Accepted Manuscript

Assessing Green Human Resources Management practices in Palestinian

manufacturing context: An empirical study

Hiba A. Masri, Ayham A.M. Jaaron

PII: S0959-6526(16)32151-5
DOI: 10.1016/j.jclepro.2016.12.087
Reference: JCLP 8662

To appear in: Journal of Cleaner Production

Received Date: 22 October 2016

Revised Date: 16 December 2016
Accepted Date: 17 December 2016

Please cite this article as: Masri HA, Jaaron AAM, Assessing Green Human Resources Management
practices in Palestinian manufacturing context: An empirical study, Journal of Cleaner Production
(2017), doi: 10.1016/j.jclepro.2016.12.087.

This is a PDF file of an unedited manuscript that has been accepted for publication. As a service to
our customers we are providing this early version of the manuscript. The manuscript will undergo
copyediting, typesetting, and review of the resulting proof before it is published in its final form. Please
note that during the production process errors may be discovered which could affect the content, and all
legal disclaimers that apply to the journal pertain.
 ACCEPTED MANUSCRIPT

Assessing Green Human Resources Management Practices in

Palestinian Manufacturing Context: An Empirical Study

Abstract:
Green Human Resources Management (GHRM) refers to using Human Resources Management

PT
(HRM) practices to reinforce environmental sustainable practices and increase employee’s
commitment on the issues of environmental sustainability. It embraces considering concerns and
values of Environmental Management (EM) in applying Human Resources (HR) initiatives

RI
generating greater efficiencies and better Environmental Performance (EP) necessary for
reducing employees’ carbon footprints. This paper presents an empirical assessment and
measurement of impact of GHRM practices in manufacturing organizations on EP in Palestinian

SC
context. The research approach, using both qualitative and quantitative aspects, extracted six
main GHRM practices used in manufacturing organizations from literature review and field data
through conducting 17 semi-structured interviews with HR managers. The identified practices
were green recruitment and selection, green training and development, green performance

U
management and appraisal, green reward and compensation, green employee empowerment and
participation, and green management of organizational culture. A survey instrument was then
AN
designed based on GHRM practices identified through qualitative methods, and used for data
collection from 110 organizations operating in three manufacturing sectors (i.e. food, chemical,
and pharmaceutical sectors) that have implemented GHRM practices at varying levels. Using a
five-point Likert-type scale, these extracted practices were evaluated to find out GHRM practices
M

with positive impact on EP. The statistical analysis revealed that the overall mean of the
implementation of GHRM practices is 2.72 on a scale of 5, which is considered as a moderate
level. Furthermore, the analysis confirmed that there is a statistically positive and significant
D

relationship at a significant level (α ≤ 0.05) between the six GHRM practices and EP. A model
was also developed by connecting critical practices of GHRM that can be incorporated in
TE

workplace for maximized EP. The value of this paper is the identification, prioritization, and
validation of GHRM practices, which influence EP in manufacturing organizations. The
presented model offers useful insights on how manufacturing organizations should strategically
link their HR functions to support their EP necessary for competitive advantage.
EP

Keywords: Green Human Resources Management; GHRM practices; Environmental

Performance; Environmental Management, Manufacturing Sector; Palestine.
C

1. Introduction
AC

Recently, both developed and developing countries became more concerned about the
importance of environmental issues and sustainable development (Sharma and Gupta, 2015), this
came as a result of the industrial revolution which caused an increment in degradation of the
environment (Jabbour and Santos, 2008a). These concerns generated more pressure and
inculcated business and industry to develop and use green management by adopting
environmentally friendly practices and products (Marcus and Fremeth, 2009; Prasad, 2013). This
requires an increased organizational focus on their environmental impact, considered both from
the perspective of its interaction with the firm’s financial and social growth and in terms of its
stand-alone virtues. To achieve this evolution, many companies seek to develop and deploy a
formal Environmental Management System (EMS). Since the 1990s, EMSs have stood out as

1
 ACCEPTED MANUSCRIPT

one of the most effective tools to achieve sustainable development (Chan, 2011) through
integrating aspects of Environmental Management (EM) into corporate decision-making
processes (Wagner, 2013). EM has been included in many departments such as marketing,
supply chain, finance and others (Soo wee and Quazi, 2005; Rehman and Shrivastava, 2011;
Mittal and Sangwan, 2014). Recently, HRM joined the green movement (Prathima and Misra,
2013). Since HRM plays a vital part in shaping organizational culture, structure, strategy, and
policy development (Paauwe and Boselie, 2005; Schuler and Jackson, 2014), HR is regarded as a

PT
key player in achieving sustainable development in the organization (Mandip, 2012). In response
to this, several researchers (e.g. Daily and Huang, 2001; Jackson et al. 2011; Renwick et al.,
2013) directed their attention towards the relation between HRM and EM. They have

RI
emphasized the importance of employees’ green activities in the workplace. This integration of
EM into HRM practices is known as Green Human Resource Management (GHRM), which aims
to help organizations to improve Environmental Performance (EP) through increasing positive

SC
employees' involvement and commitment towards environment (Renwick et al., 2008; Jackson et
al., 2011).
However, the manufacturing sector is considered to be a source of various forms of

U
environmental pollution in both developed and developing countries, which need its managerial
activities to be critically assessed, monitored and rectified (Rehman et al., 2016). Because of the
AN
important role and effects of manufacturing sector on economic growth of nations (Szirmai and
Verspagena, 2015; Marconi et al., 2016), there is an increasing need for adopting effective
environmentally friendly practices that can mitigate environmental impacts of this vital sector.
Adopting green practices is not limited to specific organizational department. In fact, employees
M

in all organization’s functions are equally responsible to keep their organization's environment
green (Jabbour et al., 2008; Opatha and Arulrajah, 2014). Thus, managers should include their
employees at all levels in the environment preservation practices. Therefore, a clear guide is
D

needed to help HR managers in applying and developing GHRM for the improvement of EP.
TE

Although there is an increasing extent of the substantial literature about GHRM in developed
countries (Jackson and Seo, 2010; Jackson et al., 2011; Renwick et al., 2013; Renwick et al.,
2016, Ehnert et al., 2016; Jabbour and Jabbour, 2016; O'Donohue and Torugsa, 2016), there is
still uncertainty about what HR practices are needed for an effective implementation of GHRM
EP

in both developed and developing countries, and how these practices can be connected and
incorporated in workplace to help the organization achieve green corporate culture and maximize
EP (Cherian and Jacob, 2012; Sathyapriya et al., 2013; Jabbar and Abid, 2014; Ahmad, 2015;
C

Haddock-Miller et al., 2016); paying little attention to prioritizing and validating such practices
that can operationalize activities necessary for environmental sustainability. As a result, it is
AC

expected that many manufacturing organizations fail to incorporate HR functions into their EM
initiatives. The challenge is, therefore, to explore what type of GHRM practices should be linked
with manufacturing organizations’ EP strategies to support their green corporate culture.
Emanating from this, the present research attempts to empirically assess and measure the impact
of GHRM practices in manufacturing organizations on EP. The research sheds the light on the
main GHRM practices used in manufacturing organizations from literature review and field data
from 110 organizations operating in three Palestinian manufacturing sectors (i.e. food, chemical,
and pharmaceutical sectors) that have implemented GHRM practices at varying levels. The
research also establishes a correlation between GHRM practices and EP, before developing a

2
 ACCEPTED MANUSCRIPT

model that connects critical practices of GHRM, which can be incorporated in workplace for
improved EP.

In fact, several researchers discussed the lack of empirical studies from the manufacturing sector
in the developing countries (Zhan et al., 2016; Rehman et al., 2016). The value of these studies
also increases if they are carried out in a challenging environment of a developing country such
as Palestine, where Palestinian manufacturing organizations are dominated by the presence of

PT
dual environmental laws (i.e. Palestinian National Authority Law and Israeli Authorities Law) in
the Occupied Palestinian Territories (OPT) where majority of Palestinian manufacturers are
located (Palestinian Federation of Industries, 2009). The situation in OPT is unique in the sense

RI
that Israeli Authorities dominate Palestinian internal environmental policies (Görlach et al.,
2011). This has very practical implications for Palestinian manufacturing sector as manufacturers
are obliged to comply with Israeli environmental policies beside those of the Palestinian National

SC
Authority.

However, in addition to the research gap identified earlier, the novelty of this study is twofold.

U
First, this paper presents a first study of its kind in Palestine, and among very few studies
exploring GHRM in the context of developing countries (See for example Jabbar and Abid
AN
(2014), Mishra et al. (2014), and Bhutto and Auranzeb, (2016)). Investigating GHRM in
Palestinian manufacturing sector is very relevant because of the proximity of Palestine from
other developed European trade partners that play a main role in pressuring to improve EP.
These neighboring developed countries also use import restrictions to encourage Palestinian
M

manufacturers, among other manufacturers in the region, to follow environmental laws and curb
environmental damages (Djoundourian, 2012). Second, despite the major impacts of political
instability and movement obstacles, Palestine is an active member in a number of regional
D

agreements on transboundary environmental issues such as water and solid waste, and has been
able to secure funds from international donors to implement measures within the Occupied
TE

Territories of adopting cleaner practices and technologies that contribute to meeting international
environmental priorities (EQA, 2010). These contextual challenging factors present Palestinian
manufacturing sector as a unique sector when studying the adoption of GHRM practices.
EP

The paper is organized into seven sections. The paper begins by presenting previous studies to
outline the concept of GHRM and its relationship with EP. Then, the research methodology is
presented; including data collection methods and respondents profile. Next, data analysis and
C

results are explained. Based on results, the conceptual model linking various GHRM practices
and EP has then been developed. This is followed by presenting conclusions and discussing
AC

results. Finally, theoretical and managerial implications are provided, and research limitations
and future research work are highlighted.

