Personnel ReviewEmployee participation and engagement in working for the environmentSuzanne Benn Stephen TT Teo Andrew Martin

Article informationTo cite this documentSuzanne Benn Stephen TT Teo Andrew Martin (2015)Employee participation and engagement inworking for the environment Personnel Review Vol 44 Iss 4 pp 492 - 510Permanent link to this documenthttpdxdoiorg101108PR-10-2013-0179

Downloaded on 27 May 2015 At 1917 (PT)References this document contains references to 64 other documentsTo copy this document permissionsemeraldinsightcomThe fulltext of this document has been downloaded 106 times since 2015

Users who downloaded this article also downloadedAnitha J (2014)Determinants of employee engagement and their impact on employeeperformance International Journal of Productivity and Performance Management Vol 63 Iss 3 pp308-323 httpdxdoiorg101108IJPPM-01-2013-0008M Brad Shuck Tonette S Rocco Carlos A Albornoz (2011)Exploring employee engagement fromthe employee perspective implications for HRD Journal of European Industrial Training Vol 35 Iss4 pp 300-325 httpdxdoiorg10110803090591111128306Alan M Saks (2006)Antecedents and consequences of employee engagement Journal ofManagerial Psychology Vol 21 Iss 7 pp 600-619 httpdxdoiorg10110802683940610690169

Access to this document was granted through an Emerald subscription provided by 407354 []

For AuthorsIf you would like to write for this or any other Emerald publication then please use our Emeraldfor Authors service information about how to choose which publication to write for and submissionguidelines are available for all Please visit wwwemeraldinsightcomauthors for more information

About Emerald wwwemeraldinsightcomEmerald is a global publisher linking research and practice to the benefit of society The companymanages a portfolio of more than 290 journals and over 2350 books and book series volumes aswell as providing an extensive range of online products and additional customer resources andservices

Emerald is both COUNTER 4 and TRANSFER compliant The organization is a partner of theCommittee on Publication Ethics (COPE) and also works with Portico and the LOCKSS initiative fordigital archive preservation

Related content and download information correct at time ofdownload

Dow

nloa

ded

by A

uckl

and

Uni

vers

ity o

f T

echn

olog

y A

t 19

17 2

7 M

ay 2

015

(PT

)

Employee participation andengagement in working for

the environmentSuzanne Benn

Business School University of Technology Sydney Broadway AustraliaStephen TT Teo

AUT Business School Auckland University of Technology AucklandNew Zealand andAndrew Martin

Business School University of Technology Sydney Broadway Australia

AbstractPurpose ndash The purpose of this paper is to explore the role of specific human resource management(HRM) practices in the implementation of environmental initiatives in terms of their impact onemployee attitudes to the organization and to its environmental programmeDesignmethodologyapproach ndash The study used a mixed method approach comprising a surveyof 675 employees and 16 semi-structured interviews undertaken across two organizationsFindings ndash Survey data analysed using path analysis showed that participation in environmentalinitiatives is directly associated with higher levels of employee engagement with the organizationhigher rating of their organizationrsquos environmental performance and lower intention to quitThe qualitative study supports the quantitative data also highlighting other aspects of environmentalinitiatives that may affect employee attitudesResearch limitationsimplications ndash Future study should either collect longitudinal data or rely ondata collected from two waves of data collection Objective performance data should also be collected inorder to better understand the causal effect of HRM on environmental performancePractical implications ndash Our findings have implications for the business case for sustainabilityproviding some evidence that implementing environmental initiatives with HRM support may not onlymotivate staff around environmental programmes but may provide wider benefits for organizations interms of overall job satisfaction and employee retentionSocial implications ndash Successful implementation of environmental management initiatives haveboth organizational and employee level outcomes Employees who were more aligned with theirorganizational environmental objectives were found to be more engaged and less likely to quitOriginalityvalue ndash This study provided both quantitative and qualitative empirical evidence tosupport the importance of integrating the HRM function into the implementation of environmentalinitiativesKeywords Job satisfaction Employee participation Engagement QualitativeEnvironmental management Mixed methodologies Advanced statistical Intention to quitPaper type Research paper

This paper explores the role of specific human resource management (HRM) practicesin the implementation of environmental initiatives in terms of their impact on employeeattitudes to the organization and to its environmental programme It addresses the lackof understanding of how the HRM system might be used to address the ldquopeople factorrdquothe impediment that its employees pose to the environmental or Green performance oforganizations (Robertson and Barling 2013 Stone 2006)

While the wider HRM literature acknowledges the link between certain HRMpractices such as employee participation and positive outcomes for the organization

Personnel ReviewVol 44 No 4 2015pp 492-510copyEmeraldGroup Publishing Limited0048-3486DOI 101108PR-10-2013-0179

Received 8 October 2013Revised 3 April 201427 May 2014Accepted 30 July 2014

The current issue and full text archive of this journal is available on Emerald Insight atwwwemeraldinsightcom0048-3486htm

492

PR444

Dow

nloa

ded

by A

uckl

and

Uni

vers

ity o

f T

echn

olog

y A

t 19

17 2

7 M

ay 2

015

(PT

)

(eg Hunton-Clarke et al 2002) the Green HRM literature is characterized by claimsand counter claims (eg Jabbour and Santos 2008b Jabbour et al 2008) and by adearth of empirically based research papers that link specific HRM practices to thevarious stages or phases of Green implementation (Jabbour and Santos 2008b p 52) Asnoted in a recent review (Renwick et al 2013) much extant knowledge of Green HRM ispractice based and there is a need for more rigorous empirical data on the relationshipbetween various elements of the HRM system such as employee participation orinvolvement employee attitudes to environmental initiatives and whether Green HRMldquopaysrdquo through its impact on such factors as employee attraction and retention

There is considerable evidence that employee participation in environmentalinitiatives is crucial to their success (Remmen and Lorentzen 2000 Renwick et al2013) This study highlights how participation-oriented managerial practices in theimplementation of these initiatives impact on employee perception of the environmentalperformance of the organization and in turn on their engagement with and attitude tothe organization It therefore provides the much needed empirical evidence on thecritical role of HRM in environmental management

The importance of the study also lies in the fact that despite the extensive literatureon the topic of a relationship between various HRM interventions and aspects oforganizational performance we do not have a clear understanding of what mightmotivate a business organization to commit HRM resources to assist in generating andmaintaining pro-environmental behaviour In this paper we address both the howand why of bringing the HRM system together with the implementation of environmentalinitiatives

Employee attitudes in environmental management initiativesA wide and overlapping literature links factors of HRM interest such as employeeparticipation attitudes (such as engagement satisfaction and support for changeinitiatives) and turnover (both actual turnover and intention to quit) Claims that high-quality employee participation is a means of achieving organizational effectivenessthrough facilitating employee commitment and engagement[1] with the organization(Gollan 2005) are supported by some empirical evidence Empowering employeesthrough involvement and participation has been shown to increase job satisfaction andemployee retention paying dividends for the organization Generalizable relationshipssignificant enough to have substantial practical value have been established betweenunit-level employee satisfaction ndash engagement and business-unit outcomes (Harter et al2002) Participation communication and interaction between groups are found to assist inbreaking down barriers between specialists and innovators thus saving time and buildingcommitment (Hunton-Clarke et al 2002) Other studies have found that that HRM practicescan lower employee intentions to leave but also that this relationship is partially mediatedby organizational commitment (Guchait and Cho 2010) However the relationship betweenattitudes to the workplace and turnover intentions is complex and it has recently beenshown that differences in the extent to which job satisfaction systematically improvesor declines accounts for change in employeesrsquo ldquoturnover intentionsrdquo rather than absolute(average) levels of job satisfaction (Chen et al 2011)

Another body of work relevant to the relationship between employee involvement inand attitudes to the organization shows the importance of participation in gainingsupport from employees towards new initiatives This research has been summarizedby Oreg et al (2011) in their 60 year review of quantitative studies on change recipientsrsquoreactions to change Drawing on the work of researchers such as Amiot et al (2006) and

493

Employeeparticipation

andengagement

Dow

nloa

ded

by A

uckl

and

Uni

vers

ity o

f T

echn

olog

y A

t 19

17 2

7 M

ay 2

015

(PT

)

Holt et al (2007) the review finds evidence that change recipients who experienced highlevels of participation report higher acceptance of new initiatives and exhibit overallsupport for the change From the work of Bartunek et al (2006) other positiveassociations are made between participation and understanding the meaning andbenefits of a change initiative (Bartunek et al 2006) Steel and Lloydrsquos (1988) study alsoprovides evidence that participation results in increased attachment to the organizationMacey and Schneider (2008) in their recent review proposed that employee engagementcan be enhanced with participative management and job involvement practices

HR practices and Green outcomesThe relationship between participation or involvement employee engagement with theorganization job satisfaction support for new initiatives and employee retention foundin the general HRM literature has not been systematically investigated in specific termsin relation to the implementation of organizational Greening

