Sustainable Human Resource Management

Introduction:
The advancement of new communication and information technologies and the
consequent mushrooming of economy industries like service sectors causes to view
human resources as source of competitive advantage than any other capital in
organizations. The competitive world drives everyone to value resources and
currently the most valuable resources are human resources. Whether in the
business world or even in the public sector, human resource or human capital is an
asset that cannot be denied.
The Human Resource Planning Society defines five key knowledge areas for HR
practitioners: HR strategy & planning, leadership development, talent
management, organizational effectiveness, and building a strategic HR function.
Sustainable HRM is the use of instruments on employees that will have “the
trust, values, skills and motivation to achieve a profitable triple bottom line” (Cohen
et al., 2015). Examples of sustainable HRM practices include employees are
encouraged to reduce the usage of hazardous chemicals in their products as well
as employees’ emphasis on employment that will last a longer period to elude
interruption for employees, their families and communities.
The purpose of the study is to examine important factors associated with
moving organizations toward greater sustainability and the role Human Resources
is and might be playing in that process.

Literature Review:
In recent years, several studies have focused on sustainability and HRM on
individual analysis (Docherty, 2002) and HRM system analysis (Zaugg, Blum &
Thom, 2001). There are also works on interdependencies between societal,
corporate, HRM and individual level of analysis which are acknowledged by several
scholars in sustainability (Docherty, 2002; Zaugg et al., 2001). According to Zaugg
et al., (2001), there are three pillars of sustainability and HRM: (1) work life balance;
(2) individual responsibility and (3) employability. Several instruments of
measurement include “…recruitment, deployment, HR marketing, retention,
deployment, disemployment (exit policy), management and leadership” (Zaugg et
al., 2001).
The term “sustainability” can be used in different aspects which is concerned
with “meeting the needs of people today without compromising the ability of
future generations to meet their own needs”(World Business Council for
Sustainable Development, 2005).Sustainability and sustainable development are
synonymously used for the notions ‘long-term’, ‘durable’, ‘sound’, and ‘systematic’
(Filho, 2000). Dyllick and Hockerts (2002) noted that, the term ‘sustainability’ has
been influenced mainly by three different stakeholder groups; ecologists, business
strategy scholars, and the United Nation’s World Commission on Environment and
Development (WCED, 1987), called the ‘Brundtland Commission.
Sustainable human resource management was then discussed by Ehnert (2008)
that linked sustainability with the elements in Human Resource Management
(HRM). Sustainable HRM can be defined as “the adoption of HRM strategies and
practices that enable the achievement of financial, social and ecological goals, with
an impact inside and outside of the organization and over a long-term time horizon
while controlling for unintended side effects and negative feedback” (Ehnert, 2009;
Kramar, 2014). Ehnert (2006; 2012) noted that, the Sustainable Management
perspective explores “what companies themselves have to do with their
environments to have durable access to skilled human resources (Sustainable
HRM)”. Her suggestions are twofold. One is, organizations should reduce negative
side effects of practices and strategies on the sources for resources. Another is,
organizations should ensure the survival of those sources for resources which
provide human resources with the skills and motivation required. In other words,
sustainable HRM is economically rational for companies to invest in the survival of
their sources for resources if the functioning of these is endangered (Ehnert
2006).Sustainable HRM is a long-term oriented conceptual approaches and
activities aimed at a socially responsible and economically appropriate recruitment
and selection, development, deployment, and release of employees.” (Zaugg&
Thom, 2004: 217).
According to Kramar (2014), sustainable HRM refers to social and human
outcomes which contribute to the continuation of the organization in the long
term, that is to a sustainable organization. It has also been used to refer to HRM
activities which enhance positive environmental outcomes, and positive social and
human outcomes for their own sake, rather than just asmediating factors between
financial outcomes and strategy. Kramer (2014) mentioned some interchangeable
terms of sustainable HRM which include sustainable work systems (SWSs; Docherty
et al 2002), HR sustainability (Wirtenberg, et al 2007), sustainable management of
HRs (Ehnert2006, 2009, 2011, 2012), sustainable leadership (Avery 2005; Avery and
Bergsteiner2010) and sustainable HRM (Marriappanadar 2003; 2012). In addition,
the term sustainable organization (Dunphy et al. 2007) has been used.

