Introduction

China’s manufacturing sector plays a pivotal role in the global economy, significantly influencing both economic growth and environmental challenges. As one of the largest manufacturing hubs, China is responsible for a substantial portion of global greenhouse gas emissions, particularly CO2, as well as particulate matter and other pollutants that adversely affect air quality beyond its borders, impacting East Asia and contributing to global climate shifts (Liu et al. 2022; Kang and Eltahir, 2018). Additionally, China’s extensive consumption of natural resources for manufacturing exacerbates resource depletion, placing further pressure on global ecosystems (Fazli 2023; Çankaya and Sezen 2019). The interconnectedness of environmental impacts extends well beyond national boundaries, underscoring the urgency of addressing emissions, resource use, and pollution from China’s manufacturing industry to help maintain the global ecological balance (Jakhar et al. 2020).

In response, the Chinese government has implemented stringent environmental policies to encourage eco-friendly practices within the manufacturing sector, pushing companies to adopt environmental management strategies aligned with national sustainability goals (Liu et al. 2022; Kang and Eltahir, 2018). However, the success of these policies depends on cultivating a corporate culture that actively supports environmental goals. Green human resource management (GHRM) practices play an essential role here by promoting environmental values, raising awareness, and fostering internal commitment to sustainability (Wang 2023; You et al. 2023). Employees’ ecological behaviors, attitudes, and motivations in the workplace depend on effective human resource management practices and an eco-friendly organizational culture (Rubel et al. 2021). GHRM leverages human resources to drive innovation, enhance environmental performance, reduce waste, fulfill social responsibilities, and gain competitive advantages (Li et al. 2023). This is achieved through ongoing learning and development initiatives that prioritize environmental goals and strategies (Saeed et al. 2018). Integrating GHRM practices within manufacturing organizations can enhance sustainability efforts, helping the industry contribute to both national and global environmental targets (Jamwal et al. 2022). Therefore, exploring which GHRM practices can encourage and influence green organizational culture (GOC) and employee ecological behavior is a necessary step in helping manufacturing enterprises develop efficient environmental management strategies.

For the green transformation and sustainable development of organizations, the role of GHRM in influencing employees’ green behaviors (such as pro-environmental behavior and organizational citizenship behavior) has become a hot topic. GHRM holds significance in fostering environmentally responsible behavior among employees in the workplace. Currently, the extant literature on GHRM in the manufacturing sector focuses on GHRM’s influence on pro-environmental behavior and organizational citizenship behavior under the joint roles of transformational leadership (Tu et al. 2022), organizational commitment (Nasir et al. 2022), green human capital (Ogiemwonyi et al. 2023a), environmental performance (Ogiemwonyi et al. 2023b), and green innovation (Aftab et al. 2022). While existing research has extensively explored the relationship between GHRM practices and environmental performance, there is a notable gap in the literature regarding the integration of Ability-Motivation-Opportunity (AMO) theory and Social Identity Theory (SIT) to develop a comprehensive model that links GHRM practices, GOC, and the pro-environmental behavior of employees. Some studies have confirmed the impacts of GHRM practices on pro-environmental behavior, GOC, and employees’ green values (e.g., Dumont et al. 2016; Ahmad et al. 2023); however, further investigation is required to understand the mechanism of the impact of GHRM practices and GOC on the pro-environmental behavior of employees. By integrating AMO theory, which emphasizes the role of HRM practices in enhancing human capital and performance outcomes (Renwick et al. 2012), with Social Identity Theory, which focuses on how individuals’ identification with a group influences their behavior, an empirical study could provide a more holistic understanding of how GHRM practices shape employees’ attitudes and behaviors toward environmental sustainability.

The purpose of this study is twofold. The first is to explore the mechanism and relationships between GHRM practices, GOC, and Workplace Pro-Environment Behavior (WPEB) by developing an integrated model using AMO theory and SIT. This study explores GHRM practices through the following five dimensions to examine the dimensions that can maximize the effect of GHRM practices: performance management and appraisal, employee empowerment and participation, reward and compensation, recruitment and selection, and training and development. Therefore, this study integrates various organizational factors into a comprehensive framework, contributes to sustainable development discourse, identifies novel relationships, and fosters interdisciplinary dialog, thereby enriching our understanding of sustainability initiatives within organizations. This study also contributes to academia by expanding the application of AMO and SIT theories in environmental management. Additionally, this study selected the manufacturing industry in China as its research target to study GHRM practices in developing countries. China is one of the largest manufacturing countries globally, with vast scale and ongoing technological innovation and development. The accompanying issues of overcapacity and environmental pollution are also becoming increasingly severe; therefore, this study hopes to help Chinese manufacturing enterprises’ environmental management with effective and practical suggestions.

Literature review

Theoretical foundation

Ability motivation theory (AMO)

AMO theory is used in organizational psychology and management to understand and optimize employee performance; that is, high performance stems from employees’ competencies (skills and knowledge), motivation (desire to do a good job), and opportunities (appropriate conditions and resources) needed to do their jobs effectively (Iftikar et al. 2022). Previous studies have examined GHRM in various industries from an AMO theory perspective. For example, Bhatti et al. (2021) examined the connection between GHRM and ecological performance in the oil and gas industry. Iftikar et al. (2022) investigated the extent to which GHRM affects the environmental behavior of employees in the hospitality industry through the mediating role of green entrepreneurship and the moderating role of green self-efficacy. Veerasamy et al. (2023) investigated the influence of GHRM practices on employees’ environmentally conscious behavior.

Ability, motivation, and opportunity are the three main attributes of the AMO theory. This validates a variety of distinct but related human resource management practices that can achieve high performance for employees and organizations (Anwar et al. 2020; Harrell-Cook et al. 2001). Capacity, based on a series of practices, including recruitment and selection and training and development, ensures that organizations recruit candidates with the skills and qualifications needed for the job, while also ensuring that employees acquire the necessary skills and knowledge to effectively perform their work. Similarly, reward and compensation and employee empowerment and participation fall under the “motivation” part of the AMO theory, wherein organizations can motivate employees to achieve high performance through rewards and recognition, fostering employees’ sense of ownership and participation to promote their efforts in achieving performance goals (Iftikar et al. 2022). Lastly, performance management and appraisal simultaneously align with the “ability” and “opportunity” aspects of the AMO theory, assessing employees’ skills and knowledge, providing feedback, and identifying areas for improvement. Performance appraisals may involve evaluating employees’ performance in green initiatives, such as their commitment to sustainable practices or their contributions to environmental goals, thereby helping them understand how their actions promote environmental sustainability clearly (Adawiyah and Putrawan 2021).

