Mahfuz Judeh*
| Jameel Khader
© 2023 IIETA. This article is published by IIETA and is licensed under the CC BY 4.0 license (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/).
OPEN ACCESS
Organizations, in general, have been emphasizing the green human resource management practices in the last two decades in order to change employees` attitudes and evoke their positive behaviors. Management can elicit employees` positive attitudes and behaviors through implementing green training and development, as one of the main human resources functions. The aim of this study was to explore the link between green training and development, green employee behavior, and employee retention. In addition, the study tried to assess the role of job delight as a mediating variable in the relationship between green training and development, green employee behavior, and employee retention. The study was conducted and collected data from 287 employees working with hotels and tourism corporations listed in Amman Stock Exchange in Jordan to assess the proposed relationships. Results showed that the relationships between green training and development, green employee behavior, and employee retention were positively significant. The study also found that job delight significantly contributed as a mediator in these relationships. Academic and managerial implications of these findings were discussed.
green training, organizational behavior, employee retention, Jordan
The fast-growing business and the evolution of technology have driven organizations to follow new human resource strategies so as to stay competitive in the market. In the last two decades, concern for environmental and green requirements for all human resource practices has been increasing. Hence, organizations are becoming more interested in enhancing sustainability and green human resource policies and practices. Human resources management has to be aware of this issue and adopt proactive environmental management policies in all its activities and functions including training and development.
In the hotel and tourism industry, almost all of environmental management researches had examined hotels` environmental management practices, such as energy efficiency and water waste, and prevention of pollution. Hsiao et al. [1] established the environmental management criteria for the hotel industry to measure green hotels. Furthermore, researchers had approached environmental management in hotels from two different viewpoints: consumers and employees.
In general, few of the researchers explored that practicing green human resource management behaviors can be related to positive behaviors. Zaki and Norazman [2] explained that empowered employees can be stimulated to execute environmental jobs more than the disempowered employees. Moreover, Akpa et al. ]3[discovered that green human resource management actions and green work life balance were related to employee retention in hospitality organizations.
Human resource management practices focus has been moved to such practices which can develop employee green behaviors. Green training and development (GTD) is one of the approaches which can increase the level of job delight, and stimulate green attitudes and behaviors. This approach can elicit employees’ green behaviors and in turn, may influence their performance and their intent to stay. Deng et al. [4] proved that green training was evidenced to provoke employees` attitudes and behaviors, and accordingly, deepening green values. Thereupon, employees` green values would presumably enhance their motivations to implement environmental practices naturally] 5[, which sequentially generates green outcomes.
Green employee behavior (GEB) which aims at protecting or minimizing harm to the environment ]6[, can be viewed as crucial factors to the effective implementation of green practices at work. Besides, studies have provided evidence that involving employees in green practices is essential for the environmental management initiatives [7[. Therefore, GEB can contribute to the better environmental performance at the workplace.
GTD can be considered a vital concept in employee retention. An organization not just only create an environment that attract its employees, but also try to retain experienced, knowledgeable and creative employees [8[. Human Resource Management dimensions such as training and development, supervisory support, compensation and benefits and performance appraisal were proved to be significantly and negatively related to employee intention to leave [9[. Therefore, management should consider and focus on antecedents of retention, such as GTD, so that they can retain talented and competent employees.
Since the concept of GTD is relatively new for practitioners and scholars, its antecedents and consequences are not yet fully explored. This study tries to explore the direct effect of GTD and job delight on green employee behavior (GEB) and employee retention, intending to widen the understanding of the way how these four variables are associated.
Associating GTD and job delight with GEB and employee retention enlightens critical but rarely studied variables that can affect the results of organizations.
Past literature [10[ showed that green training had a significant influence on the employee performance. Moreover, Kim’s survey [11] on state government IT employees found that promotion, training and development, and other human resource management policies were significantly associated with employee retention. In general, to solicit positive individual and organizational behaviors, to retain employees and to motivate them to work harder, an organization must provide its employees the necessary GTD designed particularly for building and changing their attitudes towards work. There is a need to deploy all human resources policies, including GTD policies, into all hotels activities and processes. In a study conducted by Farid and El-Sawalhy [12] on five star hotels in Egypt, results showed that in spite of the awareness of HR hotel managers in Egypt about the green HRM, they do not integrate green HRM procedures in their departments, suggesting to involve these procedures into all departments` procedures.
Although GTD antecedents and consequences on individual and organizational behaviors have been studied barely, the association between them is poorly empirically supported. Using structural equation modeling methodology, the study is trying to explore whether GTD, employee retention and GEB are associated together, and how job delight can perform as a mediator between GTD, retention, and GEB. Findings of this study is expected to provide evidence that when the delighted employees are provided with the appropriate environmental knowledge, skills and abilities, they will be inclined to demonstrate better green behaviors. Similarly, the findings confirm the Jordanian hotels and tourism employees who receive the appropriate environmental knowledge, skills and abilities and who are delighted can be expected to increase employee retention rates. The delighted employees who received GTD courses feel tend to display green behaviors and stay in their organizations.
