Next Article in Journal
Sustainable and Green Synthesis of Carbon Nanofibers from Date Palm Residues and Their Adsorption Efficiency for Eosin Dye
Next Article in Special Issue
How Does Sustainable Leadership Promote the Willingness to Adopt an Environmental Innovation Strategy? The Key Mediating Role of Environmental Value
Previous Article in Journal
Study of a New Wave Energy Converter with Perturb and Observe Maximum Power Point Tracking Method
 
 
Search for Articles:
Title / Keyword
Author / Affiliation / Email
Journal
Article Type
 
 
Advanced Search
 
Section
Special Issue
Volume
Issue
Number
Page
 
Journals
Sustainability
Volume 15
Issue 13
10.3390/su151310449
sustainability-logo
Submit to this Journal Review for this Journal Propose a Special Issue
► Article Menu

Article Menu

share Share announcement Help format_quote Cite question_answer Discuss in SciProfiles thumb_up
...
Endorse textsms
...
Comment
first_page
settings
Order Article Reprints
Font Type:
Arial Georgia Verdana
Font Size:
Aa Aa Aa
Line Spacing:
Column Width:
Background:
Article

The Impact of Ethical Leadership on Financial Performance: The Mediating Role of Environmentally Proactive Strategy and the Moderating Role of Institutional Pressure

by
Chien-Hsiang Huang
1,
Chih-Wen Ting
2,*,
Tai-Wei Chang
3,
Yue-Shi Lee
4 and
Show-Jane Yen
4
1
General Education Center, Chihlee University of Technology, New Taipei City 22050, Taiwan
2
Department of Finance, Nanhua University, Chiayi 62248, Taiwan
3
Graduate School of Resources Management and Decision Science, National Defense University, Taoyuan 33550, Taiwan
4
Department of Computer Science and Information Engineering, Ming Chuan University, Taipei 111013, Taiwan
*
Author to whom correspondence should be addressed.
Sustainability 2023, 15(13), 10449; https://doi.org/10.3390/su151310449
Submission received: 23 May 2023 / Revised: 4 June 2023 / Accepted: 27 June 2023 / Published: 3 July 2023
(This article belongs to the Special Issue Gray Shades of Sustainability Issues in Organization Management)
Browse Figures
Versions Notes

Abstract

:
For the sustainable development of agriculture, few investigations have explored how to achieve the sustainable development of agritech companies through management mechanisms. Therefore, this study proposes a novel model that describes the impact of the ethical leadership of the chief executive officer on financial performance through environmentally proactive strategy adoption, which is moderated by institutional pressures to deal with the problem of the literature gap. In fact, past research on financial performance has nearly always examined profitability or earnings per share, but few studies have explored the relationship between organizational leadership and environmentally proactive strategy adoption to improve firm performance. To fill this research gap mentioned above, this study employs the methodology of structural equation modeling to analyze the theoretical model. Empirical data were collected by 75 chief executive officers and their upper management teams in the agritech firms, and the analysis result confirmed all hypotheses. That said, the impact of the ethical leadership of the chief executive officer significantly influences the financial performance through the environmentally proactive strategy adoption, which is significantly moderated by institutional pressures Therefore, this study can provide a new milestone in the sustainable agricultural literature and provides agritech firms with specific recommendations for performance improvements to achieve sustainability.

1. Introduction

As the world is facing extreme climate, environmental changes, cultural conflicts, political instability, and poverty [1,2], to deal with these challenges, the United Nations proposed 17 sustainable development goals (SDGs). These SDGs are about economic progress, eradicating global poverty, encouraging social trust among different stakeholders, and environmental protection [3,4]. Moreover, various pressures from the governmental organizations and the social public have led many companies to incorporate the environmental and social aspects of the SDGs into their corporate development strategies, indirectly becoming an important driving force for sustainable development.
For agritech firms, the most important issues are to meet the expectations of various stakeholders and to increase the firm’s financial performance [5,6,7], as the process of agricultural production will lead to huge pollution [8,9,10] to form a research gap. Therefore, to fill this gap, the present study describes the relationship between the ethical leadership of the chief executive officer and the firm financial performance from the perspective of environmentally proactive strategy adoption. In other words, the chief executive officers can shape the values (e.g., ethical values) of their upper management teams from the leadership (e.g., ethical leadership), and the values of the top management teams will affect resource allocations to which business activities, which will affect the type of corporate strategy. Thus, the ethical leadership of the chief executive officer can influence the environmental strategy adoption of the upper management team to reduce the pollution of agritech firms. This is the first contribution of this study.
For sustainable development, the financial performance of agritech firms is also an important factor. However, most of the past studies have investigated how to promote firms to adopt environmental strategies or how to increase financial performance in a single context. Few studies explored how environmental strategies can affect financial performance. In particular, most of the past studies regard environmental activities as operating costs that damage the firm’s financial performance, while another stream believes that environmental activities will attract consumers’ willingness to buy and increase the firm’s financial performance, resulting in mixed conclusions. Indeed, previous research on the drivers of environmental strategy has mainly focused on institutional theory [11], suggesting that firms will adopt environmental strategies that conform to institutional norms (e.g., laws and regulations). However, few studies have explored ethical leadership as a driving factor of environmental strategy. Indeed, past studies have used corporate social responsibility/environment, social, and governance to explore corporate social performance [12,13,14], but this study is different from this research trend, using organizational management mechanisms to explore how to increase social performance (environmental strategy adoption), which, in turn, increases the financial performance of firms. This research framework can make a significant incremental contribution to this research trend. This is the second contribution of this study.
Finally, past research believes that an environmentally proactive strategy can meet the stakeholders’ expectations [15,16,17] to increase operational efficiency and profitability, thus supporting the relationship between the environmentally proactive strategy adoption and financial performance. In addition, this study employs institutional pressure as a boundary condition, because an upper management team encountering more institutional pressure must demonstrate more intention to adopt the environmental strategy. This study proposes institutional pressure as a moderating role between ethical leadership and environmentally proactive strategy adoption to deeply open the black box mechanism, and this is the third contribution of this study.
To confirm the research model of this study, 75 chief executive officers and their upper management teams joined this study, and the analysis result confirm all hypotheses. This study can provide a new direction in the field of sustainable agricultural literature and demonstrate how to improve financial performance to achieve sustainability.
This study proposes the research question as follows:
  • Research question: How does the ethical leadership of the chief executive officer affect financial performance through the environmentally proactive strategy adoption, which is moderated by institutional pressures?

