Antecedents of green creativity: the mediating role of employee green commitment and employee job satisfaction

Figures & data

Figure 1. Research framework.

Table 1. Summary of Related Researches

Researcher	Research purposes	Results
(Hameed et al., 2021)	Examining the relationship between GHRM practices and employee green creativity, with green transformational leadership and organizational support as mediating variables.	The green transformational leadership and organizational support were able to mediate the influence of green HRM on green creativity.
(Luu, 2021)	Examining the effect of GHRM practices on employee green creativity with green craft and harmonious environmental spirit as the mediating variables.	The green craft and harmonious environmental spirit were able to mediate the effect of GHRM practices on employee green creativity.
(Farooq et al., 2022)	Examinig the effect of GHRM on and green creativity with green self-efficacy as a mediating variable.	There was a positive relationship between GHRM and green creativity with green self-efficacy as the mediating variable.
(Abualigah et al., 2022)	Examining the effect of GHRM on green creativity with green work engagement as a mediating variable.	The green work engagement was able to mediate the effect of GHRM on green creativity.
(Muisyo et al., 2022)	Examining the effect of GHRM on green creativity with green culture as a mediating variable.	The green culture was able to mediate the effect of the GHRM variable on green creativity

Table 2. Measures of constructs and indicators

Construct	Definition	Indicators
Green HRM Practice (GHRMP)	The policies, practices, and systems that make the organization’s employees green for the benefit of the individual, society, natural environment, and the business (Arulrajah & Opatha, 2014).	Digitalization of recruitment and selection. Green issues in the employees’ job descriptions. Green behavior in the employee training and development. Green performance indicators in systems and the employee performance appraisal. Targets, goals, and responsibilities in green behavior to the employees. Rewards for the employees’ green behavior. Opportunities for the employees to engage in the green behavior. Encouraging the employees to engage in the green behavior at work. Utilization of information technology in communication and administrative governance in the HRM. Encouraging the use of green technology/materials/products. (Arulrajah & Opatha, 2014; Gupta, 2018; Khan & Liu, 2022; Mandip, 2012; Masri & Jaaron, 2017; Raut et al., 2020; Renwick et al., 2013; Roscoe et al., 2019; Shahriari et al., 2019; Ramli et al., 2012)
Employee Green Commitment (EGC)	An emotional state of mind that encompasses attachment, identification, and responsibility for environmental concerns in the workplace (Paillé et al., 2019).	Emotional attachment. Good behavior. Considering continuing to work. Considering losses if they stop working. Showing loyalty as a moral obligation. Refusing to offer other types of work at other places. (Athar et al., 2020; Paillé et al., 2019)
Employee Job Satisfaction (EJS)	An individual’s positive emotional state toward work and the work environment (Bartlett, 2000; Filiz, 2014).	The employees are satisfied with the company and leadership efforts in developing a green environment in the workplace. The employees enjoy working for the company that has a green commitment. The employees feel proud to work for the company that has a green commitment. The employees are enthusiast about the company’s policies and commitment to the environment. The employees are happy with the work related to the green behavior. The employees are satisfied with the rewards given by the company. The employees are comfortable with interpersonal relationships with their coworkers in the workplace. The employees are comfortable with work facilities and the physical office environment with the green concept. The employees are satisfied with the company’s performance appraisal system. The employees are happy with the company’s opportunity and support to practice the green behavior at work. (Bartlett, 2000; Filiz, 2014; Mphahlele & Dachapalli, 2022; Popović et al., 2015)
Green Creativity (GC)	The development of new ideas for green products, green services, green processes or green practices considered original, novel and valuable (Chen & Chang, 2013)	The employees feel successful in participating in the green creative work. The employees are encouraged to participate in the green creative work. The employees feel honored to be involved in the green creative work in the workplace. The green creative work is a significant activity for the employees. There is flexibility to explore about green creative issues at work. The employees are fluent in addressing the green creative issues in the workplace. The employees are thinking about the green creative issues in detail at work; The employees frequently consider about green creative steps at work. The employees collaborate effectively with others for the green creative work in the workplace. The employees share their green creative knowledge and skills with others in the workplace. The employees promote green creative work in the workplace. The employees are able to get information about green creative works quickly. The employees have the ability to make new and beneficial green ideas a reality at work. (Jiang et al., 2020; Chen & Chang, 2013)

