic Sustainability indicators of SHRM as well as the Organisational, Environmental, and
Financial benefits of adopting SHRM. Since sustainability adoption is a continuous process, it
needs continuous support from the drivers of SHRM. The identification of drivers (Environmental
performance programmes, Stakeholders, Green HRM practices, Human aspects, Environmental
laws, Welfare, and employee satisfaction, Market pressures, Employee performance, working
environment) contributes to the easy adoption of SHRM practices in an organisation. The
identification of barriers is vital so organisations can reduce the hurdles and benefits can be derived
without much issue.
Drivers of
Sustainable
Indicators of Human
Benefits of
Sustainable Human Resource
Management Sustainable Human
Resource Resource
Management Management
Environmental
Sustainability Benefits of Organizational
Indicators of
Sustainable Performance
Sustainable
Human Resource
Human
Management
Social Resource
Sustainability Management Environmental
Performance
Economic
Financial
Sustainability Barriers of Performance
Sustainable
Human Resource
Management
Figure 1. Proposal of SHRM framework for sustainability adoption
6. Conclusions
This study explored the concept of SHRM and its importance in sustainability adoption in an
organisation. By adopting a systematic literature review approach, this study identifies the
indicators, drivers, barriers and benefits of SHRM adoption. The process of sustainability adoption
begins with the identification of indicators of SHRM and ends at deriving benefits. This research
also provides an integrated conceptual framework that could be used for developing a long-lasting
sustainability adoption through sustainable human resource management (SHRM). Like any other
research, this research has certain limitations. At first, the research completely relies on secondary
data. Further research can gather primary data for concurrent exploitation of the concept’s value.
Secondly, the research presents a conceptual framework which needs verification and validation.
1022
Vol. 5, No. 6, 1014-1031, 2020
Furthermore, future research can deploy different methodological angles, such as qualitative and
quantitative approaches to validate the research findings and implications.
Conflict of Interest
The authors confirm that there is no conflict of interest to declare for this publication.
Acknowledgement
The authors sincerely thank anonymous reviewers and the Editor-in-Chief for providing critical comments and
suggestions for improving the quality of the paper.
References
Aguilera-Caracuel, J., & Ortiz-de-Mandojana, N. (2013). Green innovation and financial performance: an
institutional approach. Organization & Environment, 26(4), 365-385.
Ahmad, S. (2015). Green human resource management: policies and practices. Cogent Business &
Management, 2(1), 1030817.
Ahmad, S., & Schroeder, R.G. (2002). The importance of recruitment and selection process for sustainability
of total quality management. International Journal of Quality & Reliability Management, 19(5), 540-
550.
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), 498-522.
Arulrajah, A.A., Opatha, H.H.D.N.P., & Nawaratne, N.N.J. (2015). Green human resource management
practices: a review. Sri Lankan Journal of Human Resource Management, 5(1), 1-16.
Banerjee, S.B. (2002). Corporate environmentalism: the construct and its measurement. Journal of Business
Research, 55(3), 177-191.
Bansal, P., & Gao, J. (2006). Building the future by looking to the past: examining research published on
organizations and environment. Organization & Environment, 19(4), 458-478.
Basu, A.K., Chau, N.H., & Kanbur, R. (2009). A theory of employment guarantees: contestability, credibility
and distributional concerns. Journal of Public Economics, 93(3-4), 482-497.
Beard, C., & Hartmann, R. (1997). Sustainable design: rethinking future business products. The Journal of
Sustainable Product Design, 1(3), 18-27.
Berry, M.A., & Rondinelli, D.A. (1998). Proactive corporate environmental management: a new industrial
revolution. Academy of Management Perspectives, 12(2), 38-50.
Bhushan, A.K., & MacKenzie, J.C. (1992). Environmental leadership plus total quality management equals