2. Literature Reviewing

2.1. Leadership Development

Over the past six decades, management scholars have expanded the concept of leadership, and have extensively studied the effectiveness of this [18,19,20]. Although leadership has made great progress over the past few decades [21,22,23], the leadership literature still needs to continue to emphasize the effectiveness of leadership within different types. This is coupled with the fact that organizational leaders must pay more attention than ever to the organization and the global environment [24]. Most of the past scholars’ research on leadership explored its relationship with sustainable performance and added different intermediary variables [25,26], but few studies combine ethical leadership with environmental strategies to predict financial performance. There is limited research to consider the mediation effect of environmentally proactive strategy adoption between the leadership and its outcomes.

2.2. Financial Performance

Financial performance refers to the profitability of a firm [27]. In the past, the measurement of financial performance mostly used financial statement indicators, such as Tobin’s Q, return on equity, or return on assets [28,29]. However, past research found inconsistent conclusions between environmental activities and financial performance. Tan et al. [30] found that environmental activities will reduce financial performance, while Andries and Stephan [31] believed that environmental activities will increase financial performance. This discrepancy may be due to possible measurement errors in the benefits of environmental activities and financial statement indicators (e.g., Tobin’s Q,). For example, most empirical researchers generally use the event study method [32] to analyze the time point of firms’ environmental activities and their financial indicators for statistical analysis, but empirical researchers cannot know the actual benefits of these firms’ internal environmental activities on their financial performance. Therefore, it is possible to obtain a more accurate measurement through the evaluation of firms’ internal senior executives. Therefore, in this study, both the environmental strategy and financial performance are measured by questionnaires completed by firms’ internal senior executives to alleviate this problem. Indeed, the past study also confirmed the relationship between the chief executive officer and performance [33].

2.3. Ethical Leadership and the Environmentally Proactive Strategy Adoption

Ethical leadership refers to leaders demonstrating and promoting normative appropriate behavior through the leadership process [34]. In other words, leaders apply ethics to guide their subordinates on what to do and what not to do under those ethics. In the contemporary business world, ethics has been regarded as an important issue, so leadership combined with ethics is an important leadership style. Indeed, past research has shown that ethical leadership can increase many positive employee behaviors, such as organizational citizenship behavior [35], innovative behavior [36], and work engagement [37].
Environmentally proactive strategy refers to that firms proactively modifying the production process to meet environmental responsibilities [15,38]. Leaders can communicate their expectations (e.g., moral values) to their subordinates, and leaders can translate their subordinates’ values into alignment with the leaders’ expectations [39], thereby articulating the relationship between ethical leadership and subordinate values. In other words, the chief executive officer can shape the ethical values of his/her upper management team through ethical leadership, so the upper management team should be more willing to adopt environmental strategies to comply with environmental ethics. Indeed, the past study also confirmed the relationship between leadership and environmental strategy [40]. Therefore, the ethical leadership of the chief executive officer should prompt the upper management team to adopt an environmental strategy.
Hypothesis 1.
The ethical leadership of the chief executive officer will influence the environmentally proactive strategy adoption of the upper management team.

2.4. The Environmentally Proactive Strategy Adoption and Financial Performance

Financial performance is the extent to which a firm’s return on investment, customer retention, sales growth rate, and profitability [27]. Most theoretical and empirical studies report that environmental policies are crucial for business performance [41,42,43]. Environmental policies can respond to increased competition, consumer demand, and product quality because the environmental image of firms meets stakeholder expectations. Previous research also indicated that environmental policies could increase competitive advantage [44,45,46].
To explain the relationship between environmentally proactive strategy adoption and financial performance, we borrow from two perspectives to explain the relationship. First, based on the resource-based view and the natural-resource-based view, the environmentally proactive strategy of a firm is one kind of intangible asset that is challenging for rivals to imitate in the short term. The environmental activities of a firm may facilitate the acquisition of resources through more productive resource utilization [47]. Therefore, based on the resource-based view and the natural-resource-based view, environmentally proactive strategy adoption should increase financial performance. Second, the adoption of an environmental strategy should positively influence product production efficiency [48,49]. Marshall and Mayer [50] propose that an environmental orientation strategy can be a benefit for organizations because an environmental strategy aims to reduce production costs caused by environmental pollution. Indeed, the implementation of an environmental strategy can meet the expectations of various stakeholders, thereby improving a company’s operational efficiency and shaping a company’s environmental reputation to increase a company’s sales [51]. In addition, a company’s environmental reputation can draw resources from the government and can improve employee job satisfaction. Therefore, adopting an environmental strategy should improve a firm’s financial performance.
Hypothesis 2.
The environmentally proactive strategy adoption will influence the firm’s financial performance.