2. Literature Review
Inherently, human irresponsible activities at work can cause environmental degradation (Ones
and Dilchert, 2012). Green HRM practices can be used to stimulate employees’ responsible
behavior to preserve the environment (Cherian and Jacob, 2012). Research studies about
greening the organization through the relation between HRM and EM started in the 1990s,
perhaps originated in 1996 through the work of Wehrmeyer (1996) who edited a book titled

3
 ACCEPTED MANUSCRIPT

“Greening people: human resources and environmental management”. With increasing numbers
of similar studies, organizations’ needs of HRM practices to implement greening initiatives
became more obvious (Govindarajulu and Daily, 2004; Sudin, 2011). These needs were
strengthened by studies that have discussed the positive effects of HRM to firms' EP (Schuler
and Jackson, 2014; Renwick et al., 2013; Paauwe and Boselie, 2005). Another major factor that
has fueled the expansion of such studies was the introduction of the famous environmental
management system, ISO14001 (Jabbour and Santos, 2008a; Chan, 2011; Jabbour and Jabbour,

PT
2016). This was translated by the work of Jackson et al. (2011) who organized the first special
issue on HRM; decisively merging the research areas of human resources and
environmental/green management. Since then, studies on HRM have become more common,

RI
encouraging new empirical studies on the subject (Renwick et al., 2013). The notion of GHRM is
related to the HRM function as the main driver in an organization to take up the green initiatives
(Mandip, 2012, Jabbour and Jabbour, 2016; Bhutto and Auranzeb, 2016). GHRM is an offshoot

SC
of green management philosophy, policies, and practices followed by a firm for EM
implementation (Patel, 2014). Sharma and Gupta (2015) defines GHRM as using HRM practices
with the intention of promoting the sustainable use of resources, which will reinforce cause of
environmental sustainability in general, and will increase employee awareness and commitments

U
on the issues of environmental management in particular. The emergence of GHRM includes the
extent of improving the social (i.e. work-life balance) and economic well-being (i.e. sustain
AN
profits) beside awareness toward environmental concern (i.e. reduced wastes). GHRM has
actually supported the paradigmatic understanding of the concept of ‘triple bottom-line’; that is
to say, that GHRM involves practices aligned with the three sustainability pillars of environment,
social, and economic balance (Yusoff et al., 2015) and bring the benefits to the organization in
M

the long run (Wagner, 2013). This is congruent with the findings of O'Donohue and Torugsa
(2016) who studied the association between environmental management and organizational
financial performance in the Australian machinery and equipment-manufacturing sector. They
D

found that higher levels of GHRM practices are positively linked with improved financial
benefits of the proactive environmental management programs and the overall financial
TE

performance of organizations. At the same time, GHRM form part of wider program of corporate
social responsibility (Sathyapriya et al., 2013). In this regard, HR managers are expected to
create awareness amongst people working for the organization about how to improve EP of the
EP

organization through human behavior (Shaikh, 2012). Jabbar and Abid (2014) explain that
employees are only motivated to play an active role in eco-initiatives when they are given
monetary and non-monetary rewards. They have also elucidated that employees are more ready
to actively support greening practices when their immediate managers show encouraging
C

behavior to such practices. Therefore, it is important for managers to involve employees in

greener activities at every step of HRM practices; once it becomes a daily activity, then it will be
AC

treated as a culture (Jabbour et al., 2008). The manufacturing of products with lower
environmental impact requires the support of HRM (Govindarajulu and Daily, 2004). This have
been asserted by Jabbour and Santos (2008b) who stated that superior EP outcome requires HRM
practices that support the whole implementation and maintenance of EMS in the organizations.

Furthermore, Jackson and Seo (2010) asserted that companies which pay attention to the
greening of human factors may be more productive, thus gaining a competitive advantage
(Cherian and Jacob, 2012). In contrast, organizations not having a comprehensive program for
using GHRM will have potential limitations in the effectiveness of their EP (Renwick et al.,

4
 ACCEPTED MANUSCRIPT

2013). Paying attention to GHRM entail using environmentally friendly HR practices such as
increasing efficiency within processes, reducing and eliminating environmental waste, and
revamping HR products, tools, and procedures to bring about green behavior; resulting in greater
efficiency and lower costs. These actions will generate activities such as electronic filing, ride
sharing, job sharing, teleconferencing and virtual interviews, recycling, telecommuting, online
training, and developing more energy-efficient office spaces (Sharma and Gupta, 2015;
Sathyapriya et al., 2013). Even though many organizations are trying to effectively influence and

PT
increase employees’ environmental behavior, there is a clear discrepancy between environmental
policies and actual behavioral patterns of employees, especially in large organizations. Haddock-
Miller et al. (2016) conducted a comparative qualitative study to investigate patterns of GHRM

RI
practices in a global food service across three European subsidiaries. Authors found that GHRM
practices differ amongst the three subsidiaries as a result of changing workforce cultural patterns
and strategic dimensions. This creates challenge in the HRM literature.

SC
It is noteworthy that recent studies illustrate the cross-fertilization between EM and HRM for the
achievement of EP (Jackson et al, 2011; Jabbour et al., 2013; Ahmad, 2015; Jabbour and
Jabbour, 2016; Bhutto and Auranzeb, 2016). Daily and Huang (2001), Ferna´ndez et al. (2003),

U
Madsen and Ulhoi (2001) and Jabbour and Santos (2008a) emphasized the association between
HR factors, such as green recruitment and selection, green training, green performance
AN
evaluation, green reward systems, green empowerment, green organizational culture
management, and achieving successful EMS implementation. According to Jabbour and Jabbour
(2016), the above list of GHRM practices are more tangible and may guarantee that green issues
will be considered in employees’ daily routine. These practices will be discussed in details below
M

to provide an account on how organizations can transform HRM practices into green initiatives
that support organizational EP.
D

2.1 Green recruitment and selection

Organizations need to focus on selecting and hiring an employee who support, and interested in,
TE

the environment (Renwick et al., 2013). Therefore, to increase their selection attractiveness from
an increasingly environmentally aware talent (Ehnert, 2009), organizations should build an
environmental reputation and images inspired by the thought that these organizations are
EP

environment responsive (Kapil, 2015a; Guerci et al., 2016). Organizations should reflect their
environmental sustainability agenda on the organization's website and other public facing
channels available so that candidates can clearly view the organization’s greening focus (Kapil,
2015a; Arulrajah et al., 2015). This was asserted by the work of Guerci et al. (2016) who found
C

that environmental sustainability-related intents can play a major role in attracting prospective
applicants. Green recruitment ensures that new recruits understand organization’s green culture
AC

and shares its environmental values (Jackson and Seo, 2010) through drawing out candidate’s
environmental knowledge, values and beliefs (Renwick et al., 2013). The recruitment messages
should include environmental criteria (Arulrajah et al., 2015). In the job analysis phase, job
description, and person specifications should clarify and emphasize on environmental aspects,
green accomplishments and explain what is expected out of future green employee (Mandip,
2012; Renwick et al., 2013). However, Wehrmeyer (1996) recommends a number of measures
that organizations can implement to enhance GHRM through recruitment and selection
processes. First, job descriptions should include elements that emphasize the role of environmental
reporting. Second, an induction program for newly recruited employees should be focused on

5
 ACCEPTED MANUSCRIPT

providing information about environmental sustainability policies, values, and green goals of the
organization. Third, interviews should be deigned to assess potential compatibility of candidates with
the organization greening programs. This design of the interviewing process was supported by
Abdull Razab et al. (2015) who stated that when interviewing potential candidates environmental-
related questions should constitute a major part of the evaluation process. In addition, Arulrajah
et al. (2015) explained that organizations can improve their efforts to protect the environment
through integrating environmental tasks into duties and responsibilities of each employee’s job,

PT
or design environmentally concerned new jobs or positions in order to focus exclusively on EM
aspects of the organizations (Opatha, 2013). During shortlisting of candidates; employees’
selection process should ensure selecting environmentally committed candidates who were

RI
involved in previous related green initiatives (Jabbour, 2011). The above presented relationships
have lead authors to formally articulate the following hypothesis:

SC
H1: Green recruitment and selection positively affects EP in manufacturing organizations.
2.2 Green training and development
Environmental training stands out as one of the primary methods through which HRM develops

U
support for EM initiatives (Daily et al., 2007; Brío et al., 2008, Jabbour, 2013). It was also the
focus of early studies witnessed in 1990s that theorized human resources and environmental
AN
sustainability (Venselaar, 1995, Hale, 1996, Madsen and Ulhoi, 2001). Teixeira et al. (2012)
investigated the relationship between environmental training and environmental management in
Brazilian organizations. Authors revealed that these two constructs are interlinked as they evolve
M

in the organization together. Also, Opatha and Arulrajah (2014) stated that the most significant
impact towards environmental awareness among employee was through environmental training.
According to authors, this type of training is responsible for creating the culture to foster the
D

green practice in organizations. This is congruent with the findings of Sarkis et al. (2010) who
explained that employees can foster EM practices through relevant environmental training.
TE

Similarly, Arulrajah et al. (2015) discussed the value of green education and training of
employees in providing necessary knowledge and abilities for good EP. Employee training and
development programs should include social and environmental issues at all levels (Mandip,
2012; Mehta and Chugan, 2015). According to Cherian and Jacob (2012), it is imperative to
EP

design environmental training based on training needs in order to achieve optimum

environmental benefits from the training. In this context, Daily et al. (2012), in their quantitative
study of investigating correlation between environmental empowerment and environmental
training on EP in 220 manufacturing organizations in Mexico, discovered that environmental
C

training of employees in more effective in influencing EP than environmental empowerment.

Therefore, training, development and learning plans should include programs, workshops, and
AC

sessions to enable employees to develop and acquire knowledge in EM (Liebowitz, 2010;

Prasad, 2013). Renwick et al., (2008, 2013) suggest certain green training and development
practices such as training staff to produce green analysis of workspace, energy efficiency, waste
management, recycling, and development of green personal skills. These were also
recommended by Jackson et al. (2011). In addition, Zoogah (2011) explains that organizations
should provide opportunities to engage employees in environmental problem solving projects. To
achieve this goal, job rotation principles should be used in green assignments as an essential part
of training and career development plans of talented green managers of the future (Wehrmeyer,
1996; Prasad, 2013). Based on this, the following hypothesis has been formulated:

6
 ACCEPTED MANUSCRIPT

H2: Green Training and development positively affects EP in manufacturing organizations.

2.3 Green performance management and appraisal
Performance Management Systems (PMS) guide employees’ performance to achieve the desired
EP through measuring employees' contribution to the advancement of EP (Ahmad, 2015). PMS,
in this sense, ensures the effectiveness of green management work over time (Jackson et al.,
2011), and protects EM initiatives against any deterioration (Epstein and Roy, 1997). In order to

PT
sustain good EP, organizations must adopt corporate-wide metrics for assessing resource
acquisition, usage, and waste; establish Environmental Management Information Systems to
track resource flows and environmental audits (Arulrajah et al., 2015; Jackson and Seo, 2010).
For this reason, contemporary organizations today have developed corporate-wide environmental

RI
performance standards that are combined with green information systems, to evaluate EP and
green performance of their employees (Marcus and Fremeth, 2009). HRM should integrate EP
into PMS by setting EM objectives, responsibilities, monitoring EM behaviors, and evaluating

SC
achievement of environmental objectives by using green work rating as the key indicators of job
performance (Sharma and Gupta, 2015; Kapil, 2015b). This green work rating should be
included in managers' and employees’ appraisals record (Ramus, 2002; Prasad, 2013; Renwick et

