R E S E A R CH A R T I C L E
Triggering employee green activism through green human
resource management: The role of green organizational
learning and responsible leadership
Muhammad Usman1 | Muhammad Waheed Akhtar2 | Nadia Zahoor3,4 |
Muhammad Aamir Shafiq Khan5 | Samuel Adomako6,7
1College of Business Administration,
University of Sharjah, Sharjah, UAE
2Rabat Business School, International
University of Rabat, Rabat, Morocco
3School of Business and Management, Queen
Mary University of London, London, UK
4InnoLab, University of Vaasa, Vaasa, Finland
5School of Management, Jiangsu University,
Zhenjiang, People's Republic of China
6Birmingham Business School, University of
Birmingham, Birmingham, UK
7Adnan Kassar School of Business, Lebanese
American University, Beruit, Lebanon
Correspondence
Samuel Adomako, Birmingham Business
School, University of Birmingham, Birmingham,
UK.
Email: s.adomako@bham.ac.uk
Abstract
Several studies have unveiled that green human resource management (GHRM) posi-
tively affects employees' voluntary green behaviors at work. However, the literature
has overlooked the influence of GHRM on employee beyond-work green activism—
employees' participation in different environmental campaigns and initiatives and
supporting/influencing organizations, environmental groups, and political actions
aimed at protecting the natural environment. We hypothesize that GHRM leads to
employee beyond-work green activism directly and indirectly via green organizational
learning. The present study also tests the moderating role of responsible leadership
in the GHRM-green organizational learning link. Multisource survey data collected
using the time-lagged strategy supported the proposed relationships. The findings
offer important recommendations for managers that can help them signify the role of
business organizations and HR practices in protecting the natural environment.
K E YWORD S
green activism, green human resource management, green organizational learning, responsible
leadership
1 | INTRODUCTION
Corresponding to the increasing pressure to integrate environmental
and social issues in the organizational strategy to protect nature,
scholars have integrated the environmental management strategy and
HRM practices to propose the concept of green human resource man-
agement (GHRM) (Aftab et al., 2023; Gyensare et al., 2023; Zhang
et al., 2024). Renwick et al. (2013) define GHRM as “HRM activities
which enhance positive environmental outcomes” (p. 4). Past research
has revealed that GHRM affects several environmental outcomes,
such as green psychological climate, firm environmental performance,
and employees' in-role green performance (Aftab et al., 2023;
O'Donohue & Torugsa, 2016). Despite making valuable contributions,
the effect of GHRM on positive environmental outcomes has primar-
ily been examined within organizational boundaries. By doing so, the
literature has overlooked the role of GHRM in encouraging green
activism. For example, scholars (e.g., Chiarini & Bag, 2024; Roscoe
et al., 2019) have shown that GHRM positively influences employee
green behavior at work. Usman et al. (2023), a notable exception,
examined how green training affects employee green behaviors
beyond organizational boundaries. However, their study focuses on
green behavior rather than green activism, defined as employees'
engagement in different ecological behaviors beyond organizational
boundaries, spanning involvement in environmental organizations and
political actions, environmental group membership, and influencing/
supporting policies and campaigns intended to preserve ecological
Received: 29 March 2024 Revised: 27 September 2024 Accepted: 14 October 2024
DOI: 10.1002/bse.4028
This is an open access article under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License, which permits use, distribution and reproduction in any medium,
provided the original work is properly cited.
© 2024 The Author(s). Business Strategy and the Environment published by ERP Environment and John Wiley & Sons Ltd.
Bus Strat Env. 2024;1–12. wileyonlinelibrary.com/journal/bse 1
balance (Paço & Gouveia Rodrigues, 2016). This research gap is crucial
because green activism extends beyond individual actions to encom-
pass collective, community-driven efforts to advocate for environ-
mental change. Employees who are environmentally conscious and
possess green skills can voice their concerns in different public
and private forums and participate in and support different campaigns
targeted at safeguarding nature (Chiarini & Bag, 2024; Heyes &
King, 2020; Paço & Gouveia Rodrigues, 2016; Zhang et al., 2024). Fur-
ther, organizations that encourage green activism can enhance their
social responsibility profile, fostering a culture of environmental stew-
ardship that extends beyond business operations. By focusing solely
on green behavior within organizational confines, we miss the broader
potential of GHRM to inspire and mobilize employees toward activ-
ism, advocacy, and broader societal change, offering a restrictive view
of employees' and organizations' endeavors and practices, such as
GHRM tailored to protect nature.
To address this limitation, the present work builds on the conser-
vation of resources (COR) theory to hypothesize a positive association
between GHRM and employee green activism. By considering green
activism, we challenge the neglect of existing research to confine the
role of employees' discretionary green behaviors within organizational
boundaries, leading to an incomplete picture of organizations' and
employees' contributions to the wider ecosystem of complex
and dynamic interactions between humans and nature. We offer a
more comprehensive view of organizations' efforts and contributions
to protecting the natural environment and provide a complete picture
of employees' pro-environmental behaviors. Our focus on employee
green activism also concurs with the calls (e.g., Fotaki &
Foroughi, 2022; Heyes & King, 2020) to explore the antecedents of
employees' beyond-work ecological behaviors. Moreover, organiza-
tions are under consistent pressure from community groups, regula-
tors, governments, and other stakeholders to adopt green practices
and enhance their contributions to safeguard the natural environment
(Abualigah et al., 2023; Vázquez-Brust et al., 2023). By understanding
and highlighting the GHRM contributions within and across organiza-
tional boundaries, organizations can respond to such pressures.
COR theory proposes that people are driven to accumulate and
conserve resources they deem valuable (Hobfoll, 1989). Further, con-
textual resources (e.g., GHRM) are vital in shaping individuals' per-
sonal resources (e.g., motivation, energy, and knowledge) that we
argue can lead to their engagement in green activism. Notably, the
theory posits that resources tend to develop and exist in aggregate
and that resource caravans are either facilitated or inhibited by envi-
ronmental or organizational climate conditions (Hobfoll, 2011), such
as psychological safety climate (Mansour & Tremblay, 2018) and ini-
tiative climate (Aslam et al., 2022) that are labeled as resource caravan
passageways. Based on the concept, we conceptualize green organi-
zational learning (GOL) as a resource caravan passageway that func-
tions as a medium to facilitate the flow of contextual resources
(e.g., GHRM) to employees, leading them to enhance their engage-
ment in green activism. Building on the concept of organizational
learning by Theriou and Chatzoglou (2008) GOL, in this context, refers
to improvement in green organizational practices through acquiring,
disseminating, and applying eco-friendly knowledge. GOL can have
important implications for employee green behaviors, such as green
activist behavior. In the face of escalating environmental challenges,
such as climate change and resource depletion, it can help organiza-
tions adopt sustainable practices (Usman et al., 2023). It leads organi-
zations to adopt radical innovation and achieve competitive
advantage (Zhang et al., 2024). By facilitating the acquisition, dissemi-
nation, and application of eco-friendly knowledge, GOL leads to
improved environmental, operational, and innovation performance
(Argote et al., 2021; Bhatia, 2021), contributing to sustainable devel-
opment goals. GOL also instigates job performance (Lin &
Huang, 2021). Tu and Wu (2021) suggest that GOL leads to enhanced
behavioral and adaptive capabilities of individuals.
