Theoretical Exploration of Sustainable Human Resource Management Systems: A Corporate Social Responsibility Perspective

Abstract

Against the backdrop of increasingly interconnected environmental, social, and governance (ESG) challenges, enterprises must formulate sustainable strategies to achieve synergistic development among economic performance, social responsibility, and ecological conservation. As a core organizational resource, human resources serves as a critical enabler for fulfilling corporate social responsibility (CSR) and driving sustainable development. Whether enterprises can enhance the contribution of human resources to the fulfillment of corporate social responsibility and sustainable development is an important issue that currently needs to be studied in the field of human resource management. Therefore, this research follows the grounded theory method, integrates CSR and sustainable development theories, and uses systematic thinking to deeply explore the concept and structure of sustainable human resource management systems, and it develops relevant scales and combines exploratory and confirmatory factor analysis methods to revise and validate the scales. The research results show that the sustainable human resource management system is a multidimensional concept, including the following: employee rights protection, employee training and development, employee occupational health, employee relations management, and sustainable development management; its measurement scale contains five factors, with a total of 20 items. The results of factor analysis indicate that the reliability and validity tests of the developed scale have reached an ideal level. The research results enrich the concept and connotation of sustainable human resource management systems, and the development of the sustainable human resource management systems scale aims to promote the extension of the field of sustainable human resource management systems from theoretical exploration to empirical analysis research, providing a theoretical basis for Chinese enterprises to achieve sustainable development goals.

1. Introduction

Amid profound transformations in the energy sector, scholars have increasingly recognized that integrating sustainable development theory with corporate governance has become a core strategy for enterprise development. Against this backdrop, human resources—as a crucial cornerstone for driving corporate sustainability—demand an organic integration of management practices with sustainability principles, which holds paramount significance for highlighting individual value. Despite the growing academic interest in sustainable human resource management (SHRM), research in the Chinese context is yet to systematically integrate corporate social responsibility (CSR) practices into human resource management to construct a sustainable HR management system. Furthermore, there is a lack of measurement tools that can comprehensively reflect the multidimensional structure of SHRM and have been empirically validated, which significantly limits its localization and practical application. Most scholars approach the subject from the triple bottom line theory perspective, attempting to construct conceptual frameworks for sustainable human resource management (SHRM) and delving into its unique value in enhancing organizational performance [1], fulfilling ecological responsibilities, and promoting social equity [2,3]. These studies have provided valuable support for understanding sustainable human resource management systems from multiple dimensions, including theoretical foundations, practical applications, and impact outcomes. However, they remain in the conceptual exploration and theoretical infancy stage [4]. The relevant frameworks are still confined to abstract notions and cannot be effectively applied to concrete practices [5,6]. As a result, there remains a lack of clarity regarding the conceptual connotation and structural characteristics of sustainable human resource management systems, even leading to confusion with other similar concepts. There is a pressing need to delve deeper into its fundamental nature and examine its intrinsic attributes and operational mechanisms as an organizational management subsystem from a systematic perspective.

Considering this, this study takes the perspective of corporate social responsibility and conducts an exploratory study on sustainable human resource management systems, aiming to construct a structural framework and measurement tools applicable to the Chinese context. First, drawing upon perspectives from management systems, we propose and define the concept of sustainable human resource management systems. Second, through in-depth interviews with middle-senior managers and employees in enterprises, we employ qualitative research methods to explore and identify the structural dimensions of sustainable human resource management systems. Finally, following the standard scale development process, a measurement scale with good reliability and validity is compiled, providing an operational and measurable assessment tool for the empirical research of sustainable human resource management systems in the Chinese enterprise context.

2. Literature Review and Definitions

2.1. Connotation of Sustainable Human Resource Management Systems and Related Evaluations

Sustainability is often defined as the ability of a society, organization, or individual to maintain, strengthen, and develop its own resources (e.g., resources, capital) from within. Corporate sustainability has become an important paradigm in the modern business landscape, reflecting the growing recognition that enterprises must strike a balance between economic growth, environmental protection, and social equity [7]. Its essence goes beyond the pursuit of mere profits, advocating for responsible practices to address environmental, social, and governance (ESG) challenges and create both short-term and long-term value [8]. Within this framework, corporate social responsibility (CSR) is regarded as the foundation of sustainable development and has given rise to classic theories such as stakeholder salience theory, legitimacy theory, and Carroll’s pyramid model. These theories collectively indicate that corporate sustainability is not merely about fulfilling compliance obligations but also involves integrating economic, social, and ecological responsibilities into strategic and governance systems through active stakeholder engagement [9], thereby promoting the widespread application of sustainable concepts in political and business spheres and enhancing enterprises’ attention to resource scarcity and externalities. At the same time, with the development of socioformation theory, scholars advocate understanding sustainability within the overall framework of “sustainable social development”. This framework centers on problem-oriented and cross-disciplinary collaboration, emphasizing the integration of multiple actors and complex system elements [10]. Based on the concepts of socioformation and complexity thinking, this theory redefines the concept of sustainability and proposes a lifestyle paradigm that combines moral concern with sustainable values—one that focuses on individual development, promotes the well-being of others, and takes into account environmental protection [11]. This lifestyle perspective constitutes the core of sustainable social development within the socioformation framework. This further indicates that, beyond the traditional “three pillars” of sustainable development (economy, society, and environment), the “human” dimension should also be a focus of attention, meaning that people can be regarded as the fourth dimension of sustainable development. However, in existing literature, the human dimension of sustainability has not been adequately discussed, especially the issue of maintaining and regenerating human resources.

Over the past few decades, given the significant role of human resource management in organizational performance, scholars’ interest in the study of human resource management has only increased rather than decreased. For instance, the AMO model (capability–motivation–offer) provides a theoretical basis for understanding how human resource practices can influence performance by enhancing employees’ capabilities, stimulating motivation, and creating opportunities; the social exchange theory helps explain how the reciprocal relationship between employees and the organization is strengthened through human resource practices. However, with the development of theories such as the social formation perspective and sustainable development, the functions and focuses of human resource management have undergone significant changes. The combination of human resource management and the fourfold goals of sustainable development (organization–society–environment–employee) is insufficient. Managers need human resource management to support enterprises in achieving sustainable development and obtaining a series of satisfactory economic, social, and environmental performances; employees need human resource management to support their own sustainable development and gain a competitive advantage in the labor market [12]. In this evolving context, the role of human resource management (HRM) urgently needs to be reexamined; it should not only focus on achieving organizational efficiency but also assume the responsibility of promoting the construction of a sustainable society. This dual demand makes the conceptual integration of sustainability and HRM imperative. From a theoretical perspective, the HRM field has long acknowledged sustainability concerns [13]. The resource-based view explicitly positions employees as scarce resources that organizations can leverage to create sustainable competitive advantages. To ensure the continuous creation of value and the sustained unleashing of employees’ potential over time, managers should leverage employees’ experience and knowledge to serve both ongoing value creation and the building of enduring competitive advantages [14]. From a practical standpoint, the future availability of human resources has become a pressing concern for corporate managers [15]. With demographic shifts in the labor market, attracting and retaining highly skilled employees has emerged as a primary challenge for HRM. The concept of sustainable development appears to offer HRM a novel approach to addressing these challenges, namely, by enhancing employees’ employability and equipping them to meet future labor market demands [16]. In summary, sustainability and HRM maintain a mutually reinforcing relationship: sustainability relies on HRM to cultivate competitive advantages in the marketplace, while HRM itself must embody sustainability principles to ensure these advantages can be maintained in the long term.

