ArticlePDF Available

Environmental Standards and Labor Productivity: Understanding the Mechanisms that Sustain Sustainability

Authors:

Abstract and Figures

In the last decade, a rising number of firms have adopted voluntary international environmental management and product standards, such as the international ISO 14001 management standard or organic certification. Although emerging research analyzes the impact of these standards on environmental and financial performance, there is to our knowledge, no empirical research on how they affect the productivity of employees. In this paper, we investigate the direct relationship between environmental standards and labor productivity, as well as two mediating mechanisms through which environmental standards influence labor productivity: employee training and enhanced interpersonal contacts within the firm. Our empirical results, based on a French employer-employee survey from 5,220 firms, reveal that firms that have adopted environmental standards enjoy a one standard deviation higher labor productivity than firms that have not adopted such standards.
Content may be subject to copyright.
Environmental standards and labor productivity:
Understanding the mechanisms that
sustain sustainability
MAGALI A. DELMAS
1
*AND SANJA PEKOVIC
2
1
Anderson School of Management & Institute of the Environment and Sustainability, University of California, Los Angeles, U.S.A.
2
University Paris-Dauphine, Paris, France
Summary In the last decade, a rising number of rms have adopted voluntary international environmental management
and product standards, such as the international ISO 14001 management standard or organic certication.
Although emerging research analyzes the impact of these standards on environmental and nancial perfor-
mance, there is to our knowledge no empirical research on how they affect the productivity of employees.
In this paper, we investigate the direct relationship between environmental standards and labor productivity,
as well as two mediating mechanisms through which environmental standards inuence labor productivity:
employee training and enhanced interpersonal contacts within the rm. Our empirical results, based on a
French employeremployee survey from 5220 rms, reveal that rms that have adopted environmental
standards enjoy a one standard deviation higher labor productivity than rms that have not adopted such
standards. Copyright © 2012 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.
Keywords: environmental standards; positive social identity; training; interpersonal contacts; labor
productivity
Introduction
Environmental management and product standards have been proposed as an innovative governance mechanism for
improving rmsenvironmental performance (Delmas & Young, 2009). These standards include the International
Environmental Management System Standard ISO 14001 and organic certication, both of which are increasingly
being adopted worldwide (Delmas & Grant, 2010; Delmas & Montes-Sancho, 2011). More than 150 000 ISO
14001 certicates have been issued around the world,
1
and as of 2007, organic certication reached a 3.9 per cent
market share in the EU.
2
Scholars have suggested that environmental standards could allow rms to prot from reducing their negative
environmental impact by improving their labor productivity (Ambec & Lanoie, 2008). Although an emerging body
of literature investigates the environmental and nancial benets derived from the adoption of environmental
standards (e.g., Aerts, Cormier, & Magnan, 2008; Barla, 2007; Christmann, 2000; Darnall, Gallagher, Andrews, &
Amaral, 2000; Delmas, 2001; Delmas & Montiel, 2009; King & Lenox, 2002; Nakamura, Takahashi, & Vertinsky,
2001), exactly how these standards impact organizational effectiveness and employee productivity remains unclear.
So far, only anecdotal evidence has been presented to support the argument of greater employee loyalty and
*Correspondence to: Magali A. Delmas, Anderson School of Management & Institute of the Environment and Sustainability, University of
California, Los Angeles, California, 90095, U.S.A. E-mail: delmas@ucla.edu
1
ISO website: www.iso.ch
2
http://epp.eurostat.ec.europa.eu
Special Issue Article
Copyright © 2012 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.
Received 3 June 2011
Revised 15 June 2012, Accepted 7 August 2012
Journal of Organizational Behavior, J. Organiz. Behav. 34, 230252 (2013)
Published online 11 September 2012 in Wiley Online Library (wileyonlinelibrary.com) DOI: 10.1002/job.1827
productivity at environmentally or socially responsible rms (Brekke & Nyborg, 2008; Frank, 2003). For example,
the multinational corporation, Dole Food Co., Inc. reported that key benets [of the adoption of environmental
management systems] include strong employee motivation and loyalty that translate into reduced absenteeism and
improved productivity.
3
Studying the effect of environmental standards on employeesproductivity is important
because employees are widely recognized as a major source of competitive advantage (Grant, 1996; Pfeffer,
1994; Schuler & Jackson, 1987).
In this paper, we develop and test hypotheses on the relationship between the adoption of environmental standards
and labor productivity. First, we argue that the adoption of environmental standards might increase employees
social identication with their rm and result in enhanced labor productivity. Second, we make the case that the
adoption of environmental standards is associated with organizational changes, which may result in increased pro-
ductivity. These changes include implementation of employee training programs and higher levels of interpersonal
interactions, or greater employee engagement, in standard business operations. Training can lead to more effective
employees, and interpersonal contacts can help employees engage in knowledge transfer and lead to innovative
ideas that improve productivity. Interpersonal contacts can also promote employee job satisfaction and motivation,
which in turn lead to increased productivity. In other words, the adoption of environmental standards may also
improve organizational effectiveness through adjustments in the rms work systems.
We test our hypotheses with data obtained from a French survey, including responses with detailed employee
characteristics from 5220 rms. Our results show that the adoption of environmental standards is associated with
higher levels of labor productivity and that improved training and interpersonal contacts mediate this relationship.
This paper makes several contributions to the management literature as well as the business and the environment
literature. First, by unveiling organizational mechanisms that link the adoption of environmental standards to
corporate performance, our paper responds to the call made by some scholars to open the organizational black
box in order to understand the organizational changes associated with greeningarm (Delmas & Toffel, 2008;
Jackson, Renwick, Jabbour, & Muller-Camen, 2011). Second, we use data on employee and rm characteristics
from a large, representative sample of French rms, each of which employs more than 20 individuals. This allows
us to control for a very detailed set of workers and job characteristics in order to properly isolate the effect of envi-
ronmental standards on labor productivity. Third, using a French database brings a new and potentially enlightening
perspective to the debate on the relationship between corporate environmental performance and nancial perfor-
mance, as empirical studies on the subject are typically based on U.S. data.
This paper is organized as follows. In the second section, we review the literature on environmental standards and
their impact on performance. In the third section, we develop hypotheses relating the adoption of environmental
standards to labor productivity. In the fourth section, we describe our empirical strategy based on a novel employee
database. In the fth section, we describe our results. A concluding section follows.
Literature Review
Understanding the relationship between corporate environmental performance and nancial performance has been
the focus of considerable research since the 1970s (Orlitsky, Schmidt, & Rynes, 2003). Within this wider context,
many scholars have focused on whether rms are nancially rewarded for improving their environmental
performance. The contention of neoclassical microeconomics is that rms accrue little or no gain from investing
in environment performance, whereas winwintheorists claim that such investments can generate competitive
advantage and other prot opportunities (Orsato, 2006). Scholars attempting to empirically test these conicting
3
Dole Reports Motivation, Health and Safety, and Productivity Benets from ISO 14001. http://staratel.com/iso/ISO/ISO900014000/articles/pdf/
casestudy_2-01.pdf. Accessed on 27 May 2011.
ENVIRONMENTAL STANDARDS AND LABOR PRODUCTIVITY 231
Copyright © 2012 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd. J. Organiz. Behav. 34, 230252 (2013)
DOI: 10.1002/job
theories empirically have generated an extensive body of literature, with the balance of studies suggesting a
positive relationship between improved environmental and nancial performance (Margolis & Walsh, 2003;
Orlitsky et al., 2003).
Environmental standards aim to improve environmental performance and rmsrelationships with both market
and non-market actors (Delmas & Montiel, 2008). They require the adoption of management practices, which
are not legally mandated and which may promote organizational commitment to improving the natural environ-
ment (Darnall, Henriques, & Sadorsky, 2010; Delmas, 2002). These practices include the implementation of
environmental policies (Henriques & Sadorsky, 1996); the utilization of internal assessment tools, such as
benchmarking and accounting procedures (Nash & Ehrenfeld, 1997); the establishment of environmental
performance goals (Hart, 2005); internal and external environmental audits; the implementation of employee
environmental training; and the establishment of employee incentive compensation plans based on the rms
environmental performance (Welford, 1998). Hence, adopting these standards requires signicant organizational
changes within the rm.
The literature has identied several mechanisms that can link the adoption of environmental management
standards to corporate performance. These include cost reduction, improved internal efciency, enhanced rm
reputation, and access to green markets (Delmas & Montiel, 2009; Porter & Van Der Linde, 1995).
Environmental standards require the implementation of a set of environmental practices and procedures that
ensure that risks, liabilities, and impacts are properly identied, minimized, and managed (Darnall et al., 2000). Such
practices have the potential to reduce risks related to environmental compliance (Delmas, 2001; Grolleau, Mzoughi,
& Thomas, 2007) and decrease insurance costs (Barla, 2007).
Environmental standards can also help the rm improve efciency, as the adoption of environmental practices
establishes new systems for gathering information and monitoring environmental performance (Khanna & Anton,
2002), which can induce the redesign of production processes (Christmann, 2000), trigger innovation, and improve
technologies that will positively affect a rmsefciency (Shrivastava, 1995).
Additionally, environmental standards can enhance corporate reputation (e.g., Konar & Cohen, 2001) and provide
access to environmentally oriented consumers (Anton, Deltas, & Khanna, 2004; Delmas & Montiel, 2009; Khanna
& Damon, 1999; Nakamura et al., 2001).
Research has also shown that employee involvement in the adoption and implementation of the environmental
management system ISO 14001 can lead to a competitive advantage (Delmas, 2001). However, there is very little
empirical evidence to support the hypothesis that environmental practices inuence employee performance
outcomes. The goals of this paper are to develop and test hypotheses on the mechanisms that link environmental
certication to labor productivity. By identifying and testing such mechanisms, we hope to ll a void in the literature
and to enhance knowledge of the organizational changes associated with the adoption of green practices.
Hypotheses
Through the adoption of an environmental standard, a rm sends a signal to both its internal and external stake-
holders about its commitment to improve environmental performance (Delmas, 2002; Delmas & Montiel, 2009).
Hence, it would seem likely that an organizations commitment to social and environmental issues would lead to
a positive organizational reputation and have a positive impact on employeeswork attitudes. As Ambec and Lanoie
(2008, p. 57) noted:
people who feel proud of the company for which they work not only perform better on the job, but also become
ambassadors for the company with their friends and relatives, enhancing goodwill and leading to a virtuous circle
of good reputation.
232 M. A. DELMAS AND S. PEKOVIC
Copyright © 2012 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd. J. Organiz. Behav. 34, 230252 (2013)
DOI: 10.1002/job
One mechanism that we argue links the adoption of environmental standards to labor productivity is the positive
social identity that can be derived from working in a greenerrm. Employees can identify more strongly with
ethical and responsible rms, and such identication may be translated into cooperative and citizenship-type
behaviors (Dutton, Dukerich, & Harquail, 1994; Frank, 2003; Jones & Hamilton Volpe, 2011) and increased
employee organizational commitment (Brammer, Millington, & Rayton, 2010; Peterson, 2004). Such positive
corporate social identity may create a stronger emotional association between employees and their rm, resulting
in enhanced labor productivity (Hess, Rogovsky, & Dunfee, 2002; Koh & Boo, 2001; Viswesvaran, Deshpande,
& Joseph, 1998).
Social and environmental responsibility may also make the rm more attractive to prospective employees
(Greening & Turban, 2000; Grolleau, Mzoughi, & Pekovic, 2012; Turban & Greening, 1997), and individuals
who choose to work for greener rmsmay work harder (Brekke & Nyborg, 2008).
As we will discuss in more details later, there are additional tangible organizational changes, such as training,
that result from the adoption of environmental standards that may also lead to high-performance work systems
and increased productivity. In other words, the implementation of environmental standards can create a virtuous
circle of reciprocal interactions between the rm structure and its workforce (Perez, Amichai-Hamburger, &
Shterental, 2009).
We therefore hypothesize that the adoption of environmental standards is associated with greater labor productivity.
Hypothesis 1: The adoption of environmental standards is associated with greater labor productivity.
We develop two additional hypotheses focusing on the main organizational changes associated with the
adoption of environmental standardsnamely training and on interpersonal communication and contacts within
the organizationthat we argue can lead to greater labor productivity. Such organizational changes have been
recognized as central to the adoption of environmental standards. Indeed, most environmental standards such as
ISO 14001 require the rm to implement an environmental management system in order to document and commu-
nicate environmental information more effectively and to allow continuous improvement (Delmas, 2000). A
substantial number of ISO 14001 requirements relate to the internal structure of the organization, record keeping
procedures, internal communication methods, denition of responsibilities, and training programs (Delmas, 2001).
As such, training and communication are essential elements in the implementation of ISO 14001(Sammalisto
& Brorson, 2008, p. 299).
Environmental standards, employee training, and labor productivity
The adoption of an environmental standard requires investment in employee training (Khanna & Anton, 2002).
For example, one of the basic requirements to become ISO 14000 certied is to provide job-appropriate employee
training (ISO, 1996), and several authors have shown that ISO certication is an important determinant of training
efforts within the organization (Blunch & Castro, 2007; Ramus & Steger, 2000). Training is typically provided to
over half of the rms employees, with some rms training over 95 per cent of their staff (Corbett & Luca, 2002).
For example, Hondas environmental certication resulted in the development of a contractor-training program
(McManus & Sanders, 2001). This type of training enables employees to better identify pollution prevention
opportunities and empowers them to offer recommendations (Morrow & Rondinelli, 2002; Rondinelli & Vastag,
2000; Toffel, 2000).
Human capital stock, accumulated through training activities, is one of the main factors of production (e.g.,
Lynch, 1994). Investment in human resources has been recognized as a signicant source of competitive advantage,
as such investments can lead to more effective employees (Porter, 1985), and one of the key tools for investing in
human resources is training (Jennings, Cyr, & Moore, 1995). Scholars have also argued that training is protable
through an increase in the specicity of human capital, which is difcult to imitate (Koch & McGrath, 1996).