2.5. Moderating Effect of Institutional Pressure

Institutional pressure represents the typical situation in which legal and government entities force the firm towards external environmentalism [52,53]. This study proposes that institutional pressure can promote the relationship between ethical leadership and environmental strategy adoption. Indeed, while an upper management team perceives a high level of ethical leadership, the upper management team should show a higher-level intention of environmental strategy adoption under a higher-level institutional pressure than under a lower-level institutional pressure. It makes sense because the upper management team should have more intention to propose an environmental strategy caused by ethical leadership to ease the institutional pressure, thereby supporting the moderating role of institutional pressure. In addition, past research has also pointed out that institutional pressure increases the relationship between environment-related variables [54,55] because individuals in the face of high institutional pressure environments are bound to exhibit institutional-conforming behaviors, such as environmentally proactive strategy adoption.
Hypothesis 3.
Institutional pressure will positively moderate the relationship between the ethical leadership of the chief executive officer and the environmentally proactive strategy adoption of the upper management team.

3. Methodology

This research proposes the theoretical model in Figure 1. The theoretical model describes that the ethical leadership of the chief executive officer affects the environmentally proactive strategy adoption and financial performance, which is moderated by institutional pressure. This study collected 75 chief executive officers and their senior executives of agritech firms to analyze the research model in this study (Figure 1), and hierarchical regression was used to test the path relationships between ethical leadership, environmentally proactive strategy, financial performance, and institutional pressure.

3.1. Subjects and Procedures

This research touched on several associations of horticulture to collect data, and 75 agritech firms agreed to support the survey of this study. This study obtained 75 chief executive officers and their upper management teams. The samples are all male, with an average age of 42 years or older, and all college graduates or above. In addition, this research obtained data through e-mail to reduce social desirability bias [56,57,58]. For example, chief executive officers of these agritech firms may expect that their upper management teams should achieve high scores on ethical leadership, environmentally proactive strategy, and financial performance.

3.2. Measure

The reverse translation was used in this study to verify the quality of the questionnaire, and the Likert seven-point scale was used to evaluate ethical leadership, environmentally proactive strategy adoption, financial performance, and institutional pressure. This study adopts the Likert seven-point scale, as past research has proved that the style scale has good measuring discrimination [59]. This research used and adapted the scale of Brown et al. [60] to evaluate ethical leadership. The environmentally proactive strategy was adopted by Dai et al.’s [61] scale. Financial performance was adapted by Chen et al. [27], including return on investment, customer retention, sales growth rate, and profitability. Institutional pressure was adapted by Latif et al.’s [62] scale.

4. Results

Analysis Results

The root mean square error of approximation (RMSEA) and root mean square residual (RMR) represent the error between the empirical data and the research model. The goodness of fit index (GFI) represents the explaining power of the theoretical model for empirical data. The comparative fit index (CFI) represents an improvement between the research model and the other competitive model. Normed-fit index (NFI) represents the degree of improvement between the worst and best models. The RMSEA of the empirical data is lower than 0.05, when the RMR of the empirical data is lower than 0.08, which indicates the accepted error. The GFI, CFI, and NFI of the empirical data are all above 0.09, which indicates the accepted model fit index. Composite reliability represents the measurement reliability, and the average variance extracted represents the measurement validity of concepts. The reliability, validity, and model fit indices are reported in Table 1, and these indices are all acceptable [63]. To detect the endogeneity problem of ethical leadership, environmentally proactive strategy adoption, financial performance, and institutional pressure, this study adopts Harman’s one-factor test [64] to detect the endogeneity problem. The analysis result demonstrates that the variances are equally distributed among the four constructs in this study, so there is no single endogenous variable to seriously influence the research model of this study (please see Table 2). There are no serious endogenous problems in this study.
Ethical leadership significantly affects the environmentally proactive strategy (β = 0.55, p-value < 0.01), so Hypothesis 1 is verified. That is to say, upper management teams who perceived a high level of ethical leadership would show a high level of environmentally proactive strategy adoption. It makes sense because ethical leadership will change the values of the upper management team to prefer to adopt an environmentally proactive strategy based on the leadership process. Next, the environmentally proactive strategy adoption significantly affects the financial performance (β = 0.58, p-value < 0.01), so Hypothesis 2 is verified. In other words, the environmentally proactive strategy adoption would affect financial performance. It makes sense, because environmentally proactive strategy adoption is one kind of intangible asset that is challenging for rivals to imitate in the short term based on the resource-based view. Finally, institutional pressure has a significant impact between environmentally proactive strategy adoption and ethical leadership (β = 0.64, p-value < 0.01), so Hypothesis 3 is verified. It makes sense, because while an upper management team perceives a high level of ethical leadership, the upper management team should show a higher-level intention of environmental strategy adoption under a higher-level institutional pressure than under a lower-level institutional pressure. Table 3 and Figure 2 are the analysis results.