However, the academic community has yet to reach a consensus on the definition of sustainable human resource management (SHRM). Nevertheless, this has not dampened scholarly enthusiasm for exploring its conceptual dimensions. Building upon the concept of HRM and drawing from the relevant literature, particularly adopting the perspective of Cheng Bao [17] and others, this study defines sustainable human resource management (SHRM) as follows: HRM activities conducted under the guidance of sustainability management, in a non-depleting manner aimed at achieving sustainable development and performance objectives, guide employees to activate their individual value while balancing corporate benefits and corporate social responsibility (CSR).

2.2. The Connotation of Human Resource Management Systems and Related Evaluations

Research on human resource management systems first emerged in the 1990s. This concept encompasses a broad and rich scope of study, and scholars have proposed various formulations of the concept based on different classification criteria. Currently, the human resource management literature features many differently named human resource management systems, such as high-performance work systems, commitment-oriented human resource systems, high-involvement work systems, human capital enhancement systems, sustainable work systems, and others. Regarding why there exists such significant variation in the conceptualization of human resource management systems in the literature, Li Tong [18] posits that different management objectives correspond to different human resource management systems.

In the conceptual study of human resource management systems, Wright [19] started from a universal perspective and proposed a universally applicable human resource management model. Its series of measures promote the improvement of enterprise operating performance in an additive manner. Boon [20] believes that the most suitable human resource management systems for an organization should be composed of the best practices. By adopting this system, the organization not only can enhance financial performance but also can accelerate the realization of strategic goals. Jiang K [21] further pointed out that the human resource management system consists of interrelated but functionally distinct practices, aiming to help enterprises obtain sustained competitive advantages and improve organizational performance. Regarding the distinction between traditional HRM and human resource management systems, relevant studies indicate that the human resource management systems emphasize the consistency of overall HR practices and the complementarity between individual HR practices [22]. Isolated HR practices cannot effectively improve employee performance; only an integrated and complementary human resource management system yields meaningful results [23]. Currently, topics such as digital transformation, the application of artificial intelligence in human resource management, and Industry 5.0 are generating extensive discussions worldwide and are becoming the forefront of human resource management research [24]. For instance, digital transformation requires the systematic integration of big data to optimize decision making; the introduction of artificial intelligence is reshaping recruitment, training, and other processes, enhancing management efficiency [25]; however, the concept of human–machine collaboration and sustainable development advocated by Industry 5.0 prompts a system to pay more attention to employee well-being and organizational social responsibility. These trends indicate that future human resource management systems need to integrate technological innovation and humanistic care to cope with the complex and changing organizational environment. Therefore, the systematic construction of human resource management practices can provide an operational theoretical framework for the application of artificial intelligence in human resource management and can more effectively guide employee behavior and shape organizational capabilities to adapt to the requirements of digital transformation [26]. Furthermore, scholars have analyzed the relationship between human resource management systems and corporate objectives from an organizational goal perspective. Their findings suggest that all HR practices should serve corporate objectives. When conflicts arise between different HR practices, decisions should be guided by overall organizational benefits, with the most suitable human resource management systems being selected based on both internal and external environmental factors [27].

From the above analysis, it can be seen that the human resource management system is the result of systematically structuring HR management activities, with its essence being a system for managing human resources. This paper defines the human resource management system as follows: a management system that effectively utilizes limited resources such as personnel, equipment, energy, capital, and information through a series of HR management activities to enhance both the quantity and quality of an organization’s intellectual and manual labor capabilities, thereby maximizing their potential. Specifically, it constitutes an organic system comprising consistent HR practices and policies, representing the highest level of analysis for HR management activities.

2.3. Concepts Related to Sustainable Human Resource Management Systems

Scholars have provided various definitions regarding the conceptual essence of sustainable human resource management and human resource management systems. As previously discussed, the human resource management systems constitutes an organic whole composed of diverse human resource management practices, designed to assist organizations in achieving their strategic objectives [28]. Due to differences in goal orientation, distinct human resource management systems exhibit significant variations in their conceptual underpinnings. The sustainable human resource management systems are precisely the human resource management systems that center on corporate sustainable development as their core orientation. This study integrates CSR and sustainable development theories, integrates corporate social responsibility practices into human resource management practices, and systematically constructs a sustainable human resource management systems to achieve sustainable and responsible results for enterprises, aligning their goals with the well-being of society and the environment. Based on this, this paper defines the sustainable human resource management systems based on the concepts of “sustainable human resource management” and “human resource management system” as follows: centered on sustainable development management, through a systematic combination of human resource management policies and practices and a management system constructed within the organization aimed at activating individual values and achieving the coordinated development of four goals, i.e., economic performance, employee development, corporate social responsibility, and environmental protection.

This conceptualization internalizes the sustainability of sustainable human resource management systems as embodying shared responsibility toward corporate stakeholders and contributions to employee sustainable development [29]. First, compared with previous studies, the sustainable human resource management systems place greater emphasis on activating individual employee value, positioning employees’ personal sustainable development at its core rather than merely treating them as components of the social benefits dimension of sustainability. Second, the system underscores the internal alignment between HRM practices—i.e., an organization’s HRM activities should form a logically consistent “set” that emphasizes complementarity between various practices to ensure the achievement of sustainable organizational goals [30,31]. Finally, the sustainable human resource management systems also prioritize the interaction between internal and external organizational environments. When conflicts arise between different HRM practices, companies should adapt to internal and external environmental changes by prioritizing approaches that maximize overall organizational benefits, thereby achieving sustainable development objectives [32].

This concept exhibits the following core characteristics:

• Sustainability integration—deeply embedding sustainable development strategic objectives into the entire HR process, including workforce planning, recruitment, training, performance management, and employee relations.
• Systemic synergy—creating management synergy through a highly aligned and mutually reinforcing set of HR practices.
• Dynamic equilibrium—establishing a long-term balancing mechanism between employee development, organizational benefits, corporate social responsibility (CSR), and environmental protection.
• Optimal resource allocation—scientifically integrating limited resources (human capital, equipment, energy, funding, and information) to continuously enhance organizational intellectual capital and physical labor efficiency. At its core, this approach achieves sustainable human resource development and utilization, simultaneously enhancing organizational competitiveness while promoting employees’ holistic development and social value creation [33,34,35].

