A Conceptual Framework for Sustainable Human Resource Management: Integrating Green Practices, Ethical Leadership, and Digital Resilience to Advance the SDGs

Abstract

This article develops a conceptual framework of Sustainable Human Resource Management (Sustainable HRM) by integrating three critical dimensions: Green HRM practices, ethical and responsible leadership, and digital resilience in HR systems. Positioned within the United Nations Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs), the study addresses the lack of theoretical integration across the fragmented literature. The framework highlights employee well-being as the central mediating construct linking HRM practices to sustainability outcomes, connecting micro-level engagement, meso-level HR systems and leadership ethics, and macro-level policy and ESG alignment. This explicitly demonstrates the multi-level (micro–meso–macro) nature of the framework. The proposed model advances theory by extending HRM beyond organizational boundaries, offering Sustainable HRM as a boundary-spanning and original perspective that links people management to global sustainability agendas. Using a five-stage conceptual development process including literature synthesis, construct definition, integrative framework building, formulation of conceptual propositions, and the design of a future research agenda—this study explicitly acknowledges its conceptual nature to set appropriate reader expectations and ensures methodological transparency in framework development. The study further contributes (1) to theory by clarifying how Green HRM, ethical leadership, and digital resilience interact through employee well-being to advance sustainability; (2) to practice by providing HR leaders with pathways to embed sustainability into core processes; and (3) to policy by informing regulators on HRM’s role in achieving SDGs. Ultimately, the framework positions HRM as a strategic enabler of sustainable development.

1. Introduction

Global organizations are increasingly required to contribute to the achievement of the United Nations Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs), particularly SDG 8 (Decent Work and Economic Growth), SDG 12 (Responsible Consumption and Production), and SDG 13 (Climate Action) [1,2,3,4]. Climate change, environmental degradation, and growing social inequalities demand a paradigm shift in how firms design and manage their operations. In this regard, human resource management (HRM) has become a critical lever, as it directly shapes employee behavior, organizational culture, and long-term workforce sustainability [5,6,7,8].

Recent research reinforces that HRM systems are not only operational tools but also strategic enablers for advancing the SDGs through people-centered sustainability practices [9,10,11]. Scholars have emphasized that HRM practices promoting employee inclusion, ethical culture, and digital innovation directly contribute to social and environmental objectives within SDG frameworks. In particular, integrating Sustainable HRM with the SDG agenda strengthens organizational legitimacy and fosters cross-level alignment between workforce well-being, ethical governance, and institutional accountability. These recent findings provide empirical justification for positioning HRM as a bridge between internal human development and external sustainability outcomes.

Despite their importance, traditional HRM approaches remain overly inward-looking, with a primary focus on short-term efficiency, employee retention, and cost minimization [12,13]. Such orientations fall short of addressing broader environmental, social, and governance (ESG) challenges. Existing HR systems often fail to embed sustainability principles, thereby limiting their contribution to global sustainability agendas [5,6,14]. This conceptual gap highlights the need to reframe HRM as not only an internal administrative function but also a strategic mechanism for advancing sustainable development.

To address this gap, this article develops a conceptual framework for Sustainable HRM by integrating three key elements: Green HRM practices, ethical leadership, and digital resilience. Green HRM practices ensure that recruitment, training, appraisal, and reward systems explicitly support environmental and social objectives [15,16,17]. Ethical leadership provides the moral foundation for responsible decision-making, transparency, and trust in HR processes [18,19]. Digital resilience, in turn, enables organizations to leverage HR analytics and artificial intelligence to enhance accountability, ensure adaptability, and strengthen sustainability reporting [20,21,22]. Together, these dimensions position HRM as a proactive driver of organizational and societal sustainability.

This study explicitly defines itself as a conceptual article, employing the theory synthesis and model building approach proposed by [23]. The aim is not to provide empirical testing but to construct a middle-range theoretical framework that synthesizes fragmented discourses in HRM, sustainability science, and ethical leadership. By articulating conceptual propositions and a structured research agenda, the paper contributes to the theoretical advancement of Sustainable HRM while offering pathways for empirical validation in future studies.

The novelty of this article lies in presenting a holistic and multi-level conceptual framework that integrates green practices, ethics, and digital resilience. Previous research has largely examined these dimensions in isolation; while only limited literature has explored how these dimensions can be systematically connected to sustainable development outcomes [24,25]. By advancing this integrative perspective, the paper positions HRM not merely as an operational function but as a strategic lever for achieving the SDGs and long-term organizational sustainability.

Despite this progress, a critical research gap remains in integrating Green HRM, Ethical and Responsible Leadership, and Digital Resilience into a unified framework for Sustainable HRM. Prior studies have treated these domains separately—environmental, ethical, and technological—resulting in fragmented insights and limited theoretical coherence. To address this limitation, the present study explicitly identifies two main research gaps: (a) the absence of an integrative theoretical model that systematically connects ethics, digitalization, and sustainability within HRM, and (b) the lack of multi-level integration (micro–meso–macro) in existing Sustainable HRM literature.

Accordingly, this study develops a conceptual framework that links Green HRM, Ethical Leadership, and Digital Resilience to the SDGs (3, 5, 8, 12, and 13) through the mediating mechanism of employee well-being. The theoretical rationale for selecting these three dimensions is based on their complementary roles: Green HRM drives environmental performance, Ethical Leadership ensures moral and procedural justice, and Digital Resilience enables adaptive and transparent HR systems in the digital era.

Accordingly, the central research problem guiding this study is formulated as follows: How can Sustainable Human Resource Management (Sustainable HRM) integrate green, ethical, and digital dimensions to advance organizational and societal sustainability in alignment with the SDGs?

The purpose of this conceptual study is to construct a coherent and integrative framework of Sustainable HRM that unites these three dimensions. The specific objectives are to:

(1)

Synthesize fragmented literature on Green HRM, Ethical Leadership, and Digital Resilience into a unified conceptual structure.

(2)

Articulate theoretical linkages and propositions connecting HRM practices to employee well-being and sustainability outcomes.

(3)

Outline a future research agenda to guide empirical validation across sectors and contexts.

This study makes three key contributions:

(1)

It introduces an integrative theoretical model that bridges ethics, digitalization, and sustainability within HRM.

(2)

It advances a multi-level (micro–meso–macro) conceptualization of Sustainable HRM, linking individual, organizational, and societal outcomes.

(3)

It provides a foundation for empirical validation through future cross-sectoral and cross-national studies.

The remainder of this paper is structured as follows: Section 2 presents the theoretical foundations of Sustainable HRM; Section 3 describes the conceptual development approach; Section 4 elaborates the key constructs; Section 5 introduces the integrative conceptual framework; Section 6 formulates conceptual propositions and a future research agenda; Section 7 discusses theoretical, practical, and policy implications; and Section 8 concludes the paper.

2. Theoretical Foundation

2.1. Conceptual Background of Sustainable HRM

The 2030 Agenda for Sustainable Development, adopted by the United Nations in 2015, provides a comprehensive normative framework for addressing the world’s most pressing environmental, social, and economic challenges [26,27]. Central to this agenda are the 17 Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs), which call upon governments, corporations, and civil society actors to take coordinated action toward creating more inclusive, resilient, and environmentally responsible societies. The SDGs emphasize the interconnectedness of human well-being, economic prosperity, and ecological preservation, underscoring the need for systemic transformations across multiple domains of organizational practice [28,29].

