Exploring the cornerstones of green, sustainable and socially responsible human resource management

• DOI: https://doi.org/10.1108/IJM-12-2021-0696
• Published date: 05 October 2022
• Date: 05 October 2022
• Pages: 524-542
• Subject Matter: Economics,Labour economics
• Author: Lydia Murillo-Ramos,Irene Huertas-Valdivia,Fernando E. García-Muiña

Exploring the cornerstones of

green, sustainable and socially

responsible human

resource management

Lydia Murillo-Ramos, Irene Huertas-Valdivia and

Fernando E. Garc



ıa-Mui~

na

Department of Business Administration, Faculty of Social Sciences and Law,

Universidad Rey Juan Carlos, Madrid, Spain

Abstract

Purpose –This study aims to delineate the fast-growing path of human resource management (HRM)

research with a sustainable orientation and resolve confusion over the differences and interdependences of

the various approaches that have emerged: green human resource management (GHRM), sustainable

human resource management (Sustainable HRM), and socially responsible human resource management

(SR-HRM).

Design/methodology/approach–In this study, bibliometrics and science mapping were used to analyze the

field’sconceptual structure based on 587 related documents extracted from the ISI Web of Science database. Co-

word analysis with SciMAT software enabled the authors to map the main themes studied and identify

evolution, importance, and relevance.

Findings –SR-HRM is the least developed of the three approaches analyzed and has been overlooked by the

journals that publish themost work in the field of HR. The authors identify a lack of sustainability-relatedHRM

studies on higher education and an ongoing need both to explore the role of culture in GHRM implementation

and to explain further the potential non-green behavioral outcomes that can result from GHRM’s use.

Practical implications –This study demonstrates how human resource factors are key to managing

challenges such as aging workforce, unstable employmentrelationships, implementation of green supply chain

management, and Industry 4.0.

Originality/value –This study explores in detail the interrelations among various emerging sustainable

human resource approaches and subtopics derived from the interrelations to reveal hotspots, dilemmas,

paradoxes, and research gaps.

Keywords Science mapping, CSR-HRM, GHRM, Sustainable HRM and SR-HRM

Paper type Literature review

1. Introduction

The Sustainable Development Goals Report 2020 states that significant efforts are still needed

to reduce environmental degradation and eliminate or mitigate persistent inequalities (United

Nations, 2020). Various groups of stakeholders are demanding that organizations show

greater commitment to environmental management (EM) and corporate sustainability issues

(Kramar, 2014). Meanwhile, competition has increased sharply in the last decade due to

innovation disruption and globalization, causing changes in organizational structure and

employment relations (Cuguer

o-Escofet et al., 2019).

IJM

44,3

524

Research funding

This work was funded by Ministerio de Ciencia e Innovaci

on (Madrid, Spain)

(No: FPU19/00945).

The authors thank the Universidad Rey Juan Carlos Strategor Group for funding the

translation of this article.

The current issue and full text archive of this journal is available on Emerald Insight at:

https://www.emerald.com/insight/0143-7720.htm

Received 18 December 2021

Revised 26 July 2022

Accepted 16 September 2022

International Journal of Manpower

Vol. 44 No. 3, 2023

pp. 524-542

© Emerald Publishing Limited

0143-7720

DOI 10.1108/IJM-12-2021-0696

In this context, the functional area of human resource management (HRM) has gained

strategic importance for organizations moving towards more sustainable business models.

Three HRM approaches have been attracting researchers’and practitioners’attention in the

past decade given their increased sustainability orientation. Sustainable HRM, Green Human

Resource Management (GHRM), and Socially Responsible Human Resource Management

(SR-HRM) are currently seen as key to solving crucial organizational challenges.

Firstly, Kramar (2014) argues that, despite lack of consensus regarding the definition of

Sustainable HRM, the term could be defined as the bundle of structured or emerging human

resource strategies and activities designed to enable attainment of economic, social, and

ecological goals (in accordance with the triple bottom line), while simultaneously reproducing

the human resource base in the long run. The notion of sustainable work systems and the

Sustainable HRM approach overlap in their shared interest in employees’capability

regeneration, health, and growth (Ehnert and Harry, 2012). For authors like Stankevi

ciute

and Savanevi

ciene (2018), the strategy of prompting sustainability of the HRM system itself

enhances organizations’continuity, as organizations depend on highly talented employees.

As to GHRM, Kramar (2014) argues that the approach belongs to the broader category

Sustainable HRM. GHRM builds on the application of EM fundamentals and postulates to

HRM processes, practices, and systems (Renwick et al.,2013). It is thus associated with

construction of green abilities, enhancement of workforce motivation through green

performance appraisals and reward programs, and initiatives that promote employee

engagement in green affairs (Dumont et al.,2017). The main objective of the practices and

policies embedded in GHRM is to develop a green workforce to benefit the organization

and its individuals, the natural environment, and society (Ehnert et al.,2014). To guarantee

a successful shift of organizational behavior towards efficient use of resources, Muster and

Schrader (2011) introduced the concept of green work-life balance, noting that the scope of

GHRM should extend beyond workplace boundaries to support adoption of

pro-environmental behaviors in the domain of workers. Although GHRM research is

still in its infancy, it is a useful tool for green management, as it nurtures more efficient

processes, proactive green behaviors, and waste reduction (Hameed et al., 2020).

Orlitzky and Swanson (2006) coined the term SR-HRM, opening a new path within the

Corporate Social Responsibility (CSR) framework. Shen and Benson (2016) define SR-HRM as

CSR directed at employees, thereby differentiating SR-HRM from HRM in general because it

attendsto the interests of externalstakeholders.For Shen and Zhu (2011), the concept has three

dimensions: laborlaw-related legalcompliance HRM,employee-orientedHRM, and generalCSR

facilitation HRM. For them,SR-HRM includes not only the need to follow employment-related

legal requirements and standards but also the application of employee-centric HRM practices

and policies to address their professional and personal demands for self-development and

achieveemployee engagementin external CSR projects(Newman et al., 2016). To date,literature

on the CSR–HRM nexushas adopted two perspectives: HRMas part of CSR and CSR aspart of

HRM. The former perspective views “good”HRM as a feature of CSR, while simultaneously

considering CSR as an indispensable mechanism for “effective”HRM (Iqbal et al., 2019). As

Barrena-Mart



ınez et al. (2019) asserted, SR-HRM aims to embrace a social focuson managing

people, and because SR-HRM practices and policies include creating value for workers, they

increase work ers’organizationalcommitment (Shen and Zhu, 2011).

These sustainability-oriented constructs relatedto HRM came to light as a consequence of

the multidimensional nature of the Sustainable HRM construct (Kainzbauer and Rungruang,

2019). This alternative approach to HRM entails the establishment of broader goals for HRM by

recognizing the complexities of workplace dynamics andexplicitly acknowledging the needto

mitigate the negative effects of HRM practices (Anlesinya and Susomrith, 2020). Meanwhile,

GHRM and SR-HRM are considered key types of Sustainable HRM and will reflect both the

ecological and social perspective of Sustainable HRM, re spectively (Piwowar-Sulej, 2021).

Sustainable

human

resource

approaches

525