Research Gap:
The analysis of research gaps in both HRM and in HR-related sustainability
literature uncovers conceptual, analytical and empirical and shortcomings in a
describing, understanding, explaining and predicting the emergence of
sustainability in HRM practice. Prior literature on strategic HRM and the emerging
literature on sustainability and HR- related topics have neglected the following five
aspects which form the gap in conceptual and analytical research for the study at
hand:
1. Lack of development of a theory into the link between sustainability and
HRM.
2. General neglect in developing a theory in Strategic HRM.
3. “Blind Spots” in HRM theorizing.
4. Neglect of considering a theory on paradoxical phenomena in
5. Lack of exploratory research into the sustainability-HRM Link.
Lack of development of a theory into the link between sustainability and HRM: Until
recently, sustainability and Strategic HRM literature have been developed as two
separate fields of research, advanced from different scholars, on different
conferences, in different academic journals, and in different languages. A lack of
research linking the fields of sustainability and (Strategic) HRM research has been
noted before (Boudreau and Ramstad 2005; Thom and Zaugg 2004; Ehnert 2006a).
Scholars in the area of Sustainable Business Development like Rainey (2006) or
Dyllick and Hockerts (2002) treat HR issues from a broad societal perspective and
neglect incorporating specific HRM views and knowledge.
Several topics relate to the lack of development of a theory into the sustainability–
HRM link. First, HR-related topics in sustainability research are dominated by the
discourse on CSR, and in this discourse research focusing on CSR and (Strategic)
HRM is scarce (Whetten et al. 2002). Second, in this research as well as in the
emerging research on sustainability and HRM in the traditional Strategic HRM field
(e.g., Boudreau and Ramstad 2005; Docherty et al. 2002a; Paauwe 2004).
General neglect of the development of a theory in Strategic HRM: The development
of a theory has a long tradition in organizational literature (Eisenhardt 1989), but,
Strategic HRM scholars have only recently started improving the development of
theory-guided research and development of theories (e.g., McMahan et al. 1999;
18The author has made first attempts to compare the literature in Ehnert (2006a)
and Ehnert (2007a). HRM understands itself as an applied field of research, i.e.
concerned with practice. As a consequence for this study, these choices have been
made transparent and supported by a theory on theory development in the
corresponding sections.
‘‘Blind spots’’ : In HRM theorizing become visible if the literature is regarded from
a sustainability approach. In Strategic HRM, the main focus of enquiry is the link
between HRM and performance (see Boselie et al. 2005; Way and Johnson 2005).
Four ‘‘modes of theorizing’’ have influenced theorizing in Strategic HRM:
universalistic, contingent, configurational, and a contextual approach (Delery and
Doty 1996; Brewster 1999).By focusing on one theory and on continuously
improving it, it may happen that the “the theory tends to bind the researcher’s
judgment. The researcher develops a ‘trained incapacity’ to appreciate aspects not
mentioned in her or his theory. A sustainability perspective, however, adds to the
arguments of those scholars who have recognized that efficiency and effectiveness
might advance a biased view on HRM.
Neglect of considering theory on paradoxical phenomena for theorizing in HRM:
Paradoxical demands and tensions are well recognized in HRM literature (see Sect.
1.2.3). Since approximately two decades ago, concepts such as paradoxes,
dualities, or dilemmas have become an important concern for some scholars of
organization theory (e.g., Cameron and Quinn 1988) and HRM (e.g., Evans and Doz
1991; Legge 2005). These ancient, often philosophical concepts have been
introduced into organizational research as analytical tools and as a basis for finding
new explanations on situations of increased change, turbulence, and competition
(e.g., Cameron and Quinn 1988). Their relevance for Strategic HRM theory has been
outlined by scholars like Paul Evans: Theoretical HRM concepts and models are
often based on the assumptions of stable organizational environments (e.g., Evans
and Doz 1991).
Lack of exploratory research into the sustainability-HRM Link: Few empirical and
exploratory investigations have addressed the link between sustainability and
HRM. One reason for this is that the topic ‘‘Sustainable HRM’’ is only just emerging
in practice and research (see Sect. 1.3). Prior exploratory research has focused on
identifying ‘‘best practices’’ for Sustainable HRM and on identifying companies via
case studies which are doing particularly well in this area (see Thom and Zaugg
2004). But prior research has not yet explored how companies represent their
understanding of sustainability for HRM to their key 1.3 Emergence of Conceptual
Approaches Linking Sustainability and HRM 15 stakeholders, how they justify the
link between sustainability and HRM, and which key arguments are presented in
this debate.