2.1 Green training and development
GTD notion has been developed to generate employee awareness on sustainable use of resources and protect the native environment. GTD can be referred to as one of the main human resource management activities that concerns green coaching, on-the job and off- the-job training, and on development of employees which can strengthen positive environmental behaviors at the workplace. GTD aims to enhance employees` environmental awareness and attitudes, and to enlarge knowledge and social responsibility of employees towards their environment. Training and developing employees is one of the main elements for the successful achievement of environmental goals ]13[, since this training enables employees to address the environmental issues. It is pertaining to training employees to be aware of how to save energy, minimize waste, and disseminate environmental awareness. It also strengthens the ability to manage organizational change and enhances positive attitudes in connection with environmental concerns [14[.
In fact, GTD is concerned with the entire application of the notion of sustainability to organizations and their employees. GTD strategies and policies focus on behavioral perspective as a ground to achieve the planned organizational environmental management purposes. Accordingly, employees` attitudes can nurture their motivations to emotionally get involved in environmental practices. GTD is a process to train employees to be aware of work methods that save energy and provide employees to get involved in solving environmental problems. Members of organizations are encouraged to be concerned with green training to update their knowledge and skills in the field of expertise and improve their level of awareness in green practices. Furthermore, green training and development may influence employees’ attitudes and their career growth. The results of Xie et al. ]15[ proved that green training was associated with employee career growth via employee performance.
GTD is concerned with providing workers with methods to enable them address the environmental goals and strategies concerning energy, paperless work and water usage.
A previous study has clarified that organizations providing green training have more aware and efficient employees to meet environmental standards in comparison to others provide traditional training ]16[.
In general, modern organizations realize the need to consider integrating GTD with sustainable development strategies and environmental management systems to achieve the ultimate in clean processes and outputs. Recently, increasing number of organizations worldwide has been attempting to design their training processes on accomplishing environmental measures.
2.2 Job delight
A growing body of research in organizational psychology examined the role of job satisfaction in managing its relationships at the workplace. In spite of the large literature and studies made on job satisfaction, almost no studies were conducted on job delight. Depending on psychological and motivational theories, it was detected that mere job satisfaction might not be a valid notion [17[. In general, satisfying employees may be assumed as a good way of improving employee loyalty, increasing productivity and decreasing intent to leave, but merely satisfying employees might not be enough to ensure achieving the highest levels of these important factors. The effect of job delight on loyalty, productivity and retention could be larger than that of job satisfaction. Aggarwal and Sharma [18[ stated that job satisfaction by itself is not enough to retain qualified employees and therefore job delight entails stronger emotions and physiological outcomes in comparison to job satisfaction. Although job satisfaction and job delight can be highly associated but each state entails separate emotional conditions. Delight is likely to generate positive business results such as word of mouth communications, loyalty and increased profitability [19[.
Although job satisfaction and job delight are two complementary concepts, each concept entails separate emotional conditions. Delight can be viewed as a sharp end of a satisfaction feeling; in fact, it actually exceeds satisfaction. Emotion is an essential part of delight since it is a reactive feeling and an emotional response to how employees are treated and how their achievements are recognized. The emotion is felt more strongly than in mere satisfaction and the stronger the emotional connection, the stronger the connection to the organization [20[. Delight is a feeling of great happiness; it is a high degree of pleasure or enjoyment. Delight is deeper in feeling than happy and may continue longer.
However, job delight is a new managerial philosophy, which aims to recruit and retain high performers and exceptional individuals. The challenge for scholars and managers is to support the environment that enhances employee delight as a prerequisite for organization loyalty and commitment. Delight may provide emotional attachment of workers to their organization which can generate extra advantages to workers. As per Abidin and Roslin [21[, increased firm competitive advantage, increased operational efficiency, attract talents and engage employees, increased productivity, lower absenteeism and turnover and increased organizational effectiveness, will be the results of job delight.
2.3 Green employee behavior
In the last three decades, organizations have largely reacted to the growing societal concerns of encouraging and supporting environmental green practices. Green employee behaviors refer to the employee actions that minimize the harm to the environment [6[, such as, saving energy use, and reducing waste. GEB can be described as any measurable individual behavior assist realizing environmental sustainability in organizations [22, 23].
Green behaviors can be regarded as clues to the efficient implementation of green activities in the organization. Getting employees involved in green behaviors is essential for the environmental initiatives and drives, as this can lead to better environmental performance.