Social identity theory (SIT)

SIT is a psychological framework developed by Henri Tajfel and John Turner in the 1970s (Tajfel and Turner 1979). It-contains core constructs like; social categorization, social identification, and social comparison- posits that individuals derive a sense of identity and self-esteem from their membership in social groups, which can include categories such as nationality, ethnicity, profession, or in the context of this study, organizational affiliation. The theory emphasizes the role of group membership in shaping individual behaviors, attitudes, and perceptions, suggesting that people are motivated to maintain a positive self-concept based on their group associations. In the context of GHRM, SIT provides a lens through which to understand how employees’ identification with their organization influences their commitment to environmental practices. When employees perceive their organization as a leader in sustainability, they are more likely to adopt eco-friendly behaviors, reinforcing their identity as environmentally conscious individuals (Kim et al. 2019). This alignment between personal and organizational values fosters a sense of belonging and responsibility towards the organization’s sustainability goals, ultimately leading to increased engagement in pro-environmental behaviors (Ribeiro et al. 2022; Kim et al. 2019). Furthermore, a strong GOC can significantly enhance employees’ sense of belonging and commitment to sustainability initiatives. A robust GOC not only motivates employees to engage in environmentally friendly practices but also reinforces their identification with the organization, creating a virtuous cycle of commitment and action towards sustainability (Chowdhury et al. 2023; Carmeli et al. 2022).

Specifically, this study identifies recruitment and selection and training and development as key constructs under the ability dimension, emphasizing their role in enhancing employees’ skills and knowledge for engaging in sustainable practices. The motivation aspect is addressed through performance management and appraisal and reward and compensation, which are designed to incentivize eco-friendly behaviors among employees. For the opportunity construct, employee empowerment and participation and green transformation leadership are highlighted as essential for fostering an inclusive environment where employees feel encouraged to contribute to sustainability initiatives. Additionally, the study incorporates GOC and employee’s green values under SIT, illustrating how a strong cultural emphasis on sustainability can shape employees’ identities and promote environmentally responsible behaviors, reflected in workplace environmental behavior. Through this comprehensive mapping, the research underscores the interconnectedness of these constructs in promoting sustainable practices within organizations.

Hypotheses development

Green human resource management practices

GHRM is a management strategy that integrates environmental principles and practices into human resource management policies and processes to promote organizational ecological sustainability and enhance environmental performance (Chaudhary 2019). GHRM reflects a shift from traditional human resource management to a more sustainable approach, emphasizing the consideration of long-term environmental impacts and sustainable resource utilization while meeting current organizational needs (Dumont et al. 2016). Through GHRM, companies can not only enhance their environmental responsibility but also improve employee satisfaction and work efficiency, ultimately promoting long-term development and market competitiveness (Xie et al. 2023). GHRM encourages businesses to lessen the adverse ecological effects of their operations by implementing environmental measures, such as energy conservation, emission reduction, and waste recycling. Companies’ green practices help shape a positive corporate image, increase brand value, and attract consumers and investors who are more concerned about ecological sustainability (Ansari et al. 2020). GHRM is an essential element for companies to move toward sustainable development as it helps reduce adverse ecological impacts, enhances environmental performance, and strengthens internal and external competitiveness and social responsibility (Hameed et al. 2021). A recent debate has emerged following the novel findings of Fawehinmi et al. (2020), who intriguingly found no significant direct relationship between GHRM and employe green behavior within university settings in emerging economies. In contrast, studies conducted in other emerging economies, such as China, by Zhang et al. (2019) and Zhu et al. (2021), observed valid relationships within the manufacturing sector, highlighting potential contextual differences across industries and regions. Therefore, it is imperative to conduct further research to clarify these discrepancies and examine the underlying factors that may influence GHRM and employe green behavior relationships across different settings. GHRM typically involves human resource management practices, such as recruitment, selection, training, empowerment, and reward management, which play a decisive role in enhancing employees’ capabilities, creativity, and skills and promoting the emergence of a green workforce and green values within organizations, thereby facilitating the realization of the vision and goals of green sustainable development (Iftikar et al. 2022). Therefore, this study explores GHRM using five practices: performance management and appraisal, employee empowerment and participation, reward and compensation, recruitment and selection, and training and development.

Performance management and appraisal

Performance management and appraisal are key processes in GHRM to promote organizational sustainability and achieve environmental goals by measuring and evaluating employees’ performance and contributions to achieving organizational environmental objectives (Xie et al. 2023). This process involves evaluating employees’ performance in environmental activities, introducing various environmental performance indicators, such as minimizing carbon emissions, participating in ecological events and responsibilities, and effectively communicating ecological policies to assess and monitor individuals’ contributions to environmental effectiveness (Saeed et al. 2018). Through this interaction between green management and performance appraisal, employee behavior is aligned with the company’s sustainability objectives (Chaudhary, 2019). Human resource managers play a critical role in this process, as they not only need to measure and collect information on employees’ environmental performance, but also need to interact with employees during performance evaluations to explore ways to reduce waste and improve environmental performance (Jiang et al. 2023). Performance appraisal is a significant tool, as it enhances employees’ values and efforts toward achieving environmental behaviors, motivating them to take further steps to improve their environmental actions and meet the organization’s ecological goals (Iftikar et al. 2022). 2.2.3 Employee Empowerment and Participation Empowering employees to make decisions on environmental issues effectively encourages them to take autonomous actions to improve the organization’s ecological performance. Empowerment provides decision-making authority, autonomy, and freedom, allowing employees to carry out their daily tasks without direct instructions from superiors and motivates them to make innovative decisions based on environmental considerations (Khan and Muktar 2024). Employee empowerment and participation can enhance job satisfaction, stimulate innovation, and improve the organization’s overall performance and competitiveness (Roscoe et al. 2019). Management should promote employee participation in environmental programs by implementing green empowerment and developing environmentally oriented concepts and policies (Nasir et al. 2022). Employee empowerment involves multiple processes, including creating a conducive learning environment, establishing a clear work vision, opening up various communication channels, and providing practical opportunities to encourage active participation in green practices (Xie et al. 2023). Through these measures, employees have the opportunity to curb environmental issues and improve ecological performance. Specifically, this empowerment strategy not only enhances employees’ awareness of environmental issues but also fosters a culture of actively addressing environmental problems through mutual learning and information sharing within the organization.