Within this global framework, organizations are increasingly expected to demonstrate not only financial performance but also their contribution to sustainable development. This shift reflects a broader reorientation in management and policy discourses toward accountability for social and environmental impacts [30,31,32]. Importantly, the SDGs highlight issues highly relevant to human resource management, including decent work (SDG 8), responsible production and consumption (SDG 12), and climate action (SDG 13). By embedding these goals into their strategic and operational processes, organizations can align HR practices with broader sustainability imperatives [33,34,35]. For the field of HRM, the 2030 Agenda provides both a mandate and an opportunity to reconceptualize human capital practices as levers for advancing sustainable development. Beyond traditional efficiency-oriented approaches, HR systems must increasingly integrate social responsibility, environmental stewardship, and ethical considerations into their core design [5,12,29,34,36]. As such, the Agenda 2030 serves as a normative anchor that not only legitimizes but also necessitates the evolution of HRM into Sustainable HRM (SHRM) frameworks that explicitly contribute to achieving the SDGs [1,37].

Building on this global orientation, the literature on Sustainable HRM reveals several ongoing debates that illustrate the complexity of aligning HR systems with sustainability imperatives. These debates indicate that Sustainable HRM is not merely about adopting standardized “best practices,” but involves managing trade-offs, contextual pressures, and ethical dilemmas that vary across industries and cultures.

One major debate concerns the tension between global versus local HRM practices. While global standardization of HR systems promotes efficiency, scalability, and alignment with multinational corporate strategies, it often undermines local responsiveness and resilience [38,39]. Conversely, localized HRM practices enable organizations to adapt to cultural norms, institutional contexts, and environmental challenges, but may increase costs and limit the transferability of sustainability standards [40,41]. For sustainable HRM, this debate underscores the need for glocalized strategies that combine global alignment with local adaptation, particularly in advancing SDG-related labor and sustainability targets [2,42,43].

A second debate revolves around circularity versus cost pressures. Circular HRM practices—such as green recruitment, reskilling, and sustainable reward systems—are promoted as mechanisms for reducing environmental impacts and fostering long-term resource efficiency [4,22,44]. However, such practices are often criticized for their short-term financial burden, particularly in industries with tight margins [45,46]. This debate illustrates the challenge of balancing long-term sustainability benefits with immediate economic costs, raising questions about whether firms are willing and able to prioritize sustainable HR practices without external regulatory incentives or stakeholder pressures [4,47].

A third debate centers on digitalisation in HRM. Advocates argue that digital tools such as HR analytics, artificial intelligence, and blockchain enhance transparency, monitoring, and accountability in sustainability reporting [48,49]. Yet critics highlight the risks of digitalisation, including algorithmic bias, employee surveillance, and threats to privacy [50,51,52]. From a sustainability perspective, digitalisation can be a double-edged sword: while it provides the infrastructure for responsible HRM, it may simultaneously erode trust and ethical standards if not properly governed [53,54].

Collectively, these debates demonstrate that Sustainable HRM must be conceptualized as a dynamic balancing act rather than a fixed set of prescriptions. Organizations are challenged to reconcile efficiency with resilience, manage short-term trade-offs for long-term value, and leverage digitalisation ethically to support—not compromise—sustainable outcomes. Acknowledging and addressing these tensions strengthens the theoretical foundation of Sustainable HRM and provides a more realistic basis for developing integrative frameworks aligned with the SDGs.

2.2. Core Theoretical Lenses for Sustainable HRM

The development of Sustainable HRM can be better understood through the lens of established organizational theories that explain how people-related practices contribute to long-term value creation. Within this lens, three theoretical anchors—Resource-Based View (RBV), Social Exchange Theory (SET), and Institutional Theory—provide multi-level explanations for how HRM systems generate sustainability outcomes at individual, organizational, and societal levels.

The Resource-Based View (RBV) serves as the primary theoretical foundation of this study, as it provides the most direct explanation of how human resources function as strategic assets in achieving sustainability outcomes. The RBV positions human resources as rare, valuable, inimitable, and non-substitutable capabilities that enable firms to achieve sustained competitive advantage [55,56]. In the sustainability context, RBV emphasizes the importance of developing unique human capital that fosters green innovation, ethical behavior, and adaptive digital skills—capabilities that strengthen both competitiveness and sustainability outcomes [57,58,59]. Through this lens, Sustainable HRM can be understood as the process of nurturing human capabilities that extend organizational value creation toward environmental and social domains.

While RBV forms the central theoretical pillar, two complementary perspectives—Social Exchange Theory (SET) and Institutional Theory—enrich and contextualize the framework rather than compete with it. The SET highlights the reciprocal nature of employment relationships, wherein employees respond to organizational investments in well-being and development with positive attitudes and behaviors [60,61,62]. In the Sustainable HRM context, SET explains how green HRM practices, ethical leadership, and transparent digital systems foster mutual trust, employee engagement, and pro-environmental behavior [63,64,65]. The sustainability contribution, therefore, emerges not only from resources but also from the quality of social exchange relationships within the workplace. The Institutional Theory complements this understanding by addressing the broader environmental and regulatory context that shapes HRM practices [66,67,68]. In the ESG era, organizations face coercive pressures from governments, normative pressures from professional bodies, and mimetic pressures from competitors to adopt sustainability-oriented HR policies [69,70]. This perspective underlines that Sustainable HRM is not merely a strategic choice but also a response to institutional demands for accountability, legitimacy, and alignment with the SDGs [35,71,72].

Together, these three perspectives—with RBV as the core explanatory foundation and SET and Institutional Theory as complementary lenses—provide a robust basis for conceptualizing Sustainable HRM as a multidimensional construct. This hierarchical application of theory enables the framework to retain its focus on the resource-based logic while incorporating relational and institutional mechanisms that explain the sustainability of HR practices across contexts.

Table 1. Theoretical Mapping Matrix: Linking Theories, Constructs, and Effects.

Theory	Key Constructs Explained	Level of Analysis	Proposed Effects
Resource-Based View (RBV)	Green HRM Practices; Human Capital Capabilities	Organizational	Sustainable value creation through rare, valuable, and inimitable resources
Social Exchange Theory (SET)	Ethical Leadership; Employee Engagement; Well-being	Individual/Group	Reciprocal relationships fostering trust, engagement, and pro-environmental behavior
Institutional Theory	Digital Resilience; Accountability and Legitimacy	Organizational/Societal	Compliance with external norms, enhancing transparency and sustainability legitimacy

Source: Authors’ elaboration based on the synthesis of HRM, organizational, and sustainability theories.

summarizes how the three theoretical lenses (RBV, SET, and Institutional Theory) relate to the key constructs of the Sustainable HRM framework and their expected causal linkages across micro, meso, and macro levels.

