Determinants of Sustainable Organizational Performance: A Systematic Literature Review

Abstract

This study aims to identify and map the factors that can influence sustainable organizational performance. This study aims to identify the factors that directly and indirectly influence sustainable organizational performance. This study also categorizes its findings based on research themes, theories employed, and the organizational sectors under examination, thereby providing a comprehensive, up-to-date, and structured overview as a foundation for theoretical development and strategic guidance for organizations seeking to enhance their sustainable performance. This study employs the systematic literature review (SLR) method following the PRISMA guidelines. The Scopus database was used to search for articles. The study analyzed 44 selected articles based on predetermined criteria. The results suggest that sustainable organizational performance can be influenced by several key factors, including knowledge, innovation, leadership, organizational learning, human resource management, organizational culture, technology, and market orientation. This study also reveals the theories used in research related to sustainable organizational performance. The Resource-Based View emerged as the most dominant theory, followed by Dynamic Capabilities, Social Exchange, and Knowledge-Based View. Several mediating and moderating variables were identified as playing a significant role in strengthening or weakening the relationship between factors, although some findings yielded inconsistent results. These findings underscore the need for further research to clarify the role of these factors in supporting sustainable organizational performance.

1. Introduction

The business sector faces intense pressure from the global community, governments, and other stakeholders to operate sustainably [1]. Companies are not only required to generate profits, but also to care for the environment and society [2]. Furthermore, companies are required to achieve short-term efficiency and effectiveness, and consider long-term sustainability aspects [3]. As the pace of development accelerates, competition among companies also intensifies [4]. This poses a challenge for companies in maintaining sustainability in their operational processes.

The increasingly fierce competitive challenges, the need to improve performance effectiveness and efficiency, cost control, and productivity have made organizational performance evaluation an increasingly relevant topic [5]. In the context of a dynamic global economy, organizations are required to meet the expectations of all stakeholders while improving their performance across various areas [6]. Both organizations and companies fundamentally aim to achieve sustainable organizational performance [7]. Sustainability itself reflects the ability to meet current consumer needs while considering future needs [8]. Sustainable organizational performance is highly dependent on a company’s ability to address challenges arising from both internal and external environments [9].

Sustainable organizational performance is an essential concept in modern management that emphasizes the achievement of organizational goals while taking into account economic, social, and environmental factors in the long term [10]. Pressure on organizations to demonstrate their contribution to sustainable development comes from various directions, including government regulations, consumer expectations, and other stakeholders’ concerns regarding environmental issues and social justice [11,12]. Organizations are no longer measured solely by their profitability but by their impact on society and ecosystems [13]. Therefore, organizations must understand and manage various factors that can support the achievement of comprehensive sustainable performance [14].

Other studies, such as Hutahayan et al. [6] and Suparwadi et al. [14], explore knowledge management and stakeholder engagement as critical enablers. Despite this progress, the findings remain fragmented, with many studies focusing only on selected determinants without providing an integrated perspective. Moreover, several empirical results are context-dependent, leading to inconsistencies across sectors and regions. Thus, this study formulates the following research question:

RQ1: How is the distribution of research articles on sustainable organizational performance?

RQ2: What factors directly influence sustainable organizational performance?

RQ3: What factors influence sustainable organizational performance through mediating mechanisms?

RQ4: What factors influence sustainable organizational performance through moderating mechanisms?

In answering this research question, this study aims to conduct a literature review of various empirical and conceptual studies that discuss the internal and external determinants of sustainable organizational performance. This study uses the PRISMA guidelines and focuses on articles published in the last 5 years. The PRISMA guidelines were chosen because PRISMA is an internationally recognized guide for reporting systematic literature reviews. PRISMA ensures that the review process is conducted transparently, systematically, and can be replicated [15]. Therefore, using the PRISMA guidelines can enhance the credibility of the research results [16].

In recent years, research on sustainable organizational performance has grown rapidly across disciplines, highlighting factors such as leadership, innovation, digital transformation, employee engagement, and knowledge management [17,18]. For example, Ayad & Al-Sabi [17] emphasize leadership as a driver of sustainable performance, while Qin et al. [18] highlight the role of innovation in enhancing competitiveness within dynamic environments. Despite this progress, the findings remain fragmented, with many studies focusing only on selected determinants without providing an integrated perspective. Moreover, several empirical results are context-dependent, leading to inconsistencies across sectors and regions.

Previous studies have only discussed a small portion of the factors that influence sustainable organizational performance, without identifying the complex factors that play a role. Therefore, this study attempts to fill this gap by revealing the factors that can influence sustainable organizational performance both directly and indirectly (through moderation and mediation roles). In addition, this study also explores relevant themes and theories in this field. On the other hand, many empirical studies produce inconsistent or context-specific findings, making it difficult to draw general conclusions. To address this limitation, this study presents a synthesis and comparison of study results to identify clearer and more consistent patterns.

In addition, this study will also reveal various research sectors related to sustainable organizational performance. This will serve as a reference for future research on sustainable organizational performance. This study adopts the SLR method with the PRISMA protocol for empirical articles indexed in Scopus in the last 5 years, providing a more updated knowledge map than previous reviews [15,16]. The results of this study are expected to make an important contribution to the development of theory by mapping various factors that determine sustainable organizational performance. In addition, this study provides an understanding of how organizations can integrate internal resources while responding to external pressures to achieve sustainable performance. The findings of this study not only form the basis for further research but also offer practical guidance for organizations in various sectors to adopt strategies that enhance sustainability.

Section 2 of this study reviews the concept of sustainable organizational performance and synthesizes the main theoretical lenses used in previous studies. Section 3 details the PRISMA-based systematic review protocol. Section 4 presents the results, including bibliographic distribution (by year, source, and field of study), thematic mapping, theories employed, and determinants of sustainable organizational performance, covering direct, mediating, and moderating effects. Section 5 discusses the findings, implications for theory and practice, and outlines limitations. Section 6 concludes and proposes directions for further research.

2. Literature Review

Sustainable Organizational Performance

Sustainable organizational performance refers to the effective achievement of organizational goals through a systematic, comprehensive, and continuous approach [19]. This performance can be evaluated based on several indicators, such as the implementation of organizational strategies, resource utilization, the development of social responsibility, and the learning process within the organization [20]. Sustainable organizational performance can be defined as achieving organizational goals that focus on short-term profits and positive impacts on society and the environment [21]. This concept has developed alongside awareness of the importance of sustainability and corporate social responsibility.

Sustainable organizational performance is a form of performance that ensures the optimal utilization of natural resources without sacrificing future economic potential and without causing negative impacts on society or the environment [22]. Sustainable organizational performance reflects a company’s ability to meet stakeholder expectations while consistently strengthening investments, policies, and management strategies to ensure the sustainability of profits, social welfare, and environmental responsibility in the future [23]. Sustainable organizational performance has been extensively studied through several theoretical models that provide a structured evaluation framework [19,23,24,25]. The Triple Bottom Line (TBL) emphasizes three interrelated dimensions, namely economic, social, and environmental [26]. This framework asserts that organizational performance is not only measured by financial achievements, but also by its contribution to community welfare and environmental sustainability [26].

In relation to sustainable organizational performance, the Resource-Based View (RBV) offers an important perspective that the sustainability of organizational performance is greatly influenced by the ownership and utilization of resources that are unique, scarce, difficult to imitate, and not easily replaced [27]. These resources can take the form of innovation capabilities, knowledge, organizational culture, and a commitment to sustainability embedded in managerial practices [27]. Through RBV, sustainable performance is understood not only as the result of external strategies, but also as a consequence of the internal capabilities of organizations in developing and managing strategic assets [28]. Thus, sustainable organizational performance must be understood not only as a short-term result but also as the organization’s ability to integrate strategy, resources, and learning to achieve profitability, environmental sustainability, and social welfare simultaneously.