If we look to some of the relevant studies in the wider organizational Greeningliterature we see evidence of trends that we can build on to develop constructs for moresystematic empirical testing In their systematic review of Green HRM Renwick et al(2013) apply the Ability-Motivation-Opportunity theory to examine different types ofHRM practices that could be classified as Green HRM as they were found to have animpact on environmental management An example of Green HRM includes thosepractices that relate to workplace involvement and participation The literature hasalso shown that employee involvement and participation in environmental initiatives ispositively related to key aspects of environmental management systems (EMS)(Remmen and Lorentzen 2000 Renwick et al 2013) such as efficient use of resourceswaste reduction and pollution reduction in the workplace

Remmen and Lorentzen (2000) found that employee participation in the implementationof a cleaner technology project can increase employee understanding of environmentalproblems and issues and had a strong effect on changing work routines and increasingenvironmental consciousness Paille et alrsquos (2014) study in the Chinese context showed thatinternal environmental concern moderates the effect of strategic HRM on organizationalcitizenship behaviour for the environment The research of Kitazawa and Sarkis (2000)showed that employee empowerment and participation in decision making are crucialelements in managing continuous source reduction programmes because they increasetheir employeesrsquo buy-in to the environmental challenges of the organization Zutshi andSohal (2004) also found that employee involvement in planning of environmental policyEMS processes and supporting programmes was strongly associated with moralebuilding within the company These studies indicate that high levels of employeeparticipation and involvement are positively associated with environmental performanceThis is achieved as employees develop a better understanding of the rationale behind theenvironmental goals and environmental performance of the organization

The implementation of EMS has been shown to be influenced by the extent to whichGreen HRM practices are being implemented (Wagner 2013) As employees became moreinvolved and participated more strongly in environmental management employees feltmore motivated which subsequently led to a higher level of work engagement Cantoret al (2012) have shown higher levels of employee engagement and commitment are seenon green initiatives Employee involvement and participation are both examples of highinvolvement HRM practices and they have been shown to enhance employeesrsquomotivation and commitment towards their organization (Gollan 2005 Wilkinson et al2001) Employee involvement and participation are also considered to be aspects of Green

494

PR444

Dow

nloa

ded

by A

uckl

and

Uni

vers

ity o

f T

echn

olog

y A

t 19

17 2

7 M

ay 2

015

(PT

)

(eg Hunton-Clarke et al 2002) the Green HRM literature is characterized by claimsand counter claims (eg Jabbour and Santos 2008b Jabbour et al 2008) and by adearth of empirically based research papers that link specific HRM practices to thevarious stages or phases of Green implementation (Jabbour and Santos 2008b p 52) Asnoted in a recent review (Renwick et al 2013) much extant knowledge of Green HRM ispractice based and there is a need for more rigorous empirical data on the relationshipbetween various elements of the HRM system such as employee participation orinvolvement employee attitudes to environmental initiatives and whether Green HRMldquopaysrdquo through its impact on such factors as employee attraction and retention

There is considerable evidence that employee participation in environmentalinitiatives is crucial to their success (Remmen and Lorentzen 2000 Renwick et al2013) This study highlights how participation-oriented managerial practices in theimplementation of these initiatives impact on employee perception of the environmentalperformance of the organization and in turn on their engagement with and attitude tothe organization It therefore provides the much needed empirical evidence on thecritical role of HRM in environmental management

The importance of the study also lies in the fact that despite the extensive literatureon the topic of a relationship between various HRM interventions and aspects oforganizational performance we do not have a clear understanding of what mightmotivate a business organization to commit HRM resources to assist in generating andmaintaining pro-environmental behaviour In this paper we address both the howand why of bringing the HRM system together with the implementation of environmentalinitiatives

Employee attitudes in environmental management initiativesA wide and overlapping literature links factors of HRM interest such as employeeparticipation attitudes (such as engagement satisfaction and support for changeinitiatives) and turnover (both actual turnover and intention to quit) Claims that high-quality employee participation is a means of achieving organizational effectivenessthrough facilitating employee commitment and engagement[1] with the organization(Gollan 2005) are supported by some empirical evidence Empowering employeesthrough involvement and participation has been shown to increase job satisfaction andemployee retention paying dividends for the organization Generalizable relationshipssignificant enough to have substantial practical value have been established betweenunit-level employee satisfaction ndash engagement and business-unit outcomes (Harter et al2002) Participation communication and interaction between groups are found to assist inbreaking down barriers between specialists and innovators thus saving time and buildingcommitment (Hunton-Clarke et al 2002) Other studies have found that that HRM practicescan lower employee intentions to leave but also that this relationship is partially mediatedby organizational commitment (Guchait and Cho 2010) However the relationship betweenattitudes to the workplace and turnover intentions is complex and it has recently beenshown that differences in the extent to which job satisfaction systematically improvesor declines accounts for change in employeesrsquo ldquoturnover intentionsrdquo rather than absolute(average) levels of job satisfaction (Chen et al 2011)

Another body of work relevant to the relationship between employee involvement inand attitudes to the organization shows the importance of participation in gainingsupport from employees towards new initiatives This research has been summarizedby Oreg et al (2011) in their 60 year review of quantitative studies on change recipientsrsquoreactions to change Drawing on the work of researchers such as Amiot et al (2006) and

493

Employeeparticipation

andengagement

Dow

nloa

ded

by A

uckl

and

Uni

vers

ity o

f T

echn

olog

y A

t 19

17 2

7 M

ay 2

015

(PT

)

Holt et al (2007) the review finds evidence that change recipients who experienced highlevels of participation report higher acceptance of new initiatives and exhibit overallsupport for the change From the work of Bartunek et al (2006) other positiveassociations are made between participation and understanding the meaning andbenefits of a change initiative (Bartunek et al 2006) Steel and Lloydrsquos (1988) study alsoprovides evidence that participation results in increased attachment to the organizationMacey and Schneider (2008) in their recent review proposed that employee engagementcan be enhanced with participative management and job involvement practices

HR practices and Green outcomesThe relationship between participation or involvement employee engagement with theorganization job satisfaction support for new initiatives and employee retention foundin the general HRM literature has not been systematically investigated in specific termsin relation to the implementation of organizational Greening

If we look to some of the relevant studies in the wider organizational Greeningliterature we see evidence of trends that we can build on to develop constructs for moresystematic empirical testing In their systematic review of Green HRM Renwick et al(2013) apply the Ability-Motivation-Opportunity theory to examine different types ofHRM practices that could be classified as Green HRM as they were found to have animpact on environmental management An example of Green HRM includes thosepractices that relate to workplace involvement and participation The literature hasalso shown that employee involvement and participation in environmental initiatives ispositively related to key aspects of environmental management systems (EMS)(Remmen and Lorentzen 2000 Renwick et al 2013) such as efficient use of resourceswaste reduction and pollution reduction in the workplace

Remmen and Lorentzen (2000) found that employee participation in the implementationof a cleaner technology project can increase employee understanding of environmentalproblems and issues and had a strong effect on changing work routines and increasingenvironmental consciousness Paille et alrsquos (2014) study in the Chinese context showed thatinternal environmental concern moderates the effect of strategic HRM on organizationalcitizenship behaviour for the environment The research of Kitazawa and Sarkis (2000)showed that employee empowerment and participation in decision making are crucialelements in managing continuous source reduction programmes because they increasetheir employeesrsquo buy-in to the environmental challenges of the organization Zutshi andSohal (2004) also found that employee involvement in planning of environmental policyEMS processes and supporting programmes was strongly associated with moralebuilding within the company These studies indicate that high levels of employeeparticipation and involvement are positively associated with environmental performanceThis is achieved as employees develop a better understanding of the rationale behind theenvironmental goals and environmental performance of the organization

The implementation of EMS has been shown to be influenced by the extent to whichGreen HRM practices are being implemented (Wagner 2013) As employees became moreinvolved and participated more strongly in environmental management employees feltmore motivated which subsequently led to a higher level of work engagement Cantoret al (2012) have shown higher levels of employee engagement and commitment are seenon green initiatives Employee involvement and participation are both examples of highinvolvement HRM practices and they have been shown to enhance employeesrsquomotivation and commitment towards their organization (Gollan 2005 Wilkinson et al2001) Employee involvement and participation are also considered to be aspects of Green

494

PR444

Dow

nloa

ded

by A

uckl

and

Uni

vers

ity o

f T

echn

olog

y A

t 19

17 2

7 M

ay 2

015

(PT

)

Holt et al (2007) the review finds evidence that change recipients who experienced highlevels of participation report higher acceptance of new initiatives and exhibit overallsupport for the change From the work of Bartunek et al (2006) other positiveassociations are made between participation and understanding the meaning andbenefits of a change initiative (Bartunek et al 2006) Steel and Lloydrsquos (1988) study alsoprovides evidence that participation results in increased attachment to the organizationMacey and Schneider (2008) in their recent review proposed that employee engagementcan be enhanced with participative management and job involvement practices

HR practices and Green outcomesThe relationship between participation or involvement employee engagement with theorganization job satisfaction support for new initiatives and employee retention foundin the general HRM literature has not been systematically investigated in specific termsin relation to the implementation of organizational Greening