As shown Figure 1, enterprise sustainability integrates the human resource management system with corporate social responsibility. This paper embeds the CRS practices into the HR management practice and constructs a sustainable human resource management systems. This system takes “Socioformative projects” as the guiding concept, adheres to the principle of “local problems, global vision”, and relies on a collaborative ecosystem to promote the in-depth integration of corporate social responsibility into HR management practices. On this basis, the system forms clear structural dimensions and measures and evaluates them through scale development, ultimately driving the enterprise to achieve coordinated development in the four aspects of society, environment, employees and the organization, promoting value cocreation, and achieving the ultimate goal of sustainable development of the corporate.

3. Exploring the Structural Dimensions of Sustainable Human Resource Management Systems

3.1. Research Methodology

This study employs the grounded theory method for data analysis and coding to explore the structure and dimensions of the scale. Grounded theory, proposed by Glaser et al. [36], aims to identify core concepts reflecting social phenomena and their interrelationships through coding, thereby constructing theories from empirical data as a bottom–up inductive research approach. This method effectively addresses several limitations in traditional qualitative research, including the lack of standardized methodological support, difficulties in tracing research processes, and insufficient persuasiveness of conclusions.

This study used the grounded theory method to construct the structural dimensions of the sustainable human resource management systems, mainly based on the following considerations: Firstly, the grounded theory is applicable to exploring research topics in the field of organizational management that have not yet reached consensus. Currently, the concept of sustainable human resource management systems is not clear, and related research is relatively scarce. This method builds theories from empirical data in a bottom-up manner, which helps to deeply reveal the essence and structural characteristics of sustainable human resource management systems. Secondly, the grounded theory can extract theoretical frameworks from complex data through systematic coding of multiple sources of data. This study employed a three-level coding procedure, combined with the Chinese enterprise management context, to build a theoretical system from bottom to top, which helps to clarify the system construction standards, explore the logical relationships between categories, and provide a theoretical basis for establishing sustainable human resource management systems that are in line with the Chinese context.

3.2. Theoretical Sampling

To ensure comprehensive sampling, this study selected human resource managers (mid-level) and frontline employees (with ≥3 years of work experience) from industries including construction/real estate, machinery manufacturing, and energy/chemicals as interview subjects. The selection criteria are as follows: First, all the sample enterprises belong to industries with Chinese capital and labor-intensive characteristics, which helps to capture the characteristics and differences in management practices in different situations. Second, the sample enterprises are in the stage of transformation and development, with clear sustainable development strategies. Third, the respondents have rich industry experience. Human resource managers can explain sustainable human resource management practices from a strategic perspective, while grassroots employees provide feedback on policy implementation. This dual-perspective “management–implementation” design ensured both data comprehensiveness and enhanced the study’s persuasiveness. Based on these considerations, this study ultimately selected 21 interviewees. The recruitment process adopted a combination of formal company invitations and individual targeted invitations, supplemented by snowball sampling until the interview data reached thematic saturation. Among them, there were 7 HR managers and 14 frontline employees; 14 male and 7 female; and 4 with associate degrees, 11 with bachelor’s degrees, and 6 with master’s degrees or higher. The information of the interviewees is shown in

Table 1. Information of interviewees.

No.	Code	Gender	Age	Education	Position	Years of Work	Industry
1	DFG	Male	35	Bachelor	Frontline Employee	7	Construction/Real Estate
2	HJN	Male	44	Associate	Frontline Employee	17	Machinery Manufacturing
3	DC	Female	29	Master	Frontline Employee	5	Machinery Manufacturing
4	HJN	Male	50	Associate	Frontline Employee	24	Machinery Manufacturing
5	KMB	Female	35	Bachelor	Frontline Employee	8	Energy/ Chemical
6	SFG	Male	28	Master	Frontline Employee	4	Construction/Real Estate
7	EDA	Female	38	Bachelor	HR Manager	9	Construction/Real Estate
8	HUI	Male	35	Bachelor	HR Manager	11	Machinery Manufacturing
9	CX	Female	28	Master	Frontline Employee	4	Energy/ Chemical
10	CYV	Male	35	Bachelor	HR Manager	12	Construction/Real Estate
11	QET	Male	37	Bachelor	HR Manager	12	Energy/ Chemical
12	JIK	Female	32	Master	Frontline Employee	6	Energy/ Chemical
13	SG	Male	35	Bachelor	HR Manager	9	Energy/ Chemical
14	AWT	Male	31	Master	Frontline Employee	6	Machinery Manufacturing
15	WEF	Male	51	Associate	Frontline Employee	26	Machinery Manufacturing
16	ZP	Female	34	Bachelor	Frontline Employee	6	Construction & Real Estate
17	SG	Male	35	Bachelor	Frontline Employee	5	Construction/Real Estate
18	QDG	Male	43	Associate	Frontline Employee	18	Energy/ Chemical
19	WEF	Female	35	Master	HR Manager	8	Energy & Chemical
20	CYG	Male	36	Bachelor	Frontline Employee	8	Construction/Real Estate
21	HM	Male	37	Bachelor	HR Manager	9	Machinery Manufacturing

.

3.3. Data Collection

As previously mentioned, foreign scholars have conducted extensive theoretical discussions and empirical research on sustainable human resource management, resulting in a substantial body of literature. Therefore, the development of sustainable human resource management systems should effectively utilize these existing research findings. This study simultaneously aims to conduct an emic investigation into the conceptualization of sustainable human resource management systems in Chinese enterprises. In this context, the current state of sustainable development and HRM practices in domestic firms inevitably becomes a crucial source of information. Thus, corporate sustainability reports can serve as valuable references, while interviews can provide additional real-world contextual insights. Specifically, this study incorporates three methodological approaches in its research design: bibliometric analysis, corporate sustainability reports, and semi-structured interviews.

• Sorting of literature

This study was conducted based on core databases such as Web of Science and Scopus. Using the parallel search terms “CSR”, “sustainable development human resource management” and “social formation perspective”, a fuzzy search was conducted. Initially, 112 valid records of journal papers (articles), review papers (reviews), and conference papers (meetings) were obtained. Subsequently, the language of the articles was limited to English, and they were refined to the fields of business management and behavioral science. Papers that only mentioned the relevant concepts but did not delve deeper were excluded. Finally, 59 papers were selected, covering research results from 1995 to 2025, serving as the literature basis for the system construction. The entire screening process followed the “identification → de-duplication → screening → eligibility → exclusion → inclusion” procedure, ensuring the transparency and reproducibility of the literature selection. The specific selection flow and quality screen can be found in Appendix D.

2.

Sorting of enterprise reports

To ensure the contextual applicability of concept development, this study selected 54 sustainability reports (including CSR reports and ESG reports) published by companies listed on the “2023 China Top 100 Corporate Sustainability List” as Supplementary Materials. Through systematic content analysis, this study specifically examined the following: (1) corporate sustainability practices across HR functional areas including workforce planning, recruitment and staffing, training and development, performance evaluation, compensation management, and employee relations and (2) key sustainability topics such as environmental protection, corporate social responsibility (CSR), and stakeholder management.

3.

