Next Article in Journal
Modeling the Dynamic Behavior of Recycled Concrete Aggregate-Virgin Aggregates Blend Using Artificial Neural Network
Previous Article in Journal
Enhancing Thermal Performance of Autoclaved Aerated Concrete (AAC) Incorporating Sugar Sediment Waste and Recycled AAC with Phase Change Material-Coated Applications for Sustainable Energy Conservation in Building
Previous Article in Special Issue
Work-Life Balance and Employee Satisfaction during COVID-19 Pandemic
 
 
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 19
10.3390/su151914223
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

Fostering Employees’ Job Performance through Sustainable Human Resources Management and Trust in Leaders—A Mediation Analysis

by
Panteha Farmanesh
1,
Alla Mostepaniuk
2,
Parisa Gharibi Khoshkar
3,* and
Riham Alhamdan
1
1
Department of Business Management, Faculty of Business and Economics, Girne American University, Mersin 10, Girne 99300, Turkey
2
Department of Business Administration, Faculty of Economics and Administrative Sciences, Final International University, Mersin 10, Girne 99320, Turkey
3
Department of Psychology, Faculty of Arts and Sciences, Final International University, Mersin 10, Girne 99320, Turkey
*
Author to whom correspondence should be addressed.
Sustainability 2023, 15(19), 14223; https://doi.org/10.3390/su151914223
Submission received: 30 August 2023 / Revised: 12 September 2023 / Accepted: 23 September 2023 / Published: 26 September 2023
(This article belongs to the Special Issue Towards Sustainable HRM: Types, Factors, Drivers and Outcomes)
Browse Figures
Versions Notes

Abstract

:
Organizations are encouraged to integrate sustainability into their HRM practices to enhance their attractiveness as employers to prospective employees and to motivate employees to excel, which allows them to recognize the contribution they make to society and the lasting impact they create. Establishing a trusting relationship between employees and leaders emerges as a crucial factor when organizations opt to implement sustainable HRM practices across diverse contexts. Thus, this study examines the role of trust in leaders on the relationship between sustainable HRM practices and employee job performance. Consequently, we employed a quantitative approach in which a simple random sampling technique was used to collect data from 156 academic staffs of three private universities across Kyrenia in Northern Cyprus. The research hypotheses were examined through the application of Smart PLS 3.0. Our results indicated a significant impact of sustainable HRM practices on employees’ job performance, emphasizing the importance of judiciously selecting these practices while fostering a trusting relationship between leaders and employees. These findings offer organizations the opportunity to not only enhance their comprehension and awareness of strategic resource allocation but also to tailor their policies in congruence with the company’s objectives and strategies, thereby ensuring the efficient utilization of resources to enhance employee satisfaction and well-being, ultimately leading to an improvement in job performance.

1. Introduction

Human resources management (HRM) has emerged as a critical trend in contemporary organizations, playing a pivotal role in ensuring the organization’s success through the establishment of practices and guidelines that effectively manage employees throughout various stages, encompassing pre-hiring, post-hiring, and at employee termination [1]. Establishing such effective guidelines will not only provide a clear direction for employees but also yield a positive organizational impact as a whole. HRM practices within an organization exert a positive impact on job performance through variables such as selection, participation, and employee empowerment [2,3]. These dimensions enable us to link HRM with sustainability, thereby contributing to long-term performance and efficiency [1].
The concept of sustainable HRM underscores the significant role of HR policies in aligning with the ultimate objectives of organizations, particularly those that extend beyond mere profit generation [4,5]. Prior research has demonstrated a consistent and positively linear relationship between HRM policies and job performance [6,7,8]. Moreover, HRM policies demonstrated an overall positive relationship with the productivity of an organization [9,10,11]. When HRM policies are implemented and standardized within an organization, all members of the organization tend to have increased confidence that their treatment and job conditions are equitable and fair [12]. As a result, sustainable HRM is perceived as the imperative choice if conventional HR concepts are to maintain their relevance in the ever-evolving business landscape for the foreseeable future.
Recent studies have presented statistical evidence demonstrating the association between sustainable HRM and its positive influence on employee performance, e.g., [13,14]. However, the existing literature, i.e., [13], proposed that future studies should explore other organization-level boundary conditions (e.g., leadership) to gain a more comprehensive understanding of how HRM practices impact employee well-being and performance. Thus, this study aimed to investigate the mediating role of trust in leaders [15] within the academic context in order to further examine the association between sustainable HRM and employee performance. Exploring these relationships will provide valuable insights into the interplay between these variables and how such interplays can be harnessed to enhance overall organizational performance. The findings of our study underscore the indispensable role of trust in leaders in enhancing employees’ job performance through the implementation of sustainable HRM practices within the organizational setting. By recognizing and effectively addressing the challenges regarding the variables being investigated, organizations may improve their employees’ state of well-being, satisfaction, and motivation. This, in turn, has the potential to decrease employee turnover rates. Acquiring such insights empowers organizations and policymakers to make appropriate decisions about clear selection criteria, employee empowerment policies, well-designed training programs, and resource allocation, tailored to their specific requirements, thereby optimizing resource utilization and minimizing wasteful expenditure. Implementing such policies would be advantageous in improving employee job performance, which is one of the fundamental aspects of sustainable HRM practices.