ENVIRONMENTAL STANDARDS AND LABOR PRODUCTIVITY 233
Copyright © 2012 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd. J. Organiz. Behav. 34, 230252 (2013)
DOI: 10.1002/job
Empirical evidence corroborates this conclusion and shows that training is positively associated with labor
productivity improvement (Conti, 2005; Dearden, Reed, & Van Reenen, 2006; Koch & McGrath, 1996; Rennison
& Turcotte, 2004; Zwick, 2004).
On the basis of this reasoning, we formulate the following hypothesis on the mediating role of employee training
on the relationship between environmental standards and labor productivity:
Hypothesis 2: Training mediates the relationship between the adoption of environmental standards and greater
labor productivity.
Environmental standards, interpersonal contacts, and labor productivity
Scholars have shown that the adoption of environmental standards alters the organization of the rm by requiring
changes in employee attitudes, roles, and responsibilities (Florida & Davidson, 2001; Hart, 1995) that might
indirectly inuence employee performance outcomes (Lanfranchi & Pekovic, 2010). More specically, we argue
that environmental standards are associated with improved interpersonal contacts within the rm, which may
increase labor productivity.
The majority of environmental management projects require a combination of different types of competencies that
can be obtained by establishing cross-functional teams (Denton, 1999; Rothenberg, 2003) and promoting collabora-
tive work from employees of different hierarchical levels and functions (OhEocha, 2000). Environmental standards,
such as ISO 14001, have demonstrated the potential to transcend functional areas of the organization and integrate
environmental considerations throughout the entire organization (Delmas, 2001), and to additionally encourage
employees to work together in teams regardless of their placement within the organization (Arimura, Darnall, &
Katayama, 2011). Consequently, interpersonal contacts and teamwork are considered as a fundamental element of
environmental management standards.
There are two main reasons proposed in the literature to explain why increased interpersonal contacts in an
organization can lead to improved labor productivity. First, interpersonal contacts and communication among
workers with heterogeneous abilities can help employees engage in knowledge transfer and lead to innovative
ideas that improve productivity (Hamilton, Nickerson, & Hideo, 2003; Mohrman & Novelli, 1985). Second,
interpersonal contacts can promote employee job satisfaction and motivation, which in turn lead to increased
productivity. Work is a social activity that engages the same social needs and responses as any other part of life,
such as the need for connection, cooperation, support, and trust (Cohen & Prusak, 2001). Organizations that
facilitate interpersonal contacts among their employee provide an enhanced working environment that might lead
employees to give more to the rm and increase their productivity, which results in overall improved organiza-
tional productivity (Banker, Field, Schroeder, & Sinha, 1996; Batt, 2004; Huselid, 1995). We therefore hypoth-
esize the following:
Hypothesis 3: Interpersonal contacts mediate the relationship between the adoption of environmental standards
and greater labor productivity.
In summary, several mechanisms explain a positive relationship between environmental standards and labor
productivity. We argue that employees can derive a positive social identity from being associated with a rm adopt-
ing environmental standards and may be willing to work harder for such a rm. We also contend that the adoption of
environmental standards is associated with higher performance work systems, which we hypothesize lead to im-
proved employee productivity. These mediating mechanisms include employee training and improved interpersonal
contacts. We illustrate these relationships in Figure 1.
234 M. A. DELMAS AND S. PEKOVIC
Copyright © 2012 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd. J. Organiz. Behav. 34, 230252 (2013)
DOI: 10.1002/job
Method
Data
To test our hypotheses, we used data from the French Organizational Changes and Computerizations (COI) 2006
survey.
4
The COI survey is a matched employeremployee dataset on organizational change and computerization
from the National Institute for Statistics and Economic Studies (INSEE), the Ministry of Labor, and the Center
for Labor Studies (CEE). The survey contains 7700 rms, with at least 20 employees belonging to the private sector.
It is a representative population of French rms from all industries except agriculture, forestry, and shing. Each
rm lls in a self-administered questionnaire concerning the utilization of information technologies and work
organizational practices in 2006, and changes that have occurred in those areas since 2003.
5
Firms were also
interviewed on the economic goals driving the decision to implement organizational changes and the economic
context in which those decisions were made.
Within each surveyed rm, employees were randomly selected and asked about their personal socio-economic
characteristics, as well as information about their job and position within the organization. The labor force
survey denes the employees job duties and responsibilities at the time of the survey and provides only a
few elements dealing with actual changes. In our sample, the respondents are associated with the following
departments: 46 per cent to general management; 32 per cent to nance and accounting; 7 per cent to human
resources; 2 per cent to manufacturing, logistics, and quality; 7 per cent to information technology; and 6 per cent
are classied as others.
The original dataset includes 14 369 employees. In order to obtain information on business export volumes,
employee value-added activities, and earnings and wage information, the COI survey was merged with two other
databases: the Annual Enterprise Survey (EAE) and the Annual Statement of Social Data (DADS). As a result of
these merges, our sample includes 10 663 employees from 5220 rms.
These databases offer a propitious opportunity to examine three relationships: (i) between the rms environmen-
tal orientation, employee training, and interpersonal contacts; (ii) between employee training and interpersonal
contacts and labor productivity; and (iii) between environmental standards and labor productivity. By controlling
for the organizational changes associated with the adoption of environmental standards, we sought to isolate the
4
More details about the design and scope of this survey are available on www.enquetecoi.net: Survey COI-TIC 2006-INSEE-CEE/Treatments
CEE.
5
We present information on questionnaire respondents in Appendix 1.
Figure 1. Environmental standards, training, interpersonal contacts, and labor productivity
ENVIRONMENTAL STANDARDS AND LABOR PRODUCTIVITY 235
Copyright © 2012 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd. J. Organiz. Behav. 34, 230252 (2013)
DOI: 10.1002/job
positive social identity effect, which implementation of environmental standards may bring about and which might
lead to improved labor productivity.
Dependent and independent variables
Green
To test the main hypothesis of the paper, namely, that rms that have adopted environmental standards enjoy higher
labor productivity than rms that have not adopted such standards, we used the variable denoted Green, which is a
binary variable, coded 1 if the rm was registered according to one of the following standards in 2006: ISO 14001
standard, organic labeling, fair trade, and other types of environmental-related standards. Unfortunately, the database
does not distinguish between those standards; however, as these standards include similar components, it is expected
that their impact will be comparable. At the time of the survey, the majority of the adoption of environmental
standards consisted of the ISO 14001 standard with 3476 ISO 14000 certied rms in 2006.
6
Labor productivity
Drawing on prior research (e.g., Salis & Williams, 2010), we measured labor productivity as the logarithm of the
rms value added by the number of employees. We used the Annual Enterprise Survey (EAE) to obtain information
on the rm value added. We obtained number of employees from the Organizational Changes and Computerization
(COI) database.
Training
In order to estimate the mediating role of training on the relationship between environmental standards and labor
productivity, we constructed a training indicator that consists of the following ve components: (i) general training
provided; (ii) employee received training in the last three years; (iii) duration of the last training received; (iv) training
led to a certicate; and (v) employee obtained training certicate. Because these variables were dummy or categorical
variables, we added them to construct the training variable. We tested the reliability of the training scale using
the mean standardized Cronbachs alpha. We obtained a Cronbachsaof .77, which is considered satisfactory
(e.g., Churchill, 1979).
Interpersonal contacts
In order to analyze if improvement in employees interpersonal contacts could mediate the relationship between
environmental standards and labor productivity, we created an indicator for interpersonal contacts that includes
the following components: (i) employee works regularly with his or her subordinates; (ii) employee works regularly
with colleagues from the same or different departments; (iii) employee works regularly with people outside the rm;
(iv) employee shows his or her colleagues how to conduct specic tasks: often (at least two or three times a month),
sometimes (at least two or three times a year), never, or almost never; (v) employee shares work or takes part in work
distribution with his or her colleagues: often (at least two or three times a month), sometimes (at least two or three
times a year), never, or almost never; (vi) employee is consulted over difculties with the team, clients, or other
persons: often (at least two or three times a month), sometimes (at least two or three times a year), never, or almost
never; (vii) employee is part of a work group, such as a project, problem-solving, pilot, or brainstorming group; (viii)
the employee works with: one colleague, two to ve colleagues, six to 10 colleagues, or more than 10 colleagues;
and (ix) employee attends meetings. The interpersonal contact scale proved to be reliable with a mean standardized
Cronbachsacoefcient of .72, which is considered satisfactory (e.g., Churchill, 1979).
6
The ISO Survey of Certications 2007 (17th Cycle).
236 M. A. DELMAS AND S. PEKOVIC
Copyright © 2012 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd. J. Organiz. Behav. 34, 230252 (2013)
DOI: 10.1002/job
Controls
In order to control for rm-level heterogeneity, our analysis includes variables representing rm characteristics
based on previous studies, specically those relating environmental performance, training, interpersonal contacts,
and labor productivity (e.g., Delmas & Montes-Sancho, 2011; Delmas & Montiel, 2009; Grolleau, Mzoughi, &
Pekovic, 2007; Pfeffer & Langton, 1993; Zwick, 2004).
ISO 9000
Previous studies have shown that the adoption of the international quality management standard ISO 9000 can
facilitate the successful implementation of environmental standards through the utilization of related information,
resources, and skills (Delmas, 2002; Delmas & Montes-Sancho, 2011; Grolleau, Mzoughi, & Pekovic, 2007; King
& Lenox, 2002). Moreover, the adoption of management practices such as ISO 9000 is found to increase labor
productivity through improvement of employee skills (Huselid, 1995). We therefore included a binary variable
representing the adoption of ISO 9000 by the rm.
Export
Several empirical studies have conrmed the signicant role played by exports in rmsdecisions to adopt
environmental standards (Corbett & Kirsch, 2001; Delmas & Montiel, 2009; Grolleau, Mzoughi, & Pekovic,
2007). Furthermore, export-oriented rms tend to have higher labor productivity in order to compete internationally
(Zwick, 2004). We used a variable representing the rms volume of exports divided by the rms sales.
Earnings
The implementation of environmental standards requires the investment of signicant nancial and other resources;
hence, rms with more nancial resources might be more likely to adopt an environmental standard (Grolleau,
Mzoughi, & Pekovic, 2007; Welch, Mori, & Aoyagi-Usui, 2002). In addition, the nancial strength of the rm leads
to productivity improvement (Dearden et al., 2006). To control for this issue, we used information on rmsearnings
before interest, taxes, and depreciation.
Holding
Being part of a holding company could play a substantial role in the adoption of environmental management
standards (Abrahamson & Rosenkopf, 1997; Darnall et al., 2010). This might be because rms with holding
company associations have more nancial resources available to them for investment in new practices (Pekovic,
2010; Zyglidopoulos, 2002). Additionally, being part of a holding company could improve labor productivity
through economies of scope (Eriksson & Jacoby, 2003). Hence, we included a dummy variable that takes a value
of 1 when the rm belongs to a holding company.
Size
Most empirical studies have found that the probability of implementing environmental standards increases with rm
size (e.g., Darnall et al., 2010; Delmas & Montiel, 2009; Grolleau, Mzoughi, & Pekovic, 2007). Firm size has also
been seen as a signicant determinant of labor productivity (e.g., Pfeffer & Langton, 1993; Zwick, 2004). Firm size
is measured by the number of employees within the rm.
Sector of activity
In order to control for sector differences, we included sector dummy variables on the basis of the N36 sector
classication, created by the French National Institute for Statistics and Economic Studies: agri-food; consumption
goods; cars and equipment; intermediate goods; energy; construction; commercial; transport; nancial and
real-estate activities; and business services and individual services.
ENVIRONMENTAL STANDARDS AND LABOR PRODUCTIVITY 237
Copyright © 2012 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd. J. Organiz. Behav. 34, 230252 (2013)
DOI: 10.1002/job
In addition, we control for employee characteristics that have been found to be related to green performance or
labor productivity in previous research (Burks, Carpenter, & Goette, 2009; Krueger & Schkade, 2008; Pfeffer &
Langton, 1993; Torgler & Garcia-Valinas, 2007; Zwick, 2004).
Gender
Gender has been identied as a predictor of environmental behavior. The ndings show that women tend to have
greater environmental concerns than men (Torgler & Garcia-Valinas, 2007). There is also some evidence that
men are more likely to receive employer sponsored training (Veum, 1993). Research has also shown that women
are more likely to invest in interpersonal relationships than men (Liebler & Sandefur, 2002). Furthermore, it is
argued that women are less productive than men (Pfeffer & Langton, 1993). We therefore include a binary variable
that takes a value of 1 if the employee is a woman.
Age
Previous studies consider age to be negatively correlated with decisions to adopt environmental practices (Torgler &
Garcia-Valinas, 2007). As indicated by Frazis, Gittleman, and Joyce (2000), age decreases the probability of being
trained, as well. Moreover, interpersonal contacts at work tend to decrease with age (Krueger & Schkade, 2008). The
impact of employeesage on labor productivity depends on specic age groups (Conti, 2005). We therefore
introduce a variable that represent employeesage.
Education
It has been argued that employees with higher educational levels will be more interested in contributing environmen-
tal initiatives (e.g., Torgler & Garcia-Valinas, 2007) and in receiving training courses (Lynch & Black, 1998). The
productivity of highly educated employees should be greater than those of less educated employees. In order to
control for the level of education, we use 10 categories of education numbered from 1 to 10 from primary school
to Grande Ecole, PhD.
Wage
Wages offered by rms may have an impact on labor productivity. We therefore include a continuous variable
representing the rm average wage.
Seniority
Referencing previous literature, we may presume that seniority within the rm will positively inuence labor
productivity (Medoff & Abraham, 1980; Pfeffer & Langton, 1993). Seniority is found to be negatively correlated
with training (Barth, 1997), as well as with employeesinterpersonal contacts (Krueger & Schkade, 2008). Hence,
we include a variable that measures the number of years the employee has worked for the rm.
Occupation
Occupation has been shown to be closely related to employeeseducation and skills (Becker, 1964; Schultz, 1961).
The data comprise four categories: management, middle management, white-collar work, and blue-collar worker.
We include the management and blue-collar worker categories in the analysis, which are contrasted to the other
categories.
