Examining Effect of Green Transformational Leadership and Environmental Regulation through Emission Reduction Policy on Energy-Intensive Industry’s Employee Turnover Intention in China
Abstract
:1. Introduction
2. Literature Review and Hypothesis Development
2.1. Green Transformational Leadership
2.2. Factors Influencing Employee Turnover Intention
2.3. Factors Influencing Energy-Intensive Industry Employee Turnover
2.4. Green Transformational Leadership and Employee Turnover
2.5. Research Model
3. Methods
3.1. Sampling and Procedure
3.2. Measures
3.3. Data Analysis Technique
4. Empirical Analysis
4.1. The Results of Descriptive Statistics and Correlation Analysis
4.2. The Results of Validity and Reliability
4.3. The Results of Confirmation Factor Analysis and Convergent Validity
4.4. The Results of Hypotheses Testing by Using SEM Model
4.5. Heterogeneity Testing
5. Conclusions
5.1. Discussion
5.2. Managerial Implications
5.3. Limitations and Future Recommendations
Author Contributions
Funding
Data Availability Statement
Acknowledgments
Conflicts of Interest
References
- Li, M.; Mi, Z.; Coffman, D.M.; Wei, Y.M. Assessing the policy impacts on non-ferrous metals industry’s CO2 reduction: Evidence from China. J. Clean. Prod. 2018, 192, 252–261. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
- Zeng, S.; Jiang, X.; Su, B.; Nan, X. China’s SO2 shadow prices and environmental technical efficiency at the province level. Int. Rev. Econ. Financ. 2018, 57, 86–102. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Li, L.; Msaad, H.; Sun, H.; Tan, M.X.; Lu, Y.; Lau, A.K. Green innovation and business sustainability: New Evidence from Energy Intensive Industry in China. Int. J. Environ. Res. Public Health 2020, 17, 7826. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Sun, M.; Wang, Y.; Shi, L.; Klemeš, J.J. Uncovering energy use, carbon emissions and environmental burdens of pulp and paper industry: A systematic review and meta-analysis. Renew. Sustain. Energy Rev. 2018, 92, 823–833. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Fankhaeser, S.; Sehlleier, F.; Stern, N. Climate change, innovation and jobs. Clim. Policy 2008, 8, 421–429. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Dechezleprêtre, A.; Martin, R.; Bassi, S. Climate change policy, innovation and growth. In Handbook on Green Growth; Edward Elgar Publishing: Cheltenham Glos, UK, 2019. [Google Scholar]
- Long, X.; Chen, Y.; Du, J.; Oh, K.; Han, I. Environmental innovation and its impact on economic and environmental performance: Evidence from Korean-owned firms in China. Energy Policy 2017, 107, 131–137. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Shen, N.; Liao, H.; Deng, R.; Wang, Q. Different types of environmental regulations and the heterogeneous influence on the environmental total factor productivity: Empirical analysis of China’s industry. J. Clean. Prod. 2019, 211, 171–184. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Long, X.; Zhao, X.; Cheng, F. The comparison analysis of total factor productivity and eco-efficiency in China’s cement manufactures. Energy Policy 2015, 81, 61–66. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Hafstead, M.; Williams, R.C., III; Golub, A.; Meijer, S.; Narayanan, B.G.; Nyamweya, K.; Steinbuks, J. Effect of Climate Policies on Labor Markets in Developing Countries: Review of the Evidence and Directions for Future Research; The World Bank: Washington, DC, USA, 2018. [Google Scholar]
- Sierpińska-Sawicz, A.; Bąk, P. Costs of corporate bond issue in coal mining companies. Contemp. Econ. 2016, 10, 99–112. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
- Hom, P.W.; Lee, T.W.; Shaw, J.D.; Hausknecht, J.P. One hundred years of employee turnover theory and research. J. Appl. Psychol. 2017, 102, 530–545. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Amundsen, S.; Martinsen, Ø.L. Self–other agreement in empowering leadership: Relationships with leader effectiveness and subordinates’ job satisfaction and turnover intention. Leadersh. Q. 2014, 25, 784–800. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
- Dawley, D.; Houghton, J.D.; Bucklew, N.S. Perceived organizational support and turnover intention: The mediating effects of personal sacrifice and job fit. J. Soc. Psychol. 2010, 150, 238–257. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