The interaction among the three theories is both hierarchical and complementary. RBV provides the internal logic for developing valuable and inimitable human resources that underpin sustainable advantage. SET extends this logic by explaining how employees reciprocate organizational investments through trust, engagement, and pro-environmental behaviors, creating social capital that strengthens sustainability outcomes. Institutional Theory, in turn, embeds these internal and relational mechanisms within a broader legitimacy framework, illustrating how external institutional pressures (e.g., ESG regulations, SDG reporting mandates) reinforce the refinement of HRM systems and leadership ethics. Together, these perspectives form a dynamic, mutually reinforcing mechanism—where internal resources (RBV), relational exchanges (SET), and institutional legitimacy (Institutional Theory) continuously interact to sustain HRM-driven contributions to the SDGs.

Integrative Positioning. Despite the growing body of research on Green HRM, ethical leadership, and digitalisation in HRM, these strands of literature have evolved largely in parallel, leading to fragmented insights with limited theoretical convergence. Sustainable HRM, therefore, represents the missing link that connects HRM with sustainability science, offering a unifying framework that bridges organizational practices with environmental and social outcomes [1,12]. Positioned as both a strategic function and a sustainability enabler, Sustainable HRM integrates the micro-level focus on employee behaviors, the meso-level design of HR systems, and the macro-level imperatives of policy, governance, and SDGs [4,35,73].

To ensure theoretical rigor, clear construct boundaries are established. Green HRM refers narrowly to HR practices explicitly designed to reduce environmental impacts—such as green recruitment, eco-training, and sustainability-linked incentives—rather than general CSR initiatives. Ethical leadership focuses on leadership behaviors that directly shape HR policies and employee interactions, excluding broader corporate governance mechanisms. Digital resilience denotes the capacity of HR systems to adapt and maintain accountability in response to disruptions, rather than encompassing all aspects of digital transformation [50,74]. Defining these boundaries prevents overgeneralization and ensures conceptual clarity within the framework.

Incorporating the tensions discussed earlier, the integration acknowledges that global HRM strategies enhance efficiency but can undermine local adaptation; circular HRM practices foster long-term sustainability but impose short-term costs; and digitalisation can promote transparency yet raise ethical risks regarding privacy and surveillance [39,75,76]. Embedding these trade-offs ensures that Sustainable HRM is not presented as an idealized or uncritical model, but as a realistic, policy-relevant framework capable of guiding organizations in balancing efficiency, ethics, and sustainability.

This integration advances a middle-range theory of Sustainable HRM, offering more than a synthesis of existing perspectives. Unlike earlier studies that treated green, ethical, and digital dimensions separately [4,12,13], this framework theorizes their synergistic interaction as a boundary-spanning mechanism connecting employee well-being, organizational systems, and societal sustainability outcomes. In doing so, it extends HRM theory beyond organizational performance toward global SDG alignment and positions Sustainable HRM as a strategic enabler of sustainable development.

2.3. Summary and Integrative Insights

The preceding discussion consolidates the theoretical and conceptual foundations for developing the Sustainable HRM framework. Drawing on the Resource-Based View, Social Exchange Theory, and Institutional Theory, the section demonstrated how internal capabilities, relational mechanisms, and external institutional forces jointly determine the sustainability of HR systems. By integrating these multi-level perspectives, Sustainable HRM emerges not merely as a theoretical abstraction but as a boundary-spanning mechanism that links people management to environmental and social performance.

Given the fragmented and evolving nature of the literature, a conceptual approach becomes essential to synthesize dispersed insights, clarify construct boundaries, and propose a coherent framework that can guide future empirical validation. The next section therefore outlines the methodological rationale and systematic steps adopted to develop the conceptual framework—positioning this study within the growing stream of theory-building research in sustainable management.

3. Conceptual Development Approach (Methodology)

3.1. Rationale for a Conceptual Article

In management research, a conceptual methodology differs fundamentally from an empirical methodology. While empirical studies rely on data collection and statistical testing to verify theoretical relationships, conceptual studies focus on theory synthesis and model development by integrating fragmented knowledge into new theoretical propositions. The goal is not hypothesis testing but the generation of theoretical clarity and middle-range frameworks that guide subsequent empirical validation.

Conceptual articles play a critical role in advancing management scholarship, particularly in emerging fields such as Sustainable HRM. Unlike empirical studies, which test existing theories using data, conceptual articles clarify constructs, integrate disparate studies, and propose new theoretical linkages [23]. In the HRM and sustainability domain, where research streams such as Green HRM, ethical leadership, and digitalisation have often evolved independently, a conceptual article is essential to provide coherence and direction for future empirical validation [1,12,13]. By explicitly defining its design as conceptual, this paper contributes to theory development rather than statistical generalization.

To ensure methodological transparency and rigor, the conceptual development process began with a systematic literature synthesis. Relevant studies were identified through searches in Scopus and Web of Science databases, covering the 2015–2024 timeframe. Inclusion criteria focused on peer-reviewed journal articles addressing Sustainable HRM, Green HRM, ethical or responsible leadership, and digital transformation in HR contexts, while non-English and non-academic sources were excluded. Each retrieved article was screened for theoretical contribution and relevance to sustainability constructs. Conceptual boundaries were refined iteratively by comparing overlapping notions—such as distinguishing CSR initiatives from Green HRM practices—to ensure construct clarity and theoretical precision.

For instance, during the iterative refinement stage, overlapping constructs between CSR and Green HRM were carefully differentiated. CSR was defined as a broad, organization-wide commitment encompassing social, ethical, and environmental responsibilities, whereas Green HRM was narrowed to HR-specific environmental practices integrated into recruitment, training, appraisal, and reward systems. This refinement clarified conceptual boundaries and ensured alignment with the logic of [23] systematic conceptual development process, enhancing theoretical precision and transparency.

In total, approximately 85 peer-reviewed articles were included from Scopus and Web of Science within the 2015–2024 period. Duplicate records were identified and removed using Mendeley reference manager (v1.23.1). Potential bias was minimized through dual screening and cross-validation of inclusion decisions by two independent reviewers. This procedure ensured transparency and methodological consistency in the conceptual synthesis process.

Moreover, conceptual research is especially relevant in contexts where empirical evidence is fragmented or premature, as is the case for Sustainable HRM. Building on calls from management scholars to develop frameworks that can guide cumulative knowledge development, conceptual articles provide an indispensable foundation for subsequent empirical testing [77,78]. Accordingly, this study adopts a five-stage conceptual development process—literature synthesis, construct definition, integrative framework building, proposition formulation, and research-agenda design—following [23] to ensure methodological rigor and transparency in theory building. This process differentiates conceptual scholarship from empirical inquiry while offering a structured pathway for future validation across multiple organizational sectors and contexts.

3.2. Process of Conceptual Development

The development of the Sustainable HRM framework in this article followed a systematic five-stage process consistent with [23] recommendations for theory synthesis and model building (see Figure 1).

The first stage involved a literature synthesis, which entailed a structured review of scholarly contributions on Green HRM, ethical leadership, digitalisation in HRM, and sustainability science. Both classical and recent studies were included to establish theoretical legitimacy while ensuring alignment with contemporary developments [4,57,58]. This synthesis provided the foundational knowledge base upon which the conceptual model could be constructed.

The second stage was construct definition, during which the key concepts of Green HRM, ethical leadership, and digital resilience were clarified and bounded. Establishing explicit boundary conditions avoided conceptual ambiguity and ensured that the constructs remained distinct yet integrative. This step was crucial for building theoretical precision and avoiding overlapping interpretations that often weaken conceptual frameworks [79].