Reward and compensation

The reward and compensation mechanism are designed to attract, motivate, and mobilize employees to achieve organizational goals by providing economic and non-economic benefits. Specifically, rewards and incentives for environmentally friendly behavior not only promote the development of employees’ green behavior but also encourage their active participation in environmental activities (Mostafa and Saleh 2023). Social exchange theory suggests that when employees receive positive feedback on their pro-environmental behavior, they are more inclined to continue engaging in such behavior (Nurul Alam et al. 2023). The establishment of green rewards and compensation is crucial for enhancing employees’ organizational interests and encouraging them to strive to meet their organizational goals (Paillé et al. 2022). In addition to monetary rewards, non-monetary incentives come in various forms such as green tax benefits, green recognition, and green travel benefits, all of which aim to motivate employees to engage in ecological actions and feel their contribution to the environment (Iftikar et al. 2022). These rewards not only enhance employees’ green awareness, but also increase their enthusiasm for participating in green activities, propelling the organization toward continuous environmental progress.

Recruitment and selection

Most human resource professionals believe that recruitment and selection are essential steps in addressing the challenges faced by many businesses in human resource management: how to draw in the necessary candidates and choose the best possible employees (Alqudah and Yusof 2024). For environmental management and green development, green RES are key HR practices involving the attraction and selection of candidates interested in environmental issues and committed to addressing them. This practice not only improves an organization’s environmental performance but also enhances its reputation and attractiveness (Das and Dash 2023). A good green reputation makes it easier for organizations to attract talented candidates who are highly concerned about the environment. Research by Iftikar et al. (2022) found that an organization’s reputation is positively correlated with its attractiveness to candidates, and organizations implementing green policies tend to attract employees with a sense of environmental responsibility and green values to become part of the organization. Today, businesses are striving to showcase their environmental consciousness, attracting individuals with the required expertise and eco-friendly behavior, while employees are also committed to proving their green values driven by the global green culture (Joshi et al. 2023). Therefore, green recruitment and selection is not only an effective means of achieving environmental goals but is also an indispensable part of the overall green HR strategy.

Training and development

Training and development are a common human resource management practice that offers learning opportunities for employees to enhance their knowledge, skills, abilities, and behavior (Khan and Terason 2021). Training typically involves educating employees on specific skills or knowledge to help them perform their job better and improve their work efficiency (Sarwar and Mustafa 2023). On the other hand, development focuses more on long-term career advancement and personal growth, providing broader learning opportunities and career planning to help employees achieve their goals (Xie et al. 2023). Training and development is not just about meeting employees’ learning needs; it is also an important means for organizations to improve their overall performance and competitiveness. However, in GHRM, organizations need to consider ecological issues when initiating training and development programs, making eco-friendly thinking part of employee training and development. Training and development for employees is a GHRM practice that can successfully influence efficient green management and environmental stewardship in businesses (Alqudah and Yusof 2024). Green training and development focus on training employees by reducing harmful practices, helping them focus on environmental projects, enhancing their understanding of the environment, and preventing energy waste and reducing waste (Nurul Alam et al. 2023). Thus, employee training can improve their abilities to realize various ecological issues and encourage them to adopt ecological behaviors.

Green human resources management and green organizational culture

As the adverse effects of climate change and environmental pollution become more apparent and the spread of information through social media platforms awakens public environmental consciousness, there is growing recognition of the need to protect the environment. Consequently, an increasing number of companies are implementing sustainable development strategies and ecological practices (Ahmed et al. 2021). In this context, human resource departments play a crucial role in shaping an eco-friendly corporate culture by guiding employees’ behaviors and values toward environmental conservation through green human resource practices (Muisyo et al. 2021). These green human resource measures, such as green recruitment, training, performance management, and incentives, not only mitigate the adverse impact of corporate activities on the natural environment but also promote environmental activities within the company, helping to build and promote a GOC (Aggarwal and Agarwala 2022). In particular, companies can attract new, environmentally friendly employees and quickly integrate them into their eco-friendly culture through green recruitment (Xie et al. 2023). These employees will then better understand and internalize the company’s green values after green training. A green performance management system ensures that employees who exhibit proactive environmental behaviors are identified and rewarded, further solidifying the standards for green behavior (Iftikar et al. 2022). When employees are fully engaged in environmental activities, green culture is strengthened within the company, providing a green and environmentally friendly work atmosphere.

Thus, there are mutually reinforcing connections between GHRM and GOC. Through green practices in HR, not only can the environmental impact be minimized, but a culture that supports sustainable development can also be cultivated within the organization (Muisyo et al. 2021). According to Roscoe et al. (2019), implementing sustainable practices effectively fosters the development of a green culture within an organization, and employee cooperation in addressing environmental challenges fosters the development of an internal environmental protection culture. Therefore, regarding the connection between GHRM and GOC, this study proposes the following hypotheses:

H1-5. Performance management and appraisal, employee empowerment and participation, reward and compensation, recruitment and selection and training and development have a positive association with green organizational culture.