In fact, pro environmental strategies in organizations can enhance their competitive advantage [24[. This outcome can be realized by setting green attitudes and behaviors in employees, which explores the need to encourage green behaviors in organizations. Green training can result in beneficial gains since it enhances employee`s knowledge, skills and can change her/his behavior. A previous research proved the influence of green human resource management practices on environmental sustainability [25[. These results emphasize the importance of recruiting and training employees aware of environmental concerns and green initiatives. GTD can create awareness in employees to enhance their green behaviors. Environmental awareness can affect employees’ information, knowledge, attitudes, intentions, and behaviors [26[. It is concerned with the psychological aspects which rules individual`s tendency towards pro-environmental actions and behaviors.
In addition, management should motivate employees’ green practices to encourage them to engage and interact with other employees in green practices. Organizations should reward their members for green performance in order to enhance their engagement and encouragement with regard to green actions [27[.
Norton et al. [23[ differentiated between two types of GEB: required green behavior and voluntary green behavior. Required green behavior is involved with green behaviors that are performed within the context of the job duties, such as, adhering to organizational regulations, choosing alternatives, and producing green products [23[. Voluntary green behavior is concerned with behaviors that are beyond the organization’s expectations, such as, emphasizing the environmental concerns, turning off lights after leaving, and convincing colleagues to go green.
2.4 Employee retention
Human resource is one of the most precious resources in organization; therefore, keeping efficient and talented people are very crucial. Organizations increasingly recognize that human resource is essential for the success and perceive good employer-employee relationship as a prerequisite for pleasant work environment, which can lead to better performance and increased productivity.
Frank et al. [28[ describes retention as the efforts exerted by organizations to retain good performers so as to achieve their organizational goals. Retention studies progressively concentrate on recognizing organizational practices as vital components that may contribute to employee retention. The research of Hytter [29[ recognized many key factors presumably to be regarded as antecedents of employee retention and can have an indirect effect on retention of employees. Personal factors, such as, loyalty and commitment, can affect employee retention.
If management required keeping their employees, it is necessary to pay attention to these factors; otherwise they are likely to leave their organization, and consequently, as per Chang et al. [30[ they may negatively affect the organizational performance.
In this connection, it is essential to differentiate between two types of employee turnover: voluntary and involuntary. Voluntary employee turnover is related to the employee decision to stay or quit the organization s/he works with. Retention policies and strategies can play a role in the voluntary turnover to attract talented and efficient employees to stay in the organization. Involuntary turnover can exist as a corporate strategy for different causes, such as cost cutting, redesigning workflow, restructuring departments, or downsizing the organization for the purpose of fighting inefficiency and low profitability.
In general, it is fundamental for management to focus on measuring and managing employee turnover rates during a certain period of time, which comprised the voluntary and involuntary turnover. When antecedents of turnover intentions are recognized early, management can develop appropriate policies to prevent avoidable visible and invisible costs [30[.
Visible costs in this concern may involve resignation management costs; the cost of selecting and hiring a new employee; the cost of coverage during the vacancy; and, the cost and time of training a new employee [31[. Indirect, invisible costs are very often hidden from managers because there is no profit and loss statement/account that would specifically cover the cost of voluntary turnover [32[. Invisible costs comprise costs of new hiring, loss of productivity, mistakes, delays and idle times. Other invisible costs involve missed deadlines, loss of organizational knowledge, low morale and loss of clients.
Measuring employee turnover by utilizing surveys, consultation process, or exit interview is very essential. Holthman et al. [33[ ascertained the necessity for management to develop clear strategies for keeping efficient and talented employees.
2.5 Research framework and hypotheses
The research model was predesigned to consider the direct and indirect relationships by which GTD and job delight affect each of GEB and retention. Figure 1 postulates GTD directly affecting job delight, GEB, and employee retention. Away from its direct effect, GTD could have indirect effects on GEB and retention.
Figure 1. Proposed research model
In the proposed research model (Figure 1), it was suggested that GTD would indirectly affect GEB and retention through job delight. According to the purpose of the research, the study utilized GTD as independent variable, GEB and employee retention as dependent variable and job delight as mediator. In this research, it was argued that either GEB or employee retention could be improved through GTD. It was also suggested that higher level of job delight would enhance this improvement.
Based on the proposed model, the following hypotheses could be posited:
H1: Employee retention is significantly related to GTD.
H2: GEB is significantly related to GTD.
H3: Job delight is significantly related to GTD.
H4: GEB is significantly related to job delight.
H5: Job delight mediates the relationship between GTD and GEB.
H6: Job delight mediates the relationship between GTD and employee retention.
3.1 Participants and procedure
The population in the current study includes permanent employees working with six corporations in hotels and tourism sector as listed in Amman Stock Exchange in Jordan. In line with Cohen [34[, a sample size of 284 was required to test the model structure. According to Nicolaou and Masoner [35[, researchers can select survey samples by multiplying the number of indicators by 5 to 10.