Sorting of interview texts

This study employed semi-structured in-depth interviews to collect textual data. Prior to conducting the interviews, the research team developed a preliminary interview guide through internal discussions and by incorporating suggestions from relevant experts. The online interviews commenced in mid-August 2024 and spanned approximately two months, with each interview session lasting between 30 and 60 min. Within one week following each interview, the audio recordings and written materials were transcribed verbatim, ultimately yielding over 80,000 Chinese characters of textual data. To conduct content analysis and text coding, this study selected the software NVivo11. This software is suitable for mixed research methods and can effectively handle various types of data such as interview texts, questionnaires, and audio images. Its advantage lies in assisting researchers in managing, exploring, and identifying the potential logical relationships within the data. Therefore, it is often used in combination with the grounded theory analysis. After numbering each enterprise sustainable development report and importing all reports into NVivo11, this study also conducted coding analysis together with the subsequent 59 articles and interview texts that were imported.

3.4. Data Coding and Analysis Process

This study adopted a three-stage coding process for bottom-up inductive analysis, following scientific research logic to gradually refine constructs through inductive analysis. First, we systematically organized literature materials, corporate reports, and interview transcripts to clarify the overall development landscape of human resource management systems in Chinese enterprises. Subsequently, grounded coding procedures were implemented to decompose, conceptualize, and reorganize the data through open coding, axial coding, and selective coding approaches, thereby facilitating theoretical emergence. The encoding process is shown in Figure 2.

• Open coding

This study employed open coding to analyze the raw data. Key statements were first extracted and labeled, after which semantically similar labels were clustered to form initial concepts. Through repeated comparisons with the original text, related concepts were then categorized into corresponding dimensions. During the coding process, concepts with a frequency of ≤2 were eliminated, and after multiple rounds of consolidation, initial categories were ultimately formed. This method ensures the scientific validity and reliability of the coding results through systematic concept extraction and category induction [37]. Through repeated coding and comparison at this stage, this study ultimately extracted 658 original statements, formed 278 initial concepts, and refined 86 clearly defined concepts (with their meanings and attributes specified). These were then elevated to categories and abstractly named according to their respective domains, resulting in the final formation of 28 initial categories. The specific process of open coding is shown in Appendix B.

2.

Axial coding

Axial coding is the process of reintegrating information from open coding to establish connections between categories, aiming to reorganize segmented data from open coding and provide a more precise refinement and explanation of phenomena. The primary objective of this stage is to conduct an in-depth analysis of a category, identifying and defining the relationships between core categories and subcategories to clarify the internal structure of specific phenomena or issues. In the analytical process, first, the 28 categories formed during the open coding phase were further clustered and synthesized to assess potential semantic and logical connections between them. Then, based on these connections, hierarchical relationships between categories were determined, distinguishing core categories from subcategories, thereby establishing a structured logical hierarchy [38,39]. Through this process, this study consolidated the 28 initial concepts derived from open coding into 13 subcategories and 5 core categories: employee rights protection, employee occupational health, employee relations management, employee training and development, and sustainable development management. The results of axial coding are presented in

Table 2. Results of axial coding.

Main Categories	Subcategories	Initial Categories
Employee rights protection	Protection of basic rights and interests	Respect for and protection of human rights, diversity and equality of opportunity
	Protection of remuneration	Pay management, implement customized incentive, implement employee welfare plan
	Democratic participation management	Employee communication and participation, democratic construction
Employee occupational health	Employee physical health	Protect human body health, pay attention to employee mental health
	Employees’ mental health
Employee relations management	Harmonious labor relationship	Maintain the relationship between employees and the company, the relationship between employees and employees, and help employees
	Balance of work and family
Employee training and development	Talent building and training	Talent introduction, brain drain management, and talent training
	Innovation and potential stimulation	Promote innovation and potential stimulation
	Career planning and development	Professional development, clear career development channel
Sustainable development management	Sustainable company governance	Good faith compliance management, risk management and internal control, scientific and technological innovation and intellectualization development
	Fulfilling social responsibilities	Contributing to society, and the preservation of the rights of stakeholders
	Advocating environmental protection	Climate change, emissions management, ecological protection

.

3.

Selective coding

The select type code is based on the main shaft type code for further analysis of the relationship between the concept category and the process of refining the core category of a higher level [40]. The core concept of this study is “sustainable human resource management systems”; according to it, the initial coding frame can be understood as a continuous guarantee of basic labor rights and interests of enterprise employees with occupational health; they promote employee career development and lifelong learning and, at the same time, ask employees to strictly abide by the compliance management and production safety management requirements, actively fulfill the corporate social responsibility (CSR), earnestly implement the relevant obligations such as environmental protection, and implement the human resource management activities of sustainable development management with practical actions [41,42,43]. Therefore, this research through the generalization of the original data and the repeated comparison of studies, according to the selection of the operation process of the coding and need to meet the theoretical characteristics of the core category, around the “sustainable human resource management systems” construction “story line” core category, deletes the code and does not conform to the connotation of the fragment in the process of content, eventually forming the five dimensions of sustainable human resource management systems framework (Figure 3).

The sustainable human resource management system is composed of five dimensions: employee rights protection, employee occupational health, employee relations management, employee training and development, and sustainable development management. Among them, employee rights protection, employee occupational health, employee relations management, and employee training and development are the core of the motivated individual value category, and the core category of sustainable development management is a new category based on the ESG framework, including the practice of the concept of sustainable company governance, fulfilling social responsibilities, and advocating environmental protection.

From the perspective of corporate social responsibility (CSR), this system is closely related to the significance theory of stakeholders, the legitimacy theory, and the Carroll Pyramid model. Employee rights protection and employee occupational health fulfill legal and ethical responsibilities and respond to the basic demands of significant internal stakeholders; employee relations management and employee training and development further expand to ethical and charitable responsibilities, promoting harmonious labor relations and employee capability development to enhance organizational legitimacy; sustainable development management integrates economic, legal, ethical, and charitable responsibilities, promoting enterprises to respond to the expectations of diverse stakeholders on a broader scale, and systematically consolidating their long-term legitimacy in the social contract. The five dimensions jointly drive enterprises from compliance to value creation, achieving the deep integration of enterprise human resource management and sustainable development, and promoting the coordinated development of organizational interests, employee development, social responsibility, and environmental protection. The relationship between the core dimensions and the corporate sustainable development goals is shown in Figure 4.

To verify the accuracy of the conclusion, after encoding and analyzing the interview texts, social media comments, news media reports, and literature materials to form the initial structural dimensions, this study added the interview data of six participants for the same cleaning, encoding, and analysis that were used for the test of theoretical saturation. No new categories and concepts were found, indicating that the above theory has reached saturation.

4. Scale Development for the Sustainable Human Resource Management Systems

4.1. Initial Scale

• Preparation of initial items

This study used deductive method and inductive method to develop the initial items of the sustainable human resource management systems scale. First of all, based on the coding results of semi-structured interviews, enterprise reports, and the relevant literature, five dimensions of the sustainable human resource management systems were established, and an initial item pool was generated using the deductive–inductive method [44]. Second, based on the existing research results of the sustainable human resource management literature collection and carding, lessons were drawn from mature sustainable human resource management and scaled to the initial scale analysis, classification, and sorting. In addition, this paper also conducted in-depth interviews with grassroots employees in Chinese enterprises, introduced the concept of sustainable human resource management systems to them, and asked them about their inner experience and psychological feelings regarding sustainable human resource management systems. This allowed us to update the initial item library of this study, resulting in a total of 13 first-order categories containing five dimensions of 156 original measurement items, with each dimension problem having more than five items overall.