Finally, COR theory states that people's resources are embedded
in ecological contexts that either nurture or obstruct resource creation
and conservation (Hobfoll, 2011), indicating that the effectiveness of
contextual resources in developing enabling conditions (i.e., resource
caravan passageways) and shaping employee behaviors is not homog-
enous across contexts. Instead, different individual and organizational
level factors reinforce or subside the potential of contextual resources
to create resource caravan passageways (Hobfoll et al., 2018). As
such, we contend that the potential of GHRM to create GOL depends
on the presence of reinforcing or inhibiting elements within the orga-
nizational context. Thus, to offer a nuanced view of when GHRM
practices are more effective in shaping GOL and green activism, the
present study explores the role of perceived responsible leadership
(RL henceforth) as a boundary condition. RL is referred to as “a social-
relational and ethical phenomenon, which occurs in social processes
of interaction to achieve societal and environmental targets and
objectives of sustainable value creation and positive change” (Maak &
Pless, 2006, p. 5). We considered RL here because, compared to other
leadership styles, it is more consistent in terms of its positive effects
on employee environmental and green outcomes (Voegtlin
et al., 2020; Wang et al., 2024). RL actively promotes collaborative
problem-solving and participative decision-making to fulfill environ-
mental and societal responsibilities (Waldman et al., 2020); it is likely
that they make GHRM more effective by providing extended support
and resources that align with the organization's sustainability. Since
environmental responsibilities are one of the central focuses of RL, it
can reinforce the conditions necessary for the success of GHRM ini-
tiatives and ensure that the resources introduced through GHRM are
more effectively utilized and sustained within the organization, facili-
tating a stronger relationship between GHRM and GOL.
The current work contributes in several ways to various literature
streams. First, our study offers novel insights how GHRM affects
employee green activism. Compared to past studies (e.g., Abualigah
et al., 2023; Aftab et al., 2023; Chiarini & Bag, 2024; Usman
et al., 2023; Vázquez-Brust et al., 2023; Zhang et al., 2024) that have
studied employee pro-environmental behavior, the present work
applies COR theory to bring to the fore important yet overlooked
aspects of employees' and organizations' contributions to efforts
aimed at protecting nature, as well as advance the scope of GHRM. In
doing so, we respond to the calls (e.g., Chiarini & Bag, 2024; Heyes &
2 USMAN ET AL.
 10990836, 0, Downloaded from https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1002/bse.4028 by University Of Vaasa, Wiley Online Library on [14/11/2024]. See the Terms and Conditions (https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/terms-and-conditions) on Wiley Online Library for rules of use; OA articles are governed by the applicable Creative Commons License
King, 2020; Zhang et al., 2024) to explore the antecedents of
employees' engagement in ecological behaviors and activities outside
of work and thus highlight the overlooked role of employees and
organizations in protecting the natural environment. Second, by fore-
grounding GOL as an imperative mediator of the GHRM-green activ-
ism link, we emphasize the need to promote learning across
individual, team, and organizational levels and establish recurring
cycles of iterative learning to encourage their engagement in green
activism and contribute to the literature on the environmental sustain-
ability link (Abualigah et al., 2023; Argote et al., 2021; Chiarini & Bag,
2024; Fotaki & Foroughi, 2022; Heyes & King, 2020; Zhang et al.,
2024). Finally, previous studies on RL show that it fosters employee
green behavior and green innovation performance and leads to
environmental and financial performance (Ur Rehman et al., 2023;
Waldman et al., 2020; Wang et al., 2024). However, RL in association
with green activism has been overlooked. Thus, by highlighting the
moderating role of RL, the current study adds to the RL literature. The
conceptual framework is visually depicted in Figure 1.
2 | THEORY AND HYPOTHESES
DEVELOPMENT
2.1 | COR theory
COR theory proposes that individuals have an inherent drive to pro-
tect and acquire valued resources, such as personal resources, objects,
and conditions (Hobfoll, 1989). According to Hobfoll (1989), a
resource is loosely defined as an object, state, and other things that
an individual values in his/her life. One of the key premises of COR
theory that explains individuals' work tendencies and behaviors is the
investment of resources. The investment of resources (e.g., material
resources, time, and knowledge and skills) is aimed at gaining addi-
tional resources (e.g., knowledge creation and sharing), and individuals
who possess more personal resources have an enhanced ability to
invest and thus increase resources.
COR theory has also been applied in environmental sustainability
literature to understand how individuals and organizations manage
and conserve natural resources. The theory serves as a foundation for
analyzing how GHRM practices help employees use various resources,
such as energy and water, to manage these resources more sustain-
ably and enhance organizations' environmental performance (Gim
et al., 2022; Roscoe et al., 2019). The theory has also been used to
explain the role of HRM practices in shaping employee behaviors at
work (Gyensare et al., 2023). In this study, green activism has been
conceptualized as the potential means of future resource reserves.
COR theory suggests that people are driven to generate future
resource gains (Hobfoll, 1989). Accordingly, by engaging in green
activism, employees can generate various personal resources, such as
sensed self-fulfillment through knowledge creation and sharing.
Moreover, we conceptualize GHRM practices and RL as contex-
tual resources. Further, resources spanning different domains, such as
personal and contextual domains, are intricately linked, and as a result,
changes in resources in one domain can affect those in another
(Hobfoll et al., 2018). Importantly, resources travel through caravan
passageways, for instance, organizational culture, supportive struc-
ture, and so on. Following this concept, we conceptualize GOL as a
resource caravan passageway through which GHRM, as a contextual
resource, enhances employee green activism. As such, we argue that
GRHM offers employees different resources, such as environmental
knowledge and competencies that can enhance their personal
resources that they can use while engaging in behaviors comprising
environmental activism. As such, we argue that COR theory can help
understand the role of GHRM in shaping GOL, as well as advance the
scope of GHRM.
2.2 | Green activism
Environmental activism is about voicing concerns about environmen-
tal issues in different public and private forums to incite positive
responses from people, government, and businesses to address ongo-
ing environmental degradation (Heyes & King, 2020). Green activism
entails an individual's participation in different types of activities, such
as engaging in fund-raising campaigns, writing letters to governments
and policymakers, signing petitions, and trying to influence the behav-
ior of people toward the environment (Seguin et al., 1998).
Interests in green activism have increasingly grown in recent
years (Carberry et al., 2019; Fotaki & Foroughi, 2022), but studies
have yet to examine the impact of GHRM on green activism.
F IGURE 1 Theoretical framework.
USMAN ET AL. 3
 10990836, 0, Downloaded from https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1002/bse.4028 by University Of Vaasa, Wiley Online Library on [14/11/2024]. See the Terms and Conditions (https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/terms-and-conditions) on Wiley Online Library for rules of use; OA articles are governed by the applicable Creative Commons License
A distinction needs to be made between pro-environmental behaviors
and green activism. Pro-environmental behaviors refer to employee
behaviors like conserving energy and resources, recycling, and reduc-
ing waste aimed at reducing organizations' impact on the natural envi-
ronment (Robertson & Barling, 2017a). Pro-environmental behaviors
can also include making environmentally friendly purchasing decisions
or supporting the implementation of sustainable practices within the
company. These actions can have significant effects on reducing
the environmental impact of organizations and promoting sustainabil-
ity (Tang & Hinsch, 2018).
On the other hand, environmental activism refers to actions taken
by individuals and groups outside of the workplace to promote
environmental sustainability (Fotaki & Foroughi, 2022). Activism can
take many forms, including peaceful protests, educational campaigns,
and lobbying for policy change (Carberry et al., 2019). Environmental
activists often work to raise awareness about pressing
environmental issues and to inspire individuals and communities to
take action to address them. The main focus of environmental activ-
ism is not within the workplace but rather on a broader societal and
political level with the goal of change in law, policies, and societal
values to create a more sustainable future (Hysing & Olsson, 2017).
While both employee pro-environmental behaviors and environ-
mental activism can contribute to environmental sustainability, they
operate on different levels and have distinct goals. Employee pro-
environmental behaviors focus on reducing the environmental impact
of a specific company or organization. In contrast, environmental
activism aims to create broader societal and systemic change to
address environmental issues.