U
al., 2013). Furthermore, managers must provide a regular feedback to the employees or teams
about their role in achieving environmental goals to improve their EP (Arulrajah et al., 2015;
AN
Jackson et al., 2011); this feedback will help the employees to enhance their knowledge, skills
and ability. This was asserted by Govindarajulu and Daily (2004) who explained that sharing
appraisal results with employees on how well they are making progress toward environmental
objectives is essential for employees’ motivation, and will increase their engagement in EM
M

responsibilities. It is as suggested by Harvey et al. (2013) and Kapil (2015b), organizations may
also provide an online information system and audits that allow employees to track their own EP
and provide an opportunity for employees to participate and suggest practical ways of making
D

the organization greener. To achieve this, Ahmad (2015) suggested that human resources
departments should redesign the performance appraisal rating system to be able to rate
TE

employees on their behavioral and technical competencies related to environmental

sustainability. These relationships are articulated more formally as:
H3: Green performance management and appraisal positively affects EP in manufacturing
EP

organizations.
2.4 Green reward and compensation
Achieving goals of greening the organization can be enhanced by rewarding employees for their
C

commitment to environmental practices (Jabbour and Santos, 2008a; Jabbour and Jabbour,
2016). In this context, EM could benefit from reward and compensation systems if it focuses on
AC

avoidance of negative behaviors and encourage the eco-friendly behavior (Zoogah, 2011). To
achieve this, reward systems should be designed to mirror management’s commitment to EP
while reinforcing and motivating employees’ pro-environmental behaviors (Daily and Huang,
2001). This management commitment will increase commitment from workers themselves by
becoming more environmentally responsible and will get them more involved in eco-initiatives
(Renwick et al, 2013; Daily and Huang, 2001). Calia et al. (2009) illustrated that to increase
successfulness of rewards programs aiming at motivating employees’ pro-environmental
behavior; rewards should be connected with results of greening projects within organizations. In
addition to this, the core success of recognition rewards is making them available at different

7
 ACCEPTED MANUSCRIPT

levels within the organization (Arulrajah et al., 2015). There are many types of reward practices
to green skills acquisition. Rewards can be on the form of monetary-based EM rewards (e.g.
bonuses, cash, premiums), non-monetary based EM rewards (e.g. sabbaticals, leave, gifts),
recognition-based EM rewards (e.g. awards, dinners, publicity, external roles, daily praise), and
positive rewards in EM (e.g. feedback) (Renwick et al, 2013; Opatha, 2013). All of these types
of rewards value employees who contribute the most to environmental sustainability (Renwick et
al., 2013) through recognizing and rewarding employees who are dedicated to achieving

PT
environmental goals, and those in the middle management who encourage their subordinates to
adopt green practices (Kapil, 2015a; Arulrajah et al., 2015). Of particular importance here is the
study of Ramus (2001), where the author studied the impact of practicing rewards on

RI
environmental practices implementation. It was identified, in this study, that recognition-based
rewards, in the form of praise letters and plaques, had better impact on employees’ commitment
to environmental practices more than other types of rewards. Furthermore, organizations may use

SC
green reward management practices through linking participation in green initiatives with
promotion/career gains, or by providing incentives to encourage eco-friendly practices such as
recycling and waste management (Jabbar and Abid, 2014; Prasad, 2013). Also, it can be used to
encourage some green creativity and innovation by asking employees to share innovative green

U
ideas pertaining to their individual jobs (Ahmad, 2015). This leads to formulating the following
hypothesis:
AN
H4: Green reward and compensation positively affects EP in manufacturing organizations.
2.5 Green employee empowerment and participation
M

As part of the EP enhancement practices, HR managers have to encourage employees to

participate and initiate green and eco-friendly ideas through empowering employees (Jabbour
and Santos, 2008a; Ahmad, 2015). For this purpose, HR staff can highlight the necessity to
D

create a participative work environment to top management; where employees can disagree or
negotiate with management and offer different ideas to address important issues (Liebowitz,
TE

2010). According to Harvey et al. (2013), improving organizational mechanisms for

empowerment and participation of employees in the workplace enable hearing the voice of
employees to help shape environmental objectives. However, the importance of employees’
empowerment and participation emanates from the fact that employees enjoy autonomy to make
EP

decisions concerning environmental problems and other issues that may emerge when
implementing environmental sustainability initiatives (Daily and Huang, 2001; Daily et al.,
2012). Furthermore, encouraging employee participation creates entrepreneurs within the
C

organization who are socially or ecologically oriented (Sudin, 2011). To achieve this, employees
should get involved in formulating an environmental strategy which will enable them to create
AC

and expand the requested knowledge to market green products and services (Margaretha and
Saragih, 2013). Employees participation enhances a tacit knowledge inside people, which has
great influence in identifying pollution sources, managing emergency circumstances, and
expanding preventive solutions (Boiral and Paillé, 2012); resulting in improved EP (Renwick et
al., 2013). Rothenberg (2003) studied worker participation in EM projects in a US automobile
plant (i.e. NUMMI). The study revealed that employees’ active participation and involvmene t in
such projects generates significant contributions to EP. This is due to the fact that experienced
employees have both technical and contextual knowledge that managers lack. The study
concluded that allowing employees to provide suggestions and to be early involved in problem
solving tasks is the main vehicle for enhancing workers’ participation in EM initiatives. In this

8
 ACCEPTED MANUSCRIPT

regard, environmental empowerment is defined as a process through which authority shares its
power with employees to address environmental issues (Daily et al., 2011). This provides
employees with independence to generate creative solutions to solve environmental problems
and to invest the best of their abilities. In EM practices, empowered employees are more
susceptible to be involved in the improvement of the environment (Govindarajulu and Daily,
2004). The majority of environmental problems cannot be related to individual projects only; the
complexity of these problems requires empowered individuals who enjoy various types of

PT
competencies to implement EMS effective solutions (Daily et al., 2007; Rothenberg, 2003; Neto
and Jabbour, 2010). Beside effective implementation of EM, empowered employees foster EM
practices and tacit knowledge particularly when environmental problems are group-oriented

RI
within organizations (Daily et al., 2007). Based on this, the following hypothesis has been
formulated:

SC
H5: Green employee empowerment and participation positively affects EP in manufacturing
organizations.
2.6 Green management of organizational culture

U
In addition to the above practices of GHRM, environmentally sustainable businesses can ensure
continuous improvement of their EP through the initiation of a green corporate culture (Gupta
AN
and Kumar, 2013; Margaretha and Saragih, 2013). GHRM also creates a green culture if it
receives an adequate support from HRM (Jabbour and Santos, 2008a, Jabbour and Jabbour,
2016). According to Mishra et al. (2014), GHRM has much wider scope than simply supporting
EP in organizations; it is perceived as main driver for organizational green culture. From an
M

environmental perspective, Harris and Crane (2002) defined the organization environmental
culture as the set of assumptions, values, symbols, and organizational artifacts that reflect the
desire or necessity of being an environmentally oriented organization. Also, Govindarajulu and
D

Daily (2004) described organizational culture as a factor of either promotion or inhibition to

employee's motivation and willingness to adopt responsible environmental behaviors, and to
TE

employee's participation in improvement projects for improving EP in companies (Rothenberg,

2003; Ones and Dilchert, 2012; Paillé et al., 2013; Paillé and Raineri, 2015). However,
materialization of a green culture requires that employees at all levels understand the
environmental values in the organization (Ahmad, 2015; Bhuto and Auranzeb, 2016). Therefore,
EP

top management should broadcast environmental programs, initiatives, and goals constantly to
all employees (Ramus, 2001; Daily, et al. 2007; Govindarajulu and Daily, 2004). Also, top
management has to provide employees with feedback on EP in order to maintain proper values,
besides reinforcing them through education and training (Ferna´ndez et al., 2003). On the other
C

hand, top management should define penalties for violating environmental regulations and rules
AC

(Renwick et al., 2008; Mandip; 2012). Furthermore, top management could give employees time
for experimentation towards EP and making environmental improvements without excessive
management intervention. This would ultimately increase their motivation towards EM (Daily
and Huang 2001, Daily, et al., 2007; Govindarajulu and Daily, 2004), and will eventually
promote EP innovation (Govindarajulu and Daily, 2004; Ramus, 2001; Ramus and Steger, 2000).
Fernandez et al. (2003) explained that antecedents for an organizational green culture include
employees’ involvement in EM activities, employees training, motivation and incentives,
managers’ commitment to environmental issues, and the eco-centric values of employees.
Authors further added that among all of these antecedents, employee participation and
involvement in EM projects is a core driver for the creation of a green culture. It is as highlighted

9
 ACCEPTED MANUSCRIPT

by Daily et al. (2012) and Jabbour and Jabbour (2016), employees’ empowerment constitutes an
important element in creating a green culture; as it allows employees to make decisions about
environmental problems whenever needed. Furthermore, Gupta and Kumar (2013) have
emphasized that creating a green culture would also require the following human resources
changes: First, employees should be allowed to express their thoughts on how environmental
actions should be executed and implemented. Second, institutionalizing open channels of
communication as part of the organization’s green initiatives to encourage employees to

PT
contribute to the greening goals and will allow managers to be informed of sustainable practices.
However, these relationships are articulated more formally as:

RI
H6: Green management of organizational culture positively affects EP in manufacturing
organizations.

SC
In addition to the above six hypotheses, another hypothesis was developed to explore the
relationship among the six GHRM practices. This is articulated below:

H7: The practices of GHRM are interrelated and a strong relation is available between them in

U
manufacturing organizations.
AN
Based on this literature review and the resulting seven hypotheses, a conceptual model is
presented in Figure1 below. The conceptual model links the construct of EP and the presented
six practices of GHRM (i.e. H1 to H6), and also demonstrate potential correlations among the six
GHRM practices (i.e. H7).
M
D
TE
C EP
AC

Figure 1 - Conceptual GHRM research model.

10
 ACCEPTED MANUSCRIPT

3. Research methodology
An exploratory research inquiry using a mixed methods approach, covering both qualitative and
quantitative aspects sequentially (Creswell, 2004), has been used to empirically assess and
measure the impact of GHRM practices in manufacturing organizations on EP in Palestinian
context. Despite the fact that mixing qualitative and quantitative data is still not adequately
addressed for research in GHRM, there is an increasing number of GHRM studies, albeit weak,

PT
that are using both qualitative and quantitative methods in the same study. See, for example,
Harvey et al., (2013), and Gholami et al., (2016). In this research, adopting mixed methods
approach was chosen due to two main reasons. First, mixed methods approach is particularly

RI
appropriate in revealing the underlying insights of the relationships identified within real-life
operational context and to uncover additional contextual factors which potentially affect GHRM
implementation in manufacturing organizations (Tashakkori and Teddlie, 1998). Second, the bi-

SC
focal lens of using qualitative data and then quantitative data in a sequential manner has a
significant positive impact on informing quantitative part of a study as they are perceived as
complementary to each other (Onwuegbuzie, 2005). As a first stage, an extensive review of the
literature allowed for the identification of initial set of GHRM practices presented in previous