Green transformational leadership, organizational culture, and green values

Researchers have become increasingly interested in green transformational leadership as a strategy to promote environmental sustainability in organizations over the last ten years (Lathabhavan and Kaur, 2023). Enhancing employee and organizational results is essential because it can inspire employees with a compelling vision and support their growth in achieving organizational environmental objectives. Green transformational leadership has had several advantageous impacts on individuals and organizations, such as the development of personal green values, increased green performance, and enhanced green creativity (Al-Swidi et al. 2021; Srivastava et al. 2024). Furthermore, it establishes GHRM practices, fosters a GOC, and promotes corporate social responsibility, all of which have positive effects on teams and organizations (Tosun et al. 2022; Saeed et al. 2018). Moreover, organizational culture is a system of shared beliefs and value-shaping behavior that must evolve to incorporate sustainability and environmental stewardship as core principles to effectively address ecological challenges (Rizvi and Garg 2020; Aggarwal and Agarwala 2022). GOC is characterized by its dedication to eco-friendly practices, which substantially influences the perspectives of members regarding sustainability and establishes them as pivotal agents of change (Al-Hakimi et al. 2022; Al-Swidi et al. 2021). GOCs flourish in settings in which the pursuit of operational motivations and the reduction of adverse environmental effects are prioritized over profit-driven objectives (Roscoe et al. 2019).

Leaders are instrumental in instigating this shift toward green culture by modeling environmentally responsible behaviors, laying the groundwork for a sustainable culture, and encouraging employee participation in green practices (Rizvi and Garg 2020; Singh et al. 2021). The initiatives and values propagated by these leaders not only cultivate an ecological mindset among employees but also contribute to the development of a robust GOC. At the core of the green transformational leadership is the facilitation of the emergence and development of a GOC, which in turn disseminates and fosters green values among employees, thereby promoting the adoption of green values throughout the organization (Rizvi and Garg 2020; Roscoe et al. 2019). Leaders’ effective communication of a distinct environmental vision and endorsement of green innovation fosters an organizational culture committed to environmental responsibility and motivates employees to embrace eco-friendly practices (Aggarwal and Agarwala 2022). At the same time, a strong GOC inspires employees to recognize the impact of their actions on the environment and view environmental protection as an important factor in their decision-making processes. This cultural environment motivates employees to internalize the organization’s green philosophy and values, which, in turn, influences their personal behaviors and attitudes (Lathabhavan and Kaur 2023). Therefore, to address the connection between the green transformational leadership, GOC, and green values, this study anticipates associations among the three based on the following hypotheses:

H6. Green transformation leadership has a positive association with green organizational culture.

H7. Green organizational culture has a positive association with employees’ green values.

Workplace pro-environment behavior

Embracing pro-environmental behaviors has become a crucial aspect of employee roles in environmental management and organizations’ green strategies. Especially in manufacturing companies, there are problems of resource wastage and carbon emissions that cause air pollution and water waste in the production process, which, in turn, make employees’ environmental behaviors even more necessary (Iftikar et al. 2022). GOC has a positive effect on employee attitudes and promotes green behavior among employees (Ahmad et al. 2023; Susanto 2023). Khan and Terason (2021) confirmed that GOC is the basis for promoting the success of an organization in implementing a green strategy, and that if an organization’s employees do not share its green values, then investments and management efforts based on conserving resources and protecting the environment will ultimately reduce the drain. Al-Swidi et al. (2021) found that an organization’s green culture positively encourages green behaviors among employees. This indicates a definite link between GOC, green values, and WPEB.

Transformational leadership plays a critical role in promoting eco-friendly behaviors in the workplace. Transformational leaders create a culture of environmental awareness and behavior by motivating employees to achieve environmental goals and encouraging them to exhibit behaviors that go beyond normal requirements (Lathabhavan and Kaur 2023). This type of leadership influences subordinates to view the leader as a model of environmental value who encourages employees to form and apply solutions to ecological problems (Rizvi and Garg 2020). Azhar and Yang (2021) found that value-based transformational leadership inspires employees’ environmental behaviors and can be used to motivate employees by aligning their words with their actions, communicating a clear vision, and making commitments. Direct leaders play a critical role in this process because they are more influential on employees and are increasingly likely to shape their environmental attitudes and behaviors through their interactions (Singh et al. 2021). Therefore, this study hypothesized the following connection between GOC, green values, green transformational leadership, and WPEB in the workplace:

H8-10. Green organizational culture, employees’ green values and green transformation leadership has a positive association with workplace pro-environment behavior.

All association highlighted above are presented in Fig. 1 below:

Fig. 1
figure 1

Conceptual Framework.

Full size image

Research methodology

Sample selection and data collection

This study adopted a quantitative approach and collected cross-sectional data using questionnaires and purposive sampling methods. The sample primarily consisted of manufacturing and service enterprises located in southeastern China, particularly in Jiangsu and Zhejiang provinces. These two provinces are key industrial hubs in China, with a large number of enterprises and strong competitive capabilities, making them highly representative. According to the 2024 list of China’s Top 500 manufacturing enterprises, Zhejiang ranked first with 86 enterprises, followed closely by Shandong and Jiangsu (Liang 2024). As economically developed regions, Jiangsu and Zhejiang have significant environmental impacts due to their manufacturing and service sectors. In recent years, many enterprises in these regions have increasingly emphasized green development and environmental protection practices to achieve sustainable growth. In this context, the Chinese government has introduced policies to encourage and promote green management and environmental protection practices among enterprises. Therefore, this study selected enterprises from these regions, as they are expected to have a more mature understanding and implementation of green management, providing more representative and accurate feedback for the research.

Data was collected through an online survey platform (Wenjuanxing), and the questionnaire was distributed using a social media platform (WeChat) to reach the large number of employees working in manufacturing firms. This study added screening questions to confirm that the respondents were full-time employees who were directly involved in formulating and implementing the organization’s green practices. (Screening question: 1. Are you currently working in a manufacturing firm located in Jiangsu and Zhejiang provinces? 2. Are you directly involved in formulating or implementing the organization’s green practices?). Given the rigorous hiring, training, development, and reward systems in place for full-time staff, these employees have a comprehensive understanding of the organization’s GHRM initiatives. Part-time employees were excluded from the study, as their limited hours may restrict familiarity with human resource and sustainability practices. Screening questions ensured participants were knowledgeable about environmental, sustainability, and GHRM issues and confirmed their full-time employment status. All data collection procedures were anonymous and confidential, and respondents could choose to withdraw from the survey at any time. The G*Power software was used to determine the minimum sample size required for this study. An F test was conducted, considering an effect size of 0.15, α level of 0.05, power of 0.80, and 8 predictors. This analysis revealed that a minimum sample size of 109 was required.