3. Research Methods

A Systematic Literature Review (SLR) is a type of secondary research that uses a structured and clearly defined methodology to identify, analyze, and interpret all relevant evidence related to a specific research question [29]. A Systematic Literature Review (SLR) is a rigorous and systematic method for collecting, identifying, and critically analyzing available research studies related to a formulated research question [30]. This approach is widely applied in the international research community, particularly for publications indexed by leading databases such as Scopus [31,32]. The primary objective of a systematic review (SR) is to provide a comprehensive, transparent, and unbiased synthesis of the best available evidence related to a specific research question [15]. An SR aims to answer specific questions by thoroughly reviewing all relevant studies and the literature [33].

This study uses a systematic literature review to answer the specified research question. In conducting the systematic literature review, it uses the PRISMA (Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses) guidelines developed by Page et al. [16]. The PRISMA guidelines were chosen because they ensure that the identification, selection, and inclusion of studies are carried out in a systematic, transparent, and reproducible manner. To synthesize the findings from the selected articles, this study uses a narrative synthesis approach. This synthesis process involves in-depth reading of each article to identify factors that may influence “sustainable organizational performance”. These findings are then systematically documented and summarized in a table to provide a clear and organized overview of the relationships identified in previous studies. The following are the stages of the systematic literature review process in this study. The complete set of reviewed articles, accompanied by the PRISMA 2020 checklist, is publicly available in the registration record on Figshare: https://doi.org/10.6084/m9.figshare.29919479 (accessed on 15 August 2025). As all extracted data are thoroughly reported in the included studies, no data transformation or imputation was undertaken.

3.1. Determining Eligibility Criteria

The first step in a systematic literature review is to determine the criteria for the articles to be analyzed, following the main objectives of the study [15]. In the article eligibility stage of the PRISMA guidelines, the full text is evaluated to ensure that each article meets the established inclusion criteria. In this study, all articles were assessed based on eligibility criteria. This study also established exclusion criteria to ensure that the selected articles would be valid for research.

Table 1. Eligibility and Exclusion Criteria.

Eligibility Criteria	Exclusion Criteria
The article is a final manuscript that has undergone peer review	Articles that do not examine the direct influence of “Sustainable organizational performance” or “Sustainable Performance”
The article is an empirical study	Articles that do not discuss “Sustainable organizational performance” or “Sustainable Performance”
The article uses a quantitative or mixed approach	Incomplete articles
It examines factors that influence “Sustainable organizational performance” or “Sustainable Performance”	Pre-print articles
The article is written in English

below shows the eligibility criteria and exclusion criteria established in this study.

Table 1 shows the eligibility and exclusion criteria for this study. These criteria were used to select the articles. First, the selected articles are final manuscripts that have undergone peer review to ensure the quality and credibility of the findings. Second, only empirical studies will be analyzed. This is because this study focuses on concrete evidence regarding the factors that influence sustainable organizational performance, rather than merely conceptual studies or theoretical reviews. Third, research with a quantitative or mixed-method approach is prioritized so that the results obtained are measurable, consistent, and allow for more systematic cross-study comparisons. Fourth, the selected articles explicitly examine factors that influence sustainable organizational performance, ensuring the analysis remains focused on the research’s main objective. Finally, only articles in English are included, given that this language is the international academic language, which facilitates consistency in analysis and reduces the risk of misinterpretation. This was performed to ensure that only articles that met high methodological standards and were relevant to the topic under discussion were included in the analysis. This was performed to improve the validity and reliability of the findings and to ensure that the synthesis was based on strong and reliable evidence from the existing literature [15].

3.2. Source and Identification of Articles

After determining the eligibility criteria and exclusion criteria, the next step is to determine the sources and identify the articles [34]. This study uses Scopus as the data source to select the articles for analysis. Scopus was chosen because it is one of the largest and most reputable academic databases covering high-quality scientific journals that have undergone peer review [15]. In addition, Scopus offers an efficient and structured search system, allowing researchers to identify articles that are most relevant to the research topic more systematically and comprehensively. Thus, the use of Scopus ensures that the selected articles have high credibility and strong relevance to the objectives of this study.

In the identification stage of the PRISMA framework, this study used the following keywords: “TITLE-ABS-KEY (“Sustainable organizational performance”)”. The keyword “sustainable organizational performance” was chosen because it explicitly links the two core concepts that are the focus of this study: sustainability and organizational performance. This direct link ensures that the articles obtained are conceptually and contextually relevant to the research objectives [15,34]. Thus, this keyword ensures that the search results are genuinely relevant to the research objectives. According to the PRISMA protocol, one of its principles is to use terms that are both specific and representative of the research question [16]. This keyword fulfils this principle because it is specific enough to produce articles that focus on organizational performance, while also being representative enough to cover various cross-sector and cross-theme studies [15]. This search does not limit the publication year, but the results are filtered to include only journal articles published in English and that have reached the final publication stage. The search on Scopus was conducted in July 2025. The initial search yielded 144 articles on Scopus. These 144 articles were then processed for analysis according to the previously determined criteria.

3.3. Articles Deleted Before Screening

Before the screening stage, a record cleaning process was conducted to remove duplicates and records that did not meet administrative criteria [34]. This step ensured that only eligible records proceeded to the content screening stage. The first step was to screen articles published between 2020 and 2025. From the initial search of 144 articles, 114 articles published between 2020 and 2025 were obtained. Subsequently, 32 articles were excluded before screening because they did not meet the following eligibility criteria:

• The document is not a journal article (e.g., proceedings, book chapter).
• The article was still in the publication process.
• The source was not a peer-reviewed journal.
• The article was written in a language other than English.

After this process, 82 articles were identified as eligible and will proceed to the screening stage. In this process, we used the filter available on Scopus, using the following combination of keywords: TITLE-ABS-KEY (“Sustainable organizational performance”) AND PUBYEAR > 2019 AND PUBYEAR < 2026 AND (LIMIT-TO (DOCTYPE, “ar”)) AND (LIMIT-TO (PUBSTAGE, “final”)) AND (LIMIT-TO (SRCTYPE, “j”)) AND (LIMIT-TO (LANGUAGE, “English”)).

3.4. Screening

During the screening stage, the titles and abstracts of the articles were evaluated to ensure that they met the inclusion criteria. Articles that did not meet the inclusion criteria and were not relevant to the research objectives were excluded from this study. At this stage, the articles were evaluated based on the eligibility criteria listed in Table 1, namely: articles that examined factors influencing “Sustainable organizational performance” or “Sustainable Performance.” The screening process was carried out manually by all authors without relying on automated tools. To reduce potential bias, inter-rater reliability was measured, and disagreements were addressed through structured discussions until agreement was reached.

Based on this process, 60 articles were found to be consistent with the research objectives, and 22 articles were excluded from this study. Articles that did not meet these criteria were excluded and documented as excluded notes. This was performed to ensure that the articles analyzed were in line with the research objectives. Articles were excluded, for example, because they did not meet inclusion criterion 3 as listed in Table 1, namely: “Articles using a quantitative or mixed approach.”

Table 2. Example of articles excluded from this study.

Authors	Purpose	Reason
Deshpande and Srivastava [35]	This study aims to examine the role of green training and green work-life balance on sustainable organizational performance.	Based on the abstract, this study examines the relationship using a qualitative approach.
Wang and Zhang [25]	This study aims to examine the role of internal organizational stakeholders in viewing sustainable intellectual capital in terms of sustainable organizational performance (economic, social, and environmental dimensions).	Based on the title and abstract, this study employs a qualitative case study approach.

below is a sample or example of articles excluded from this study.