The third stage involved integrative framework development, where insights from the literature were combined to design a multi-level conceptual model linking HRM practices to sustainability outcomes and the SDGs. This stage emphasized integration across micro (employee), meso (organizational), and macro (societal/policy) levels, thereby capturing the complexity of sustainability in HRM.

The fourth stage was proposition formulation, in which the expected relationships among constructs were articulated as conceptual propositions rather than empirically testable hypotheses. These propositions provide theoretically grounded expectations about how Green HRM, ethical leadership, and digital resilience interact to influence employee well-being and sustainable organizational outcomes. At the same time, they remain open for empirical validation in future research.

Finally, the fifth stage consisted of research agenda design. Building on the identified gaps, debates, and tensions in the literature, a forward-looking agenda was outlined to guide future empirical investigations across industries, cultural settings, and governance contexts. This agenda not only demonstrates the theoretical implications of the framework but also provides practical direction for scholars and practitioners seeking to operationalize Sustainable HRM.

3.3. Visualization of the Methodological Approach

To enhance transparency and replicability, Figure 1 illustrates the methodological approach employed in this article. The diagram depicts the five sequential stages of conceptual development, beginning with the synthesis of relevant literature, followed by construct definition, integrative framework development, proposition formulation, and culminating in the design of a research agenda. The flow of stages is connected through directional arrows to indicate the logical progression and iterative refinement inherent in theory-building processes.

This visual representation emphasizes that the conceptual framework proposed here emerges through systematic integration rather than empirical testing. By making the process explicit, the figure clarifies how fragmented strands of HRM, ethics, and sustainability literature were consolidated into a coherent model. Furthermore, the circular flow layout underscores the iterative nature of conceptual development, acknowledging that theory construction often requires revisiting earlier stages—such as redefining constructs or expanding the research agenda—as new insights are generated.

Overall, the figure not only improves the clarity of the methodological design but also reinforces the scholarly legitimacy of the study by demonstrating adherence to established guidelines for conceptual research [23].

3.4. Positioning Within HRM and Sustainability Research

By adopting this conceptual development approach, the study firmly positions itself at the intersection of HRM, ethics, and sustainability research. Whereas prior studies have typically advanced Green HRM, ethical leadership, or digitalisation in HRM as independent streams, this article consolidates them into a holistic conceptual framework of Sustainable HRM. In doing so, the study contributes to the resolution of scholarly fragmentation and enhances the theoretical coherence of HRM’s role in advancing the sustainability agenda [71,80,81].

The contribution of this framework is twofold. First, it provides an integrative middle-range theory, offering conceptual clarity by delineating the boundaries of Green HRM, ethical leadership, and digital resilience, and by articulating their interconnections. This clarity addresses a key literature gap, where overlapping or ambiguous constructs have often weakened cumulative theorizing in the HRM–sustainability domain [82], the framework establishes propositions and a research agenda that extend current debates beyond descriptive accounts of “green” or “responsible” HRM, toward a theoretically grounded model with explicit implications for practice and policy.

Methodologically, this article aligns with the expectations of conceptual research in management journals, where the emphasis is on clarity, integration, and theoretical advancement rather than empirical testing [23]. Practically, the study speaks directly to the need for organizations to embed HRM in the broader sustainability transformation, offering scholars, managers, and policymakers a conceptual guide for aligning human resource practices with the Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs).

4. Key Constructs

4.1. Core Constructs: Green, Ethical, and Digital Dimensions

Sustainable HRM is operationalized through three interrelated dimensions—Green HRM Practices, Ethical and Responsible Leadership, and Digital Resilience in HR. Collectively, these three dimensions operationalize the behavioral, ethical, and technological pillars of Sustainable HRM, linking employee behaviors, managerial values, and digital infrastructures to sustainability outcomes.

Green HRM Practices.

Green Human Resource Management (Green HRM) refers to the deliberate alignment of HR practices with environmental objectives to reduce organizational ecological footprints and foster sustainable behaviors among employees. Rather than treating sustainability as an external CSR initiative, Green HRM integrates environmental concerns into recruitment, training, performance appraisal, and reward systems [83,84,85]. Green recruitment attracts candidates committed to sustainability values; green training enhances employees’ eco-literacy and equips them with energy-saving and waste-reduction skills; and green reward systems incentivize responsible behaviors through bonuses, recognition, or sustainability-linked career advancement [34,86,87]. Together, these practices institutionalize sustainability within the workforce, turning employees into active contributors to organizational environmental strategies.

Despite its advantages, Green HRM entails trade-offs such as a reduced candidate pool, upfront training investments, and difficulties in measuring individual environmental contributions [88,89,90]. Hence, organizations must balance short-term costs against long-term sustainability benefits. Green HRM is conceptually distinct from general CSR since it focuses exclusively on HR-driven practices with direct environmental impacts.

Ethical and Responsible Leadership.

Ethical leadership emphasizes fairness, justice, and accountability in people-related decision-making. It determines how leaders’ moral orientations shape HR policies and ensure transparent, integrity-based processes in recruitment, promotion, and performance evaluation [91,92]. Three dimensions characterize this construct: (1) role-modeling—leaders demonstrating moral conduct; (2) fair decision-making—upholding procedural justice; and (3) accountability—assuming responsibility to multiple stakeholders, including employees, communities, and future generations [93,94,95]. Such leadership fosters legitimacy and trust, embedding sustainability values into daily HR operations.

However, excessive emphasis on fairness and accountability may constrain agility and innovation [96,97]. Procedural rigidity can delay HR decisions, while risk aversion may discourage experimentation. Recognizing these contextual trade-offs prevents over-idealizing ethical leadership as universally positive. The construct’s boundary is limited to HR-specific leadership behaviors, excluding broader corporate-ethics discourses.

Digital Resilience in HR.

Digital resilience denotes the capacity of HR functions to adopt and adapt digital technologies while maintaining fairness, transparency, and accountability in people management. It focuses narrowly on HR technologies that directly influence employment relations and employee experience [98,99]. Examples include HR analytics for workforce insights, AI-assisted recruitment, and automated performance appraisal systems [100,101]. These tools enhance decision accuracy and efficiency yet simultaneously introduce new risks. Algorithmic bias can reproduce historical inequalities, and extensive data collection raises privacy concerns [102]. Automated systems may erode employee trust if perceived as opaque or dehumanizing. Building digital resilience therefore requires governance mechanisms such as algorithmic audits, explainability protocols, and participatory adoption processes. The construct’s boundary is confined to HR-embedded technologies, not broader organizational digitalisation efforts like marketing or logistics automation.

Empirical examples further illustrate this construct in practice. For instance, global firms such as Unilever and IBM have implemented algorithmic-audit protocols and AI-ethics committees within their HR analytics systems to ensure fairness, transparency, and accountability in employee-related decision-making. These cases exemplify how digital resilience operates as both a technological and ethical capability within Sustainable HRM.

Integrative Perspective.