Table 3. Response category

No.	Interval	Category
1	1.00–2.20	Very Low
2	2.21–3.40	Low
3	3.41–4.60	Medium
4	4.61–5.80	High
5	5.81–7.00	Very High

Table 4. Respondent profile

Characteristics	Frequency	Percentage (%)
Age
20–29 years old	65	32.5
30–39 years old	76	38.0
40–49 years old	40	2.0
50–59 years old	18	9.0
60–69 years old	1	.5
Total	200	100
Gender
Male	113	56.5
Female	87	43.5
Total	200	100
Education Level
Senior High School	14	7.0
Diploma (D1-D3)	21	1.5
Bachelor Degree	141	7.5
Postgraduate Degree	24	12.0
Total	200	100
Work Experience
1–5 years old	83	41.5
6–10 years old	53	26.5
11–15 years old	34	17.0
16–20 years old	11	5.5
21–25 years old	10	5.0
26–30 years old	6	3.0
31–35 years old	3	1.5
Total	200	100
Sector
Telecommunications	95	47.5
Manufacturing	40	2.0
Mining	7	3.5
Trading	16	8.0
Service	34	17.0
Other	8	4.0
Total	200	100

Table 5. Descriptive statistics of GHRM practice (GHRMP)

X	Indicator	Mean	Min.	Max.	STDEV.
X1	Digitization of recruitment administration.	5.93	1	7	1.301
X2	Green selection of employees.	5.65	1	7	1.366
X3	Digital communication at work.	5.23	1	7	1.634
X4	Green issues in the employees’ job descriptions.	5.47	1	7	1.299
X5	Green behavior in the employee training and development.	5.51	1	7	1.449
X6	Green performance indicators in systems and the employee performance appraisal.	5.34	1	7	1.450
X7	Targets, goals and responsibilities in green behavior to the employees.	5.51	1	7	1.345
X8	Rewards for the employees’ green behavior	5.90	1	7	1.132
X9	Opportunities for the employees to engage in the green behavior at work.	5.68	1	7	1.267
X10	Encouraging the employees to engage in the green behavior at work.	5.95	1	7	1.104
X11	Utilization of information technology in administrative governance in the HRM.	5.99	1	7	1.188
X12	Encouraging the use of green technologies/materials/products.	5.99	1	7	1.203
	Mean	5.68	High

Table 6. Descriptive Statistics of Employee Green Commitment (EGC)

Z1	Indicator	Mean	Min.	Max.	STDEV.
Z1.1	Support for company policies and commitment to a green workplace.	6.14	1	7	1.026
Z1.2	Commitment to perform the green behavior in carrying out work.	6.15	2	7	0.960
Z1.3	Commitment to promote the green behavior to colleagues.	5.90	1	7	1.053
Z1.4	Commitment to assist the colleagues in performing the green behavior in the workplace.	5.97	1	7	1.053
Z1.5	Commitment to be responsible for performing the green behavior in the workplace.	5.97	2	7	1.012
Z1.6	Commitment to be a role model in performing the green behavior at work.	5.92	1	7	1.065
Z1.7	Commitment to make the green behavior a habit and work culture.	6.06	1	7	0.933
Z1.8	Commitment to participate in every green activity program conducted by the company.	6.13	1	7	0.963
		6.030	Very High

Table 7. Descriptive statistics of Employee Job Satisfaction (EJS)