After identifying the percentage of employees from each corporation to the total sample size, questionnaires were determined to be distributed proportionally. For the purpose of conservativeness associated with response rates of surveys, a total of 500 questionnaires were distributed. Out of the 500 distributed questionnaires, 287 with complete data were returned, yielding a response rate of 57.4%.
In this study, convenience sampling was used for collecting data in coordination with corporations’ human resource managers. The questionnaires were then administered by both online and in person. Permission for filling out the questionnaires and collecting the necessary data was obtained through management. To assure that the sample size is adequate, all items of the constructs were entered in the factor analysis and the results disclosed that the Kaiser-Meyer-Olkin (0.916) index demonstrated the sampling adequacy and the significance of Bartlett`s test of sphericity (p < .05) demonstrated the appropriateness of the sample.
3.2 Measures
Green Training and Development: GTD was evaluated applying seven questions from Daily et al. [36[ scales. The sample item was "Managers receive environmental training frequently".
Job Delight: Job delight was measured with six items adopted from Judeh et al. [37[ like, "when facing challenges, I keep on working". Retention: Retention (seven items) was measured using Dockel [38[ study by items like “An employee’s career development is important to this organization". Green Behavior was assessed using seven items from McConnaughy [39[ and Morgan and Rayner [40.[An example ite was, "At work, I recycle paper and cardboard etc.". The research instrument was based on a seven-point Likert–type scale, which was developed to measure GTD, job delight, retention, and green behavior. Control Variables: Demographic variables, such as sex, age and experience were included due to the possibility of their impact on the constructs of the study. Sex was measured as a dichotomous variable, while age and experience were assessed by reporting the participants` absolute years and classifying them later into four specified categories.
3.3 Common method bias
Common Method Bias can be found when majority of the variance is explained by one factor, which can be subject to artificial inflation of relationships. Common method variance is very essential to evade this kind of inflation in the relationships, which can distort the accuracy of the study results and mislead the interpretation of the study. Harman’s single factor test was utilized to reveal if there is a common method bias in the sample responses towards all constructs used in the study. Results of the test showed that the first factor explained only 18.391% of the cumulative variance, which was less than the critical level of 50%. Thus, common method bias did not exist.
4.1 Demographic profile
Table 1 showed all detailed demographic characteristics related to respondents.
Most of the respondents (59.9%) were male while the rest (40.1%) were female. In addition, the highest percentage (31.0%) of the sample age were between 28 and 36 years old, and the lowest percentage (12.9%) were 46 years and above. Less than one third of the sample (32.1%) had between 5 to 10 years of experience at work while about (13.9%) of the sample had 17 years of experience and above. The research proposed to test the relationship between these demographic factors and the main constructs so as to eliminate any distortion of interpretation of the findings. Univariate analysis of variance was used to examine whether retention or GEB may change when including the demographic factors of the sample in the analysis. Results of entering the interaction among sex*age*experience in the analysis revealed that none of these demographic variables were related significantly neither with retention (F=1.740, p > .01) nor with EGB (F=0.234, p >.01). Therefore, all demographic variables (sex, age and experience) were eliminated because of their non-significant effect.
4.2 Descriptive statistics
Descriptive statistics and Pearson correlations for all constructs are illustrated in Table 2. The higher coefficient denotes stronger correlation between the constructs.
The Cronbach alphas of all scales ranged between 0.861 and 0.923 hence surpassed the threshold of 0.70 suggesting that multicollinearity did not exist in findings and proving that the data were reliable.
4.3 Data analysis
All items of the constructs were entered in the factor analysis using SPSS-26, and the results disclosed that total explained variance of all the four constructs was 66.282 per cent after Varimax rotation was selected. The exploratory factor analysis of all the statements in the study generated four components, with each statement loaded to its respective construct affirming their labeling as GTD, GEB, job delight and retention.
Confirmatory factor analysis (CFA) was utilized to test the model fit. Results proposed a good model fit (X2/df=1.69, CFI =.96, TLI=.95, SRMR=.05, RMSEA=0.04) showing proper measures. According to these results, the model demonstrated good fit; thus, it was applicable for further analysis. The results also indicated (as shown on Table 3) that all factor loadings were within the acceptable limits as per Hair et al. [41[.