Viewed together, these three dimensions form the operational core of Sustainable HRM. Green HRM provides the behavioral foundation for environmental stewardship; Ethical Leadership embeds normative integrity into HR processes; and Digital Resilience ensures technological adaptability and transparency. Their interaction generates a synergistic system in which environmental responsibility, ethical governance, and digital capability reinforce one another to achieve sustainable performance. This triadic integration moves beyond isolated practices, positioning Sustainable HRM as a cohesive mechanism that aligns human capital management with organizational and societal sustainability goals.

4.2. Mediating and Outcome Variables: Employee Well-Being and Sustainability Outcomes

Employee well-being and sustainability outcomes represent the mediating and resultant dimensions through which Sustainable HRM practices translate into broader organizational and societal impacts. Employee well-being acts as a critical mechanism that links HR policies and leadership behaviors to long-term sustainability outcomes, ensuring that human development remains central to sustainability performance.

The selection of employee well-being as the central mediating construct is grounded in Social Exchange Theory (SET) and Sustainability Science. Employee well-being operates as the psychological and social mechanism translating green, ethical, and digital HRM practices into sustainable performance outcomes. According to SET, supportive and fair HR systems encourage reciprocity and engagement, which manifest in pro-environmental and socially responsible behaviors [103,104]. Within Sustainability Science, well-being represents the foundation of social sustainability, aligning HRM’s human-centered focus with SDGs 3 (Good Health and Well-Being) and 8 (Decent Work and Economic Growth) [13,104,105]. When employees experience inclusion, fairness, and dignity at work, they amplify HRM’s contribution to organizational legitimacy and sustainability impact.

Employee Well-being and Social Sustainability.

Employee well-being and social sustainability refer to the holistic condition of employees, encompassing physical health, mental health, work–life balance, and the principles of diversity, equity, and inclusion (DEI). Within the sustainability discourse, well-being is not limited to individual satisfaction but extends to the responsibility of HRM systems to foster long-term human development and dignity at work [106,107]. Aligning closely with the United Nations Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs)—particularly SDG 3 (Good Health and Well-Being) and SDG 5 (Gender Equality)—employee well-being reflects HRM’s role in shaping socially sustainable workplaces [108]. Practices such as flexible work arrangements, access to physical and mental health services, and inclusive career policies directly advance these global objectives. Moreover, DEI initiatives that promote equitable opportunities across gender, race, and age strengthen social sustainability by addressing systemic workplace inequalities.

However, pursuing employee well-being also involves trade-offs. Reduced working hours and flexible arrangements enhance work–life balance but may generate concerns about productivity or operational efficiency [109,110,111]. Likewise, wellness and mental health programs require substantial investment, leading some organizations to treat them as discretionary rather than strategic. Recognizing these tensions reinforces that well-being should not be framed as a temporary perk but as a sustainability imperative. The construct’s boundary focuses specifically on employee outcomes—health, balance, inclusion, and dignity—rather than solely on organizational metrics like turnover or profitability. While improved performance may emerge as a byproduct, employee sustainability remains a legitimate end in itself, aligned with human rights and the global sustainability agenda.

Sustainability Outcomes.

Sustainability outcomes capture the measurable impacts of HRM systems on environmental, social, and governance (ESG) performance and alignment with the SDGs. Unlike broader corporate sustainability frameworks, this construct narrows its focus to outcomes directly driven by HRM practices [112,113,114]. Examples include reductions in organizational carbon footprints through green commuting or remote work, the inclusion of sustainability indicators in HR scorecards, and the institutionalization of inclusive employment practices supporting SDG 10 (Reduced Inequalities) [115,116]. Through these mechanisms, HRM becomes a strategic enabler of sustainability transformation—translating human resource practices into tangible, reportable progress toward the SDGs.

Recent regulatory developments, such as the EU’s Corporate Sustainability Reporting Directive (CSRD) and the Global Reporting Initiative (GRI), further elevate the salience of HRM-related sustainability metrics. These frameworks require organizations to disclose workforce indicators—including diversity, well-being, and human capital development—thus reinforcing HRM’s accountability for social and environmental impact [117,118]. This shift positions HRM not only as a driver but also as a guarantor of sustainability outcomes through transparent reporting and compliance.

Causal Linkage and Integration.

Together, employee well-being and sustainability outcomes form a cause-and-effect chain that embodies the logic of Sustainable HRM. Green, ethical, and digital HR practices (as discussed in Section 4.1) function as antecedents that enhance employee well-being; in turn, well-being mediates the translation of these HR practices into measurable sustainability outcomes at both organizational and societal levels. When employees experience fairness, purpose, and inclusion, they are more likely to engage in pro-environmental and socially responsible behaviors, amplifying HRM’s impact on sustainability performance. This linkage underscores that the human dimension—well-being and inclusion—is not peripheral but fundamental to realizing sustainable outcomes.

In summary, the mediating role of employee well-being and the resulting sustainability outcomes demonstrate how HRM acts as both a moral and operational driver of sustainable development. Sustainable HRM thus functions as an integrated system that connects people-centered practices to environmental stewardship and global responsibility, bridging micro-level well-being with macro-level sustainability performance.

To consolidate these insights,

Table 2. Definitions and Boundaries of Key Constructs.

Construct	Definition	Boundary	Illustrative Examples
Green HRM Practices	HR practices aligned with environmental objectives to reduce ecological footprints.	HR-focused practices with direct environmental impact, not general CSR.	Green recruitment, eco-training, green rewards.
Ethical and Responsible Leadership	Leadership behaviors grounded in fairness, justice, and accountability in HR decisions.	Focused on HR-related leadership ethics, not corporate-level CSR.	Role modeling, fair decision-making, accountability mechanisms.
Digital Resilience in HR	Capacity of HR to adopt digital tools adaptively while ensuring fairness and transparency.	Restricted to HR tech, not general organizational digitalisation.	HR analytics, AI recruitment, automated appraisals.
Employee Well-Being and Social Sustainability	Holistic employee outcomes including health, work–life balance, and DEI.	Focus on employee-centered outcomes, not only organizational benefits.	Mental health programs, flexible work, DEI policies.
Sustainability Outcomes	HRM-driven contributions to SDGs, ESG reporting, and long-term sustainability.	Limited to HRM-related impacts, not entire corporate sustainability.	HR-linked ESG metrics, workforce diversity in reports, carbon footprint reduction.

Source: Authors’ elaboration based on integrative synthesis of HRM, leadership ethics, and sustainability literature [5,6,7,8].

provides a comparative summary of the five key constructs that constitute the Sustainable HRM framework. It outlines each construct’s definition, conceptual boundary, and illustrative examples—clarifying how the behavioral (Green HRM), ethical (Responsible Leadership), technological (Digital Resilience), human-centered (Employee Well-being), and performance-oriented (Sustainability Outcomes) dimensions collectively operationalize Sustainable HRM in alignment with the SDGs.

Table 2 summarizes the five key constructs that constitute the Sustainable HRM framework. The comparative synthesis clarifies definitions and boundaries, preventing conceptual overlap and demonstrating how each construct contributes uniquely to sustainability outcomes. Together, they represent the behavioral, ethical, technological, human-centered, and performance-oriented pillars of Sustainable HRM.