Working hours
Previous research has shown a positive correlation between productivity and working hours (Sousa-Poza & Ziegler,
2003). We included a variable that indicates employee working hours.
We present the variables used in estimation, their denitions, and sample statistics in Table 1. We detected no
problem of multi-colinearity (Appendix 1).
238 M. A. DELMAS AND S. PEKOVIC
Copyright © 2012 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd. J. Organiz. Behav. 34, 230252 (2013)
DOI: 10.1002/job
Table 1. Denition of variables and sample statistics.
Variable Description Mean SD Min Max
Dependent and independent variables
Green* Registered for ISO 14001, organic labeling or
fair trade (=1 if registered in 2006)
0.22 0.42 0.00 1.00
Labor
productivity**
Logarithm of valued added per employee 3.90 0.64 1.16 7.92
Training* General training provided, employee received
training in the last 3 years, duration of the last
training, training lead to certicate, employee
obtained training certicate
4.84 3.82 0.00 13.00
Interpersonal
contacts*
Employee works with subordinates, colleagues
from the same or different departments;
employee works regularly with people outside
the rm; employee shows to his or her
colleagues how to conduct specic tasks: often
(at least 2 or 3 times a month), sometimes (at
least 2 or 3 times a year), never or almost never;
employee shares work or takes part in work
distribution with his or her colleagues: often (at
least 2 or 3 times a month), sometimes (at least 2
or 3 times a year), never or almost never;
employee is consulted over difculties with the
team, clients, or other persons often (at least 2 or
3 times a month), sometimes (at least 2 or 3
times a year), never or almost never; employee
is part of a working group such as a project,
problem-solving, pilot, or brainstorming group;
employee works with 1 colleague, with 2 to 5
colleagues, with 6 to 10 colleagues, with more
than 10 colleagues; employee attends meetings
8.27 3.11 1.00 15.00
Control variables
Client supply
center*
Under customer policy rm uses contract to
assure delivery timeless in 2003
0.67 0.47 0.00 1.00
Dummy variable (=1 if yes)
Client call
center*
Under customer policy rm has contact or call
client center in 2003
0.35 0.48 0.00 1.00
Dummy variable (=1 if yes)
Informal
pronoun
usage*
The employee uses the between the informal
subject pronoun tuwhen speaking to his or
her superior (=1 if yes)
0.62 0.49 0.00 1.00
ISO 9000* Certied with ISO 9000 0.54 0.50 0.00 1.00
Dummy variable (=1 if certied in 2006)
Export** Share of exports of total sales () 0.12 0.23 0.00 1.01
Earnings** Earnings before interest, taxes, and
depreciation ()
15 234.89 177 338.9 198 916 8 433 584
Size* Number of employees 655.26 3426.30 20.00 111 956.00
Holding* Belongs to a holding group (=1 if yes) 0.67 0.47 0 1.00
Sector* Agri-food, consumption goods, cars and
equipment, intermediate goods, energy,
construction, commercial, transport, nancial
and real-estate activities, business services,
and individual services
(Continues)
ENVIRONMENTAL STANDARDS AND LABOR PRODUCTIVITY 239
Copyright © 2012 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd. J. Organiz. Behav. 34, 230252 (2013)
DOI: 10.1002/job
Estimation strategy
We hypothesize a direct effect of the adoption of environmental standards on labor productivity, as well as mediat-
ing effects of training and interpersonal contacts. Hence, in our model, employee training and interpersonal contacts
are determined by the adoption of environmental standards. We further argue that the adoption of environmental
standards and the degree of training and interpersonal contact within an organization determine labor productivity.
However, the adoption of environmental standards, training, interpersonal contacts, and labor productivity can be
inuenced by the same variables (e.g., size, sector of activity, rms strategy), and this may cause a spurious rela-
tionship. Thus, an OLS regression is inappropriate because it considers environmental standards adoption, training,
and interpersonal contacts as exogenous.
In light of such endogeneity, we used a three-stage least square (3SLS) model (Aerts et al., 2008; Anton et al.,
2004) that considers environmental standards, training, and interpersonal contacts as endogenous variables. The
model relies on a simultaneous estimation approach (Pindyck & Rubinfeld, 1991), in which (i) the factors that
determine environmental standards are estimated simultaneously with (ii) the factors that explain employee training
or interpersonal contacts, and (iii) the factors that dene labor productivity. We estimated jointly the three equations
for each explanatory variable using maximum likelihood.
Y
1,Y
2, and Y
3are latent variables inuencing the probability that the rm implements environmental standards;
improves employee training or interpersonal contacts; and improves labor productivity, respectively. We consider
the following 3SLS model:
Table 1. (Continued)
Variable Description Mean SD Min Max
Wage*** Logarithm of average wage within a rm per
hour
12.35 8.06 1.26 68.03
Gender* The employee is a women (=1 if yes) 0.37 0.48 0.00 1.00
Age* Age 40.32 10.01 17.00 77.00
Education* Employee highest academic diploma is from:
(1) primary school; (2) middle school; (3)
short technical course: CAP (vocational
certicate), BEP (technical school certicate),
in apprenticeship; (4) short technical course:
CAP, BEP, etc. without apprenticeship; (5)
general secondary school (full 3 years); (6)
technological or professional secondary school
(full course); (7) 3-year university degree; (8)
4-year university degree; (9) 5-year university
degree; (10) grande école, engineering school,
business school
5.00 2.32 1.00 10.00
Seniority* Seniority 11.78 9.49 0.00 42.00
Occupation* Employee works as:
Management (included) 0.14 0.35 0.00 1.00
Middle management (not included) 0.23 0.42 0.00 1.00
White-collar worker (not included) 0.20 0.40 0.00 1.00
Blue-collar worker (included) 0.43 0.50 0.00 1.00
Working
hours*
Number of working hours per week 37.78 6.93 1.00 90.00
Because of the tables length, we do not report sample statistics for these variables.
*Variables were retrieved from the COI.
**Variables retrieved from the EAE database.
***Variables retrieved from the DADS databases.
240 M. A. DELMAS AND S. PEKOVIC
Copyright © 2012 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd. J. Organiz. Behav. 34, 230252 (2013)
DOI: 10.1002/job
Y
1¼a1þb1X1þd1Z1þm1
Y
2¼a2þb2X2þg1Y1þd2Z2þm2
Y
3¼a3þb3X3þg1Y1þg2Y2þm3
8
<
:
(1)
where X
1
are the vectors of exogenous variables including rm characteristics, such as export level, being a part of a
holding company, size, and sector activity. In addition, we control for employee characteristics, including gender,
age, education, and wage.
The vector of variable Z
1
represents the vectors of instrumental variables that guarantee the identication of the
model and help estimate correlation coefcients (Maddala, 1983). Hence, in order to identify the three-stage least
square model, we needed additional variables that explain the probability of adopting environmental standards,
but are not correlated to the error term of the labor productivity equation. In our case, Z
1
indicates that the rm
assured timely delivery to its customers and had a client call center in 2003.
Several rationales can explain why the client supply center and client call center variables affect environmental
practices. With environmental standards, it is essential to maintain close links with customers in order to identify
their needs, to receive feedback necessary for understanding if customer requirements are successfully met, and
to determine whether to initiate relevant improvement activities. Hence, rms that have a close link with their
customers also have strong incentives to demonstrate goodwill to their customers by implementing successful envi-
ronmental management systems (Nishitani, 2009). Moreover, the literature argues that a rm that wants to deliver
their products or services on time should adopt management practices, because the implementation of such practices
improves delivery performance, mainly through reduction in time spent on non-value-added activities (Pekovic, 2010).
We presumed that a rms relationships with clients would not positively inuence labor productivity, because
scholars have identied potential tradeoffs between customer satisfaction and productivity (Anderson, Fornell, & Rust,
1997). It is worth noting that our proposed instrumental variables do not appear to be a signicant determinant of
training, interpersonal contacts, and labor productivity in a single equation logit or probit model.
X
2
includes two sets of variables: (i) rm characteristics (export level, being a part of a holding, size, and sector
activity) and (ii) socio-demographic characteristics (gender, age, age square, education, wage, seniority, occupation,
and working hours).
As in the previous case, the vector of variable Z
2
represents the vector of the instrumental variable that explains
the probability of employee training improvement or interpersonal contacts, but is not correlated to the error term
of the labor productivity equation. For employee training and interpersonal contacts, the vector Z
2
includes
whether the employee uses the informal pronoun tuwhen speaking to his or her superior. The choice of this
variable as an instrument seems to be reasonable, because supervisors play a central role in employee work
empowerment and integration (Hopkins, 2005) and in developing opportunities for employees to practice their
skills (Noe, 1986).
X
3
also includes two sets of variables: (i) rm characteristics (export level, being a part of a holding, size, and
sector activity) and (ii) socio-demographic characteristics (gender, age, age square, education, wage, seniority,
occupation, and working hours).
b
1
,b
2
,b
3
,g
1
,g
2
,g
3
,d
1
,d
2
, and d
3
are slope coefcients to be estimated.
Finally, a
1
,a
2
,a
3
,m
1
,m
2
, and m
3
are the intercepts and the disturbance terms for the three equations, respectively.
Because our data provide information on multiple individuals within each organization, there is the potential
for correlation of errors across individuals within each organization. We therefore trimmed our sample and
used only a single individual respondent per rm in our estimations. As a robustness test, we conducted the
analysis with all the 10 663 observations. There is no signicant difference in the results between the two
samples.
7
7
Results available from the authors.
ENVIRONMENTAL STANDARDS AND LABOR PRODUCTIVITY 241
Copyright © 2012 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd. J. Organiz. Behav. 34, 230252 (2013)
DOI: 10.1002/job
Table 2. 3SLS estimates of the effect of environmental standards and training on labor productivity.
Variables Green (1) Training (2) Productivity (3)
Green 4.04* 0.61**
(1.56) (0.36)
Training 0.04 0.16*
(0.03) (0.05)
ISO 9000 0.27* 0.31 0.21*
(0.02) (0.42) (0.08)
Export 0.26* 0.19 0.15
(0.04) (0.47) (0.09)
Earnings 0.00 0.00 0.00*
(0.00) (0.00) (0.00)
Size 0.00* 0.00 0.00*
(0.00) (0.00) (0.00)
Holding 0.06* 0.58* 0.02
(0.03) (0.15) (0.04)
Wage 0.00** 0.01 0.01*
(0.00) (0.01) (0.00)
Gender 0.01 1.04* 0.13***
(0.03) (0.14) (0.06)
Age 0.00** 0.03* 0.00
(0.00) (0.01) (0.00)
Education 0.00 0.11* 0.01
(0.00) (0.04) (0.01)
Management position 0.06* 0.22 0.04
(0.03) (0.24) (0.05)
Blue-collar worker 0.00 0.10 0.03
(0.04) (0.15) (0.03)
Seniority 0.00* 0.05* 0.01**
(0.00) (0.001) (0.00)
Working hours 0.00 0.02** 0.00
(0.00) (0.01) (0.00)
Client supply center 0.03*
(0.01)
Client call center 0.08*
(0.02)
Informal 0.43*
(0.12)
Agri-food 0.01 0.72* 0.07
(0.03) (0.25) (0.06)
Consumption goods 0.09* 0.02 0.13*
(0.03) (0.28) (0.06)
Cars and equipment 0.00 0.23 0.08**
(0.02) (0.23) (0.05)
Energy 0.33* 0.17 0.15
(0.07) (0.82) (0.17)
Construction 0.02 0.21 0.03
(0.03) (0.25) (0.05)
Commercial 0.03 0.27 0.03
(0.02) (0.21) (0.04)
Transport 0.09* 0.84* 0.08
(0.03) (0.29) (0.07)
Financial and real estate 0.01 1.53* 0.84*
(0.06) (0.45) (0.12)
(Continues)
242 M. A. DELMAS AND S. PEKOVIC
Copyright © 2012 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd. J. Organiz. Behav. 34, 230252 (2013)
DOI: 10.1002/job
Results
We present the results of the 3SLS estimation in Tables 2 and 3. In the rst column, we present the model of the
determinants of environmental standards adoption; in the second column, the determinants of employee training
or interpersonal contacts; and in the third column, the determinants of labor productivity.
Adoption of environmental standards
We rst present the estimation results regarding the factors that may inuence rms to adopt environmental
standards (column 1 of Tables 2 and 3). As expected, the variables representing the adoption of ISO 9000export
level,size and holdingare signicant predictors for the adoption of environmental standards, and these results
conrm the ndings of previous studies (e.g., Delmas & Montes-Sancho, 2011; Delmas & Montiel, 2009; Grolleau,
Mzoughi, & Pekovic, 2007).
The variables training and interpersonal contacts are not signicant in this rst stage. As expected, our
instrumental variables are positive and signicant determinants of the adoption of environmental standards. Firms
in the energy and consumption goods sectors are also more likely to adopt environmental standards.
Regarding employee characteristics, as expected, wage is positively associated with the adoption of environmen-
tal standards.
Training and interpersonal contacts
We present the results of the determinants of training in the second column of Table 2 and of interpersonal contacts
in the second column of Table 3. Our results indicate that the adoption of environmental standards improves
employee training, because the coefcient of environmental standards on training is positive and signicant
(p<.10). Similarly, the implementation of environmental standards is found to be positively and signicantly
associated with interpersonal contacts improvement (p<.10).
Concerning the effect of the control variables on training, the variables holding,education,seniority, and working
hours have a positive and signicant effect on training, whereas management position and age have a negative
association with training. Furthermore, women tend to obtain less training than men.
Table 2. (Continued)
Variables Green (1) Training (2) Productivity (3)
Business services 0.11* 0.62* 0.05
(0.02) (0.27) (0.06)
Individual services 0.03 0.74* 0.26*
(0.04) (0.31) (0.07)
Constant 0.11 2.94* 2.79***
(0.11) (0.54) (0.20)
Fstatistic 43.14 16.92 30.65
p0.00 0.00 0.00
Observations 4929 4929 4929
*Parameter signicance at the 1 per cent level.