U
studies (see, for example, Daily and Huang (2001), Ferna´ndez et al., (2003), Madsen and Ulhoi
(2001), Jabbour and Santos (2008a), Arulrajah et al., (2015), and Jabbour and Jabbour, (2016)).
AN
It was deemed necessary at this stage that inputs and suggestions from practicing HR managers
is necessary to confirm and update the list of initial GHRM practices identified earlier through
literature reviews. For this purpose, 17 semi-structured interviews were conducted with HR
M

managers in 17 different manufacturing organizations implementing GHRM initiatives at

varying levels. All interviews were tape recorded and transcribed as soon as interviews were
completed. To ensure reliability of data, a guiding protocol (Creswell, 2004) was used as a
backup to direct conversation around major concepts of GHRM. Interviewees were asked diverse
D

set of questions to fully investigate nature of implementation of GHRM practices and their
involvement in EM. For example, questions asked included: ‘what measures are in place to select
TE

and hire employees who are interested in greening the environment?’, ‘can you explain how do
you train your employees to be involved in EM initiatives?’, ‘How do you measure your
employees performance and contributions to the advancement of EP?’, and ‘can you explain how
EP

do you instill values of green practices among your employees?’. The completion of the
qualitative data collection and analysis stage provided a comprehensive list of GHRM elements
and allowed for the formulation of a number of hypothesis (see Figure 1) representing potential
relationships between GHRM practices and EP. Finally, a research instrument was developed in
C

the form of a survey based on interrelationship of identified GHRM practices and EP from
literature review. The procedure followed for developing this research instrument was supported
AC

by the work of O'Donohue and Torugsa (2016). To increase the validity and internal consistency
of the survey instrument, it was pilot-tested with seven HR managers and expert practitioners
before its full deployment among targeted manufacturing organizations. This pilot-testing
process, as recommended by Mohtar and Rajiani (2016), provided suggestions for rearranging
various items/elements of practices which were taken into consideration before its full scale
usage. The instrument contained three main sections. First section included ten items collecting
data that describe both the firm and the respondents’ demographic information. Second section
included 28 items measuring the extent of using GHRM practices. In this section, response
options were grouped into six categories: (1) management of organizational culture, (2)

11
 ACCEPTED MANUSCRIPT

recruitment and selection, (3) training and development, (4) performance management and
appraisal, (5) reward and compensation, and (6) employee empowerment and participation.
Finally, third section included eight items investigating impact of environmental commitment on
firm’s environmental performance.

3.1 Sampling procedure

PT
The study population consists of manufacturing organizations from three manufacturing
industrial sectors (i.e. food, chemical, and pharmaceutical manufacturers) operating in the
West Bank region of OPT, where most of the Palestinian manufacturing organizations are

RI
located. This is in line with cautionary recommendations by Mohtar and Rajiani (2016) of
choosing manufacturing organizations from areas where they are located the most. The
Palestinian Federation of Industries was contacted to get clean information about names,

SC
details, and numbers of valid registered manufacturing organizations. Based on the database
provided, the total available population of organizations was 130 organizations. However, in
order to pinpoint, and then only target manufacturing organizations implementing GHRM
initiatives, researchers directly contacted each organization’s HR manager, or HR senior

U
personnel in some cases, through a telephone call to inquire about availability of all or some
of GHRM practices in place before electronically sending the survey. This same procedure
AN
allowed for the identification of potential candidates for the semi-structured interviews
mentioned earlier. Out of the 130 manufacturing organizations available, 110 organizations
(64 from food, 42 from chemical, and 4 from pharmaceutical manufacturers) expressed the
availability of some or all of the GHRM practices and agreed to participate in the study. To
M

obtain statistically representative sample size of population, Thompson formula was used.
86 responses were required to fully complete the survey. For this purpose, data were
collected over a period of eight weeks via a web-based survey that has been sent through
D

email to HR managers in all of those organizations who agreed to participate in the survey.
The web-based survey provided easy and relatively quick gathering of data (Creswell,
TE

2004). However, out of the 110 targeted manufacturing organizations implementing GHRM
practices, the total number of useable returned surveys was only 90; representing a response
rate of 81.81%. The respondents for the survey instrument were requested to rate each item
under a five-point Likert scale (1-Not at all, 2-To a slight extent, 3-To a moderate extent, 4-
EP

To a large extent, 5-To a very large extent). This rating allowed for the identification of the
extent of using GHRM practices in their respective manufacturing organizations (Roy and
Khastagir, 2016). The level of GHRM practices in an organization was assessed by the
C

average ratings of the measurement items for each measure.

AC

4. Data analysis and results

This section illustrates the detailed analysis of the data collected through the survey instrument
and highlights the outcome of correlation analysis and testifies the formulated hypotheses. The
software of "Statistical Package for the Social Sciences (SPSS)", version 23 has been used in the
analysis process. As a first step, the Cronbach Alpha method was used to test the internal
consistency of the survey instrument. Based on the result of the Cronbach's Alpha test, refer to
Table (1), the reliability of all elements of the survey is above 70%, and the total reliability of the
survey is above 97% which is considered as excellent (Vogt 1999).

12
 ACCEPTED MANUSCRIPT

Table 1: Results of Cronbach’s Alpha test.

Cronbach's
Dimension No. of Items
Alpha
Management of organizational culture 5 0.867
Recruitment and selection 5 0.917
Training and development 5 0.913

PT
Performance management and appraisal 5 0.945
Reward and compensation 3 0.944
Employee empowerment and
5 0.920
participation

RI
Environmental performance 8 0.928
Drivers of Green HRM 5 0.848
Barriers of Green HRM 5 0.791

SC
Expected benefits of Green HRM 6 0.884
Total 52 0.976

U
4.1 Respondents’ profile
AN
Profile analysis shows that 79% of the respondents from the targeted manufacturing
organizations are male while 21% only are female. Moreover, 59% of respondents work in food
industry, 36% are in chemical industry and 5% in pharmaceutical industry. Additionally, the
results show that 42% of respondents were HR managers, 31% were HR directors, while 19%
M

were HR specialists, and 8% were senior HR assistants. Regarding educational level of

respondents, 75% have a bachelor degree, 17% have a master degree or higher, and 8% have a
diploma or below. In addition, 37% of the respondents have from 6 to less than 11 years of
D

experience, 27% have from 2 to less than 6 years of experience and 11% have from 11 to less
than 15 years of experience. Furthermore, it was found that 26% of respondents’ manufacturing
TE

organizations have from 20 to 49 employees, 23% from 50 to 99 employees, and 17% from 10 to
19 employees, 14% employ less than 9 employees, 13% from 100 to 249, while only 7% employ
more than 250 employees. With respect to geographical distribution of respondents’
organizations (shown in Figure 2), it was found that 36% of participating organizations are
EP

located in the city of Ramallah, 16% of the organizations are located in Nablus, 13% are located
in Tulkarem, 12% are located in Hebron, 8% are located in Bethlehem, 7% are located in
Jericho, 2% are located in Jenin, 2% are located in Tubas, 2% in Qalqilia, and only 2% of the
C

companies are located in Jerusalem. Analysis also shows that 42% of organizations fully
incorporated EM programs in their business operations, while the remaining 58% only have a
AC

formal plan to do that.

13
 ACCEPTED MANUSCRIPT

Jericho Hebron Jerusalem Bethlehem Jenin

Ramallah Tubas Tulkarem Qalqilia Nablus

7%
2% 16%
12% 2%

PT
13% 8%

RI
2%
2%
36%

SC
Figure 2 - Geographical distribution of respondents’ organizations.

U
4.2 Prevalence of GHRM practices in manufacturing organizations
AN
To assess GHRM practices in manufacturing organizations in Palestinian context, respondents’
inputs were analyzed using descriptive analysis. Standard deviation and means of responses were
used to identify the application degree for each GHRM practice as shown in Table 2. The use of
M

the application degree concept reflects the level of implementing GHRM practices in the studied
manufacturing organizations. As it was mentioned earlier, the respondents for the survey
instrument were requested to rate each item of the survey under a five-point Likert scale (1-Not
at all, 2-To a slight extent, 3-To a moderate extent, 4-To a large extent, 5-To a very large extent).
D

The application degree of each practice was identified by classifying the response means of
respondents into five degrees. These degrees were calculated by dividing the response range (i.e.
TE

5 which corresponds to “a very large extent” minus 1 which corresponds to “not at all”) by the
number of levels (i.e. 5 levels) in the Likert scale used. This is represented by the following
formula: (5-1)/4= 0.8. Table (2) shows the intervals and their represented application degrees
EP

used in the research.

Table 2: Intervals of application degrees.

C

Interval Degree
1.00-1.80 Very low
AC

> 1.80-2.60 Low

> 2.60-3.40 Moderate
> 3.40-4.20 High
> 4.20-5.00 Very High

Table 3 demonstrates the application degree for GHRM practices in descending order. Based on
the results, the total implementation of GHRM is 2.72, which is considered as a moderate level.
Furthermore, Table 4 outlines the descriptive analysis of all GHRM items under their related
main practices. Based on Table 4, the results show that the top four most prevalent GHRM items

14
 ACCEPTED MANUSCRIPT

used in manufacturing organizations to encourage pro-environmental behavior belong to “green

management of organizational culture” practice. These items are “top management support of
environmental practices” with a score of 3.34, “organizational visions/mission statement include
environmental concern” with a score of 3.41, “top management clarifies information and values
of EM through the organization” with a score of 3.33, and “top management develops
punishment systems and penalties for employees’ noncompliance with EM requirements” with a
score of 3.05. On the other side, the least prevalent items that have been applied in targeted

PT
manufacturing organizations are “offering non-monetary and monetary rewards based on
environmental achievements” with a score of 2.36, and “environmental performance is
recognized publically” with a score of 2.23 that belong to the GHRM practice of “reward and

RI
compensation”, and the items of “using teamwork to successfully manage and produce
awareness of the environmental issues of the company” with a score of 2.20, and “Involving
employee in formulating environmental strategy” with a score of 2.40 that belong to the GHRM

SC
practice of “green employee empowerment and participation”.

Table 3: Application degree for GHRM practices.

