Green Servant Leadership and Pro-Environmental Behaviour of Employees: Comparison
View Latest Version
Please note this is a comparison between Version 2 by Lindsay Dong and Version 1 by Mochammad Fahlevi.

Pro-environmental behaviour (PEB) refers to the practices that are helpful in promoting the natural environment through different practices of recycling, reusable initiatives, reprocessing, rebuilding, and the applications of different ideas to implement practices that reduce the harmful effect of an organization towards the environment by adopting the practices of green products and processes. Organizations that are involved in PEB practices are in a better position to gain a competitive edge over their competitors, as pro-environmental practices reduce costs, generate revenue, and help create a positive image through certain practices towards sustainability.

  • green servant leadership
  • pro-environmental behaviour
  • environmental passion
  • climate for green creativity

1. Introduction

The role of leaders is immensely important in shaping employees’ behaviour [12,13,14,15][1][2][3][4]. However, there is a lack of understanding and empirical evidence to uncover the underlying mechanisms of leadership roles on enhancing pro-environmental behaviour (PEB) [12[1][5][6],16,17], particularly green servant leadership (GSL) [1[7][8],2], which has been reported as a significant predictor of PEB [18,19][9][10]. GSL places a higher emphasis on environmental advantages, both for the leader personally and the organization, while simultaneously focusing on instilling pro-environmental values in key organizational stakeholders, such as employees and customers [3,7,12][1][11][12]. Various studies have been conducted on other styles of leadership like green transformational leadership [20][13], ethical leadership [21][14], and responsible leadership [6][15]. Therefore, there is a gap in the empirical evidence to investigate GSL’s impact on PEB [2,22,23][8][16][17]. The novelty of the study lies in bridging the gap in the literature by focusing on the environmental aspect of GSL that inculcates and promotes the PEB.
The role of passion is significant in carrying out different activities with dedication. Employees exhibit passion in multiple ways demonstrating positive emotions at work, developing meaningful connections to different work tasks, and being intrinsically directed to accomplish the tasks [24][18]. Environmental passion (EP) is the employee’s emotional experiences towards the various environmental practices in the organization [20][13]. A strong passion for the environment serves as a motivating force that drives individuals to engage in pro-environmental behaviour [25][19]. Employees who are passionate about environmental causes not only engage in spontaneous pro-environmental actions but also maintain a consistent commitment to PEB, and exhibit themselves as environmentalists [26][20]. Employees with strong EP are not only inclined towards the PEB but also identify themselves as environmentalists [20,26][13][20]. The role of the leader is pertinent to further strengthen the EP in employees, which in turn can promote PEB. GSL specifically prioritizes environmental concerns and acknowledges employees’ contributions to the community, particularly through environmentally conscious actions [27][21], which can enhance their EP as conscientious environmental citizens and portray PEB in the organization [12][1]. There is a lack of studies and gaps that investigate the mediation mechanism of EP between GSL and PEB, particularly in the SMEs of Pakistan.
To promote PEB, the role of climate for green creativity (CFGC) is also crucial [28,29][22][23]. CFGC refers to organizational support to employees to achieve their outcomes through their own creative manner [28,30,31][22][24][25]. Particularly, when employees believe that they are appreciated and rewarded at a workplace for their creativity, such practices enhance the notion of the climate for creativity [22,32][16][26]. GSL is regarded as an architect of environments that promote a climate conducive to creativity [33][27]. Moreover, it provides essential resources and offers support for creative and innovative endeavours [28][22]. Servant leadership was found to have positive relationship with group creativity [34][28]. In an environment where there is an abundance of resources, comprehensive support, and attractive incentives for novel ideas, employees are more inclined to engage in innovative behaviours while considering the environment [28][22]. However, there is a limitation in the literature regarding the mechanism underlying the mediation of CFGC between GSL and PEB [28,35][22][29].