Z2	Indicator	Mean	Min.	Max.	STDEV.
Z2.1	The employees are satisfied with the company and leadership efforts in developing a green environment in the workplace.	5.61	1	7	1.098
Z2.2	The employees enjoy working for the company that has a green commitment.	5.97	1	7	1.046
Z2.3	The employees feel proud to work for the company that has a green commitment.	6.00	1	7	1.037
Z2.4	The employees are enthusiast about the company’s policies and commitment to the environment.	5.94	1	7	1.008
Z2.5	The employees are happy with the work related to the green behavior.	6.02	1	7	1.037
Z2.6	The employees are satisfied with the rewards given by the company.	5.71	1	7	1.201
Z2.7	The employees are comfortable with interpersonal relationships with their coworkers in the workplace.	5.92	1	7	1.106
Z2.8	The employees are comfortable with work facilities and the physical office environment with the green concept.	6.00	1	7	1.056
Z2.9	The employees are satisfied with the company’s performance appraisal system.	5.59	1	7	1.175
Z2.10	The employees are happy with the company’s opportunity and support to practice the green behavior at work.	5.89	1	7	1.111
		5.865	Very High

Table 8. Descriptive Statistics of Green Creativity (GC)

Y	Indicators	Mean	Min.	Max.	STDEV.
Y1	The employees feel successful in participating in the green creative work.	5.40	2	7	1.203
Y2	The employees are encouraged to participate in the green creative work.	5.68	1	7	1.160
Y3	The employees feel honored to be involved in the green creative work in the workplace.	5.77	1	7	1.097
Y4	The green creative work is a significant activity for the employees.	5.66	1	7	1.154
Y5	There is flexibility to explore about green creative issues at work.	5.56	2	7	1.119
Y6	The employees are fluent in addressing the green creative issues in the workplace.	5.51	1	7	1.098
Y7	The employees are thinking about the green creative issues in detail at work.	5.47	1	7	1.129
Y8	The employees frequently consider about green creative steps at work.	5.49	2	7	1.134
Y9	The employees collaborate effectively with others for the green creative work in the workplace.	5.62	1	7	1.145
Y10	The employees share their green creative knowledge and skills with others in the workplace.	5.76	1	7	1.067
Y11	The employees promote green creative work in the workplace.	5.59	2	7	1.135
Y12	The employees are able to get information about green creative works quickly.	5.61	1	7	1.151
Y13	The employees have the ability to make new and beneficial green ideas a reality at work.	5.69	1	7	1.132
		5.62	High

Table 9. Validity and Reliability Test

Paths	Outer Loadings	AVE	CR	Cronbach’s Alpha
X1 ← GHRMP	0.741	0.669	0.953	0.945
X4 ← GHRMP	0.790
X5 ← GHRMP	0.849
X6 ← GHRMP	0.806
X7 ← GHRMP	0.797
X8 ← GHRMP	0.816
X9 ← GHRMP	0.869
X10 ← GHRMP	0.870
X11 ← GHRMP	0.827
X12 ← GHRMP	0.808
Y1 ← GC	0.826	0.748	0.968	0.962
Y2 ← GC	0.856
Y3 ← GC	0.868
Y4 ← GC	0.864
Y5 ← GC	0.865
Y6 ← GC	0.902
Y7 ← GC	0.893
Y8 ← GC	0.882
Y9 ← GC	0.844
Y10 ← GC	0.869
Y11 ← GC	0.870
Y12 ← GC	0.850
Y13 ← GC	0.855	0.790	0.975	0.972
Z1.1 ← EGC	0.868
Z1.2 ← EGC	0.871
Z1.3 ← EGC	0.879
Z1.4 ← EGC	0.916
Z1.5 ← EGC	0.911
Z1.6 ← EGC	0.890
Z1.7 ← EGC	0.900
Z1.8 ← EGC	0.874
Z2.1 ← EJS	0.803	0.734	0.965	0.960
Z2.2 ← EJS	0.868
Z2.3 ← EJS	0.906
Z2.4 ← EJS	0.862
Z2.5 ← EJS	0.889
Z2.6 ← EJS	0.802
Z2.7 ← EJS	0.831
Z2.8 ← EJS	0.881
Z2.9 ← EJS	0.822
Z2.10 ← EJS	0.897

Note: X2 and X3 are removed from the model because their outer loadings values in the first stage are less than 0.6.