2.3 | GHRM and employee green activism
GHRM practices embed green values and behaviors in HRM practices
(e.g., green training, recruitment, reward and compensation, and
performance management and appraisal) that positively influence
several employees' environmentally friendly outcomes (Renwick
et al., 2013). The term green recruitment refers to the process of hir-
ing candidates based on their environmental knowledge and propen-
sity to adopt green practices (Ren et al., 2018). Enhancing employees'
knowledge of procedures, techniques, and technologies assists busi-
nesses in reducing their carbon footprint and improves organizations'
green performance is referred to as green training (Usman et al.,
2023). Green performance management and appraisal system is
defined as a system aimed at monitoring employees' environmental
performance based on their contribution to the organization's
eco-friendly targets (Robertson & Barling, 2017b). Green reward and
compensation system is considered policies to reward individuals
based on their eco-friendly initiatives and environmental performance
(Pham et al., 2019).
The association of GHRM with employee green activism can be
established in several ways. For instance, prior studies suggest that
green training provides employees with access to a range of different
expertise and resources, including social and technological resources
that help them improve their existing environmental protection skills,
develop new skills, and create novel ideas aimed at reducing environ-
mental degradation (Tang & Hinsch, 2018). Importantly, trainers are
experts, who are often connected to diverse social networks within
and outside the organization and connect the trainees to these net-
works (Wakkee et al., 2010). Such connections offer employees
opportunities to engage in discussions and learn from people with
diverse knowledge. As such, green training can configure a new
combination of eco-friendly cognitions, practices, knowledge, and
resources and thus opportunities to develop new green competencies
and a perception that they can play a role in protecting the natural
environment. Indeed, extant literature suggests that individuals'
knowledge of environmental problems leads them to get involved in
general ecological behaviors, such as recycling and sustainable con-
sumption (Chan et al., 2014) and conserving resources (Usman
et al., 2023), such as papers, electricity, and water. As such, we infer
that those employees who are aware of environmental issues and
possess green skills can engage in green activist behaviors, such as
supporting policies aimed at protecting nature and environmental sup-
port groups/organizations. Likewise, green performance management
and appraisal activities challenge employees' existing employees'
existing green skills and green contributions, thereby encouraging
them to exert extra-role efforts to improve their green skills and con-
tributions (Dumont et al., 2017; Hameed et al., 2020). Importantly,
according to Renwick et al. (2013), green performance management
activities ignite employees' sense of responsibility toward protecting
the natural environment. Such a sense of responsibility is likely to
encourage employees' participation in green activism.
Finally, drawing on COR theory, we contend that employees'
access to contextual (organizational) resources, such as green training
and green rewards enhances their personal resources, for instance,
green motivation, skills, and awareness. Moreover, since GHRM prac-
tices signal to employees about the availability of generous organiza-
tional resources that they have access to, GHRM practices stimulate
gain spirals and inspire employees to engage in green activist behav-
iors that help them accumulate additional resources, such as satisfac-
tion, self-fulfillment, and self-esteem. Furthermore, COR theory
proposes that it is essential to maintain a balance of resource
exchange between a larger system (e.g., nature, society, organizations,
or groups) and an individual. Since green activism can allow
employees to achieve such a balance of resource exchange, they may
reinvest resources to support different initiatives of protecting nature
and help the organization ease the external pressure to safeguard
nature and its environment. Therefore, we postulate
Hypothesis 1. GHRM is positively associated with
employee green activism.
2.4 | GOL as a mediator
COR theory proposes that there is an intricate interconnection among
resources in various domains. Further, resources in one domain, like
4 USMAN ET AL.
 10990836, 0, Downloaded from https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1002/bse.4028 by University Of Vaasa, Wiley Online Library on [14/11/2024]. See the Terms and Conditions (https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/terms-and-conditions) on Wiley Online Library for rules of use; OA articles are governed by the applicable Creative Commons License
contextual resources, can augment resources in other domains, such
as employees' personal resources. Importantly, contextual resources
affect individuals' personal resources through resource caravan pas-
sageways. As suggested earlier, we consider GOL to be a resource
caravan passageway that enhances employees' green knowledge and
skills that they may use in green activism. GHRM enables the organi-
zation to attract, recruit, and develop employees with a high aware-
ness of environmental issues (Renwick et al., 2013). By focusing on
green training and development programs, GHRM ensures that
employees develop essential sustainability-related knowledge. Man-
agers' consistent focus on providing employees' training and develop-
ment encourages employees to create and share novel ideas for
developing and implementing pro-environmental strategies (Tang &
Hinsch, 2018; Tu & Wu, 2021). This exchange of ideas not only raises
environmental awareness among employees but also inspires them to
adopt pro-environmental practices and technologies (Leidner
et al., 2019). Extant literature on green indicates that green training
induces transformations in employees' values, norms, and behaviors
toward sustainability (Cop et al., 2020; Pham et al., 2019).
Furthermore, GHRM harmonizes employee actions with the
organization's environmental objectives by incorporating sustainability
criteria into performance management systems. According to Renwick
et al. (2013), green appraisal activities increase the salience of
environmental issues and are the source of understanding and
acknowledging employees' green contributions. Green performance
management and appraisal activities share assessments with
employees concerning their environmental efforts, encouraging them
to reflect on their green performance and contributions (Renwick
et al., 2013). By rewarding green initiatives, GHRM ensures that
acquired knowledge is actively applied in everyday organizational
practices. Prior studies indicate that GHRM practices create a work
environment wherein employees perceive an enhanced sense of sup-
port and recognition (McClean & Collins, 2011; Usman et al., 2023),
thereby developing employees' perceptions that, through their job,
they are contributing to a greater good (e.g., protecting nature). Stud-
ies (e.g., Argote et al., 2021; Theriou & Chatzoglou, 2008) also suggest
that employees' sense of intelligibility about how their work roles con-
tribute to the greater good encourages them to enhance and share
their knowledge. Thus, we argue that GHRM can lead to GOL.
The organizational learning environment is crucial in enhancing
employees' capabilities, facilitating effective collaboration and achiev-
ing organizational goals (Subramanian & Suresh, 2022). Organiza-
tional learning involves transforming experiences into positive
behaviors (Argote et al., 2021; Yin et al., 2020). Organizational learn-
ing involves continuous learning and transformation (Marsick &
Watkins, 1996; Seguin et al., 1998). In the context of rising environ-
mental concerns, GOL emphasizes acquiring, disseminating, and
applying eco-friendly knowledge. Such a focus on green learning may
instill in employees sustainable values, encouraging them to integrate
these principles into their daily lives. In other words, employees'
green learning is not confined to the workplace. Instead, as
employees become more environmentally conscious and equipped
with green knowledge, they are likely to engage in political actions
and campaigns aimed at protecting the natural environment. GOL
also contributes to the development of a sense of collective responsi-
bility among employees (Carberry et al., 2019), encouraging them to
collaborate and advocate for environmental causes beyond organiza-
tional boundaries. According to COR theory, people strive to main-
tain and improve precocious resources. Viewed through the
framework of COR theory, the natural environment is a crucial
source for human life and the survival of other living species on our
planet. In essence, building on COR theory, we argue that employees
may support different eco-friendly initiatives to protect the natural
environment. Together, we postulate
Hypothesis 2. GOL mediates the positive association
between GHRM and employee green activism.
2.5 | Responsible leadership as a moderator
COR theory posits that people's and organizations' resources exist in
ecological conditions, which either support or constrain further
resource development (Hobfoll, 2011). This suggests that the effec-
tiveness of contextual resources for creating favorable conditions—
often referred to as resource caravan passageways—and shaping
employee behavior is not uniform across different settings. Instead,
various individual and organizational factors either amplify or diminish
the ability of these contextual resources to generate such passage-
ways. We draw on this concept to propose that RL moderates the
GHRM-GOL link to explain when RL is more effective in developing
GOL (a resource caravan passageway).