If we look to some of the relevant studies in the wider organizational Greeningliterature we see evidence of trends that we can build on to develop constructs for moresystematic empirical testing In their systematic review of Green HRM Renwick et al(2013) apply the Ability-Motivation-Opportunity theory to examine different types ofHRM practices that could be classified as Green HRM as they were found to have animpact on environmental management An example of Green HRM includes thosepractices that relate to workplace involvement and participation The literature hasalso shown that employee involvement and participation in environmental initiatives ispositively related to key aspects of environmental management systems (EMS)(Remmen and Lorentzen 2000 Renwick et al 2013) such as efficient use of resourceswaste reduction and pollution reduction in the workplace

Remmen and Lorentzen (2000) found that employee participation in the implementationof a cleaner technology project can increase employee understanding of environmentalproblems and issues and had a strong effect on changing work routines and increasingenvironmental consciousness Paille et alrsquos (2014) study in the Chinese context showed thatinternal environmental concern moderates the effect of strategic HRM on organizationalcitizenship behaviour for the environment The research of Kitazawa and Sarkis (2000)showed that employee empowerment and participation in decision making are crucialelements in managing continuous source reduction programmes because they increasetheir employeesrsquo buy-in to the environmental challenges of the organization Zutshi andSohal (2004) also found that employee involvement in planning of environmental policyEMS processes and supporting programmes was strongly associated with moralebuilding within the company These studies indicate that high levels of employeeparticipation and involvement are positively associated with environmental performanceThis is achieved as employees develop a better understanding of the rationale behind theenvironmental goals and environmental performance of the organization

The implementation of EMS has been shown to be influenced by the extent to whichGreen HRM practices are being implemented (Wagner 2013) As employees became moreinvolved and participated more strongly in environmental management employees feltmore motivated which subsequently led to a higher level of work engagement Cantoret al (2012) have shown higher levels of employee engagement and commitment are seenon green initiatives Employee involvement and participation are both examples of highinvolvement HRM practices and they have been shown to enhance employeesrsquomotivation and commitment towards their organization (Gollan 2005 Wilkinson et al2001) Employee involvement and participation are also considered to be aspects of Green

494

PR444

Dow

nloa

ded

by A

uckl

and

Uni

vers

ity o

f T

echn

olog

y A

t 19

17 2

7 M

ay 2

015

(PT

)

HRM as these were found to positively associate with environmental performance(Renwick et al 2013) Hence we propose the following three hypotheses

H1 There is a positive relationship between employee participation and involvementin environmental initiatives and employee engagement

H2 There is a positive relationship between employee participation and involvementin environmental initiatives and assessment of organizational environmentalperformance

H3 There is a positive relationship between employee engagement and their assessmentof organizational environmental performance

A recent meta-analytical review of the relationships between engagement and jobsatisfaction has shown that these two concepts are different and positively correlated(Christian et al 2011) While participative practices enhance engagement (see Maceyand Schneider 2008) job satisfaction is also positively correlated with participativepractices (Cox et al 2009)

The introduction of environmental initiatives such as environmental standards canfacilitate increased communication between workers and lead to knowledge development(Delmas and Pekovic 2013) Participatory approaches to knowledge development havealso been linked empirically to job satisfaction Teh and Sun (2012) empirically testedthe relationships showing that when employees are involved in their job higher jobsatisfaction results This positive relationship is related to their knowledge sharingbehaviour Research has also shown that while employees possess important contextualknowledge and the importance of process intra-organizational and external knowledgemake the role of specialist staff critically important for environmental improvementsSuch improvements often require a combination of more than one knowledge type(Rothenberg 2003) Hence we expect participation and engagement to have a practicalrole to fulfil in regard to innovation for environmental improvement This leads us to thefollowing hypotheses

H4 There is a positive relationship between employeesrsquo engagement and the level oftheir job satisfaction

H5 There is a positive relationship between employeesrsquo satisfactory assessmentof their organizationrsquos environmental performance (such as their unitrsquosperformance outcomes and organizational environmental performanceoutcomes) and their level of job satisfaction

The work of Chen et al (2011) that associates changes in job satisfaction to employeeretention is complemented in the environmental responsibility literature by studies(such as Strandberg 2009) which link the integration of environmental responsibilityinto organizational values to enhanced employee recruitment and retention Pride in theorganization in general has been shown to predict organizational commitment(Boezeman and Ellemers 2008) and perceived alignment of corporate with individualemployee values around environmental sustainability has been suggested as a keysource of business advantage a source of job satisfaction and a means of attracting andretaining talented staff (Dunphy et al 2007)

If there are connections between engagement and job satisfaction andor betweenperceptions of environmental performance and job satisfaction it would seem reasonable tosuggest engagement high perceptions of environmental performance and job satisfaction

495

Employeeparticipation

andengagement

Dow

nloa

ded

by A

uckl

and

Uni

vers

ity o

f T

echn

olog

y A

t 19

17 2

7 M

ay 2

015

(PT

)

may engender higher levels of loyalty and morale (Bhatnagar 2007) something whichmight be indicated by a negative link with an intention to leave the organization This leadsus to our final two hypotheses that link into a series of causal hypotheses

H6 There is a negative relationship between employeesrsquo satisfactory assessmentof their organizationrsquos environmental performance (such as their unitrsquosperformance outcomes and organizational environmental performanceoutcomes) to their intention to quit

H7 There is a negative relationship between employeesrsquo level of job satisfaction totheir intention to quit (Figure 1)

MethodsBased on the need to develop a deep understanding of the phenomena being researched(Morse and Niehaus 2009) we adopted a two-phase mixed method research design inthe form of an online questionnaire accompanied by a qualitative study Our aimto explore relationships between employee participation or involvement employeeattitudes to environmental initiatives and the impact on such factors as employeeattraction and retention cannot be divorced from complex considerations such ascultural characteristics Hence as suggested by Creswell and Plano Clark (2007 p 5) itseemed that quantitative and qualitative approaches in combination could provide uswith a better understanding of the research problems than either approach alone

Accordingly we took one of the mixed methods approaches recommended byCreswell and Plano Clark (2007) where we followed up our quantitative data collectionwith interviews with a few key respondents within our survey samples in order toprovide further explanation of some key points that emerged in the quantitative studyCresswell (2009 p 211) terms this methodological approach a ldquosequential exploratorystrategyrdquo and argues it is suitable when a qualitative approach can be used to explainquantitative data or when the researchers see the need for more detailed informationabout the organizational context particularly when there are issues of cultural contextwhich may be difficult to test quantitatively Hence the two forms of data are separateand while coming from different philosophical positions may be usefully connected

Our selected organizations for the study are two Australian organizations Educatorand Engineer for anonymity named here after their advertised core function

OrgEnvironmentalPerformance

Participationin EMS

EmployeeEngagement

JobSatisfaction

Intentionto

Quit

+

+

+

+

ndash

ndash

+

Figure 1Proposed path model

496

PR444

Dow

nloa

ded

by A

uckl

and

Uni

vers

ity o

f T

echn

olog

y A

t 19

17 2

7 M

ay 2

015

(PT

)

Educator is a major Australian technical college with 2700 staff Engineer is anengineering consultancy with 8000 staff The use of two cases provides for analyticbenefits (Yin 2003) An important factor in selecting the organizations is the fact thatthey are both large organizations well advanced in implementing an environmentalprogramme Each organization is a member of a voluntary sustainability programmepart funded by government designed to progress environmentally sustainablebusiness practices and each has a documented environmental policy Eachorganization has the means for their staff to participate in environmental initiativesFor example a certain level of staff participation is a requisite of the government-funded sustainability programme This programme is designed to raise theenvironmental capacity of the member organizations such as Engineer and Educatorthrough participation in sustainability workshops and other events Engineer also hasa number of operational green initiatives such as water and energy reduction systemsthat staff may engage in Staff make suggestions concerning a range of incentiveschemes designed to reduce waste and resource use and sustainability is referred to asa key aspect of client services Educator is certified to ISO 14000 provides training toother educational institutions on environmental auditing has developed numerous newenvironmental courses and widely embeds sustainability in existing educational productsIt has won multiple sustainability awards Staff participate in suggestions for howenvironmental sustainability can be embedded in the organizationrsquos educational products aswell as making suggestions concerning operational improvements

Quantitative phaseOur quantitative data were derived from a survey with banks of items designed to testthe key variables hypothesized For Educator we received 201 responses and 436responses for Engineer The sample comprised of senior management (6 per cent)middle management (161 per cent) supervisory management (213 per cent) and theremaining were non-management employees The majority of the respondents weremale (62 per cent) Most of them were in the age group between 20 and 34 years old(309 per cent) followed by those between 35 and 45 years old (231 per cent)

Survey data were input into SPSS v19 for Windows to conduct exploratory factoranalysis (EFA) cluster analysis and descriptive statistics EFA was undertaken usingprincipal axis factoring and oblimin rotation while confirmatory factor analysis wasconducted using IBM PAWS 190 and AMOS SmartPLS v2 30 (Ringle et al 2005) wasused to analyse the path model (note internal reliability coefficients and averagevariance estimates are reported in Table I)