Research Objectives and Questions:

It is attempted in this study to make contributions to the emerging literature linking
sustainability and HRM and to the body of literature on HRM. As sustainability has
rarely been used as a concept for HRM research, the central research objective of
this study does not aim at testing theory but at developing a theoretical framework
and model for a Sustainable HRM. In this study, the need is seen to understand
interdependencies between different levels of analysis (individual, workforce,
organizational environments) as well as different HRM sub-problems (HR
shortages, side and feedback effects). To show the complexity and variety of the
phenomenon studied, to point out the potential for HRM research, and eventually
to allow for better problem-solving a relatively broad view on the topic of
sustainability and HRM has been chosen. The general contribution of the
dissertation is in describing, explaining, and understanding the emergence and
meaning of the heterogeneous and complex phenomenon of sustainability in HRM
practice of European MNEs. By doing so, this study adds to the scholarship which
has started bridging the gap between sustainability and HRM literature for
providing a contribution to the conceptualization and theoretical foundation of a
sustainability perspective for HRM (‘‘Sustainable HRM’’). More specifically, the key
problems addressed in the thesis are the problem of attracting and retaining
talented people over time.
• How can Sustainable HRM contribute to attracting, developing and retaining
highly qualified human resources over time?
• How can a paradox perspective contribute to understanding and coping with
paradoxical tensions in Sustainable HRM?
• How can sustainability be used as a ‘‘deliberate strategy’’ for HRM?
 These questions address conceptual, analytical, exploratory, and pragmatic
research objectives. The conceptual work of this dissertation is
supplemented and extended by an exploratory analysis with the objective of
investigating the representation of sustainability as a concept on the
websites of European MNEs.

Methodology:
The target population was the HR Professionals who were working in the HR
department of the different organizations located in Bangladesh. As the study was
concerned with the impact of sustainable HRM in the organization’s performance,
so the non-HR professionals were excluded from the study. The study
conveniently chose 100 HR professionals, all of them were Bangladeshi by birth.
The sample maintained ethical consideration of not disclosing their name and
address in any part of the study. The Questionnaire had been made on the basis
of 7 sustainable HRM instruments derived from the research work on sustainable
HRM practices in different countries by Zaugg and Thom (2001).
On the basis of the research question and objective, the organizational
performance considered as the dependent variable. The sustainable HR
instruments were the independent variables. The study tested the following
hypotheses:
H1: Human Resource Recruitment and Selection has a positive impact on
organizational performance.
H2: Personnel deployment has a positive impact on organizational performance.
H3: Human Resource development has a positive impact on organizational
performance.
H4: Human Resource Marketing has a positive impact on organizational
performance.
H5: Employee Retainment has a positive impact on organizational performance.
H6: Misemployment has a positive impact on organizational performance.
H7: Management and Leadership has a positive impact on organizational
performance.
Findings: Demographic data of the respondents are given below:
Out of the means, statement 3 which was “The organization imposes great
importance to assessment centers as a means of personnel selection”
represented the highest mean, i.e., 4.48 which means, the surveyed respondents
showed the most optimistic response about the assessment centers in their
organizations which determined the overall sustainable HRM practices. On the
contrary, statement 8 entitled “Retired employees have a chance to get part time
or contractual basis works.” showed the least mean value which was 2.01. To
illustrate this fact, the organizations provide a very little chance for retired
employees to return their workplace on a contractual or part-time basis.
After getting the reliability and consistency score, the study moved to the
calculation of multiple regression analysis was used to understand the effect of
the sustainable HRM impact in the overall organizational performance. For this
study, sustainable HR factors or instruments (Zaugg and Thom 2001) like human
resource recruitment and selection, personnel deployment, human resource
development, human resource marketing, employee relations, misemployment,
management and leadership were taken as the independent variables because
these were considered as the determinants of sustainable HRM practices in an
organization and the organizational performance was taken as the dependent
variable which actually depended on the sustainable HR factors.