2.

Item combination and downsizing

The first step is to combine similar items: (1) merge the exact same items and their statistical frequency; (2) integrate the items with different expressions but similar contents; and (3) summarize the items through an analysis of their connotation and ensure item integration is scientific [45,46]. For example, in the dimension of employee’s rights and interests, “consider employees with pay demands” and “salary welfare setting linked to the development of the employees’ expectation” are merged into “When setting salary and welfare, consider both the current demands of employees and their long-term development expectations”, which are formed after adjusting the merging process of the 82 initial items.

The second step is to refine the items using the following principles: (1) keep a clear and single item description; (2) refine or clarify considering the multiple meanings of item descriptions; (3) remove significant deviation from the item descriptions of sustainable human resource management systems; and (4) incorporate subjects mentioned many times, meaning the same item description, and do not calculate frequency [47,48,49]. For example, the original item “I like to attend the annual meeting of company organization” is related to the enterprise culture, but has no direct relation with sustainability or sustainable human resource management systems, deviating from the core construct; this article disregards it to ensure focus and to measure validity of the scale. After refining, a total of 42 meanings for a single item are extracted and retained.

The third step is abstraction and naming: (1) delete fuzzy, unrelated items; (2) specify items as words; (3) summarize and name the items [50]. For example, the original item “enterprises through various ways to support employee growth” was changed to “enterprise through professional training, promotion channels, including support employee career development”, to retain its original meaning, on the basis of enhanced items of professionalism and measurability.

The fourth step is the evaluation of content validity. To ensure the scale’s validity, the four invited reviewers assessed the applicability of the item, as well as the head of enterprise human resource management, and according to their feedback, it is revised, eventually forming five dimensions of 30 items for the initial scale [51].

4.2. Pre-Investigation and Scale Revision

• Sample selection

In this study, 30 initial measurement scales were compiled into questionnaires, which were measured using the Likert 5-point scale (1 = “completely inconsistent”, 5 = “completely consistent”), and the initial scale of sustainable human resource management systems was improved. This study conducted an electronic questionnaire survey in October 2024, collecting responses from 130 employees across 21 enterprises located in Tianjin, Guangxi, Sichuan, and other regions of China, using a unique one-link-per-participant distribution method, and obtaining 114 effective questionnaires, with an effective questionnaire rate of 87.69%. The distribution of the basic characteristics of the pre-investigation sample is shown in

Table 3. Distribution of sample characteristics in pre-investigation (N = 114).

Characteristic	Category	Frequency	Percentage (%)
Gender	Male	78	68.42
	Female	36	31.58
Age Group	18–30 years	31	27.19
	31–40 years	45	39.47
	41–50 years	26	22.81
	51 years and above	12	10.53
Education Background	Bachelor’s degree and below	61	53.51
	Master’s degree and above	53	46.49
Work Experience	0–3 years	21	18.42
	4–6 years	37	32.46
	7–10 years	30	26.32
	More than 10 years	26	22.81
Industry	Construction & Real Estate	48	42.11
	Machinery & Manufacturing	39	34.21
	Energy & Chemical	27	23

. During the exploratory factor analysis (EFA) stage, the sample size was 114 and the number of items was 30. The ratio of sample size to item number was approximately 3.8:1, which was slightly below the ideal standard of 5:1, but still within an acceptable range. Subsequently, confirmatory factor analysis (CFA) will be conducted in independent samples to further test the stability of the factor structure.

2.

Screening of items in the pre-test scale

Before the exploratory factor analysis (EFA), this study reserved 30 measurement items for project analysis through the content validity inspection, aiming at the test preparation scale or individual items of the appropriate or reliability test. Project analysis mainly includes measurement item intercommunity, reliability, and identification of inspection [52].

(1)

Commonality

Commonality means that the measurement items can explain the variation in common traits or attributes. The lower the value of commonality, the lower the degree of target constructs that can be measured by the measurement item. The items with lower commonality have less homogeneity with the scale. According to the suggestions of previous researchers, when the commonality of a certain measurement item is lower than 0.40, it should be deleted [53].

Table 4. Correlation analysis of the initial items and the total score of the sustainable human resource management systems.

Items	Total Score	Items	Total Score
Q1	0.663 ***	Q16	0.661 ***
Q2	0.251 **	Q17	0.739 ***
Q3	0.631 ***	Q18	0.179
Q4	0.605 ***	Q19	0.568 ***
Q5	0.582 ***	Q20	0.585 ***
Q6	0.555 ***	Q21	0.697 ***
Q7	0.567 ***	Q22	0.605 ***
Q8	0.159	Q23	0.581 ***
Q9	0.631 ***	Q24	0.227 *
Q10	0.472 ***	Q25	0.659 ***
Q11	0.529 ***	Q26	0.231 *
Q12	0.11	Q27	0.799 ***
Q13	0.643 ***	Q28	0.760 ***
Q14	0.585 ***	Q29	0.746 ***
Q15	0.599 ***	Q30	0.646 ***

Note: * p < 0.05; ** p < 0.01; *** p < 0.001.

shows the correlation coefficient test results between each item in the initial scale of sustainable human resource management and the total score.

After item analysis, it can be found that Q2, Q8, Q12, Q18, Q24, and Q26 do not meet the requirement of having a correlation coefficient greater than 0.4; thus, they are deleted from the initial items.

(2)

Reliability analysis

Reliability analysis, also known as the credible degree [54], refers to the measurement tools to prove that the research conclusion is based on consistent continuity and stability measurements [55]. For the Likert scale, the research in the field of social science mainly uses Cronbach’s α to estimate the reliability of the scale [56], and the following two criteria are taken into account: first, the overall Cronbach coefficient of the initial scale should be greater than 0.7; second, if the test item and the overall correlation coefficient (corrected item total correlation, CITC) are greater than 0.4, the item with Cronbach’s α coefficients less than the overall Cronbach’s α value is deleted. As shown in

Table 5. The CITC analysis of the initial scale of sustainable human resource management systems.

Item	Correction Term Total Correlation (CITC)	Coefficient α for Terms with Removed	Cronbach’s α Coefficient
Q1	0.621	0.913	0.918
Q3	0.596	0.914
Q4	0.561	0.914
Q5	0.533	0.915
Q6	0.517	0.915
Q7	0.521	0.915
Q9	0.597	0.914
Q10	0.424	0.916
Q11	0.489	0.916
Q13	0.605	0.914
Q14	0.544	0.915
Q15	0.559	0.914
Q16	0.628	0.914
Q17	0.707	0.912
Q19	0.527	0.915
Q20	0.547	0.915
Q21	0.663	0.913
Q22	0.566	0.914
Q23	0.534	0.915
Q25	0.618	0.913
Q27	0.775	0.911
Q28	0.73	0.912
Q29	0.715	0.912
Q30	0.604	0.914

, all 24 items (Q2, Q8, Q12, Q18, Q24, Q26 were deleted) meet the above criteria. So far, the initial scale of sustainable human resource management systems includes 24 items in total.