Based on Table 2, it can be seen that Deshpande and Srivastava [35] conducted research related to sustainable organizational performance. This study is fascinating as it examines the influence of green training and green work-life balance on sustainable organizational performance. However, upon reading the abstract, it becomes clear that the study employs a qualitative approach. This does not align with the established eligibility criteria. Therefore, the study by Deshpande and Srivastava [35] is excluded from this research. Similarly, Wang and Zhang’s [25] study examines factors influencing sustainable organizational performance but uses a qualitative approach that does not align with the eligibility criteria established for this study. Therefore, Wang and Zhang’s [25] study is excluded from this research. Additionally, 20 other articles do not meet the eligibility criteria for this study.

3.5. Analysis of the Article Content

After the screening stage was completed, all articles that met the criteria were then analyzed based on their entire content. This is in accordance with the PRISMA guidelines, which state that all potentially relevant records must undergo a full-text retrieval process for a more comprehensive feasibility evaluation [15]. This aims to assess the suitability of each study based on the full text and content of the article [34]. In this study, 62 articles that passed the title and abstract screening stage will be manually analyzed based on the entire content of the article. Based on the manual analysis of the 62 articles that passed the screening process, 44 articles were found to meet the inclusion and exclusion criteria of the study. The stage of the report not included in this study refers to articles that do not meet the inclusion criteria set in this study. In this study, 18 articles did not align with the objectives of this study.

3.6. Articles Analyzed

The final stage is to analyze the articles that have passed the previous stages [36]. Based on the selection process that has been carried out, this study obtained 44 articles that met the predetermined eligibility criteria. The 44 articles that passed the selection process will be analyzed manually. In this study, all articles that passed the full-text eligibility evaluation were compiled for further analysis, which included:

• Subject areas in research articles related to sustainable organizational performance.
• Analyzing factors that can influence sustainable organizational performance in articles that have passed the selection process.
• Examining the theoretical framework used in the research.
• Examining the overall results of the selected articles.
• Examining the conclusions and limitations of the research.

In conducting the analysis, this study used a manual method by reading the contents of the articles by all authors. In addition, we also used MS Excel to record the results of the analysis that had been carried out. We did this to minimize the risk of bias during the screening process. Furthermore, this approach aimed to ensure objectivity and consistency in the selection and evaluation of studies included in the synthesis. Figure 1 is a flowchart summarizing the research process, which follows the PRISMA guidelines by Page et al. [16].

4. Results

In this study, 44 selected articles were analyzed as part of a Systematic Literature Review (SLR) related to sustainable organizational performance. The articles were selected based on predetermined criteria, including relevance to the topic, research methods, and contribution to understanding the factors that influence organizational sustainability. A detailed description of the 44 selected articles is attached in Appendix A. To ensure accuracy and minimize the risk of bias, the analysis process was conducted manually for each article included in the study, without the use of automation software. All important information from the articles is recorded and categorized using Microsoft Excel to ensure data accuracy and prevent information duplication. To maintain reliability, differences of opinion among authors are resolved through discussion until consensus is reached. This approach is chosen to maintain the integrity of the analysis and ensure that each finding truly reflects the content and context of the research being examined.

4.1. Distribution of Articles

4.1.1. Thematic Analysis

The thematic map in Figure 2 shows that key themes, including sustainability, sustainable performance, corporate social responsibility, artificial intelligence, and performance currently dominate research on sustainable organizational performance. These themes have high levels of relevance (centrality) and density, making them the primary focus and rapidly developing in the literature. On the other hand, there are basic themes that include innovation, performance management, and sustainable firm performance. These themes form the conceptual foundation in the study of sustainable performance, although they still require further exploration, especially in the context of cross-organizational and developing countries.

Meanwhile, niche themes such as dynamic capabilities, partial least squares (PLS), empirical analysis, and industrial performance indicate specific and in-depth research directions. However, their connection to the primary literature is still limited. This indicates that specific methodologies and analytical approaches have been used to examine sustainability issues, but have not yet fully entered the mainstream. On the other hand, emerging or declining themes such as transformational leadership and green human resource management (GHRM) appear to be in the early stages of development or beginning to decline in relevance. In fact, both have great potential as strategic factors that can drive sustainable organizational performance if further researched in the future.

Overall, this thematic map shows that the literature on sustainable organizational performance is relatively well established, with a focus on the integration of sustainability, technology, and social responsibility aspects. However, there is still room for development on fundamental and emerging themes, particularly in linking transformational leadership, GHRM, and dynamic capabilities as drivers of organizational innovation and sustainability.

4.1.2. Articles by Years

In this study, 44 selected articles were grouped by publication year to provide an overview of trends and developments in sustainable organizational performance over time. These articles were selected based on predetermined criteria, and grouping them by year aimed to highlight changes in research focus and methodology in this field. Figure 3 shows the distribution of articles by year.

From this data, it is evident that 2022 and 2025 are the years with the highest number of articles, each reaching 10 articles, indicating a surge in interest in the topic of sustainable organizational performance during those years. This reflects that the subject of organizational sustainability has been gaining increasing attention from researchers in recent years. In 2021, the number of articles was lower compared to other years, with only three articles.

4.1.3. Articles by Source

This study also categorizes articles based on journal sources. Based on the distribution of journal sources shown in

Table 3. Distribution Articles by Journal Source.

Source	Number of Articles	Authors
Sustainability	12	Aina and Atan [37]; Alnamrouti et al. [38]; Chen et al. [39]; Hassan et al. [40]; Hossin et al. [41]; Ingram et al. [42]; Kokkaew et al. [43]; Kordab et al. [22]; López-López et al. [44]; Mollah et al. [45]; Shin et al. [46]; Umar et al. [47]
Frontiers in Psychology	2	Bashir et al. [48]; Wang et al. [49]
Quality—Access to Success	2	Bhastary et al. [50]; Wibowo and Widodo [19]
Cogent Business and Management	1	T. Khan et al. [51]
Business: Theory and Practice	1	Eniola et al. [52]
African Journal of Hospitality, Tourism and Leisure	1	Salama [53]
Business Strategy and the Environment	1	Skalli et al. [54]
Economics	1	Daniel Akinsola et al. [55]
Current Issues in Tourism	1	Elzek et al. [56]
Economies	1	Sapta et al. [57]
Evidence-based HRM: a Global Forum for Empirical Scholarship	1	Jangbahadur et al. [58]
Foresight and STI Governance	1	Shayegan et al. [59]
International Journal of Information Management,	1	Gupta et al. [60]
Heliyon	1	Inthavong et al. [9]
Intangible Capital	1	Nasution et al. [61]
International Journal of Innovative Research and Scientific Studies	1	Al-Ayed [62]
International Review of Management and Marketing	1	Nawangsari et al. [63]
Journal of Cleaner Production	1	Khan and Mukhtar [64]
Journal of Business Research	1	Olan et al. [65]
Journal of Chinese Human Resources Management	1	Zhang et al. [66]
Journal of Knowledge Management	1	Nguyen et al. [67]
Journal of Infrastructure, Policy and Development	1	Qin et al. [18]
Journal of Eastern European and Central Asian Research	1	Sinaga et al. [68]
Journal of Innovation and Knowledge	1	Sun et al. [69]
Oeconomia Copernicana	1	Amin et al. [70]
Journal of Tourism and Services	1	Ayad and Al-Sabi [17]
Journal of Small Business Strategy	1	F. A. Khan et al. [71]
Management Research Review	1	Ooi et al. [72]
Sustainable Production and Consumption	1	Gadekar et al. [73]
South African Journal of Business Management	1	Jacobs and Maritz [74]
Social Sciences and Humanities Open	1	Somwethee et al. [75]

, it is evident that literature related to sustainable organizational performance is multidisciplinary and has been widely published in various reputable international journals. Out of the total 44 articles analyzed, 31 journals served as publication platforms. This indicates that sustainable organizational performance has cross-disciplinary appeal and has been extensively studied in various international scientific journals.