RL, marked by ethical decision-making, the empowerment of
employees, and an emphasis on social and environmental obligations
(Bérard & Cloutier, 2023), is likely to use GHRM practices effectively
to help employees acquire, disseminate, and apply eco-friendly knowl-
edge. Responsible leaders prioritize ethical, sustainable, and socially
responsible decision-making (Folger et al., 2022). Therefore, they can
ensure that GHRM policies are not merely implemented but actively
supported, enhancing the acquisition, dissemination, and application
of green knowledge across the organization. Responsible leaders
model environmentally responsible behavior and emphasize sustain-
ability's importance in strategy and daily operations (Liao &
Zhang, 2020). Employees under such leadership's supervision are
more likely to benefit from GHRM practices (e.g., green training) and
are more likely to engage in knowledge-sharing practices and apply
green knowledge. As such, we understand that, in the presence of
high RL, the effectiveness of GHRM in developing GOL will be
strengthened.
Conversely, in organizations where RL is lacking, GHRM practices
may not translate into GOL effectively. Without leadership that
actively promotes sustainability, the ecological conditions necessary
for enhancing GOL will be weakened. In such environments,
employees may view GHRM initiatives as superficial or disconnected
from broader organizational goals. Consequently, GHRM practices
may not foster the acquisition, dissemination, and application of green
USMAN ET AL. 5
 10990836, 0, Downloaded from https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1002/bse.4028 by University Of Vaasa, Wiley Online Library on [14/11/2024]. See the Terms and Conditions (https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/terms-and-conditions) on Wiley Online Library for rules of use; OA articles are governed by the applicable Creative Commons License
knowledge effectively, ultimately limiting the development of GOL.
Thus, we hypothesized that
Hypothesis3. Perceived RL moderates the positive
relationship between GHRM and GOL, such that the
relationship is stronger when RL is high (vs. low).
As posited earlier (H2), GHRM develops GOL, which in turn
inspires employees to engage in green activism. Put differently, the
influence of GHRM on green activism is translated through GOL.
Additionally, as proposed above (H3), high RL may accentuate the
effects of GHRM on GOL. Together, we infer that RL can serve as a
boundary condition of the indirect association between GHRM and
green activism. From a statistical viewpoint, this represents a moder-
ated mediation case (Hayes, 2015), whereby RL interacts with GHRM
practices to indirectly (via GOL) influence green activism. Thus, the
following hypothesis is developed.
Hypothesis 4:. Perceived RL moderates the indirect
(via GOL) positive relationship between GHRM and
employee green activism, such that the relationship is
stronger when RL is high (vs. low).
3 | METHODS
3.1 | Context of the study
We contextualized our theoretical model in Chinese business organi-
zations. China provides a compelling context for this study due to its
increasing efforts to balance economic growth with environmental
protection, a priority for both the corporate sector and government
initiatives. Many Chinese companies have taken significant steps to
reduce environmental waste and incorporate sustainable practices
into their operations, reflecting global trends in pro-environmental
business strategies (Zibarras & Coan, 2015). The Chinese government
has introduced stringent environmental regulations, particularly in
sectors like construction, to control pollution and manage waste,
pushing companies to adopt greener practices (State Council of
China, 2013). Additionally, organizations in China are actively integrat-
ing green HRM practices, such as environmental training and develop-
ment, which foster employee involvement in sustainable initiatives
both at work and beyond (Zhang et al., 2019). These regulatory and
corporate efforts, combined with China's growing focus on sustain-
ability, create an ideal setting for exploring how GHRM influences
green activism (Marquis & Qian, 2014).
3.2 | Sample and data collection
This study employed a time-lagged design to collect two-source data
from supervisors and employees in 60 organizations. We conducted
this project in organizations operating in China. We translated
survey questionnaires into Chinese language by applying a back-
translation approach. The questionnaire was pretested with five aca-
demicians and 20 potential respondents. There was a 2-month gap
between the data collection rounds. Data about GHRM practices
were collected from supervisors, while data about RL, GOL, and
employee green activism were collected from employees. Access to
these organizations was managed using alumni networks of different
public sector universities in the region. We randomly chose
600 employees from 60 organizations (10 employees from each of
the organizations) from the list of employees, and 452,452 partici-
pants consented in writing to participate. A cover letter was pro-
vided, detailing the study's purpose, confidentiality assurances, the
voluntary aspect of participation, and an opportunity to win one of
five smartphones.
Those employees who gave written informed consent were work-
ing in different departments and thus were reporting to 452 different
supervisors, who were given similar cover letters as we provided to
employees. We received consent from 398 supervisors. In the first
round, we received 334 supervisor responses about GHRM, and at
the same time, we received 397 employee responses about RL and
demographic data. In the second phase, we collected 353 employee
responses regarding GOL. In the final phase, we gathered
344 responses from employees concerning their engagement in green
activism. After the data were matched using unique codes and exam-
ined for negligence, 322 employee responses and the same number of
supervisor responses were retained. Structural equation modeling
(SEM) was employed to analyze the data using Mplus (8.8).
The respondents belonged to various organizations from several
sectors, including textile, electronics, steel manufacturing, cement
manufacturing, energy, healthcare, hospitality, tourism, and banking.
GHRM practices can vary considerably across organizations and
industries. The objective of obtaining data from diverse industry sec-
tors was to capture the maximum variance in GHRM and its effects
on GOL and environmental activism. The sample for this study
included 54.3% males and 45.7% females. In terms of education,
26.7% had completed 10 years of schooling, 29.2% had 12 years,
23.6% held undergraduate degrees, and 20.5% had master's degrees.
The average age of respondents was 36.33 years, with an average
tenure of 3.93 years at their current organization. In terms of industry,
51.9% belonged to different manufacturing sectors, and 48.1%
belonged to various service sectors.
3.3 | Common method variance (CMV)
We applied procedural and statistical remedies proposed by Podsak-
off et al. (2000) to lessen CMV. First, data were collected using the
time-lagged design. Second, we also used two-source data. The time-
lagged design and multisource data help reduce CMV (Podsakoff
et al., 2000). Third, we used Harman's single-factor test. A single-
factor extraction solution without rotation explained 29.86% (less
than the threshold, 50%) of the variance . Thus, CMV is not a concern
in our study.
6 USMAN ET AL.
 10990836, 0, Downloaded from https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1002/bse.4028 by University Of Vaasa, Wiley Online Library on [14/11/2024]. See the Terms and Conditions (https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/terms-and-conditions) on Wiley Online Library for rules of use; OA articles are governed by the applicable Creative Commons License
3.4 | Measures
Five-point Likert scales anchored on 1 (Strongly disagree) to 5 (Strongly
disagree) were used to measure the study constructs.
3.4.1 | Green human resource management
Dumont et al.'s (2017) 6-item scale (α = .92) was used to assess
GHRM. Example item: “Our company provides employees with green
training to promote green values.”
3.4.2 | Green organizational learning
Green organizational learning was measured by using a 4-item scale
(α = .86) from Bhatia and Jakhar (2021). Example item: “We are effec-
tive in transforming existing environmental information into new envi-
ronmental knowledge.”
3.4.3 | Responsible leadership
Responsible leadership was assessed by using a 5-item scale (α = .91)
adapted from Voegtlin (2011). Example item: “My supervisor tries to
achieve a consensus among the affected stakeholders.”
3.4.4 | Green activism
We adapted the 6-item scale (α = .91) from Seguin et al. (1998) to
assess green activism. Example item: “I give financial support to an
environmental group.”
3.4.5. Control variables
Research suggests employees' engagement in pro-environmental
behaviors can vary across tenure with the current organization, educa-
tion, industry, gender, and age and thus confound the results
(Robertson & Barling, 2017b). Demographics, such as education, tenure
with the current organization, gender, and age, can also affect GOL
(Theriou & Chatzoglou, 2008). Further, GHRM practices can be differ-
ent in manufacturing and service organizations. Therefore, we con-
trolled for age (actual age in years), gender (1 = female, 2 = male),
tenure with the organization (number of years working with the current
organization), industry type (1 = manufacturing sector, 2 = service
sector), and education (1 = undergraduate, 2 = master's degree).