MeasuresParticipation in environmental initiatives (reflective scale) Three items were used tooperationalize employeesrsquo participation in the implementation of environmentalinitiatives These items were adopted from a survey conducted by the NSWDepartment of Environment Climate Change and Water (2007) also utilized insubsequent surveys and the Wackernagel and Rees (1996) Ecological Footprintcalculator as utilized by the Victorian Governmentrsquos Environmental PlanningAuthority (EPA Victoria) (2006) Employees were asked to rate on a five-point scaleranging from ldquo1rdquofrac14 not at all to ldquo5rdquofrac14 a lot These were ldquoTo what extent do you feelthat you could offer the organization ideas about how to improve its environmentalperformancerdquo ldquoIf you did have ideas to what extent do you think that the

497

Employeeparticipation

andengagement

Dow

nloa

ded

by A

uckl

and

Uni

vers

ity o

f T

echn

olog

y A

t 19

17 2

7 M

ay 2

015

(PT

)

MSD

αAVE

12

34

56

1Levelo

fappointm

ent

323

096

ndashndash

100

2Pa

rticipationin

EMS

317

072

081

063

minus019

079

3Employee

Eng

agem

ent

210

082

080

050

019

minus028

071

4OrgE

nvP

erform

ance

352

062

085

085

minus004

034

minus024

081

5JobSatisfaction

226

111

ndashndash

007

minus023

067

minus014

100

6Intentionto

Quit

222

137

092

085

minus008

016

minus049

minus018

minus057

092

Notes

FornellandLa

rcker(1981)testofdiscriminanta

nalysissquare

rootsofAVEsareshow

nindiagonalrowas

italicizedeng

agem

enta

ndjobsatisfaction

itemswereratedon

ldquo1rdquofrac14completelyagreetoldquo7rdquofrac14completelydisagree

whileparticipationitemswereratedon

ldquo1rdquofrac14

notatalltoldquo5rdquofrac14

alotIntentiontoQuit

hasbeen

reversecoded

sothat

high

erscores

sign

ifyhigh

erIntentionto

Quitp

o005p

o001po

0001

Table IMean standarddeviation AVE andcorrelations

498

PR444

Dow

nloa

ded

by A

uckl

and

Uni

vers

ity o

f T

echn

olog

y A

t 19

17 2

7 M

ay 2

015

(PT

)

organization would listen to yourdquo and ldquoTo what extent do you think theorganization might act on your suggestionsrdquo

Organizational environmental performance (reflective scale) As the case studyorganizations originated from the public and private sector they do not have the sameobjective performance measures Hence we decided to use subjective perceptualperformance indicators We used three items to measure employeesrsquo perception of theirorganizationrsquos environmental performance The items were ldquoIn comparison with itscompetitors in the same industry how would you rate your organizationrsquosenvironmental performancerdquo ldquoIn comparison with other business unitsdepartmentswithin your organization how would you rate your business unitdepartmentrsquosenvironmental performancerdquo and ldquoIn general terms how would you personally rateyour organizationrsquos environmental goalsrdquo These items were rated on a five point scalefrom ldquo1rdquofrac14 very poor to ldquo5rdquofrac14 very strong

Employee engagement (reflective scale) Four items developed by JRA (2007) wereused to measure employee engagement in Australia and New Zealand These itemswere similar to those used in the literature to measure employee engagement (seereviews by Christian et al 2011) The items were ldquoI look for ways to do my job moreeffectivelyrdquo ldquoI feel inspired to go the extra mile to help this organization succeedrdquo ldquoI feela sense of commitment to this organizationrdquo and ldquoOverall I would recommend thisorganization as a great place to workrdquo Respondents were asked to rate the items onldquo1rdquofrac14Completely agree to ldquo7rdquofrac14 Completely disagree Low scores indicate highengagement

Job satisfaction We used a single global item to determine job satisfaction Jobsatisfaction was rated on ldquo1rdquofrac14 completely agree to ldquo7rdquofrac14 completely disagreeRespondents were asked to respond to ldquoOverall I am satisfied with my jobrdquo A lowrating signified a higher level of job satisfaction Research has shown that jobsatisfaction can be adequately measured using a single item (see Wanous et al 1997)

Intention to quit (reflective scale) Respondents were asked to respond to a two-itemscale which measured their intention to quit the organization These items were ldquoI amactively looking for a job outside this organizationrdquo and ldquoI am seriously thinking aboutquitting my jobrdquo Intention to Quit was measured on a seven-point scale with higherscores signifying higher intention to quit These items were adopted from JRA (2007)

Validity and reliability Our sample size of 637 respondents is more than sufficient toachieve a medium effect size of 080 for a path model with four predictors (Green 1991p 503) Following Ringle et al (2005) the significance of PLS parameter estimates weredetermined by using the bootstrap option incorporated within the SmartPLS (Ringleet al 2005) software A bootstrap procedure with 500 sub-samples was undertaken toprovide extra confidence that the results are not sample specific Discriminant validityof the reflective constructs is assessed by using Fornell and Larckerrsquos (1981) rule thatthe average variant estimates (AVEs) of both constructs should be larger than thesquare of the correlation between them (reported in Table I)

Common method variance was checked with two different tests First Harmanrsquosex-post one factor test was used to ensure that the current study did not suffer fromcommon method variance (Podsakoff and Organ 1986) All the variables used in thestudy were entered into an unrotated factor analysis to determine the number offactors The analysis showed that the single largest factor explained 35 per centA single common latent factor analysis was also computed using AMOS The analysisshowed that the paths accounted for o10 per cent of the variance in the common latent

499

Employeeparticipation

andengagement

Dow

nloa

ded

by A

uckl

and

Uni

vers

ity o

f T

echn

olog

y A

t 19

17 2

7 M

ay 2

015

(PT

)

organization would listen to yourdquo and ldquoTo what extent do you think theorganization might act on your suggestionsrdquo

Organizational environmental performance (reflective scale) As the case studyorganizations originated from the public and private sector they do not have the sameobjective performance measures Hence we decided to use subjective perceptualperformance indicators We used three items to measure employeesrsquo perception of theirorganizationrsquos environmental performance The items were ldquoIn comparison with itscompetitors in the same industry how would you rate your organizationrsquosenvironmental performancerdquo ldquoIn comparison with other business unitsdepartmentswithin your organization how would you rate your business unitdepartmentrsquosenvironmental performancerdquo and ldquoIn general terms how would you personally rateyour organizationrsquos environmental goalsrdquo These items were rated on a five point scalefrom ldquo1rdquofrac14 very poor to ldquo5rdquofrac14 very strong

Employee engagement (reflective scale) Four items developed by JRA (2007) wereused to measure employee engagement in Australia and New Zealand These itemswere similar to those used in the literature to measure employee engagement (seereviews by Christian et al 2011) The items were ldquoI look for ways to do my job moreeffectivelyrdquo ldquoI feel inspired to go the extra mile to help this organization succeedrdquo ldquoI feela sense of commitment to this organizationrdquo and ldquoOverall I would recommend thisorganization as a great place to workrdquo Respondents were asked to rate the items onldquo1rdquofrac14Completely agree to ldquo7rdquofrac14 Completely disagree Low scores indicate highengagement

Job satisfaction We used a single global item to determine job satisfaction Jobsatisfaction was rated on ldquo1rdquofrac14 completely agree to ldquo7rdquofrac14 completely disagreeRespondents were asked to respond to ldquoOverall I am satisfied with my jobrdquo A lowrating signified a higher level of job satisfaction Research has shown that jobsatisfaction can be adequately measured using a single item (see Wanous et al 1997)

Intention to quit (reflective scale) Respondents were asked to respond to a two-itemscale which measured their intention to quit the organization These items were ldquoI amactively looking for a job outside this organizationrdquo and ldquoI am seriously thinking aboutquitting my jobrdquo Intention to Quit was measured on a seven-point scale with higherscores signifying higher intention to quit These items were adopted from JRA (2007)

Validity and reliability Our sample size of 637 respondents is more than sufficient toachieve a medium effect size of 080 for a path model with four predictors (Green 1991p 503) Following Ringle et al (2005) the significance of PLS parameter estimates weredetermined by using the bootstrap option incorporated within the SmartPLS (Ringleet al 2005) software A bootstrap procedure with 500 sub-samples was undertaken toprovide extra confidence that the results are not sample specific Discriminant validityof the reflective constructs is assessed by using Fornell and Larckerrsquos (1981) rule thatthe average variant estimates (AVEs) of both constructs should be larger than thesquare of the correlation between them (reported in Table I)

Common method variance was checked with two different tests First Harmanrsquosex-post one factor test was used to ensure that the current study did not suffer fromcommon method variance (Podsakoff and Organ 1986) All the variables used in thestudy were entered into an unrotated factor analysis to determine the number offactors The analysis showed that the single largest factor explained 35 per centA single common latent factor analysis was also computed using AMOS The analysisshowed that the paths accounted for o10 per cent of the variance in the common latent