continuous improvement. Environmental Quality Management, 1(3), 207-224.
Boiral, O., & Paillé, P. (2012). Organizational citizenship behaviour for the environment: measurement and
validation. Journal of Business Ethics, 109(4), 431-445.
Bramley, G., Dempsey, N., Power, S., Brown, C., & Watkins, D. (2009). Social sustainability and urban
form: evidence from five British cities. Environment and planning A: Economy and Space, 41(9), 2125-
2142.
1023
Vol. 5, No. 6, 1014-1031, 2020
Branco, M.C., & Rodrigues, L.L. (2006). Corporate social responsibility and resource-based
perspectives. Journal of Business Ethics, 69(2), 111-132.
Brockhoff, K., Chakrabarti, A.K., & Kirchgeorg, M. (1999). Corporate strategies in environmental
management. Research-Technology Management, 42(4), 26-30.
Carmona-Moreno, E., Céspedes-Lorente, J., & De Burgos-Jiménez, J. (2004). Environmental strategies in
Spanish hotels: contextual factors and performance. The Service Industries Journal, 24(3), 101-130.
Chan, E., & Lee, G.K. (2008). Critical factors for improving social sustainability of urban renewal
projects. Social Indicators Research, 85(2), 243-256.
Chan, E.S., Hon, A.H., Chan, W., & Okumus, F. (2014). What drives employees’ intentions to implement
green practices in hotels? The role of knowledge, awareness, concern and ecological
behaviour. International Journal of Hospitality Management, 40, 20-28.
Chartered institute of personnel and development (CIPD) (2007). The environment and people management.
Retrieved from https://www.cipd.co.uk/Images/annual-report_2007-8_tcm18-11764.pdf.
Chen, J.C., Silverthorne, C., & Hung, J.Y. (2006). Organization communication, job stress, organizational
commitment, and job performance of accounting professionals in Taiwan and America. Leadership &
Organization Development Journal, 27(4), 242-249.
Clarke, E. (2006). People management. Power Brokers, 12(10), 40-42.
Cohen, E., Taylor, S., & Muller-Camen, M. (2012). HRM’s role in corporate social and environmental
sustainability. SHRM Report, 1, 1-16. Retrieved from https://www.shrm.org/hr-today/trends-and-
forecasting/special-reports-and-expert-views/Documents/Corporate-Social-Environmental-
Sustainability.pdf.
Collison, D.J., Cobb, G., Power, D.M., & Stevenson, L.A. (2008). The financial performance of the
FTSE4Good indices. Corporate Social Responsibility and Environmental Management, 15(1), 14-28.
Cook, J., & Seith, B.J. (1992). Designing an effective environmental EMS training program. Journal of
Environmental Regulation, 2(1), 53-62.
Copus, A.K., & Crabtree, J.R. (1996). Indicators of socio-economic sustainability: an application to remote
rural Scotland. Journal of Rural Studies, 12(1), 41-54.
Crane, A., Matten, D., & Moon, J. (2008). Ecological citizenship and the corporation: politicizing the new
corporate environmentalism. Organization & Environment, 21(4), 371-389.
Crosbie, L., & Knight, K. (1995). Strategy for sustainable business: environmental opportunity and strategic
choice. McGraw-Hill, London, pp196-211.
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),
1539-1552.
Daily, B.F., Bishop, J.W., & Massoud, J.A. (2012). The role of training and empowerment in environmental
performance: a study of the Mexican maquiladora industry. International Journal of Operations &
Production Management, 32(5), 631-647.
Daily, C.M., Dalton, D.R., & Cannella Jr, A.A. (2003). Corporate governance: decades of dialogue and
data. Academy of Management Review, 28(3), 371-382.
De Prins, P., Van Beirendonck, L., De Vos, A., & Segers, J. (2014). Sustainable HRM: bridging theory and
practice through the' respect openness continuity (ROC)'-model. Management Revue, 25(4), 263-284.
Doi: 10.1688/mrev-2014-04-Prins.
1024
Vol. 5, No. 6, 1014-1031, 2020
Deepak, B., & Prakash, T. (2015). Green HRM-A way to greening the environment. IOSR Journal of
Business and Management, 17(12), 45-53.
Dempsey, N., Bramley, G., Power, S., & Brown, C. (2011). The social dimension of sustainable development:
defining urban social sustainability. Sustainable Development, 19(5), 289-300.
Ditz, D.W., Ranganathan, J., & Banks, R.D. (1995). Green ledgers: case studies in corporate environmental
accounting. World Resources Institute. Retrieved from: http://agris.fao.org/agris-