Since all original items of the constructs were developed in English, the final version of the questionnaire was translated and back-translated by professional translators before being used, to ensure the accurate understanding of all measurement items (Klotz et al. 2022). This process aimed to ensure the conceptual equivalence of the measurement items across different languages and cultural contexts, reducing bias caused by cross-cultural misunderstandings (Sekaran and Bougie 2020). During the questionnaire design process, a pre-test was conducted. A senior professor, two lecturers and a group of four doctoral students thoroughly reviewed the English and Chinese versions of the questionnaire and provided feedback on specific details to ensure all measurement items were clear and understandable. The revised questionnaire was then sent to the target population for a pilot test to comprehensively evaluate the feasibility of the questionnaire. Through the pilot test, the study recorded the average time taken to complete the questionnaire, which served as one of the criteria for data screening. After completing the full evaluation, the data collection team distributed the final questionnaire to the target population. To ensure the accuracy and validity of the data, the study excluded a total of 24 incomplete responses or those without signed consent forms, as well as responses where the completion time was less than 10 min. In the end, the study collected 412 valid responses, excluding the pilot test respondents.

Survey instrument

Before completing the questionnaire, all respondents were informed of the following: (a) the main aim of the research, (b) the option to withdraw or decline participation in the study at any time, (c) the reporting method, (d) the confidentiality of the study, (e) there are no right or wrong answers to any questions in the research and they must answer based on their true thoughts, and (f) a brief explanation of the key terms in each item. Subsequently, the questionnaire was divided into two sections: a survey of background information and questions pertaining to the latent variables. The background questions included age, gender, education level, average monthly income, and work-related questions. Likert scales were used to measure the participants’ views and perceptions of GHRM, green transformational leadership, GOC, WPEB, and green values. To guarantee content validity and practicality, all measurement items for the variables in this study were derived from existing literature and modified according to the contextual needs and relevance of this research.

All items were rated on a seven-point Likert scale, ranging from “strongly disagree” to “disagree,” “somewhat disagree,” “neutral,” “somewhat agree,” “agree,” and “strongly agree.” The study chose a 7-point Likert scale for its capacity to capture a nuanced range of responses, allowing participants to express degrees of agreement or disagreement with each item. This scale provides a higher level of granularity compared to shorter Likert scales, which can enhance reliability and sensitivity, especially in behavioral and attitudinal research (Kusmaryono, and Wijayanti 2022). During data analysis, we performed data cleaning and factor analysis to ensure validity and reliability, retaining only items with factor loadings above 0.5. Consequently, one item each from the PMA and RES constructs was excluded. As a result, each construct was represented by five items to robustly capture its dimension.

The study’s measures for GHRM encompass multiple dimensions, each adapted from established research scales. The performance management and appraisal measure, adapted from Longoni et al. (2016), includes actions to set environmental goals, integrate green performance in evaluations, and offer non-monetary incentives. Employee empowerment and participation, adapted from Roscoe et al. (2019), captures employees’ understanding of green practices, shared responsibility, and autonomy. Reward and compensation, from Zaid et al. (2018), addresses variable compensation and rewards based on environmental performance. The recruitment and selection measure, following Jabbour, (2011), emphasizes hiring based on environmental knowledge and motivation. Training and development items, from Renwick et al. (2012), focus on GHRM training to build environmental awareness and involvement. GOC assesses efforts to prioritize environmental preservation and embed it into corporate values, adapted from Gürlek and Tuna, (2017) and Roscoe et al. (2019). Employee’s green values, adapted from Yusoff et al. (2019), reflects positive attitudes, teamwork, and competence in environmental protection. Green transformation leadership, adapted from Hameed et al. (2021), describes leaders inspiring and guiding team members toward environmental goals. Lastly, WPEB, adapted from Singh et al. (2020), includes actions to minimize resource consumption, emissions, waste, and product impact. Together, these measures provide a comprehensive framework for assessing pro-environmental behavior within the company.

Common method bias

To maximize the avoidance of bias factors that may influence the respondents’ motivation, this study considered and examined Common Method Bias (CMB) when implementing preventive measures. Initially, Harman’s single-factor test was performed to evaluate the level of bias in the final sample and assess the maximum variance explained by a single factor. The findings revealed that the maximum variance explained by a single factor was 37.235%, which falls below the rigorous threshold of 40% necessary to mitigate CMB. Additionally, this study employed the full collinearity test recommended by Kock (2017) to examine and assess CMB. According to the data in Table 1 below, the Variance Inflation Factor (VIF) values for all study variables are performance management and appraisal (1.593), employee empowerment and participation (1.322), reward and compensation (1.390), recruitment and selection (1.438), training and development (1.434), GOC (1.486), employee’s green values (1.554), green transformation leadership (1.594), and WPEB (1.429), all of which are significantly below the threshold value of 3.3 mentioned in Kock’s (2017) study. Therefore, it can be inferred that CMB is not a concern in this model based on the data provided.

Table 1 Full collinearity test.
Full size table

Data analysis method

Examining multivariate normality is essential for selecting an appropriate data analysis approach. The Web Power online tool (https://webpower.psychstat.org/wiki/tools/index) was used to assess multivariate normality in this study. The calculated Mardia’s multivariate p-value indicated issues with non-normality, as a recorded p-value below 0.05 signifies non-normality issues in the study data (Yang et al. 2022), thereby determining the presence of non-normality issues in the study data. Therefore, considering the issue of non-normality, this study adopted partial least-squares structural equation modeling (PLS-SEM) for data analysis. Given that the results indicated violations of multivariate normality, this study employed PLS-SEM for data analysis. The PLS-SEM analysis included Average Variance Extracted (AVE), internal consistency reliability, discriminant validity, loadings and cross-loadings, predictive relevance, and multi-group analysis.