5. Discussion

5.1. Academic Contribution

First, this research is expected to explain how the chief executive officer’s ethical leadership affects the adoption of environmental strategies and the relationship is moderated by institutional pressure on agritech firms. In particular, this study is the first to open the black-box mechanism of ethical leadership and environmental strategy, and the importance of this research is different from the traditional passive viewpoint (e.g., regulation perspective). This research proposes that agritech firms adopt the environmental strategy actively from the driver of ethical leadership to achieve the goal of financial performance. Almost all strategy studies use institutional theory (regulations formulated by the government) or pressure from stakeholders to force firms to adopt environmental strategies. Few studies start from the perspective of the organizational management mechanism to explain why the chief executive officer is the main force, and why it affects the type of strategy adopted by the firm.
Second, this research presents a novel model describing why the chief executive officer’s ethical leadership leads to an environmentally proactive strategy by the moderating impact of institutional pressure, which in turn improves an agritech firm’s financial performance. In other words, this research uses the chief executive officer’s ethical leadership to explain upper management’s strategy adoption and how strategy adoption contributes to financial performance. Therefore, ethical leadership is a significant driver of strategic adoption of the upper management team, as ethical leadership can shape the upper management team’s preference for environmental ethics to influence strategic preference. Past research also supports this mechanism that both leadership and environmental strategies can improve firm performance [21,65,66].
Third, previous surveys almost examined environmental strategies in technology manufacturing firms [67,68,69]. Therefore, examining drivers of environmentally proactive strategy adoption not only can advance the literature on sustainable agricultural production but also can assist agritech firms to implement the environmentally proactive strategy in realizing financial performance. In particular, agricultural production will lead to huge pollution, so exploring the driving factors of an environmentally proactive strategy can also alleviate the pollution of agricultural production. In addition, this study also confirms the positive relationship between environmentally proactive strategy and financial performance, because past surveys have mixed results.
Fourth, few studies have explored why ethical leadership can affect an agritech firm’s financial performance through the intermediary mechanism of the upper management team. As such, this study opens the black box of the importance of the upper management team, creating a new milestone in ethical leadership and financial performance. This perspective is significant for the agricultural field because there are limited surveys on the application of leadership styles in this field [12].
Fifth, on the theoretical level, we handled empirical evidence corroborating that a chief executive officer’s ethical leadership leads to an environmentally proactive strategy by the moderating impact of institutional pressure, which in turn improves an agritech firm’s financial performance. These findings help to alleviate the confusion caused by the mixed results reported by past studies. We considered the mediating role of environmentally proactive strategy in this relationship which scholars mainly neglected. By doing so, we filled the gap in the literature and examined part of the black box of the leadership-performance link. We also provide evidence on the explanatory power of the resource-based and natural-resource-based views of the firm in explaining the relationship between ethical leadership and financial performance.
Finally, this study put forward the research model to answer the research question “How does the ethical leadership of the chief executive officer affect financial performance through the environmentally proactive strategy adoption, which is moderated by institutional pressures?”, and the empirical result supports all hypotheses. Indeed, past research paid little attention to financial performance through the perspective of leadership, so this study has a significant contribution to the sustainable literature. In addition, the environmentally proactive strategy adoption has a significant mediating effect between ethical leadership and financial performance, and the institutional pressure has a significant moderating effect between ethical leadership and environmentally proactive strategy adoption. This study thus provides a novel contribution to guide further research direction in the field of sustainable agricultural literature.

5.2. Practice Contribution

This research has several practical implications. The findings guide agritech firms on the importance of considering ethical leadership as their important management mechanism. The analysis of our sample of agritech firms suggests that “doing ethic” can be translated to “doing well”. Hence, the social and environmental activities of the agritech firms play crucial roles in their gains. Managers who seek to bolster the performance of agritech firms should also pay extra attention to ethical leadership. They can use empirical evidence documented in this study to justify allocating the firm’s scarce resources to ethical leadership. We encourage the management of agritech firms to increase their ethical leadership practices, as it promotes a better financial performance.
The research also provides practical recommendations for institutional pressures on agritech firms. When agritech firms encounter institutional pressure, they may passively conduct environmental image management to cope with institutional pressure. This research argues that when the chief executive officers of agritech firms adopt the management mechanism of ethical leadership and encounter institutional pressures, they will adopt environmental strategies more actively to respond to these pressures. In other words, the institutional pressure is equal to a positive factor for the adoption of environmental strategies caused by ethical leadership. Therefore, this research suggests that agritech firms should adopt ethical leadership as the main environmental management mechanism.
Finally, agritech companies should consider ethical leadership as a primary organizational management mechanism as it not only influences the implementation of environmental strategies for sustainable development but also helps businesses achieve financial performance. In addition, this research can provide a reference for the firm to implement the environmental strategy that increases financial performance.

5.3. Limitations and Further Research

To verify the theoretical model of this research, future research should employ more data to confirm the external validity. Our paper is subject to some limitations regarding its sample. This study only provides evidence based on agritech firms. Future studies can address this limitation by analyzing an international sample of small and medium-sized firms. In addition, the sample of firms we analyzed in this study is confined to the Taiwan context. Future research can improve the generalizability of our results through replication of the proposed framework using data from other countries. Next, there may be other important variables that can drive environmentally proactive strategy adoption, so future research should explore other variables. Next, this research takes institutional pressure as the boundary condition relationship between ethical leadership and environmentally proactive strategies, but there may be other important moderators with similar roles that need to be explored in future research. Next, this study puts forward that the ethical leadership of chief executive officers would lead top management teams to prefer environmental strategies, but past research has indicated that chief executive officers may employ environmental strategies or corporate social responsibility for personal gain or to cover up fraud and misconduct [70]. However, this study does not explore this dark side view, suggesting that future research can delve deeper into the underlying motivations of companies to adopt environmental strategies. Finally, as this study collected cross-section data to analyze the research model, causal relationships between ethical leadership, environmentally proactive strategy adoption, financial performance, and institutional pressure require careful inference. In addition, the endogeneity problem may also influence the causal relationships between these constructs. Further research should use more longitudinal data to verify the causal relationship between variables.