2. Literature Review

2.1. Sustainable HRM and Job Performance

As previously discussed, the concept of sustainable HRM encompasses the internal dynamics of an organization that contribute to its prolonged viability and prosperity. Furthermore, it can encompass outcomes that extend beyond the organization itself, encompassing benefits for the broader society in which the organization operates, as well as the environmental dimension [16]. Sustainability in HRM offers practical solutions for attracting and retaining dependable, trustworthy, and highly skilled employees for businesses aiming to promote their brand among both their current workforce and potential prospective candidates [17,18,19,20]. Consequently, it is recommended that organizations integrate sustainability into their HRM practices not solely for the purpose of enhancing their image as employers or organizations but also to distinguish themselves from competitors within the job market and enhance their attractiveness to prospective employees. Previous studies have highlighted the positive impact of sustainable HRM practices on employees’ job performance by improving their motivation, attitudes, and behaviors. This, in turn, contributes to enhanced organizational performance as well as individual job performance [1,7,8,11]. The research has highlighted the crucial role of leadership in enhancing employee satisfaction by creating favorable conditions (e.g., initiatives) to promote growth, development, a sense of belonging, autonomy, and meaningful work. Employees with positive attitudes are often motivated to exert maximum effort with the expectation of earning a promotion within the organization [21,22]. Lu et al. [13] argued that contribution of sustainable HRM practice on employee performance is attributed to the positive impact of sustainable HRM practices on employee resilience and work engagement, which indirectly results in increased employee job performance. Contrary to its numerous benefits, which include elevating the standards of living for employees, some studies have adopted a contrasting perspective. They emphasize the potential negative impacts of sustainable HRM on employee health, which can impede both their professional development and personal growth, particularly through the implementation of high-performance work systems [23].
The Ability–Motivation–Opportunity (AMO) framework emphasizes that sustainable HRM practices have the potential to impact employee performance and productivity [24]. The AMO theory underscores that sustainable HRM practices motivate employees to achieve objectives by leveraging their own knowledge, skills, and abilities [25,26,27,28]. According to the AMO theory, when employees are motivated to engage in their job and perceive their work as meaningful and valuable, they are more likely to exhibit high levels of performance [29]. Concisely, sustainable HRM practices should offer incentives that motivate employees to excel and recognize the impact they make on society and the organization. Therefore, sustainable HRM practices encourage employees to perform well, and this high performance can contribute to organizational sustainability. Furthermore, motivated employees may take the initiative to establish proactive work dynamics that add additional value to the implementation of sustainability within the organization [30]. If employees perceive HRM procedures as elements that contribute to their own sense of worth or value, they tend to be more inclined to reciprocate by contributing something valuable in return. In such a scenario, when employees view such signals in HRM as demonstrating compliance, openness, and consistency, they are more likely to exhibit a willingness to take on additional roles within the organization. This often results in the display of positive attitudes and actions, particularly when it comes to fostering creativity and productivity in the workplace [29]. In accordance with the existing literature that underscores the impact of sustainable HRM on performance, the following hypothesis was formulated through integrating these findings:
H1: 
Sustainable HRM practices are positively correlated with job performance.

2.2. Sustainable HRM and Trust in Leaders

Sustainable HRM can be delineated from mainstream HRM by virtue of distinct attributes, including flexibility, employee participation, value orientation, knowledge orientation, competency, stakeholder orientation, and a mutually trusting relationship between employees and leaders [15,20]. Therefore, this underscores the importance of organizations considering that the implementation of sustainable HRM practices must be accompanied by the cultivation of a trusting relationship between employees and their leaders. This dynamic facilitates employee development and growth while also ensuring the enduring success of sustainable HRM practices in the long term [31]. It has been posited that, in order to achieve success, organizations must undertake multifaceted transformations. This endeavor requires concerted efforts in strategically implementing sustainable plans, perspectives, and procedures, spanning both the internal and intra-organizational dimensions of the company (i.e., creative cultural atmosphere, easygoing configurations, and clear paths of communication that lack ambiguity) [32,33]. Sustainable HRM endeavors to establish a creative cultural atmosphere by fostering employees’ innovative potential and implementing impartial systems. This includes fostering new ideas in technology, distributing power equitably, and enabling employees to communicate freely with others in the organization, irrespective of hierarchical positions [34,35]. Accordingly, one of the main goals of SHRM is to implement environmentally friendly processes and simultaneously assess their subsequent implications on the organizational environment. When making decisions about implementing sustainable HRM practices within an organization, it is essential to consider three key factors: equity, employee well-being, and professional development. These elements collectively contribute to the development of better relationships between employees and leaders within the organization. In light of these findings, it is evident that, when an organization intends to implement sustainable HRM practices, it must place significant emphasis on cultivating a trusting relationship between employees and their leaders. Such trust serves as a foundational element, creating an environment conducive to employee development and growth, ultimately facilitating the successful adoption of sustainable HRM practices with a long-term perspective [20,36]. Consequently, the following hypothesis emerged from the preceding discussion:
H2: 
Trust in leaders is positively correlated with sustainable HRM practices.

2.3. Trust in Leaders and Job Performance

Jones et al. established a distinction between leadership and a leader in their study. They posited that leadership involves the interpersonal processes related to behaviors like acting as a leader during work, demonstrating interpersonal skills, and motivating the team to achieve common goals. Conversely, a leader is someone who proficiently engages in certain behaviors, along with possessing traits and other personal attributes, such as skills and experience, that enable them to effectively demonstrate leadership actions. Holmes and Rempel [37] delved into the idea that trust in a leader fosters an environment where employees feel emboldened to voice their opinions and take proactive initiative within the organization. Their argument centered on the premise that such behaviors emerge from a foundation of trust, signifying that the leader will not purposefully provide detrimental feedback, act with self-interest, or exploit the employees. Hence, having trust in the leader motivates employees to exhibit greater proactivity and instils in them a sense of security and recognition, ultimately manifesting in their individual job performance. Numerous prior studies have consistently shown that a supportive leader has a positive impact on work attitudes and performance, particularly in fostering creativity and innovation [38,39,40,41,42]. Studies have also emphasized the significant role of effective leadership in enhancing employees’ work performance by efficiently managing factors such as work intervention, civility, respect, and work engagement [13,43,44,45]. Their findings confirmed that the implementation of such practices can foster organizational sustainability by promoting extensive enhancements in employees’ psychological capital, job satisfaction, performance, and reducing burnout and turnover. In this regard, Corbos et al. [46] correspondingly found that an efficient leadership style (i.e., transformational and transactional) would impose prolonged advantages on the workplace. This positively impacts the quality of employees’ performance and their perception of interpersonal relationships in the workplace. The primary focus of these studies underscores the significance of leaders in promoting positive outcomes within the context of sustainable HRM [47,48]. Consequently, when employees perceive their perspectives as valuable and influential within their group, organizations can effectively foster a culture of creative conduct [49,50,51,52,53]. Zargar et al. [54] indicated that an association between employees and managers, even if present, is unlikely to be effective if trust is lacking in that relationship. The presence of trust in a leader signifies the effectiveness of the manager and underscores their positive qualities and attributes. Furthermore, it was highlighted that the existence of trust within this relationship functions as the binding agent that fosters cohesion between employees and managers, thereby fostering the potential for organizational success. Hence, H3 has been formulated in accordance with the literature mentioned above:
H3: 
Trust in leaders is positively correlated with job performance.