**Parameter signicance at the 10 per cent level.
***Parameter signicance at the 5 per cent level.
ENVIRONMENTAL STANDARDS AND LABOR PRODUCTIVITY 243
Copyright © 2012 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd. J. Organiz. Behav. 34, 230252 (2013)
DOI: 10.1002/job
Table 3. 3SLS estimates of the effect of environmental standards and interpersonal contacts on labor productivity.
Variables Green (1) Interpersonal contacts (2) Productivity (3)
Green 1.98* 0.82**
(1.12) (0.37)
Interpersonal contacts 0.05 0.21**
(0.04) (0.09)
ISO 9000 0.25** 0.23 0.21**
(0.02) (0.30) (0.09)
Export 0.24** 0.24 0.17
(0.03) (0.33) (0.10)
Earnings 0.00 0.00 0.00**
(0.00) (0.00) (0.00)
Size 0.00** 0.00* 0.00**
(0.00) (0.00) (0.00)
Holding 0.05** 0.15 0.04
(0.02) (0.10) (0.04)
Wage 0.01* 0.06** 0.00
(0.00) (0.01) (0.01)
Gender 0.02 0.85** 0.15*
(0.04) (0.10) (0.08)
Age 0.00* 0.01** 0.00
(0.00) (0.01) (0.00)
Education 0.01 0.14** 0.00
(0.01) (0.02) (0.01)
Management 0.02 0.70** 0.14*
(0.03) (0.17) (0.08)
Blue-collar worker 0.05 1.13** 0.23**
(0.05) (0.11) (0.10)
Seniority 0.00** 0.02** 0.00
(0.00) (0.01) (0.00)
Working hours 0.00 0.06** 0.01
(0.00) (0.01) (0.00)
Client supply center 0.03**
(0.01)
Client call center 0.07**
(0.01)
Informal 0.31**
(0.08)
Agri-food 0.03 0.02 0.05
(0.02) (0.18) (0.05)
Consumption goods 0.08** 0.07 0.12*
(0.03) (0.20) (0.06)
Cars and equipment 0.00 0.14 0.08
(0.02) (0.16) (0.05)
Energy 0.30** 0.42 0.21
(0.07) (0.58) (0.18)
Construction 0.00 0.53** 0.11
(0.03) (0.18) (0.07)
Commercial 0.02 0.27* 0.04
(0.02) (0.15) (0.05)
Transport 0.11** 0.13 0.02
(0.03) (0.21) (0.06)
Financial and real estate 0.05 0.45 0.98**
(0.05) (0.32) (0.10)
(Continues)
244 M. A. DELMAS AND S. PEKOVIC
Copyright © 2012 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd. J. Organiz. Behav. 34, 230252 (2013)
DOI: 10.1002/job
Regarding the impact of the control variables on interpersonal contacts, the variables education, wage,
management position, seniority, and working hours are positively and signicantly associated with interpersonal
contacts, whereas size and age as well as blue-collar workers and women are associated with less interpersonal
contacts.
The results reveal that some sectors are more sensitive to training or interpersonal contacts. More precisely, being
a part of agri-food; transport; nancial and real estate; and services sectors increases the probability of training.
Being a part of consumption goods; nancial and real estate; and business service sectors increases the probability
of interpersonal contacts improvement. Finally, our instrumental variable informal has a positive and statistically
signicant effect on training and interpersonal contacts.
Labor productivity
Third, we analyze the effect of the adoption of environmental standards on labor productivity (column 3 of Tables 2
and 3). The coefcient of the variable green on labor productivity is positive and statistically signicant (p<.05
and p<.001, respectively) in Tables 2 and 3. The effect is quite large because the adoption of environmental standards
is associated with a change in almost one standard deviation of the labor productivity variable in Table 2 and 1.28
standard deviation in Table 3. This corresponds to a 16% increase above the average labor productivity in Table 2
and a 21% increase in Table 3. Hence, the main hypothesis of the paperwhich is rms that have adopted
environmental standards are associated with higher labor productivity than rms that have not adopted environmental
standardsis conrmed by our results. Moreover, we obtained similar results concerning the effect of employee
training and interpersonal contacts on labor productivity.
The estimated coefcients of training and interpersonal contacts are positive and signicant; we may conclude
that training and interpersonal contacts are positively associated to labor productivity improvement. As we also nd
that environmental standards predict the adoption of training and interpersonal contacts, our results conrm
Hypotheses 2 and 3 on the mediating effect of training and interpersonal contacts on the relationship between
environmental standards and labor productivity.
Turning to the control variables, our ndings are in line with those of the previous literature regarding earnings
and wages, which we found, generally, to have a positive inuence on labor productivity, whereas size decreases
labor productivity (e.g., Conti, 2005; Pfeffer & Langton, 1993; Zwick, 2004). Interestingly, we nd a negative
relationship between ISO 9000 standard and labor productivity. This is consistent with other studies that found
that ISO 9000 certication has no explanatory power on productivity and that this standard could potentially
reduce employeesexibility and impede creativity because of its formal procedures (Levine & Toffel, 2010;
Martinez-Costa, Martinez-Lorente, & Choi, 2008).
Table 3. (Continued)
Variables Green (1) Interpersonal contacts (2) Productivity (3)
Business services 0.12** 0.19 0.11*
(0.02) (0.19) (0.06)
Individual services 0.03 0.63** 0.28**
(0.04) (0.22) (0.09)
Constant 0.23 4.80*** 2.24**
(0.22) (0.39) (0.45)
Fstatistic 44.53 64.34 26.09
p0.00 0.00 0.00
Observations 4929 4929 4929
*Parameter signicance at the 10 per cent level.
**Parameter signicance at the 1 per cent level.
***Parameter signicance at the 5 per cent level.
ENVIRONMENTAL STANDARDS AND LABOR PRODUCTIVITY 245
Copyright © 2012 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd. J. Organiz. Behav. 34, 230252 (2013)
DOI: 10.1002/job
We conducted several robustness tests. As we mentioned earlier, the estimation was performed on the 10 663
observations and yielded similar results. We also ran a simpler model including only rm-level variables. The effect
of the variable green on labor productivity was also positive and signicant (p<.01) but with a larger coefcient.
The results that we presented in this paper are therefore more conservative.
8
Discussion and Conclusion
Although the literature has focused on the impact of environmental practices on rm nancial performance, little is
known about the impact of environmental practices on employeesoutcomes, especially on labor productivity. The
subject is of great importance, especially if we consider that labor productivity is a crucial organizational outcome
that indicates the extent to which a rms labor force is efciently creating output (Huselid, 1995).
The purpose of this study was to propose a richer conceptualization of the links between the rms commitment to
the environmentwitnessed through the implementation of voluntary environmental standardsand employee
behavior. We propose several mechanisms that link the adoption of environmental standards to labor productivity.
We argue that employees may be more committed to rms that have adopted environmental standards, but that such
standards might also result in organizational changes, such as more training and better interpersonal contacts, that
may also contribute to labor productivity.
The main hypothesis of the paper, namely, that greener rms are associated with higher labor productivity, is
conrmed by our results. These ndings are consistent with studies that have argued that a rms involvement in
social causes (such as improvement of environmental reputation) generally enhances a rms reputation, which leads
to a positive impact on employee work attitudes (e.g., Brekke & Nyborg, 2008; Hess et al., 2002; Peterson, 2004).
Furthermore, our study demonstrates that the adoption of environmental standards is associated with increased
employee training and interpersonal contacts, which in turn contribute to improved labor productivity. We argue that
increased communication among workers with diverse capabilities can lead to knowledge transfer and innovation.
This is consistent with the innovation literature, which shows that the integration of divergent thoughts and perspec-
tives enables teams to solve problems and leverage opportunities, and is a critical antecedent of innovation and
productivity (Barczak, Lassk, & Mulki, 2010; Hamilton et al., 2003). We also argued that enhanced interpersonal
contacts can lead to an improved work environment and increased productivity. This is also in line with the literature
showing how group characteristics, and social interactions impact organizational outcomes (Liden, Wayne, &
Sparrowe, 2000; Parker & Wall, 1998).
These results are also consistent with the literature on high-performance work systems, which have been shown to
increase labor productivity (Guthrie, 2001; Way, 2002). The adoption of environmental standards enhances work
practices and can create a virtuous circle of positive interactions between the organization and its employees.
Policymakers and supporters of voluntary standards can emphasize these benets in order to encourage rms to
adopt environmental standards. Our ndings suggest new ways of achieving the Porter hypothesispromise of a
positive relationship between environmental practices and nancial performance. They indicate that a rms social
orientation may not only lead to environmental improvements but can also act as an enhancement tool designed to
improve work systems.
This study makes several contributions. First, we tested the effect of environmental standards on labor productiv-
ity and provided a much-needed analysis in an area of inquiry where there is limited empirical work. We used a rich
and large database that allowed us to control for both rm and employee characteristics in order to provide a robust
test of our hypotheses. Second, we described and tested several mechanisms by which the adoption of environmental
8
Results available from the authors.
246 M. A. DELMAS AND S. PEKOVIC
Copyright © 2012 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd. J. Organiz. Behav. 34, 230252 (2013)
DOI: 10.1002/job
standards may be related to labor productivity. Third, we integrated concepts from both the organizational behavior
and the business and environment literatures, potentially enriching both areas of inquiry.
This paper is, or course, not without limitations. First, our analysis was limited to the French context, and future
research should explore similar questions in an international setting, because scholars have identied international
institutional differences regarding the implementation of environmental practices (Delmas & Montes-Sancho,
2011; Delmas & Montiel, 2008). Second, scholars should examine whether the effects identied in this study
persist over time. Although our database included a rich set of variables that allowed us to control for many or-
ganizational and individual characteristics, its cross-sectional nature hindered the completion of such an analysis.
Our database allowed us to identify important associations between variables, but a longitudinal analysis would be
better suited to tease out long-term causal effects. Third, because the survey instrument was not designed specif-
ically for our study, further research could add variables that more clearly isolate our constructs. For example, the
training variable included general training as well as environmental training, and further research could separate
both to test their relationship. We introduced a comprehensive indicator for interpersonal contact that includes
nine different items ranging from the amount of contact and number of colleagues involved to the type of
interactions. However, further research could include perceptions of conicts between individuals or among teams
in such an indicator.
Fourth, whereas we focused primarily on training and interpersonal contacts, future research should test whether
additional mechanisms might affect employeesoutcomes. The literature so far has focused mostly on the impact of
the adoption of corporate social responsibility practices at the macro-level, and our research opens the path to inves-
tigate the more micro-organizational impacts of the adoption of such practices. Scholars could, for example, test the
effect of environmental standards on safety, stress, or employee absenteeism. Future research could also better
evaluate organizational commitment such as organizational citizenship behavior and organizational identication
(Evans, Davis, & Frink, 2011). In our research, we hypothesized a positive relationship between interpersonal
contacts and organizational commitment. However, research has shown that an overload of interpersonal contacts
could lead to stress and lower organizational commitment (Leiter & Maslach, 1988). Additional research could test
the relationship between environmental standards, interpersonal contacts, and job burnout or stress in the organization.
Finally, the literature argues that corporate social performance consists of many dimensions, including environ-
mental impact, and also community investment and outreach, support for diversity in the workplace, employee
involvement, and benets (Chen & Delmas, 2011). Hence, it would be interesting to examine the impact of various
environmental and social dimensions on these employee indicators.
Acknowledgement
Sanja Pekovic gratefully acknowledges the nancial support for this work from the AFNOR Performance des
Organisationsendowment in collaboration with the Paris-Dauphine Foundation.
Author biographies
Magali A. Delmas is a Professor of Management at the UCLA Anderson School of Management and the Institute of the
Environment and sustainability. She has written more than 50 articles, book chapters, and case studies in the area of busi-
ness and the natural environment.
Sanja Pekovic is a researcher at the University of Paris Dauphine (DRM-CNRS-UMR 7088). She is conducting
research on quality and environmental management, the economics of innovation, and applied econometrics.
ENVIRONMENTAL STANDARDS AND LABOR PRODUCTIVITY 247
Copyright © 2012 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd. J. Organiz. Behav. 34, 230252 (2013)
DOI: 10.1002/job
References
Abrahamson, E., & Rosenkopf, L. (1997). Social network effects on the extent of innovation diffusion: A computer simulation.
Organization Science,8(3), 289309. DOI: 10.1287/orsc.8.3.289
Aerts, W., Cormier, D., & Magnan, M. (2008). Corporate environmental disclosure, nancial markets and the media: An inter-
national perspective. Ecological Economics,64(3), 643659. DOI: 10.1016/j.ecolecon.2007.04.012
Ambec, S., & Lanoie, P. (2008). When and why does it pay to be green. Academy of Management Perspective,23,4562.
Anderson, E. W., Fornell, C., & Rust, R. (1997). Customer satisfaction, productivity, and protability: Differences between good
and services. Marketing Science,16(2), 129145.
Anton, W. R. Q., Deltas, G., & Khanna, M. (2004). Incentives for environmental self-regulation and implications for environmen-
tal performance. Journal of Environmental Economics and Management,48, 632654. DOI: 10.1016/j.jeem.2003.06.003
Arimura, T. H., Darnall, D., & Katayama, H. (2011). Is ISO 14001 a gateway to more advanced voluntary action? The case of
green supply chain management. Journal of Environmental Economics and Management,61(2), 170182. DOI:
10.1016/j.jeem.2010.11.003
Banker, R. E., Field, J. M., Schroeder, R. G., & Sinha, K. K. (1996). Impact of work teams on manufacturing performance:
A longitudinal eld study. Academy of Management Journal,39(4), 867890.
Barczak, G., Lassk, F., & Mulki, J. (2010). Antecedents of team creativity: An examination of team emotional intelligence, team
trust and collaborative culture. Creativity & Innovation Management,19(4), 332345.
Barla, P. (2007). ISO 14001 certication and environmental performance in Quebecs pulp and paper industry. Journal of
Environmental Economics and Management,53(3), 291306. DOI: 10.1016/j.jeem.2006.10.004
Barth, E. (1997). Firm-specic seniority and wages. Journal of Labor Economics,15(1), 459506.
Batt, R. (2004). Who benets from teams? Comparing workers, supervisors and managers. Industrial Relations,43(1), 183212.