search/search.do?recordID=US9607583.
Driessen, E., Van, H.L., Don, F.J., Peen, J., Kool, S., Westra, D., Hendriksen, M., Schoevers, R.A., Cuijpers,
P., Twisk, J.W.R., & Dekker, J.J. (2013). The efficacy of cognitive-behavioral therapy and
psychodynamic therapy in the outpatient treatment of major depression: a randomized clinical
trial. American Journal of Psychiatry, 170(9), 1041-1050.
Ehnert I., Harry, W., & Zink, K.J. (2014). Sustainability and HRM. In: Ehnert I., Harry W., Zink K. (eds)
425 Sustainability and Human Resource Management. Springer, Berlin, Heidelberg. pp 3-32.
Ehnert, I. (2009a). Sustainability and HRM. Sustainability and Human Resource Management (pp 3-32).
Springer, Berlin, Heidelberg.
ehnert, i. (2009b). sustainable human Resource Management. A Conceptual and Exploratory Analysis from
a Paradox Perspective (pp33-78). Physica-Verlag: Berlin/Heidelberg, Germany.
Ehnert, I. (2009c). Conceptual model for sustainable HRM and a Paradox Framework. In Sustainable Human
Resource Management (pp163-181). Physica-Verlag HD.
Ehnert, I. (2009d). Sustainability and human resource management: reasoning and applications on corporate
websites. European Journal of International Management, 3(4), 419-438.
Epstein, M.J. (2008). Making sustainability work: best practices in managing and measuring corporate
social. Environmental and Economic Impacts, Greenleaf, Sheffield.
Erdogan, N., & Baris, E. (2007). Environmental protection programs and conservation practices of hotels in
Ankara, Turkey. Tourism Management, 28(2), 604-614.
Fayyazi, M., Shahbazmoradi, S., Afshar, Z., & Shahbazmoradi, M.R. (2015). Investigating the barriers of the
green human resource management implementation in oil industry. Management Science Letters, 5(1),
101-108.
Fernández, E., Junquera, B., & Ordiz, M. (2003). Organizational culture and human resources in the
environmental issue: a review of the literature. International Journal of Human Resource
Management, 14(4), 634-656.
Gadenne, D.L., Kennedy, J., & McKeiver, C. (2009). An empirical study of environmental awareness and
practices in SMEs. Journal of Business Ethics, 84(1), 45-63.
Garza-Reyes, J.A. (2015). Lean and green-a systematic review of the state of the art literature. Journal of
Cleaner Production, 102(1), 18-29.
Garza-Reyes, J.A., Salomé Valls, A., Nadeem, S.P., Anosike, A., & Kumar, V. (2019). A circularity
measurement toolkit for manufacturing SMEs. International Journal of Production Research, 57(23),
7319-7343.
Gill, J.D., Crosby, L.A., & Taylor, J.R. (1986). Ecological concern, attitudes, and social norms in voting
behavior. Public Opinion Quarterly, 50(4), 537-554.
Glaser, M., & Diele, K. (2004). Asymmetric outcomes: assessing central aspects of the biological, economic
and social sustainability of a mangrove crab fishery, Ucides cordatus (Ocypodidae), in North
Brazil. Ecological Economics, 49(3), 361-373.
1025
Vol. 5, No. 6, 1014-1031, 2020
Gollan, P.J., & Xu, Y. (2014). Fostering corporate sustainability. In: Ehnert, I., Harry, W., & Zink, K.
(eds) Sustainability and Human Resource Management. CSR, Sustainability, Ethics & Governance.
Springer, Berlin, Heidelberg, pp. 225-245.
Gollan, P.J. (2000). Human resources, capabilities and sustainability. In: Dunphy, D., Benveniste, J.,
Griffiths, A., & Sutton, P. (eds.) Sustainability: The Corporate Challenge for the 21st Century. Allen
and Unwin, Crows Nest, NSW, Australia, pp. 55-77.
González-Benito, J., & González-Benito, Ó. (2005). Environmental proactivity and business performance:
an empirical analysis. Omega, 33(1), 1-15.
Govindan, K., Kannan, D., & Shankar, K.M. (2014). Evaluating the drivers of corporate social responsibility
in the mining industry with multi-criteria approach: a multi-stakeholder perspective. Journal of Cleaner
Production, 84, 214-232.
Govindarajulu, N., & Daily, B.F. (2004). Motivating employees for environmental improvement. Industrial
Management & Data Systems, 104(4), 364-372.
Graves, L.M., Sarkis, J., & Zhu, Q. (2013). How transformational leadership and employee motivation
combine to predict employee pro-environmental behaviours in China. Journal of Environmental
Psychology, 35, 81-91.