6. Conclusions

To open the black box of sustainable agriculture, this study proposes that ethical leadership can increase financial performance through the mediating role of an environmentally proactive strategy, which is moderated by institutional pressures. Indeed, past research has ignored the way that organizational leadership can cause sustainable agriculture development, so the theoretical model of this study can fill the academic and practical gaps. In particular, past research on financial performance has nearly always examined profitability or earnings per share, but few studies have explored the relationship between organizational leadership and environmentally proactive strategy adoption to improve firm performance. Therefore, this study employs the methodology of structural equation modeling to analyze the theoretical model to fill this gap.
In addition, this study also introduces the chief executive officer-upper management team interface to connect organizational leadership with sustainable development, which opens a new milestone in the sustainable agricultural field and the sustainable agricultural literature. The analysis results support all hypotheses. Therefore, agritech firms can employ the research model of this study to implement financial performance and sustainable development.

Author Contributions

Methodology, T.-W.C. and C.-W.T.; Software, T.-W.C. and Y.-S.L.; Investigation, C.-W.T.; Resources, Y.-S.L.; Data curation, S.-J.Y.; Writing—original draft, C.-H.H.; Writing—review & editing, Y.-S.L. and C.-W.T.; Visualization, S.-J.Y.; Project administration, T.-W.C. and S.-J.Y. All authors have read and agreed to the published version of the manuscript.

Funding

This research received no external funding.

Institutional Review Board Statement

Not applicable.

Informed Consent Statement

Informed consent was obtained from all subjects involved in the study.

Data Availability Statement

Not applicable.

Conflicts of Interest

The authors declare no conflict of interest.