4 | RESULTS
Since 322 respondents belonged to 60 organizations, we examined
the data for nonindependence. We followed Bliese's (2000)
recommendations and calculated ICC(1) values of green activism and
GOL. The results showed that the ICC1 values of both variables were
.01 (ns). As such, nonindependence did not pose a concern in
our data.
Moreover, we also calculated within- and between-level variances
of all the variables of the study, including GHRM, GOL, RL, and green
activism. The within-level variance of all the variables was significant,
while the between-level variance of these variables was insignificant.
As a result, all variables in our study were examined at the individual
level. Table 1 displays the descriptive statistics and correlations for
the variables under investigation.
4.1 | Measurement model assessment
The measurement model underwent confirmatory factor analysis,
revealing significant loadings for all items. The model demonstrated a
good fit with the data, as evidenced by the following fit indices:
χ2(183) = 421.17, χ2/df = 2.30, CFI = .95, TLI = .94, SRMR = .05,
and RMSEA = .06. Additionally, the average variance extracted (AVE)
values for all variables exceeded .50, as shown in Table 2. Additionally,
the square root of the AVE for each variable was greater than its
inter-construct correlations. Table 2 shows that both the average
shared variance (ASV) and maximum shared variance (MSV) were
below the AVE for all variables. These findings affirm the satisfactory
levels of both convergent and discriminant validities for the scales uti-
lized in the study.
4.2 | Hypotheses testing
As shown in Table 3, GHRM was positively associated with green
activism, both directly (B = .23, SE = .05, p < .01) and indirectly, via
GOL (B = .04, SE = .02, p < .05). Thus, we found support for
Hypotheses 1 and 2. To test the moderation Hypothesis 3, we
added the interaction term of RL and GHRM to the indirect effect
model. We found that the impact of the interaction was significant
(B = .16, SE = .04, p < .01). Figure 2 exhibits the moderated path,
whereby two conditional values of the association of GHRM with
GOL at two different levels of RL (i.e., low and high values of RL)
are depicted in simple slope plots. It was found that the association
between GHRM and GOL was significant (B = .42, SE = .07,
p < .01) when RL was high, while the association was insignificant
(B = .08, SE = .06, ns) when RL was low. Thus, we found support
for Hypothesis 3.
Finally, it was found that the moderated mediation index was sig-
nificant for the proposed indirect (via GOL) association of GHRM with
green activism [index = .03, SE = .01, p < .05, CI = (.004, .05)]. The
conditional indirect association of GHRM with green activism via GOL
was significant (B = .06, SE = .03, p < .01) when RL was high but the
indirect association of insignificant when RL was low (B = .01,
SE = .01, ns). Thus, Hypothesis 4 was supported.
USMAN ET AL. 7
 10990836, 0, Downloaded from https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1002/bse.4028 by University Of Vaasa, Wiley Online Library on [14/11/2024]. See the Terms and Conditions (https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/terms-and-conditions) on Wiley Online Library for rules of use; OA articles are governed by the applicable Creative Commons License
TABLE 1 Means and correlations.
Construct Means SD 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8
1. GHRM 3.40 .93
2. GOL 3.57 .82 .26**
3. Green activism 3.46 .86 .26** .21**
4. Responsible leadership 3.27 1.04 .15** .21** .19**
5. Age 36.33 7.66 
.07 .04 .17** 
.04
6. Gender .10 
.03 .01 
.02 
.05
7. Education .01 
.02 
.03 .06 
.01 .04
8.Tenure 3.93 2.09 .07 .06 .11 .00 .29** 
.02 .06
9.Industry type 
.01 
.03 .10 
.01 .04 .02 .08 .03
Note: Sample size (N) = 322. Gender = 1 (male) and 2 (female). Tenure = job duration (in years) with the current organization.
Abbreviations: GHRM, green human resource management; GOL, green organizational learning.
*p < .05, and **p < .01.
TABLE 2 Discriminant validity and convergent validity.
Construct 1 2 3 4 AVE MSV ASV
1. GHRM .81 .65 .08 .07
2. GOL .29 .78 .60 .08 .06
3. Green activism .29 .23 .80 .65 .08 .06
4. Responsible leadership .16 .23 .22 .83 .68 .05 .04
Note: Sample size (N) = 322. Bolded values on the diagonals of columns 2 to 5 are the square root values of AVE.
Abbreviations: ASV, average variance shared; AVE, average variance extracted; GHRM, green human resource management; GOL, green organizational
learning; MSV, maximum variance shared.
*p < .05, and **p < .01.
TABLE 3 Hypothesis testing results with control variables.
Variables
GOL Green activism
B (SE) p CI (95%) B (SE) p CI (95%)
GHRM .23(.05) .00 .13, .32 .24(.05) .00 .14, .33
GOL .16(.06) .00 .05, .27
Responsible leadership*GHRM .16(.04) .00 .09, .24
Age .01(.01) .17 
.01, .02 .02(.01) .00 .01, .03
Gender 
.06(.09) .48 
.23, .11 
.01(.09) .93 
.19, .17
Education 
.02(.04) .55 
.10, .05 
.03(.04) .49 
.11, .05
Tenure .01(.02) .80 
.04, .05 .02(.02) .50 
.03, .06
Industry 
.06(.08) .50 
.23, .11 .18(.09) .05 
.001, .36
B (SE) CI (95%)
Indirect effects
Indirect effect of GHRM on green activism via GOL .04(.02) .01, .07
Moderated mediation
Conditional indirect effect of GHRM on green activism via GOL .03(.01) .004, .05
Note: Sample size (N) = 322 (bootstrapping by specifying a sample of size 2000). Bootstrapping was specified at 5000 with 95% confidence interval.
Abbreviations: B, unstandardized coefficient; CI, confidence interval; GHRM, green human resource management; GOL, green organizational learning; SE,
standard error.
*p < .05, and **p < .01.
8 USMAN ET AL.
 10990836, 0, Downloaded from https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1002/bse.4028 by University Of Vaasa, Wiley Online Library on [14/11/2024]. See the Terms and Conditions (https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/terms-and-conditions) on Wiley Online Library for rules of use; OA articles are governed by the applicable Creative Commons License
5 | DISCUSSION
5.1 | Theoretical contributions
This paper makes the following important contributions to the litera-
ture, as well as advances the scope of COR theory. First, while COR
theory primarily emphasizes the accumulation and protection of
resources in general contexts and has been used by a number
of scholars in the HRM context (Shantz et al., 2016; Sun & Pan, 2008;
Yan et al., 2019; Yang et al., 2021), its application in the GHRM con-
text has been scarce. Our study demonstrates how GHRM provides
the resources necessary for employees to engage in environmental
activism outside organizational boundaries, expanding COR theory's
application to environmental practices and behaviors. Importantly, we
highlight how COR theory can explain employee behaviors that tran-
scend organizational boundaries. Further, based on the COR theory's
concept of resource caravan passageway, several studies have shown
how different resource passageways, such as psychological safety cli-
mate (Mansour & Tremblay, 2018) and initiative climate (Aslam
et al., 2022), play crucial roles in enhancing employees' personal
resources from contextual resources. Our study adds to the COR the-
ory by illustrating GOL as a resource caravan passageway, allowing
GHRM's potential to convert into tangible employee actions like
green activism. We also demonstrate RL the role of RL as a boundary
condition strengthen the influence of contextual resources—GHRM
practices—on developing GOL as a resource caravan passageway.