2. Green Servant Leadership and Pro-Environmental Behaviour

2.1. Pro-Environmental Behaviour

PEBs are generally regarded as to be human behaviours that are developed and used sustainably in relation to the environment or that attempt to lessen the negative effects of those behaviours on the environment [20[13][30],36], as well as the performance of actions that are good for the environment and the avoidance of actions that are bad for the environment [37][31]. Some studies have referred to PEB as the environmentally friendly behaviours of employees at the workplace, such as deliberately recycling paper, conserving water and electricity, etc., which are relevant to the organizational management setting [15][4]. Further, PEB is defined as activity that modifies the ecosystem’s structure and dynamics and has a positive impact on the availability of resources like energy or materials [38][32].
Employees’ PEB is crucial to achieving an organization’s sustainability goals and halting the degradation of the environment [2][8]. Additionally, it is posited that the conduct observed within the organization, which deviates from formal policies and prescribed implementation procedures, is undertaken voluntarily by employees [4][33]. In a nutshell, employees have discretion and complete freedom to exhibit behaviour that is proactive toward environmental preservation at the individual level. Businesses have started to recognize the connection between environmental protection, as well as their persistence and performance [39][34].
Cultivating PEB can benefit firms strategically by increasing efficiency, increasing income, improving brand perception, achieving sustainability goals, and giving them an edge over its competitors [2][8]. Nonetheless, both academics and practitioners have neglected the topic of employee PEB. Employees’ pro-environmental conduct is defined as their desire to participate in environmental engagement [40][35]. One of the major predictors of employee PEB is the leadership style in a business, according to past research studies [20,26,41][13][20][36].

2.2. Green Servant Leadership and Pro-Environmental Behaviour

The focus and the centre of attention for servant leadership is the employees’ interest [1[7][37],42], directing them in a way to pursue their needs [43][38], and carrying out different activities that exhibit him/her as a role model of compassionate, altruistic love and empathy [1][7]. Servant leadership has received much attention from scholars regarding its impact on various aspects of organizational, group, and individual outcomes [1][7]. Very few studies have focused the environmental concerns and issues and their relation to servant leadership [2,35][8][29]. Luu Trong Tuan’s [31][25] idea of integrating the environmental component with servant leadership in the literature says that PEB should serve as an example of humility, sincerity, interpersonal acceptance, and stewardship toward employees’ pro-environmental accomplishments. It should also give advice, help people become pro-environmental citizens, and encourage this kind of behaviour in others. This reflects the pro-environmental approach of the leaders, which can be termed as green leadership. Thus, this study takes this concept as GSL [1,35][7][29]. In addition to that, the various concepts of green practices, particularly green human resource management (GHRM) practices, are also part of the organizational initiatives, and to implement green practices properly, the role of leaders is critical, and plays an integral part in impacting the organization and employees [5][39]. Furthermore, Robertson and Barling [44][40] advocated that servant leadership is significant in promoting PEB, and after the article appeared, most of the researchers turned to investigating the servant leadership in the context to the environment, which is now referred to as GSL [1,12,35][1][7][29]. PEB is reflected in the positive initiatives of the employees with respect to energy, material, nature, and ecosystem [38,45][32][41]. Further, it is discussed in the literature as behaviour that is reflected in terms of reuse, recycling, and conservation of the energy [46][42]. Employees who are directed for PEB benefit the organizational performance directly and indirectly [1,2][7][8]. The concepts of GSL and PEB are taken and linked from the perspective of SLT [47][43]. The green philosophy paves the way for the implementation of such practices, which opens the venue to cultivate and develop green values in employees through leadership [35][29].