U
Standard Application
Rank GHRM practices Mean
Deviation Degree
AN
Green management of organizational
1 3.21 0.85
culture Moderate
Green performance management and
2 2.77 1.03
appraisal Moderate
M

3 Green recruitment and selection 2.76 0.98

Moderate
D

4 Green training and development 2.68 0.93

Moderate
TE

Green employee empowerment and

5 2.51 0.99
participation Low

6 Reward and compensation 2.37 1.12

Low
EP

Overall Mean 2.72 0.89

Moderate
C

Table 4: Descriptive analysis of all items under their related GHRM practices.
AC

Green management of Standard Standard

Mean Recruitment and selection Mean
organizational culture Deviation Deviation
top management actively support Job description specification
3.47 0.98 3.00 1.17
environmental practices includes environmental concerns
organizational vision/mission Environmental performance of
statements include environmental 3.41 1.12 the company attracts highly 2.91 1.16
concern qualified employees
Top management clarify Selecting applicants who are
3.33 0.96 2.70 1.11
information and values of sufficiently aware of greening to

15
 ACCEPTED MANUSCRIPT

Environmental Management fill job vacancies

throughout the organization
Top management develop Recruitment messages include
punishment system and penalties for 3.05 1.07 environmental 2.63 1.07
noncompliance in EM behavior/commitment criteria
jobs positions designed to focus
team/departmental budgets cover exclusively on environmental
2.79 1.10

PT
2.58 1.14
Environmental impact management aspects of the
organizations
Standard Performance management and Standard
Training and development Mean Mean

RI
Deviation appraisal Deviation
Providing environmental training to employees know their specific
the organizational members to 2.80 1.13 green targets, goals and 3.03 1.17
increase environmental awareness responsibilities

SC
environmental behavior/targets
and Contributions to
Take into account the needs of 1.00
environmental management are
environmental issues when training 2.75 2.76 1.03

U
assessed and include in
requirement analyzed
Performance indicators/appraisal
AN
and recorded
Following Induction programs that roles of manages in achieving
emphasize environmental issues 2.70 1.02 green outcomes included in 2.75 1.11
concerns appraisals
M

Providing regular feedback to the

All training materials are available
employees or teams to achieve
online for employee to reduce paper 2.58 1.17 2.65 1.15
environmental goals or improve
cost
D

their environmental performance

corporate Incorporates
environmental training is a priority
environmental management
TE

when
2.55 1.10 objectives and targets with the 2.64 1.20
compared to other types of company
performance evaluation system of
training
the organization
EP

Standard Employee empowerment and Standard

Reward and compensation Mean Mean
Deviation participation Deviation
link suggestion schemes into reward
system by Introducing rewards for Introducing green whistle-
C

2.52 1.20 2.88 1.15

innovative environmental blowing and help-lines
initiative/performance
AC

Providing opportunities to the

The company offers a non-monetary
employee to involve and
and monetary rewards based on the
participate in green suggestion
environmental achievements 2.36 1.10 2.63 1.14
schemes and Joint consultations
(sabbatical, leave, gifts, bonuses,
for environmental issues problem
cash, premiums, promotion)
solving.
organization offers workshops or
Environmental performance is
forums for staff to improve
recognized publically (awards, 2.23 1.25 2.45 1.19
environmental behavior and
dinner, and publicity)
exchange their tacit knowledge

16
 ACCEPTED MANUSCRIPT

Involve employee in formulating

2.40 1.12
environmental strategy
Top managers use teamwork to
successfully manage and produce
2.20 1.07
awareness of the environmental
issues of the company

PT
4.3 Measuring Environmental performance
To measure current status of targeted organization’s EP, respondents were asked to rate eight EP
affirmative outcomes, based on their commitment to the environmental sustainability, on a five-

RI
point Likert scale, with 5 being “Much better” and 1 being “Much worse”. Table 5 presents the
mean ratings and the ranking of potential EP outcomes as a result of implementing GHRM
Practices in a descending order.

SC
Table 5: Measuring environmental performance.

Standard
Environmental performance Mean Rank

U
Deviation
Improvement of corporate reputation 4.06 0.75 1
AN
Reduce emissions of toxic chemicals in air and water 3.97 0.72 2
improved product quality 3.94 0.70 3
Reduced waste and recycling of the materials during the production process 3.89 0.76 4
M

Improved plant performance 3.85 0.60 5

Reductions in the consumption of electric energy 3.76 0.71 6
D

Helped our company design/develop better products 3.75 0.66 7

Increased use of renewable energy and sustainable fuels 3.57 0.60 8
TE

Based on data analysis, it is evident that “Improvement of corporate reputation” is a top

environmental performance affirmative outcome in manufacturing organizations with a mean of
EP

4.06, whereas “Increased use of renewable energy and sustainable fuels” was the lowest
environmental performance affirmative outcome with a mean of 3.57.
4.4 Prevalence of GHRM practices according to different variables
C

This section explores the availability of potential significant differences in GHRM practices that
can be attributed to the control variables of manufacturing organizations’ size, existence of EMS,
AC

and the type of industrial sector. The analysis of the relationships between the GHRM practices
and the three control variables was done using the bivariate analysis and developed through
using one-way ANOVA test; which allows for the comparison of more than two independent
groups.
As for the size of the manufacturing organizations, respondents' answers were divided into three
groups according to size (measured by the number of employees) based on OECD standards and
classifications (OECD, 2005). The OECD definition originates from the EU/OECD
classification. It defines small organizations as those with 1–49 employees, medium-sized
organizations as those with 50–249 employees, and large organizations as those with 250

17
 ACCEPTED MANUSCRIPT

employees or more. Table 6 shows that there is no statistical proof for significant differences in
the degree of applying the GHRM practices of “green employee empowerment and
participation”, “green recruitment and selection”, “green reward and compensation”, and “green
performance management and appraisal” where (P-value > 0.05) for all. While there are
statistical differences between three sizes of organizations in the degree of applying the GHRM
practices of “green management of organizational culture”, “green reward and compensation”,
and “green training and development” where (P-value < 0.05). To understand the differences, a

PT
post hoc test was conducted to test variation between the groups. For the three GHRM practices
with significant statistical differences, when comparing between small and large size
manufacturers, there are differences in favor of large manufacturers, and when comparing

RI
between meduim and large manufacturers, there are also differences in favor of large
manufacturers. However, there is no difference between small and meduim manufacturers.

SC
According to the existence of EMS at the targeted manufacturing organizations, Table 6 shows
that there is a statistical difference in the degree of applying all of the GHRM practices were (P-
value < 0.05). Similarly, to understand the differences, a post hoc test was conducted to test

U
variation between the groups. For all GHRM practices when comparing between 1) EMS
currently exists, 2) have plan to implement within 12 months, 3) have plan to implement in more
AN
than 12 months, and 4) have no plans to implement, there are differences in favor of “EMS
currently exists”. Furthermore, according to the industrial sector, Table 6 shows that there are no
statistical differences between three industrial sectors of organizations (i.e. food, chemical, and
pharmaceutical) in degree of applying any of the GHRM where (P-value > 0.05), except for the
M

“green training and development” practice where (P-value < 0.05). To understand the
differences, a post hoc test was conducted to test variation between the groups. It has been found
that there are statistically significant differences only between food industry and chemical
D

industry in favor of chemical industry. On the other hand, there are no differences between
pharmaceutical industry and food industry, or between pharmaceutical industry and chemical
TE

industry.

Table 6: Summarized ANOVA Test for differences among GHRM practices according to size of
EP

manufacturing organizations, existence of EMS, and type of industrial sector.

Size of Type of
Existence of
manufacturing industrial
EMS
C

ANOVA – Among GHRM practices organization sector

F Sig. F Sig. F Sig.

AC

Green Management of organizational culture 6.349 .003* 4.840 .002* .344 .710
Green Employee empowerment and participation 2.058 .134 3.028 .022* 1.329 .270
Green Recruitment and selection 2.675 .075 3.632 .009* 1.543 .220
Green Reward and compensation 5.330 .007* 2.836 .030* .797 .454
Green Performance management and appraisal 1.606 .207 4.628 .002* .888 .415
Green Training and development 5.766 .049* 2.719 .035* 3.381 .039*
* Significant level at the 0.05

18
 ACCEPTED MANUSCRIPT

4.5 Hypothesis testing

In this study, Pearson's correlation coefficient test was used to test the research hypotheses that
were formulated and presented in Figure. 1. Displaying correlations of the study variables was
necessary to assess the correlations between EP and the six practices of GHRM identified. This
test is based on assuming the null hypothesis (Ho) of the existence of no significant relationship
between the different groups.

PT
4.5.1 Testing Correlation between GHRM Practices and EP
Table 7 shows that there is a correlation between EP and the six groups of GHRM practices,
where EP is collectively affected by these groups of practices since all of the P-values are below

RI
0.05 (p < 0.05). However, these practices correlate with EP positively where the strongest
correlation is with “green recruitment and selection” practice (ρ=0.637), while the weakest
correlation is with “green training and development” (ρ=0.486). Furthermore, it is noted that the

SC
GHRM practices correlates with EP positively in a descending order; green recruitment and
selection (ρ=0.637), green performance management and appraisal (ρ=0.620),
green management of organizational culture (ρ=0.605), green employee empowerment and
participation (ρ=0.595), green reward and compensation (ρ=0.574) and green training and

U
development (ρ=0.486).
AN
Table 7: Correlation coefficient between GHRM practices and EP.
GHRM Practices Pearson's Correlation EP Type of Correlation
M

Correlation Coefficient .637**

Positive
Green Recruitment and selection
P-value (Sig.) .000
D

Correlation Coefficient .620**

Positive
TE

Green Management of organizational culture

P-value (Sig.) .000

Correlation Coefficient .605**

EP

P-value (Sig.) .000 Positive

Green Performance management and appraisal
P-value (Sig.) .000

Correlation Coefficient .595**

C

Positive
Green Employee empowerment and participation
P-value (Sig.) .000
AC

Correlation Coefficient .574**

Positive
Green Reward and compensation
P-value (Sig.) .000

Correlation Coefficient .486** Positive

Green Training and development
*Pearson's Correlation is significant at the 0.05 level

19
 ACCEPTED MANUSCRIPT

4.5.2 Testing Correlation among the GHRM Practices

To describe the correlations among the six groups of GHRM practices, the Pearson’s correlation
test was also used. Table 8 shows that GHRM practices have a significant correlation with each
other since all of the P-values are below (p<0.05). These correlations can be described as
positively strong since all of the Pearson correlation coefficients is above ρ=0.5. The strongest
correlation is between “green recruitment and selection” and “green training and development”

PT
were (ρ=0.897), on the other side, the weakest correlation is between “green employee
empowerment and participation” and “green management of organizational culture” where
(ρ=0.707).

RI
Table 8: Correlation coefficient among GHRM practices.

Reward and compensation

Training and development

Performance management
SC
Recruitment and selection
organizational culture
Management of

and appraisal
U
Pearson's
GHRM Practices
Correlation
AN
M

Correlation
Green Recruitment and .771**
Coefficient
selection
P-value (Sig.) .000
D

Correlation
Green Training and .710** .897**
Coefficient
TE

development
P-value (Sig.) .000 .000
Green Performance Correlation **
.784 .867** .886**
management and Coefficient
appraisal P-value (Sig.) .000 .000 .000
EP

Correlation
Green Reward and .700** .803** .754** .767**
Coefficient
compensation
P-value (Sig.) .000 .000 .000 .000
Green Employee Correlation
C

** ** **
.707 .794 .786 .798** .840**
empowerment and Coefficient
participation P-value (Sig.) .000 .000 .000 .000 .000
AC

* Pearson's Correlation is significant at the 0.05 level

In general, results of the correlation test indicate a positive correlation between GHRM and EP.
Therefore, the seven proposed hypotheses in the research are accepted and their results are
summarized in Figure 3.

20
 ACCEPTED MANUSCRIPT

PT
RI
U SC
AN
Figure 3 - Research hypothesis testing results.