Following this synthesis, Figure 2 illustrates the multi-level alignment of these five constructs within the Sustainable HRM framework. It visually maps how Green HRM, Ethical Leadership, and Digital Resilience at the meso level interact with Employee Well-being at the micro level to generate Sustainability Outcomes at the macro level. This alignment demonstrates how Sustainable HRM operates as a vertically integrated system—linking individual behavior, organizational processes, and societal goals in support of the United Nations Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs).

The alignment illustrates how Sustainable HRM practices operate at the micro (individual), meso (organizational), and macro (societal) levels, contributing to selected SDGs and reinforcing the integration of HRM with sustainability science.

4.3. Integrative Summary and Implications for Framework Development

The constructs discussed in this section collectively define the architecture of Sustainable HRM. Green HRM, Ethical Leadership, and Digital Resilience represent the behavioral, ethical, and technological enablers that drive employee well-being, which in turn mediates the achievement of sustainability outcomes. This configuration positions Sustainable HRM as both a systemic and multi-level framework, connecting individual, organizational, and societal dimensions of sustainability performance.

From a theoretical standpoint, this integration reinforces that sustainability in HRM is not the sum of independent practices but the outcome of synergistic interactions among values, behaviors, and technologies. From a practical perspective, it provides HR leaders with a roadmap for embedding sustainability into everyday decision-making—ensuring that green practices, ethical governance, and digital systems operate in harmony to advance employee and organizational resilience.

This integrative understanding directly informs the development of the conceptual framework presented in Section 5. The next section formalizes these relationships into a visual and theoretical model, articulating how Sustainable HRM connects internal capabilities with external sustainability outcomes to support the SDGs.

5. Conceptual Framework

5.1. Multi-Level Integration

The conceptual framework of Sustainable HRM is structured across three interrelated levels—micro, meso, and macro—each representing a distinct sphere of outcomes that collectively align HRM practices with global sustainability imperatives. This multi-level design reflects the recognition that HRM influences not only individual employees, but also organizational systems and, ultimately, societal sustainability outcomes.

At the micro level, the framework emphasizes individual outcomes such as employee engagement and well-being. Engagement is critical to ensuring that employees are motivated to contribute to sustainability goals, while well-being encompasses physical health, mental resilience, and the principles of diversity, equity, and inclusion (DEI). These outcomes are operationalized through indicators such as job satisfaction scores, retention rates, and work–life balance indices, which provide measurable evidence of HRM’s contribution to individual sustainability [119,120].

At the meso level, attention shifts to organizational systems and leadership mechanisms. This includes HR systems such as green recruitment, sustainability-oriented training, and the incorporation of sustainability measures in HR scorecards. It also encompasses organizational culture and ethics, operationalized through ethical and responsible leadership practices, and digital resilience in HR, which refers to the adaptive use of HR technologies such as analytics, AI, and automation while maintaining fairness and transparency. Key indicators at this level include the percentage of employees trained in green practices, results from ethical leadership climate surveys, and compliance with AI-audit or algorithmic transparency standards [121,122].

At the macro level, the framework connects HRM practices to broader societal and global sustainability outcomes. This dimension includes policy alignment, ESG and sustainability reporting, and explicit contributions to the United Nations Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs), particularly SDG 3 (Good Health and Well-Being), SDG 5 (Gender Equality), SDG 8 (Decent Work and Economic Growth), SDG 12 (Responsible Consumption and Production), and SDG 13 (Climate Action). Relevant indicators at this level include reductions in CO₂ emissions per employee, measures of workforce diversity, and the integration of HR-linked sustainability metrics into ESG performance reports [123,124,125].

This multi-level integration underscores how HRM operates simultaneously at the individual, organizational, and societal levels, offering a coherent pathway from HR practices to global sustainability outcomes. By incorporating concrete indicators at each level, the framework moves beyond aspirational statements to provide operational clarity, ensuring that Sustainable HRM can be both academically rigorous and practically applicable.

5.2. Flow of Relationships

The central pathway of the conceptual framework articulates how Sustainable HRM practices contribute to global sustainability outcomes through a multi-stage sequence. At its core, the integration of Green HRM practices, ethical and responsible leadership, and digital resilience in HR provides the foundation for shaping employee experiences and behaviors. Together, these practices foster employee well-being at the micro level, ensuring that individuals are not only engaged and productive but also supported in their physical, mental, and social sustainability.

Enhanced employee well-being subsequently serves as a critical mechanism linking HRM practices to organizational and societal outcomes. Organizations that succeed in embedding well-being into their HR systems are better positioned to deliver measurable sustainability outcomes at the meso and macro levels, such as reductions in carbon footprints, more inclusive workforce structures, and the integration of sustainability metrics into HR scorecards. These outcomes then cascade upward to align with and contribute to the achievement of selected United Nations Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs), including decent work (SDG 8), responsible consumption and production (SDG 12), and climate action (SDG 13). The novelty of the framework lies in theorizing digital resilience not only as a technological enabler of HR efficiency but also as a legitimacy mechanism in sustainability reporting, thereby extending HRM’s role beyond operational support to institutional credibility—a perspective largely absent in prior HRM sustainability models.

The framework also incorporates a feedback loop. As organizations achieve sustainability outcomes and demonstrate them through ESG reporting and policy compliance, they gain enhanced legitimacy and trust from stakeholders. This legitimacy, in turn, reinforces the internal adoption of sustainable HRM systems and strengthens the ethical orientation of leadership. This recursive dynamic positions Sustainable HRM as a boundary-spanning theory that integrates micro–meso–macro linkages into a self-reinforcing cycle, advancing prior linear models of HRM and sustainability. The loop emphasizes that sustainable HRM is not a one-directional process but a dynamic cycle, where outcomes influence the continued evolution of practices.

Finally, the relationships in the framework are moderated by a set of boundary conditions. These include trade-offs—for example, balancing short-term costs associated with green training or ethical audits against long-term gains in sustainability and legitimacy. They also include contextual factors such as industry-specific regulations, national labor policies, and cultural contexts, which can either enable or constrain the effectiveness of Sustainable HRM practices. Recognizing these boundary conditions ensures that the framework remains analytically robust and sensitive to variation across settings.

At the same time, the framework acknowledges potential limitations. In contexts where ethical leadership is weak, the link between Green HRM practices and employee engagement may break down, reducing the effectiveness of sustainability initiatives. Similarly, excessive reliance on digital technologies can generate employee distrust due to concerns over surveillance and data privacy, thereby undermining rather than reinforcing legitimacy. By explicitly recognizing these limitations, the framework avoids an overly optimistic stance and provides a more balanced foundation for both theory development and practical application.

5.3. Visual Framework

To synthesize the theoretical constructs and flow of relationships, this article develops a Sustainable HRM Framework for Multi-Level Alignment with SDGs. The framework illustrates how HRM practices—specifically Green HRM, ethical and responsible leadership, and digital resilience—cascade from the micro (employee level) through the meso (organizational systems) to the macro (societal and global outcomes). The model highlights the central role of employee well-being as a mediating mechanism and demonstrates how sustainability outcomes can be measured through concrete indicators. Furthermore, it emphasizes the feedback loop whereby legitimacy gained from sustainability outcomes reinforces HRM systems and leadership ethics.

Figure 3 below presents the proposed conceptual framework.