2.4. Mediating Role of Trust in Leaders

Victor and Cullen [55] defined ‘trust in leader’ as a psychological state in which one party holds positive expectations towards another party, leading to a sense of comfort in displaying vulnerability and interpreting actions and intentions in a positive manner. Research has emphasized the pivotal role of leaders in generating positive outcomes for both employees and the organization [56], including job satisfaction, while also serving as a protective barrier against negative workplace experiences, such as bullying, burnout, or work–life imbalance [54,55,57,58]. As previously mentioned, establishing a relationship of trust between employees and their leaders is a crucial factor for organizations when implementing sustainable HRM practices across different contexts. Consequently, the presence of such a relationship between employees and leaders contributes to the organization’s long-term benefits, encompassing progress, success, and numerous advantageous psychological outcomes. Kahn [59] contended that three factors can shape an employee’s engagement in their job performance across various dimensions, including physical, mental, and emotional levels. He posited that the key determinants governing employee engagement are psychological availability, psychological meaningfulness, and psychological safety. The concept of psychological safety is intricately linked with trust in leaders as an employee’s perception of feeling safe within the organization often corresponds with having trust in their leader [60]. Employees might be hesitant to openly share their thoughts and innovative ideas or actively engage with the organization if they are uncertain about the potential negative consequences of expressing their viewpoints [4,61,62,63,64,65,66]. These factors serve as the underlying drivers determining whether employees will be motivated to perform their jobs effectively or not. Consequently, a robust sense of trust in leaders not only fosters feelings of appreciation, safety, and courage among employees but also cultivates a motivated and energized workforce, ultimately translating into enhanced job performance over the long term [67,68]. In alignment with the aforementioned literature, the subsequent hypothesis has been formulated:
H4: 
Trust in leaders mediates the relationship between sustainable HRM and job performance.

2.5. Research Model

The conceptual model (Figure 1) embodies the variables that have captured our interest for assessment. This model draws inspiration from the framework proposed by Manzoor et al. [1], which highlights that sustainable HRM comprises three fundamental dimensions: selection, participation, and employee empowerment. The mediating variable of trust in leaders, as outlined by Zargar et al. [54], transpires when both involved parties, namely the employee and the manager, share a mutual respect and commitment to preserving their relationship. This entails refraining from actions that could potentially harm that relationship and trust. This construct is often manifested through indicators such as overall satisfaction and heightened employee engagement. Figure 1 presents the conceptual model devised for the purpose of scrutinizing the aforementioned hypotheses, all within the framework of the present study:

3. Materials and Methods

3.1. Sampling and Data Collection Procedure

The framework of this study predominantly rested upon the deductive approach, which was further accompanied by the quantitative method to aid in better reflecting the interrelations among the variables under examination. The calculation of the sample size was carried out using the G*Power (3.1.9.4) software [69]. Subsequently, this analysis indicated that a minimum sample size of 148 participants was deemed essential. Furthermore, a confidence interval of 99 percent was adopted, and, correspondingly, a 1% margin of error was selected. Therefore, a grand total of 194 online survey questionnaires were extensively distributed to a randomly selected sample group of academics of three private universities across Kyrenia, within the Turkish Republic of Northern Cyprus. Consequently, a total of 156 questionnaires remained as valid.

3.2. Sample Characterization

After conducting the data analysis, it was discerned that, out of the total 156 respondents, women had a higher participation rate (59%) compared to their male counterparts (41%). A substantial proportion of the participants were married (66%), and a majority reported having worked in their current position for a duration of 1 to 5 years (85%).

3.3. Measurement Scales

In order to examine the potential mediating role of trust in leadership inclusion in the association between sustainable HRM practices and employees’ job performance, the study participants were solicited to respond to a series of demographic inquiries as well as a comprehensive battery of questionnaires. As previously noted, in their study, Manzoor et al. investigated the effects of sustainable human resource management practices on workplace performance [1]. Their findings demonstrated that sustainable HRM practices, encompassing employee selection, participation, and empowerment, wielded a significant and positive impact on employee work performance.
The selection items encompassed a total of 3 items, aiming to assess the related independent variable in regard to sustainable HRM practices (e.g., experienced and qualified workers have the opportunity to be promoted to positions of superior pay and/or responsibility within the department). Respondents conveyed their responses on a 5-point Likert scale, ranging from 1 (Strongly Disagree) to 5 (Strongly Agree). The participation scale consisted of a cumulative total of 5 items, which were utilized to examine the relevant independent variable in regard to sustainable HRM practices (e.g., my superiors are receptive and listen to my ideas and suggestions). Respondents indicated their responses on a 5-point Likert scale, spanning from 1 (Not at all) to 5 (Very much). A total of twelve 5-point Likert scale items were employed to evaluate the independent variable of sustainable HRM practices regarding employee empowerment. Items were ranked ranging from 1 (Strongly Disagree) to 5 (Strongly Agree) across various statements (i.e., my impact on what happens in my department is significant). The dependent variable ‘Job Performance’ was measured through a set of 5 items on a 5-point Likert scale, ranging from 1 (Strongly Disagree) to 5 (Strongly Agree) addressing inquiries such as ‘I fulfil all responsibilities required by my job’. The mediating role of trust in leaders was assessed using a total of 5 items on a 5-point Likert scale. Respondents selected their responses on a range of 1 (Strongly Disagree) to 5 (Strongly Agree) (i.e., I trust in my supervisor/leader).

4. Results

The collected data from the present study underwent a process of cleaning and analysis utilizing PLS 3.0 software to assess the study’s main variables. This study has followed the positivist theory in all its applications to examine statistical data that are bound to either support our theory or draw attention to flaws in it. The t-test was executed with the statistical framework of linear multiple regression, employing a one-tailed approach.

4.1. Measurement Model

To test for indications of reliability within the dataset, the measurement model was employed. Various statistical tests were conducted to assess the reliability of the model constructs, encompassing outer loading, Cronbach’s alpha, Rho A, and compo-site reliability (CR) (see Table 1). As a result, our analysis demonstrated that the measurement model met the satisfactory thresholds in relation to outer loadings (see Table 2). Furthermore, the t-statistic is employed to assess the significance of the items included in the study (see Table 3).
Table 1 illustrates the reliability assessment of the constructs within the model. Notably, a significant correlation was indicated among the items as all the construct values ranged between 0.7 and 0.95 in terms of Cronbach’s alpha, Rho A, and CR, as outlined by Hair et al. [70,71].
Table 2 presents the outer loadings measurement tool, which enables us to assess the indicator reliability of the items. A general guideline, as explained by Hair et al. [70,71], is to verify whether each item in the table holds an outer loading value of 0.7 or higher. As shown in Table 2, all the outer loading values are above 0.7, which is a positive indication. This suggests that the constructs explain more than half of the indicator’s variability, indicating a strong relationship between the constructs and their indicators.
The t-statistic results presented in Table 3 serve as indicators of the significance of the inner model path coefficients. Since a t-statistic value of 1.96 or higher is considered acceptable, as indicated in the table, all the listed indicators have t-statistic values exceeding 1.96. Consequently, it can be inferred that the outer model loadings are statistically significant.
The results depicted in Table 4 provide an overview of the assessments for discriminant validity values, encompassing AVE, HTMT, and VIF values. As noted by Hair et al. [70,71], AVE scores above the threshold of 0.5 are considered essential. Upon examining the AVE values in the current study, which are highlighted in bold along the diagonal in Table 4, it becomes evident that all three results exceed 0.5, thus meeting the satisfactory criterion. The upper triangle values in the matrix represent the HTMT (heterotrait–monotrait) values. As noted by Henseler et al. [72], HTMT values are recommended to be lower than 0.85. Upon examination of the values in the current study, it can be affirmed that the values in this study are satisfactory, indicating the absence of discriminant validity issues. The lower triangle values in the matrix correspond to the VIF (variance inflation factor) values. These values are satisfactory as they are close to, but still below, the threshold of 3. This indicates the absence of multicollinearity problems within the study [70].