Becker, G. (1964). Human capital: A theoretical and empirical analysis, with special reference to education. New York, NY:
Columbia University Press.
Blunch, N.-H., & Castro, P. (2007). Enterprise-level training in developing countries: do international standards matter?
International Journal of Training and Development,11(4), 314324.
Brammer, S., Millington, A., & Rayton, B. (2010). The contribution of corporate social responsibility to organizational commitment.
International Journal of Human Resource Management,18(10), 7011719. DOI: 10.1080/09585190701570866
Brekke, K. A., & Nyborg, K. (2008). Attracting responsible employees: Green production as labor market screening. Resource
and Energy Economics,30(4), 509526. DOI: 10.1016/j.reseneeco.2008.05.001
Burks, S., Carpenter, J., & Goette, L. (2009). Performance pay and the erosion of worker cooperation: Field experimental
evidence. Journal of Economics and Behavior Organization,70, 458469. DOI: 10.1016/j.jebo.2008.02.012
Chen, C.-M., & Delmas, M. (2011). Measuring corporate social responsibility: An efciency perspective. Production and
Operations Management,20(6), 789804.
Christmann, P. (2000). Effects of best practicesof environmental management on cost advantage: The role of complementary
assets. Academy of Management Journal,43(4), 663680.
Churchill, G. A., Jr. (1979). A paradigm for developing better measures of marketing constructs. Journal of Marketing Research,
16,6473.
Cohen, D., & Prusak, L. (2001). In good company: How social capital makes Organizations Work. Cambridge, MA: Harvard
Business Press.
Conti, G. (2005). Training, productivity and wages in Italy. Labor Economics,12, 557576. DOI: 10.1016/j.labeco.2005.05.007
Corbett, C. J., & Kirsch, D. A. (2001). International diffusion of ISO 14000 certication. Production and Operations Management,
10, 327342. DOI: 10.1111/j.1937-5956.2001.tb00378.x
Corbett, C. J., & Luca, A. (2002). Global survey on ISO 9000 and ISO 14000: Summary of ndings. Unpublished manuscript,
The Anderson School, University of California at Los Angeles, Los Angeles, California.
Darnall, N., Gallagher, D. R., Andrews, R. N. L., & Amaral, D. (2000). Environmental management systems: Opportunities for
improved environmental and business strategy? Environmental Quality Management,9(3), 19. DOI: 10.1002/1520-6483(200021)
Darnall, N., Henriques, I., & Sadorsky, P. (2010). Adopting proactive environmental practices: The inuence of stakeholders and
rm size. Journal of Management Studies,47(6), 10721094. DOI: 10.1111/j.1467-6486.2009.00873.x
Dearden, L., Reed, H., & Van Reenen, J. (2006). The impact of training on productivity and wages: Evidence from British panel
data. Oxford Bulletin of Economics and Statistics,68(4), 397421. DOI: 10.1111/j.1468-0084.2006.00170
Delmas, M. (2000). Barriers and incentives to the adoption of ISO 14001 in the United States. Duke Environmental Law and
Policy Forum,Fall:138.
Delmas, M. (2001). Stakeholders and competitive advantage: The case of ISO 14001. Production and Operation Management,
10(3), 343358. DOI: 10.1111/j.1937-5956.2001.tb00379.x
Delmas, M. (2002). The diffusion of environmental management standards in Europe and in the United States: An institutional
perspective. Policy Sciences,35(1), 91119. DOI: 10.1023/A:1016108804453
248 M. A. DELMAS AND S. PEKOVIC
Copyright © 2012 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd. J. Organiz. Behav. 34, 230252 (2013)
DOI: 10.1002/job
Delmas, M., & Grant, L. (2010). Eco-labeling strategies and price-premium: The wine industry puzzle. Business & Society.
http://bas.sagepub.com/content/early/2010/03/04/0007650310362254.full.pdf+html. DOI: 10.1177/0007650310362254
Delmas, M., & Montes-Sancho, M. (2011). An institutional perspective on the diffusion of international management
system standards: The case of the environmental management standard ISO 14001. Business Ethics Quarterly,21(1), 103132.
Delmas, M., & Montiel, I. (2008). The diffusion of voluntary international management standards: Responsible care, ISO 9000
and ISO 14001 in the chemical industry. Policy Studies Journal,36(1), 6593. DOI: 10.1111/j.1541-0072.2007.00254.x
Delmas, M., & Montiel, I. (2009). Greening the supply chain: When is customer pressure effective? Journal of Economics and
Management Strategy,18(1), 171201. DOI: 10.1111/j.1530-9134.2009.00211.x
Delmas, M., & Toffel, M. (2008). Organizational responses to environmental demands: Opening the Black Box. Strategic
Management Journal,29(10), 10271055.
Delmas, M., & Young, O. 2009. Governance for the environment: New perspectives. Edited volume. Cambridge, MA:
Cambridge University Press.
Denton, K. D. (1999). Employee involvement, pollution control and pieces to the puzzle. Environmental Management and
Health,10(2), 105111.
Dutton, J. E., Dukerich, J. M., & Harquail, C. V. (1994). Organizational images and member identication. Administrative
Science Quarterly,39, 239263.
Eriksson, C., & Jacoby, S. (2003). The effects of employer networks on workplace innovation and training. Industrial & Labor
Relations Review,56(2), 203223.
Evans, W. R., Davis, W. D., & Frink, D. D. (2011). An examination of employee reactions to perceived corporate citizenship.
Journal of Applied Social Psychology,41(4), 938964.
Florida, R., & Davidson, D. (2001). Gaining from green management: Environmental management systems inside and outside the
factory. California Management Review,43(3), 6484.
Frank, R. H. (2003). What price the moral high ground? Ethical dilemmas in competitive environments. Princeton, NJ: Princeton
University Press.
Frazis, H., Gittleman, M., & Joyce, M. (2000). Correlates of training: An analysis using both employer and employee character-
istics. Industrial & Labor Relations Review,53, 443462.
Grant, R. M. (1996). Toward a knowledge-based theory of the rm. Strategic Management Journal,17(Special Issue), 109122.
Greening, D. W., & Turban, D. B. (2000). Corporate social performance as a competitive advantage in attracting a quality work-
force. Business & Society,39, 254280. DOI: 10.1177/000765030003900302
Grolleau, G., Mzoughi, N., & Pekovic, S. (2007). Chemical rmsregistration for the responsible care program and the ISO
14001 standard: A comparative approach. Economics Bulletin,12,113.
Grolleau, G., Mzoughi, N., & Pekovic, S. (2012). Green not (only) for prot: An empirical examination of the effect of environ-
mental-related standards on employeesrecruitment. Resource and Energy Economics,34(1), 7492.
Grolleau, G., Mzoughi, N., & Thomas, A. (2007). What drives agrifood rms to register for an environmental management
system? European Review of Agriculture Economic,34,123. DOI: 10.1093/erae/jbm012
Guthrie, J. (2001). High-involvement work practices, turnover, and productivity: Evidence from New Zealand. Academy of
Management Journal,44(1), 180190.
Hamilton, B. H., Nickerson, J. A., & Hideo, O. (2003). Team incentives and worker heterogeneity: An empirical analysis of the
impact of teams on productivity and participation. Journal of Political Economy,111(3), 46597.
Hart, S. L. (1995). A natural-resource-based view of the rm. Academy of Management Review,20(4), 9861014.
Hart, S. L. (2005). Capitalism at the crossroads: The unlimited business opportunities in solving the worlds most difcult
problems. Upper Saddle River, NJ: Wharton School Publishing.
Henriques, I., & Sadorsky, P. (1996). The determinants of an environmentally responsive rm: An empirical approach. Journal of
Environmental Economics and Management,30, 381395. DOI: 10.1006/jeem.1996.0026
Hess, D., Rogovsky, N., & Dunfee, T. (2002). The next wave of corporate community involvement: Corporate social initiatives.
California Management Review,44(2), 110125.
Hopkins, K. (2005). Supervisor support and worklife integration: A social identity perspective. In E. E. Kossek, & S. J. Lambert
(Eds.), Work and life integration: Organizational, cultural and individual perspectives (pp. 445468). Mahwah, NJ: Erbaum.
Huselid, M. A. (1995). The impact of human resource management practices on turnover, productivity, and corporate nancial
performance. Academy of Management Journal,38, 635672.
ISO. (1996). Retrieved from www.iso.org
Jackson, S. E., Renwick, D. W. S., Jabbour, C. J. C., & Muller-Camen, M. (2011). State-of-the-art and future directions for green
human resource management: Introduction to the special issue. Zeitschrift für Personalforschung (German Journal of
Research in Human Resource Management),25(2), 99116.
Jennings, P. D., Cyr, D., & Moore, L. F. (1995). Human resource management on the Pacic Rim: An integration. In L. F. Moore,
& P. D. Jennings (Eds.), Human resource management on the Pacic Rim: Institutions, practices, and attitudes (pp. 351379).
Berlin: de Gruyter.
ENVIRONMENTAL STANDARDS AND LABOR PRODUCTIVITY 249
Copyright © 2012 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd. J. Organiz. Behav. 34, 230252 (2013)
DOI: 10.1002/job
Jones, C., & Hamilton Volpe, E. (2011). Organizational identication: Extending our understanding of social identities through
social networks. Journal of Organizational Behavior,32, 413434. DOI: 10.1002/job.694
Khanna, M., & Anton, W. R. (2002). Corporate environmental management: Regulatory and market-based incentives. Land
Economics,78(4), 539558.
Khanna, M., & Damon, L. A. (1999). EPAs voluntary 33/50 program: Impact on toxic releases and economic performance of
rms. Journal of Environmental Economics and Management,37(1), 125. DOI: 10.1006/jeem.1998.1057
King, A., & Lenox, M. (2002). Exploring the locus of protable pollution reduction. Management Science,48(2), 289299.
doi: 10.1287/mnsc.48.2.289.258
Koch, M. J., & McGrath, R. G. (1996). Improving labor productivity: Human resource management policies do matter. Strategic
Management Journal,17(5), 335354. DOI: 10.1002/(SICI)1097-0266(199605)17:5<335::AID-SMJ814>3.0.CO;2-R
Koh, H. C., & Boo, E. H. Y. (2001). The link between organizational ethics and job satisfaction: A study of managers in
Singapore. Journal of Business Ethics,29, 309324. DOI: 10.1023/A:1010741519818
Konar, S., & Cohen, M. A. (2001). Does the market value environmental performance? The Review of Economics and Statistics,
83(2), 281289. DOI: 10.1162/00346530151143815
Krueger, A., & Schkade, D. (2008). Sorting in the labor market: Do gregarious workers ock to interactive jobs? Journal of
Human Resources,43, 859883.
Lanfranchi, J., & Pekovic, S. (2010). How green is my rm? Worker well-being and job involvement in environmentally related
certied rms. Working paper. Noisy-le-Grand, France: CEE.
Leiter, M. P., & Maslach, C. (1988). The impact of interpersonal environment on burnout and organizational commitment.
Journal of Organizational Behavior,9, 297308.
Levine, D. I., & Toffel, M. W. (2010). Quality management and job quality: How the ISO 9001 standard for quality management
systems affects employees and employers. Management Science,56(6), 978996. DOI: 10.1287/mnsc.1100.1159
Liden, R. C., Wayne, S. J., & Sparrowe, R. T. (2000). The examination of the mediating role of psychological empowerment on
the relations between the job, interpersonal relationships, and work outcomes. Journal of Applied Psychology,85, 407416.
Liebler, C. A., & Sandefur, G. D. (2002). Gender differences in the exchange of social support with friends, neighbors, and
co-workers at midlife. Social Science Research,31, 364391. DOI: 10.1016/S0049-089X (02)00006-6
Lynch, L. M. (1994). Training and the Private Sector, NBER Comparative Labor Market Series. Chicago, IL: University of
Chicago Press.
Lynch, L. M., & Black, S. E. (1998). Beyond the incidence of employer-provided training. Industrial & Labor Relations Review,
52,6481.
Maddala, G. S. (1983). Limited-dependent and qualitative variables in econometrics. Cambridge, MA: Cambridge University
Press.
Margolis, J., & Walsh, J. (2003). Misery loves companies: Rethinking social initiatives by business. Administrative Science
Quarterly,48(2), 268305.
Martinez-Costa, M., Martinez-Lorente, A. R., & Choi, T. Y. (2008). Simultaneous consideration of TQM and ISO 9000 on
performance and motivation: An empirical study of Spanish companies. International Journal of Production Economics,
113(1), 2339.
McManus, M., & Sanders, L. (2001). Integrating an environmental management system into a business and operating culture:
The real value of an EMS. Pollution Engineering,33(5), 2427.
Medoff, J., & Abraham, K. (1980). Experience, performance and earnings. Quarterly Journal of Economics,95, 703736.
Mohrman, S. A., & Novelli, Jr. L. (1985). Beyond testimonials: Learning from a quality circles programme. Journal of
Occupational Behavior,6(2), 93110.
Morrow, D., & Rondinelli, D. A. (2002). Adopting environmental management systems: Motivations and results of ISO 14001
and EMAS certication. European Management Journal,20(2), 159171. DOI: 10.1016/S0263-2373(02)00026-9
Nakamura, M., Takahashi, T., & Vertinsky, I. (2001). Why Japanese rms choose to certify: A study of managerial responses to
environmental issues. Journal of Environmental Economics and Management,42,2352. DOI: 10.1006/jeem.2000.1148
Nash, J., & Ehrenfeld, J. (1997). Codes of environmental management practice: Assessing their potential as tools for change.
Annual Review of Energy and Environment,22, 487535. DOI: 10.1146/annurev.energy.22.1.487
Nishitani, K. (2009). An empirical study of the initial adoption of ISO 14001 in Japanese manufacturing rms. Ecological
Economics,68(3), 669679. DOI: 10.1016/j.ecolecon.2008.05.023
Noe, R. A. (1986). Trainee attributes and attitudes: Neglected inuences of training effectiveness. Academy of Management
Review,11, 736749.