Table 1. Demographic characteristics
|
|
Characteristics |
Number |
% |
|
Sex |
Male |
172 |
59.9 |
|
Female |
115 |
40.1 |
|
|
Age |
< 28 years |
77 |
26.8 |
|
28-36 |
89 |
31.0 |
|
|
37-45 |
84 |
29.3 |
|
|
|
46 and above |
37 |
12.9 |
|
Experience |
< 5 years |
69 |
24.0 |
|
5-10 |
92 |
32.1 |
|
|
11-16 |
86 |
30.0 |
|
|
17 and above |
40 |
13.9 |
|
|
Total |
|
287 |
100.0 |
Table 2. Descriptive statistics, reliability and correlation coefficients
|
|
Mean |
S.D. |
1 |
2 |
3 |
4 |
|
1. GTD |
5.138 |
1.321 |
(.906) |
|
|
|
|
2. Job Delight |
5.362 |
1.020 |
.288** |
(.861) |
|
|
|
3. GEB |
5.061 |
1.305 |
.278** |
.267** |
(.923) |
|
|
4. Retention |
4.893 |
1.212 |
.477** |
.426** |
.312** |
(.920) |
Note: Alpha is portrayed in parentheses along diagonal; **p < .01 level
Table 3. Factor loadings, Composite Reliability (C.R.) and Average Variance Extracted (AVE)
|
Construct |
Items |
Factor Loadings |
T-Value |
t-sig. |
Composite Reliability |
AVE |
|
Green Training & Development |
GTD1 |
.77 |
12.85 |
.000 |
0.906 |
0.582 |
|
|
GTD2 |
.71 |
13.65 |
.000 |
|
|
|
|
GTD3 |
.89 |
17.21 |
.000 |
|
|
|
|
GTD4 |
.67 |
11.82 |
.000 |
|
|
|
|
GTD5 |
.72 |
13.51 |
.000 |
|
|
|
|
GTD6 |
.69 |
11.57 |
.000 |
|
|
|
|
GTR7 |
.86 |
9.34 |
.000 |
|
|
|
Job Delight |
JOD1 |
.73 |
8.65 |
.000 |
0.876 |
0.544 |
|
|
JOD2 |
.88 |
12.04 |
.000 |
|
|
|
|
JOD3 |
.68 |
9.36 |
.000 |
|
|
|
|
JOD4 |
.66 |
7.61 |
.000 |
|
|
|
|
JOD5 |
.78 |
10.06 |
.000 |
|
|
|
|
JOD6 |
.67 |
8.89 |
.000 |
|
|
|
Green Employee Behavior |
GEB1 |
.81 |
14.02 |
.000 |
0.929 |
0.654 |
|
|
GEB2 |
.87 |
15.75 |
.000 |
|
|
|
|
GEB3 |
.79 |
15.23 |
.000 |
|
|
|
|
GEB4 |
.84 |
16.84 |
.000 |
|
|
|
|
GEB5 |
.86 |
16.78 |
.000 |
|
|
|
|
GEB6 |
.83 |
15.94 |
.000 |
|
|
|
|
GEB7 |
.64 |
8.31 |
.000 |
|
|
|
Retention |
RET1 |
.72 |
8.84 |
.000 |
0.921 |
0.626 |
|
|
RET2 |
.75 |
10.61 |
.000 |
|
|
|
|
RET3 |
.77 |
10.03 |
.000 |
|
|
|
|
RET4 |
.84 |
11.79 |
.000 |
|
|
|
|
RET5 |
.81 |
11.05 |
.000 |
|
|
|
|
RET6 |
.86 |
10.94 |
.000 |
|
|
|
|
RET7 |
.78 |
10.16 |
.000 |
|
|
As demonstrated in Table 3, the composite reliability (CR) of constructs ranged from 0.876 to 0.929, which was higher than the minimum value of 0.70, proposing that the measure had adequate internal consistency. The average variance extracted (AVE) values ranging from 0.544 to 0.654 indicated were higher than the minimum value of .50, indicating that the measure had acceptable convergent validity.
For examining the discriminant validity, the study compared the square-root of AVE value with equivalent correlation coefficients between the constructs.
Table 4. Discriminant validity of constructs
|
Construct |
AVE |
1 |
2 |
3 |
4 |
|
1. GTD |
.582 |
(.763) |
|
|
|
|
2. Job Delight |
.523 |
.330 |
(.745) |
|
|
|
3.GEB |
.654 |
.305 |
.296 |
(.809) |
|
|
4. Retention |
.626 |
.524 |
.469 |
.336 |
(.791) |
* Diagonal elements show the square root of AVE.
Table 4 showed that the square-root of AVE values (.763, .745, .809, .791) were higher than the corresponding correlation coefficients, thus, the structural model had valid discriminant validity.
4.4 Test of research hypothesis
As for testing hypotheses of the study, results exhibited in Figure 2 showed that there was significant relationship between GTD and each of employee retention (β = 0.416, p < 0.01) and GEB (β = 0.236, p < 0.01). Therefore, H1 and H2 were supported. Results also revealed significant effect of GTD on delight (β = 0.330, p < 0.05) which validated the acceptance of H3. Other results of the study showed that job delight had significant effect on GEB (β = 0.225, p < 0.05). Thus, H4 was evidenced.