Griessler, E., & Littig, B. (2005). Social sustainability: a catchword between political pragmatism and social
theory. International Journal for Sustainable Development, 8(1/2), 65-79.
Guerci, M., & Shani, A.B. (2013). Moving toward stakeholder-based HRM: a perspective of Italian HR
managers. The International Journal of Human Resource Management, 24(6), 1130-1150.
Guerci, M., Longoni, A., & Luzzini, D. (2016). Translating stakeholder pressures into environmental
performance–the mediating role of green HRM practices. The International Journal of Human Resource
Management, 27(2), 262-289.
Hanegraaf, M.C., & Biewinga, E.E. (1998). Assessing the ecological and economic sustainability of energy
crops. Biomass and Bioenergy, 15(4-5), 345-355.
Harris, L.C., & Ogbonna, E. (1998). Employee responses to culture change efforts. Human Resource
Management Journal, 8(2), 78-92.
Harvey, G., Williams, K., & Probert, J. (2013). Greening the airline pilot: HRM and the green performance
of airlines in the UK. The International Journal of Human Resource Management, 24(1), 152-166.
Hillary, R. (2004). Environmental management systems and the smaller enterprise. Journal of Cleaner
Production, 12(6), 561-569.
Ilinitch, A.Y., Soderstrom, N.S., & Thomas, T.E. (1998). Measuring corporate environmental
performance. Journal of Accounting and Public Policy, 17(4-5), 383-408.
Jabbour, C.J.C. (2013). Environmental training in organisations: from a literature review to a framework for
future research. Resources, Conservation and Recycling, 74, 144-155.
Jabbour, C.J.C. (2015). Environmental training and environmental management maturity of Brazilian
companies with ISO14001: empirical evidence. Journal of Cleaner Production, 96, 331-338.
Jabbour, C.J.C., & de Sousa Jabbour, A.B.L. (2016). Green human resource management and green supply
chain management: linking two emerging agendas. Journal of Cleaner Production, 112, 1824-1833.
Jabbour, C.J.C., & Santos, F.C.A. (2008a). Relationships between human resource dimensions and
environmental management in companies: proposal of a model. Journal of Cleaner Production, 16(1),
51-58.
1026
Vol. 5, No. 6, 1014-1031, 2020
Jabbour, C.J.C., & Santos, F.C.A. (2008b). The central role of human resource management in the search for
sustainable organizations. The International Journal of Human Resource Management, 19(12), 2133-
2154.
Jabbour, C.J.C., Santos, F.C.A., & Nagano, M.S. (2010). Contributions of HRM throughout the stages of
environmental management: methodological triangulation applied to companies in Brazil. The
International Journal of Human Resource Management, 21(7), 1049-1089.
Jackson, S.E., Schuler, R.S., & Jiang, K. (2014). An aspirational framework for strategic human resource
management. The Academy of Management Annals, 8(1), 1-56.
Jafri, S. (2012). Green HR practices: an empirical study of certain automobile organizations of India. Human
Resource Management, 42, 6193-6198.
Järlström, M., Saru, E., & Vanhala, S. (2018). Sustainable human resource management with salience of
stakeholders: a top management perspective. Journal of Business Ethics, 152(3), 703-724.
Jepsen, D.M., & Grob, S. (2015). Sustainability in recruitment and selection: building a framework of
practices. Journal of Education for Sustainable Development, 9(2), 160-178.
Jha, R., Gaiha, R., & Pandey, M.K. (2013). Body mass index, participation, duration of work and earnings
under the national rural employment guarantee scheme: evidence from Rajasthan. Journal of Asian
Economics, 26, 14-30.
Jones, P., Hillier, D., & Comfort, D. (2014). Sustainability in the global hotel industry. International Journal
of Contemporary Hospitality Management, 26(1), 5-17.
Jones, T.M., & Felps, W. (2013). Stakeholder happiness enhancement: a neo-utilitarian objective for the
modern corporation. Business Ethics Quarterly, 23(3), 349-379.
Kesidou, E., & Demirel, P. (2012). On the drivers of eco-innovations: empirical evidence from the
UK. Research Policy, 41(5), 862-870.
Kramar, R. (2014). Beyond strategic human resource management: is sustainable human resource
management the next approach. The International Journal of Human Resource Management, 25(8),
1069-1089.
Laudal, T. (2011). Drivers and barriers of CSR and the size and internationalization of firms. Social