References

  1. Caffaro, F.; Roccato, M.; Micheletti Cremasco, M.; Cavallo, E. An ergonomic approach to sustainable development: The role of information environment and social-psychological variables in the adoption of agri-environmental innovations. Sustain. Dev. 2019, 27, 1049–1062. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  2. Liu, D.; Fisher, G.; Chen, G.L. CEO attributes and firm performance: A sequential mediation process model. Acad. Manag. Ann. 2018, 12, 789–816. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  3. Elalfy, A.; Weber, O.; Geobey, S. The Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs): A rising tide lifts all boats? Global reporting implications in a post SDGs world. J. Appl. Account. Res. 2021, 22, 557–575. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  4. Sachs, J.D. The Age of Sustainable Development; Columbia University Press: New York, NY, USA, 2015. [Google Scholar]
  5. Cameira, M.D.R.; Mota, M. Nitrogen Related Diffuse Pollution from Horticulture Production—Mitigation Practices and Assessment Strategies. Horticulturae 2017, 3, 25. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  6. Kuntosch, A.; König, B.; Bokelmann, W.; Doernberg, A.; Siebert, R.; Schwerdtner, W.; Busse, M. Identifying System-Related Barriers for the Development and Implementation of Eco-Innovation in the German Horticultural Sector. Horticulturae 2020, 6, 33. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  7. Valenzuela, H. Agroecology: A Global Paradigm to Challenge Mainstream Industrial Agriculture. Horticulturae 2016, 2, 2. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  8. Wang, R.; Wang, Q.; Dong, L.; Zhang, J. Cleaner agricultural production in drinking-water source areas for the control of non-point source pollution in China. J. Environ. Manag. 2021, 285, 112096. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  9. Latini, A.; Giagnacovo, G.; Campiotti, C.A.; Bibbiani, C.; Mariani, S. A Narrative Review of the Facts and Perspectives on Agricultural Fertilization in Europe, with a Focus on Italy. Horticulturae 2021, 7, 158. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  10. Li, Z.; Wu, Y.; Xing, D.; Zhang, K.; Xie, J.; Yu, R.; Chen, T.; Duan, R. Effects of Foliage Spraying with Sodium Bisulfite on the Photosynthesis of Orychophragmus violaceus. Horticulturae 2021, 7, 137. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  11. Scott, W.R. Institutions and Organizations; Sage: Thousand Oaks, CA, USA, 1995. [Google Scholar]
  12. Huang, S.Y.B.; Li, M.-W.; Lee, Y.-S. Why Do Medium-Sized Technology Farms Adopt Environmental Innovation? The Mediating Role of Pro-Environmental Behaviors. Horticulturae 2021, 7, 318. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  13. Huang, S.Y.B.; Lee, S.-C.; Lee, Y.-S. Why Can Green Social Responsibility Drive Agricultural Technology Manufacturing Company to Do Good Things? A Novel Adoption Model of Environmental Strategy. Agronomy 2021, 11, 1673. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  14. Huang, S.Y.B.; Lee, S.-C.; Lee, Y.-S. Constructing an Adoption Model of Proactive Environmental Strategy: A Novel Quantitative Method of the Multi-Level Growth Curve Model. Mathematics 2021, 9, 1962. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  15. Buysse, K.; Verbeke, A. Proactive environmental strategies: A stakeholder management perspective. Strateg. Manag. J. 2023, 24, 453–470. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  16. Madime, E.; Gonçalves, T.C. Consequences of Social and Environmental Corporate Responsibility Practices: Managers’ Perception in Mozambique. Int. J. Financ. Stud. 2022, 10, 4. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  17. Wagner, M.; Schaltegger, S. The effect of corporate environmental strategy choice and environmental performance on competitiveness and economic performance: An empirical study of EU manufacturing. Eur. Manag. J. 2004, 22, 557–572. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  18. Lee, C.J.; Huang, S.Y. Can ethical leadership hinder sales performance? A limited resource perspective of job embeddedness. Chin. Manag. Stud. 2019, 13, 985–1002. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  19. Lee, C.-J.; Huang, S.Y.B. A moderated mediation examination of Kahn’s theory in the development of new product performance: Cross-level moderating role of open discussion of conflict. Chin. Manag. Stud. 2019, 13, 603–615. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  20. Lee, C.J.; Huang, S.Y. Double-edged effects of ethical leadership in the development of Greater China salespeople’s emotional exhaustion and long-term customer relationships. Chin. Manag. Stud. 2020, 14, 29–49. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  21. Hu, L.; Huang, S.Y.B.; Li, H.-X.; Lee, S.-C. To help others or not: A moderated mediation model of emotional dissonance. Front. Hum. Neurosci. 2022, 16, 893623. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  22. Huang, S.Y.B.; Li, M.-W.; Chang, T.-W. Transformational Leadership, Ethical Leadership, and Participative Leadership in Predicting Counterproductive Work Behaviors: Evidence from Financial Technology Firms. Front. Psychol. 2021, 12, 658727. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  23. Huang, S.Y.B.; Huang, C.-H.; Chang, T.-W. A New Concept of Work Engagement Theory in Cognitive Engagement, Emotional Engagement, and Physical Engagement. Front. Psychol. 2022, 12, 663440. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  24. Boiral, O.; Baron, C.; Gunnlaugson, O. Environmental leadership and consciousness development: A case study among Canadian SMEs. J. Bus. Ethics 2014, 123, 363–383. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  25. Iqbal, Q.; Ahmad, N.H.; Li, Z.; Li, Y. To walk in beauty: Sustainable leadership, frugal innovation and environmental performance. Manag. Decis. Econ. 2021, 43, 738–750. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  26. Sulasmi, E.; Agussani Tanjung, H. Bridging the way towards sustainability performance through safety, empowerment and learning: Using sustainable leadership as driving force. J. Secur. Sustain. Issues 2020, 10, 93–107. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  27. Chen, L.; Zhai, L.; Zhu, W.; Luo, G.; Zhang, J.; Zhang, Y. Financial Performance Under the Influence of the Coronavirus Disease 2019: Effects of Strategic Flexibility and Environmental Dynamics in Big Data Capability. Front. Psychol. 2021, 12, 798115. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  28. Dang, V.C.; Nguyen, Q.K.; Tran, X.H. Corruption, institutional quality and shadow economy in Asian countries. Appl. Econ. Lett. 2022, 1–6. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  29. Nguyen, Q.K.; Dang, V.C. Does the country’s institutional quality enhance the role of risk governance in preventing bank risk? Appl. Econ. Lett. 2023, 30, 850–853. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  30. Tan, S.H.; Habibullah, M.S.; Tan, S.K.; Choon, S.W. The impact of the dimensions of environmental performance on firm performance in travel and tourism industry. J. Environ. Manag. 2017, 203, 603–611. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  31. Andries, P.; Stephan, U. Environmental innovation and firm performance: How firm size and motives matter. Sustainability 2019, 11, 3585. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  32. Huang, S.Y.; Lee, S.C.; Chen, Y.F. How do the attributes and changes of senior management affect the company’s abnormal rate of return? Evidence from China. Corp. Manag. Rev. 2022, 42, 37–69. [Google Scholar]
  33. Chandren, S.; Qaderi, S.A.; Ghaleb, B.A.A. The influence of the chairman and CEO effectiveness on operating performance: Evidence from Malaysia. Cogent Bus. 2021, 8, 1935189. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  34. Kabbani, S.; Karkoulian, S.; Balozian, P.; Rizk, S. The Impact of Ethical Leadership, Commitment and Healthy/Safe Workplace Practices toward Employee Attitude to COVID-19 Vaccination/Implantation in the Banking Sector in Lebanon. Vaccines 2022, 10, 416. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  35. Shin, Y. CEO ethical leadership, ethical climate, climate strength, and collective organizational citizenship behavior. J. Bus. Ethics 2012, 108, 299–312. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  36. Dhar, R.L. Ethical leadership and its impact on service innovative behavior: The role of LMX and job autonomy. Tour. Manag. 2016, 57, 139–148. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  37. Lisbona, A.; Las Hayas, A.; Palací, F.J.; Frese, M. Initiative in Work Teams: Lever between Authentic Leadership and Results. Int. J. Environ. Res. Public Health 2021, 18, 4947. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  38. Menguc, B.; Auh, S.; Ozanne, L. The interactive effect of internal and external factors on a proactive environmental strategy and its influence on a firm’s performance. J. Bus. Ethics 2010, 94, 279–298. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  39. Lee, S.C.; Huang, S.Y. The effect of Chinese-specific environmentally responsible leadership on the adoption of green innovation strategy. Energy Environ. 2023, 0958305X231177731. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  40. Yang, C.; Zhang, L. CEO environmentally specific transformational leadership and firm proactive environmental strategy: Roles of TMT green commitment and regulative pressure. Pers. Rev. 2022. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  41. Al-Jalahma, A.; Al-Fadhel, H.; Al-Muhanadi, M.; Al-Zaimoor, N. Environmental, social, and governance (ESG) disclosure and firm performance: Evidence from GCC banking sector. In Proceedings of the 2020 International Conference on Decision Aid Sciences and Application (DASA), Sakheer, Bahrain, 8–9 November 2020; IEEE: Piscataway, NJ, USA, 2020; pp. 54–58. [Google Scholar]