Findings

Demographic characteristic

This study received valid responses from 412 participants, and a descriptive analysis of the participant characteristics is detailed in Table 2. All participants were from manufacturing (51%) and service industries (49%), with the majority aged between 21 and 38 years (21–26 years old accounted for 23.1%, 27–32 years old for 29.1%, and 33–38 years old for 25.5%). Consistent with previous social research indicating that employees in China’s manufacturing and service enterprises generally have a lower level of education (Huld, 2023), the majority of participants in this survey had only high school (30.8%) or junior college (39.3%) education. In terms of income characteristics, most participants (32.8%) had an income ranging from RMB 5001 to 8000, followed by RMB 3001 to 5000, accounting for 28.2%. Regarding work experience, the majority of participants had less than five years of work experience (35%), followed by to 5–10 years (28.9%).

Table 2 Demographic details.
Full size table

Measurement of the constructs

Validity and reliability

Before measuring the external structural model using PLS-SEM, the convergent validity, discriminant validity, and internal consistency were evaluated. To test the reliability and validity of all measurement indicators in the questionnaire and ensure consistency of the scale measurement structure, the data analysis was initiated. Thus, this study employed Cronbach’s alpha and Dijkstra–Henseler rho. The detailed results are presented in Table 3. The composite reliability values ranged from 0.947 to 0.963, significantly surpassing the minimum threshold of 0.70 required to ensure internal consistency. Moreover, the Average Variance Extracted values exceeded 0.50, indicating the overall convergent validity of the model.

Table 3 Reliability and validity.
Full size table

In this study, multicollinearity was assessed using variance inflation factor (VIF) as a metric. The data presented in Table 4 reveal VIF values ranging from 1.330 to 1.493. None of these values surpassed the threshold of 3.3—which indicates no multicollinearity issues (Hair et al. 2021). Based on these findings, there was no evidence suggesting the presence of multicollinearity in this study.

Table 4 Collinearity statistics (Inner model).
Full size table

The discriminant validity of the measurement items in this study was assessed using the Fornell-Larcker criterion and the Heterotrait-Monotrait Ratio (HTMT). According to the results of the Fornell-Larcker Criterion presented in Table 5, the square root value of the Average Variance Extracted for each latent variable (found on the diagonal) exceeded the correlations with other latent variables (Fornell and Larcker 1981). Furthermore, the HTMT values listed in Table 5 were notably below the recommended threshold of 0.85. This indicates that the HTMT between dimensions were within an acceptable range, indicating good discriminant validity between constructs (Avkiran 2018).

Table 5 Discriminant validity.
Full size table

The outcomes of the cross-loading tests reinforced discriminant validity within the model. This validation is evidenced by the outer loading of each item being greater than its loading on the other constructs, as illustrated in Table 6 (Henseler et al. 2014).

Table 6 Loading and cross loadings.
Full size table

Structural model

To assess the predictive capability of the research model, the R² value was used as a statistical measure of the model fit, further representing the model’s ability to explain variations in the dependent variable. Therefore, this section assesses the structural model of this study based on the R² values listed in Table 7. Hair et al. (2021) confirmed that when R² is greater than 0.75, the model has a significant explanatory power, and when the R² value is approximately 0.5, the model has moderate explanatory power. Based on the above, GOC (0.316), employee’s green values (0.165), and WPEB (0.214), which have lower R² values, indicate a weaker model explanatory power. Additionally, we evaluated the effect size of the predictive variables using Hair et al. 2021 research threshold for f²; effect sizes of 0.005, 0.01, and 0.025 were considered small, medium, and large, respectively. Following this standard, the results show the following: (i) performance management and appraisal (0.028), recruitment and selection (0.033), green transformation leadership (0.056, 0.048), GOC (0.197), and green values (0.055) have relatively large effect sizes; (ii) employee empowerment and participation (0.013) and GOC (0.015) have medium effect sizes; and (iii) reward and compensation (0.004) and training and development (0.002) have small effect sizes.

Table 7 Hypothesis testing.
Full size table

Hypothesis testing

This study generated path coefficients, p-values, and t-values through path coefficient analysis (the detailed results are presented in Table 7 and Fig. 2). Specifically, performance management and appraisal (β = 0.169, p < 0.005), employee empowerment and participation (β = 0.107, p < 0.05), recruitment and selection (β = 0.174, p < 0.005), and green transformation leadership (β = 0.240, p < 0.001) are significantly positively related to GOC, while recruitment and selection (β = 0.061, p > 0.05) and training and development (β = 0.040, p > 0.05) have no effect on GOC. Then, GOC (β = 0.406, p < 0.001) has a positive and significant effect on employee’s green values. Moreover, GOC (β = 0.125, p < 0.05), employee’s green values (β = 0.235, p < 0.001), and green transformation leadership (β = 0.226, p < 0.001) have a significant positive influence on WPEB. Accordingly, only H3 and H5 were not supported, whereas the other hypotheses were confirmed.

Fig. 2
figure 2

Structural model.

Full size image

The measurement of predictive validity within the models relied on the partial least squares (PLS) prediction method outlined by Shmueli et al. (2019). Throughout this study, Q² predictions consistently yielded positive results, indicating their effectiveness. Furthermore, in comparison with the linear model (LM) baseline, the root mean square error (RMSE) values for the PLS-SEM predictions consistently showed lower values across the indicators for GOC, employee’s green values, and WPEB (Table 8). Consequently, the PLS-SEM model employed in this study demonstrated superior predictive precision.

Table 8 Predictive model assessment.
Full size table

Multigroup analysis (MGA)

As PLS-SEM assessments always use a complete data set, they default on the idea that all data come from a single homogeneous population, which is often unrealistic in practical studies. However, ignoring this may lead to unreliable results (Hair et al. 2021). Hair et al. (2021) recommended the use of a multi-group analysis to address this issue. When conducting a multi-group analysis, it is important to ensure measurement invariance. Respondents were categorized according to gender, age, educational background, and employment industry in the MGA.