Figure 2. Confirmatory factor analysis results
Results of the mediation hypotheses were shown in Figure 2. The indirect effect of GTD on GEB through job delight (β = 0.074, p < 0.05) was significant which rendered that job delight mediated the relationship between GTD and GEB, providing support for H5. Similarly, the indirect effect of GTD on employee retention (β = 0.110, p < 0.05) was also significant which rendered that job delight mediated the relationship between GTD and employee retention, providing support for H6. Those results clearly indicated that job delight could enhance the effect of GTD on each of GEB and employee retention.
This paper aimed at exploring the relationship among GTD, job delight, GEB, and retention. Additionally, the paper tried to assess the role of job delight as a mediating variable in the relationship between green training and development, green employee behavior, and employee retention. This research explored how delivering GTD improves GEB and employee retention in the context of Jordanian hotels and tourism sector while viewing the role of job delight as a mediator.
Primitively, none of demographic characteristics were linked significantly to any of the study constructs. Results showed that the interaction of sex*age*experience of the participants were found to have minimal influence on defining the employee retention and also on green employee behavior. This finding was consistent with the study findings of Chaudhary [42[.
Regarding the hypothesis between GTD and GEB, the study confirmed that adopting GTD delivery directly affected GEB in the workplace. It could be inferred from the findings that GTD practices were crucial in improving the GEB by conveying green awareness and knowledge to the employees. This result was consistent with the study of Karmoker et al. [43[ who claimed that there was a relationship between green training and development and employee green behavior. Similarly, the study results are congruent with the results of Amruth and Geeth [44[ study which proved that green training had strong significant influence on voluntary workplace green behavior.
The study also revealed that implementing GTD delivery could directly affect employee retention. Bibi et al. [45[ training and development was related to retention of employees. Failure in investing in GTD can lead to lower rates of employee retention. In general, these results proposed that hotels and tourism entities can provide GTD to their employees so as to improve their green behaviors and enhance employee retention. Furthermore, the study results confirmed the relationship between GTD and job delight, which could be interpreted that the more appropriate the delivery of GTD in an organization, the higher degree of satisfaction and delight its employees are expected to be.
Moreover, a significant role of job delight, as a mediator, was demonstrated to strengthen the relationship between GTD and GEB. This finding proposed that in order to enhance the GEB, organizations must provide GTD and work on increasing the employee delight.
In addition, a significant role of job delight, as a mediator, was proven to deepen the relationship between GTD and employee retention, suggesting that the appropriate GTD delivered to employee and the more delighted they were the more settled they would be and the higher levels of retention the organization could achieve. It is very essential to deliver employees appropriate training and equip them with required knowledge, skills, and abilities in regard with green initiatives.
Finding of this research provided evidence that when the delighted employees are provided with the appropriate environmental knowledge, skills and abilities, they will be inclined to demonstrate better green behaviors. Similarly, the current findings confirm that Jordanian hotel and tourism employees who receive appropriate environmental knowledge, skills and abilities and who are delighted can be expected to increase employee retention rates. The delighted employees who received GTA courses feel tend to display green behaviors and stay in their organizations. The study findings emphasizes the importance of GTD and job delight in displaying the green behaviors and keeping higher retention rates in organizations.
There are some limitations that need to be explained in the current study. First, the design of the study was cross-sectional made it difficult to infer causal relations between the variables. A longitudinal design would be better to test the changes in relationships between variables over time. Another limitation of the findings was that the findings of the study were specific for the hotel and tourism industry which can limit the generalization across all industries. Although the results of this study were consistent with many previous studies, the results still need to be replicated using a larger sample size within other industries and contexts.
Likewise, this study explored the direct link between green training and development and job delight as determinants of green employee behavior and employee retention. Future research may include other mediating variables, such as employee empowerment, employee involvement, and organizational justice.