Table 10. Results of Heterotrait-Monotrait Ratio Test

Path	Original Sample (O)	2.5%	97.5%
EJS ➔ EGC	.855	0.778	0.909
GC ➔ EGC	.761	0.659	0.843
GC ➔ EJS	.775	0.642	0.871
GHRMP ➔ EGC	.800	0.708	0.869
GHRMP ➔ EJS	.818	0.714	0.891
GHRMP ➔ GC	.710	0.559	0.830

Figure 2. PLS-SEM Graphical Output.

Table 11. Direct and Indirect (Mediated) Effect

Direct Hypothesis	β	t-stat.	Conclusion
GHRMP ➔ EGC	0.251	2.886***	Supported
GHRMP ➔ GC	0.683	10.292***	Supported
GHRMP ➔ EJS	0.787	17.801***	Supported
EGC ➔ GC	0.219	3.723***	Supported
EJS ➔ GC	0.467	5.401***	Supported
Indirect Hypothesis	β	t-stat.	Conclusion
GHRMP ➔ EGC ➔ GC	0.149	3.281***	Supported
GHRMP ➔ EJS ➔ GC	0.367	5.038***	Supported

Table 12. Goodness of Fit Index Test

Construct	R^2	AVE	GoF = $\sqrt{A\mathbf{V}\mathbf{E}\mathbf{x}{\mathbf{R}}^2}$
GC	0.742	0.748	-
EJS	0.619	0.734	-
EGC	0.467	0.790	-
GHRMP	-	0.669	-
Average	0.609	0.735	0.669

Hameed, Z., Naeem, R. M., Hassan, M., Naeem, M., Nazim, M., & Maqbool, A. (2021). How GHRM is related to green creativity? A moderated mediation model of green transformational leadership and green perceived organizational support. International Journal of Manpower, 43(3), 595–613. https://doi.org/10.1108/IJM-05-2020-0244

 Web of Science ®Google Scholar

Luu, T. T. (2021). Can green creativity be fostered? Unfolding the roles of perceived green human resource management practices, dual mediation paths, and perceived environmentally-specific authentic leadership. The International Journal of Human Resource Management, 34(6), 1246–1273. https://doi.org/10.1080/09585192.2021.1986107

 Web of Science ®Google Scholar

Farooq, R., Zhang, Z., Talwar, S., & Dhir, A. (2022). Do green human resource management and self-efficacy facilitate green creativity? A study of luxury hotels and resorts. Journal of Sustainable Tourism, 30(4), 824–845. https://doi.org/10.1080/09669582.2021.1891239

 Web of Science ®Google Scholar

Abualigah, A., Koburtay, T., Bourini, I., Badar, K., & Gerged, A. M. (2022). Towards sustainable development in the hospitality sector: Does green human resource management stimulate green creativity? A moderated mediation model. Business Strategy and the Environment. https://doi.org/10.1002/bse.3296

 Google Scholar

Muisyo, P. K., Su, Q., Hashmi, H. B. A., Ho, T. H., & Julius, M. M. (2022). The role of green HRM in driving hotels’ green creativity. International Journal of Contemporary Hospitality Management, 34(4), 1331–1352. https://doi.org/10.1108/IJCHM-07-2021-0833

 Web of Science ®Google Scholar

Arulrajah, A., & Opatha, H. (2014). Green human resource management: Simplified general reflections. International Business Research, 7(8), 101–112. https://doi.org/10.5539/ibr.v7n8p101

 Google Scholar

Gupta, H. (2018). Assessing organizations performance on the basis of GHRM practices using BWM and Fuzzy TOPSIS. Journal of Environmental Management, 226, 201–216. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jenvman.2018.08.005

 PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar

Khan, U., & Liu, W. (2022). Does environmental responsible effect human resources management practice on firm effectiveness and green technology innovation? Environmental Science and Pollution Research, 1–16. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11356-022-24845-1

 Web of Science ®Google Scholar

Mandip, G. (2012). Green HRM: People management commitment to environmental sustainability. SSRN Electronic Journal, 1, 244–252. https://doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.3323800