4.2. Structural Model Assessment

Analyzing the conceptual model presented in Figure 2 allows us to draw conclusions regarding the relationships between the constructs. It is crucial to note that t-statistic values should exceed 1.96 and p-values should be below 0.05, as indicated by Hair et al. [71]. Given that both requirements are fulfilled, it can be deduced that the relationship between the constructs is statistically significant. The beta value for mediator presence, indicated as beta 3, is relatively lower due to the mediator’s role in the model. Moreover, betas 1 and 2 exhibit medium to strong values. These beta values were evaluated in conjunction with the t and p values of the research model.
The notations of R-squared (R2) and Q-squared values are featured on the right corner of Figure 2. According to Hair et al. [70,71], R2 values are indicative of the model’s predictive strength. As illustrated above, the obtained R2 value is 0.46, signifying a moderate predictive strength. Furthermore, Q2 evaluates the model’s out-of-sample predictive power [70,71]. In this instance, the model’s Q2 value is 0.31, indicating a medium to large level of prediction strength.
Table 5 provides a concise overview of the hypothesis testing process, indicating the direct and mediator effects. H1 and H2 indicate the influence of the independent variable on the dependent and mediator variables, respectively. Furthermore, H3 examines the effect of the mediator on the dependent variable, while H4 represents the relationship between the two variables along with the mediator. The results indicate that all the hypotheses proposed in the current study are supported.

5. Discussion

The present study aimed to contribute to the existing literature and advance the theoretical framework by exploring the impact of trust in leaders on the relationship between sustainable HRM and employees’ job performance among academic staff. Following the analysis (see Section 4), the results indicated that sustainable HRM was positively correlated with job performance. Furthermore, our findings also revealed that the association between sustainable HRM and job performance becomes more robust when mediated by trust in leaders.

5.1. Theoretical Implications

In the contemporary business landscape, the workforce plays an important role in the success of a company [73]. Given the rapid and dynamic changes taking place in our modern world, the knowledge and strategies related to effectively managing the workforce have become indispensable. This entails not only optimizing the management of employees but also aligning these efforts with the overarching organizational objectives [28]. The concept of sustainable HRM is progressively gaining prevalence within businesses due to its potential impact on the long-term viability of organizations [4,5]. Embracing sustainable HRM allows companies to adapt to evolving trends in both their external and internal environments, ensuring that their human resource strategies remain relevant and effective, e.g., [16,17,18,19,20]. This proactive approach to HRM contributes to the organization’s ability to navigate changes and challenges while maintaining a sustainable competitive advantage. The implementation of sustainable HRM practices encompasses a comprehensive consideration of employee well-being and working conditions [38,39,40,41,42,74,75]. The objective is to create favorable employment conditions that not only promote employee satisfaction and engagement but also contribute to the overall success of the organization. Sustainable HRM strives to align the company’s practices with its goals, whether they are short-term objectives or long-term aspirations [76]. This approach acknowledges that a positive work environment and supportive HR practices are integral to achieving both employee and organizational objectives in a harmonious and sustainable manner [77,78]. Therefore, the results of testing our Hypothesis 1, which indicated a significant positive relationship between sustainable HRM practices and employee performance, were consistent with the existing literature. Previous research has indicated that sustainable HRM plays a significant role in establishing a positive work environment and cultivating trust in leaders, e.g., [15,20,31]. The findings from our analysis of H2 align with the existing literature, providing support for the relationship between sustainable HRM and trust in leaders. The current study’s findings from the testing of Hypothesis 3 are in consensus with the established literature regarding the association between trust in leaders and job performance, e.g., [37,54]. The results provide support for the existence of a positive correlation between these two constructs. Our fourth hypothesis (H4) was substantiated, affirming that the construct of trust in leader functions as a mediator in the relationship between sustainable HRM practices and employees’ job performance. Aligned with the existing literature, our findings exhibited consistency with the anticipated nature of such relationships, stating that employees’ enhanced perception of their leaders as trustworthy and supportive leads to a higher degree of engagement and advantages derived from sustainable HRM practices, e.g., [4,55,60,65]. Such a trusting relationship fosters a positive psychological environment where employees feel secure, valued, and empowered. This, in turn, can enhance employees’ job performance as they are more likely to be proactive, motivated, and committed when they trust that the organization’s leadership has their well-being at heart. Thus, trust in leaders acts as an intermediary mechanism that enhances the positive impact of sustainable HRM practices on employees’ job performance, creating a virtuous cycle of engagement and productivity [79]. In the context of the current study’s objectives, both organizational psychology and sustainability psychology are considered as relevant scientific domains. The present study makes several significant contributions to the existing literature. First, it addresses the noted gaps and recommendations in recent literature, i.e., [13,14], by providing empirical evidence on the relationship between sustainable HRM practices and employees’ job performance. Second, our study adds to the literature by introducing leadership, specifically trust in leadership, as a mediating variable. This inclusion enhances our understanding of the underlying effects and the interconnectedness of different elements within the context of leadership and HRM. Lastly, the findings of this study have practical implications. Managers and leaders at universities and other organizations can benefit from these results as they underscore the importance of adopting appropriate leadership styles and sustainable HRM practices to improve stakeholders’ perceptions, particularly employees, and enhance overall organizational performance through the promotion of sustainability practices.