- Hamann, R. Mining companies’ role in sustainable development: The “why” and “how” of corporate social responsibility from a business perspective. Dev. South. Afr. 2003, 20, 237–254. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Jenkins, H.; Yakovleva, N. Corporate social responsibility in the mining industry: Exploring trends in social and environmental disclosure. J. Clean. Prod. 2006, 14, 271–284. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Zhu, C.J. Human resource development in China during the transition to a new economic system. Asia Pac. J. Hum. Resour. 1998, 35, 19–44. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Song, L. State and non-state enterprises in China’s economic transition. In Routledge Handbook of the Chinese Economy; Routledge: London, UK, 2015; pp. 182–207. [Google Scholar]
- Lee, T.W.; Hom, P.W.; Eberly, M.B.; Junchao, L.; Mitchell, T.R. On the next decade of research in voluntary employee turnover. Acad. Manag. Perspect. 2017, 31, 201–221. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Tan, X.H.; Pan, X.F. The relationship between perceived organizational support, job satisfaction and turnover intention. Psychol. Sci. 2007, 30, 441–443. [Google Scholar]
- Bryman, A. Research methods in the study of leadership. In The SAGE Handbook of Leadership; Sage Publishing: New York, NY, USA, 2011; pp. 15–28. [Google Scholar]
- Bass, B.M.; Bass, R. The Bass Handbook of Leadership: Theory, Research, and Managerial Applications; Simon and Schuster: New York, NY, USA, 2009. [Google Scholar]
- Bass, B.M. Leadership and Performance Beyond Expectations; Free Press: New York, NY, USA, 1985. [Google Scholar]
- Chen, Y.S.; Chang, C.H. The determinants of green product development performance: Green dynamic capabilities 1985, green transformational leadership, and green creativity. J. Bus. Ethics 2013, 116, 107–119. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Singh, S.; Giudice, M.D.; Chierici, R.; Graziano, D. Green innovation and environmental performance: The role of green transformational leadership and green human resource management. Technol. Forecast. Soc. Chang. 2020, 150, 119762. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Mittal, S.; Dhar, R.L. Effect of green transformational leadership on green creativity: A study of tourist hotels. Tour. Manag. 2016, 57, 118–127. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Chen, Y.S.; Chang, C.H.; Lin, Y.H. Green transformational leadership and green performance: The mediation effects of green mindfulness and green self-efficacy. Sustainability 2014, 6, 6604–6621. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
- Mobley, W.H.; Griffeth, R.W.; Hand, H.H.; Meglino, B.M. Review and conceptual analysis of the employee turnover process. Psychol. Bull. 1979, 86, 493–522. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Laker, D.R. Job search, perceptions of alternative employment and turnover. J. Appl. Bus. Res. 1991, 7, 6–15. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
- Zhang, Z.; Zhao, S. Empirical research on the demission motivation of knowledge workers in less developed areas: A case study of northern Jiangsu. J. Manag. World 2007, 8, 95–103. [Google Scholar]
- Lewandowska, A.; Stopa, M. The impact of innovative professional qualifications on the sense of employment security: Evidence from Poland. Econ. Sociol. 2020, 13, 72–83. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
- Chen, J.K. Perspective on the Influence of Leadership on Job Satisfaction and Lower Employee Turnover in the Mineral Industry. Sustainability 2020, 12, 5690. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Ketkaew, C.; Manglakakeeree, O.; Naruetharadhol, P. The interrelationships of work-related factors, person-environment fit, and employee turnover intention. Cogent Bus. Manag. 2020, 7, 1823580. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Zhang, J.; Wang, F. Empirical study on the reasons for the turnover of professional managers in private enterprises: A test analysis of the turnover tendency of professional managers in private enterprises in Guangdong. J. Manag. World 2003, 9, 129–135. [Google Scholar]