 Google Scholar

Masri, H. A., & Jaaron, A. A. M. (2017). Assessing green human resources management practices in Manufacturing Context: An empirical study. Journal of Cleaner Production, 143, 474–489. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jclepro.2016.12.087

 Web of Science ®Google Scholar

Raut, R. D., Gardas, B., Luthra, S., Narkhede, B., & Kumar Mangla, S. (2020). Analysing green human resource management indicators of automotive service sector. International Journal of Manpower, 41(7), 925–944. https://doi.org/10.1108/IJM-09-2019-0435

 Web of Science ®Google Scholar

Renwick, D. W. S., Redman, T., & Maguire, S. (2013). Green human resource management: A review and research agenda. International Journal of Management Reviews, 15(1), 1–14. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1468-2370.2011.00328.x

 Web of Science ®Google Scholar

Roscoe, S., Subramanian, N., Jabbour, C. J. C., & Chong, T. (2019). Green human resource management and the enablers of green organisational culture: Enhancing a firm’s environmental performance for sustainable development. Business Strategy and the Environment, 28(5), 737–749. https://doi.org/10.1002/bse.2277

 Web of Science ®Google Scholar

Shahriari, B., Hassanpoor, A., Navehebrahim, A., & Jafarinia, S. (2019). A systematic review of green human resource management. Evergreen, 6(2), 177–189. https://doi.org/10.5109/2328408

 Google Scholar

Ramli, N. H., Masri, M. H., Zafrullah, M., Taib, H. M., & Abd Hamid, N. (2012). A comparative study of green school guidelines. Procedia-Social & Behavioral Sciences, 50, 462–471. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.sbspro.2012.08.050

 Google Scholar

Paillé, P., Morelos, J. H. M., Raineri, N., & Stinglhamber, F. (2019). The influence of the immediate manager on the avoidance of non-green behaviors in the Workplace: A three-wave moderated-mediation model. Journal of Business Ethics, 155(3), 723–740. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10551-017-3519-1

 Web of Science ®Google Scholar

Athar, H. S., Hermanto, H., & Sakti, D. P. B. (2020). The influence of organizational culture on organizational commitment post pandemic Covid-19. International Journal of Multicultural and Multireligious Understanding, 7(5), 19–157. https://doi.org/10.18415/ijmmu.v7i5.1626

 Google Scholar

Bartlett, C. (2000). Supervisory communication and subordinate job satisfaction: The relationship between superiors’ self-disclosure, offers of help, offers of cooperation, frequency of contact, trust and subordinates’ job satisfaction. Public Library Quarterly, 18(1), 9–30. https://doi.org/10.1300/J118v18n01_03

 Google Scholar

Filiz, Z. (2014). An analysis of the levels of job satisfaction and life satisfaction of the academic staff. Social Indicators Research, 116(3), 793–808. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11205-013-0319-6

 Web of Science ®Google Scholar

Mphahlele, L., & Dachapalli, L.-A. P. (2022). The influence of performance management systems on employee job satisfaction levels at a telecommunications company in South Africa. SA Journal of Human Resource Management, 20, 1804. https://doi.org/10.4102/sajhrm.v20i0.1804

 Web of Science ®Google Scholar

Popović, B., Maletić, R., & Paunović, T. (2015). Employee satisfaction survey in function of business improvement. Management: Journal of Sustainable Business and Management Solutions in Emerging Economies, 20(76), 31–40. https://doi.org/10.7595/management.fon.2015.0021

 Google Scholar

Chen, Y.-S., & Chang, C.-H. (2013). The determinants of green product development performance: Green dynamic capabilities, green transformational leadership, and green creativity. Journal of Business Ethics, 116(1), 107–119. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10551-012-1452-x

 Web of Science ®Google Scholar

Jiang, H., Wang, K., Lu, Z., Liu, Y., Wang, Y., & Li, G. (2020). Measuring green creativity for employees in green enterprises: Scale development and validation. Sustainability, 13(1), 275. https://doi.org/10.3390/su13010275

 Web of Science ®Google Scholar