499

Employeeparticipation

andengagement

Dow

nloa

ded

by A

uckl

and

Uni

vers

ity o

f T

echn

olog

y A

t 19

17 2

7 M

ay 2

015

(PT

)

factor These checks provided us with additional confidence that common method biaswas not a concern

As PLS models do not have any goodness of fit indices such as AMOS we evaluatedthe quality of the proposed structural model using R2 of the dependent variables andthe Stone-Geisser Q2 test for predictive relevance (Chin 2010) Since the values werestable for both omission distances and the majority of the Q2 W0 we were confidentthat the model had predictive stability

Qualitative phaseThe qualitative study aimed at contextualizing and expanding on the factors identifiedabove in relation to the seven hypotheses We utilized in-depth interviews in order toobtain thick descriptions of staff experiences that might allow us some insight into theworkplace context for each organization (Morse and Niehaus 2009)

Altogether 16 semi-structured interviews from across the two organizations wereundertaken Respondents included individuals who by virtue of position or jobdescription would be most likely to participate in or be responsible for managing theimplementation of the environmental initiative in each organization In our interviewsand subsequent analysis we probed more deeply around our core themes ofparticipation employee engagement and perceived environmental performance butparticularly probed for understandings that might inform us on the organizationalculture around environmental sustainability We were interested in which HRM isbeing embedded in the implementation of environmental initiatives This is critical asvariability in sustainability culture could have a major influence on how employeesreact to environmental implementation (eg Linnenluecke and Griffiths 2010) andtherefore on their motivation around environmental programmes

Our key intention with these individuals was to understand employee responses inthe context of their organizational sustainability cultures a complex issue very difficultto explore in a quantitative approach (Dunphy et al 2007) We also analysed the formaldiscourses of each of the organizations via examination of their web sites and otherpublicly available information in order to explore potential impacts of differencesbetween espoused and actual sustainability values

We used the sustainability phase model (Benn et al 2014 Dunphy et al 2007) toclassify the sustainability culture of each organization According to this model in theefficiency phase for example the organization has a sustainability culturecharacterized by an instrumental focus on reducing waste and increasing processand materials efficiencies In the strategic phase the sustainability culture is signifiedby an emphasis on innovation and broad support from across the organizationincluding from leadership for the strategic opportunities of sustainability and its long-term importance to the organization This phase is notable for an alignment of formaland informal discourses around sustainability reflecting management decisions toembed sustainability in the core business model (Dunphy et al 2007)

ResultsQuantitative phaseMeans standard deviations AVEs and correlations between the variables are reportedin Table I The model has discriminant validity as the correlation matrix shows thatthe square roots of the AVEs reported (in the diagonal) are greater than thecorresponding off-diagonal correlation coefficients We followed the calculation of

500

PR444

Dow

nloa

ded

by A

uckl

and

Uni

vers

ity o

f T

echn

olog

y A

t 19

17 2

7 M

ay 2

015

(PT

)

global goodness-of-fit index by Tenenhaus et al (2005) to compute a global goodness-of-fitindex of 0474 suggesting a high goodness of fit (Wetzels et al 2009 p 187) R2 of thedependent variable Intention to Quit was 354 per cent

Results of the path analysis are reported in Table II while Figure 2 showed the results indiagrammatic formatWith the exception of one hypothesis (H5) all of the hypotheses weresupported Our results show that participation in environmental initiatives is associatedwith employee engagement which is associated with job satisfaction Participation inenvironmental initiatives is directly associated with perceptions of environmentalperformance but this relationship is also mediated by levels of job satisfaction

Figures 3 and 4 showed the differences in the path model in each case studyorganization Educator respondents reported higher levels of participation engagementindicated higher assessment of the organizationrsquos performance and evidenced lessintention to quit Higher levels of participation were reflected in higher levels of employeeengagement and in both organizations higher participation and higher engagementresulted in improved perceptions of organizational environmental performance In bothcases higher rates of engagement led to increased job satisfaction

Qualitative studyThe qualitative phase of the study was designed to assist in explaining the contextof the differing levels of employee characteristics described in the quantitative phaseThe differences (see Figure 3) whereby Educator respondents reported higher levels of

Paths Path coefficients t-Statistic

H1 ParticipationrarrEngagement 034 1003H2 ParticipationrarrEnvironmental Perf 034 911H3 EngagementrarrEnvironmental Perf 017 467H4 EngagementrarrJob Satisfaction 068 2126H5 Environmental PerfrarrJob Satisfaction 001 043H6 Environmental PerfrarrIntention to Quit minus010 310H7 Job SatisfactionrarrIntention to Quit minus057 1589Notes po001 po0001

Table IIResults of path

coefficients

Participation in EMS

OrgEnvironmentalPerformance

Intentionto

Quit

EmployeeEngagement

JobSatisfaction

034

034

017

ndash010

ndash057

068

Notes plt001 plt0001

Figure 2Results of partial

least squaresanalysis

501

Employeeparticipation

andengagement

Dow

nloa

ded

by A

uckl

and

Uni

vers

ity o

f T

echn

olog

y A

t 19

17 2

7 M

ay 2

015

(PT

)

participation and engagement associated with higher assessment of the organizationrsquosperformance and less intention to quit are suggestive of different organizational culturesor subcultures (Linnenluecke et al 2009) The differences between the samples in thequantitative study imply that the two organizations may have different ldquosustainabilityculturesrdquo relating to the extent to which sustainability strategies and practices areembedded in organizational practices (Benn et al 2014 Dunphy et al 2007) and whichhave been shown to impact on levels of participation and employee attitudes (Benn et al2014 Dunphy et al 2007 Russell and McIntosh 2011) The results of the qualitativestudy designed to explore the sustainability culture of the two organizations confirmedthis suggestion As discussed below the strategy of Educator management had been toembed environmental sustainability into its core business hence explaining the higherlevels of participation and engagement perceived in this organization

Although the formal organizational discourses of the two organizations on web sitesand other organizational documents for example their partnerships with the governmentdepartment were quite similar in terms of their espoused commitment to sustainabilitythe informal discourse through the interviews reveal marked differences between how theemployees of the two organizations (see Table III) saw the environmental performance oftheir organization In short the interviews revealed very different sustainability cultures(Linnenluecke and Griffiths 2010)

OrgEnvironmentalPerformance

Intentionto

Quit

JobSatisfaction

EmployeeEngagement

Participationin EMS

045

017

ndash016

ndash055

037

064

013

Notes plt001 plt0001

Figure 4Results of pathanalysis forEducator

OrgEnvironmentalPerformance

Intentionto

Quit

JobSatisfaction

EmployeeEngagement

Participationin EMS

020

018

069

ndash058

030

Note plt0001

Figure 3Results of pathanalysis for Engineer

502

PR444

Dow

nloa

ded

by A

uckl

and

Uni

vers

ity o

f T

echn

olog

y A

t 19

17 2

7 M

ay 2

015

(PT

)

Educator Engineer

Sustainability aimsand objectivesformal discourse

ldquoAt [Educator] environmentalsustainability is a way of thinking anddoing that is embedded in every aspect ofthe Institutersquos operations As aneducational provider we are committed toenabling others to do the same not justto meet basic standards or mandatoryrequirements but to reach a stage whereall business decisions are approachedthrough the lens of sustainabilityrdquo

ldquoWe are an innovative organizationcommitted to helping our clients achieveunprecedented and sustained businessresultsrdquo

Sustainability aimsand objectivesinformal discourse

ldquoWhat we ultimately want is to have it soyou canrsquot get your diploma from (theEducator) unless you are demonstratingcompetency in environmentalmanagement within that particular area ofqualification as well as always providingthe means and ways so that all studentshave the opportunity to experience thatknowledge even if itrsquos not part of thatparticular training package What Irsquod bestriving for is to do precisely thatrdquo(Educator Director the Educatorinterviewed 10 September 2008)

Instrumental (client) focusldquo[Engineer] is not a leader of companiesIt is a follower and it does what its clientsask it to do Itrsquos very difficult to go outthere and say wersquoll build you a sustainablesteel plant when no one wants asustainable steel plant And I seesustainability being asked for in as littleas 10 of clientsrdquo documentation at bestVery weakrsquo (Sustainable DevelopmentManager the Engineer interviewed 31July 2008)Efficiency focusldquoA lot of people donrsquot see the differencebetween sustainability and what theyhave always done which is to look forefficiencyrdquo (Engineer-sponsored PhDstudent interviewed 1 August 2008)

Participation formaldiscourse

ldquoEffective communication andcollaboration underpins our success Yourinput to our approach is vitalrdquo

ldquoWe ask you to rate our performance onspecific categories applicable to yourproject We especially welcome additionalcomments and information that will helpus to fine tune our current practices tobetter serve yourdquo