Responsibility Journal, 7(2), 234-256.
Linnenluecke, M.K., & Griffiths, A. (2010). Corporate sustainability and organizational culture. Journal of
World Business, 45(4), 357-366.
Longoni, A., Golini, R., & Cagliano, R. (2014). The role of new forms of work organization in developing
sustainability strategies in operations. International Journal of Production Economics, 147, 147-160.
Love, P.E., & Gunasekaran, A. (1997). Process reengineering: a review of enablers. International Journal of
Production Economics, 50(2-3), 183-197.
Mahmood, A., Sandhu, M.A., Kanwal, S., & Iqbal, J. (2016). The effect of green HRM practices on
sustainability: evidence from manufacturing companies in Pakistan. Pakistan Journal of Social Sciences
(PJSS), 36(1), 177-188.
Mampra, M. (2013, January). Green HRM: does it help to build a competitive service sector? a study. In
Proceedings of Tenth AIMS International Conference on Management (pp. 1273-1281), AIMS
International, Banglore, India
Mariappanadar, S., & Kramar, R. (2014). Sustainable HRM: the synthesis effect of high performance work
systems on organisational performance and employee harm. Asia-Pacific Journal of Business
Administration, 6(3), 206-224.
1027
Vol. 5, No. 6, 1014-1031, 2020
Martin-Alcazar, F., Romero-Fernandez, P.M., & Sánchez-Gardey, G. (2005). Strategic human resource
management: integrating the universalistic, contingent, configurational and contextual perspectives. The
International Journal of Human Resource Management, 16(5), 633-659.
Masri, H.A., & Jaaron, A.A. (2017). Assessing green human resources management practices in Palestinian
manufacturing context: an empirical study. Journal of Cleaner Production, 143, 474-489.
Mehta, K., & Chugan, P.K. (2015). Green HRM in pursuit of environmentally sustainable
business. Universal Journal of Industrial and Business Management, 3(3), 74-81.
Milliman, J. & Clair, J. (1996), Best Environmental HRM Practices in the USA, In Wehrmeyer, W. (eds),
Greening People - Human Resources and Environmental Management, Greenleaf Publishing, Sheffield.
pp 49-74
Mittal, V.K., & Sangwan, K.S. (2014). Prioritizing drivers for green manufacturing: environmental, social
and economic perspectives. Procedia CIRP, 15, 135-140.
Molina-Azorín, J.F., Claver-Cortés, E., López-Gamero, M.D., & Tarí, J.J. (2009). Green management and
financial performance: a literature review. Management Decision, 47(7), 1080-1100.
Mostafa, M.M. (2006). Antecedents of Egyptian consumers' green purchase intentions: a hierarchical
multivariate regression model. Journal of International Consumer Marketing, 19(2), 97-126.
Munasinghe, M. (1993). Environmental economics and biodiversity management in developing
countries. Ambio, 22(2/3), 126-135.
Murillo-Luna, J.L., Garcés-Ayerbe, C., & Rivera-Torres, P. (2007). What prevents firms from advancing in
their environmental strategy?. International Advances in Economic Research, 13(1), 35-46.
Nadeem, S.P., Garza-Reyes, J.A., & Glanville, D. (2018). The challenges of the circular economy. In
Conway, E., & Byrne, D. (eds.) Contemporary Issues in Accounting. Palgrave Macmillan, Cham,
Switzerland. pp. 37–60.
Nadeem, S.P., Garza-Reyes, J.A., Anosike, A.I., & Kumar, V. (2017). Spectrum of circular economy and its
prospects in logistics. In Proceedings of the 2017 International Symposium on Industrial Engineering
and Operations Management (IEOM) (pp. 440-451). Bristol, UK.
Nadeem, S.P., Garza-Reyes, J.A., Kumar, V., & Anosike, A.I. (2019). Coalescing the lean and circular
economy. Proceedings of the 9th International Conference on Industrial Engineering and Operations
Management (IEOM) (pp. 1-12). Michigan: IEOM Society, Bangkok, Thailand.
North, K. (1997). Environmental business management: an introduction. International Labour Organization,
Switzerland.
Oates, A. (2017). Industrial Relations and the Environment in the UK 1. In Wehrmeyer, W. (ed), Greening
People. Routledge, New York, USA. pp. 117-140.
Opatha, H.H.P., & Arulrajah, A.A. (2014). Green human resource management: simplified general
reflections. International Business Research, 7(8), 101-112.
Orlitzky, M., Schmidt, F.L., & Rynes, S.L. (2003). Corporate social and financial performance: a meta-
analysis. Organization Studies, 24(3), 403-441.