Sustainability journals dominate with 12 articles, indicating that organizational sustainability issues are the main focus of these journals. These journals explicitly focus on cross-sector sustainability issues, including organizations, business, the environment, and society. Articles by authors such as Aina and Atan [37], Chen et al. [39], and Shin et al. [46] illustrate that sustainability is not only viewed from an environmental perspective but also involves leadership roles, innovation, organizational culture, and corporate governance. This journal’s dominance also signifies that organizational sustainability is increasingly understood as a complex phenomenon requiring a systemic and holistic approach.

Two articles are from the journal Frontiers in Psychology, indicating attention to the psychological dimensions of achieving sustainable organizational performance. Meanwhile, two other articles were published in the journal Quality—Access to Success, a journal focused on quality management and organizational issues. Additionally, 28 other journals each featured research publications related to sustainable organizational performance. This indicates that research on sustainable organizational performance aligns with the journals’ objectives and represents an area of growing interest for future research. Overall, the analyzed literature indicates that sustainable organizational performance is a strategic theme that continues to evolve and remains relevant across various disciplines. Cross-sectoral and multidisciplinary approaches are key to understanding and developing sustainable practices. Information regarding the journal sources and articles published in these journals is presented in Table 3.

4.1.4. Articles by Subject Area

This study also identifies the subject areas of the articles analyzed. Figure 4 shows the distribution of articles based on the subject areas selected for analysis in this study (a total of 44 articles). Social Science is the dominant field with a 23% share, Business, Management, and Accounting at 17%, Environmental Science at 14%, Energy at 12%, Computer Science at 10%, and Economic Econometrics and Finance at 8%. Meanwhile, the remaining 12% represent other subject areas. This demonstrates the diversity of disciplines in research related to sustainable organizational performance. This diversity underscores that organizational sustainability is a cross-disciplinary topic that involves various fields of knowledge to achieve a more holistic understanding of the factors influencing sustainable performance.

4.1.5. Theories Used

Based on the analysis of 44 selected articles, researchers use various theoretical foundations to explain the factors that can influence sustainable organizational performance. The most dominant theory used is the Resource-Based View, which was used in 10 articles discussing sustainable organizational performance. Research conducted by Amin et al. [70], Eniola et al. [52], Ingram et al. [42], F. A. Khan et al. [71], López-López et al. [44], Nguyen et al. [67], Shin et al. [46], Sun et al. [69], Chen et al. [39], and Umar et al. [47] Using the RBV theoretical framework in their research. This theory emphasizes the importance of internal organizational resources as the foundation for building a sustainable competitive advantage [27].

Furthermore, Dynamic Capability theory was used in five articles [19,38,60,61,73]. This theory complements RBV by emphasizing the organization’s ability to respond to change through adaptation, integration, and transformation of the resources owned by the organization [76]. Five other articles use Social Exchange theory as the theoretical foundation for their research [41,58,64,65,68]. This theory highlights the reciprocal relationship between organizations and their employees [77].

Three other theories used as a basis in research related to sustainable organizational performance are the Knowledge-Based View (KBV), Institutional Theory, and Stakeholder Theory. These theories were used in three articles, respectively. The KBV theory is used in the research conducted by Mollah et al. [45], Sapta et al. [57], and Sun et al. [69]. The KBV theory emphasizes the importance of knowledge as a strategic resource in creating innovation and sustainable efficiency [78]. Meanwhile, Institutional Theory is used in the research conducted by Umar et al. [47], Wang et al. [49], and Nguyen et al. [67]. This theory explains the role of institutions in organizational practices [79]. Stakeholder Theory was used as the basis for the research conducted by Alnamrouti et al. [38], Chen et al. [39], and F.A. Khan et al. [71]. This theory argues that an organization’s long-term success depends heavily on its ability to manage the interests of its stakeholders in a balanced manner [80].

The Ability, Motivation, Opportunity (AMO) theory was also used as the basis for research conducted by Jangbahadur et al. [58], M. H. Khan and Muktar [64], Sinaga et al. [68]. This theory emphasizes that sustainable employee performance can be achieved by paying attention to capabilities, motivation, and opportunities to contribute optimally [81]. Meanwhile, Contingency Theory is used by Gadekar et al. and Qin et al. This theory shows that sustainability depends on the alignment between internal and external organizational factors [82]. On the other hand, there are several theories used in one article, detailed in

Table 4. Theories Used.

Theory	Number of Articles	Authors
Resource-Based View	10	Amin et al. [70]; Eniola et al. [52]; Ingram et al. [42]; F. A. Khan et al. [71]; López-López et al. [44]; Nguyen et al. [67]; Shin et al. [46]; Sun et al. [69]; Chen et al. [39]; Umar et al. [47]
Dynamic Capability	5	Gupta et al. [60]; Nasution et al. [61]; Wibowo dan Widodo [19]; Alnamrouti et al. [38]; Gadekar et al. [73]
Social Exchange Theory	5	Hossin et al. [41]; Jangbahadur et al. [58]; M. H. Khan and Muktar [64]; Olan et al. [65]; Sinaga et al. [68]
Knowledge-Based View	3	Mollah et al. [45]; Sapta et al. [57]; Sun et al. [69]
Institutional Theory	3	Umar et al. [47]; Wang et al. [49]; Nguyen et al. [67]
Stakeholder Theory	3	Alnamrouti et al. [38]; Chen et al. [39]; F. A. Khan et al. [71]
Ability, Motivation, Opportunity	3	Jangbahadur et al. [58]; M. H. Khan and Muktar [64]; Sinaga et al. [68]
Contingency Theory	2	Gadekar et al. [73]; Qin et al. [18]
Practice-Based View Theory	1	Skalli et al. [54]
Information System Strategies	1	Hassan et al. [40]
Intellectual Capital-Based View	1	Elzek et al. [56]
Organizational Learning Theory	1	Inthavong et al. [9]
Talent Management	1	Aina and Atan [37]
Triple Bottom Line	1	Ooi et al. [72]
Digital Leadership Behaviour	1	Mollah et al. [45]
Lean Production Theory	1	Ooi et al. [72]
Marketing Theory	1	Chen et al. [39]

. Thus, the literature shows that various theories can explain the relationship related to sustainable organizational performance. The diverse theoretical approaches reflect the complexity of research related to sustainable organizational performance. This reinforces the need to use an integrative and contextual theoretical framework in future research.

The diversity of theoretical foundations shows that sustainable organizational performance cannot be explained from just one perspective. Although RBV and Dynamic Capabilities dominate, the integration of other theories such as KBV, Institutional Theory, Stakeholder Theory, AMO, and Contingency Theory confirms the multidimensional nature of organizational sustainability. This indicates that future research needs to use an integrative approach that combines internal resource perspectives with external institutions and stakeholders, as well as employee-centred frameworks, to provide a more comprehensive understanding of sustainable organizational performance.

4.2. Determinants of Sustainable Organizational Performance

This study aims to identify factors that influence sustainable organizational performance systematically. This study will describe the factors that directly and indirectly influence sustainable organizational performance (moderation and mediation). The following are details of several factors that can influence sustainable organizational performance.

4.2.1. Direct Effect

This study discusses factors that directly influence sustainable organizational performance. The results of the literature synthesis show that various factors can influence sustainable organizational performance. These factors are grouped into main themes based on variables that frequently appear in the articles analyzed.