  42. Merida, P.D. Environtmental Management Accounting, Competitive Advantage, Firm Perfomance: Indonesia’s Manufacturing Sector. J. Ris. Akunt. Aksioma 2021, 20, 144–156. [Google Scholar]
  43. Thanh, T.L.; Huan, N.Q.; Hong, T.T.T. Effects of corporate social responsibility on SMEs’ performance in emerging market. Cogent Bus. Manag. 2021, 8, 1878978. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  44. Huang, S.Y. How can corporate social responsibility predict voluntary pro-environmental behaviors? Energy Environ. 2023, 0958305X231167473. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  45. Huang, S.Y.; Yu, C.C.; Lee, Y.S. How to Promote the Agricultural Company Through Environmental Social Responsibility to Achieve Sustainable Production? Front. Environ. Sci. 2022, 9, 521. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  46. Huang, S.Y.; Chen, K.H.; Lee, Y.S. How to Promote Medium-Sized Farms to Adopt Environmental Strategy to Achieve Sustainable Production during the COVID-19 Pandemic? Agriculture 2021, 11, 1052. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  47. Gök, O.; Peker, S. Understanding the links among innovation performance, market performance and financial perfor-373 mance. Rev. Manag. Sci. 2017, 11, 605–631. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  48. Aldieri, L.; Kotsemir, M.; Vinci, C.P. Environmental innovations and productivity: Empirical evidence from Russian regions. Resour. Policy 2019, 74, 101444. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  49. Yu, X.; Xu, Y.; Zhang, J.; Sun, Y. The Synergy Green Innovation Effect of Green Innovation Subsidies and Carbon Taxes. Sustainability 2022, 14, 3453. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  50. Marshall, M.E.; Mayer, D.W. Environmental training: It’s good business. Bus. Horiz. 1992, 35, 54–58. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  51. Fraj-Andrés, E.; Martinez-Salinas, E.; Matute-Vallejo, J. A multidimensional approach to the influence of environmental marketing and orientation on the firm’s organizational performance. J. Bus. Ethics 2009, 88, 263–286. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  52. Galleli, B.; Semprebon, E.; Santos, J.A.R.d.; Teles, N.E.B.; Freitas-Martins, M.S.d.; Onevetch, R.T.d.S. Institutional Pressures, Sustainable Development Goals and COVID-19: How Are Organisations Engaging? Sustainability 2021, 13, 12330. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  53. Tang, Y.; Zhu, J.; Ma, W.; Zhao, M. A Study on the Impact of Institutional Pressure on Carbon Information Disclosure: The Mediating Effect of Enterprise Peer Influence. Int. J. Environ. Res. Public Health 2022, 19, 4174. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  54. Liu, Y.; Kim, C.Y.; Lee, E.H.; Yoo, J.W. Relationship between Sustainable Management Activities and Financial Performance: Mediating Effects of Non-Financial Performance and Moderating Effects of Institutional Environment. Sustainability 2022, 14, 1168. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  55. Zeng, S.; Qin, Y.; Zeng, G. Impact of Corporate Environmental Responsibility on Investment Efficiency: The Moderating Roles of the Institutional Environment and Consumer Environmental Awareness. Sustainability 2019, 11, 4512. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  56. Bir, C.; Olynk Widmar, N.; Croney, C. Exploring Social Desirability Bias in Perceptions of Dog Adoption: All’s Well that Ends Well? Or Does the Method of Adoption Matter? Animals 2018, 8, 154. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  57. Kowalkowska, J.; Poínhos, R. Eating Behaviour among University Students: Relationships with Age, Socioeconomic Status, Physical Activity, Body Mass Index, Waist-to-Height Ratio and Social Desirability. Nutrients 2021, 13, 3622. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  58. Lajunen, T.; Gaygısız, E. Can We Rely on Self-Assessments of Sense of Coherence? The Effects of Socially Desirable Responding on the Orientation to Life Questionnaire (OLQ) Responses. Soc. Sci. 2019, 8, 278. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  59. Pimentel, J. Some biases in Likert scaling, usage and its corrections. Int. J. Sci. Basic Appl. Res. 2019, 45, 183–191. [Google Scholar]
  60. Brown, M.E.; Trevino, L.K.; Harrison, D.A. Ethical leadership: A social learning perspective for construct development and testing. Organ. Behav. Hum. Decis. Process. 2005, 97, 117–134. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  61. Dai, J.; Chan, H.K.; Yee, R.W.Y. Examining moderating effect of organizational culture on the relationship between market pressure and corporate environmental strategy. Ind. Mark. Manag. 2018, 74, 227–236. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  62. Latif, B.; Mahmood, Z.; Tze San, O.; Mohd Said, R.; Bakhsh, A. Coercive, Normative and Mimetic Pressures as Drivers of Environmental Management Accounting Adoption. Sustainability 2020, 12, 4506. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  63. Fornell, C.; Lacker, D.F. Evaluating structural equation models with unobservable variables and measurement error. J. Mark. Res. 1981, 18, 39–50. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  64. Podsakoff, P.M.; MacKenzie, S.B.; Lee, J.; Podsakoff, N.P. Common method biases in behavioral research: A critical review of the literature and recommended remedies. J. Appl. Psychol. 2003, 88, 879–903. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  65. Huang, S.Y.B.; Li, M.W.; Lee, Y.S. Transforming the Emotional Intelligence of the Feeders in Agribusinesses into the Development of Task Performance and Counterproductive Work Behaviors during the COVID-19 Pandemic. Animals 2021, 11, 3124. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  66. Chen, Y.S.; Huang, S.Y.B. A conservation of resources view of personal engagement in the development of innovative behavior and work-family conflict. J. Organ. Chang. Manag. 2016, 29, 1030–1040. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  67. Ma, L.; Song, W.; Zhou, Y. Modeling Enablers of Environmentally Conscious Manufacturing Strategy: An Integrated Method. Sustainability 2018, 10, 2284. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  68. Huang, S.Y.B.; Ting, C.-W.; Fei, Y.-M. A Multilevel Model of Environmentally Specific Social Identity in Predicting Environmental Strategies: Evidence from Technology Manufacturing Businesses. Sustainability 2021, 13, 4567. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  69. Huang, S.Y.B.; Ting, C.-W.; Li, M.-W. The Effects of Green Transformational Leadership on Adoption of Environmentally Proactive Strategies: The Mediating Role of Green Engagement. Sustainability 2021, 13, 3366. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  70. Li, Z.F.; Lu, X.; Wang, J. Corporate Social Responsibility and Goodwill Impairment: Charitable Donations of Chinese Listed Companies. SSRN 2023. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
Sustainability 15 10449 g001 550
Figure 1. Research model of this research.
Figure 1. Research model of this research.
Sustainability 15 10449 g001
Sustainability 15 10449 g002 550
Figure 2. Theoretical model of this research. Note: ** = p < 0.01.
Figure 2. Theoretical model of this research. Note: ** = p < 0.01.
Sustainability 15 10449 g002
Table
Table 1. Reliability and Validity.
Table 1. Reliability and Validity.
ConstructsItemsλCronbach’s αComposite ReliabilityAverage Variation Extracted
Ethical LeadershipEL010.83 **0.870.890.63
EL020.67 **
EL030.76 **
EL040.65 **
Environmentally Proactive StrategyEPS010.76 **0850.840.57
EPS050.73 **
EPS060.76 **
EPS070.81 **
Financial PerformanceIP010.83 **0.840.890.67
IP030.84 **
IP040.82 **
IP050.81 **
Institutional pressureIP010.88 **0.860.890.68
IP020.75 **
IP030.83 **
IP040.84 **
Note: RMR = 0.063, RMSEA = 0.045, CFI = 0.91, GFI = 0.91, NFI = 0.90. ** denotes that p value < 0.01.
Table
Table 2. Harman’s Test.
Table 2. Harman’s Test.
ComponentTotal (Eigenvalue)% of VarianceCumulative %
Ethical Leadership2.10.300.30
Environmentally Proactive Strategy1.80.280.28
Financial Performance1.60.250.25
Institutional pressure1.40.170.17
Table
Table 3. Analysis results.
Table 3. Analysis results.
HypothesisPath RelationshipCoefficient
H1Ethical Leadership -> Environmentally Proactive Strategy0.55 **
H2Environmentally Proactive Strategy -> Financial Performance0.58 **
H3Institutional Pressure -> Ethical Leadership and Environmentally Proactive Strategy0.64 **
Note: ** = p < 0.01.
Disclaimer/Publisher’s Note: The statements, opinions and data contained in all publications are solely those of the individual author(s) and contributor(s) and not of MDPI and/or the editor(s). MDPI and/or the editor(s) disclaim responsibility for any injury to people or property resulting from any ideas, methods, instructions or products referred to in the content.