Paille, P., Chen, Y., Boiral, O., & Jin, J. (2013). The impact of human resource management on
environmental. Pakistan Journal of Social Sciences, 36 (1), 177-188.
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), 451-466.
Peneda Saraiva, P., & Serrasqueiro, Z.M.S. (2007). Corporate sustainability in the Portuguese financial
institutions. Social Responsibility Journal, 3(2), 82-94.
1028
Vol. 5, No. 6, 1014-1031, 2020
Peng, Y.S., & Lin, S.S. (2008). Local responsiveness pressure, subsidiary resources, green management
adoption and subsidiary’s performance: evidence from Taiwanese manufactures. Journal of Business
Ethics, 79(1-2), 199-212.
Phillips, L. (2007). Go green to gain the edge over rivals. People Management, 13(17), 9.
Prasad, R.S. (2013). Green HRM-partner in sustainable competitive growth. Journal of Management
Sciences and Technology, 1(1), 15-18.
Ramus, C.A. (2001). Organizational support for employees: encouraging creative ideas for environmental
sustainability. California Management Review, 43(3), 85-105.
Ramus, C.A. (2002). Encouraging innovative environmental actions: what companies and managers must
do. Journal of World Business, 37(2), 151-164.
Rawashdeh, A. (2018). The impact of green human resource management on organizational environmental
performance in Jordanian health service organizations. Management Science Letters, 8(10), 1049-1058.
Renwick, D.W., Redman, T., & Maguire, S. (2013). Green human resource management: a review and
research agenda. International Journal of Management Reviews, 15(1), 1-14.
Revill, C. (2000). The “Greening” of personnel. human resource management an assessment. International
Journal of Applied HRM, 1(3), 1-30.
Rompa, I. (2011). Explorative research on sustainable human resource management. Master's Thesis.
University of Amsterdam.
Roy, M., & Khastagir, D. (2016). Exploring role of green management in enhancing organizational efficiency
in petro-chemical industry in India. Journal of Cleaner Production, 121, 109-115.
Russo, M.V., & Fouts, P.A. (1997). A resource-based perspective on corporate environmental performance
and profitability. Academy of Management Journal, 40(3), 534-559.
Sathyapriya, J., Kanimozhi, R., & Adhilakshmi, V. (2013). Green HRM-Delivering high performance HR
systems. International Journal of Marketing and Human Resource Management, 4(2), 19-25.
Sawang, S., & Kivits, R.A. (2014). Greener workplace: understanding senior management's adoption
decisions through the theory of planned behaviour. Australasian Journal of Environmental
Management, 21(1), 22-36.
Schaltegger, S., & Wagner, M. (2006). Integrative management of sustainability performance, measurement
and reporting. International Journal of Accounting, Auditing and Performance Evaluation, 3(1), 1-19.
Seidel, S., Recker, J.C., Pimmer, C., & vom Brocke, J. (2010). Enablers and barriers to the organizational
adoption of sustainable business practices. In Proceeding of the 16th Americas Conference on
Information Systems: Sustainable IT Collaboration Around the Globe (pp. 1-10). Association for
Information Systems, United States.
Sena, J., & Shani, A.R. (2008). Utilizing technology to support sustainability. In: Docherty, P., & Mira kira,
A.B. (eds) Creating Sustainable Work Systems. Routledge, London. pp. 110-126.
Smith, P.C. (2000). Sustainability and urban design. In: Wong, W.C., & Chan, E.H.W. (eds) Building Hong
Kong: Environmental Considerations. Hong Kong University Press, Hong Kong, pp. 17-42.
Sosik, J.J., Avolio, B.J., & Jung, D.I. (2002). Beneath the mask: examining the relationship of self-
presentation attributes and impression management to charismatic leadership. The Leadership
Quarterly, 13(3), 217-242.
Stiglitz, J.E. (2002). Employment, social justice and societal well‐being. International Labour
Review, 141(1‐2), 9-29.
1029
Vol. 5, No. 6, 1014-1031, 2020
Stringer, L. (2010). The green workplace: sustainable strategies that benefit employees, the environment,
642 and the bottom line. St. Martin's Press, New York, USA
Sweeney, L. (2009). A study of current practice of corporate social responsibility (CSR) and an examination
of the relationship between CSR and financial performance using structural equation modelling (SEM).