Table 5. Factors Influencing Sustainable Organizational Performance (Direct Effect).

No	Variable Related	Term Used	Number of Articles	Result	Authors
1	Knowledge Factors	Knowledge Risk Management	8	Sig. +	Daniel Akinsola et al. [55]
		Dimensions of Knowledge Management Process		Inconsistent	Kordab et al. [22]
		AI + Knowledge Sharing		Sig. +	Olan et al. [65]
		Knowledge Management Practices		Sig. +	Qin et al. [18]; Sun et al. [69]; Umar et al. [47]; Sapta et al. [57]
		Knowledge Application		Not. Sig.	Nguyen et al. [67]
2	Innovation Factors	Innovative Work Behaviour	8	Sig. +	Eniola et al. [52]
		Innovation Output		Sig. +	Ingram et al. [42]
		Organizational Innovation		Sig. +	Inthavong et al. [9]
		Green Innovation Behaviour		Sig. +	Nawangsari et al. [63] Nguyen et al. [67]
		Innovation Capability		Sig. +	Qin et al. [18]
		Social Innovation Agility		Sig. +	Wibowo and Widodo [19]
		Innovative Performance		Sig. +	Wibowo and Widodo [19]
3	Leadership Factors	Sustainable Leadership Practices	7	Sig. +	Ayad and Al-Sabi [17]
		Change Leadership		Sig. +	Bashir et al. [48]
		Leadership Behaviour		Sig. +	Daniel Akinsola et al. [55]
		Digital Leadership		Sig. +	Mollah et al. [45] Shin et al. [46]
		Transformational Leadership		Sig. +	Umar et al. [47]
		Leadership Style		Sig. +	Sapta et al. [57]
4	Learning and Development factors	Learning and Development Factors	7	Sig. +	Aina and Atan [37]
		Organizational Learning		Sig. +	Alnamrouti et al. [38]; Intavong et al. [9]; Kokkaew et al. [43]; Mollah et al. [45]; Kordab et al. [22]
		Learning Organization		Sig. +	Qin et al. [18]
5	Human Resource Management Factors	Strategic HRM	7	Sig. +	Al-Ayed [62]; Alnamrouti et al. [38]
		Green HRM Practices		Sig. +	Khan dan Muktar [64]; Zhang et al. [66]; Shayegan et al. [59]
		HRM		Sig. +	Kokkaew et al. [43]
		Green Human Capital		Not. Sig.	Nawangsari et al. [63]
6	Organizational Culture Factors	Organizational Culture	6	Sig. +	Sapta et al. [57]; Ayad and Al-Sabi [17]
		Internal market-oriented culture		Sig. +	Chen et al. [39]
		Digital Culture		Sig. +	Shin et al. [46]
		Innovation culture		Sig. +	Wang et al. [49]
		Information security culture		Sig. +	Hassan et al. [40]
7	Employee Factors	Employee Resilience	5	Sig. +	Bashir et al. [48]
		Employrre digital capabilities		Sig. +	Shin et al. [46]
		Green Employee Empowerment		Sig. +	Khan dan Muktar [64]
		Employee Engagement		Sig. +	Jangbahadur et al. [58]
		Green Employee Behaviour		Sig. +	Sinaga et al. [68]
8	Technological Factors	Technology Competence	5	Sig. +	Al-Ayed [62]
		IT infrastructure		Sig. +	Hassan et al. [40]
		IT Capabilities		Sig. +	Mollah et al. [45]
		New Technology		Sig. +	Shayegan et al. [59]
		Industry 4.0 Technologies		Sig. +	Skalli et al. [54]
9	Environmental and social factors	Environment and Social Responsibility Perception	4	Sig. +	Zhang et al. [66]
		ESG Strategies		Sig. +	Chen et al. [39]
		Corporate Social Responsibility		Sig. +	Alnamrouti et al. [38]; FA Khan [71]
10	Talent Management Factors	Talent Attraction	3	Not. Sig.	Aina and Atan [37]
		Talent Retention		Not. Sig.	Aina and Atan [37]
		Talent Management		Sig. +	Bhastary et al. [50]
11	Artificial Intelligence Factors	Artificial Intelligence Human Resources	3	Sig. +	Al-Ayed [62]
		Artificial Intelligence		Inconsistent	Alnamrouti et al. [38]; Olan et al. [65]
12	Supply Chain Management Factors	Supply Chain Visibility	3	Sig. +	Sun et al. [69]
		Green Supply Chain Management		Sig. +	T Khan et al. [51]; Zhang et al. [66]
13	Market Orientation Factors	Tactical Green Marketing Orientation	2	Sig. +	Fa Khan et al. [71]
		Green market orientation		Not. Sig.	Nguyen et al. [67]
14	Entrepreneurship Orientation	Entrepreneurship Orientation	2	Not. Sig.	Ingram et al. [42]
		Social Entrepreneurial Capability		Sig. +	Somwethee et al. [75]
15	Organizational ambidexterity		2	Sig. +	Jacobs and Maritz [74]; Nasution et al. [61]
16	circular economy practices		2	Sig. +	Amin et al. [70]; Skalli et al. [54]

Note. “Sig.”= significant; “Not Sig.”= not significant; “+”= positive effect.

below shows the factors most frequently discussed in influencing sustainable organizational performance.

Based on Table 5, the factors most discussed in the articles are knowledge factors and innovation factors. Knowledge factors are discussed in eight studies conducted by Daniel Akinsola et al. [55], Kordab et al. [22], Olan et al. [65], Qin et al. [18], Sun et al. [69], Umar et al. [47], Sapta et al. [57], and Nguyen et al. [67]. Aspects such as knowledge risk management, knowledge management practices, and knowledge sharing generally show a significant positive influence on sustainable organizational performance [18,55,65]. However, there is an inconsistency in the knowledge management process dimension [22]. Additionally, the aspect of knowledge application has been found to have no significant impact on sustainable organizational performance [67]. Innovation factors also play a crucial role in sustainable organizational performance [9,18,19,42,52,63,67]. This is evidenced by eight articles stating that innovation aspects such as innovative work behaviour, green innovation, innovation capability, and social innovation agility significantly influence sustainable organizational performance (see Table 5).

Leadership factors can also influence sustainable organizational performance. This study found that leadership factors (Sustainable Leadership Practices, Change Leadership, Leadership Behaviour, Digital Leadership, Transformational Leadership, and Leadership Style) have a positive and significant effect on sustainable organizational performance [17,45,46,47,48,55,57]. On the other hand, Learning and Development Factors are also variables that can influence sustainable organizational performance. This study found that all aspects of Learning and Development Factors (such as Learning and Development Factors, Organizational Learning, and Learning Organization) have a significant and positive impact on sustainable organizational performance [9,18,22,37,38,43,45]). This also highlights the strong connection between organizational learning and the ability to maintain performance in dynamic conditions.

Human Resource Management (HRM) factors also play an important role in influencing organizational sustainable performance [43]. Research by Al-Ayed [62] and Alnamrouti et al. [38] shows that strategic HRM has a significant and positive effect on sustainable organizational performance. Research by Khan and Muktar [64], Zhang et al. [66], and Shayegan et al. [59] shows that Green HRM Practices have a positive impact on sustainable organizational performance. However, research by Nawangsari et al. [63] shows that Green Human Capital does not have a significant impact on sustainable organizational performance. Organizational culture is also a factor that can influence sustainable organizational performance. Seven articles prove that aspects of organizational culture (such as) have a significant and positive impact on sustainable organizational performance [17,39,40,46,49,57].