[1] Hsiao, T.Y., Chuang, C.M., Kuo, N.W., Yu, S.M.F. (2014). Establishing attributes of an environmental management system for green hotel evaluation. International Journal of Hospital Management, 36: 197-208. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.ijhm.2013.09.005
[2] Zaki, N.A.B.M., Norazman, I. (2019). The relationship between employee motivation towards green HRM mediates by green employee empowerment: A systematic review and conceptual analysis. Journal of Research in Psychology, 1(2): 6-9. https://doi.org/10.31580/jrp.v1i2.946
[3] Akpa, V.O., Mowaiye, B., Akinlabi, B.H., Magaji, N. (2022). Effect of green human resource management practices and green work life balance on employee retention in selected hospitality firms, in Lagos and Ogun States in Nigeria. European Journal of Human Resource Management Studies, 5(4): 129-143. https://doi.org/10.46827/ejhrms.v5i4.1265
[4] Deng, X., Kang, J.K., Low, B.S. (2013). Corporate social responsibility and stakeholder value maximization: Evidence from mergers. Journal of financial Economics, 110(1): 87-109. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jfineco.2013.04.014
[5] Li, W., Bhutto, T.A., Wang, X., Maitlo, Q., Zafar, A.U., Bhutto, N.A. (2020). Unlocking employees’ green creativity: the effects of green transformational leadership, green intrinsic, and extrinsic motivation. Journal of Cleaner Production, 255: 120229. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jclepro.2020.120229
[6] Steg, L., Vlek, C. (2009). Encouraging pro-environmental behavior: An integrative review of research agenda. Journal of Environmental Psychology, 29(3): 309-317. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jenvp.2008.10.004
[7] Mazzi, A., Toniolo, S., Mason, M., Aguiari, F., Scipioni, A. (2016), What are the benefits and difficulties in adopting an environmental management system? The opinion of Italian organizations. Journal of Cleaner Production, 139: 873-885. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jclepro.2016.08.053
[8] Acton T., Golden, W. (2003). Training the knowledge worker: A descriptive study of training practices in Irish software companies. Journal of European Industrial Training, 27(4): 137-146 https://doi.org/10.1108/03090590310468958
[9] Ariffin, H.F., Che Ha, N. (2015). Examining Malaysian hotel employees’ organizational commitment: The effect of age, education level and salary. The South East Asian Journal of Management, 9(1). https://doi.org/10.21002/seam.v9i1.4373
[10] Sinaga, S.A., Nawangsari, L.C. (2019). The effect of green recruitment and green training on employee performance in PT TRU using organizational citizenship for environment as mediation variable. Dinasti International Journal of Management Science, 1(2): 204-216. https://doi.org/10.31933/dijms.v1i2.57
[11] Kim, S. (2012). The impact of human resource management on state government IT employee turnover intentions. Public Personnel Management, 41(2): 257-279. https://doi.org/10.1177/009102601204100204
[12] Farid, M., El-Sawalhy, H. (2016) Green human resource management in hotels: Awareness and implementation. Journal of Association of Arab Universities for Tourism and Hospitality, 13(2): 125-134. https://doi.org/10.21608/jaauth.2016.49747
[13] Joshi, G., Dhar, R.L. (2020). Green training in enhancing green creativity via green dynamic capabilities in the Indian handicraft sector: The moderating effect of resource commitment. Journal of Cleaner Production, 267: 1-14. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jclepro.2020.121948
[14] Carter, C., Dressner, M. (2001). Purchasing’s role in environmental management: Cross-functional development of grounded theory. The Journal of Supply Chain Management, 37(2): 12-27. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1745-493x.2001.tb00102.x
[15] Xie, X., Zhu, Q., Qi, G. (2020). How can green training promote employee career growth? Journal of Cleaner Production, 259: 120818. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jclepro.2020.120818
[16] Perron, G.M., Côté, R.P., Duffy, J.F. (2006). Improving environmental awareness training in business. Journal of Cleaner Production, 14(6-7): 551-562. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jclepro.2005.07.006
[17] Rai, S., Sinha, A.K. (2002). Job delight: Beyond job satisfaction. Indian Journal of Industrial Relations, 37(4): 554-571.
[18] Aggarwal, N., Sharma, V. (2016). Job delight beyond job satisfaction among managerial employees. International Journal in Management & Social Science, 4(1): 458-468.
[19] Torres, E.N., Kline, S. (2006). From satisfaction to delight: A model for the hotel industry. International Journal of Contemporary Hospitality Management, 18(4): 290-301. https://doi.org/10.1108/09596110610665302
[20] Schneider, B., Bowen, D.E. (1999). Understanding customer delight and outrage. Sloan Management Review, 41(1): 35-45.
[21] Zainal Abidin, H.A., Roslin, R.M. (2019). The mediating effect of employee delight on the relationship between internal marketing and employee performance. International Journal of Business & Society, 20(3): 908-923.