Doctoral Thesis, Dublin Institute of Technology, Dublin.
Tabatabaei, S.A.N., Omran, E.S., Hashemi, S., & Sedaghat, M. (2017). Presenting sustainable HRM model
based on balanced scorecard in knowledge-based ICT companies (The Case of Iran). Economics &
Sociology, 10(2), 107-124.
Teck Hui, L. (2008). Combining faith and CSR: a paradigm of corporate sustainability. International Journal
of Social Economics, 35(6), 449-465.
Teixeira, A.A., Jabbour, C.J.C., & de Sousa Jabbour, A.B.L. (2012). Relationship between green
management and environmental training in companies located in Brazil: a theoretical framework and
case studies. International Journal of Production Economics, 140(1), 318-329.
Thom, N., Zaugg, R.J. (2004). Nachhaltiges und innovatives personal ma nagement. In: Schwarz, E.J.
(ed) Nachhaltiges Innovations Management (pp. 215-245). Gabler Verlag, Wiesbaden.
Tisdell, C. (1996). Economic indicators to assess the sustainability of conservation farming projects: an
evaluation. Agriculture, Ecosystems & Environment, 57(2-3), 117-131.
Tooranloo, H.S., Azadi, M.H., & Sayyahpoor, A. (2017). Analyzing factors affecting implementation success
of sustainable human resource management (SHRM) using a hybrid approach of FAHP and type-2 fuzzy
DEMATEL. Journal of Cleaner Production, 162, 1252-1265.
Turkington, R., & Sangster, K. (2006). From housing mix to social mix-housing's contribution to social
sustainability. Town and Country Planning-London-Town and Country Planning Association, 75(6),
184.
Udokporo, C.K., Anosike, A., Lim, M., Nadeem, S.P., Garza-Reyes, J.A., & Ogbuka, C.P. (2020). Impact of
lean, agile and green (LAG) on business competitiveness: an empirical study of fast moving consumer
goods businesses. Resources, Conservation and Recycling, 156, 104714.
Vincent, J.R. (1997). Resource depletion and economic sustainability in Malaysia. Environment and
Development Economics, 2(1), 19-37.
Wagner, M. (2013). ‘Green’human resource benefits: do they matter as determinants of environmental
management system implementation?. Journal of Business Ethics, 114(3), 443-456.
Wehling, C., Guanipa Hernandez, A., Osland, J., Osland, A., Deller, J., Tanure, B., & Sairaj, A. (2009). An
exploratory study of the role of HRM and the transfer of German MNC sustainability values to
Brazil. European Journal of International Management, 3(2), 176-198.
Wehrmeyer, W. (2017). Greening people: human resources and environmental management. Routledge,
New York.
Williamson, D., Lynch-Wood, G., & Ramsay, J. (2006). Drivers of environmental behaviour in
manufacturing SMEs and the implications for CSR. Journal of Business Ethics, 67(3), 317-330.
Wolf, J. (2013). Improving the sustainable development of firms: the role of employees. Business Strategy
and the Environment, 22(2), 92-108.
Wright, P.M., & McMahan, G.C. (2011). Exploring human capital: putting ‘human’ back into strategic
human resource management. Human Resource Management Journal, 21(2), 93-104.
Yadav, P.L., Han, S.H., & Rho, J.J. (2016). Impact of environmental performance on firm value for
sustainable investment: evidence from large US firms. Business Strategy and the Environment, 25(6),
402-420.
1030
Vol. 5, No. 6, 1014-1031, 2020
Yeh, A.G.O., & Ng, M.K. (2017). Planning for a better urban living environment in Asia. Routledge, New
York.
Youndt, M.A., Snell, S.A., Dean Jr, J.W., & Lepak, D.P. (1996). Human resource management,
manufacturing strategy, and firm performance. Academy of Management Journal, 39(4), 836-866.
Yusoff, Y.M., & Nejati, M. (2019). A conceptual model of green HRM adoption towards sustainability in
hospitality industry. In Corporate Social Responsibility: Concepts, Methodologies, Tools, and
Applications, IGI Global, Hershey, USA. pp. 400-421.
Zaugg, R.J., Blum, A., & Thom, N. (2001). Sustainability in human resource management. Evaluation
Report. Survey in European Companies and Institutions, Switzerland.
Original content of this work is copyright © International Journal of Mathematical, Engineering and Management Sciences. Uses
under the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International (CC BY 4.0) license at https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/
1031
View publication stats