2.3. Mediating Role of Environmental Passion

EP is investigated and linked with environmental issues [28][22]. EP is considered as the motivational state related to the environment. Passion is referred to as the state where employees dedicate themselves in a way to pursue certain tasks and activities persistently [48][44]. Studies have advocated that such a source of pursuing dedication be utilized by the organization to maximize the organizational performance [49][45]. When such emotions are directed towards environmentally friendly practices, they develop a state of EP in which they care about the environment and redirect their behaviour towards environmental conservation practices [25,50][19][46]. GLS attracts employees to work voluntarily, and is friendly towards the environment [1][7]. The purpose of GSL is to inculcate the emotions in employees towards environmentally friendly practices [51][47]. Furthermore, it follows the directions of the philosophical perspective from SLT that followers tend to follow leaders and reciprocate through their behaviour and actions. Based on the above argument, it can be referred to as GSL leading employees towards environmentally friendly practices [31][25]. Furthermore, transformational leadership behaviours, whether verbal or nonverbal, emphasizing environmental issues can be viewed as affective events that are essential for igniting the EP of subordinates [15,20][4][13]. Additionally, by displaying protection of the environment, environmentally focused transformational leaders can show employees the organization’s commitment and conviction, potentially raising their positive emotional anticipation of environmental operations [52][48]. In addition to that, environmentally focused transformational leaders who exhibit high levels of idealized influence and intellectual stimulation encourage people to find creative solutions to environmental problems and direct staff to put organizational social responsibility and environmental sustainability ahead of their own self-interests, increasing staff’s intrinsic motivation to participate in environmental protection activities [20,53][13][49]. Environmentally focused transformational leaders who display interactive processes (such as compassion and mentoring) for their employees to be more receptive to their leadership’s guidance on environmental issues and to participate in environmental protection activities should also make them feel effective and practical support [54][50]. Employees are much less likely to demonstrate a passion for environmental issues if they have limited opportunities to observe or support environmentally beneficial actions exhibited by their leaders [20,29][13][23]. A study found a relationship between transformational leadership and EP [15][4]. Similarly, other studies also found that other types of leadership impact EP [25,50,55][19][46][51]. GSL promotes employees’ behaviour to serve the organization as well as the community through environmental practices [56][52]. The aim of GSL is to develop the emotional state in which employees always want to protect the environment while using fewer resources and less energy and adopting recycling practices [35][29]. GSL exhibits PEB, which in turn influences the employees in a way to develop behaviour that cares for the environment [2,25,35][8][19][29]. Most studies investigated the mediating role of EP between other styles of leadership on PEB [15,20][4][13].

2.4. Mediating Role of Climate for Green Creativity

CFGC is referred to as organizational support to employees to carry out their activities in a way in which they work in a creative manner [28][22]. CFGC reflects on an environment where employees are treated and rewarded based on their creative manner to use fewer resources and new initiatives to solve problems and adopt environmentally friendly behaviour [32][26]. Moreover, CFGC is considering the utilization of organizational resources and providing support for green creativity, and is involved constantly in developing new insights regarding green change, green practices, green initiatives, and reward systems to employees accordingly for their green creative work-related outcomes [25][19]. Moreover, the allocation of financial resources by the organization for green projects and initiatives is referred to as CFGC. It has been argued that the values of a green environment convey to employees the need for them to act sustainably [57][53]. By giving employees the social resources, they require a setting that encourages innovation in the green movement, values, and pro-environmental perception to be merged, which may motivate employees to channel their pro-environmental resources into green work-related behaviours [28][22]. The role of GSL is very important for cultivating a green environment for employees. Employees have a greater tendency to positively perceive CFGC when environmentally friendly leaders invest in creating it through the provision of adequate green resources, and as a result, they are more likely to display PEB [28][22]. There are various reasons why this study has focused on GSL as leadership style. First, GSL is regarded as the architecture of the organization that cultivates and supports CFGC [33][27]. In addition to that, they encourage and reward the employees for green creativity [31[25][54],58], and give them the opportunity to solve problems in their own creative manner, and embed this in the culture of the organization [59][55]. Another reason is that GSL develops the organizational environment in a way in which employees feel free to develop and share their ideas and perform experiments regardless of the success or failure of the idea because they feel support from GSL for green creativity [58,60][54][56]. Although some efforts have been made to investigate the role of a green climate as a mediating factor between environmentally conscious servant leadership and green performance [22][16], the role of a green climate as a mediating factor for green creativity in the hospitality sector has not yet been investigated [28,30][22][24]. Moreover, in general, the literature on green workplaces argues that employees’ views of a workplace’s green environment might influence their attitudes and behaviours [61,62][57][58]. Another reason is that by giving discretion to employees to utilize resources in a way in which employees feel empowered, and ultimately develop feelings that employees are given resources and empowerment to transfer resources the way they want for green creativity, such decisions reflect CFGC. SLT also advocates the same: that employees tend to follow their leaders’ actions, and environmentally friendly practices performed by leaders are like catalysts to boost their confidence level and lead them to exhibit support and care for organizational CFGC.