This study used the MICOM protocol to assess measurement invariance across two study subgroups: (i) Group 1: female respondents and (ii) Group 2: male respondents (Table 9). This study compared the path coefficients of the above two subgroups using PLS-SEM, as most of the study constructs had reciprocal p-values exceeding 0.05 (see Table 10). The data in Table 10 show no differences between the two groups. This study grouped respondents by age as follows: (i) Group 1: 32 years and below and (ii) Group 2: 33 years and above. Differences in all hypothesized relationships were observed through the effect of training and development on GOC (p < 0.05) and GOC on WPEB (p < 0.05), implying that there was a significant age-based difference between the two groups. The influence of green values on WPEB (<0.05) is significantly greater among employees lacking bachelor’s degrees or higher.

Table 9 MICOM analysis.
Full size table
Table 10 MGA analysis.
Full size table

Measurement invariants between groups were assessed using the MICOM procedure by grouping respondents primarily based on their educational background: (i) Group 1: college or below (ii) Group 2: bachelor degree or above. In all hypothesized relationships (Table 10), the effect of employee’s green values on WPEB was significantly different between the two groups (p < 0.005). In addition, this study grouped respondents by industry. (i) Group 1: manufacturing and (ii) Group 2: service. According to the results in Table 10, there was no difference between the two groups for all hypothesized relationships.

Discussions

This study investigated the connection between various organizational factors and the adoption of GOC and WPEB in Chinese enterprises. This study built and tested a model based on the AMO and SIT theories with the proposed ten direct relationships, eight of which were established empirically.

Performance management and appraisal, employee empowerment and participation, and recruitment and selection in the GHRM have a positive impact on GOC, confirming H1, H2, and H4. This result aligns with the outcomes of Ahmad et al. (2023): GHRM plays a role in the formation of a GOC in which the organization can accelerate the integration of new members into the green culture of the company and promote the generation of green ideas through the selection of employees with environmental values. By incorporating green indicators into performance evaluation, organizations can enhance employees’ awareness of and actions toward environmental protection, which, in turn, enhances their sense of responsibility and creativity toward environmental practices by empowering and promoting employee participation. However, the outcome of this study shows that rewards and compensation, training, and development have no significant effect on GOC; thus, H3 and H5 were rejected. This is different from the findings of Iftikar et al. (2022), and this result may be due to the fact that most manufacturing firms in China do not focus on providing periodic real-time training and development to their employees, and that the rewards and compensation in the organization are deficient in their concrete implementation. This amounts to failure in terms of meeting the needs and satisfaction of employees, which in turn disconnects the organization’s green goals. Meanwhile, some small- and medium-sized manufacturing enterprises lack a basic organizational culture to support green change, the standard of incentives and compensation measures is not clear or transparent, and the training provided to employees lacks continuity and real-time updates; these issues cause confusion among employees regarding the organizational culture.

Moreover, there is a close and complementary relationship between green transformation leadership and GOC, and green transformation leadership can positively influence the emergence and development of GOC. Thus, H6 was supported. Similar to Lathabhavan and Kaur’s, (2023) findings, the green transformation leadership style helps foster and reinforce a positive GOC that includes environmentally friendly beliefs, values, and codes of conduct. Thus, the green transformation leadership is a key factor in shaping and maintaining a GOC by setting standards and modeling behaviors. At the same time, there is a strong interaction between GOC and employee’s green values, and the results of the study confirmed that GOC can positively motivate employees’ green values, supporting H7. As Rizvi and Garg (2020) argued, a distinct and reinforcing GOC can significantly influence employees’ values and encourage them to adopt and practice behaviors consistent with the organization’s environmental goals. Such a culture provides a supportive framework that enables employees to demonstrate environmental concerns and responsibility in their daily work and decision making.

Eventually, green transformation leadership, GOC, and employee’s green values positively influence employees’ environmental behaviors in the workplace by shaping a work environment that supports and encourages environmentally friendly practices, supporting H8, H9, and H10. In line with the findings of previous studies, green transformation leadership in organizations convey strong environmental values and visions through motivation and modeling, which, in turn, leads employees to actively participate in environmental activities (Al-Swidi et al. 2021; Azhar and Yang 2021; Rizvi and Garg 2020). At the same time, GOC creates a social atmosphere in the workplace that promotes environmental protection and continuously strengthens employees’ recognition of their environmental responsibilities; employees’ green values directly drive them to adopt environmentally friendly behaviors in their daily work (Susanto 2023; Khan and Terason 2021). The organization and its employees share the goal of encouraging environmental behaviors through the interactions of the green transformation leadership, GOC, and employee’s green values, which creates a positive cycle of reinforcement.

Implications

Theoretical implications

This study has numerous theoretical implications. First, the theoretical contribution of this research provides new perspectives for understanding how organizations can promote sustainability through human resource management practices in the context of the Chinese manufacturing and service industries. As pointed out by Miah et al. (2024b), there is a lack of empirical studies in the service industry, highlighting the need for more research in this area. Second, Miah et al. (2024b), in their systematic literature review, suggested that more focus should be placed on individual-level antecedents, as most existing studies address organizational factors. The antecedents of GHRM should be further explored, particularly at the employee level, similar to the study by Obeidat et al. (2020). This study contributes theoretically by adding an empirical study on the employee level.

Third, this study discusses employee pro-environmental behaviors through the AMO and SIT theories, which, in turn, expands the application of the theory in the field of environmental management. In contrast, Iftikar et al. (2022) and Carballo-Penela et al. (2023) focus solely on AMO theory. Therefore, this study contributes to both the AMO and SIT theories by providing empirical insights into the organizational factors that influence employees’ abilities, motivations, opportunities, and social identities related to environmental sustainability. By determining the interplay between individual and organizational factors, this study advances our understanding of how these theoretical frameworks operate within organizations in the context of sustainability initiatives. This validation enhances the credibility and applicability of the theoretical frameworks in the context of environmental management.

Fourth, this study integrates various organizational factors, including performance management, employee empowerment, leadership, and WPEB, into a comprehensive framework for understanding and promoting GOC, Unlike studies that included pro-environmental behavior (Iftikar et al. 2022) or employee empowerment (Paillé and Francoeur, 2022) only, By examining the simultaneous effects of these factors, this study offers a holistic view of the organizational dynamics underlying the cultivation of GOC and their related outcomes. This integrated approach helps bridge the gaps between disparate theories and offers a more holistic perspective on sustainability within organizations.