Participationinformal discourse

ldquoIf staff have something they want toshare or are interested in they alwaysknow therersquos an avenue to come and sharethese ideas I think it has to be completelyopen And if you get lots of people thenyou just need to find a new venue and thatwould be fantasticrdquo (EnvironmentalOfficer interviewed 18 August 2008)

ldquoThe way that change occurs in thisorganization is that someone in areasonably senior position that has a lot oftrust in the organization sees a vision ofthe future thatrsquos different from the currentvisionrdquo (Sustainable DevelopmentManager the Engineer interviewed 31July 312008)

Commitment andengagementinformal discourse

ldquoThe key reason I came to the Educatorfrom (previous place of employment) wasbecause they had the commitment to theISO14001 which gives a lot of validity tothe work that I dordquo (EnvironmentOfficer the Educator interviewed18 August 2008)

ldquoOn one hand they [Engineer] haveinvested this money into sustainabilitybut they havenrsquot come up with anystrong declaration or commitment foreveryone to see Sustainability isnot critical whilst other elementsare seen as critical such as financialreturn and safety But sustainabledevelopment is not there among thetop ranking objectivesrdquo(Engineer sponsored PhD researcherinterviewed 1 August 2008)

Table IIIThemes emergingfrom interviews

503

Employeeparticipation

andengagement

Dow

nloa

ded

by A

uckl

and

Uni

vers

ity o

f T

echn

olog

y A

t 19

17 2

7 M

ay 2

015

(PT

)

Environmental sustainability objectives and approaches of Educator Within Educatorsupporting findings from the quantitative study participating and engaged Educatorrespondents perceived that Educator is a leader in environmental management aligningthemselves with its formal discourse and espoused organizational values As evidencedby respondent quotes in Table III Educator purports to be attempting to embedsustainability strategically and utilizing participatory approaches in the core functions ofthe organization and would be classified according to the Dunphy et al (2007) phasemodel as being in the strategic phase of sustainability Such a strategy of embeddingenvironmental sustainability thus further explains why engaged individuals may remainloyal to their organization as suggested by our quantitative data Supporting thefindings from the quantitative study that highly engaged individuals show a positiveresponse to the organizationrsquos environmental goals and performance overall theserespondents perceived that they shared values with the organization and that Educatorrsquoscommitment to sustainability added to their job satisfaction So in this case we see astrong alignment between the individual and their sustainability values with both theorganizational formal and informal discourses ndash a highly motivating set of factors forthe employee around environmental initiatives and their implementation

Environmental sustainability objectives and approaches of Engineer Engineer did notshow the same alignment of informal and formal discourse around sustainability aimsand objectives In contrast to the organizationrsquos public discourse expressed on web sitestatements our interview analysis suggests that employees do not see Engineer as anenvironmental ldquoleaderrdquo They see the organization as following client demand rather thansustainability leading it in a more strategic direction In Table III we describe examples ofsuch responses as having an ldquoinstrumental (client) focusrdquo or as demonstrating anldquoefficiency focusrdquo Interviewees generally perceived the environmental commitment ofEngineer to be ldquoweakrdquo

Discussion and implicationsThe aim of the current study is to examine how HRM practices and approaches such asemployee participation and involvement may affect employee attitudes to theimplementation of environmental initiatives and to the organization in general Resultsof the path analysis showed across both organizations support for all of the researchhypotheses except for H5

As indicated by the path analyses there were some slight differences in the findingsbetween Engineer and Educator In Educator employees with higher perception oforganization environmental performance report higher job satisfaction and lessintention to quit while in Engineer these two paths were not found These findingswere reflected in the qualitative study as employees in Educator reported higher levelof participation in EMS while in Engineer their employees were not provided theopportunity to participate in EMS The qualitative study revealed that these differenceswere due to the sustainability culture in Educator where management had recognizedthe importance of developing organization-wide commitment to sustainabilitypractices It highlights the significance for senior management to actively use HRMpractices as the means to enhance employeesrsquo job satisfaction and reduce their intentionto turnover while showing the importance of embedding a sustainability culture basedin a participatory approach

From the qualitative study while Educator respondents highlighted an understandingthat sustainability was embedded in the core business of the organization and that this

504

PR444

Dow

nloa

ded

by A

uckl

and

Uni

vers

ity o

f T

echn

olog

y A

t 19

17 2

7 M

ay 2

015

(PT

)

Environmental sustainability objectives and approaches of Educator Within Educatorsupporting findings from the quantitative study participating and engaged Educatorrespondents perceived that Educator is a leader in environmental management aligningthemselves with its formal discourse and espoused organizational values As evidencedby respondent quotes in Table III Educator purports to be attempting to embedsustainability strategically and utilizing participatory approaches in the core functions ofthe organization and would be classified according to the Dunphy et al (2007) phasemodel as being in the strategic phase of sustainability Such a strategy of embeddingenvironmental sustainability thus further explains why engaged individuals may remainloyal to their organization as suggested by our quantitative data Supporting thefindings from the quantitative study that highly engaged individuals show a positiveresponse to the organizationrsquos environmental goals and performance overall theserespondents perceived that they shared values with the organization and that Educatorrsquoscommitment to sustainability added to their job satisfaction So in this case we see astrong alignment between the individual and their sustainability values with both theorganizational formal and informal discourses ndash a highly motivating set of factors forthe employee around environmental initiatives and their implementation

Environmental sustainability objectives and approaches of Engineer Engineer did notshow the same alignment of informal and formal discourse around sustainability aimsand objectives In contrast to the organizationrsquos public discourse expressed on web sitestatements our interview analysis suggests that employees do not see Engineer as anenvironmental ldquoleaderrdquo They see the organization as following client demand rather thansustainability leading it in a more strategic direction In Table III we describe examples ofsuch responses as having an ldquoinstrumental (client) focusrdquo or as demonstrating anldquoefficiency focusrdquo Interviewees generally perceived the environmental commitment ofEngineer to be ldquoweakrdquo

Discussion and implicationsThe aim of the current study is to examine how HRM practices and approaches such asemployee participation and involvement may affect employee attitudes to theimplementation of environmental initiatives and to the organization in general Resultsof the path analysis showed across both organizations support for all of the researchhypotheses except for H5

As indicated by the path analyses there were some slight differences in the findingsbetween Engineer and Educator In Educator employees with higher perception oforganization environmental performance report higher job satisfaction and lessintention to quit while in Engineer these two paths were not found These findingswere reflected in the qualitative study as employees in Educator reported higher levelof participation in EMS while in Engineer their employees were not provided theopportunity to participate in EMS The qualitative study revealed that these differenceswere due to the sustainability culture in Educator where management had recognizedthe importance of developing organization-wide commitment to sustainabilitypractices It highlights the significance for senior management to actively use HRMpractices as the means to enhance employeesrsquo job satisfaction and reduce their intentionto turnover while showing the importance of embedding a sustainability culture basedin a participatory approach

From the qualitative study while Educator respondents highlighted an understandingthat sustainability was embedded in the core business of the organization and that this

504

PR444

Dow

nloa

ded

by A

uckl

and

Uni

vers

ity o

f T

echn

olog

y A

t 19

17 2

7 M

ay 2

015

(PT

)

was a positive in terms of their commitment to the organization within Engineer whereenvironmental sustainability strategies and practices were focused on utility andefficiency there was little perceived alignment of personal values with the sustainabilityvalues of the organization With Educator there was a much higher level of alignmentbetween the formal and informal discourses around sustainability In other wordssustainability culture in Educator is more strongly embedded and more strategicallysignificant than is the case with Engineer which we classified more in the efficiency phaseof sustainability according to the Dunphy et al (2007) framework

Bringing together the two research phases it can be seen that despite having verydifferent sustainability cultures and being in different phases of sustainability therelationship between our variables held although we note a stronger relationship betweenparticipation and environmental performance and more engaged individuals with theorganization with the stronger sustainability culture (Educator) as shown in Figure 4

Educator is a public sector organization which perhaps explains either or both thedifferences in sustainability culture and relationship between our variables Howeverthis does not detract from the finding that if espoused and actual (as perceived byemployees) sustainability values are in alignment and there is employee participationin environmental initiatives then it seems we have a strong motivating force for theenvironmental initiative itself as well as for the organization as a whole

Hence the results from the qualitative study extend understandings from thequantitative study because they indicate that the level of alignment between what isespoused formally by the organization in terms of its environmental goals and strategiesand how this is played out in the actual culture of the organization as reflected in theinformal discourse of the employees impacts on the attitudes of employees and theirmotivation or engagement In other words levels of involvement participationengagement job satisfaction and intention to quit in relation to environmental initiativesneed to be considered in the context of the sustainability culture of the organization

From an HRM perspective our findings suggest a stronger instrumental linkbetween support for participatory approaches to implementation of Green initiativesemployee engagement and employee attraction and retention if the organization isembedding environmental sustainability in its strategies and practices Our qualitativedata also suggest that employees with strong levels of personal commitment tosustainability are more likely to be attracted to and remain with an organization if it isseen to be on the ldquojourneyrdquo to sustainability (Milne et al 2006)