5.2. Practical Implications

The present research holds significance for organizations as it offers insights into optimizing the implementation of sustainable HRM practices to achieve desired job performance outcomes, all the while considering the mediating role of trust in leaders. Possessing such insights into this mechanism can yield substantial benefits for organizations. It can aid in resource optimization by identifying optimal strategies for allocating both financial and temporal resources to various business practices. In this regard, the current research asserts that the implementation of an effective leadership style that aligns with the nature and context of the organization, such as universities in this case, can indeed lead to positive outcomes. Accordingly, the results underscore that the HRM departments in academic institutions should recognize the significance of leaders in fostering trusting relationships with employees and strategies relevant to sustainable practices to improve the performance of the academic staff. It is, thus, crucial for university decision makers to execute strategies aimed at attracting, recruiting, or nurturing leaders who have the ability to effectively and positively influence the psychological well-being of employees, thereby facilitating the accomplishment of long-term objectives. Hence, our findings suggest that educational institutions, including schools and universities, can gain significant advantages by implementing sustainable HRM practices that facilitate the adoption of trusting leadership within their organizational frameworks. We suggest that this could be achieved through harnessing employees’ full potential and expertise, granting autonomy in decision making, providing a platform for employees to voice their opinions, and empowering them. Additionally, it has the potential to pinpoint areas of deficiency within an organization, offering opportunities for targeted improvements to ensure the organization’s viability. Gaining a comprehensive understanding of this relationship holds the potential to yield significant rewards for management teams. Moreover, it serves as a valuable foundation for guiding future research endeavors in the fields of organizational psychology, sustainable psychology, leadership, and organizational behavior.

5.3. Research Limitations

Throughout the course of this study, participant contact was exclusively conducted through online means, which at times led to diminished participation opportunities. Additional limitations inherent to the study encompass factors such as geographical location and the total number of participants involved. Future research should be conducted in diverse geographical locations with distinct demographics and a potentially larger participant pool to ascertain the generalizability of the results across different contexts. The conceptual model outlined in this study holds potential for application in future research endeavors. Its applicability extends beyond the current context of private universities’ academic staff and could be employed to investigate a broader spectrum of institutions and organizations in order to mitigate these limitations. Furthermore, to further evaluate the impact of alternative dimensions on job performance, researchers might explore supplementary dimensions within sustainable HRM, such as reward systems, promotion mechanisms, equitable evaluation procedures, performance-based incentives, and other aspects encompassed by sustainable HRM. Finally, exploring an alternative moderator or mediator beyond the scope of this study could offer new avenues for exploration. Our findings could also lead to future findings that diverge from the current outcomes, thus fostering a richer understanding and deeper insights into the subject matter under scrutiny.

6. Conclusions

Our research stands out in several key ways that distinguish it from the existing studies in the field. This study addresses a longstanding gap in the literature regarding sustainability, which is still a relatively new field with ample room for further study and exploration. Our study is the first to comprehensively evaluate the impact of the mediating role of trust in a leader on the relationship between sustainable HRM and job performance, providing valuable insights that have not been previously explored in the existing research literature. This adds a fresh and significant perspective to the topic, contributing to the advancement of knowledge in this area. The findings of the current study have immediate practical implications, not only for academic sectors but also for various industries and organizations. Overall, these unique elements collectively contribute to the distinctiveness and significance of our study in advancing knowledge and addressing practical challenges in the fields of organizational studies, human resources, leadership, and other relevant areas. Accordingly, the findings of the current study revealed a significant and positive association between sustainable HRM practices and job performance, with the mediation of trust in leaders being a significant contributing factor. Accordingly, the association between sustainable HRM and trust in leaders was found to be positive and significant, while trust in leaders and job performance had a positive and significant association. The mediation assessment conducted reflects that sustainable HRM has a direct impact on job performance and is significant. Consequently, there is a significant but indirect impact of sustainable HRM on job performance with the presence of trust in leaders. Our findings imply that sustainable HRM practices exert a relatively discernible influence on employees within an organization; however, the inclusion of trust in leadership strengthens this relationship and reinforces desirable behavior and attitudes among the employees in the execution of their roles within the organization. In sum, when sustainability is integrated into HRM practices, leaders’ endeavors to establish trust can yield beneficial outcomes that benefit both the staff and the organization, contributing positively to society as a whole. Our findings hold relevance for practitioners in various industries, scholars, human resource managers, managers, policymakers, and decision makers across different sectors. The constructs examined in the present study exhibit significant and positive interrelations. Consequently, the proposed hypotheses in this study were supported, as corroborated by the statistical analysis outlined in Section 5.

Author Contributions

Conceptualization, P.F. and R.A.; methodology, P.F.; software, A.M.; validation, P.F. and P.G.K.; formal analysis, P.F.; investigation, P.F.; resources, P.G.K.; data curation, P.F.; Data collection: R.A.; writing—original draft preparation, R.A. and P.G.K.; writing—review and editing, P.F. and P.G.K.; visualization, A.M.; supervision, P.F.; project administration, P.F. and R.A. All authors have read and agreed to the published version of the manuscript.

Funding

This research received no external funding.

Institutional Review Board Statement

The study was approved by the Business Faculty Research Ethics Committee of GIRNE AMERICAN UNIVER-SITY on 10.12.2022.