(3)

Discrimination degree

As proposed by scholars, this research uses 27% as the high- and low-threshold partition groups (the top 27% of the high group, the bottom 27% for the low group) in an independent sample t-test to investigate each item for the identification of degrees. The results showed that all items reached significant differences (p < 0.001), indicating that all items in the scale had good discrimination.

3.

Exploratory factor analysis (EFA)

This study is based on the initial inventory of 114 questionnaire data samples collected for exploratory factor analysis to explore the main dimensions of sustainable human resource management systems and the suitability between test items and dimensions. However, this study earlier used the KMO value and the Bartlett sphericity test to judge the relationship between the constructs. After running the software SPSS26.0, the sample KMO value is equal to 0.908, and Bartlett ball has a significance level of p < 0.001, which proves that constructs between common factors are suitable for exploratory factor analysis.

Then, based on the principal component analysis method and the maximum variance rotation method, the exploratory factor analysis was carried out according to the principle of factor extraction with an eigenvalue greater than 1. This gradually eliminated the factor loadings with a value of less than 0.5, ending up with five factors and 20 items.

It can be seen from

Table 6. Results of exploratory factor analysis of the initial scale of the sustainable human resource management systems.

Total Variance Explained
Component	Initial Eigenvalues			Extraction Sums of Squared Loadings			Rotation Sums of Squared Loadings a
	Total	% of Variance	Cumulative%	Total	% of Variance	Cumulative%	Total
1	7.779	38.893	38.893	7.779	38.893	38.893	6.072
2	2.180	10.899	49.791	2.180	10.899	49.791	3.994
3	1.527	7.635	57.426	1.527	7.635	57.426	3.634
4	1.324	6.622	64.048	1.324	6.622	64.048	3.584
5	1.027	5.133	69.181	1.027	5.133	69.181	3.767
6	0.694	3.470	72.651
7	0.651	3.256	75.907
8	0.571	2.855	78.761
9	0.536	2.678	81.439
10	0.511	2.553	83.993
11	0.484	2.418	86.411
12	0.447	2.235	88.646
13	0.410	2.052	90.698
14	0.382	1.909	92.607
15	0.326	1.629	94.237
16	0.287	1.434	95.671
17	0.260	1.301	96.972
18	0.250	1.251	98.223
19	0.209	1.045	99.269
20	0.146	0.731	100.000

Extraction Method: Principal Component Analysis. a. When components are correlated, sums of squared loadings cannot be added to obtain a total variance.

that the extracted five common factors explain 69.181% of the variance of the SHRMS in total, indicating that the SHRMS scale has high construct validity. In addition, the data of this study were rotated using oblique rotation (Oblimin with Kaiser Normalization) to identify the correspondence between the factors and the research items.

Table 7. Rotated component matrix of items in the initial scale of sustainable human resource management systems.

Structure Matrix
	Component					Communalities
	1	2	3	4	5
Q13	0.808	0.347	−0.251	0.208	0.295	0.672
Q14	0.72	0.264	−0.267	0.281	0.336	0.533
Q15	0.79	0.23	−0.174	0.39	0.181	0.657
Q16	0.824	0.191	−0.357	0.363	0.325	0.716
Q17	0.799	0.289	−0.462	0.301	0.486	0.736
Q25	0.783	0.317	−0.275	0.269	0.292	0.619
Q19	0.67	0.376	−0.06	0.346	0.17	0.53
Q20	0.751	0.243	−0.366	0.189	0.186	0.595
Q1	0.343	0.909	−0.329	0.309	0.393	0.837
Q21	0.344	0.831	−0.438	0.335	0.496	0.765
Q3	0.354	0.842	−0.265	0.399	0.374	0.728
Q4	0.328	0.265	−0.844	0.217	0.439	0.756
Q5	0.332	0.374	−0.859	0.269	0.2	0.775
Q6	0.322	0.33	−0.836	0.262	0.245	0.717
Q10	0.238	0.302	−0.162	0.861	0.243	0.746
Q11	0.366	0.273	−0.209	0.785	0.341	0.643
Q23	0.354	0.373	−0.284	0.819	0.208	0.699
Q7	0.229	0.449	−0.152	0.352	0.833	0.749
Q22	0.321	0.389	−0.351	0.317	0.781	0.641
Q9	0.424	0.357	−0.313	0.226	0.83	0.724
The dimensions of qualitative analysis are named	Sustainable development management	Employee rights protection	Employee occupational health	Employee training and development	Employee relations management
Extraction Method: Principal Component Analysis. Rotation Method: Oblimin with Kaiser Normalization.

shows that five common factors are aggregated after the items are rotated, which is basically consistent with the concept construction of the qualitative analysis in the previous section. The relevant descriptive statistical analysis and homogeneity variance analysis are presented in Appendix C.

The results of exploratory factor analysis indicate that the sustainable human resource management systems scale consists of five dimensions and 20 items. Among them, three items related to employee training and development (Q10, Q11, Q23) have a strong loading on a single factor, which empirically supports that this dimension has cohesion and uniqueness in the concept of the sustainable human resource management systems. The other dimensions have also been verified in a similar way. Finally, the five dimensions and items of the scale are determined as follows: employee rights protection (Q1, Q21, Q3), employee occupational health (Q4–Q6), employee relations management (Q7, Q22, Q9), employee training and development (Q10, Q11, Q23), and sustainable development management (Q13–Q17, Q25, Q19, Q20).

4.3. Formal Investigation and Scale Validation

• Data collection

The software AMOS24.0 was used for confirmatory factor analysis to further test the validity of the construct. On the advice of Fokkema and Greiff, this study used exploratory factor analysis after the formation of the scale (with a total of 20 measurement items) for the sampling investigation. Through the questionnaire star electronic platform, a total of 300 questionnaires were distributed, with 282 valid answers being collected (effective recovery rate: 94%). The statistical distribution of sample characteristics for this survey is shown in

Table 8. Distribution of characteristics of formal investigation sample (N = 282).

Characteristic	Category	Frequency	Percentage (%)
Gender	Male	184	65.25
	Female	98	34.75
Age Group	18–30 years	81	28.73
	31–40 years	109	38.73
	41–50 years	63	22.34
	51 years and above	29	10.21
Education Background	Bachelor’s degree and below	149	52.84
	Master’s degree and above	133	47.16
Work Experience	0–3 years	50	17.73
	4–6 years	87	30.85
	7–10 years	78	27.66
	More than 10 years	67	23.77
Industry	Construction & Real Estate	114	40.43
	Machinery & Manufacturing	99	35.11
	Energy & Chemical	69	24.46

.

2.