Employee factors are also important factors that can influence sustainable organizational performance. This is evidenced by the fact that all aspects of employee factors (such as Employee Resilience, Employee Digital Capabilities, Green Employee Empowerment, Employee Engagement, and Green Employee Behaviour have a positive impact on sustainable organizational performance [46,48,58,64,68]. This indicates that employee empowerment is a crucial element in corporate sustainability. Additionally, in this digital era, technological factors play a vital role in almost all aspects [83]. This study found that technological aspects (such as Technology Competence, IT Infrastructure, IT Capabilities, New Technology, and Industry 4.0 Technologies) have a significant and positive influence on sustainable organizational performance [40,45,54,59,62].

Environmental and Social Responsibility factors are discussed in four articles with results supporting the positive influence of ESG strategies, CSR, and perceptions of social responsibility [38,39,66,71]. This indicates that organizations responsive to social and environmental issues can better maintain their business continuity. Meanwhile, the results related to talent management factors are inconsistent. Aina and Atan [37] state that talent attraction and talent retention do not significantly impact sustainable organizational performance. On the other hand, Bhastary et al. [50] assert that talent management significantly influences sustainable organizational performance.

Artificial Intelligence Factors also have varying results, depending on the context and approach. Al-Ayed [62] states that Artificial Intelligence Human Resources significantly and positively affects sustainable organizational performance. Alnamrouti et al. [38] also found that artificial intelligence significantly and positively affects sustainable organizational performance. Meanwhile, Olan et al. [65] argue that AI does not have a significant impact on sustainable organizational performance. This gap forms the basis for further research to test the impact of AI on sustainable organizational performance. Supply Chain Management Factors are also one of the factors that can influence sustainable organizational performance [51,66,69]. Sun et al. [69] state that Supply Chain Visibility significantly impacts sustainable organizational performance. T Khan et al. [51] and Zhang et al. [66] argue that Green Supply Chain Management significantly and positively impacts sustainable organizational performance.

Market Orientation Factors (Tactical Green Marketing Orientation and Green Market Orientation) are among the factors that can be considered [67,71]. Research by F. A. Khan [71] found that Tactical Green Marketing Orientation significantly affects sustainable organizational performance. Meanwhile, Nguyen et al. [67] found that Green Market Orientation does not significantly affect sustainable organizational performance. This gap can be addressed by future research on the relationship between market orientation factors and sustainable organizational performance. A similar situation occurs with the Entrepreneurial Orientation factor, where entrepreneurship orientation is not significant [42]. However, social entrepreneurial capability shows positive results [75].

Organizational ambidexterity factors were identified in two articles and showed a significant positive influence on sustainable organizational performance [61,74]. Meanwhile, circular economy practices were also discussed in two articles with consistent positive results [54,70]. The application of circular economy principles, such as waste reduction, recycling, and resource optimization, has proven to support organizational sustainability by enhancing efficiency and creating long-term value.

4.2.2. Mediating Effect

This study also identifies the role of mediating variables in bridging the influence between factors on sustainable organizational performance. The synthesis results show that mediating variables are important in strengthening or explaining the indirect relationship between the main variables. Details of these mediating variables are shown in

Table 6. Factors Influencing Sustainable Organizational Performance (Mediating Effect).

No	Exogenous Variables	Mediate Variable	Number of Articles	Result	Authors
1	High Performance Work System	Innovation factors	10	Sig.	Eniola et al. [52]
	Entrepreneurship Orientation			N.S.	Ingram et al. [42]
	Organizational Learning			Sig.	Intavong et al. [9]
	Green Human Capital			Sig.	Nawangsari et al. [63]
	Green Structural Capital			N.S.	Nawangsari et al. [63]
	Green Relational Capital			Sig.	Nawangsari et al. [63]
	Learning Organization			Sig.	Qin et al. [18]
	Knowledge Application			Sig.	Nguyen et al. [67]
	Government Policy			Sig.	Nguyen et al. [67]
	Green Market Orientation			Sig.	Nguyen et al. [67]
2	Learning Organization	Knowledge Management Practices	6	Sig.	Qin et al. [18]
	Organizational Culture			Sig.	Sapta et al. [57]
	Leadership Style			Sig.	Sapta et al. [57]
	Change Readiness			N.S.	Umar et al. [47]
	Climate for Change			Sig.	Umar et al. [47]
	Change Process			Sig.	Umar et al. [47]
3	Knowledge Risk Management	Leadership Factors	4	Sig.	Daniel Akinsola et al. [55]
	Change Readiness			N.S.	Umar et al. [47]
	Climate for Change			Sig.	Umar et al. [47]
	Change Process			N.S.	Umar et al. [47]
4	Organizational Learning	HRM Factors	4	Sig.	Alnamrouti et al. [38]
	Corporate Social Responsibility			Sig.	Alnamrouti et al. [38]
	AI HR			Sig.	Al-Ayed [62]
	New Technologies			Sig.	Shayegan et al. [59]
5	Talent Attraction	Green intellectual capital	4	Sig.	Elzek et al. [56]
	Talent Retention			N.S.	Elzek et al. [56]
	Learning and development			Sig.	Elzek et al. [56]
	Career management			Sig.	Elzek et al. [56]
6	Change Leadership	Employee Factors	3	Sig.	Bashir et al. [48]
	Digital Leadership			Sig.	Shin et al. [46]
	Ai-enabled HRM dimension			Sig.	Al-Ayed [62]
7	Organizational Learning	AI	2	Sig.	Alnamrouti et al. [38]
	Corporate Social Responsibility			Sig.	Alnamrouti et al. [38]
8	HRM	Organizational Learning	2	N.S.	Kokkeaw et al. [43]
	Digital Leadership			N.S.	Mollah et al. [45]
9	AI HR	Technological Factors	2	Sig.	Al-Ayed [62]
	Digital Leadership			N.S.	Mollah et al. [45]
10	Sustainable Leadership Practices	Culture Factors	2	Sig.	Ayad and Al-Sabi [17]
	ESG Strategies			Sig.	Chen et al. [39]
16	CSR	Tactical Green Marketing Orientation	2	Sig.	F A Khan et al. [71]
	Stakeholder Pressure			Sig.	F A Khan et al. [71]
11	Knowledge management	Blockchain Adoption	1	Sig.	Sun et al. [69]
12	Industry 4.0 Technologies	Circular Economies	1	Sig.	Skalli et al. [54]
13	Perceived Organizational Support	Sustainable Organisational Reputation	1	Sig.	Hossin et al. [41]
14	Digital Business Transformation	Organisational Ambidexterity	1	Sig.	Nasution et al. [61]
15	Knowledge management	Supply Chain Visibility	1	Sig.	Sun et al. [69]

Note. Dependent variable: Sustainable Organizational Performance (SOP); “Sig.”= significant; “N.S.”: not significant.

below.

Based on Table 6, it can be seen that 15 variables serve as mediating variables, namely innovation factors, knowledge management practices, leadership factors, human resource management (HRM) factors, green intellectual capital, employee factors, artificial intelligence (AI), organizational factors, technological factors, cultural factors, green marketing orientation, blockchain adoption, circular economy, sustainable organizational reputation, organizational ambidexterity, and supply chain visibility. Eniola et al. [52] research found that innovation is a mediating variable in the relationship between high-performance work systems and sustainable organizational performance (SOP). Nawangsari et al. [63] found that innovation factors mediate the relationship between green intellectual capital and green structural capital toward SOP. Qin’s research also found that innovation can act as a mediating variable in the relationship between learning organizations and SOP. Nguyen et al. [67] found that innovation factors mediate the relationship between knowledge application, government policies, and green market orientation toward SOP. Meanwhile, Ingram’s research found that innovation is not a mediating variable in the relationship between entrepreneurship and SOP.