Recommendation:
This study among a heterogeneous sample of employers showed that
organizations implemented a broad range of HR practices to improve the health,
motivation, and skills and knowledge of their employees. The main findings were
that employers regarded the HR practices they implemented as more effective in
increasing sustainable employability of employees as they implemented a larger
number of the examined HR practices, as more employees used the implemented
practices and participated in designing these practices. Implementation of a larger
amount of the HR practices was also related to higher satisfaction with the
current employability of employees, and to increased productivity of the
organization. Our study indicates that a broad range of HR practices aimed at
health, motivation and employability contribute to sustainable employability of
personnel, at least in the eyes of the employers. This finding expands earlier
evidence that HR practices focused at employee development are related to
higher work performance, work motivation, and employability of (mainly older)
personnel. An important contribution of our study to the more general HR
literature is that the perceived effectiveness of HR practices in improving
employees’ sustainable employability (i.e. health, employability and motivation) is
examined. These issues are seldom addressed in research. Whereas extensive
research has focused on the impact of work and job design (for an overview, see
Parker, 2014), studies focusing on the effectiveness of actual practices that
organizations have developed are still scarce.
Moreover, our study points at two factors that contribute to the effectiveness of
these HR practices: the actual use employees make of implemented practices and
their participation in designing these practices. It is important that employers
implement HR practices that fit the needs and wishes of employees, and actively
promote and communicate the available HR practices. Indeed, HR practices can
only be effective if employees actually make use of these practices. Our study
confirmed earlier studies that demonstrated the importance to investigate the
actual use of the implemented practices. All organizational outcomes in our study
were related to the use employees made of the implemented policy practices,
including higher satisfaction with employability of employees, increased
productivity, and lower sickness absence. Moreover, employee participation in
designing the HR practices was also related to higher satisfaction with
employability of employees.

Conclusion:
Sustainability is an emerging phenomenon in HRM practice and research. As the
world has entered the 21st century, companies found themselves in need to
develop more sustainable business models, and the HR function has a key role to
play in the process. According to Zaugg and Thom (2011), human resource
recruitment and selection process is only sustainable when it is capable of
recruiting employees who most adequately meet the requirements of the open
position. The next one is human resource marketing. A company intending to
effectively enhance its attractiveness in the labor market through measures of
human resource marketing which depends on information about its
corresponding image. Sustainable HRM demands organizational sustainability
through the implementation, management and development of human resources
policies, strategies and practices holding direct the economic, social and
environmental dimensions. Along with financial performance and organizational
goals sustainable HRM considers employees' satisfaction, commitment and well-
being. It demonstrates personal, financial, social and ecological goals in the
organization. As a most productive resource among the entire resources available
in the organization, human resource has to be used strategically and sustainably
to achieve organizational competitiveness. Sustainable HRM finally endorse that
ultimately successful individuals become the foundation stones for effective and
successful organizations.