These findings also have important implications to support the business case forsustainability for which there have been claims (Wilkinson et al 2001) and counterclaims (such as Orlitzky et al 2003) in the literature Specifically our findings contributeto this debate by providing the empirical evidence that if employees are given theopportunity by senior management to participate and be involved in the implementationof environmental initiatives they will be more engaged in the organization This findingwas also supported by the cluster analysis where highly engaged employees were moresatisfied with their job as they were more involved ndash a finding that corroborates theengagement literature (see Christian et al 2011)

Limitations and future research implicationsOur findings indicate that the boundaries between environmental and HRM functionsof the organization need to be less proscribed with each set of professionals aware ofthe othersrsquo key practices As well however as Jabbour and Santos (2008a) haveidentified the theory that informs each field of practice needs to be more inclusive We

505

Employeeparticipation

andengagement

Dow

nloa

ded

by A

uckl

and

Uni

vers

ity o

f T

echn

olog

y A

t 19

17 2

7 M

ay 2

015

(PT

)

have shown that people respond to being involved in environmental initiatives and thatthis seems to occur more where there has been an attempt to embed a culture ofstrategic sustainability This suggestion however needs to be tested in a widercomparative case-based study using test items specifically designed to measure theefficiency and strategic dimensions of the Dunphy et al (2007) model

We note that our two organizations can both be classified as knowledge-basedorganizations with their core function being the development and transmission ofknowledge Yahya and Goh (2002) assert the strong link between HRM and knowledgemanagement They have shown that a knowledge organization requires a differentmanagement approach than a non-knowledge organization and that the role of HRM isthus unique The similarity in our results could perhaps thus be explained ndash suggestingthe need for wider survey-based cross-sectoral studies to test our findings across otherorganizations that are not classified as knowledge organizations This study could likewisehave benefitted from inclusion of data relating the age gender and ethnic background ofrespondents (in these case omitted under the terms of our access for reasons of privacy)The issue of ldquointention to quitrdquo may be worthy of further consideration in later studiessince we have to acknowledge that interpretation of such intentions can be highly complexand may reflect for example only short-term intentions (Bhatnagar 2007)

We accept that our study shows a lack of objective longitudinal data Future studyshould either collect longitudinal data or rely on data collected from two waves of datacollection However we note that the current study relied on a mixed-method studywhich meant that the qualitative data were used to triangulate the quantitative findingsWhile it must be accepted that complex factors associated with organizational culture ndashsubcultures hierarchies organizational roles personal networks and personal factorssuch as ethnicity gender and age ndash may affect the generalizability of our findings (egLinnenluecke et al 2009) nevertheless the causal connections revealed in this studysuggest a ldquoshort cutrdquo or key focus for adapting HRM practices in a manner that offersstrong potential for stimulating environmentally oriented behaviours

Literature in the field suggests that HRM specialists have limited understanding ofhow to apply their expertise to fostering the implementation of Green initiatives andthat insignificant consideration was given to environmental issues as an integratedaspect of organizational practice The study identifies a positive role for HRM to playin interactions with environmental initiatives such as the implementation of EMS inregard to employeesrsquo active input and participation in decision making The studysuggests that HRM strategies do not require a ldquospecializedrdquo or ldquospecialistrdquo approachbut rather a more familiar approach ndash identifying a positive role for employeeinvolvement and participation in interactions with Green initiatives in regard toemployeesrsquo input and participation in decision making

Consistent with the findings of Rothenberg (2003) and Rothenberg and Becker(2004) it might appear that ldquoparticipationrdquo involves more than learning about an EMSor environmental proactivity in general (cf Ramus and Steger 2000) and refers morespecifically to providing an opportunity for employees to contribute in a ldquohands onrdquorole (not necessarily an innovative role) applying existing skills and localizedknowledge or practical critique Equally consistent is the proposition that appropriateldquoengagementrdquo arises from the useful deployment of existing skills and localizedknowledge encouraging participants to assume personal responsibility for programmeimplementation With engagement that involves personal responsibility one associatesthe development of a level of pride in achievement that is likely therefore to bolster theengaged employeesrsquo perceptions of environmental achievement of the organization

506

PR444

Dow

nloa

ded

by A

uckl

and

Uni

vers

ity o

f T

echn

olog

y A

t 19

17 2

7 M

ay 2

015

(PT

)

Note1 For the purpose of this paper we assume work engagement to be ldquoa relatively enduring state

of mind referring to the simultaneous investment of personal energies in the experience orperformance of workrdquo (Christian et al 2011 p 95)

ReferencesAmiot C Terry D Jimmieson N and Callan V (2006) ldquoA longitudinal investigation of coping

processes during a merger implications for job satisfaction and organizationalidentificationrdquo Journal of Management Vol 32 No 4 pp 552-574

Bartunek JM Rousseau DM Rudolph JW and DePalma JA (2006) ldquoOn the receiving endsensemaking emotion and assessments of an organizational change initiated by othersrdquoJournal of Applied Behavioral Science Vol 42 No 2 pp 182-206

Benn S Dunphy D and Griffiths A (2014) Organizational Change for Corporate Sustainability3rd ed Routledge New York NY London

Bhatnagar J (2007) ldquoTalent management strategy of employee engagement in Indian ITESemployees key to retentionrdquo Employee Relations Vol 29 No 6 pp 640-663

Boezeman EJ and Ellemers N (2008) ldquoPride and respect in volunteersrsquo organizationalcommitmentrdquo European Journal of Social Psychology Vol 38 No 1 pp 159-172

Cantor DE Morrow PC and Montabon F (2012) ldquoEngagement in environmental behaviorsamong supply chain management employees an organizational support theoreticalperspectiverdquo Journal of Supply Chain Management Vol 48 No 3 pp 33-51

Chen G Ployhart RE Anderson N Thomas HC and Bliese PD (2011) ldquoThe power ofmomentum a new model of dynamic relationships between job satisfaction change andturnover intentionsrdquo Academy of Management Journal Vol 54 No 1 pp 159-181

Chin WW (2010) ldquoHow to write up and report PLS analysesrdquo in Chin WW (Ed) Handbook ofPartial Least Squares Analysis Concepts Methods and Applications Springer Berlin andHeidelberg pp 645-688

Christian MS Garza AS and Slaughter JE (2011) ldquoWork engagement a quantitative reviewand test of its relations with task and contextual performancerdquo Personnel PsychologyVol 64 No 1 pp 89-136

Cox A Marchington M and Suter J (2009) ldquoEmployee involvement and participation developingthe concept of institutional embeddedness using WERS2004rdquo The International Journal ofHuman Resource Management Vol 20 No 10 pp 2150-2168

Cresswell J (2009) Research Design Qualitative Quantitative and Mixwd Methods Approaches3rd ed Thousand Oaks Sage Publications

Creswell JW and Plano Clark VL (2007) Designing and Conducting Mixed Methods ResearchSage Thousand Oaks CA

Delmas MA and Pekovic S (2013) ldquoEnvironmental standards and labor productivityunderstanding the mechanisms that sustain sustainabilityrdquo Journal of OrganizationalBehavior Vol 34 No 2 pp 230-252

Dunphy D Griffiths A and Benn S (2007) Organizational Change for Corporate SustainabilityRoutledge New York NY and London

Environmental Planning Authority (EPA) Victoria (2006) Ecological Footprint MeasuringOur Impact on the Environment State Government of Victoria Melbourne available atwwwepavicgovauecologicalfootprint (accessed 15 July 2012)

Fornell C and Larcker DF (1981) ldquoEvaluating structural equation models withunobservable variables and measurement errorrdquo Journal of Marketing ResearchVol 18 No 1 pp 39-50

507

Employeeparticipation

andengagement

Dow

nloa

ded

by A

uckl

and

Uni

vers

ity o

f T

echn

olog

y A

t 19

17 2

7 M

ay 2

015

(PT

)

Gollan PJ (2005) ldquoHigh involvement management and human resource sustainability thechallenges and opportunitiesrdquo Asia Pacific Journal of Human Resources Vol 43 No 1pp 18-33

Green SB (1991) ldquoHow many subjects does it take to do a regression analysisrdquo MultivariateBehavioral Research Vol 26 No 3 pp 499-510

Guchait P and Cho S (2010) ldquoThe impact of human resource management practices onintention to leave of employees in the service industry in India the mediating role oforganizational commitmentrdquo International Journal of Human Resource Management Vol 21No 8 pp 1228-1247

Harter JK Schmidt FL and Hayes TL (2002) ldquoBusiness-unit-level relationship betweenemployee satisfaction employee engagement and business outcomes a meta-analysisrdquoJournal of Applied Psychology Vol 87 No 2 pp 268-279

Holt DT Armenakis AA Feild HS and Harris SG (2007) ldquoReadiness for organizationalchange the systematic development of a scalerdquo Journal of Applied Behavioral ScienceVol 43 No 2 pp 232-255

Hunton-Clarke L Wehrmeyer W Clift R McKeown P and King H (2002) ldquoEmployeeparticipation in environmental initiatives facilitating more environmentally consciousdecision-making in innovationrdquo Greener Management International Vol 40 No 5 pp 45-56