OhEocha, M. (2000). A study of the inuence of company culture, communications and employee attitudes on the use of 5S for
environmental management at Cooke Brothers Ltd. The TQM Magazine,12(5), 321330.
Orlitsky, M., Schmidt, F., & Rynes, S. (2003). Corporate social and nancial performance: A metaanalysis. Organization Studies,
24, 403441.
Orsato, R. J. (2006). Competitive environmental strategies: When does it pay to be green? California Management Review,48(2), 127143.
250 M. A. DELMAS AND S. PEKOVIC
Copyright © 2012 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd. J. Organiz. Behav. 34, 230252 (2013)
DOI: 10.1002/job
Parker, S. K., & Wall, T. D. (1998). Job and work design: Organizing work to promote well-being and effectiveness.SanFrancisco,
CA: Sage.
Pekovic, S. (2010). The determinants of ISO 9000 certication: A comparison of the manufacturing and service sectors. Journal
of Economic Issues,44(4), 895914. DOI: 10.2753/JEI0021-3624440403
Perez, O., Amichai-Hamburger, Y., & Shterental, T. (2009). The dynamic of corporate self-regulation: ISO 14001, environmental
commitment, and organizational citizenship behavior. Law & Society Review,43(3), 593630.
Peterson, D. K. (2004). The relationship between perceptions of corporate citizenship and organizational commitment. Business
& Society,43, 296319. DOI: 10.1177/0007650304268065
Pfeffer, J. (1994). Competitive advantage though people. Boston, MA: Harvard Business School.
Pfeffer, J., & Langton, N. (1993). The effect of wage dispersion on satisfaction, productivity, and working collaboratively:
Evidence from College and University Faculty. Administrative Science Quarterly,38(3), 382407.
Pindyck, S. R., & Rubinfeld, D. L. (1991). Econometric models and economic forecasts. New York, NY: McGraw-Hill.
Porter, M. E. (1985). Competitive advantage. New York, NY: The Free Press.
Porter, M. E., & Van Der Linde, C. (1995). Toward a new conception of the environmentcompetitiveness relationship. Journal
of Economic Perspectives,9(4), 97118.
Ramus, C. A., & Steger, U. (2000). The roles of supervisory behaviors and environmental policy in employee ecoinitiativesat
leading edge European companies. Academy of Management Journal,43, 605626.
Rennison, L. W., & Turcotte, J. (2004). Productivity and wages: Measuring the effect of human capital and technology use from
linked employeremployee data. Working paper. Department of Finance, Economic and Fiscal Policy Branch. Canada, No.
2004-01.
Rondinelli, D., & Vastag, G. (2000). Panacea, common sense, or just a label? The value of ISO 14001 environmental manage-
ment systems. European Management Journal,18(5), 499510. DOI: 10.1016/S0263-2373(00)00039-6
Rothenberg, S. (2003). Knowledge content and worker participation in environmental management at NUMMI. Journal of
Management Studies,40(7), 17831802.
Salis, S., & Williams, A. M. (2010). Knowledge sharing through face-to-face communication and labor productivity: Evidence
from British workplaces. British Journal of Industrial Relations,48(2), 436459. DOI: 10.1111/j.1467-8543.2009.00762.x
Sammalisto, K., & Brorson, T. (2008). Training and communication in the implementation of environmental management
systems (ISO 14001). A case study at the University of Gävle, Sweden. Journal of Cleaner Production,16, 299309.
doi: 10.1016/j.jclepro.2006.07.029
Schuler, R. S., & Jackson, S. E. (1987). Linking competitive strategies with human resource management practices. The Academy
of Management Executive,1(3), 207219.
Schultz, T. (1961). Investment in human capital. American Economic Review,51,117.
Shrivastava, P. (1995). Environmental technologies and competitive advantage. Strategic Management Journal,16, 183200.
DOI: 10.1002/smj.4250160923
Sousa-Poza, A., & Ziegler, A. (2003). Asymmetric information about workersproductivity as a cause for inefcient long
working hours. Labour Economics,10(6), 727747.
Toffel, M. (2000). Anticipating greener supply chain demands: One Singapore companys journey to ISO 14001. In R. Hillary
(Ed.), ISO 14001: Case studies and practical experiences. Shefeld: Greenleaf Publishing.
Torgler, B., & Garcia-Valinas, M. A. (2007). The determinants of individualsattitudes towards preventing environmental
damage. Ecological Economics,63, 536552. DOI: 10.1016/j.ecolecon.2006.12.013
Turban, D. B., & Greening, D. W. (1997). Corporate social performance and organizational attractiveness to prospective
employees. Academy of Management Journal,40, 658672.
Veum, J. R. (1993). Training among young adults: Who, what kind, and for how long? Monthly Labor Review,116(8), 2732.
Viswesvaran, C., Deshpande, S. P., & Joseph, J. (1998). Job satisfaction as a function of top management support for ethical
behaviour. Journal of Business Ethics,17, 365371. DOI: 10.1023/A:1017956516324
Way, S. A. (2002). High performance work systems and intermediate indicators of rm performance within the US small business
sector. Journal of Management,28(6), 765785.
Welch, E. W., Mori, Y., & Aoyagi-Usui, M. (2002). Voluntary adoption of ISO 14001 in Japan: Mechanisms, stages and effects.
Business Strategy and the Environment,11,4362.
Welford, R. (1998). Corporate environmental management 1. London: Earthscan Publications.
Zwick, T. (2004). Employee participation and productivity. Labor Economics,11, 715740. DOI: 10.1016/j.labeco.2004.02.001
Zyglidopoulos, S. C. (2002). The social and environmental responsibilities of multinationals: Evidence from the Brent Spar.
Journal of Business Ethics,36(1/2), 141151. DOI: 10.1023/A:1014262025188
ENVIRONMENTAL STANDARDS AND LABOR PRODUCTIVITY 251
Copyright © 2012 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd. J. Organiz. Behav. 34, 230252 (2013)
DOI: 10.1002/job
APPENDIX 1
PEARSON CORRELATION COEFFICIENTS
Labor
productivity Green Training
Interpersonal
contacts
Client
call
center
Client
supply
center Informal
ISO
9000 Export Earnings Size Holding Gender Age Education Wage Seniority Management
Blue-
collar
worker
Working
hours
Labor
productivity
1.00 —— —— —————— — — — —
Green 0.10* 1.00 —— ———— ——— — — — —
Training 0.12* 0.12* 1.00 —— —————— — —— — —
Interpersonal
contacts
0.13* 0.03 0.23* 1.00 —— ——————— — —
Client call
center
0.09* 0.17* 0.07* 0.06* 1.00 ———————— — —— — —
Client supply
center
0.12* 0.13* 0.08* 0.08* 0.21* 1.00 —————— — —— — —
Informal 0.09* 0.04 0.11* 0.10* 0.08* 0.05* 1.00 ————— — —— — —
ISO 9000 0.11* 0.38* 0.16* 0.07* 0.30* 0.11* 0.08* 1.00 ———— — —— — —
Export 0.20* 0.24* 0.11* 0.05* 0.16* 0.04* 0.08* 0.24* 1.00 ——— — ——
Earnings 0.15* 0.09* 0.03 0.05* 0.03 0.07 0.02 0.04* 0.03 1.00 ——— — ——
Size 0.04* 0.13* 0.05* 0.04* 0.05* 0.09* 0.03 0.08* 0.05* 0.75* 1.00 ——— — ——
Holding 0.17* 0.17* 0.15* 0.11* 0.18* 0.17* 0.11* 0.24* 0.20* 0.04* 0.08* 1.00 ——— — ——
Gender 0.04* 0.03* 0.15* 0.14* 0.08* 0.04* 0.20* 0.13* 0.05* 0.00 0.01 0.02 1.00 ——— — ——
Age 0.02 0.05* 0.00 0.02 0.03 0.02 0.00 0.07* 0.07* 0.01 0.01 0.04 0.03 1.00 —— — ——
Education 0.22* 0.00 0.07* 0.32 0.02 0.10* 0.08* 0.01 0.04* 0.07* 0.05 0.09* 0.07* 0.32* 1.00 —— — —
Wage 0.30* 0.08* 0.11* 0.41* 0.07* 0.11* 0.09* 0.08* 0.13* 0.07* 0.06* 0.15* 0.14* 0.22* 0.41* 1.00 ——
Seniority 0.06* 0.12* 0.09* 0.04* 0.05* 0.01 0.05* 0.11* 0.14* 0.00 0.01 0.08* 0.03 0.63* 0.28* 0.14* 1.00 ——
Management 0.20* 0.00 0.06* 0.36* 0.05* 0.07* 0.08* 0.02 0.05* 0.08* 0.08* 0.11* 0.09* 0.09* 0.47* 0.66* 0.01 1.00 ——
Blue-collar
worker
0.12* 0.04* 0.02 0.29* 0.09* 0.11* 0.05* 0.13* 0.08* 0.04* 0.04* 0.04* 0.30* 0.04 0.50* 0.33* 0.06* 0.35* 1.00
Working
hours
0.16* 0.02 0.08* 0.30* 0.07* 0.02 0.06* 0.03 0.02 0.04 0.03 0.04* 0.24* 0.09* 0.19* 0.40* 0.01 0.38* 0.12* 1.00
*p<.01.
252 M. A. DELMAS AND S. PEKOVIC
Copyright © 2012 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd. J. Organiz. Behav. 34, 230252 (2013)
DOI: 10.1002/job
... Dentinho et al. (2021) also consider, within the framework of the relationship between the SDGs and sustainability, to specify the assumptions of each study of sustainable development in terms of systemic impacts on the various dimensions of the goals of sustainable development. In their study, Dentinho et al., (2023) use Q analysis and examine the preferences of people across different cities in Europe in relation to the situation of different cities in terms of indicators of sustainable development goals. ...
... (CENIA, n.d.) Eco-labels are also a helping hand in detecting greenwashing. In their conclusions, Delmas & Pekovic (2013) state that green certifications should be used by managers to increase productivity, potential employees as a sign of a better working environment, and investors as an indicator of best management practices. ...
... For employees, this means more effective communication and they will acquire skills faster in the given area of the documented process. At the same time Delmas & Pekovic (2013) state that companies that voluntarily adopt international practices, ecolabels or ISO 14001 standards have employees who are 16 percent more productive than average, employees in such green companies are more motivated, receive more training and benefit from better interpersonal relationships. ...
Conference Paper
Full-text available
While certification is generally understood as a third-party confirmation that the requirements set out in an agreed framework have been met, sustainable development is seen as a type of development that also seeks to eliminate or mitigate the negative impacts of the way human society has developed to date without compromising the ability of future generations to meet their basic needs and maintain their standard of living. In integrating ESG criteria into corporate strategies, ISO standards and other certifications are proving to be important tools. The aim of this paper is to assess the interrelationship between certification and the concept of sustainability in the context of market competitiveness. The authors consider that certification is a key condition for sustainability, especially because it creates standards without which there would be inconsistencies in the applied processes. And it is the alignment of set processes through certification that is a prerequisite for successful sustainable development and market competitiveness.
... (Delmas and Pekovic, 2013) . (Astuti and Wahyuni, 2020) . ...