Process and results of confirmatory factor analysis

In this study, the scale structure was constructed in the AMOS software interface according to the dimensions of questionnaire scale and index composition, and then the data were imported and calculated for the model. As shown in Figure 5, the first-order factor analysis process was established by the structural equation model. The loading coefficients among the five dimensions were all above 0.5, and there was a certain degree of correlation between the dimensions. Therefore, it is assumed that the first-order factors can theoretically extract the higher-order factors.

Then, to verify the correlation between the dimensions and measurement items of the sustainable human resource management systems according to the second-order factors, the path analysis of the influencing structural equation between the variables was performed, as shown in Figure 6.

Through structural equation model analysis on the content of the scale, the fitting results were obtained (

Table 9. The verification of the fit of the factor analysis model.

Fit Index	Acceptable Range	First Order Measurements	Second-Order Measurements
CMIN		237.405	241.675
DF		160	165
CMIN/DF	<3	1.484	1.465
GFI	>0.9	0.925	0.924
AGFI	>0.9	0.901	0.903
RMSEA	<0.08	0.041	0.041
IFI	>0.9	0.978	0.978
NFI	>0.9	0.935	0.934
TLI(NNFI)	>0.9	0.973	0.974
CFI	>0.9	0.978	0.978
SRMR	<0.05	0.037	0.039

). As shown in Table 7, CMIN/DF is 1.465, GFI, AGFI, NFI, TLI, IFI, and CFI all reach the standard above 0.9, and RMSEA is 0.041 less than 0.08. Most of the fitting indexes are in line with the standard of general SEM research; thus, it can be considered that this model exhibits a good fit.

At this point, the first-order factors reflect the internal structure between dimensions, while the second-order factors are used to verify the correlation between dimensions and measurement items. The sustainable human resource management systems scale can be intuitively observed through the path analysis diagram (see Figure 6: ZBLGS represents employee rights protection, ZBLGE represents employee occupational health, ZBLGY represents employee relations management, ZBLT represents employee training and development, and ZBLZY represents continuous development management). The results of the second-order confirmatory factor analysis show that the standardized loadings of employee rights protection, employee occupational health, employee relationship management, employee training and development, and sustainable development management in the second-order factor “sustainable human resource management systems” are 0.75, 0.75, 0.77, 0.80, and 0.78, respectively. This indicates that the five dimensions of the sustainable human resource management systems have good convergent validity, and it is of theoretical significance to divide the sustainable human resource management systems into five dimensions: employee rights protection, employee occupational health, employee relations management, employee training and development, and sustainable development management.

3.

Reliability and validity analyses

(1)

Reliability test

The evaluation of scale reliability mainly includes the overall reliability of the scale and the reliability of latent variables. The overall reliability was judged according to Cronbach’s α value, and the reliability of latent variables was comprehensively judged according to Cronbach’s α value of each latent variable and CR [57,58,59]. The results of data analysis are shown in

Table 10. Reliability and convergent validity test results of the SHRMS scale.

			Estimate	S.E.	C.R.	p	CR	AVE	Cronbach’s α Value
ZBLGS1	<---	F1	1.000				0.866	0.684	0.858
ZBLGS2	<---	F1	0.819	0.049	16.860	***
ZBLGS3	<---	F1	0.653	0.045	14.560	***
ZBLGE4	<---	F2	1.000				0.819	0.602	0.811
ZBLGE5	<---	F2	1.194	0.095	12.570	***
ZBLGE6	<---	F2	0.785	0.069	11.341	***
ZBLGY7	<---	F3	1.000				0.830	0.620	0.827
ZBLGY8	<---	F3	0.884	0.065	13.641	***
ZBLGY9	<---	F3	0.783	0.062	12.697	***
ZBLT10	<---	F4	1.000				0.886	0.721	0.827
ZBLT11	<---	F4	0.996	0.058	17.135	***
ZBLT12	<---	F4	1.160	0.075	15.456	***
ZBLZY13	<---	F5	1.000				0.924	0.604	0.922
ZBLZY14	<---	F5	0.786	0.057	13.741	***
ZBLZY15	<---	F5	1.017	0.056	18.156	***
ZBLZY16	<---	F5	0.848	0.053	15.970	***
ZBLZY17	<---	F5	0.998	0.065	15.383	***
ZBLZY18	<---	F5	1.031	0.067	15.417	***
ZBLZY19	<---	F5	0.721	0.056	12.774	***

Note: *** p < 0.001; F1 = “Employee rights protection”; F2 = “Employees occupational health”; F3 = “Employee relations management”; F4 = “Employee training and development”; F5 = “Sustainable development management”. The same below.

. The Cronbach’s α value of the sustainable human resource management systems scale as a whole and each dimension is greater than 0.7, indicating that the reliability of the scale as a whole and each dimension is good. The CR value of the composite reliability of each dimension is greater than 0.7, indicating that the internal consistency between the observed variables and the latent variables is high, and the reliability of the scale passes the test.

(2)

Validity test

The convergent validity test: The results of data analysis showed that the standardized factor loading of each item ranged from 0.673 to 0.902, which was greater than 0.5 and reached the level of significance. The AVE values of the average variance extracted from each dimension ranged from 0.602 to 0.721, and all of them were greater than 0.5 to meet the standard. It can be seen that the scale developed in this study has good convergent validity.

Discriminant validity test: As shown in

Table 11. Test results of the discriminant validity of the scale of sustainable human resource management systems.

Discriminant Validity: Pearson Correlation and AVE Square Root Value
	F1	F2	F3	F4	F5
F1	0.827
F2	0.509	0.776
F3	0.471	0.473	0.787
F4	0.541	0.539	0.552	0.849
F5	0.558	0.498	0.547	0.546	0.777

Note: Oblique diagonal numbers are AVE square root values.

, the arithmetic square root of the average variance extracted from each latent variable is greater than the correlation coefficient between the latent variable and other latent variables, which indicates that the scale developed in this study has good discriminant validity. The specific content of the scale is presented in Appendix A.

5. Conclusions and Discussion

5.1. Research Conclusions

This study used qualitative and quantitative research methods to deeply explore the concept connotation, structural dimension, and measurement scale development of sustainable human resource management systems and mainly obtained the following three research conclusions:

First, the conceptual connotation of sustainable human resource management systems is defined. The concept emphasizes the core of employee individual value stimulation and achieves synergy between employee development and organizational sustainable goals through the combination of internal and external human resource management practices and dynamic adaptation to the internal and external environment.

Second, the dimensions of the concept of sustainable human resource management systems are explored. The concept of sustainable human resource management systems includes five dimensions, i.e., employee rights protection, employee occupational health, employee relationship management, employee training and development, and sustainable development management, as well as 13 sub-dimensions such as basic rights protection, democratic participation management, and harmonious labor relations.

Third, a measurement scale of sustainable human resource management systems was developed. The measurement scale consists of five dimensions and 20 measurement items. The results of data analysis show that the 20-item measurement scale has good reliability and validity, and it can measure the sustainable human resource management systems scientifically and effectively.