Jabbour CJC and Santos FCA (2008a) ldquoThe central role of human resource management in thesearch for sustainable organizationsrdquo International Journal of Human ResourceManagement Vol 19 No 12 pp 2133-2154

Jabbour CJC and Santos FCA (2008b) ldquoRelationships between human resource dimensionsand environmental management in companies proposal of a modelrdquo Journal of CleanerProduction Vol 16 No 1 pp 51-58

Jabbour CJC Santos FCA and Nagano MS (2008) ldquoEnvironmental management system andhuman resource practices is there a link between them in four Brazilian companiesrdquoJournal of Cleaner Production Vol 16 No 1 pp 1922-1925

JRA (2007) Employee Engagement Driving Organization Performance JRA Auckland

Kitazawa S and Sarkis J (2000) ldquoThe relationship between ISO 14000 and continuous sourcereductionrdquo International Journal of Operations and Production Management Vol 20 No 2pp 225-248

Linnenluecke MK and Griffiths A (2010) ldquoCorporate sustainability and organizational culturerdquoJournal of World Business Vol 45 No 4 pp 357-366

Linnenluecke MK Russell SV and Griffiths A (2009) ldquoSubculture and sustainabilitypractices the impact on understanding corporate sustainabilityrdquo Business Strategy and theEnvironment Vol 18 No 7 pp 432-452

Macey WH and Schneider B (2008) ldquoThe meaning of employee engagementrdquo Industrial andOrganizational Psychology Vol 1 No 1 pp 3-30

Milne M Kearins K and Walton S (2006) ldquoCreating adventures in wonderlandthe journey metaphor and environmental sustainabilityrdquo Organization Vol 13 No 6pp 801-839

Morse JM and Niehaus L (2009) Mixed Method Design Principles and Procedures Left CoastPress Walnut Creek CA

NSW Department of Environment Climate Change and Water (2007) Who Cares about Waterand Climate Change in 2007 A Survey of NSW Peoplersquos Environmental KnowledgeAttitudes and Behaviour NSW Government Sydney available at wwwenvironmentnswgovauresourcescommunity07545WCWaterClimate07pdf (accessed 8 December 2010)

508

PR444

Dow

nloa

ded

by A

uckl

and

Uni

vers

ity o

f T

echn

olog

y A

t 19

17 2

7 M

ay 2

015

(PT

)

Oreg S Vakola M and Armenakis A (2011) ldquoChange recipientsrsquo reactions to organizationalchange a 60-year review of quantitative studiesrdquo The Journal of Applied BehaviouralScience Vol 47 No 4 pp 461-524

Orlitzky M Schmidt FL and Rynes SL (2003) ldquoCorporate social and financial performance ameta-analysisrdquo Organization Studies Vol 24 No 3 pp 403-441

Paille P Chen Y Boiral O and Jin J (2014) ldquoThe impact of human resource management onenvironmental performance an employee-level studyrdquo Journal of Business Ethics Vol 121No 3 pp 451-466

Podsakoff PM and Organ DW (1986) ldquoSelf-report in organizational research problems andprospectsrdquo Journal of Management Vol 12 No 4 pp 533-544

Ramus CA and Steger U (2000) ldquoThe roles of supervisory support behaviors andenvironmental policy in employee lsquoecoinitiativesrsquo at leading-edge european companiesrdquoAcademy of Management Journal Vol 43 No 4 pp 605-626

Remmen A and Lorentzen B (2000) ldquoEmployee participation and cleaner technologylearning processes in environmental teamsrdquo Journal of Cleaner Production Vol 8 No 5pp 365-373

Renwick DWS Redman T and Maguire S (2013) ldquoGreen human resource managementa review and research agendardquo International Journal of Management Reviews Vol 15 No 1pp 1-14

Ringle CM Wende S and Will A (2005) SmartPLS 20 v3 (beta) SmartPLS CommunityHamburg available at wwwsmartplsdecom

Robertson JL and Barling J (2013) ldquoGreening organizations through leadersrsquo influence onemployeesrsquo pro-environmental behaviorsrdquo Journal of Organizational Behavior Vol 34No 2 pp 176-194

Rothenberg S (2003) ldquoKnowledge content and worker participation in environmentalmanagament at NUMMIrdquo Journal of Management Studies Vol 40 No 7 pp 1783-1802

Rothenberg S and Becker M (2004) ldquoTechnical assistance programs and the diffusion ofenvironmental technologies in the printing industry the case of SMErsquosrdquo Business andSociety Vol 43 No 4pp 366-397

Russell S and McIntosh M (2011) ldquoChanging culture for corporate sustainabilityrdquoin Ashkanasy NM Wilderon CPM and Peterson MF (Eds) Handbook ofOrganizational Culture and Climate Sage Publications Thousand Oaks pp 373-411

Steel RP and Lloyd RF (1988) ldquoCognitive affective and behavioral outcomes of participationin quality circles conceptual and empirical findingsrdquo Journal of Applied Behavioral ScienceVol 24 No 1 pp 1-17

Stone L (2006) ldquoLimitations of cleaner production programmes as organizational change agentsII leadership support communication involvement and programme designrdquo Journal ofCleaner Production Vol 14 No 1 pp 15-30

Strandberg C (2009) The Role of Human Resource Management in Corporate SocialResponsibility Issue Brief and Roadmap Report for Industry CanadaIndustrie CanadaStrandberg Consulting Burnaby

Teh P-L and Sun H (2012) ldquoKnowledge sharing job attitudes and organisational citizenshipbehaviourrdquo Industrial Management amp Data Systems Vol 112 No 1 pp 64-82

Tenenhaus M Vinzi VE Chatelin Y-M and Lauro C (2005) ldquoPLS path modelingrdquoComputational Statistics and Data Analysis Vol 48 No 1 pp 159-205

Wackernagel M and Rees W (1996) Our Ecological Footprint Reducing Human Impact on theEarth Canada New Society Publishers Gabriola Island

509

Employeeparticipation

andengagement

Dow

nloa

ded

by A

uckl

and

Uni

vers

ity o

f T

echn

olog

y A

t 19

17 2

7 M

ay 2

015

(PT

)

Wagner M (2013) ldquoGreenrsquo human resource benefits do they matter as determinants ofenvironmental management system implementationrdquo Journal of Business Ethics Vol 114No 3 pp 443-456

Wanous J Reichers A and Hudy M (1997) ldquoOverall job satisfaction how good are single-itemmeasuresrdquo Journal of Applied Psychology Vol 82 No 2 pp 247-252

Wetzels M Odekerken-Schroumlder G and van Oppen C (2009) ldquoUsing PLS path modeling forassessing hierarchical construct models guidelines and empirical illustrationrdquo MISQuarterly Vol 33 No 1 pp 177-195

Wilkinson A Hill M and Gollan P (2001) ldquoThe sustainability debaterdquo International Journal ofOperations and Production Management Vol 21 No 12 pp 1492-1502

Yahya S and Goh W-K (2002) ldquoManaging human resources toward achieving knowledgemanagementrdquo Journal of Knowledge Management Vol 6 No 5 pp 457-468

Yin R (2003) Case Study Research Design and Methods Sage Publications Thousand Oaks CALondon and New Delhi

Zutshi A and Sohal A (2004) ldquoAdoption and maintenance of environmental managementsystems critical success factorsrdquo Management of Environmental Quality Vol 15 No 4pp 399-419

Further readingBartunek JM Greenberg DN and Davidson B (1999) ldquoConsistent and inconsistent impacts of

a teacher-led empowerment initiative in a federation of schoolsrdquo Journal of AppliedBehavioral Science Vol 35 No 4 pp 457-478

Colakoglu S Lepak DP and Hong Y (2006) ldquoMeasuring HRM effectiveness consideringmultiple stakeholders in a global contextrdquo Human Resource Management Review Vol 16No 2 pp 209-218

Daily BF and Huang S-C (2001) ldquoAchieving sustainability through attention to humanresource factors in environmental managementrdquo International Journal of Operations andProduction Management Vol 21 No 12 pp 1539-1552

Jacobs E and Roodt G (2007) ldquoThe development of a knowledge sharing construct to predictturnover intentionsrdquo Aslib Proceedings Vol 59 No 3 pp 229-248

Prasad P and Elmes M (2005) ldquoIn the name of the practical unearthing the hegemony ofpragmatics in the discourse of environmental managementrdquo Journal of ManagementStudies Vol 42 No 4 pp 845-867

Wee YS and Quazi HA (2005) ldquoDevelopment and validation of critical factors ofenvironmental managementrdquo Industrial Management and Data Systems Vol 105 No 1pp 96-114

Corresponding authorProfessor Suzanne Benn can be contacted at SuzanneBennutseduau

For instructions on how to order reprints of this article please visit our websitewwwemeraldgrouppublishingcomlicensingreprintshtmOr contact us for further details permissionsemeraldinsightcom

510

PR444

Dow

nloa

ded

by A

uckl

and

Uni

vers

ity o

f T

echn

olog

y A

t 19

17 2

7 M

ay 2

015

(PT

)