Article
Full-text available
This study aimed at investigating the impact of green human resources management (GHRM) practices on job performance in light of resistance to change as a mediating variable. To achieve the study objectives, the descriptive analytical approach was used. The questionnaire was distributed to (66) companies. Comprehensive survey method was used to distribute the questionnaire to (200) occupants of leadership and supervisory positions in industrial companies that apply (GHRM) practices or have an environmental certification. The results showed that (GHRM) has a positive direct impact on job performance. The study also concluded that resistance to change has a negative impact on job performance. In addition, the study found that (green training and development, green reward and compensation) decrease resistance to change. Moreover, the results showed that resistance to change mediates the impact of (green training and development, green reward and compensation) on job performance; whereas resistance to change does not mediate the impact of (green job design and analysis, green staffing, performance management and appraisal) on job performance. The study recommended to increase employee awareness and knowledge of green practices and environmental sustainability. Keywords: Green job design and analysis, Green training and development, Green reward and compensation, Green employment, Green performance management and appraisal, Green employee, Green staffing, Change resistance.   ، ّ ‫ﻠ‬ ‫اﻟ‬ 18 ‫د‬ ‫اﻟﻌ‬ ، 1 ، 2022-146-© 2022 ‫ﳏ‬ ‫اﳊﻘﻮق‬ ‫ﲨﻴﻊ‬ ‫اﻷردﻧﻴﺔ.‬ ‫اﳉﺎﻣﻌﺔ‬ ‫اﻟﻌﻠﻤﻲ/‬ ‫اﻟﺒﺤﺚ‬ ‫ﻋﻤﺎدة‬ ‫ﻔﻮﻇﺔ.‬ 1 ‫و‬ ‫ﺷ‬ ‫ﺎدة‬ ‫ﻋ‬ ‫ﺔ،‬ ‫اﻟ‬ ‫ﻠﻘﺎء‬ ‫اﻟ‬ ‫ﺟﺎﻣﻌﺔ‬ ‫ﺔ،‬ ‫اﻟ‬ ‫ارد‬ ‫اﻟ‬ ‫ة‬ ‫إدار‬ ‫ﻓﻲ‬ ‫ﻣﺎﺟ‬ ‫ن‬ ‫ﺔ.‬ ‫اﻷردﻧ‬ ‫ﺎﻣﻌﺔ‬ ‫اﻟ‬ ‫ﺔ،‬ ‫ﻠ‬ ‫اﻟ‬ 1 ‫و‬ ‫ﻌﺎر‬ ‫اﻟ‬ ‫د‬ ‫ﻣ‬ ‫ﺳ‬ 2 ‫ﻣ‬ ‫ﻠ‬ ‫ـ‬ ‫اﺳﺔ‬ ‫ر‬ ‫اﻟ‬ ‫ﻩ‬ ‫ﻫ‬ ‫ﻓ‬ ‫ﻫ‬ ‫ا‬ ‫إﻟﻰ‬ ‫اء‬ ‫اﻟ‬ ‫ﺔ‬ ‫اﻟ‬ ‫ارد‬ ‫اﻟ‬ ‫ة‬ ‫إدار‬ ‫ﺎرﺳﺎت‬ ‫ﻣ‬ ‫ﻣ‬ ‫إﻟﻰ‬ ‫ف‬ ‫ﻌ‬ ‫ﻟ‬ ‫ﺎﺷ‬ ‫اﻟ‬ ‫وﻏ‬ ‫ﺎﺷ‬ ‫اﻟ‬ ‫ﻫﺎ‬ ‫أﺛ‬ ‫و‬ ‫اﻟ‬ ‫اﻷداء‬ ‫ﻓﻲ‬ ‫ﻔﻲ‬ ‫ﻣﻘﺎوﻣﺔ‬ ‫ء‬ ‫ﺿ‬ ‫ﻓﻲ‬ ‫اﺳﺔ‬ ‫ر‬ ‫اﻟ‬ ‫ت‬ ‫اﻋ‬. ‫وﺳ‬ ‫ﻐ‬ ‫ﻐ‬ ‫اﻟ‬ ‫ﻠﻲ‬ ‫ﻠ‬ ‫اﻟ‬ ‫ﺻﻔﻲ‬ ‫اﻟ‬ ‫ﻬﺞ‬ ‫اﻟ‬. ‫ﺗ‬ ‫ا‬ ‫ﺢ‬ ‫اﻟ‬ ‫ب‬ ‫أﺳﻠ‬ ‫ام‬ ‫ﺎﺳ‬ ‫ﺎﻧﺔ‬ ‫اﻻﺳ‬ ‫ﻊ‬ ‫ز‬ ‫ﺗ‬ ‫ﺎﻣﻞ‬ ‫ﻟ‬) ‫ﻋﻠﻰ‬ 200 ‫اء‬ ‫اﻟ‬ ‫ﺔ‬ ‫اﻟ‬ ‫ارد‬ ‫اﻟ‬ ‫ة‬ ‫إدار‬ ‫ﺎرﺳﺎت‬ ‫ﻣ‬ ‫ﺗ‬ ‫ﻲ‬ ‫اﻟ‬ ‫ﺔ‬ ‫ﺎ‬ ‫اﻟ‬ ‫ﺎت‬ ‫اﻟ‬ ‫ﻓﻲ‬ ‫ﺔ‬ ‫ا‬ ‫اﻹﺷ‬ ‫و‬ ‫ﺔ‬ ‫ﺎد‬ ‫اﻟ‬ ‫ﺎﺻ‬ ‫اﻟ‬ ‫ﺷﺎﻏﻠﻲ‬ ‫ﻣ‬ (‫أ‬ ‫و‬ ‫دﻫﺎ‬ ‫وﻋ‬ ‫ﺔ،‬ ‫ﺑ‬ ‫دة‬ ‫ﺟ‬ ‫ﺷﻬﺎدة‬ ‫ﯾﻬﺎ‬ ‫ﻟ‬) 66 ‫ﺔ‬ ‫ﺷ‬ (. ‫ا‬ ‫ﺔ‬ ‫اﻟ‬ ‫ارد‬ ‫اﻟ‬ ‫ة‬ ‫إدار‬ ‫ﺎرﺳﺎت‬ ‫ﻟ‬ ‫ﺎﺷ‬ ‫ﻣ‬ ‫ﺎﺑﻲ‬ ‫إ‬ ‫أﺛ‬ ‫د‬ ‫وﺟ‬ ‫إﻟﻰ‬ ‫اﺳﺔ‬ ‫ر‬ ‫اﻟ‬ ‫ﺻﻠ‬ ‫وﺗ‬ ‫اء‬ ‫ﻟ‬ ‫ﻓ‬ ، ‫ﺳ‬ ‫ﺎ‬ ‫ﻟ‬ ‫ﺎﻹﺿﺎﻓﺔ‬ ‫ﻔﻲ.‬ ‫اﻟ‬ ‫اﻷداء‬ ‫ﻓﻲ‬ ‫ﻐ‬ ‫اﻟ‬ ‫ﻘﺎوﻣﺔ‬ ‫ﻟ‬ ‫ﺎﺷ‬ ‫ﻣ‬ ‫ﻲ‬ ‫ﺳﻠ‬ ‫أﺛ‬ ‫د‬ ‫وﺟ‬ ‫إﻟﻰ‬ ‫اﺳﺔ‬ ‫ر‬ ‫اﻟ‬ ‫ﺻﻠ‬ ‫ﺗ‬ ‫ﺎ‬ ‫ﻔﻲ.‬ ‫اﻟ‬ ‫اﻷداء‬ ‫ﻓﻲ‬ ‫ﺈن‬ ‫ﺗ‬ ‫اء(‬ ‫اﻟ‬ ‫ﺎت‬ ‫ﻌ‬ ‫اﻟ‬ ‫و‬ ، ‫اﻷﺧ‬ ‫اﻟ‬ ‫و‬ ‫ر‬ ‫)اﻟ‬ ‫ر‬ ‫)اﻟ‬ ‫أﺛ‬ ‫ﻐ‬ ‫اﻟ‬ ‫ﻣﻘﺎوﻣﺔ‬ ‫ﺳ‬ ‫ﺗ‬ ‫ﺎ‬. ‫ﻐ‬ ‫اﻟ‬ ‫ﻣﻘﺎوﻣﺔ‬ ‫ﻞ‬ ‫ﺗﻘﻠ‬ ‫إﻟﻰ‬ ‫د‬ ‫و‬ ‫اﻟ‬ ‫اﻟ‬ ‫و‬ ‫اء،‬ ‫اﻟ‬ ‫ﻔﺔ‬ ‫اﻟ‬ ‫وﺗ‬ ‫ﻞ‬ ‫ﻠ‬ ‫)ﺗ‬ ‫أﺛ‬ ‫ﻐ‬ ‫اﻟ‬ ‫ﻣﻘﺎوﻣﺔ‬ ‫ﺳ‬ ‫ﺗ‬ ‫ﻻ‬ ‫ﺎ‬ ‫ﺑ‬ ‫ﻔﻲ،‬ ‫اﻟ‬ ‫اﻷداء‬ ‫ﻓﻲ‬ ‫اء(‬ ‫اﻟ‬ ‫ﺎت‬ ‫ﻌ‬ ‫اﻟ‬ ‫و‬ ‫اﻷﺧ‬ ‫أﺑ‬ ‫و‬ ‫ﻔﻲ.‬ ‫اﻟ‬ ‫اﻷداء‬ ‫ﻓﻲ‬ (‫اﻷﺧ‬ ‫اﻷداء‬ ‫وﺗﻘ‬ ‫ة‬ ‫دار‬ ‫و‬ ، ‫اﻷﺧ‬ ‫ﺎت‬ ‫اﻟ‬ ‫ﻟ‬ ‫ﻋﻲ‬ ‫اﻟ‬ ‫ﻧ‬ ‫ة‬ ‫ور‬ ‫ﺿ‬ ‫اﺳﺔ‬ ‫ر‬ ‫اﻟ‬ ‫ﻩ‬ ‫ﻫ‬ ‫ﻪ‬ ‫أوﺻ‬ ‫ﻣﺎ‬ ‫ز‬ ‫ﺔ‬ ‫اﻟ‬ ‫اﻣﺔ‬ ‫اﻻﺳ‬ ‫ل‬ ‫ﺣ‬ ‫اد‬ ‫اﻷﻓ‬ ‫و‬. ‫ﺎت‬ ‫ﻠ‬ ‫اﻟ‬ ‫اﻟﺔ‬ ‫اﻟ‬ : ‫ر‬ ‫اﻟ‬ ، ‫اﻷﺧ‬ ‫اﻟ‬ ، ‫اﻷﺧ‬ ‫ﻔﺔ‬ ‫اﻟ‬ ‫وﺗ‬ ‫ﻞ‬ ‫ﻠ‬ ‫ﺗ‬ ‫اﻟ‬ ‫و‬ ، ‫اﻷﺧ‬ ‫و‬ ‫ة‬ ‫إدار‬ ، ‫اﻷﺧ‬ ‫اﻷداء‬ ‫ﺗﻘ‬ ‫اء،‬ ‫اﻟ‬ ‫ﺎت‬ ‫ﻌ‬ ‫اﻟ‬ ‫اء‬ ‫اﻟ‬ ‫ﺎﺋﻒ‬ ‫اﻟ‬. ‫ﺔ‬ ‫ﻟﻠ‬ ‫ﻘ‬ ‫ﺗ‬ ‫ﻻ‬ ‫ﺎرﺳﺎت‬ ‫اﻟ‬ ‫ﻩ‬ ‫ﻫ‬ ‫أن‬ ‫ﺎﻟ‬ ‫ﯾ‬ ‫اﻟ‬ ‫وﻣ‬. ‫اﻻ‬ ‫ﻘ‬ ‫ﺗ‬ ‫ﻓﻲ‬ ‫ﺎﻫ‬ ‫ﻟ‬ ‫ذﻟ‬ ‫ﻫﺎ‬ ‫اﺋ‬ ‫ﻓ‬ ‫ﺎوز‬ ‫ﺗ‬ ‫ﺑﻞ‬ ، ‫ﻓﻘ‬ ‫ﺔ‬ ‫اﻟ‬ ‫اﻣﺔ‬ ‫ﺳ‬ ‫اف‬ ‫أﻫ‬ ‫ﻲ‬ ‫ﺎﻓ‬ ‫اﻟ‬ ‫ﻗﻔﻬﺎ‬ ‫ﻣ‬ ‫وﺗ‬ ‫ﺔ‬ ‫اﻟ‬ (Delmas and Pekovic, 2013). ‫و‬ ‫ل‬ ‫ﺣ‬ ‫ر‬ ‫ﺗ‬ ‫اﻷردن‬ ‫ﻓﻲ‬ ‫ﺟﻬﺎت‬ ‫ﺗ‬ ‫ة‬ ‫ﻋ‬ ‫ﺎك‬ ‫ﻫ‬ ‫ﺎﻗﺔ‬ ‫اﻟ‬ ‫و‬ ‫ﺎﻩ‬ ‫اﻟ‬ ‫ﺎﻋﺎت‬ ‫ﻗ‬ ‫ﻞ‬ ‫ﺗ‬ ، ‫اﻷﺧ‬ ‫ﻟﻠ‬ ‫ﺎت‬ ‫اﺗ‬ ‫اﺳ‬ ‫وﺿﻊ‬ ‫وﺗ‬ ‫ﺎﺣﺔ.‬ ‫اﻟ‬ ‫و‬ ‫ﺎت‬ ‫ﻔﺎ‬ ‫اﻟ‬ ‫و‬ ‫ﻘﻞ‬ ‫اﻟ‬ ‫و‬ ‫اﻋﺔ‬ ‫ر‬ ‫اﻟ‬ ‫و‬ ‫ﻣ‬ ‫ﺎﻋﺎت‬ ‫اﻟﻘ‬ ‫ﻩ‬ ‫ﻫ‬ ‫ﻌ‬ ‫ﻞ‬ ‫ﺗﻘﻠ‬ ‫ﻓﻲ‬ ‫اﻟ‬ ‫ورﻫﺎ‬ ‫ﻟ‬ ‫اﻷردن‬ ‫ﻓﻲ‬ ‫اﻣﺔ‬ ‫اﻻﺳ‬ ‫ﺎح‬ ‫ﻧ‬ ‫ﺎت‬ ‫أوﻟ‬ ‫ا‬ ‫ﻟ‬ ‫ر.‬ ‫اﻟﻬ‬ ‫و‬ ‫ﺎﻟ‬ ‫اﻟ‬ ‫ﺣﺎزت‬ ‫ﺔ‬ ‫اﻟ‬ ‫ارد‬ ‫اﻟ‬ ‫ة‬ ‫إدار‬ ‫ﺎرﺳﺎت‬ ‫ﻣ‬ ‫اء‬ ‫اﻟ‬ ‫ﻧﻬﺎ‬ ‫ة؛‬ ‫اﻷﺧ‬ ‫ات‬ ‫اﻟ‬ ‫ﻓﻲ‬ ‫ﺎرﺳ‬ ‫اﻟ‬ ‫و‬ ‫ﺎﺣ‬ ‫اﻟ‬ ‫ﺎم‬ ‫اﻫ‬ ‫ﺔ‬ ‫اﻟ‬ ‫ﺎت‬ ‫اﺗ‬ ‫اﻻﺳ‬ ‫ﻘ‬ ‫ﻟ‬ ‫اﻟ‬ ‫رد‬ ‫اﻟ‬ ‫ﻪ‬ ‫ﺟ‬ ‫ﺑ‬ ‫ﻰ‬ ‫ﻌ‬ ُ ‫ﺗ‬ ‫اﻻﺟ‬ ‫و‬) ‫ﺔ‬ ‫ﺎ‬ Arulrajah et al., 2015 .(‫ﺎرﺳﺎت‬ ‫اﻟ‬ ‫ﻔ‬ ‫ﺗ‬ ‫م‬ ‫ﻠ‬ ‫و‬ ‫ﺎﻫﺎت‬ ‫اﺗ‬ ‫ﻬﺎ‬ ‫ﻓ‬ ‫ﺎ‬ ‫ﺔ‬ ‫اﻟ‬ ‫اﺣﻲ‬ ‫ﻧ‬ ‫ﻊ‬ ‫ﺟ‬ ‫ﻞ‬ ‫ﺗ‬ ‫ات‬ ‫ﺗﻐ‬ ‫اء‬ ‫اﻟ‬    ّ ‫ﻠ‬ ‫اﻟ‬ 18 ، ‫د‬ ‫اﻟﻌ‬ 1 ، 2022-147-‫ف،‬ ‫اﻟﻬ‬ ‫ﻘ‬ ‫ﻞ‬ ‫ات‬ ‫ﻐ‬ ‫اﻟ‬ ‫ﺎﺳ‬ ‫ﺗ‬ ‫ﺎن‬ ‫ﻟ‬ ‫اد‬ ‫اﻷﻓ‬ ‫ﺎت‬ ‫وﺳﻠ‬ ، ‫ﻐ‬ ‫اﻟ‬ ‫ﻣﻘﺎوﻣﺔ‬ ‫ﻣ‬ ‫ﻘﻠﻞ‬ ‫و‬ ‫ﺔ‬ ‫اﻟ‬ ‫ارد‬ ‫اﻟ‬ ‫ة‬ ‫إدار‬ ‫ﺎﺋﻒ‬ ‫و‬ ‫ﻷن‬ ً ‫ا‬ ‫ﻧ‬ ‫ﺎ‬ ‫إﻧ‬ ‫ﻓﻲ‬ ‫ﺎﺑﻲ‬ ‫إ‬ ‫ﻞ‬ ‫ﺛ‬ ‫ﺗ‬ ‫اﻟﻌﺎﻣﻠ‬ ‫ﺔ‬ ‫ﺟ‬ (Astuti and Wahyuni, 2020). ً ‫ا‬ ‫دور‬ ‫اء‬ ‫اﻟ‬ ‫ﺔ‬ ‫اﻟ‬ ‫ارد‬ ‫اﻟ‬ ‫ة‬ ‫إدار‬ ‫ﺎرﺳﺎت‬ ‫ﻣ‬ ‫ﺗﻠﻌ‬ ‫ﻟ‬ ‫ﻛ‬ ‫ﻲ‬ ‫اﻟ‬ ‫اﻷداء‬ ‫ﺗ‬ ‫ﻓﻲ‬ ً ‫ﺎ‬ ‫ﺋ‬ ‫ر‬ (Zaid et al., 2018) ‫ﻔﺔ‬ ‫اﻟﻔﻠ‬ ‫ﻲ‬ ّ ‫ﺗ‬ ‫ﻋﻠﻰ‬ ‫ﺎت‬ ‫اﻟ‬ ‫ﻊ‬ ‫ﺷ‬ ‫اﻷﻣ‬ ‫ا‬ ‫ﻫ‬. ‫ارد‬ ‫اﻟ‬ ‫ﺎرﺳﺎت‬ ‫ﻣ‬ ‫ﺗ‬ ‫ﺎء‬ ‫أﺛ‬ ‫ﻓﻲ‬ ‫اء‬ ‫اﻟ‬ ‫ﺎﻫ‬ ‫ﻞ‬ ‫ﺔ،‬ ‫اﻟ‬) ‫ﺔ‬ ‫اﻟ‬ ‫اﻣﺔ‬ ‫اﻻﺳ‬ ‫ﻘ‬ ‫ﺗ‬ ‫ﻓﻲ‬ Ragas et al., 2017 ‫و‬ .(‫ﺔ‬ ‫ﻟﻠ‬ ً ‫وﻓﻘﺎ‬) ‫ارد‬ ‫اﻟ‬ ‫إﻟﻰ‬ ‫ة‬ ‫اﻟ‬ Resource-based Theory ‫ﺗﻠﻌ‬ ،(‫ﻓ‬ ‫ﺗ‬ ‫ﻓﻲ‬ ً ‫ﺎ‬ ‫ﺋ‬ ‫ر‬ ً ‫ا‬ ‫دور‬ ‫اء‬ ‫اﻟ‬ ‫ﺔ‬ ‫اﻟ‬ ‫ارد‬ ‫اﻟ‬ ‫ة‬ ‫إدار‬ ‫ﺎرﺳﺎت‬ ‫ﻣ‬ ‫ام‬ ‫اﻻﺳ‬ ‫ﺧﻼل‬ ‫ﻣ‬ ‫ﺔ‬ ‫ﺎﻓ‬ ‫اﻟ‬ ‫ة‬ ‫اﻟ‬ ‫ﻘ‬ ‫ﻟ‬ ‫اﻟﻼزﻣﺔ‬ ‫ﻌﺎﯾ‬ ‫اﻟ‬ ‫ا‬ ‫ة‬ ‫ر‬ ‫اﻟ‬ ‫و‬ ‫ﺔ‬ ‫ﺎﻟ‬ ‫ﻒ‬ ‫ﺗ‬ ‫ﻲ‬ ‫اﻟ‬ ‫ارد‬ ‫اﻟ‬ ‫ﺧﺎﺻﺔ‬ ‫ارد،‬ ‫ﻟﻠ‬ ‫ﻞ‬ ‫ﻷﻣ‬) Armstrong, 2011 .(‫ﺎﻏﺔ‬ ‫ﺻ‬ ‫ﻓﻲ‬ ً ‫ﺎ‬ ‫ﺣﺎﺳ‬ ً ‫ا‬ ‫دور‬ ‫اء‬ ‫اﻟ‬ ‫ﺔ‬ ‫اﻟ‬ ‫ارد‬ ‫اﻟ‬ ‫ة‬ ‫إدار‬ ‫ﺗﻠﻌ‬ ‫اﻟ‬ ‫ﺧﻼل‬ ‫ﻣ‬ ‫ﺔ؛‬ ‫اﻟ‬ ‫اﻣﺔ‬ ‫اﻻﺳ‬ ‫ﺎت‬ ‫اﺗ‬ ‫اﺳ‬ ‫ﻔ‬ ‫وﺗ‬ ، ‫)أﺣ‬ ‫ﺔ‬ ‫اﻟ‬ ‫ﻓﻲ‬ ‫ﻔﻲ‬ ‫اﻟ‬ ‫اﻷداء‬ ‫ﻟ‬ ‫ﻲ‬ ‫اﻟ‬ 2019 .(‫وﺿﻊ‬ ‫ﻋﻠﻰ‬ ‫ﻞ‬ ‫ﺗﻌ‬ ‫ﺎ‬ ‫ﻛ‬ ‫ﻋﻠﻰ‬ ‫ﻗﺎﺋ‬ ‫ﻫﺎ‬ ‫ﻫ‬ ‫ﺟ‬ ‫ﺎرﺳﺎت‬ ‫وﻣ‬ ‫ﺎﺳﺎت‬ ‫ﺳ‬ ‫ﺎﺳ‬ ‫ﻣ‬ ‫ﻞ‬ ‫اﻣﺔ‬ ‫اﻻﺳ‬ ‫ﺔ‬ ‫ﻟﻠ‬ ‫ﻘ‬ ‫اﻟ‬ ‫اﻟ‬ ‫م‬ ‫ﻣﻔﻬ‬ ‫ﺔ‬ ‫اﻟﻌﺎﻟ‬ ‫و‬ ‫ﺔ‬ ‫ﻠ‬ ‫اﻟ‬ ‫ﻬﺎ‬ ‫ﺑ‬ ‫ﺎت‬ ‫ﻠ‬ ‫ﻣ‬ ‫ﻣﻊ‬ ‫ﺎﻏ‬ ‫وﻣ‬ (Haddock-Millar et al., 2016). ‫ﺔ‬ ‫ﻧ‬ ‫ت‬ ‫ر‬ ‫ا‬ ‫ﻟ‬ ‫ﺻﺔ‬ ‫اﻟﻔ‬ ‫و‬ ‫اﻓﻊ‬ ‫اﻟ‬ ‫و‬ ‫ة‬ ‫ر‬ ‫اﻟﻘ‬ (Ability-Motivation-Opportunity Theory)
... Furthermore, H3a, H3b and H3c suggest that green manufacturing positively correlates with air quality and climate, water quality and the human environment. Green manufacturing practices enhance air quality control, aligning with the research conducted by Arda et al. (2023), Delmas and Pekovic (2013) support this study by examining the impact of environmental standards and practices, including green manufacturing, on labor productivity, aligning with the hypothesis that green manufacturing positively affects air quality and climate. Kang et al. (2020) highlighted the importance of suppliers' environmental management capabilities, indicating their capacity to improve performance in addressing environmental concerns. ...
Article
Full-text available
Purpose The purpose of this study is to examine the vital link between manufacturing firms and the environment, delving into the intricate connections among factors affecting these firms. Specifically, it investigates how the environmental performance of manufacturing firms is shaped by their adoption of environmental management practices and the regulatory environment in which they operate. Design/methodology/approach Data are currently being collected through a structured questionnaire from employees working in manufacturing firms in Pakistan. Random sampling was used to select the participants. The hypotheses were tested using PLS-SEM analysis. Findings The study reveals a positive correlation between green manufacturing practices and superior environmental performance. Effective environmental management systems further help firms reduce their environmental footprint. External environmental regulations play a significant role as moderators, influencing the strength and direction of the relationship between green manufacturing, environmental management and environmental performance. Practical implications The practical implications offer valuable insights and guidance for manufacturing companies seeking to improve their environmental responsibility and performance. Additionally, policymakers gain insights into how regulatory frameworks can be designed or modified to better support sustainability efforts within the manufacturing sector. Originality/value This study offers timely insights for sustainable business practices, aligning with corporate responsibility efforts. It contributes to both academic knowledge and provides actionable guidance for fostering environmentally responsible practices in the manufacturing sector.