Share and Cite

MDPI and ACS Style

Huang, C.-H.; Ting, C.-W.; Chang, T.-W.; Lee, Y.-S.; Yen, S.-J. The Impact of Ethical Leadership on Financial Performance: The Mediating Role of Environmentally Proactive Strategy and the Moderating Role of Institutional Pressure. Sustainability 2023, 15, 10449. https://doi.org/10.3390/su151310449

AMA Style

Huang C-H, Ting C-W, Chang T-W, Lee Y-S, Yen S-J. The Impact of Ethical Leadership on Financial Performance: The Mediating Role of Environmentally Proactive Strategy and the Moderating Role of Institutional Pressure. Sustainability. 2023; 15(13):10449. https://doi.org/10.3390/su151310449

Chicago/Turabian Style

Huang, Chien-Hsiang, Chih-Wen Ting, Tai-Wei Chang, Yue-Shi Lee, and Show-Jane Yen. 2023. "The Impact of Ethical Leadership on Financial Performance: The Mediating Role of Environmentally Proactive Strategy and the Moderating Role of Institutional Pressure" Sustainability 15, no. 13: 10449. https://doi.org/10.3390/su151310449

Note that from the first issue of 2016, this journal uses article numbers instead of page numbers. See further details here.

Article Metrics

Back to TopTop