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. Manzoor, F.; Wei, L.; Bányai, T.; Nurunnabi, M.; Subhan, Q.A. An examination of sustainable HRM practices on job performance: An application of training as a moderator. Sustainability 2019, 11, 2263. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  2. Johnson, E.K. The practice of human resource management in New Zealand: Strategic and best practice? Asia Pac. J. Hum. Resour. 2000, 38, 69–83. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  3. Chebat, J.C.; Kollias, P. The impact of empowerment on customer contact employees’ roles in service organizations. J. Serv. Res. 2000, 3, 66–81. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  4. Cugueró-Escofet, N.; Ficapal-Cusí, P.; Torrent-Sellens, J. Sustainable human resource management: How to create a knowledge sharing behavior through organizational justice, organizational support, satisfaction and commitment. Sustainability 2019, 11, 5419. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  5. Ehnert, I.; Parsa, S.; Roper, I.; Wagner, M.; Muller-Camen, M. Reporting on sustainability and HRM: A comparative study of sustainability reporting practices by the world’s largest companies. Int. J. Hum. Resour. Manag. 2016, 27, 88–108. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  6. Bahmani, S.; Farmanesh, P.; Khademolomoom, A.H. Effects of Green Human Resource Management on Innovation Performance through Green Innovation: Evidence from Northern Cyprus on Small Island Universities. Sustainability 2023, 15, 4158. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  7. Nadarajah, S.; Kadiresan, V.; Kumar, R.; Kamil, N.N.A.; Yusoff, Y.M. The relationship of HR practices and job performance of academicians towards career development in Malaysian private higher institutions. Procedia-Soc. Behav. Sci. 2012, 57, 102–118. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  8. Snape, E.; Redman, T. HRM practices, organizational citizenship behaviour, and performance: A multi-level analysis. J. Manag. Stud. 2010, 4, 1219–1247. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  9. AlDhaheri, H.; Hilmi, M.F.; Abudaqa, A.; Alzahmi, R.A.; Ahmed, G. The relationship between HRM practices, innovation, and employee productivity in UAE public sector: A structural equation modelling approach. Int. J. Process Manag. Benchmarking 2023, 13, 157–176. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  10. LeCounte, J.F. HRM solutions: A framework for small business owners to manage industrial relations while facilitating labour unionisation mitigation. Int. J. Organ. Anal. 2023. ahead-of-print. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  11. Paul, A.K.; Anantharaman, R.N. Impact of people management practices on organizational performance: Analysis of a causal model. Int. J. Hum. Resour. Manag. 2003, 14, 1246–1266. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  12. Lambooij, M.; Sanders, K.; Koster, F.; Zwiers, M. Human resource practices and organisational performance: Can the HRM-performance linkage be explained by the cooperative behaviours of employees? Manag. Rev. 2006, 17, 223–240. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  13. Lu, Y.; Zhang, M.M.; Yang, M.M.; Wang, Y. Sustainable human resource management practices, employee resilience, and employee outcomes: Toward common good values. Hum. Resour. Manag. 2023, 62, 331–353. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  14. Naseer, S.A.; Mukhtar, S.; Gul, M. Green HRM & job performance: Unveiling pathway through job satisfaction. J. Soc. Res. Dev. 2023, 4, 410–419. [Google Scholar]
  15. Rahal, F.E.Z.M.; Farmanesh, P. Does Servant Leadership Stimulate Work Engagement in the Workplace? The Mediating Role of Trust in Leader. Sustainability 2022, 14, 16528. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  16. Kramar, R. Beyond strategic human resource management: Is sustainable human resource management the next approach? Int. J. Hum. Resour. Manag. 2013, 25, 1069–1089. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  17. Boudreau, J.W.; Ramstad, P.M. Talentship, talent segmentation, and sustainability: A new HR decision science paradigm for a new strategy definition. Hum. Resour. Manag. 2005, 44, 129–136. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  18. Chreif, M.; Farmanesh, P. Applying Green Human Resource Practices toward Sustainable Workplace: A Moderated Mediation Analysis. Sustainability 2022, 14, 9250. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  19. Jabbour, C.J.C.; Santos, F.C.A. The central role of human resource management in the search for sustainable organizations. Int. J. Hum. Resour. Manag. 2008, 19, 2133–2154. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  20. Zaugg, R.J. Nachhaltiges Personalmanagement: Eine Neue Perspektive und Empirische Exploration des Human Resource Management; Springer: Berlin/Heidelberg, Germany, 2009. [Google Scholar]
  21. Wanjau, M.N.; Kyongo, J.K. Contribution of motivational management to employee performance. Int. J. Humanit. Soc. Sci. 2013, 3, 220–239. [Google Scholar]
  22. Barling, J. Brave New Workplace: Designing Productive, Healthy, and Safe Organizations; Oxford University Press: Oxford, UK, 2023. [Google Scholar]
  23. Mariappanadar, S.; Kramar, R. Sustainable HRM: The synthesis effect of high performance work systems on organisational performance and employee harm. Asia-Pac. J. Bus. Adm. 2014, 6, 206–224. [Google Scholar]
  24. Salvador-Gómez, A.; Bou-Llusar, J.C.; Beltrán-Martín, I. A multi-actor perspective on the effectiveness of human resource management implementation: An empirical analysis based on the ability-motivation-opportunity framework. Int. J. Hum. Resour. Manag. 2022, 1–39. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  25. Akhtar, S.; Khan, K.U.; Atlas, F.; Irfan, M. Stimulating student’s pro-environmental behavior in higher education institutions: An ability–motivation–opportunity perspective. Environ. Dev. Sustain. 2022, 24, 4128–4149. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  26. Zhang, B.; Morris, J.L. High-performance work systems and organizational performance: Testing the mediation role of employee outcomes using evidence from PR China. Int. J. Hum. Resour. Manag. 2014, 25, 68–90. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  27. Obeidat, S.M.; Mitchell, R.; Bray, M. The link between high performance work practices and organizational performance: Empirically validating the conceptualization of HPWP according to the AMO model. Empl. Relat. 2016, 38, 578–595. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  28. Shin, D.; Konrad, A.M. Causality between high-performance work systems and organizational performance. J. Manag. 2017, 43, 973–997. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  29. Bos-Nehles, A.; Townsend, K.; Cafferkey, K.; Trullen, J. Examining the Ability, Motivation and Opportunity (AMO) framework in HRM research: Conceptualization, measurement and interactions. Int. J. Manag. Rev. 2023. Early View. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  30. Colvin, A.J.; Boswell, W.R. The problem of action and interest alignment: Beyond job requirements and incentive compensation. Hum. Resour. Manag. Rev. 2007, 17, 38–51. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  31. Islam, T.; Khatoon, A.; Cheema, A.U.; Ashraf, Y. How does ethical leadership enhance employee work engagement? The roles of trust in leader and harmonious work passion. Kybernetes 2023. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  32. DuBois, C.L.; Dubois, D.A. Strategic HRM as social design for environmental sustainability in organization. Hum. Resour. Manag. 2012, 51, 799–826. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  33. Ramus, C.A.; Steger, U. The roles of supervisory support behaviors and environmental policy in employee “Ecoinitiatives” at leading-edge European companies. Acad. Manag. J. 2000, 43, 605–626. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  34. Dušková, M. Key enabling technologies and measuring of the company performance in relation to sustainable development: Evaluation model design. Int. J. Innov. Sustain. Dev. 2021, 15, 1–34. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  35. Witjes, S.; Vermeulen, W.J.; Cramer, J.M. Assessing Corporate Sustainability integration for corporate self-reflection. Resour. Conserv. Recycl. 2017, 127, 132–147. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  36. Cohen, E.; Taylor, S.; Muller-Camen, M. HRMs role in corporate social and environmental sustainability. SHRM Rep. 2012, 1, 1–16. [Google Scholar]
  37. Holmes, J.G.; Rempel, J.K. Trust in close relationships. In Close Relationships; Hendrick, C., Ed.; Sage Publications, Inc.: Thousand Oaks, CA, USA, 1989; pp. 187–220. [Google Scholar]
  38. Bocean, C.G.; Popescu, L.; Varzaru, A.A.; Avram, C.D.; Iancu, A. Work-Life Balance and Employee Satisfaction during COVID-19 Pandemic. Sustainability 2023, 15, 11631. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  39. Gray, C.E.; Spector, P.E.; Wells, J.E.; Bianchi, S.R.; Ocana-Dominguez, C.; Stringer, C.; Sarmiento, J.; Butler, T. How can organizational leaders help? Examining the effectiveness of leaders’ support during a crisis. J. Bus. Psychol. 2023, 38, 215–237. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  40. Hauff, S.; Felfe, J.; Klug, K. High-performance work practices, employee well-being, and supportive leadership: Spillover mechanisms and boundary conditions between HRM and leadership behavior. Int. J. Hum. Resour. Manag. 2022, 33, 2109–2137. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  41. Walk, M. Leaders as change executors: The impact of leader attitudes to change and change-specific support on followers. Eur. Manag. J. 2023, 41, 154–163. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  42. Phipps, S.T.; Prieto, L.C.; Ndinguri, E.N. Understanding the impact of employee involvement on organizational productivity: The moderating role of organizational commitment. J. Organ. Cult. Commun. Confl. 2013, 17, 107. [Google Scholar]
  43. Salanova, M.; Meyer, J.P.; Schneider, B. Work-engagement: A key to HEROs-healthy and resilient organizations. In A Research Agenda for Employee Engagement in a Changing World of Work; Edward Elgar Publishing: Cheltenham, UK, 2021; pp. 53–65. [Google Scholar]
  44. Laschinger, H.K.S.; Leiter, M.P.; Day, A.; Gilin-Oore, D.; Mackinnon, S.P. Building empowering work environments that foster civility and organizational trust: Testing an intervention. Nurs. Res. 2012, 61, 316–325. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  45. Radu, C.; Deaconu, A.; Misu, S.I.; Triculescu, M. The impact of work investment on performance. Amfiteatru Econ. 2020, 22, 1103–1120. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  46. Corbos, R.A.; Cristian, D.A.; Popescu, R.I.; Bunea, O.I.; Scaunasu, R. Leadership Style, Interpersonal Relationships and The Quality of The Medical Act During The COVID-19 Pandemic Within A State Hospital. Proc. Int. Manag. Conf. 2021, 15, 792–801. [Google Scholar]
  47. Abdelwahed, N.A.A.; Soomro, B.A.; Shah, N. Predicting employee performance through transactional leadership and entrepreneur’s passion among the employees of Pakistan. Asia Pac. Manag. Rev. 2023, 28, 60–68. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  48. Putri, R.A. Leadership style and interpersonal communication of employee satisfaction and it’s effect on the employee performance. JPBM (J. Pendidik. Bisnis Dan Manaj.) 2018, 4, 101–106. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  49. Byron, K.; Keem, S.; Darden, T.; Shalley, C.E.; Zhou, J. Building blocks of idea generation and implementation in teams: A meta-analysis of team design and team creativity and innovation. Pers. Psychol. 2023, 76, 249–278. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  50. Harvey, J.F.; Cromwell, J.R.; Johnson, K.J.; Edmondson, A.C. The Dynamics of Team Learning: Harmony and Rhythm in Teamwork Arrangements for Innovation. Adm. Sci. Q. 2023, 68, 601–647. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  51. Karakitapoğlu-Aygün, Z.; Erdogan, B.; Caughlin, D.E.; Bauer, T.N. Transformational leadership, idiosyncratic deals and employee outcomes. Pers. Rev. 2023. ahead-of-print. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  52. Li, H.; Zhao, T.; Li, C.; Pang, X. Linking visionary leadership with employee creativity: Perceived organizational support as a mediator. Soc. Behav. Personal. Int. J. 2023, 51, 1–8. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  53. Nusair, N.; Ababneh, R.; Kyung Bae, Y. The impact of transformational leadership style on innovation as perceived by public employees in Jordan. Int. J. Commer. Manag. 2012, 22, 182–201. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  54. Zargar, P.; Sousan, A.; Farmanesh, P. Does trust in leader mediate the servant leadership style–job satisfaction relationship? Manag. Sci. Lett. 2019, 9, 2253–2268. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  55. Victor, B.; Cullen, J.B. The organizational bases of ethical work climates. Adm. Sci. Q. 1988, 33, 101–125. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  56. Day, A.; Penney, S.A.; Hartling, N. The psychology, potential perils, and practice of leading healthy workplaces. Organ. Dyn. 2019, 48, 75–84. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  57. Muharam, M.P. The Impact of Transformational Leadership on Employee Satisfaction. J. EMA 2023, 1, 49–56. [Google Scholar]