5. Model development
M

Based on hypothesis testing results, a conceptual model has been developed. This model
illustrates some potentially productive GHRM practices for green organizations. The model is
designed to be a guide to help managers in applying GHRM in order to improve EP. As an
D

essential step during the designing process of this model, the model has been shared with a group
of HE experts to judge on its realism and flexibility. The group had one executive manager, and
TE

four HR managers from different manufacturing organizations. All of their notes have been
considered and some modifications were made. Consequently, as shown in Figure 4, the model
includes the six GHRM practices arranged in four sequential stages. At the first stage,
manufacturing organizations are required to develop a supportive organizational culture to
EP

guarantee a superior environmental awareness and commitment among employees via green
organizational culture deployment. This can be done tentatively, as noted earlier, through adding
an environmental concern to the vision and mission elements of the manufacturing organization,
C

and through ensuring top management support, interest and commitment toward the
environment. At this stage, it is important to encourage top managers to play a role model and
AC

adopt the democratic style of decision making towards EP. Furthermore, top managers should
facilitate the process of disseminating EM information’s and values throughout the organization.
At the second stage, the manufacturing organization should be focused on hiring employees who
support the environment and who are interested in protecting it via green recruitment; this will
guarantee successful implementation of EM values. The green recruitment and selection activity
should consider building a green reputation for the company to attract highly qualified green
employees. It is essential during this process to design job specifications that attract such
candidates for recruitment. However, during the process of interviewing candidates,
manufacturing organizations should include elements that investigate candidates’ readiness

21
 ACCEPTED MANUSCRIPT

toward effective environmental behavior. At the same time, it has to make sure that it selects
applicants who are sufficiently aware of environment importance to fill job vacancies.

PT
RI
U SC
AN
M
D

Figure 4 - Conceptual model connecting critical GHRM practices for maximized EP.
TE

At the third stage, the manufacturing organization should keep developing employee's skills,
qualifications, and awareness levels related to the environment via providing green training to
the members of the organization and continuously recording and tracking their performance.
EP

Environmental training and development should focus on educating new employees about
environmental issues, concerns about green culture in the company through emphasizing these
issues during induction programs. On the other hand, in addition to novice employees,
C

experienced employees should also be an essential part of future training requirements analysis.
It is expected at this stage that operationalization of both green training and green performance
AC

management and appraisal systems will present EP as a priority. The model suggests that
manufacturing organizations would be able to define specific green targets and objectives based
on the results of performance appraisal records. At the final stage, the manufacturing
organization should continue motivating employees and increase their interest in environmental
issues via green rewarding and green employee empowerment. This can be done throughout
linking employees’ suggestions schemes for environmental innovative ideas and solutions into
organizational reward system, where organizations, using monetary and non-monetary rewards,
may reward employees for innovative environmental initiative and excellent EP. The
manufacturing organization may also offer the opportunity to contribute to EP improvement
through employee empowerment and participation. For example, employees’ teamwork may

22
 ACCEPTED MANUSCRIPT

participate in formulating environmental strategies to successfully manage and produce

awareness of the environmental issues of the company. Also, organizations may provide
opportunities to employees to be involved in Joint consultations for solving environmental
issues. These six practices of the model should not be discrete. All of them are interrelated and
affect each other as it was found through correlation testing. Therefore, this would suggest that a
manufacturing organization should consider these practices as a continuous work.

PT
6. Discussion and conclusion
The main objective of this research was to theorize and test the relationship between GHRM
practices in manufacturing organizations and EP. Using intensive literature reviews and field

RI
data from HR managers in Palestinian manufacturing organizations, it was possible to extract six
main GHRM practices. The identified practices were green recruitment and selection, green
training and development, green performance management and appraisal, green reward and

SC
compensation, green employee empowerment and participation, and green management of
organizational culture. Although the results revealed that the total implementation of GHRM
practices is at a moderate level, the analysis confirmed that there is a statistically positive and
significant relationship between the six GHRM practices and EP. It was found that the most

U
influential practice was “green recruitment and selection”, whereas the least influential practice
was “green training and development”. Based on these results, a model was developed by
AN
connecting critical practices of GHRM that can be incorporated in workplace for maximized EP.
The presented model offers useful insights on how manufacturing organizations should
strategically link their HR functions to support their EP necessary for competitive advantage.
M

Although “green training and development” was found in this study to be the least influential
practice to EP, Daily et al. (2012), in his study among 220 Mexican manufacturing organizations,
found that green training, as compared to environmental empowerment, had the strongest impact
on EP. This is explainable in the Palestinian manufacturing case as training is perceived as
D

burdensome to several organizations due to financial constraints (Palestinian Federation of

Industries, 2009), and would cause Palestinian manufacturer to use more economically viable
TE

practices than green training. In fact, similar results were noticed in other developing countries
such as India where organizations use cheapest GHRM practices to tap into the benefits of EP
(Mishra et al., 2014). Therefore, this suggests that if Palestinian manufacturing organizations
EP

invest more in their green training programs, then they will be able to transfer their level of
GHRM implementation from a moderate level to a high level. However, it is discerned that
without improved green training and development for employees it may be difficult to achieve
high levels of EP in the future (Daily, et al., 2012).
C

However, findings demonstrate that the top most used practice, which increased employee
AC

commitment and awareness toward the environment, is the “green management of organizational
culture”. This practice focuses on top management involvement and support of the
environmental protection activities, and the clarification of information and values of EM
throughout the organization. The results advocate that top management is a facilitator of pro-
environmental behaviors through clarifying the green framework of the organization to motivate
their staff. This is in congruence with several previous studies (e.g. Govindarajulu and Daily,
2004; Ramus and Steger, 2000; Ramus, 2002; Robertson and Barling, 2013) that highlight
leading role of top management in encouraging employees to engage in environmental
initiatives. Top management impact was considered pivotal in manufacturing organizations

23
 ACCEPTED MANUSCRIPT

because of the scope, visibility and power they have which will enable them to ensure that the
same pro-environmental messages are delivered to all employees (Zibarras and Coan, 2015). It
can be said, then, that placing “green management of organizational culture” as the most used
GHRM practice introduces it as a priority in the Palestinian manufacturing organizations. This is
similar to the findings of Jabbour (2011) in his analysis of the level of greening of HRM
practices, culture, learning and teamwork in 94 Brazilian organizations, where environmental
organizational culture attained maximum agreement among respondents in these organizations.

PT
However, the second most used practice was the “green performance management and
appraisal”, where respondents agree on the existence of an individual green assessment, the
recording of its results, and predetermination of green targets, goals, and responsibilities for

RI
employees. Such a result has been considered as rare in the literature since it is present only in
companies with high level of EP (Fernandez et al., 2003). Also, major studies on this topic reveal
the lack of systematic practices within this practice in organizations (Fernandez et al., 2003;

SC
Govindarajulu and Daily, 2004).

Although there are very few examples of organizations that have been implementing
environmental criteria in their recruitment processes in the literature (Jabbour, 2011), the practice

U
of “green recruitment and selection” was the third most used practice at manufacturing
organizations. This result highlights the fact that HR managers regard EP as a priority in their
AN
organizations. This is resembled by the role played by these HR managers during the recruitment
procedures. For instance, HR managers may easily impact recruitment results and procedures by
recruiting people who are potentially better prepared at protecting organizational environmental
values. The results also indicated that “green training and development” was the fourth most
M

used practice having impact on EP. This is in line with the findings of Teixeira et al. (2012) who
explained that “green training is one of the most important tools to develop human resources and
facilitate the transition to a more sustainable society”. Despite this, the results suggest that “green
D

recruitment and selection” is more practiced as a tool for attracting already skilled and qualified
environmental competencies in manufacturing organizations; as being more efficient and less
TE

costly than it is to organize formal training courses on environmental issues. However,

employees who were trained and educated about environmental changes and policies are more
likely to engage willingly in pro-environmental behaviors (Ramus, 2002). Therefore, even
EP

though the potential costs are expected, organizations need to include employees in formal
education programs aimed at developing and encouraging pro-environmental behavior. It is only
through providing education and training that employee can learn how to enact environmental
changes and become aware of the organization’s efforts toward sustainability.
C

Although the need for active engagement of empowered employees in green management is
AC

highlighted in several previous studies (e.g. Ramus and Steger (2000), Aragon-Correa et al.
(2013); Boiral (2009)), this research shows that the GHRM practice of “green employee
empowerment and participation” was used at a moderate level. This practice includes employee
involvement at different levels, such as teamwork or workshops. Many researchers emphasized
the importance of using green teams to involve the workforce in green management practices
(Jabbour, 2013; Jabbour, 2011). However, green teamwork is the least used practice in this
practice. Based on the fact that these methods would require more resources, both financial and
administrative, to be implemented efficiently, it is predicted that manufacturing organizations
perceive green management practices as expensive.

24
 ACCEPTED MANUSCRIPT

Despite the fact that the previous studies suggest that rewards and compensation can be useful
for implementing GHRM (Daily and Huang, 2001; Govindarajulu and Daily, 2004; Jackson et
al., 2011), it is noteworthy that findings suggest that “green reward and compensation” are not
extensively used within manufacturing organizations to encourage pro-environmental behavior
of employees. Fernandez et al. (2003) explain that it can be difficult to successfully implement a
reward system that works for all employees. This is because individuals are motivated using

PT
different ways. Consequently, this poses a problem for manufacturing organizations concerning
the resources necessary to connect rewards with individual motivation. Based on this, it is
perhaps not surprising that rewards and compensation are not used to the extent as other methods

RI
especially in manufacturing organizations with large numbers of employees.
This research questioned whether the application degree of GHRM practices differs according to

SC
three independent variables of size of manufacturing organization, existence of EMS, and type of
industrial sector. In recognition of size of manufacturing organization effect, Elsayed (2006)
found that size of a firm determines its capability to apply appropriate environmental initiatives
that enhance EP. This research indicates that manufacturing organizations size significantly

U
influence the extent to which certain GHRM practices were used as an enabler for improving
environmental behavior. Based on the results, it has been found that “green management of
AN
organizational culture”, “green reward and compensation”, and “green training and
development” practices are more prevalent among larger organizations than small and medium
organizations. Although these results support the assumption that large organizations have better
resources to influence EP (Ronnenberg et al., 2011), they are different from results reported in
M

other manufacturing environments. For example, O’Donhoue and Torugsa (2016), in their study
of the role of GHRM in the association between proactive environmental management and firm
financial performance in small Australian manufacturing organizations, revealed that size of
D

manufacturing organizations is not a barrier for achieving environmental sustainability, and

should not constitute a concern for smaller manufacturers aiming at improving their greening
TE

programs. This can be explained by the fact that small and medium Palestinian manufacturing
counterparts lack adequate accessibility to affordable soft financing and loan guarantees
necessary for investing in green projects as compared to larger manufacturing organizations in
Palestine, and other manufacturers in developed countries (Palestinian Federation of Industries,
EP

2009). Findings also demonstrate that type of industrial sector has a significant effect on the
extent of implementing “green training and development” only. Implying that chemical
industries tend to perform better than food and pharmaceutical industries included in this
C

research. It can be explained that chemical industries are considered as greater pollutants;
correspondingly, they are more interested in training their employees about various
AC

environmental issues. On top of that, Palestinian chemical manufacturers are suffering from
fierce competition from their Israeli counterparts (Palestinian Federation of Industries, 2009); it
is due to this competition that these manufacturers tend to invest more in green training of their
employees to achieve competitive advantage. This is congruent to the findings of Jabbour et al.
(2008) who found that competition triggers human resources practices necessary for EP.
Regarding the existence of a formal EMS effect, findings demonstrate that manufacturing
organizations currently implementing a formal EMS or have a, action plan for EMS tend to
perform better in using GHRM practices. This is in line with the results of Massoud et al. (2011)
who suggest that there are different forms for implementing EMS, where a more formal EMS is
associated with a greater probability of adopting certain green human resources factors in the

25
 ACCEPTED MANUSCRIPT

organization, whereas informal EMS uses these factors at a lower level, and those organizations
with no EMS implement very low levels or none of green human resources related activities.