Second, by paying attention to an important yet ignored concept
of employees' beyond-work discretionary ecological behaviors, this
study explicates the importance of GHRM for shaping employees'
engagement in green activism. Consistent with COR theory, our
finding suggests that GHRM practices as contextual resources
enhance employees' personal resources, such as awareness and
knowledge about environmentally friendly activities and technologies
(Dumont et al., 2017; Renwick et al., 2013) that inspire them to
engage in green activism. Previous studies have shown that there is a
positive influence of GHRM on employees' pro-environmental behav-
iors (Pham et al., 2019). Our study departs markedly from prior work
(Fotaki & Foroughi, 2022; Heyes & King, 2020) by focusing on
employee green activism, thereby bringing to the fore a more compre-
hensive manifestation of the contributions that organizations and
GHRM practices can make to protect the natural environment.
Third, our findings suggest that GHRM practices positively influ-
ence employees' sense that their work is valuable for others, including
society at large (Chiarini & Bag, 2024; Zhang et al., 2024) and nature,
which, in turn, stimulates them to participate in green activism. By
investigating the mediating role of GOL in the link between GHRM
and green activism, this work not only signified the importance of
GOL as an essential mechanism underlying the relationship between
GHRM and green activism but also extends the literature on the
nomological networks of the consequences and outcomes of GOL
(Usman et al., 2023).
Finally, a few studies (Akhtar et al., 2023; Liao & Zhang, 2020; Lu
et al., 2022) have revealed the role of RL in boosting employees' green
behavior. Compared to previous studies that have focused on
employees' pro-environmental behaviors within the organizational
boundary, our research is the first to illuminate the role of RL in shap-
ing GOL and employees' engagement in green activism. In doing so,
the study explicates when GHRM is more effective in developing
GOL and green activism. Finally, we advance the scope of COR the-
ory, as to the extent of the authors' knowledge, our paper is the first
F IGURE 2 Responsible leadership as
a moderator of the relationship between
green human resource management
(GHRM) and green organizational
learning.
USMAN ET AL. 9
 10990836, 0, Downloaded from https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1002/bse.4028 by University Of Vaasa, Wiley Online Library on [14/11/2024]. See the Terms and Conditions (https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/terms-and-conditions) on Wiley Online Library for rules of use; OA articles are governed by the applicable Creative Commons License
research that exemplifies the application of COR theory in explaining
the interrelationships between GHRM, RL, and employees' engage-
ment in green activism.
5.2 | Practical implications
This study carries significant practical implications for organizations in
China and elsewhere aiming to enhance their sustainability efforts.
In China, the growing emphasis on sustainable development and envi-
ronmental protection aligns well with the study's findings. GHRM is
shown to foster beyond-work green activism among employees,
which is particularly relevant given China's commitment to environ-
mental sustainability. By adopting GHRM practices, Chinese organiza-
tions can instill environmental values within their workforce, helping
to align corporate environmental goals with national policies and
global sustainability standards. This not only contributes to China's
transition toward a green economy but also provides a framework for
other countries looking to promote corporate responsibility in the
area of environmental sustainability.
In addition, the study's emphasis on GOL has practical relevance
for countries that are looking to foster continuous learning and inno-
vation around sustainability. As China continues to improve its global
standing in environmental leadership, developing green knowledge
and skills within organizations is crucial for maintaining competitive-
ness while meeting environmental regulations. This approach can be
adopted by other countries striving to build more sustainable business
practices and to stay compliant with international sustainability
commitments.
RL is another key factor highlighted in this study, especially in the
Chinese context. Leaders in Chinese organizations are well-positioned
to drive sustainability efforts by integrating environmental responsibil-
ity into strategic decision-making. The findings show that RL plays a
moderating role in the GHRM-GOL link, suggesting that leadership
can foster a culture of innovation and accountability that enhances
organizational performance while meeting China's green development
goals. This insight is equally valuable for organizations in other coun-
tries, where RL can be a crucial driver of sustainable practices. As
China continues to engage with international sustainability initiatives,
such as the Paris Agreement, the study's findings provide a useful
framework for companies to align with their country's global environ-
mental commitments. By integrating GHRM into their organizational
culture, Chinese companies, along with those in other nations, can
contribute to meeting global targets for reducing carbon emissions
and environmental degradation.
5.3 | Limitations and further studies
While our research makes a significant contribution to the existing
literature, it is essential to acknowledge several limitations in our
study. Firstly, although method bias was mitigated by employing a
time-lagged design and utilizing data from two different sources,
future studies should consider employing longitudinal and experi-
mental designs to establish causal relationships more effectively.
Secondly, our study's mediation results indicated partial mediation,
suggesting the existence of other factors that could potentially
mediate the relationship between GHRM and green activism. There-
fore, identifying additional mediators in the relationship between
GHRM and green activism is a crucial area for future research.
Doing so will enhance our understanding of why GHRM is positively
associated with green activism, contributing to a more comprehen-
sive understanding of this relationship. For instance, employee com-
mitment to environmental issues motivates them to go beyond their
typical responsibilities in order to safeguard the natural environment
(Pham et al., 2019). Likewise, employees' autonomous motivation
for environmental conservation can also mediate the relationship
between GHRM and employees' beyond-work ecological behaviors.
Future research should consider environmental commitment and
employees' autonomous motivation to protect the natural environ-
ment as potential mediating variables for the GHRM-green
activism link.
Moreover, there may be various individual and contextual factors
that could moderate the association between GHRM and green activ-
ism. Hence, future studies should explore these potential moderators
to highlight the intricacies inherent in this relationship. Additionally,
leadership behaviors can significantly influence both GHRM practices
and green activism. It is evident that employees' personal traits can
positively influence GHRM, subsequently impacting their involvement
in green activism. Therefore, forthcoming research should examine
the direct relationships between positive personal traits (such as
self-enhancement motives) and both GHRM and green activism. Fur-
thermore, investigating the indirect pathways through which these
personal traits influence green activism via GHRM is also crucial for a
comprehensive understanding of this dynamic.
ORCID
Muhammad Usman https://orcid.org/0000-0002-7818-4546
Muhammad Waheed Akhtar https://orcid.org/0000-0002-7579-
5720
Samuel Adomako https://orcid.org/0000-0002-7139-0988
REFERENCES
Abualigah, A., Koburtay, T., Bourini, I., Badar, K., & Gerged, A. M. (2023).
Towards sustainable development in the hospitality sector: Does
green human resource management stimulate green creativity? A
moderated mediation model. Business Strategy and the Environment,
32(6), 3217–3232. https://doi.org/10.1002/bse.3296
Aftab, J., Abid, N., Cucari, N., & Savastano, M. (2023). Green human
resource management and environmental performance: The role of
green innovation and environmental strategy in a developing country.
Business Strategy and the Environment, 32(4), 1782–1798. https://doi.
org/10.1002/bse.3219
Akhtar, M. W., Garavan, T., Huo, C., Asrar ul Haq, M., & Aslam, M. K.
(2023). Creating facades of conformity in the face of abusive supervi-
sion and emotional exhaustion: The boundary role of self-
enhancement motives. Current Psychology, 42(36), 31824–31834.
https://doi.org/10.1007/s12144-022-04182-9
10 USMAN ET AL.
 10990836, 0, Downloaded from https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1002/bse.4028 by University Of Vaasa, Wiley Online Library on [14/11/2024]. See the Terms and Conditions (https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/terms-and-conditions) on Wiley Online Library for rules of use; OA articles are governed by the applicable Creative Commons License
Argote, L., Lee, S., & Park, J. (2021). Organizational learning processes
and outcomes: Major findings and future research directions. Manage-
ment Science, 67(9), 5399–5429. https://doi.org/10.1287/mnsc.2020.