This study also found that knowledge factors can act as mediating variables in research related to SOP. Qin et al. [18] found that knowledge management practices mediate the relationship between organizational culture and SOP. Sapta et al. [57] also found that knowledge management practices mediate the relationship between the influence of organizational culture and leadership on SOP. Umar et al. [47] also found that knowledge management practices mediate between the influence of climate for change and the change process on SOP. However, Umar et al. [47] also found that knowledge management practices are not a mediating variable in the relationship between change readiness and SOP.

This study also found that leadership style can be a mediating variable in the influence of determining variables on SOP [47,55]. However, some studies also found that leadership is not a mediating variable [47]. All the articles analyzed in this study found that human resource factors can mediate the relationship between organizational learning, corporate social responsibility, AI HR, and new technologies and SOP [38,59,62]. This study also found that green intellectual capital can act as a mediating variable. Elzek et al. [56] found that green intellectual capital mediates the influence of talent attraction, learning and development, and career management on SOP. However, Elzek et al. [56] also found that green intellectual capital is not a mediating variable in the relationship between talent retention and SOP.

This study also proves that employee factors can mediate in research related to SOP [46,48,62]. Meanwhile, Artificial Intelligence can also mediate in SOP-related research [38]. The articles analyzed in this study indicate that organizational learning is not a mediating variable in SOP-related research [43,45]. However, further research is needed to enrich existing theory and confirm this finding. Al-Ayed [62] found that technological factors mediate the relationship between AI HR and SOP. Meanwhile, Mollah et al. [45] found that technological factors are not a mediating variable in the relationship between digital leadership and SOP.

Ayad and Al-Sabi [17] research found that organizational culture is a mediating variable in the relationship between sustainable leadership practices and SOP. Chen et al. [39] research also found that internal market-oriented culture is a mediating variable in the relationship between ESG strategies and SOP. Therefore, this study concludes that cultural factors can be mediating variables in research related to SOP. F.A. Khan [71] also researched mediating factors influencing SOP. The results showed that Tactical Green Marketing Orientation can mediate the relationship between CSR and stakeholder pressure on SOP. Additionally, this study identified other mediating variables such as: blockchain adoption, circular economies, sustainable organizational reputation, organizational ambidexterity, and supply chain visibility.

4.2.3. Moderating Effect

In addition to examining direct and mediating effects, this study also identified several moderating variables that influence the strength or direction of the relationship between exogenous variables and sustainable organizational performance. Although the number of articles discussing moderating effects is more limited than those discussing direct and mediating effects, these findings still provide important insights into the specific contexts and conditions that strengthen or weaken the influence between variables.

Table 7. Factors Influencing Sustainable Organizational Performance (Moderating Effect).

No	Exogenous Variable	Moderate Variable	Result	Authorz
1	Transformational Leadership	Green Teams	Not	Umar et al. [47]
	Knowledge Management		Not	Umar et al. [47]
2	Organizational Learning	Innovation Factors	Sig.	Intavong [9]
	Energy, waste, and resource management		Sig.	Wang et al. [49]
3	Employee engagement	Fusion Skills	Not	Jangbahadur et al. [58]
4	Talent Management	Green Behaviour	Sig.	Bhastary et al. [50]
5	Green Intellectual Capital	Green Servant Leadership	Not	Elzek et al. [56]
6	Lean Production Dimension	Industry 4.0 Technologies Adoption	Inconsisten	Ooi et al. [72]
7	internal market-oriented culture	Job Crafting	Sig.	Chen et al. [39]
8	Knowledge Risk Management	Leadership Behaviour	Sig.	Daniel Akinsola et al. [55]

Note. Dependent variable: sustainable organizational performance (SOP).

below shows the results of the study related to moderating variables.

This study found that green teams do not act as a moderating variable for the influence of transformational leadership and knowledge management on SOP [47]. Although these results are insignificant, recent research on the moderating influence of green teams will enrich existing theory. This study also found that innovation can be a moderating variable. Intavong et al. [9] found that innovation moderates the relationship between organizational learning and SOP. Meanwhile, Wang et al. [49] also found that innovation can moderate the influence of energy, waste, and resource management on SOP.

Fusion Skills did not significantly moderate the relationship between employee engagement and organizational performance [58], suggesting that these skills may not be a key factor in enhancing engagement in this study. On the other hand, green behaviour positively moderates the relationship between talent management and organizational performance [50], indicating that talent management strategies will be more effective if supported by green behaviour aligned with the organization’s sustainability goals.

Green servant leadership was found not to significantly moderate the relationship between green intellectual capital and sustainable performance [56]. This may be due to the complexity of applying this leadership style in various organizational contexts. The adoption of Industry 4.0 technology shows inconsistent moderating effects in the relationship between lean production dimensions and organizational performance [72], indicating that integrating advanced technology with lean production principles may not always yield consistent results across different organizational settings or industries.

Job crafting significantly moderates the relationship between internal market-oriented culture and organizational performance [39]. This research emphasizes that when employees have autonomy to reshape their roles and tasks, the benefits of a market-oriented culture are more effectively achieved. Leadership behaviour was a significant moderator in the relationship between knowledge risk management and sustainable performance [55]. This research underscores the significance of adaptive and supportive leadership in mitigating knowledge risks and achieving sustainable outcomes.

5. Discussion

Referring to PRISMA 2020, this study followed four main stages: identification, screening, eligibility assessment, and inclusion [84]. In the identification stage, articles were searched in the Scopus database using the specific keyword “sustainable organizational performance,” resulting in 144 articles. In the screening stage, articles that were non-journal, non-final, non-English, or not peer-reviewed were excluded, leaving 87 articles. Next, the eligibility stage was conducted by reviewing the titles, abstracts, and full texts based on the inclusion and exclusion criteria, resulting in 62 eligible articles. In the final stage, inclusion, 44 articles met the criteria and were analyzed. This comparison demonstrates that the study is consistent with the PRISMA protocol and transparent in its article selection process.

From the distribution of articles by year, there has been an increase in interest in sustainable organizational performance in recent years, particularly in 2022 and 2025, each of which had 10 articles. This indicates that this topic has become increasingly relevant and has attracted more researchers in recent years. The increase in the number of articles in those years may reflect a growing awareness of the importance of sustainability in organizations, whether in an economic, social, or environmental context. Overall, this growth in the number of publications shows that sustainable organizational performance is increasingly considered an important and strategic area of research in the academic world.

It is important to note that literature on sustainable organizational performance is widely disseminated in various reputable international journals, with the Journal of Sustainability dominating with 12 published articles. This indicates that organizational sustainability has become a significant focus for many researchers and practitioners in sustainability and management. This journal, which explicitly focuses on cross-sector sustainability, provides an important platform for research covering social, economic, and environmental aspects of sustainable performance. The literature published in other journals, such as Frontiers in Psychology and Quality—Access to Success, demonstrates a multidisciplinary interest in this topic. The emphasis on psychological and managerial dimensions in achieving sustainable performance suggests that research on organizational sustainability is not solely focused on environmental issues, but also involves social and human behavioural aspects that play a crucial role in implementing sustainability.

Based on analyzing the theories used in 44 selected articles, the Resource-Based View (RBV) theory emerged as the most dominant theory in explaining sustainable organizational performance. This theory emphasizes the importance of internal organizational resources, such as capabilities, intangible assets, and expertise, in creating a sustainable competitive advantage [27]. Studies using RBV show that organizations with unique and well-managed resources have a greater ability to achieve long-term sustainability [39,42,44,46,47,52,67,69,70,71]. In addition to RBV, Dynamic Capability Theory is frequently used [19,38,60,61,73]. This theory describes the need for organizations to be able to adapt and transform in response to dynamic external environmental changes [76].