2.5 Summary

First, promoting green practices requires GSL. To successfully implement eco-initiatives, PEB, and green interests, SME administration needs to cultivate an environmentally oriented leadership mindset among their managers and overall management. Followers genuinely embrace their leader’s environmental concern, and need to be motivated by their own passion for the cause. This inner drive will compel them to exhibit PEB, both in the presence of their leader and even when they are distant from them [25][19]. At the organizational level, firms can greatly benefit from the study’s findings; multiple training programmes and effective planning procedures can achieve this milestone. Moreover, the adoption of GSL should link PEB both within and outside the workplace. Organizations are encouraged to provide training to their managers to learn the principles of GSL, enabling them to actively promote PEB [81][59]. The administration of SMEs should also give special consideration to pro-environmental issues in its hiring and recruitment practices for managers and leaders [28][22]. To ensure the success of GSL, appropriate reward systems must also be put in place [32][26]. Second, to encourage pro-environmental actions such as EP and CFGC for the environment, SME management must foster green values among followers through mentoring and training. Third, studies emphasize the significance of creating and maintaining CFGC to promote environmentally friendly behaviour [22][16].

References

  1. Afsar, B.; Cheema, S.; Javed, F. Activating Employee’s pro-Environmental Behaviors: The Role of CSR, Organizational Identification, and Environmentally Specific Servant Leadership. Corp. Soc. Responsib. Environ. Manag. 2018, 25, 904–911.
  2. Fahlevi, M.; Aljuaid, M.; Saniuk, S. Leadership Style and Hospital Performance: Empirical Evidence from Indonesia. Front. Psychol. 2022, 13, 911640.
  3. Li, W.; Abdalla, A.A.; Mohammad, T.; Khassawneh, O.; Parveen, M. Towards Examining the Link between Green HRM Practices and Employee Green In-Role Behavior: Spiritual Leadership as a Moderator. Psychol. Res. Behav. Manag. 2023, 16, 383–396.
  4. Robertson, J.L.; Barling, J. Greening Organizations through Leaders’ Influence on Employees’ pro-Environmental Behaviors. J. Organ. Behav. 2013, 34, 176–194.
  5. Al-Ghazali, B.M.; Gelaidan, H.M.; Shah, S.H.A.; Amjad, R. Green Transformational Leadership and Green Creativity? The Mediating Role of Green Thinking and Green Organizational Identity in SMEs. Front. Psychol. 2022, 13, 977998.
  6. Graves, L.M.; Sarkis, J. The Role of Employees’ Leadership Perceptions, Values, and Motivation in Employees’ Provenvironmental Behaviors. J. Clean. Prod. 2018, 196, 576–587.
  7. Faraz, N.A.; Ahmed, F.; Ying, M.; Mehmood, S.A. The Interplay of Green Servant Leadership, Self-Efficacy, and Intrinsic Motivation in Predicting Employees’ pro-Environmental Behavior. Corp. Soc. Responsib. Environ. Manag. 2021, 28, 1171–1184.
  8. Ying, M.; Faraz, N.A.; Ahmed, F.; Raza, A. How Does Servant Leadership Foster Employees’ Voluntary Green Behavior? A Sequential Mediation Model. Int. J. Environ. Res. Public Health 2020, 17, 1792.
  9. Lee, A.; Lyubovnikova, J.; Tian, A.W.; Knight, C. Servant Leadership: A Meta-Analytic Examination of Incremental Contribution, Moderation, and Mediation. J. Occup. Organ. Psychol. 2020, 93, 1–44.