78 Ijmems Spceom19 P124 5 6 1014 1031 2020

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

78 Ijmems Spceom19 P124 5 6 1014 1031 2020

Uploaded by

Document Information

Original Title

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

78 Ijmems Spceom19 P124 5 6 1014 1031 2020

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

See discussions, stats, and author profiles for this publication at: https://www.researchgate.

Sustainability Adoption through Sustainable Human Resource Management: A

Anil Kumar Bandrana Preeti Bhaskar

SEE PROFILE SEE PROFILE

Simon Peter Nadeem Mrinal Tyagi

SEE PROFILE SEE PROFILE

The user has requested enhancement of the downloaded file.

Sustainability Adoption through Sustainable Human Resource

Simon Peter Nadeem

Jose Arturo Garza-Reyes

(Received May 12, 2020; Accepted August 2, 2020)

2. Systematic Literature Review Approach

Table 1. Systematic literature review phases

3. Sustainable Human Resource Management

3.1 Models of Sustainable Human Resource Management

Table 2. Models of sustainable HRM

3.2 Indicators of Sustainable Human Resource Management

3.2.1 Environmental Sustainability

Table 3. Environmental sustainability indicators of SHRM

3.2.2 Social Sustainability

Table 4. Social sustainability indicators of SHRM

3.2.3 Economic Sustainability

Table 5. Economic sustainability indicators of SHRM

4. Benefits of Adopting Sustainable Human Resource Management

relationship, health, and wellbeing of the workforce, employee productivity, quality of

Business stakeholders such as employees, creditors, investors, shareholders, consumers, regulators,

Table 6. Benefits of adopting SHRM

4.1 Drivers of Sustainable HRM Adoption

Table 7. Drivers for sustainable human resource management adoption

4.2 Barriers in Adopting Sustainable Human Resource Management

Table 8. Barriers to SHRM adoption

5. Sustainable Human Resource Management Framework for Sustainability

Figure 1. Proposal of SHRM framework for sustainability adoption

View publication stats

You might also like