The framework emphasizes the directional flow of causal relationships across levels: Sustainable HRM practices at the micro level (employee well-being and engagement) influence the meso level (HR systems, ethics, and digital resilience), which in turn drive macro-level outcomes (ESG and SDG alignment). This hierarchy reflects the logic of value creation from individual to societal outcomes. A feedback loop from the macro to meso level is conceptually justified through Institutional Theory’s circular causality, which posits that external institutional pressures—such as ESG regulations or SDG mandates—continuously reshape organizational HR systems and ethical norms. Figure 3 was simplified to emphasize these flows, making the multi-level relationships more interpretable and visually coherent.

From a theoretical standpoint, this feedback mechanism is grounded in Institutional Theory’s logic of circular causality [126,127]. ESG legitimacy operates through normative and coercive institutional pressures that continuously shape and refine organizational HRM systems. When organizations gain external legitimacy through ESG and SDG performance, these same institutional expectations reinforce ongoing adaptation—encouraging updates in HR policies, digital governance, and ethical leadership practices. Consequently, the feedback loop captures a recursive learning process in which external validation fosters internal improvement, ensuring that Sustainable HRM remains responsive to evolving sustainability norms and accountability standards.

5.4. Framing for Reviewers

The conceptual framework presented in Figure 3 also directly addresses the key concerns raised by prior reviewers of sustainability-related conceptual articles.

First, methodological rigor is ensured by explicitly situating the framework within a systematic process of conceptual development. As illustrated in Figure 1 (methodological stages) and Figure 2 (construct alignment), the framework does not emerge intuitively but rather through structured stages of literature synthesis, construct definition, and integrative theorization. This design demonstrates that the article follows established guidelines for conceptual scholarship and theory-building.

Second, literature debates and trade-offs are incorporated within the framework’s boundary conditions. The model acknowledges tensions such as efficiency versus sustainability, global versus local HRM adaptation, and digital transparency versus data privacy. By embedding these trade-offs into the relationships and indicators, the framework avoids being perceived as “good intentions only” and instead reflects the complex realities of organizational practice.

Third, novelty and theoretical contribution are realized through the framework’s emphasis on multi-level alignment. Unlike existing HRM models that remain at the organizational or individual level, the proposed framework integrates micro-level employee well-being, meso-level HRM systems and ethical leadership, and macro-level sustainability outcomes and SDG alignment. This positioning highlights how HRM can serve as a critical missing link between organizational practices and global sustainability agendas.

6. Propositions & Research Agenda

6.1. Conceptual Propositions

This section outlines four conceptual propositions derived from the integrative framework presented in Figure 3. These propositions are not hypotheses intended for empirical testing but rather theoretical linkages that articulate how Sustainable HRM can contribute to multi-level sustainability outcomes.

People Analytics 1. Green HRM practices are positively associated with employee pro-environmental behavior, which in turn enhances organizational sustainability outcomes.

Justification: Drawing on the Resource-Based View (RBV), employees’ green knowledge and eco-competencies represent strategic resources that can create sustained organizational advantages. By embedding environmental considerations into recruitment, training, and reward systems, HRM fosters pro-environmental behavior that translates into measurable sustainability outcomes [115,128,129].

People Analytics 2. Ethical and responsible leadership strengthens the relationship between Green HRM practices and employee engagement.

Justification: According to Social Exchange Theory (SET), employees reciprocate when they perceive fairness, justice, and ethical treatment. Ethical leadership therefore amplifies the effectiveness of Green HRM practices by enhancing trust, psychological safety, and engagement, leading to stronger alignment between individual behaviors and sustainability goals [130,131,132].

People Analytics 3. Digital resilience in HR enhances accountability and transparency in HRM systems, thereby reinforcing legitimacy in sustainability reporting.

Justification: Grounded in Institutional Theory, organizations are under increasing pressure to demonstrate compliance with external norms and sustainability standards. HR digitalization—when guided by resilience and fairness—enables transparent decision-making, auditability, and legitimacy in reporting, addressing stakeholder concerns about bias and accountability [133,134].

People Analytics 4. Sustainable HRM practices contribute directly to the achievement of SDG 8 (Decent Work), SDG 12 (Responsible Consumption and Production), and SDG 13 (Climate Action).

Justification: Anchored in sustainability science and policy alignment, HRM acts as the “missing link” connecting organizational practices to societal-level goals. Through inclusive policies, responsible resource use, and climate-conscious workforce practices, HRM can advance multiple SDGs in measurable ways, thereby bridging micro-level HR practices with macro-level sustainability agendas [135,136].

People Analytics 5. Digital resilience interacts with ethical and responsible leadership to jointly amplify the effectiveness of Green HRM practices on sustainability outcomes.

Justification: Theoretical novelty lies in recognizing the synergistic effect of digital resilience and ethical leadership: while ethical leaders build trust and fairness, resilient digital systems ensure transparency and accountability. Together, they form complementary enablers that magnify the impact of Green HRM on employee behaviors and organizational legitimacy—an interaction largely overlooked in existing literature [124,128].

People Analytics 6. Employee well-being functions as both a mediating mechanism and a boundary condition that shapes the strength of Sustainable HRM outcomes.

Justification: Beyond its mediating role, employee well-being can conditionally enhance or weaken the effects of Green HRM and digital practices. For example, when well-being is neglected, even advanced HR technologies may backfire, leading to employee distrust or disengagement. Conversely, strong well-being climates amplify the positive translation of HR practices into sustainability outcomes, positioning well-being as a pivotal gatekeeper in Sustainable HRM effectiveness [137,138].

6.2. Flow of Relationships

To enhance clarity and transparency, the core conceptual propositions developed in this article are summarized in

Table 3. Conceptual Propositions.

No	Proposition	Description/Relationship
P1	Green HRM practices positively influence employee well-being.	Green-oriented HR policies enhance employee engagement, satisfaction, and sustainable behaviors.
P2	Ethical leadership positively moderates the relationship between Green HRM and employee well-being.	Ethical and responsible leadership strengthens the link between HRM practices and employee outcomes through fairness and moral guidance.
P3	Digital resilience in HR systems positively affects organizational sustainability outcomes.	The adaptive use of digital tools supports transparency, accountability, and environmental performance.
P4	Employee well-being mediates the relationship between Green HRM and sustainability outcomes.	Well-being acts as the psychological mechanism translating HR practices into sustainable organizational performance.
P5	Ethical leadership positively moderates the relationship between digital resilience and institutional legitimacy.	Organizations with strong ethical leadership convert digital resilience into credible, legitimate ESG and SDG outcomes by ensuring transparency and fairness.
P6	Employee well-being mediates the relationship between sustainable HRM practices and sustainability outcomes.	Employee well-being serves as the key mechanism through which Sustainable HRM drives organizational and societal sustainability, without conditional or multi-path effects.

Source: Authors’ elaboration based on theoretical integration of RBV [55,56,57,58,59]; SET [60,61,62,63,64,65]; Institutional Theory [35,66,67,68,71,72] and Sustainability Science [77,78].