7. Theoretical and managerial implications

This study has a number of significant contributions for EP researchers and practitioners. First, it
adds a relationship that is little explored and evolved in a manufacturing setup of developing
countries by integrating GHRM practices and EP through a model that discusses how HR factors

PT
can provide more sustainable manufacturing organizations. Second, it extends research on EP by
investigating how main GHRM practices in manufacturing organizations links with each other,
and ultimately to EP. In particular, the identification of these links among GHRM and with EP

RI
specifies theoretical prioritization, and validation of GHRM practices in a manufacturing
context, hence expanding our understanding of how manufacturing organizations should
strategically link their HR functions to support their EP initiatives. Third, previous studies have

SC
examined GHRM and its links with EP in a single industry. For example, investigation of
GHRM practices in sports centers industry (Gholami et al., 2016), comparing GHRM practices
in restaurant industry (Haddock-Miller et al., 2016), and examination of HR factors and EM in
aerospace industry (Daily et al. 2007). However, the diversity of participating manufacturing

U
organizations (i.e. chemical, food, and pharmaceutical industries) in this research highlights the
generalizability of results to organizations in multiple industries. Hence, this study also extends
AN
GHRM research to a more diverse set of industries.
From a practical perspective, the GHRM model presented in this study intend to give a guide for
manufacturing organizations about the implementation of best practices of GHRM that affects
M

the EP the most. Given the fact that EP is becoming one of the most prominent trends in
manufacturing industries, using this model of GHRM in developing nations can enhance
organizational cleaner production capabilities necessary for competing at a national and
D

international level. Furthermore, this study can guide managers at manufacturing organizations
to link environmental strategic goals with specific practices of HRM. This linking can generate
TE

the deep engagement of employees in shaping environmental practices for a stronger EP. In
addition, adopting the full set of GHRM according to priorities explored in this research helps
manufacturing organizations to build an eco-advantage culture; going beyond the basics of
cutting waste and operating efficiently to enclose environmental considerations into all aspects of
EP

their employees’ behavior, through defining green values, practices, initiatives, and rules.
C

8. Limitations and future research work

Although this study is based on data collected from manufacturing organizations operating in
AC

three different manufacturing industries in Palestinian context, replicating this study in other
developing countries’ context will be necessary to determine the extent to which the findings can
be generalized to other developing countries as well, and will allow testing this conceptual
GHRM modelling attempt in different environments so as to understand how GHRM behaves in
different settings. Because of the scarcity of empirical researches that address HR factors in the
environmental management literatures (Daily et al., 2007), it is recommended that in-depth case
studies be conducted in manufacturing organizations in developing countries to gain more insight
about using GHRM practices for enhanced EP. While this study provided a detailed investigation
on the extent of usage of GHRM practices in manufacturing organization, other researches would
be required to assess this usage of GHRM practices on the overall performance of the

26
 ACCEPTED MANUSCRIPT

organization in terms of financial benefits. It would also be valuable to conduct longitudinal

studies to track the evolution of EP in those manufacturing organizations gradually implementing
GHRM practices to understand cleaner production trends; this would be essential for possible
identification of best combinations of HR practices that affect organizational sustainability.

References

PT
Abdull Razab, M.F., Mohamed Udin, Z., Osman, W.N., 2015. Understanding the role of GHRM
towards environmental performance. Journal of Global Business and Social
Entrepreneurship, 1, 118-125.

RI
Ahmad, S., 2015. Green human resource management: policies and practices. Cogent Business &
Management, 2, 1030817.
Aragon-Correa, J. a., Martin-Tapia, I., Hurtado-Torres, N. E., 2013. Proactive environmental

SC
strategies and employee inclusion: the positive effects of information sharing and promoting
collaboration and the influence of uncertainty. Organization & Environment, 26,139-161.
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, 15,

U
1–16.
Bhutto, S.A., Auranzeb, 2016. Effects of green human resources management on firm
AN
performance: an empirical study on Pakistani firms. European Journal of Business and
Management. 8, 119-125.
Brío, J.Á., Junquera, B., Ordiz, M., 2008. Human resources in advanced environmental
M

approaches–a case analysis. International Journal of Production Research, 46, 6029–6053.

Boiral, O., 2009. Greening the corporation through organizational citizenship behaviors. Journal of
Business Ethics, 87, 221–236.
Boiral, O., Paillé, P., 2012. Organizational citizenship behavior for the environment: measurement
D

and validation. Journal of Business Ethics, 109, 431–445.

Calia, R.C., Guerrini, F. M., de Castro, M., 2009. The impact of Six Sigma in the performance of a
TE

pollution prevention program. Journal of Cleaner Production, 17, 1303-1310

Cherian, J. P., Jacob, J., 2012. A study of green HR practices and its effective implementation in
the organization: a review. International Journal of Business and Management, 7, 25–33.
EP

Chan, E.S.W., 2011. Implementing environmental management systems in small- and medium-
sized hotels: obstacles. Journal of Hospitality & Tourism Research, 35, 3–23.
Creswell, J.W., 2004. Educational Research: Planning, Conducting, and Evaluating Quantitative
and Qualitative Research, second ed. Pearson Education, Columbus.
C

Daily, B., Huang, S., 2001. Achieving sustainability through attention to human resource factors in
environmental management. International Journal of Operations & Production
AC

Management, 21, 1539–1552.

Daily, B. F., Bishop, J., Steiner, R., 2007. The mediating role of EMS teamwork as it pertains to
HR factors and perceived environmental performance. Journal of Applied Business Research,
23, 95–109.
Daily, B.F., Massoud, J. a., Bishop, J.W., 2011. Perceptions of environmental management
systems: an examination of the Mexican manufacturing sector. Industrial Management &
Data Systems, 111, 5–19.

27
 ACCEPTED MANUSCRIPT

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, 631-647.
Djoundourian, S., 2012. Environmental performance of developing countries: a comparative study.
Topics in Middle Eastern and North African Economies, 14, 265-277.
Elsayed, K., 2006. Reexamining the expected effect of available resources and firm size on firm
environmental orientation: an empirical study of UK firms. Journal of Business Ethics, 65,

PT
297-308.
Ehnert, I., 2009. Sustainable Human Resource Management: A Conceptual and Exploratory
Analysis from a Paradox Perspective. Springer, Heidelberg.

RI
Ehnert, I., Parsa, S., Roper, I., Wagner, M., Muller-Camen, M., 2016. Reporting on sustainability
and HRM: a comparative study of sustainability reporting practices by the world's largest
companies. The International Journal of Human Resource Management. 27, 88-108.

SC
EQA (Palestinian Environment Quality Authority), 2010. Environment sector strategy: executive
summary. http://www.lacs.ps/documentsShow.aspx?ATT_ID=6056 (accessed 10.12.16).
Epstein, M., Roy, M., 1997. Using ISO 14000 for improved organizational learning and
environmental management. Environmental Quality Management, 7, 21–30.

U
http://dx.doi.org/10.1002/(ISSN)1520-6483
Fernandez, E., Junquera, B., Ordiz, M., 2003. Organizational culture and human resources in the
AN
environmental issue: a review of the literature. International Journal of Human Resource
Management, 14, 634–656.
Gholami, H., Rezaei, G., Saman, M.Z.M., Sharif, S., Zakuan, N., 2016. State-of-the art Green
HRM system: sustainability in the sports center in Malaysia using a multi-methods approach
M

and opportunities for future research. Journal of Cleaner Production, 124, 142-163.
Görlach, B., Möller-Gulland, J., Bar-On, H., Atrash, I., 2011. Analysis for European
neighbourhood policy (ENP) countries and the Russian Federation of social and economic
D

benefits of enhanced environmental protection – occupied Palestinian territory country

report. http://ecologic.eu/sites/files/publication/2012/opt-enpi_benefit_assessment.pdf
TE

(accessed 11.12.16).
Govindarajulu, N., Daily, B. F., 2004. Motivating employees for environmental improvement.
Industrial Management & Data Systems, 104, 364–372.
EP

Guerci, M., Montanari, F., Scapolan, A., Epifanio, A., 2016. Green and nongreen recruitment
practices for attracting job applicants: exploring independent and interactive effects. The
International Journal of Human Resource Management. 27(2), 129-150.
Gupta, S., Kumar, V., 2013. Sustainability as corporate culture of a brand for superior
C

performance. Journal of World Business, 48, 311-320.

Haddock-Millar, J., Chandana, S., Müller-Camen, M., 2016. Green human resource management: a
AC

comparative qualitative case study of a United States multinational corporation. The

International Journal of Human Resource Management, 27,192-211. DOI:
10.1080/09585192.2015.1052087
Hale, M., 1995. Training for environmental technologies and environmental management. Journal
of Cleaner Production, 3, 19-23.
Harris, L. C., Crane, A., 2002. The greening of organizational culture: management views on the
depth, degree and diffusion of change. Journal of Organizational Change Management, 15,
214–234.

28
 ACCEPTED MANUSCRIPT

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, 152-166. DOI: 10.1080/09585192.2012.669783
Jabbar, M.H., Abid, M., 2014. GHRM: Motivating Employees towards organizational
environmental performance. MAGNT Research Report, 2, 267-278.
Jabbour, C. C., 2013. Environmental training in organizations: from a literature review to a
framework for future research. Resources, Conservation and Recycling, 74, 144– 155.

PT
Jabbour, C. J. C., Jabbour, A. B. L. de S., 2016. Green human resource management and green
supply chain management: linking two emerging agendas. Journal of Cleaner Production,
112, 1824-1833.

RI
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, 51–58.

SC
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, 2133- 2154.
Jabbour, C. J. C., 2011. How green are HRM practices, organizational culture, learning and

U
teamwork? A Brazilian study. Industrial and Commercial Training, 43, 98 –105.
Jabbour, C.J.C., Santos, F.C.A., Nagano, M.S., 2008. Environmental management system and
AN
human resource practices: is there a link between them in four Brazilian companies? Journal
of Cleaner Production, 16, 1922–1925.
Jackson, S. E., Seo, J., 2010. The greening of strategic HRM scholarship. Organization
Management Journal, 7, 278-290.
M

Jackson, S. E., Renwick, D. W. S., Jabbour, C. J. C., Müller-Camen, M., 2011. State-of-the-art and
future directions for green human resource management: Introduction to the special issue.
German Journal of Human Resource Management: Zeitschrift für Personalforschung, 25, 99-
D

116.
Kapil, P., 2015a. Green HRM- Engaging Human Resource in reducing carbon footprint and
TE

enhancing environment sustainability : A case study based approach. International Journal of

Engineering Technology Science and Research, 2, 5–14.
Kapil, K., 2015b. Green HRM : trends and prospects. GE- International Research Journal of
EP

Management Research. 1, 43–55.