Fifth, this study contributes to the broader discourse on sustainable development by emphasizing the role of organizational factors in fostering environmental responsibility. By highlighting the importance of internal organizational dynamics in shaping sustainability outcomes, this study underscores the potential of businesses to drive positive environmental change beyond mere compliance with regulations. This study discusses the impact of five GHRM practices on GOC from multiple perspectives, which, in turn, enriches the literature on GHRM and GOC, and provides new evidence and insights for research in related fields, unlike Miah et al. (2024a) and Carballo-Penela et al. (2023), who used a single dimension. In addition, this study identifies novel relationships between organizational factors and green outcomes, such as the positive association between rewards and compensation and green transformational leadership. These findings contribute to expanding our understanding of the mechanisms underlying sustainability initiatives within organizations and highlight potential avenues for further research.

Finally, this study contributes to interdisciplinary dialog by synthesizing insights from diverse fields, such as organizational behavior, leadership studies, and environmental management. Úbeda-García et al. (2022) emphasize that sustainable environmental management and green practices are crucial tools for organizations striving to reduce their environmental impact. These approaches require a multidisciplinary strategy to effectively address and minimize ecological footprints (Remsei et al. 2023). By integrating perspectives from these disciplines, this study offers a richer understanding of the complex interactions between human behavior, organizational dynamics, and environmental outcomes. This interdisciplinary approach fosters collaboration and cross-pollination of ideas, driving innovation and progress in sustainability research and practice.

Practical implications

The study offers numerous policy implications. First, it highlights the positive association between Performance Management and Appraisal practices and GOC adoption. Businesses in China can leverage this insight by integrating environmental performance metrics into appraisal systems. By incentivizing green behaviors and achievements, enterprises can cultivate a culture that values sustainability and aligns individual goals with the organizational objectives. The Chinese government can implement policies to incentivize organizations to adopt green practices by providing tax breaks, subsidies, or other financial incentives for investments in sustainability initiatives. These incentives can encourage organizations to prioritize sustainability in their operations and decision-making processes.

Second, employee empowerment and participation were significant predictors of GOC adoption. Chinese companies can empower their workforce by involving them in sustainability initiatives, decision-making processes, and problem-solving activities related to environmental concerns. Encouraging participation through training programs and establishing green teams can promote feelings of ownership and accountability in sustainable practices. The government can invest in capacity building and training programs to enhance employees’ expertise and competencies in environmental sustainability. These programs could focus on raising awareness of environmental issues, providing training on sustainable practices, and building leadership capabilities to drive sustainability initiatives within organizations.

Third, this study underscores the pivotal role of the green transformation leadership in driving GOC adoption. Business leaders in China are encouraged to demonstrate commitment to environmental stewardship by championing green initiatives, setting clear sustainability goals, and fostering a supportive organizational climate. Cultivating a cadre of green leaders who inspire and mobilize others toward sustainable action is essential for organizational transformation. The government can establish recognition and awards programs to celebrate organizations that demonstrate leadership and innovation in environmental sustainability. These programs can incentivize organizations to prioritize sustainability and serve as role models for others to follow.

Fourth, investing in environmental education and awareness-raising campaigns is vital for cultivating a culture of environmental responsibility among businesses and the broader society. Government initiatives aimed at promoting eco-consciousness, sustainable lifestyles, and green entrepreneurship can stimulate the demand for green products and services, while fostering a societal shift toward sustainability. By raising awareness and fostering a culture of environmental responsibility, these campaigns can catalyze behavioral changes and support broader sustainability efforts.

Fifth, the government of China can facilitate public-private partnerships to promote collaboration and knowledge sharing on environmental sustainability. Facilitating collaboration among businesses, government agencies, academia, and civil society organizations is essential for sharing best practices, knowledge exchange, and collective action toward sustainability goals. Establishing platforms for dialog, partnerships, and joint research initiatives can harness collective expertise and resources to address complex environmental challenges effectively. The Chinese government can implement green procurement policies that prioritize the purchase of environmentally friendly products and services. By leveraging the purchasing power of the government, these policies can create market demand for sustainable products and incentivize suppliers to adopt green practices throughout their supply chains.

Conclusions, limitations, and future research directions

This study investigated the influence of GHRM practices on the development of a GOC and how this culture interacts with green transformation leadership and employee’s green values, subsequently impacting environmental behaviors in the workplace. Drawing on the AMO theory, the research revealed that certain GHRM practices positively affect the formation of a GOC, whereas others do not. Additionally, GOC, green transformation leadership, and employee’s green values significantly shaped employee’s environmental behaviors. These findings underscore the interconnectedness of the GHRM, GOC, and green transformation leadership, offering valuable insights and recommendations for organizations in environmental management and sustainability. This study suggested that implementing such strategies can help organizations create more environmentally conscious and sustainable work environments, and foster employee engagement in environmentally friendly practices. Furthermore, it provides directions for future research and development of green management practices.

However, the current study has several potential shortcomings. First, the study exclusively focused on direct relationships, overlooking potential mediation and moderation effects that could provide deeper insights into how GHRM practices influence employee behaviors. Future research should integrate mediators, such as employee commitment or green values, along with moderators like organizational size, industry type, and leadership style, to uncover underlying mechanisms and the contexts where GHRM practices are most impactful. Second, this study mainly used a sample of manufacturing and service firms in Southeast China in terms of sample selection and scope, which may limit the generalization of the findings. Future studies should consider expanding the geographical scope of the sample sources to obtain a greater diversity of samples. Third, this study’s reliance on self-reported data may introduce biases such as social desirability bias, which can affect the validity of findings, especially in areas like environmental responsibility. To address this, future research should consider multi-source data methods, such as pairing self-reports with observational data or supervisor assessments, to improve accuracy. Additionally, response bias in questionnaire-based data collection highlights the need for improved quality control in survey design. Researchers could further refine measurement scales and examine additional organizational factors to better understand their relationship with GOC. Finally, although this study had taken precautionary measures, as a cross-sectional study, it may still be subject to common methodological biases. Therefore, future studies should employ longitudinal designs to provide a more comprehensive understanding of the relationships over time.