In addition, Social Exchange Theory and Knowledge-Based View (KBV) are also used in research related to organizational sustainability [41,45,57,58,64,65,68,69]. Social Exchange Theory describes the reciprocal relationship between organizations and employees, and knowledge as a strategic resource [77]. Meanwhile, KBV Theory describes knowledge as an important asset owned by an organization, which can be used to create a competitive advantage by managing and developing knowledge resources within the organization [78]. This is crucial for supporting sustainability performance [85,86]. Stakeholder Theory also explains the importance of managing stakeholder interests in achieving organizational sustainability [38,39,71]. This theory reflects the complexity of organizational sustainability, which requires a holistic understanding that integrates various internal and external factors [80].

This study aims to discuss the factors that directly influence sustainable organizational performance (see Figure 5). Based on an analysis of 44 selected articles, several factors were identified as significantly influencing sustainable organizational performance (SOP). Knowledge plays an important role, with research showing that aspects such as knowledge management practices, knowledge sharing, and knowledge risk management positively impact organizational sustainability. However, there is an inconsistency in the dimensions of knowledge application and knowledge management processes, which do not always yield significant results, indicating that not all aspects of knowledge management always impact sustainable organizational performance [18,55,65]. This inconsistency shows that knowledge only contributes to sustainability when it is aligned with the context and strategy of the organization. Theoretically, this emphasizes the need to integrate a knowledge-based perspective with a contextual and dynamic approach [18,55,65]. The inconsistency of these results needs to be further tested empirically in various fields. Further research will enrich this theory.

The innovation factor has also been proven to significantly impact sustainable organizational performance. This factor underscores that organizations that promote innovation are better able to adapt to existing challenges and are more capable of meeting sustainability demands [19,42,52,63]. These results are consistent across all studies reviewed. This reinforces the role of innovation as a key component that can influence sustainable organizational performance. This indicates that innovation not only increases competitiveness but also provides long-term resilience for organizations in facing a dynamic environment [19,42,52,63].

This study also found that leadership that supports sustainability, such as Sustainable Leadership Practices, Transformational Leadership, and Digital Leadership, plays an important role in promoting sustainable performance. Leadership is a key element that guides organizations in creating effective sustainability strategies [17,45,46,47,48,55,57]. The consistency of these findings shows that leadership is not only a facilitator but also a key driver of organizational sustainability. This confirms that leadership acts as a bridge between corporate vision and operational practices [87].

Additionally, learning and development factors also demonstrate a significant influence on organizational sustainability. Learning and employee capacity development, such as learning organizations and organizational learning, have been proven to strengthen an organization’s ability to adapt and survive in achieving sustainable organizational performance [9,18,22,37,38,43,45]. The consistency of these findings suggests that continuous learning and employee development are significant for maintaining long-term sustainability. This confirms that organizational sustainability is strengthened when the learning process is embedded in the organizational culture [88].

Other factors that influence sustainable organizational performance are HRM, organizational culture, employee factors, and technological factors. Several gaps need to be explored further, such as the role of Artificial Intelligence and market orientation, which still show inconsistent results in several studies. This opens up opportunities for further research to understand these factors in the context of organizational sustainability [62,65,67]. This shows that the contribution of these factors is contextual, depending on industry characteristics, organizational size, and digital readiness [88].

This study also identified various variables that influence sustainable organizational performance, including moderating and mediating variables. The mediating effect explains how mediating variables function as a link between exogenous variables and sustainable organizational performance. These mediating variables play a role in defining the processes occurring between the main variables. For example, learning organizations were found to be significant mediators in the relationship between knowledge management practices and sustainable performance [18]. Similarly, green behaviour mediates the relationship between talent management and organizational sustainability [50]. These results indicate that various factors can mediate the relationship between determinants and sustainable organizational performance. This suggests that further research is necessary to enhance existing theories related to sustainable organizational performance.

Meanwhile, the moderating effect explains the conditions or variables that influence the strength or direction of the relationship between exogenous variables and sustainable organizational performance. In the context of this study, several moderating variables were found to have a significant influence, such as job crafting moderating the relationship between internal market-oriented culture and sustainable performance [39], and leadership behaviour moderating the influence of knowledge risk management on sustainable performance [55]. These findings suggest that moderating variables play a significant role in determining how certain factors can either strengthen or weaken the relationship between strategic factors and sustainable organizational performance.

Theoretically, the results of this study enrich the theory related to sustainable organizational performance by exploring determining factors such as knowledge, innovation, leadership, learning, HRM, culture, and technology interacting with each other in determining organizational sustainability. Thus, this study provides a more comprehensive understanding of the determinants of sustainable performance. Practically, this research can serve as a reference for top management to incorporate these findings into their business strategy. By understanding the factors that influence sustainable organizational performance, companies can design more targeted policies and innovations [88,89,90].

This study is a systematic literature review conducted in accordance with the PRISMA guidelines. Several limitations need to be acknowledged in this study. This study aims to examine the factors that influence sustainable organizational performance, both directly and indirectly. Therefore, this study uses the keyword “TITLE-ABS-KEY (“Sustainable organizational performance”)” to obtain articles from the Scopus database. Additionally, the dataset used in this study is limited to the Scopus database. This was chosen because Scopus is one of the largest and most reputable sources for the peer-reviewed indexed literature. For further research, other dataset sources can be used, or several reputable article dataset sources can be integrated. Additionally, this study employed manual methods and Microsoft Excel to record information from the analysis of selected articles. In addition, this study was conducted in early August 2025, and therefore, articles published after that date were not included in this study.

6. Conclusions and Recommendations for Future Research

This study offers comprehensive insights into sustainable organizational performance (SOP) based on a systematic literature review of 44 selected articles, conducted in accordance with the PRISMA guidelines. The analysis reveals several important findings that directly address the research questions. First, the distribution of studies on SOP has increased over time, with publications spread across multiple reputable international journals, indicating that SOP has become a global and multidisciplinary concern. The Journal of Sustainability (Switzerland) emerges as the leading outlet, reflecting the strategic relevance of organizational sustainability across various sectors.

Second, the review identifies a broad set of factors that directly influence SOP, including knowledge, innovation, leadership, organizational learning, human resource management, organizational culture, technology, environmental and social factors, market orientation, entrepreneurship orientation, and circular economy practices. These determinants show that SOP is multidimensional and shaped by both internal capabilities and external pressures. Third, several factors act as mediators in strengthening or weakening the impact of independent variables on SOP. These include HRM, employee-related factors, organizational culture, AI, tactical green marketing orientation, blockchain adoption, sustainable organizational reputation, organizational ambidexterity, and supply chain visibility. However, inconsistent findings exist, particularly regarding the mediating role of organizational learning, as shown by Kokkeaw et al. [43] and Mollah et al. [45]. Lastly, the findings also highlight the importance of moderating variables, including innovation, knowledge, leadership, green intellectual capital, and technology. However, their effects remain inconclusive across studies, requiring further empirical validation to clarify the boundary conditions of their impact.

Overall, the results emphasize that diverse, interrelated factors influence SOP, but with notable inconsistencies that highlight gaps in the literature. These findings strengthen the theoretical role of RBV, DCV, SE, and KBV in explaining sustainable performance, while also calling for integrated models that capture the interplay between resources, capabilities, and contextual variables. Future research should focus on resolving inconsistent findings regarding knowledge, HRM, AI, market orientation, and entrepreneurship orientation. It also needs to conduct cross-sectoral and longitudinal studies to understand how determinants of SOP evolve. In addition, future studies should integrate emerging issues such as digital transformation, sustainability-driven innovation, and circular economy practices into theoretical models. Such efforts will not only enrich the academic debate but also provide organizations with more precise guidance in developing strategies to enhance their sustainable performance.