... Similarly, García-Pozo, Sánchez-Ollero and Marchante-Lara (2015) find that eco-innovative practices increase labour productivity in hotels in southern Spain, but argue that the investment required to put innovation in place can lead to an initial decline in productivity. A further paper argues that the improved employee commitment and interpersonal contacts produced by training are the channels by which environmental standards contribute to increased productivity in France (Delmas and Pekovic 2013). ...
Book
Full-text available
This study contributes to the literature on the relationship between trade, labour and environmental sustainability by providing empirical evidence at the firm level. For this purpose, it first explores whether exporting firms are more likely than non-exporting firms to adopt green measures. Second, it assesses how labour market outcomes such as productivity, wages, education level of workers, and training provided by firms may vary between green exporters and firms that do not engage in trade or undertake green measures. The study finds that exporting firms have a significantly higher probability of adopting green measures than do non-exporting firms. In addition, on average, among exporting firms, those that implement green measures tend to have higher levels of productivity, pay higher wages, offer more training and have a similar share of workers with a university degree in comparison with exporters that do not implement green measures. However, the gain in labour productivity associated with exporting and the adoption of green measures does not seem to translate into higher wages in lower-middle-income and upper-middle-income countries; it only does so in high-income countries.
... Tang et al. (2018) suggest that the candidates must display a sense of conviction and commitment to promoting eco-friendly performance. Delmas and Pekovic (2013) and Opatha and Arulrajah (2014) argued that training and development is a crucial factor that develops an awareness to adopt green HRM practices. Suharti and Sugiarto (2020) suggested that organizations should provide the best training programs for the existing staff to support the effective implementation of green HRM practices. ...
Article
Full-text available
The goal of this study is to identify the set of enablers that influence the implementation of green human resource management (GHRM) practices in the organization and understand mutual relationships among these enablers. The research used interpretive structural modeling (ISM), a method based on expert opinions. We recorded the opinions of experienced academicians and human resources professionals with the aim of drawing conclusions. The driving and dependent power of these factors has also been investigated using Matrice d'impacts croises multiplication applique a classement (MICMAC) analysis. This research work reveals that the primary enabler of GHRM is green government policy, specifically environmental policies, with green leadership, top management support, and green health and safety following closely behind. Green recruitment and selection, green organization culture, green brand image, and green training and development have all reached the third level of the hierarchy. The findings could aid in gaining a comprehensive understanding of these essential enablers, their contextual factors, and the cause‐and‐effect relationships involved in implementing GHRM practices in any given organization. While designing the GHRM implementation strategy, organizations should place emphasis on all the enablers to improve organizational performance.
... The practice of designing and implementing procedures and policies for managing a firm's human resources in a way that encourages workers to be both passionate and productive in their efforts to help the company succeed is known as human resource management [62]. In response to growing environmental concerns, more companies are adopting international environmental protection measures [11,63,64]. Sustainable environmental practices, public participation in sustainability initiatives, and incremental enhancements to existing infrastructure all require a significant investment in human capital [40]. ...
Article
Full-text available
The textile industry of Pakistan, a major contributor to its economy, is encountering serious sustainability challenges, akin to many developing nations. The literature is replete with assertions on the importance of sustainability; however, cross-functional research is sporadic. This paper theoretically links Green HRM (GHRM) practices, Green SCM (GSCM) practices, and Triple Bottom Line (TBL) performance within this context. In scaffolding through Resource Orchestration (ROT) and Dynamic Capabilities (DCT) theories, a conceptual framework is proposed. We posit that GSCM transforms GHRM practices into tangible, eco-friendly supply chain activities resulting in enhanced sustainable performance, thereby playing a mediating role. Additionally, a unique interplay of Entrepreneurial Orientation (EO) as a moderator between GHRM and GSCM is introduced. Firms with higher levels of EO employ innovative approaches to implement GHRM practices into their supply chain strategies, leading to robust GSCM initiatives. The literature review indicates that research on the synergistic effects of GHRM and GSCM on TBL performance in developing nations is scarce. The study warrants carrying out empirical validation and provides a clear plan for future research. The exclusive emphasis on Pakistan’s textile industry introduces contextual intricacies, facilitating a profound comprehension for implementing sustainable practices within the constraints and opportunities of an emerging economy.
Article
Full-text available
Tujuan penelitian ini adalah mengeksplorasi bagaimana proses implementasi konsep Green HRM, apa saja tantangan dan hambatan serta dampak dari implementasi konsep Green HRM. Informan dalam penelitian ini adalah site manager dan manajer produksi. Metode penelitian dengan pendekatan kualitatif studi kasus, pengumpulan data dilakukan dengan wawancara mendalam dan observasi pada perusahaan pertambangan bauksit di Kalimantan Barat. Analisis data penelitian ini menggunakan analisis data interaktif. Hasil penelitian menunjukan perusahaan belum secara sempurna dan eksplisit menerapkan Green HRM. Namun demikian perusahaan telah berupaya membangun perilaku hijau karyawan dalam aspek rekruitmen dan seleksi, pelatihan dan pengembangan karyawan, kompensasi dan manfaat, budaya organisasi, serta manajemen kinerja. Beberapa manfaat yang diperoleh dalam penerapan Green HRM adalah karyawan hidup lebih sehat, nama baik perusahaan, karyawan yang terampil dan memiliki komitmen, mengurangi dampak negatif pada lingkungan, mengurangi limbah dan mendaur ulang limbah sehingga mengurangi biaya produksi.