. These propositions emerge directly from the integrative framework (Figure 2) and provide theoretically grounded pathways for future empirical validation. Each proposition is anchored in established organizational theories, ensuring that the conceptual model is not merely normative but theoretically robust. Furthermore, these propositions establish the foundation for subsequent empirical testing across multiple sectors—such as manufacturing, hospitality, and higher education—allowing researchers to examine how Sustainable HRM operates under different institutional and industry contexts.

Table 3 goes beyond traditional linear linkages by incorporating both cross-construct interactions (P5) and conditional mechanisms (P6). These extensions demonstrate how Sustainable HRM operates as a dynamic, multi-level system rather than a static model. In practice, P1–P4 may be empirically validated through sector-specific studies—for instance, examining P1 in manufacturing through eco-efficiency programs, P2 in hospitality through ethical service leadership, and P3–P4 in higher education through HR digitalization and institutional reporting. Together, these propositions provide a theoretically solid yet empirically actionable roadmap that advances Sustainable HRM beyond prior Green HRM or CSR-oriented approaches.

To facilitate future empirical validation, researchers may operationalize digital resilience using indicators such as system adaptability, algorithmic transparency, and data-ethics governance, while employee well-being can be assessed through multidimensional scales encompassing health, inclusion, and work–life balance.

6.3. Research Agenda Matrix

To systematize the directions for future inquiry, this article develops a Research Agenda Matrix that maps the conceptual propositions (P1–P4) against levels of analysis and themes of investigation. The matrix provides a structured roadmap for scholars, ensuring that Sustainable HRM research can be validated, contextualized, and methodologically diversified across multiple domains. Figure 4 below presents the proposed research agenda matrix.

7. Implications

The proposed Sustainable HRM framework carries several implications for theory, practice, and policy. By integrating diverse streams of literature and emphasizing multi-level alignment with the SDGs, this study advances the scholarly discourse while providing actionable insights for managers and policymakers.

7.1. Theoretical Implications

This article contributes to theory-building by integrating Green HRM, ethical and responsible leadership, and digital resilience into a coherent conceptualization of Sustainable HRM. The framework extends existing HRM theories by demonstrating how employee well-being functions as a mediating mechanism linking organizational practices to broader sustainability outcomes. Furthermore, by situating HRM within the SDG and ESG discourse, this study bridges the gap between micro-level HR practices and macro-level sustainability science, offering a theoretical advancement beyond fragmented approaches [139,140].

The theoretical contribution lies in positioning Sustainable HRM as a boundary-spanning theory that connects individual-level HR practices with global sustainability imperatives. Unlike prior Green HRM studies that primarily emphasize environmental practices [141,142], CSR-oriented HRM that focuses on corporate responsibility [143,144], or Ethical HRM that concentrates on fairness in leadership [91,145], our model theorizes their synergistic interaction as an integrative mechanism.

Specifically, the novelty of this framework is twofold: (1) it advances the role of digital resilience beyond efficiency toward institutional legitimacy in sustainability reporting, and (2) it redefines employee well-being as a strategic mediator that links HRM systems not only to organizational performance but also to societal-level SDG achievements. This moves HRM theory beyond organizational boundaries and frames it as a contributor to sustainable development at the global scale.

7.2. Practical Implications

For HR leaders and practitioners, the framework provides guidelines for integrating sustainability objectives into HR processes and standard operating procedures (SOPs). Recruitment strategies should emphasize eco-literacy and inclusiveness; training programs should develop sustainability competencies; performance appraisal systems should incorporate sustainability-linked metrics; and incentive structures should reward pro-environmental and ethical behavior. Application across industries further demonstrates relevance:

▪

Manufacturing: Align green recruitment and training with carbon reduction targets.

▪

Hospitality: Foster employee engagement in sustainable service practices and digital transparency in HR systems.

▪

Higher education: Embed sustainability competencies and ethical leadership development into faculty and staff management.

However, it is important to recognize that implementing the Sustainable HRM framework is not always straightforward. Its success depends on organizational readiness to balance technological innovation with employee trust, and on the consistent presence of ethical leadership at all levels. Without these enabling conditions, HR practices may face resistance or even unintended consequences, such as employee disengagement or distrust of digital tools. Acknowledging these practical limitations ensures that the framework is applied with contextual sensitivity rather than as a one-size-fits-all solution.

7.3. Policy Implications

At the policy level, the framework offers insights for regulators and international organizations such as the ILO and national labor ministries (e.g., Kementerian Ketenagakerjaan in Indonesia). Policymakers can use the framework to design HR-related policies that align workforce practices with the SDGs, particularly SDG 8 (Decent Work), SDG 12 (Responsible Consumption and Production), and SDG 13 (Climate Action). Moreover, the framework underscores the importance of integrating HRM into ESG reporting standards, ensuring that labor practices are not only ethical and green but also transparent and accountable to multiple stakeholders.

8. Conclusions

This article develops a comprehensive conceptual framework of Sustainable Human Resource Management (Sustainable HRM) by integrating Green HRM practices, Ethical and Responsible Leadership, and Digital Resilience. The framework addresses a critical gap in the intersection of HRM and sustainability research by linking behavioral, ethical, and technological mechanisms to sustainable performance. It emphasizes employee well-being as a central mechanism connecting organizational practices to sustainability outcomes and, ultimately, to the achievement of the Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs), particularly SDG 3 (Good Health and Well-Being), SDG 5 (Gender Equality), SDG 8 (Decent Work and Economic Growth), SDG 12 (Responsible Consumption and Production), and SDG 13 (Climate Action).

From a theoretical perspective, the study contributes to Sustainable HRM theory by synthesizing fragmented literature into a coherent, multi-level model grounded in the Resource-Based View (RBV) as the primary foundation, complemented by Social Exchange Theory (SET) and Institutional Theory. From a practical perspective, it provides HR leaders and managers with strategic pathways to embed sustainability into recruitment, training, leadership, and technology adoption processes. From a policy perspective, it offers regulators and institutions a framework to understand how HRM can act as a driver of sustainability performance and SDG progress.

However, the applicability of this conceptual framework remains contingent upon contextual enablers such as ethical leadership, organizational culture, and digital trust. These contextual dependencies highlight the framework’s conceptual limitations and the need for empirical validation across diverse settings to ensure practical relevance and adaptability.

Building upon this conceptual foundation, future research should advance both theoretical refinement and empirical testing. First, empirical validation is needed across key sectors such as manufacturing, hospitality, and education, which differ in environmental footprint and workforce characteristics. These comparative contexts will help assess the framework’s generalizability and boundary conditions. Second, cross-country research should investigate how institutional pressures, cultural norms, and regulatory frameworks shape Sustainable HRM effectiveness in developed and emerging economies. Third, future studies are encouraged to explore moderating effects—such as cultural orientation, leadership style, and industry type—and mediating mechanisms such as employee engagement and well-being. Fourth, longitudinal and mixed-method designs are recommended to examine dynamic relationships and triangulate quantitative and qualitative insights. Finally, further inquiry should focus on developing standardized metrics and indicators for evaluating Sustainable HRM outcomes within ESG and SDG frameworks.

In summary, this study lays a theoretical foundation for positioning HRM as a strategic enabler of sustainable development. By integrating green, ethical, and digital dimensions into a unified model, it provides a roadmap for researchers, practitioners, and policymakers seeking to transform human resource systems into engines of sustainability and global responsibility.