  10. Hoch, J.E.; Bommer, W.H.; Dulebohn, J.H.; Wu, D. Do Ethical, Authentic, and Servant Leadership Explain Variance above and beyond Transformational Leadership? A Meta-Analysis. J. Manag. 2018, 44, 501–529.
  11. Shah, S.H.A.; Al-Ghazali, B.M.; Bhatti, S.; Aman, N.; Fahlevi, M.; Aljuaid, M.; Hasan, F. The Impact of Perceived CSR on Employees’ Pro-Environmental Behaviors: The Mediating Effects of Environmental Consciousness and Environmental Commitment. Sustainability 2023, 15, 4350.
  12. Shah, S.H.A.; Fahlevi, M.; Jamshed, K.; Aman, N.; Rafiq, N.; Jermsittiparsert, K.; Aljuaid, M. Sustaining the Earth: Unraveling the Synergy of Workplace Spirituality, Responsible Leadership, and Pro-Environmental Behavior in Pakistan’s SMEs. PRBM 2023, 16, 3075–3093.
  13. Li, Z.; Xue, J.; Li, R.; Chen, H.; Wang, T. Environmentally Specific Transformational Leadership and Employee’s Pro-Environmental Behavior: The Mediating Roles of Environmental Passion and Autonomous Motivation. Front. Psychol. 2020, 11, 1408.
  14. Jamshed, K.; Shah, S.H.A.; Majeed, Z.; Al-Ghazali, B.; Jamshaid, S. Role of Green Leadership and Green Training on the Green Process Innovation: Mediation of Green Managerial Innovation. J. Xidian Univ. 2022, 16, 66–72.
  15. Afsar, B.; Maqsoom, A.; Shahjehan, A.; Afridi, S.A.; Nawaz, A.; Fazliani, H. Responsible Leadership and Employee’s Proenvironmental Behavior: The Role of Organizational Commitment, Green Shared Vision, and Internal Environmental Locus of Control. Corp. Soc. Responsib. Environ. Manag. 2020, 27, 297–312.
  16. Luu, T.T. Building Employees’ Organizational Citizenship Behavior for the Environment: The Role of Environmentally-Specific Servant Leadership and a Moderated Mediation Mechanism. Int. J. Contemp. Hosp. Manag. 2018, 31, 406–426.
  17. Maqbool, S.; Zafeer, H.M.I.; Zeng, P.; Mohammad, T.; Khassawneh, O.; Wu, L. The Role of Diverse Leadership Styles in Teaching to Sustain Academic Excellence at Secondary Level. Front. Psychol. 2023, 13, 1096151.
  18. Vallerand, R.J.; Blanchard, C.; Mageau, G.A.; Koestner, R.; Ratelle, C.; Léonard, M.; Gagné, M.; Marsolais, J. Les Passions de l’âme: On Obsessive and Harmonious Passion. J. Personal. Soc. Psychol. 2003, 85, 756–767.
  19. Khan, M.M.; Ahmed, S.S.; Khan, E. Green Spillover: Deriving pro-Environmental Behavior on Job and off-Job through Environmental Specific Servant Leadership. Pakistan Business Review 2021, 23, 1–26.
  20. Afsar, B.; Badir, Y.; Kiani, U.S. Linking Spiritual Leadership and Employee Pro-Environmental Behavior: The Influence of Workplace Spirituality, Intrinsic Motivation, and Environmental Passion. J. Environ. Psychol. 2016, 45, 79–88.
  21. Ginting, H.B. The effect of transformational leadership and work motivation on work ethic. Priviet Soc. Sci. J. 2022, 2, 7–11.
  22. Aboramadan, M.; Kundi, Y.M.; Farao, C. Examining the Effects of Environmentally-Specific Servant Leadership on Green Work Outcomes among Hotel Employees: The Mediating Role of Climate for Green Creativity. J. Hosp. Mark. Manag. 2021, 30, 929–956.
  23. Choong, Y.-O.; Ng, L.-P.; Tee, C.-W.; Kuar, L.-S.; Teoh, S.-Y.; Chen, I.-C. Green Work Climate and Pro-Environmental Behaviour among Academics: The Mediating Role of Harmonious Environmental Passion. Int. J. Manag. Stud. 2019, 26, 77–97.
  24. Datu, J.A.D.; Buenconsejo, J.U. The Ecological Benefits of Staying Gritty: Grit Dimensions Are Associated with pro-Environmental Passion, Awareness, and Behaviours. Aust. J. Psychol. 2021, 73, 416–425.