Liebowitz, J., 2010. The role of HR in achieving a sustainability culture. Journal of Sustainable
Development, 3, 50–57.
Madsen H, Ulhoi JP., 2001. Greening of human resources: environmental awareness and training
C

interests within the workforce. Industrial Management and Data Systems, 101, 57-63.
Mittal, V. K., Sangwan, K. S., 2014. Prioritizing drivers for green manufacturing: Environmental,
AC

social and economic perspectives. Procedia CIRP, 15, 135-140.

Mandip, G., 2012. Green HRM: people management commitment to environmental sustainability.
Research Journal of Recent Sciences, 1, 244-252
Marconi, N., Fróes de Borja Reis, c., de Araújoc, E.C., 2016. Manufacturing and economic
development: The actuality of Kaldor’s first and second laws. Structural Change and
Economic Dynamics, 37, 75-89.
Marcus, A., Fremeth, R., 2009. Green management matters regardless. The Academy of
Management Perspectives, 23, 17-26.

29
 ACCEPTED MANUSCRIPT

Margaretha, M., Saragih, S., 2013. Developing new corporate culture through green human
resource practice. International Conference on Business, Economics, and Accounting.
Bangkok - Thailand.
Massoud, J. a., Daily, B. F., Bishop, J. W., 2011. Perceptions of environmental management
systems: An examination of the Mexican manufacturing sector. Industrial Management and
Data Systems, 111, 5–19.
Mehta K., Chugan P.K., 2015. Green HRM in pursuit of environmentally sustainable business.

PT
Universal Journal of Industrial and Business Management, 3, 74-81.
Mishra, R.K., Sarkar, S., Kiranmai, J., 2014. Green HRM: innovative approach in Indian public
enterprises. World Review of Science, Technology and Sust. Development, 11, 26-42.

RI
Mohtar, N.S., Rajiani, I., 2016. Conceptual model in using ability and opportunity as GHRM
framework to determine environmental performance. International Business Management,
10, 3840-3846.

SC
Neto, A.S., Jabbour, C.J.C., 2010. Guidelines for improving the adoption of cleaner production in
companies through attention to non- technical factors : A literature review. African Journal of
Business Management. 4, 4217–4229.
O'Donohue, W., Torugsa, N., 2016. The moderating effect of ‘Green’ HRM on the association

U
between proactive environmental management and financial performance in small firms. The
International Journal of Human Resource Management. 27, 239-261.
AN
Ones, D.S., Dilchert, S., 2012. Environmental sustainability at work: a call to action. Industrial and
Organizational Psychology. 5, 444-466.
Opatha, H.H.D.N.P., Arulrajah, A., 2014. Green human resource management: simplified general
reflections. International Business Research, 7, 101–112.
M

Opatha, P. H., 2013. Green human resource management : a simplified introduction. Proceedings
of the HR Dialogue, At Department of Human Resource Management & HRM Family,
Faculty of Management Studies and Commerce, University of Sri Jayewardenepura, Sri
D

Lanka, Vol. 01, No. 01, 11–21.

Onwuegbuzie, A., 2005. On becoming a pragmatic researcher: the importance of combining
TE

quantitative and qualitative research methodologies. International Journal of Social Research

Methodology, 8, 375-387.
Organization for Economic Co-operation and Development (OECD), 2005. Small and medium-
EP

sized enterprises (SMES). https://stats.oecd.org/glossary/detail.asp?ID=3123 (accessed

13.06.16).
Prasad, R. S., 2013. Green HRM- partner in sustainable competitive growth. Journal of
Management Sciences and Technology, 1, 15-18.
C

Prathima, M., Misra, S., 2013. The green revolution in human resource management. Asia Pacific
Journal of Management & Entrepreneurship Research, 1, 227–237.
AC

Paillé, P., Boiral, O., Chen, Y., 2013. Linking environmental management practices and
organizational citizenship behavior for the environment: a social exchange perspective.
International Journal of Human Resource Management. 24, 3552–3575.
Paillé, P., Raineri, N., 2015. Linking perceived corporate environmental policies and employees
eco-initiatives: the influence of perceived organizational support and psychological contract
breach. Journal of Business Research. 68, 2404-2411.
Paauwe, J., Boselie, P., 2005. HRM and performance: what next? Human Resource Management
Journal, 15, 68-83.

30
 ACCEPTED MANUSCRIPT

Palestinian Federation of Industries, 2009. The Current Status of Industrial Sector in Palestine.
http://pfi.ps/site_images/file/Final%20PFI-Carana%20Industrial%20Sectors%20Study.pdf
(accessed 11.12.16).
Patel, N.P., 2014. Green HR : a paradigm shift in human resource management philosophy.
Brazilian online journal. 2, 10–15.
Ramus, C. A., Steger, U., 2000. The roles of supervisory support behaviors and environmental
policy in employee eco-initiatives at leading-edge European companies. Academy of

PT
Management Journal, 43,605–626.
Ramus C.A., 2001. Organizational support for employees: encouraging creative ideas for
environmental sustainability. California Management Review, 43, 85-105.

RI
Ramus, C.A., 2002. Encouraging innovative environmental actions: what companies and managers
must do. Journal of World Business, 37, 151-164
Renwick, D. W. S., Redman, T., Maguire, S., 2013. Green human resource management: a review

SC
and research agenda. International Journal of Management Reviews, 15,1-14.
Renwick, D.W.S., Jabbour, C.J.C., Muller-Camen, M., Redman, T., Wilkinson, A., 2016.
Contemporary developments in Green (environmental) HRM scholarship. The International
Journal of Human Resource Management, 27, 114-128.

U
Rehman, M A., Shrivastava, R.L, 2011. An approach to develop instrument for finding status of
green manufacturing in India. Industrial Engineering Journal, 2, 24-30
AN
Rehman, M.A., Seth, D., Shrivastava, R.L., 2016. Impact of green manufacturing practices on
organisational performance in Indian context: An empirical study. Journal of Cleaner
Production, 137, 427-448. doi: 10.1016/j.jclepro.2016.07.106.
Renwick, D., Redman, T., Maquire, S., 2008. Green HRM: a review, process model, and research
M

agenda (Discussion Paper Series). The University of Sheffield: University of Sheffield

Management School.
Rothenberg, S., 2003. Knowledge content and worker participation in environmental management
D

at NUMMI. J. Manage. Stud., 40, 1783-1802.

Robertson, J. L., Barling, J., 2013. Greening organizations through leaders’ influence on
TE

employees’ pro-environmental behaviors. Journal of Organizational Behavior, 34, 176–194.

Ronnenberg, S. K., Graham, M. E., Mahmoodi, F., 2011. The important role of change
management in environmental management system implementation. International Journal of
EP

Operations and Production Management, 31, 631–647.

Roy, M., Khastagir, D., 2016. Exploring role of green management in enhancing organisational
efficiency in petro-chemical industry in India. Journal of Cleaner Production, 121, 109-115.
Sarkis, J., Gonzalez-Torre, P., Adenso-Diaz, B., 2010. Stakeholder pressure and the adoption of
C

environmental practices: the mediating effect of training. Journal of Operations Management,

28, 163-176.
AC

Shaikh, M., 2012. Green HRM: a requirement of 21st century. Journal of Research in Commerce
and Management, 1, 122-127.
Sharma, S., Gupta, N., 2015. Green HRM: an innovative approach to environmental sustainability.
Proceeding of the Twelfth AIMS International Conference on Management. 2-5 January,
Calicut , India, 825-830.
Sathyapriya, J., Kanimozhi, R., Adhilakshmi, V., 2013. Green HRM - delivering high performance
HR systems. International Journal of Marketing and Human Resource Management, 4, 19-
25.

31
 ACCEPTED MANUSCRIPT

Schuler, R., Jackson, S., 2014. Human resource management and organizational effectiveness:
yesterday and today. Journal of Organizational Effectiveness: People and Performance, 1,
35-55.
Soo Wee, Y., Quazi, H. A., 2005. Development and validation of critical factors of environmental
management. Industrial Management & Data Systems, 105, 96-114.
Sudin, S., 2011. Strategic green HRM: a proposed model that supports corporate environmental
citizenship. Proceedings of the International Conference on Sociality and Economics

PT
Development, IPEDR vol.10, IACSIT Press, Singapore. 79-83.
Szirmai, A., Verspagena, B., 2015. Manufacturing and economic growth in developing countries,
1950–2005. Structural Change and Economic Dynamics, 34, 46-59.

RI
Tashakkori, A., Teddlie, C., 1998. Mixed Methodology: Combining Qualitative and Quantitative
Approaches. Sage Publications, London.
Teixeira, A. A., Jabbour, C. J. C., Jabbour, A. B. L. D. S., 2012. Relationship between green

SC
management and environmental training in companies located in Brazil: A theoretical
framework and case studies. International Journal of Production Economics, 140, 318–329.
Venselaar J., 1995. Environmental training: industrial needs. Journal of Cleaner Production, 3, 1-2.
Vogt, W.P., 1999. Dictionary of Statistics and Methodology: A Nontechnical Guide for the Social

U
Sciences. Sage Publications, Thousand Oaks.
Wehrmeyer, W., 1996. Greening People: Human Resources and Environmental Management.
AN
Greenleaf Publishing, Sheffield.
Wagner, M., 2013. “Green” human resource benefits: do they matter as determinants of
environmental management system implementation? Journal of Business Ethics, 114, 443–
456.
M

Yusoff, Y.M., Ramayah, T., Othman, N., 2015. Why examining adoption factors, HR role and
attitude towards using E-HRM is the start-off in determining the successfulness of green
HRM ? Journal of Advanced Management Science, 3, 337–343.
D

Zhan, Y., Tan, K. H., Ji, G., Chung, L., Chiu, A. S., 2016. Green and lean sustainable development
path in China: Guanxi, practices and performance. Resources, Conservation and Recycling.
TE

http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.resconrec.2016.02.006 (in press)

Zoogah, D. B., 2011. The dynamics of green HRM behaviors : a cognitive social information
processing approach. Zeitschrift für Personalforschung, 25, 117–139.
EP

Zibarras, L. D., Coan, P., 2015. HRM practices used to promote pro-environmental behaviour: A
UK survey. International Journal of Human Resource Management, 26, 2121–2142.
C
AC

32
 ACCEPTED MANUSCRIPT

Assessing Green Human Resources Management Practices in

Palestinian Manufacturing Context: An Empirical Study

Research Highlights:

PT
• Palestinian manufacturers implement moderate level of green human resources.
• Green human resources management practices strongly support environmental
performance.

RI
• Green recruitment is the most influential practice to environmental performance.
• Green training is the least influential practice to environmental performance.

SC
• A model linking Green Human resources practices for maximized EP is proposed.

U
AN
M
D
TE
C EP
AC