References:
Barney, J. (2001). “Resource-Based Theories of Competitive Advantage: A Ten Years Retrospective on
the Resource Based View.”Journal of Management, 27(1): 643-650.
Bratton, J. and J. Gold. (2007). Human Resource Management: Theory and Practice, 4th ed. Basingstoke:
Palgrave McMillan.
Browning, V. and B. Delahaye. (2011). “Enhancing Workplace Learning Through Collaborative HRD.” In
M. Clarke (Ed.), Readings in HRM and Sustainability (pp. 36–50). Melbourne: Tilde University Press.
Buchanan, D. and A. Huczynski. (2004). Organizational Behaviour: An Introductory Text, 5th ed. Harlow:
Prentice Hall.
Carroll, A. B. (1991). “The Pyramid of Corporate Social Responsibility: Toward the Moral Management of
Organizational Stakeholders.” Business Horizons, 34: 39-48.
Chamsa, N. and J. García-Blandónb. (2019) “On the Importance of Sustainable Human Resource
Management for the Adoption of Sustainable Development Goals.” Resources, Conservation & Recycling
141: 109-122.
Chandler, A.D. (1962). Strategy and Structure: Chapters in the History of the American Industrial
Enterprise. Cambridge: MIT Press.
Cleveland, J. N. et al. (2015). “The Future of HR is RH: Respect for Humanity at Work.” Human Resource
Management Review,
Ehnert, I 2006, ‘Sustainability Issues in Human in Human Resource Management: Linkages, theoretical
approaches, and outlines for an emerging field’. Paper prepared for 21st EIASM SHRM Workshop, Aston,
Birmingham, March 28th - 29th, 2006.
Ehnert, I 2009,Sustainable Human Resource Management: A Conceptual and Exploratory Analysis From
a Paradox Perspective, Berlin: Physica-Verlag.
Ehnert, I. 2011, ‘Sustainability and Human Resource Management, in The Future of Employment
Relations’, eds. A. Wilkinson and K. Townsend, Hampshire: Palgrave Macmillan, pp. 215–237.
Ehnert, I., and Harry, W 2012, ‘Recent Developments and Future Prospects on Sustainable Human
Resource Management: Introduction to the Special Issue,’Management Revue, 23, 3, 221–238.
Elkington, J1994, "Triple Bottom Line". The Economist. November 17, 2009.
Firdaus, A., 2005. The development of HEdPERF: a new measuring instrument of service quality of higher
education sector. Paper presented at the Third Annual Discourse Power Resistance Conference: Global
Issues Local Solutions, 5-7.
Gupta, V. 2000. Regression explained in simple terms. Vijay Gupta Publication. Hitchcock, D & Willard, M
2006 ‘ The Business Guide to Sustainability: Practical.
 Questionnaire on Sustainable Human Resource Management

Dear respondent,
This questionnaire is prepared as a part of our study titled
“sustainable human resource management”. The purpose of
this questionnaire is to collect necessary information regarding the role
of sustainable development of human resource. Any information that is
given here is assured be treated as confidential and solely use in this
study. Please deliberately complete all questions in this questionnaire
to have precise & accurate research.
Thank you for your participation.
Personal Information:
➢ Name:
➢ Department:
➢ Designation:
➢ Gender:
➢ Age:
➢ Mobile:
➢ E–mail:
Please complete the following by placing a tick (√) in the
appropriate box:
1. “The organizations have plan for sustainable development for human
resource”.
 Agree
 Disagree
 Strongly disagree
  Strongly agree
 Neutral
2. “HRM is a strategic tool for an organization that helps for competitive
advantage”.
 Agree
 Disagree
 Strongly disagree
 Strongly agree
 Neutral

3. “There is a policy in place stating the organization philosophy on recruitment

and selection”.
 Agree
 Disagree
 Strongly disagree
 Strongly agree
 Neutral
4. “Restrict hiring, giving compensation, reducing working, early retirement are
the strategy that the organization are going to be act in case of surpluses of
employees exist”.
 Agree
 Disagree
 Strongly disagree
 Strongly agree
 Neutral
5. “The organizations estimate the size and composition of failure to ensure and
growth for sustainable competition with others”.
 Agree
 Disagree
 Strongly disagree
 Strongly agree
 Neutral
 6. “The HR department fulfill their responsibilities by guiding and giving a
full information for the selected employees to socialize shortly with the
environment”.
 Agree
 Disagree
 Strongly disagree
 Strongly agree
 Neutral
7. “Company creates an environment of open communication between
employees and management”.

 Agree
 Disagree
 Strongly disagree
 Strongly agree
 Neutral
8. “There is a process for assessing the organizations immediate training needs
and individual development needs”.
 Agree
 Disagree
 Strongly disagree
 Strongly agree
 Neutral
9. “New technologies, products, processes, services, market changes, and
community needs are considered in assessing training needs”.
 Agree
 Disagree
 Strongly disagree
 Strongly agree
 Neutral
10. “The HR department has practiced and allocated budgets for welcoming
programs for new selected employees”.
 Agree
 Disagree
 Strongly disagree
 Strongly agree
 Neutral