  25. Tuan, L.T. Effects of Environmentally-Specific Servant Leadership on Green Performance via Green Climate and Green Crafting. Asia Pac. J. Manag. 2021, 38, 925–953.
  26. Kim, S.; Yoon, G. An Innovation-Driven Culture in Local Government: Do Senior Manager’s Transformational Leadership and the Climate for Creativity Matter? Public Pers. Manag. 2015, 44, 147–168.
  27. Karatepe, O.M.; Aboramadan, M.; Dahleez, K.A. Does Climate for Creativity Mediate the Impact of Servant Leadership on Management Innovation and Innovative Behavior in the Hotel Industry? Int. J. Contemp. Hosp. Manag. 2020, 32, 2497–2517.
  28. Linuesa-Langreo, J.; Ruiz-Palomino, P.; Elche, D. Servant Leadership, Empowerment Climate, and Group Creativity_ a Case Study in the Hospitality Industry. Ramon Llull J. Appl. Ethics 2016, 7, 9–36.
  29. Tuan, L.T. Environmentally-Specific Servant Leadership and Green Creativity among Tourism Employees: Dual Mediation Paths. J. Sustain. Tour. 2020, 28, 86–109.
  30. Bissing-Olson, M.J.; Iyer, A.; Fielding, K.S.; Zacher, H. Relationships between Daily Affect and Pro-Environmental Behavior at Work: The Moderating Role of pro-Environmental Attitude. J. Organ. Behav. 2013, 34, 156–175.
  31. Lange, F.; Dewitte, S. Measuring Pro-Environmental Behavior: Review and Recommendations. J. Environ. Psychol. 2019, 63, 92–100.
  32. Stern, P.C. New Environmental Theories: Toward a Coherent Theory of Environmentally Significant Behavior. J. Soc. Issues 2000, 56, 407–424.
  33. Kim, S.-H.; Lee, K.; Fairhurst, A. The Review of “Green” Research in Hospitality, 2000–2014: Current Trends and Future Research Directions. Int. J. Contemp. Hosp. Manag. 2017, 29, 226–247.
  34. Kuo, L.; Yeh, C.-C.; Yu, H.-C. Disclosure of Corporate Social Responsibility and Environmental Management: Evidence from China. Corp. Soc. Responsib. Environ. Manag. 2012, 19, 273–287.
  35. Scherbaum, C.A.; Popovich, P.M.; Finlinson, S. Exploring Individual-Level Factors Related to Employee Energy-Conservation Behaviors at Work1. J. Appl. Soc. Psychol. 2008, 38, 818–835.
  36. Robertson, J.L.; Carleton, E. Uncovering How and When Environmental Leadership Affects Employees’ Voluntary Pro-Environmental Behavior. J. Leadersh. Organ. Stud. 2018, 25, 197–210.
  37. Schaubroeck, J.; Lam, S.S.K.; Peng, A.C. Cognition-Based and Affect-Based Trust as Mediators of Leader Behavior Influences on Team Performance. J. Appl. Psychol. 2011, 96, 863–871.
  38. Liden, R.C.; Wayne, S.J.; Liao, C.; Meuser, J.D. Servant Leadership and Serving Culture: Influence on Individual and Unit Performance. Acad. Manag. J. 2014, 57, 1434–1452.
  39. Pasaribu, Y.; Fitriano, A.; Syafrizal, R. The influence of training, job interest, and job environment on employee performance at PT. Tanina Karya Ajiborna. J. Econ. Bus. Lett. 2023, 3, 53–59.
  40. Robertson, J.L.; Barling, J. Contrasting the Nature and Effects of Environmentally Specific and General Transformational Leadership. Leadersh. Organ. Dev. J. 2017, 38, 22–41.
  41. Mughal, M.F.; Cai, S.L.; Faraz, N.A.; Ahmed, F. Environmentally Specific Servant Leadership and Employees’ Pro-Environmental Behavior: Mediating Role of Green Self Efficacy. Psychol. Res. Behav. Manag. 2022, 15, 305–316.
  42. Li, D.; Zhao, L.; Ma, S.; Shao, S.; Zhang, L. What Influences an Individual’s pro-Environmental Behavior? A Literature Review. Resour. Conserv. Recycl. 2019, 146, 28–34.