3693
Aslam, M. Z., Fateh, A., Omar, S., & Nazri, M. (2022). The role of initiative
climate as a resource caravan passageway in developing proactive
service performance. Asia-Pacific Journal of Business Administration,
14(4), 691–705. https://doi.org/10.1108/APJBA-09-2021-0454
Bérard, C., & Cloutier, L. M. (2023). External information seeking and
organizational ambidexterity in SMEs: Does empowerment climate
matter? European Management Review, 21, 408–424. https://doi.org/
10.1111/emre.12585
Bhatia, M. S. (2021). Green process innovation and operational perfor-
mance: The role of proactive environment strategy, technological
capabilities, and organizational learning. Business Strategy and the Envi-
ronment, 30(7), 2845–2857. https://doi.org/10.1002/bse.2775
Bhatia, M. S., & Jakhar, S. K. (2021). The effect of environmental regula-
tions, top management commitment, and organizational learning on
green product innovation: Evidence from automobile industry. Busi-
ness Strategy and the Environment, 30(8), 3907–3918. https://doi.org/
10.1002/bse.2848
Bliese, P. D. (2000). Within-group agreement, non-independence, and
reliability: Implications for data aggregation and analysis.
Carberry, E. J., Bharati, P., Levy, D. L., & Chaudhury, A. (2019).
Social movements as catalysts for corporate social innovation: Envi-
ronmental activism and the adoption of green information systems.
Business & Society, 58(5), 1083–1127. https://doi.org/10.1177/
0007650317701674
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. Interna-
tional Journal of Hospitality Management, 40, 20–28. https://doi.org/
10.1016/j.ijhm.2014.03.001
Chiarini, A., & Bag, S. (2024). Using green human resource management
practices to achieve green performance: Evidence from Italian
manufacturing context. Business Strategy and the Environment, 33,
4694–4707. https://doi.org/10.1002/bse.3724
Cop, S., Alola, U. V., & Alola, A. A. (2020). Perceived behavioral control as a
mediator of hotels' green training, environmental commitment, and
organizational citizenship behavior: A sustainable environmental prac-
tice. Business Strategy and the Environment, 29(8), 3495–3508.
Dumont, J., Shen, J., & Deng, X. (2017). Effects of green HRM practices on
employee workplace green behavior: The role of psychological green
climate and employee green values. Human Resource Management,
56(4), 613–627. https://doi.org/10.1002/hrm.21792
Folger, N., Brosi, P., & Stumpf-Wollersheim, J. (2022). Perceived techno-
logical turbulence and individual ambidexterity–The moderating role
of formalization. European Management Journal, 40(5), 718–728.
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.emj.2021.10.005
Fotaki, M., & Foroughi, H. (2022). Extinction rebellion: Green activism and
the fantasy of leaderlessness in a decentralized movement. Leadership,
18(2), 224–246. https://doi.org/10.1177/17427150211005578
Gim, G. C., Ooi, S. K., Teoh, S. T., Lim, H. L., & Yeap, J. A. (2022). Green
human resource management, leader–member exchange, core self-
evaluations and work engagement: The mediating role of human
resource management performance attributions. International Journal
of Manpower, 43(3), 682–700. https://doi.org/10.1108/IJM-05-2020-
0255
Gyensare, M. A., Adomako, S., & Amankwah-Amoah, J. (2023). Green
HRM practices, employee well-being, and sustainable work behavior:
Examining the moderating role of resource commitment. Business
Strategy and the Environment, 33(4), 3129–3141. https://doi.org/10.
1002/bse.3642
Hameed, Z., Khan, I. U., Islam, T., Sheikh, Z., & Naeem, R. M. (2020). Do
green HRM practices influence employees' environmental
performance? International Journal of Manpower, 41(7), 1061–1079.
https://doi.org/10.1108/IJM-08-2019-0407
Hayes, A. F. (2015). Hacking PROCESS for estimation and probing of linear
moderation of quadratic effects and quadratic moderation of
linear effects. Unpublished White Paper. Ohio State University.
Heyes, A., & King, B. (2020). Understanding the organization of green
activism: Sociological and economic perspectives. Organization & Envi-
ronment, 33(1), 7–30. https://doi.org/10.1177/1086026618788859
Hobfoll, S. E. (1989). Conservation of resources: A new attempt at concep-
tualizing stress. American Psychologist, 44(3), 513–524. https://doi.
org/10.1037/0003-066X.44.3.513
Hobfoll, S. E. (2011). Conservation of resource caravans and engaged set-
tings.Journal of Occupational and Organizational Psychology, 84(1),
116-122.
Hobfoll, S. E., Halbesleben, J., Neveu, J.-P., & Westman, M. (2018). Conser-
vation of resources in the organizational context: The reality of
resources and their consequences. Annual Review of Organizational
Psychology and Organizational Behavior, 5, 103–128. https://doi.org/
10.1146/annurev-orgpsych-032117-104640
Hysing, E., & Olsson, J. (2017). Green inside activism for sustainable develop-
ment: Political agency and institutional change. Springer.
Leidner, S., Baden, D., & Ashleigh, M. J. (2019). Green (environmental)
HRM: Aligning ideals with appropriate practices. Personnel Review,
48(5), 1169–1185. https://doi.org/10.1108/PR-12-2017-0382
Liao, Z., & Zhang, M. (2020). The influence of responsible leadership on
environmental innovation and environmental performance: The mod-
erating role of managerial discretion. Corporate Social Responsibility
and Environmental Management, 27(5), 2016–2027. https://doi.org/10.
1002/csr.1942
Lin, C.-Y., & Huang, C.-K. (2021). Employee turnover intentions and
job performance from a planned change: The effects of an organiza-
tional learning culture and job satisfaction. International Journal
of Manpower, 42(3), 409–423. https://doi.org/10.1108/IJM-08-2018-
0281
Lu, H., Xu, W., Cai, S., Yang, F., & Chen, Q. (2022). Does top management
team responsible leadership help employees go green? The role of
green human resource management and environmental felt-responsi-
bility. Corporate Social Responsibility and Environmental Management,
29(4), 843–859. https://doi.org/10.1002/csr.2239
Maak, T., & Pless, N. M. (2006). Responsible leadership in a stakeholder
society–a relational perspective. Journal of Business Ethics, 66, 99–115.
https://doi.org/10.1007/s10551-006-9047-z
Mansour, S., & Tremblay, D. G. (2018). Psychosocial safety climate as
resource passageways to alleviate work-family conflict: A study in the
health sector in Quebec. Personnel Review, 47(2), 474–493.
https://ldoi.org/10.1108/PR-10-2016-0281
Marquis, C., & Qian, C. (2014). Corporate social responsibility reporting in
China: Symbol or substance? Organization Science, 25(1), 127–148.
https://doi.org/10.1287/orsc.2013.0837
Marsick, V. J., & Watkins, K. E. (1996). Adult educators and the challenge
of the learning organization. Adult Learning, 7(4), 18–20. https://doi.
org/10.1177/104515959600700409
McClean, E., & Collins, C. J. (2011). High-commitment HR practices,
employee effort, and firm performance: Investigating the effects of
HR practices across employee groups within professional services
firms. Human Resource Management, 50(3), 341–363. https://doi.org/
10.1002/hrm.20429
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), 239–261. https://doi.
org/10.1080/09585192.2015.1063078
Paço, A., & Gouveia Rodrigues, R. (2016). Environmental activism and con-
sumers' perceived responsibility. International Journal of Consumer
Studies, 40(4), 466–474. https://doi.org/10.1111/ijcs.12272
USMAN ET AL. 11
 10990836, 0, Downloaded from https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1002/bse.4028 by University Of Vaasa, Wiley Online Library on [14/11/2024]. See the Terms and Conditions (https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/terms-and-conditions) on Wiley Online Library for rules of use; OA articles are governed by the applicable Creative Commons License
Pham, N. T., Tucˇková, Z., & Jabbour, C. J. C. (2019). Greening the hospital-
ity industry: How do green human resource management practices
influence organizational citizenship behavior in hotels? A mixed-
methods study. Tourism Management, 72, 386–399. https://doi.org/
10.1016/j.tourman.2018.12.008
Podsakoff, P. M., MacKenzie, S. B., Paine, J. B., & Bachrach, D. G. (2000).