  58. Khoshkar, P.G.; Farmanesh, P.; Nweke, G. Assessing the impact of burnout syndrome on romantic relationship satisfaction: The dark side of workplace bullying. South East Eur. J. Econ. Bus. 2020, 15, 44–55. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  59. Kahn, W.A. Psychological conditions of personal engagement and disengagement at work. Acad. Manag. J. 1990, 33, 692–724. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  60. Ahmed, F.; Xiong, Z.; Faraz, N.A.; Arslan, A. The interplay between servant leadership, psychological safety, trust in a leader and burnout: Assessing causal relationships through a three-wave longitudinal study. Int. J. Occup. Saf. Ergon. 2023, 29, 912–924. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  61. Detert, J.R.; Burris, E.R. Leadership behavior and employee voice: Is the door really open? Acad. Manag. J. 2007, 50, 869–884. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  62. Song, Y.; Tian, Q.T.; Kwan, H.K. Servant leadership and employee voice: A moderated mediation. J. Manag. Psychol. 2022, 37, 1–14. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  63. Peng, J.C.; Chen, S.W. In search of a cross-level mechanism linking paternalistic leadership to employee voice behavior. Manag. Decis. 2022, 60, 2238–2255. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  64. Kim, Y.; Lee, E.; Kang, M.; Yang, S.U. Understanding the Influence of Authentic Leadership and Employee-Organization Relationships on Employee Voice Behaviors in Response to Dissatisfying Events at Work. Manag. Commun. Q. 2023, 37, 64–98. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  65. Kim, S.; Noh, G.; Miao, S. Authentic leadership and employee voice behavior: The effect of Chinese employees’ Zhongyong thinking. Int. J. Organ. Theory Behav. 2022, 25, 167–185. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  66. Elsetouhi, A.M.; Mohamed Elbaz, A.; Soliman, M. Participative leadership and its impact on employee innovative behavior through employee voice in tourism SMEs: The moderating role of job autonomy. Tour. Hosp. Res. 2023, 23, 406–419. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  67. Kim, T.Y.; David, E.M.; Chen, T.; Liang, Y. Authenticity or self-enhancement? Effects of self-presentation and authentic leadership on trust and performance. J. Manag. 2023, 49, 944–973. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  68. Liu, X.; Ren, X. Analysis of the mediating role of psychological empowerment between perceived leader trust and employee work performance. Int. J. Environ. Res. Public Health 2022, 19, 6712. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  69. Faul, F.; Erdfelder, E.; Lang, A.G.; Buchner, A. G* Power 3: A flexible statistical power analysis program for the social, behavioral, and biomedical sciences. Behav. Res. Methods 2007, 39, 175–191. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  70. Hair, J.F., Jr.; Hult, G.T.M.; Ringle, C.M.; Sarstedt, M. A Primer on Partial Least Squares Structural Equation Modeling (PLS-SEM); Sage Publications: Thousand Oaks, CA, USA, 2021. [Google Scholar]
  71. Hair, J.F.; Risher, J.J.; Sarstedt, M.; Ringle, C.M. When to use and how to report the results of PLS-SEM. Eur. Bus. Rev. 2019, 31, 2–24. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  72. Henseler, J.; Hubona, G.; Ray, P.A. Using PLS path modeling in new technology research: Updated guidelines. Ind. Manag. Data Syst. 2016, 116, 2–20. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  73. Ahmad, S. Green human resource management: Policies and practices. Cogent Bus. Manag. 2015, 2, 1030817. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  74. Tortia, E.C.; Sacchetti, S.; López-Arceiz, F.J. A human growth perspective on sustainable HRM practices, worker well-being and organizational performance. Sustainability 2022, 14, 11064. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  75. Villajos, E.; Tordera, N.; Peiró, J.M. Human resource practices, eudaimonic well-being, and creative performance: The mediating role of idiosyncratic deals for sustainable human resource management. Sustainability 2019, 11, 6933. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  76. Ricardo de Souza Freitas, W.; José Chiappetta Jabbour, C.; César Almada Santos, F. Continuing the evolution: Towards sustainable HRM and sustainable organizations. Bus. Strategy Ser. 2011, 12, 226–234. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  77. Khamdamov, A.; Tang, Z.; Hussain, M.A. Unpacking parallel mediation processes between green HRM practices and sustainable environmental performance: Evidence from Uzbekistan. Sustainability 2023, 15, 1434. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  78. Stankevičiūtė, Ž.; Savanevičienė, A. Designing sustainable HRM: The core characteristics of emerging field. Sustainability 2018, 10, 4798. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  79. Chen, J.K.; Sriphon, T. Authentic leadership, trust, and social exchange relationships under the influence of leader behavior. Sustainability 2022, 14, 5883. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
Sustainability 15 14223 g001
Figure 1. Research model. Source: author.
Figure 1. Research model. Source: author.
Sustainability 15 14223 g001
Sustainability 15 14223 g002
Figure 2. Path coefficients and significance for the model. Source: author.
Figure 2. Path coefficients and significance for the model. Source: author.
Sustainability 15 14223 g002
Table 1. Reliability testing.
Table 1. Reliability testing.
ConstructCronbach’s AlphaRho ACR
Sustainable HRM0.8760.8760.875
Job Performance0.8160.8220.814
Trust in Leaders0.8370.8350.841
Source: developed by authors.
Table 2. Outer loadings testing.
Table 2. Outer loadings testing.
ConstructsSub-DimensionsIndicatorsOuter Loadings
Sustainable HRM
Selection
S10.889
S20.824
S30.851
Participation
P10.912
P20.861
P30.811
P40.849
P50.924
Employee Empowerment
E10.832
E20.928
E30.863
E40.828
E50.751
E60.906
E70.844
E80.798
E9 0.819
E100.761
E110.899
E120.836
Trust in Leaders
T10.893
T20.861
T30.819
T40.902
T50.774
Job Performance
J10.843
J20.812
J30.882
J40.913
J50.792
Source: developed by authors.
Table 3. T-statistics testing. *** p-value < 0.001.
Table 3. T-statistics testing. *** p-value < 0.001.
ConstructsSub-DimensionsIndicatorst-Statistics
Sustainable HRM
Selection
S131.207 ***
S232.158 ***
S329.189 ***
Participation
P122.011 ***
P224.967 ***
P319.217 ***
P419.901 ***
P523.759 ***
Employee Empowerment
E128.619 ***
E231.816 ***
E329.766 ***
E424.096 ***
E522.534 ***
E625.222 ***
E726.739 ***
E823.971 ***
E9 25.754 ***
E1019.761 ***
E1130.436 ***
E1228.759 ***
Trust in Leaders
T128.210 ***
T224.902 ***
T323.931 ***
T428.217 ***
T520.261 ***
Job Performance
J123.398 ***
J224.042 ***
J322.366 ***
J425.438 ***
J519.640 ***
Source: developed by authors.
Table 4. Discriminant validity testing.
Table 4. Discriminant validity testing.
ABC
A. Sustainable HRM0.7620.4910.452
B. Trust in Leaders1.9260.6850.664
C. Job Performance2.3471.6360.716
Source: developed by authors.
Table 5. Hypothesis testing.
Table 5. Hypothesis testing.
HPathβT-Valuesp-ValuesRemark
H1SHRM ⇨ JP0.1562.541≤0.01Supported
H2SHRM ⇨ TL0.5779.521≤0.001Supported
H3TL ⇨JP0.4146.561≤0.001Supported
H4SHRM ⇨ TL ⇨ JP0.2387.482≤0.001Supported
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

Farmanesh, P.; Mostepaniuk, A.; Khoshkar, P.G.; Alhamdan, R. Fostering Employees’ Job Performance through Sustainable Human Resources Management and Trust in Leaders—A Mediation Analysis. Sustainability 2023, 15, 14223. https://doi.org/10.3390/su151914223

AMA Style

Farmanesh P, Mostepaniuk A, Khoshkar PG, Alhamdan R. Fostering Employees’ Job Performance through Sustainable Human Resources Management and Trust in Leaders—A Mediation Analysis. Sustainability. 2023; 15(19):14223. https://doi.org/10.3390/su151914223

Chicago/Turabian Style

Farmanesh, Panteha, Alla Mostepaniuk, Parisa Gharibi Khoshkar, and Riham Alhamdan. 2023. "Fostering Employees’ Job Performance through Sustainable Human Resources Management and Trust in Leaders—A Mediation Analysis" Sustainability 15, no. 19: 14223. https://doi.org/10.3390/su151914223

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