  43. Bandura, A.; Walters, R.H. Social Learning Theory; Prentice Hall: Englewood Cliffs, NJ, USA, 1977.
  44. Vallerand, R.J.; Salvy, S.-J.; Mageau, G.A.; Elliot, A.J.; Denis, P.L.; Grouzet, F.M.E.; Blanchard, C. On the Role of Passion in Performance. J. Personal. 2007, 75, 505–534.
  45. Pradhan, R.K.; Panda, P.; Jena, L.K. Purpose, Passion, and Performance at the Workplace: Exploring the Nature, Structure, and Relationship. Psychol. Manag. J. 2017, 20, 222–245.
  46. Hao, P.; He, W.; Long, L.-R. Why and When Empowering Leadership Has Different Effects on Employee Work Performance: The Pivotal Roles of Passion for Work and Role Breadth Self-Efficacy. J. Leadersh. Organ. Stud. 2018, 25, 85–100.
  47. Northouse, P. Gender and Leadership. In Leadership: Theory and Practice, 7th ed.; SAGE Publications: New York, NY, USA, 2015; pp. 397–426.
  48. Walumbwa, F.O.; Avolio, B.J.; Zhu, W. How Transformational Leadership Weaves Its Influence on Individual Job Performance: The Role of Identification and Efficacy Beliefs. Pers. Psychol. 2008, 61, 793–825.
  49. Shunlong, X.; Weiming, Z. The Relationships between Transformational Leadership, LMX, and Employee Innovative Behavior. J. Appl. Bus. Econ. 2012, 13, 87–96.
  50. Judge, T.A.; Piccolo, R.F. Transformational and Transactional Leadership: A Meta-Analytic Test of Their Relative Validity. J. Appl. Psychol. 2004, 89, 755–768.
  51. Gao, A.; Jiang, J. Perceived Empowering Leadership, Harmonious Passion, and Employee Voice: The Moderating Role of Job Autonomy. Front. Psychol. 2019, 10, 1484.
  52. Graham, J.W. An Essay on Organizational Citizenship Behavior. Empl. Responsib. Rights J. 1991, 4, 249–270.
  53. Norton, T.A.; Zacher, H.; Parker, S.L.; Ashkanasy, N.M. Bridging the Gap between Green Behavioral Intentions and Employee Green Behavior: The Role of Green Psychological Climate. J. Organ. Behav. 2017, 38, 996–1015.
  54. van Dierendonck, D.; Rook, L. Enhancing Innovation and Creativity through Servant Leadership. In Servant Leadership: Developments in Theory and Research; van Dierendonck, D., Patterson, K., Eds.; Palgrave Macmillan UK: London, UK, 2010; pp. 155–165. ISBN 978-0-230-29918-4.
  55. Parris, D.L.; Peachey, J.W. A Systematic Literature Review of Servant Leadership Theory in Organizational Contexts. J. Bus. Ethics 2013, 113, 377–393.
  56. Chou, C.-J. Hotels’ Environmental Policies and Employee Personal Environmental Beliefs: Interactions and Outcomes. Tour. Manag. 2014, 40, 436–446.
  57. Khan, S.Z.; Yang, Q.; Waheed, A. Investment in Intangible Resources and Capabilities Spurs Sustainable Competitive Advantage and Firm Performance. Corp. Soc. Responsib. Environ. Manag. 2019, 26, 285–295.
  58. Dumont, J.; Shen, J.; Deng, X. Effects of Green HRM Practices on Employee Workplace Green Behavior: The Role of Psychological Green Climate and Employee Green Values. Hum. Resour. Manag. 2017, 56, 613–627.
  59. Khan, A.; Hussain, S.; Sampene, A.K. Investing in Green Intellectual Capital to Enhance Green Corporate Image under the Influence of Green Innovation Climate: A Case of Chinese Entrepreneurial SMEs. J. Clean. Prod. 2023, 418, 138177.
More
© Text is available under the terms and conditions of the Creative Commons Attribution (CC BY) license (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/)
ScholarVision Creations
Feedback