Sustaining Talent: The Role of Personal Norms in the Relationship Between Green Practices and Employee Retention

Round 1

Reviewer 1 Report

Comments and Suggestions for Authors

The manuscript is generally well-organized and based on a solid theoretical foundation. However, there are several areas where improvements would make the paper stronger and clearer.

1. In the Introduction, the authors explain why GHRM matters for employee retention. This section would be more convincing if it included more discussion of the specific context—China and the manufacturing industry. Explaining why these settings matter will help readers understand the importance of the study.

2. Terms such as GHRM, green shared vision, green CSR, and green psychological climate are introduced early, but their meanings and differences are not clearly explained. Since these terms are similar, clearer definitions and distinctions will help readers follow the manuscript more easily.

3. The hypotheses should be written in full sentences and include the direction of the expected relationship. For example, H1 could be stated as “Green shared vision is positively related to personal norms.” 

4. When developing the hypotheses, please make sure to connect them more clearly to the Chinese manufacturing context. This will show why the study matters in that particular setting.

5. Please include sample sample items from each scale used in the survey so readers can better understand how each concept was measured. Also, report the reliability for each measure, such as Cronbach’s alpha.

6. More detail is needed about the control variables used in the study. Please explain which controls were included and why they were chosen, based on existing research.

7. It would be helpful to briefly discuss whether the findings might be different in other cultural or industry settings. If the authors expect different patterns outside of China or manufacturing, they should explain why. If not, please clarify why the results might apply more broadly.

Author Response

We sincerely thank the reviewer for taking the time to carefully read our manuscript and provide thoughtful and constructive feedback. We greatly appreciate the reviewer detailed suggestions, which have helped us to significantly strengthen the clarity, contextualization, and quality of our paper. Below, we provide point-by-point responses to each comment and explain how we have addressed them in the revised version.

Comment: "In the Introduction, the authors explain why GHRM matters for employee retention. This section would be more convincing if it included more discussion of the specific context—China and the manufacturing industry. Explaining why these settings matter will help readers understand the importance of the study."

Response:
Thank you for the suggestion. We have revised the Introduction to more clearly emphasize the importance of the Chinese manufacturing sector. Specifically, we added discussion about the sector’s high turnover rates, rapid industrial modernization, competitive labor market, and increasing environmental regulations, explaining why talent retention through green practices is critical in this specific setting.

Comment: "Terms such as GHRM, green shared vision, green CSR, and green psychological climate are introduced early, but their meanings and differences are not clearly explained. Since these terms are similar, clearer definitions and distinctions will help readers follow the manuscript more easily."

Response:
We appreciate this helpful point. In the revised version, we have now added clear and distinct definitions for each key concept — green shared vision, green CSR, green psychological climate, and GHRM — early in the literature review section. We also briefly explain how these concepts differ to avoid any confusion for readers.

Comment: "The hypotheses should be written in full sentences and include the direction of the expected relationship. For example, H1 could be stated as 'Green shared vision is positively related to personal norms.' "

Response:
Thank you for this suggestion. We have rewritten all hypotheses as full sentences, clearly stating the expected direction of the relationships. For example, H1 now reads: “Green shared vision is positively and significantly related to personal norms.” Similar adjustments have been made to all hypotheses.

Comment: "When developing the hypotheses, please make sure to connect them more clearly to the Chinese manufacturing context. This will show why the study matters in that particular setting."

Response:
We agree with this important suggestion. In the hypotheses development section, we have now incorporated specific discussions about the Chinese manufacturing sector. For each variable (e.g., green shared vision, green CSR), we added a few sentences explaining why its impact is particularly relevant for China's industrial environment.

Comment: "Please include sample items from each scale used in the survey so readers can better understand how each concept was measured. Also, report the reliability for each measure, such as Cronbach’s alpha."

Response:
Thank you for highlighting this. We have now added sample survey items for each construct (e.g., green shared vision, green CSR, personal norms, etc.) in the "Measures" section. Additionally, we have reported the Cronbach’s alpha for each measure to demonstrate reliability in Table 4.

Comment: "More detail is needed about the control variables used in the study. Please explain which controls were included and why they were chosen, based on existing research."

Response:
Thank you for the suggestion. In the Methods section, we have now included a new paragraph explaining that gender, age, education level, and tenure were included as control variables. We justified these choices by referencing prior research that shows these factors can influence personal norms and employee retention outcomes.

Comment: "It would be helpful to briefly discuss whether the findings might be different in other cultural or industry settings. If the authors expect different patterns outside of China or manufacturing, they should explain why. If not, please clarify why the results might apply more broadly."

Response:
We appreciate this thoughtful comment. In the Discussion section, we have added a paragraph discussing the generalizability of findings. We note that due to cultural values around collectivism and environmental responsibility in China, results may differ in more individualistic or service-sector contexts. We also discuss why some insights may still be broadly applicable.

Author Response File: Author Response.pdf

Reviewer 2 Report

Comments and Suggestions for Authors

This study examines the relationships between green shared vision, green corporate social responsibility (GCSR), green psychological climate, and green human resource management (GHRM) with employee retention, mediated by personal norms.

Authors are advised to clearly show the existing research gaps and provide sufficient literature that exposes them.

Authors are advised to include the conceptual framework to show the relationship between variables and the hypothesis

The study provides a practical perspective on sustainable employee retention.

Authors are advised to revise the methodology by describing the research design and the study population, and the data collection procedure.

The sampling technique should be specified and justified

The conclusion is good

References are good, but should be updated with additional references after improvement of the literature review (supporting literature for research gaps).

Comments on the Quality of English Language

Simple spelling mistakes e .g “3.2. Mesures  line ……….430” etc

Author Response

We sincerely thank the reviewer for their thoughtful evaluation, helpful suggestions, and willingness to sign the review report. We appreciate the time and effort spent in carefully assessing our manuscript. We are grateful for the detailed feedback, which has helped us to improve the clarity, depth, and rigor of the paper. Below, we provide point-by-point responses to each of the comments.

Comment: "Authors are advised to clearly show the existing research gaps and provide sufficient literature that exposes them."

Response:
Thank you for highlighting this important issue. In the revised Introduction and Theoretical Background sections, we have clearly identified the research gaps. Specifically, we explain that while much research examines green practices and employee outcomes separately, limited studies investigate how personal norms mediate the relationship between green practices and retention, particularly in the Chinese manufacturing context. We also supported this discussion with updated literature references.

Comment: "Authors are advised to include the conceptual framework to show the relationship between variables and the hypothesis."

Response:
We agree with this valuable suggestion. We have added a clear conceptual framework diagram illustrating the hypothesized relationships among green shared vision, green CSR, green psychological climate, green HRM, personal norms, and employee retention. This figure has been inserted at the end of the Hypotheses Development section.

Comment: "The study provides a practical perspective on sustainable employee retention."

Response:
Thank you for this positive comment. We appreciate your recognition of the practical contributions of our study.

Comment: "Authors are advised to revise the methodology by describing the research design and the study population, and the data collection procedure."

Response:
Thank you for this valuable observation. We have revised the Methodology section to more clearly describe the research design, the study population (manufacturing sector employees in Shandong Province, China), and the data collection procedure (distribution through HR managers, voluntary participation, and confidentiality assurance).

Comment: "The sampling technique should be specified and justified."

Response:
We appreciate this comment. We have now specified that a purposive sampling technique was used, focusing on organizations with active green initiatives. We justified this choice by explaining that purposive sampling ensured that participants had relevant exposure to green organizational practices, which was necessary to test the study’s hypotheses.

 

 

Author Response File: Author Response.pdf