[22] Andersson, L., Jackson, S.E., Russell, S.R. (2013). Greening organizational behavior: An introduction to the special issue. Journal of Organizational Behavior, 34(2): 151-155. https://doi.org/10.1002/job.1854
[23] Norton T.A., Parker S.L., Zacher H., Ashkanasy, N.M. (2015). Employee green behavior: A theoretical framework, multilevel review, and future research agenda. Organization and Environment, 28(1): 103-125 https://doi.org/10.1177/1086026615575773
[24] Martinez-del-Rio, J., Antolin-Lopez, R., Cespedes-Lorente, J.J. (2015). Being green against the wind? The moderating effect of munificence on acquiring environmental competitive advantages. Organization and Environment, 28(2): 181-203 https://doi.org/10.1177/1086026615573082
[25] Guerci, M., Carollo, L. (2016). A paradox view on green human resource management: Insights from the Italian context. The International Journal of Human Resource Management, 27(2): 212-238. https://doi.org/10.1080/09585192.2015.1033641
[26] Wan, Y.K., Chan, S.H., Huang, H.L. (2017). Environmental awareness, initiatives and performance in the hotel industry of Macau. Tourism Review, 72(1): 87-103. https://doi.org/10.1108/tr-06-2016-0016
[27] Jabbour C.J.C., de Sousa Jabbour A.B.L. (2016). Green human resource management and green supply chain management: linking two emerging agendas. Journal of Cleaner Production, 112(3): 1824-1833. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jclepro.2015.01.052
[28] Frank, F.D., Finnegan, R.P., Taylor, C.R. (2004). The race for talent: Retaining and engaging workers in the 21st century. Human Resource Planning, 27(3): 12-25.
[29] Hytter, A. (2007). Retention strategies in France and Sweden. The Irish Journal of Management, 28(1): 59-79.
[30] Chang, W.J.A., Wang, Y.S., Huang, T.C. (2013). Work design–related antecedents of turnover intention: A multilevel approach. Human Resource Management, 52(1): 1-26. https://doi.org/10.1002/hrm.21515
[31] Armstrong, M. (2006). A handbook of human resource management practice. Kogan Page Publishers.
[32] Holtom, B.C., Mitchell, T.R., Lee, T.W., Eberly, M.B. (2008). 5 turnover and retention research: A glance at the past, a closer review of the present, and a venture into the future. The Academy of Management Annals, 2(1): 231-274. https://doi.org/10.5465/19416520802211552
[33] Holthom, B.C., Mitchell, T.R., Lee, T.W., Inderrieden, E.J. (2005). Shocks as causes of turnover: What they are and how organizations can manage. Journal of Human Resource Management, 44(3): 337-352. https://doi.org/10.1002/hrm.20074
[34] Cohen, J. (1988). Statistical Power Analysis for the Behavioral Sciences (2nd ed.). Lawrence Erlbaum Associates Publishers, Hillsdale, NJ.
[35] Nicolaou, A.I., Masoner, M.M. (2013). Sample size requirements in structural equation models under standard conditions. International Journal of Accounting Information Systems, 14(4): 256-274. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.accinf.2013.11.001
[36] Daily, B.F., Bishop, J.W., Massoud, J.A. (2012). The role of training and empowerment in environmental performance: A study of the Mexican Maquiladora Industry. International Journal of Operations and Production Management, 32(5): 631-647. http://dx.doi.org/10.1108/01443571211226524
[37] Judeh, M., Abed S., Gali, N. (2022). Job delight: Development and validation of a new construct. International Journal of Business Performance Management, 23(3): 285-303. https://doi.org/10.1504/IJBPM.2022.123823
[38] Döckel, A. (2003). The effect of retention factors on organizational commitment: An investigation of high technology employees. Master's thesis, University of Pretoria, Pretoria, South Africa.
[39] McConnaughy, J.C. (2014), Development of an employee green behavior descriptive norms scale. Electronic Theses, Projects, and Dissertations. 83. https://scholarworks.lib.csusb.edu/etd/83.
[40] Morgan, D., Rayner, J. (2019). Development of a scale measure for green employee workplace practices. Journal of New Business Ideas & Trends, 17(1): 1-25.
[41] Hair, J.F., Black, W.C., Babin, B.J., Anderson, R.E. (2010). Multivariate Data Analysis. (7th ed.). Upper Side River, NJ: Prentice Hall.
[42] Chaudhary, R. (2019). Green human resource management in Indian automobile industry. Journal of Global Responsibility, 10(2): 161-175. https://doi.org/10.1108/JGR-12-2018-0084
[43] Karmoker, K., Tasnia Z., Bipul R. (2020). Can green HRM practices influence hotel employees’ green behavior? Evidence from Khulna City hospitality industry, Bangladesh. International Journal of Human Resource Studies, 10(4): 149-167. https://doi.org/10.5296/ijhrs.v10i4.17641
[44] Amrutha, V.N., Geetha, S.N. (2021). Linking organizational green training and voluntary workplace green behavior: Mediating role of green supporting climate and employees’ green satisfaction. Journal of Cleaner Production, 290: 125876. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jclepro.2021.125876
[45] Bibi, P., Ashfaq, A., Abdul Halim, A.M. (2018). The impact of training and development and supervisors support on employees retention in academic institutions in Pakistan: The moderating role of the work environment, Gadjah Mada. International Journal of Business, 20(1): 113-131. https://doi.org/10.22146/gamaijb.24020