Organizational citizenship behaviors: A critical review of the theoreti-
cal and empirical literature and suggestions for future research. Journal
of Management, 26(3), 513–563. https://doi.org/10.1177/
014920630002600307
Ren, S., Tang, G., & Jackson, S. E. (2018). Green human resource manage-
ment research in emergence: A review and future directions. Asia
Pacific Journal of Management, 35, 769–803. https://doi.org/10.1007/
s10490-017-9532-1
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. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1468-
2370.2011.00328.x
Robertson, J. L., & Barling, J. (2017a). Contrasting the nature and effects
of environmentally specific and general transformational leadership.
Leadership & Organization Development Journal, 38(1), 22–41. https://
doi.org/10.1108/LODJ-05-2015-0100
Robertson, J. L., & Barling, J. (2017b). Toward a new measure of organiza-
tional environmental citizenship behavior. Journal of Business Research,
75, 57–66. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jbusres.2017.02.007
Roscoe, S., Subramanian, N., Jabbour, C. J., & Chong, T. (2019). Green
human resource management and the enablers of green organisational
culture: Enhancing a firm's environmental performance for sustainable
development. Business Strategy and the Environment, 28(5), 737–749.
https://doi.org/10.1002/bse.2277
Seguin, C., Pelletier, L. G., & Hunsley, J. (1998). Toward a model of envi-
ronmental activism. Environment and Behavior, 30(5), 628–652.
https://doi.org/10.1177/001391659803000503
Shantz, A., Arevshatian, L., Alfes, K., & Bailey, C. (2016). The effect of
HRM attributions on emotional exhaustion and the mediating roles
of job involvement and work overload. Human Resource Management
Journal, 26(2), 172–191. https://doi.org/10.1111/1748-8583.12096
State Council of China. (2013). Opinions on accelerating the development
of energy conservation and environmental protection industries. State
Council Document, No. 30. Available at https://english.mee.gov.cn/
News_service/infocus/201308/t20130814_257467.shtml. Accessed
17/05/2023.
Subramanian, N., & Suresh, M. (2022). Assessment framework for agile
HRM practices. Global Journal of Flexible Systems Management, 23(1),
135–149. https://doi.org/10.1007/s40171-021-00294-6
Sun, L. Y., & Pan, W. (2008). HR practices perceptions, emotional exhaus-
tion, and work outcomes: A conservation-of-resources theory in the
Chinese context. Human Resource Development Quarterly, 19(1), 55–
74. https://doi.org/10.1002/hrdq.1225
Tang, Y., & Hinsch, C. (2018). Going green to be morally clean: An examina-
tion of environmental behavior among materialistic consumers. Psychol-
ogy & Marketing, 35(11), 845–862. https://doi.org/10.1002/mar.21139
Theriou, G. N., & Chatzoglou, P. D. (2008). Enhancing performance
through best HRM practices, organizational learning and knowledge
management: A conceptual framework. European Business Review,
20(3), 185–207. https://doi.org/10.1108/09555340810871400
Tu, Y., & Wu, W. (2021). How does green innovation improve enterprises'
competitive advantage? The role of organizational learning. Sustainable
Production and Consumption, 26, 504–516. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.
spc.2020.12.031
Ur Rehman, Z., Shafique, I., Khawaja, K. F., Saeed, M., & Kalyar, M. N.
(2023). Linking responsible leadership with financial and environmen-
tal performance: Determining mediation and moderation. International
Journal of Productivity and Performance Management, 72(1), 24–46.
https://doi.org/10.1108/IJPPM-12-2020-0626
Usman, M., Rofcanin, Y., Ali, M., Ogbonnaya, C., & Babalola, M. T. (2023).
Toward a more sustainable environment: Understanding why and
when green training promotes employees' eco-friendly behaviors out-
side of work. Human Resource Management, 62(3), 355–371. https://
doi.org/10.1002/hrm.22148
Vázquez-Brust, D., Jabbour, C. J. C., Plaza-Úbeda, J. A., Perez-Valls, M., de
Sousa Jabbour, A. B. L., & Renwick, D. W. (2023). The role of green
human resource management in the translation of greening pressures
into environmental protection practices. Business Strategy and the Envi-
ronment, 32(6), 3628–3648. https://doi.org/10.1002/bse.3319
Voegtlin, C. (2011). Development of a scale measuring discursive responsi-
ble leadership. In Responsible leadership (pp. 57–73). Springer. https://
doi.org/10.1007/978-94-007-3995-6_6
Voegtlin, C., Frisch, C., Walther, A., & Schwab, P. (2020). Theoretical devel-
opment and empirical examination of a three-roles model of responsi-
ble leadership. Journal of Business Ethics, 167(3), 411–431. https://doi.
org/10.1007/s10551-019-04155-2
Wakkee, I., Elfring, T., & Monaghan, S. (2010). Creating entrepreneurial
employees in traditional service sectors: The role of coaching and self-
efficacy. International Entrepreneurship and Management Journal, 6, 1–
21. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11365-008-0078-z
Waldman, D. A., Siegel, D. S., & Stahl, G. K. (2020). Defining the socially
responsible leader: Revisiting issues in responsible leadership. Journal
of Leadership & Organizational Studies, 27(1), 5–20. https://doi.org/10.
1177/1548051819872201
Wang, Z., Ye, Y., & Liu, X. (2024). How CEO responsible leadership shapes
corporate social responsibility and organization performance: The
roles of organizational climates and CEO founder status. International
Journal of Contemporary Hospitality Management, 36(6), 1944-1962.
https://doi.org/10.1108/IJCHM-11-2022-1498
Yan, J., Luo, J., Jia, J., & Zhong, J. (2019). High-commitment organization
and employees' job performance: The roles of the strength of the
HRM system and taking charge. International Journal of Manpower,
40(7), 1305–1318. https://doi.org/10.1108/IJM-08-2018-0243
Yang, F., Huang, X., Tang, D., Yang, J., & Wu, L. (2021). How guanxi HRM
practice relates to emotional exhaustion and job performance: The
moderating role of individual pay for performance. The International
Journal of Human Resource Management, 32(11), 2493–2518. https://
doi.org/10.1080/09585192.2019.1588347
Yin, J., Ma, Z., Yu, H., Jia, M., & Liao, G. (2020). Transformational leadership
and employee knowledge sharing: Explore the mediating roles of psy-
chological safety and team efficacy. Journal of Knowledge Management,
24(2), 150–171. https://doi.org/10.1108/JKM-12-2018-0776
Zhang, S., Chen, M., & Tang, G. (2024). How green human resource man-
agement can promote green competitive advantage: The role of green
innovation. Business Strategy and the Environment, 33(5), 4613–4625.
https://doi.org/10.1002/bse.3715
Zhang, D., Morse, S., & Ma, Q. (2019). Corporate social responsibility and
sustainable development in China: Current status and future perspec-
tives. Sustainability, 11(16), 4392. https://doi.org/10.3390/su11164392
Zibarras, L. D., & Coan, P. (2015). HRM practices used to promote proen-
vironmental behavior: A UK survey. International Journal of Human
Resource Management, 26(16), 2121–2142. https://doi.org/10.1080/
09585192.2014.972429
How to cite this article: Usman, M., Akhtar, M. W., Zahoor, N.,
Khan, M. A. S., & Adomako, S. (2024). Triggering employee
green activism through green human resource management:
The role of green organizational learning and responsible
leadership. Business Strategy and the Environment, 1–12.
https://doi.org/10.1002/bse.4028
12 USMAN ET AL.
 10990836, 0, Downloaded from https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1002/bse.4028 by University Of Vaasa, Wiley Online Library on [14/11/2024]. See the Terms and Conditions (https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/terms-and-conditions) on Wiley Online Library for rules of use; OA articles are governed by the applicable Creative Commons License