This study makes contributions to the existing literature in two aspects: First, it systematically constructs sustainable human resource management practices. Compared with similar concepts, strategic human resource management focuses on the organization and employee; green human resource management focuses on the organization, the environment, and employee; social responsibility-based human resource management pays attention to the organization, society, and employee; and sustainable human resource management emphasizes the coordinated development of employee, environment, society, and organization. Second, it makes structural adjustments based on the existing scales. On the one hand, it integrates fulfilling social responsibilities, environmental protection, and corporate governance under the framework of ESG into the “sustainable development management” sub-dimension; on the other hand, it sets up four dimensions pertaining to “sustainable people”, i.e., employee rights protection, employee occupational health, employee relations management, and employee training and development, aiming to stimulate individual employee value and empower employees to achieve sustainable development. In summary, the sustainable human resource management system aims to achieve the overall goal of coordinating and unifying employee, environment, society, and organization. The five dimensions it constructed are as follows: sustainable development management, employee rights protection, employee occupational health, employee relations management, and employee training and development, systematically corresponding to and supporting the achievement of the above four goals.

5.2. Theoretical Contribution

This study focuses on the construction, measurement and mechanism of sustainable human resource management systems in some enterprises in China, and its theoretical contributions are mainly reflected in the following aspects:

• It expands the theoretical connotation and structural framework of sustainable human resource management.

This study was based on in-depth interviews and field investigations with enterprises, and employed the three-level coding method of grounded theory to systematically extract the theoretical connotations and five core dimensions of the sustainable human resource management systems, including sustainable development management, employee rights protection, employee occupational health, employee relationship management, and employee training and development. The saturation test of the theory indicated that the model construction was complete. This five-dimensional structure effectively addressed the issue of insufficient localization of existing theories in capital and labor-intensive industries. The research integrated perspectives from multiple disciplines such as management, education, ecology, and social sciences, and constructed a collaborative and integrated organic system. It emphasizes promoting the continuous development of employees through education and training, and integrates multiple stakeholders to jointly achieve the sustainable goals of the enterprise. This framework provides a theoretical basis for the future construction of interdisciplinary human resource management practices that integrate artificial intelligence technology.

2.

The measurement tool of sustainable human resource management systems is developed and verified.

Based on the construction of the five-dimensional structural model, this study further transformed it into measurable items and developed a sustainable human resources management system scale with good reliability and validity through exploratory factor analysis and confirmatory factor analysis. The empirical tests based on a large sample showed that the Cronbach’s α values and combined reliability (CR) of each dimension were all above 0.7, and the convergent validity and discriminant validity reached an ideal level, indicating that the scale has high stability and applicability in the local context. This achievement not only verified the rationality of the theoretical dimensions at the measurement level, but also provided a standardized assessment tool for related empirical research and organizational diagnosis, making up for the deficiencies of quantitative research tools in this field.

5.3. Practical Implications

This research has the following three implications for Chinese enterprises carrying out human resource management activities:

First, the concept of sustainable human resource management systems establishes a clear “sustainable standard” for human resource management activities. “What kind of HRM system is sustainable?” This question has always been the key and difficult point of the systematic construction of sustainable human resource management. As the bottom criterion of the systematic and sustainable human resource management of enterprises, sustainable human resource management systems can provide a clear reference standard for a series of activities such as human resource planning, recruitment and allocation, training and development, and performance management. It has strong guiding significance for enterprises in industries such as construction, real estate, machinery manufacturing, and energy and chemical industries in China.

Second, the dimension system of sustainable human resource management systems provides multiple references for the effective development of sustainable human resource management. On the one hand, the division of the conceptual structure into five dimensions and 13 sub-dimensions provides targeted “guidance” for capital and labor-intensive enterprises in China, such as those in the fields of construction, real estate, machinery manufacturing, and energy and chemical industries, to carry out sustainable human resource management practices. On the other hand, the 5 dimensions and 13 sub-dimensions form an integrated whole, emphasizing the synergy within the system and providing guidance for enterprise management practices. For instance, in the “Sustainable development management “dimension, the organization builds a sustainable learning platform to provide training for employees. Meanwhile, employees enhance their knowledge and skills, thereby better participating in company governance, fulfilling social responsibilities, and promoting environmental protection, achieving personal sustainable development.

Finally, the scale of sustainable human resource management systems provides an operational diagnostic tool.

Enterprise managers can apply the scale to evaluate and measure the sustainability of human resource management activities in a certain enterprise. With the help of the scale, the sustainable human resource management systems can be evaluated more quickly and effectively, to help enterprises comprehensively understand the advantages and disadvantages of the current human resource management activities in sustainable development. For example, based on the scale items in the “employee rights protection” dimension, they can assess the actual situation of the enterprise regarding human rights protection systems, protection of employees’ legitimate rights and interests, and whether the management level has established an effective mechanism for grassroots employees’ feedback, thereby providing a basis for formulating improvement strategies and achieving sustainable development of the enterprise.

5.4. Deficiencies and Prospects of This Research

Although this study has made some contributions to theory construction, empirical verification, and management enlightenment, there are still some areas that need to be further improved. Based on the analysis of research design, data sources, and theoretical applicability, the limitations of this paper mainly include the following aspects, and possible directions for future research are proposed.

First, there are limitations in sample representativeness and industry applicability. This study considers construction and real estate, machinery manufacturing, and energy and chemical enterprises as the main sample sources. Although they have strong representativeness within the industry, the industry characteristics are highly concentrated in resource-based enterprises, and the sample structure is closed to a certain extent. Therefore, there may be differences in the applicability of the research conclusions when they are generalized to non-resource-based industries (such as high-tech service industries) or under different national institutional backgrounds. Future research can expand the sample scope and include more comparative cases of industries and countries, to further test the stability and adaptability of the constructed system in cross-industry and cross-cultural situations.

Second, This study employed a cross-sectional design, which, while suitable for detecting associations between variables, cannot establish causal relationships. Furthermore, although the research focused on scale development and validation using quantitative methods such as exploratory and confirmatory factor analyses (EFA and CFA), the integration between theoretical construction and analytical approaches remains insufficient. More complex statistical models have yet to be applied to thoroughly examine the pathways and boundary conditions between variables. In future work, the developed scale could be utilized in empirical studies employing statistical techniques such as structural equation modeling, path analysis, and regression models to investigate mediating mechanisms and moderating effects involving variables like organizational innovation performance. Such efforts would contribute to refining the theoretical framework and offering more practical guidance.

Third, there is still room for improvement in the depth and dynamics of the scale development. Although this study constructed and validated the scale structure through a systematic factor analysis method, the scale is mainly based on the mainstream management practices of Chinese enterprises at the current stage and has not fully considered the evolving trends of human resource management in emerging issues such as digital transformation. Future research can introduce a dynamic capability perspective or context dynamic modeling method on this basis, further expand the scale dimensions, and combine interdisciplinary concepts and artificial intelligence technology to develop social formation-oriented sustainable development projects with educational and collaborative nature, in order to better cultivate the awareness of responsible citizens and enhance the scale’s ability to capture and interpret the long-term evolution of enterprise management practices.