- Liu, Z.; Liao, J.; Li, Z. Analysis of key influencing factors of employee voluntary dimission intention. J. Manag. Eng. 2006, 20, 142–145. [Google Scholar]
- Nazir, S.; Shafi, A.; Qun, W.; Nazir, N.; Tran, Q.D. Influence of organizational rewards on organizational commitment and turnover intentions. Empl. Relat. 2016, 38, 596–619. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Heneman, H.G.; Judge, T.A. Compensation Attitudes. Compensation in Organizations: Current Research and Practice; Wiley: Hoboken, NJ, USA, 2000; pp. 61–103. [Google Scholar]
- Egan, T.M.; Yang, B.; Bartlett, K.R. The effects of organizational learning culture and job satisfaction on motivation to transfer learning and turnover intention. Hum. Resour. Dev. Q. 2004, 15, 279–301. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Li, L.; Zhu, B.; Cai, X.; Long, X.; Park, C. Internal service quality affects salespersons’ performance and turnover intention: Mediating role of job involvement. Soc. Behav. Personal. Int. J. 2019, 47, 1–11. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Chan, K.W.; Wan, E.W. How can stressed employees deliver better customer service? The underlying self-regulation depletion mechanism. J. Mark. 2012, 76, 119–137. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
- Fournier, C.; Tanner, J.F., Jr.; Chonko, L.B.; Manolis, C. The moderating role of ethical climate on salesperson propensity to leave. J. Pers. Sell. Sales Manag. 2010, 30, 7–22. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Karatepe, O.M.; Karadas, G. Do psychological capital and work engagement foster frontline employees’ satisfaction? Int. J. Contemp. Hosp. Manag. 2015, 27, 1254–1278. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Yang, C.; Lu, Y.; Yang, Y. Organizational justice and employee turnover: The role of job embeddedness and fairness sensitivity. J. Manag. Eng. 2014, 1, 16–25. [Google Scholar]
- Gallego-Álvarez, I.; Segura, L.; Martínez-Ferrero, J. Carbon emission reduction: The impact on the financial and operational performance of international Companies. J. Clean. Prod. 2015, 103, 149–159. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Lewandowski, S. Corporate carbon and financial performance: The role of emission reductions. Bus. Strategy Environ. 2017, 26, 1196–1211. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Marks, M.L.; De Meuse, K.P. Resizing the organization: Maximizing the gain while minimizing the pain of layoffs, Divestitures, and Closings. Organ. Dyn. 2005, 34, 19–35. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Linz, S.J.; Semykina, A. How do workers fare during transition? Perceptions of job insecurity among Russian workers, 1995–2004. Labour Econ. 2008, 15, 442–458. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Slovic, P. Perception of risk. Science 1987, 236, 280–285. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
- Fischhoff, B.; Watson, S.R.; Hope, C. Defining risk. Policy Sci. 1984, 17, 123–139. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Vardaman, J.M.; Allen, D.G.; Renn, R.W.; Moffitt, K.R. Should I stay or should I go? The role of risk in employee turnover decisions. Hum. Relat. 2008, 61, 1531–1563. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
- Allen, D.G.; Renn, R.W.; Moffitt, K.R.; Vardaman, J.M. Risky business: The role of risk in voluntary turnover decisions. Hum. Resour. Manag. Rev. 2007, 17, 305–318. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Lu, W.; Wang, W.J.; Sulkowski, A.J.; Wu, J. The relationships among environmental management, firm value and other firm attributes: Evidence from Chinese manufacturing industry. Int. J. Environ. Sustain. Dev. 2011, 10, 78–95. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Nirino, N.; Santoro, G.; Miglietta, N.; Quaglia, R. Corporate controversies and company’s financial performance: Exploring the moderating role of ESG practices. Technol. Forecast. Soc. Chang. 2021, 162, 120341. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Pereira-Moliner, J.; Claver-Cortés, E.; Molina-Azorín, J.F.; Tarí, J.J. Quality management, environmental management and firm performance: Direct and mediating effects in the hotel industry. J. Clean. Prod. 2012, 37, 82–92. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Long, X.; Chen, Y.; Du, J.; Oh, K.; Han, I.; Yan, J. The effect of environmental innovation behavior on economic and environmental performance of 182 Chinese firms. J. Clean. Prod. 2017, 166, 1274–1282. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Zhang, W.; Xu, F.; Wang, X. How green transformational leadership affects green creativity: Creative process engagement as intermediary bond and green innovation strategy as boundary spanner. Sustainability 2020, 12, 3841. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Walsh, C.; Sulkowski, A.J. A greener company makes for happier employees more so than does a more valuable one: A regression analysis of employee satisfaction, perceived environmental performance and firm financial value. Interdiscip. Environ. Rev. 2010, 11, 274–282. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Robertson, J.L.; Barling, J. Greening organizations through leaders’ influence on employees’ pro-environmental behaviors. J. Organ. Behav. 2013, 34, 176–194. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Pham, H.; Kim, S.Y. The effects of sustainable practices and managers’ leadership competences on sustainability performance of construction firms. Sustain. Prod. Consum. 2019, 20, 1–14. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Wu, Y.; Zhu, Q.; Zhu, B. Decoupling analysis of world economic growth and CO2 emissions: A study comparing developed and developing countries. J. Clean. Prod. 2018, 190, 94–103. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Machiba, T. Eco-innovation for enabling resource efficiency and green growth: Development of an analytical framework and preliminary analysis of industry and policy practices. Int. Econ. Econ. Policy 2010, 7, 357–370. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Hiatt, S.R.; Grandy, J.B.; Lee, B.H. Organizational responses to public and private politics: An analysis of climate change activists and US oil and gas firms. Organ. Sci. 2015, 26, 1769–1786. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
- Lin, R.J.; Tan, K.H.; Geng, Y. Market demand, green product innovation, and firm performance: Evidence from Vietnam motorcycle industry. J. Clean. Prod. 2013, 40, 101–107. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Rehfeld, K.M.; Rennings, K.; Ziegler, A. Integrated product policy and environmental product innovations: An empirical analysis. Ecol. Econ. 2007, 61, 91–100. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
- Li, D.; Huang, M.; Ren, S.; Chen, X.; Ning, L. Environmental legitimacy, green innovation, and corporate carbon disclosure: Evidence from CDP China 100. J. Bus. Ethics 2018, 150, 1089–1104. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Qi, G.; Zou, H.; Xie, X. Governmental inspection and green innovation: Examining the role of environmental capability and institutional development. Corp. Soc. Responsib. Environ. Manag. 2020, 27, 1774–1785. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Porter, M.E.; Reinhardt, F.L.; Schwartz, P.; Esty, D.C.; Hoffman, A.J.; Schendler, A.; Rendlen, B. A strategic approach to climate. Harv. Bus. Rev. 2007, 85, 1–16. [Google Scholar]
- Linnenluecke, M.K.; Griffiths, A. Firms and sustainability: Mapping the intellectual origins and structure of the corporate sustainability field. Glob. Environ. Chang. 2013, 23, 382–391. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Galbreath, J. Corporate governance practices that address climate change: An exploratory study. Bus. Strategy Environ. 2010, 19, 335–350. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Ueno, T. Technology transfer to China to address climate change mitigation. Issue Brief 2009, 9, 1–31. [Google Scholar]
- Street, T.D.; Lacey, S.J.; Somoray, K. Employee stress, reduced productivity, and interest in a workplace health program: A case study from the Australian mining industry. Int. J. Environ. Res. Public Health 2019, 16, 94. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
- Palea, V.; Drogo, F. Carbon emissions and the cost of debt in the eurozone: The role of public policies, climate-related disclosure and corporate governance. Bus. Strategy Environ. 2020, 29, 2953–2972. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Pereira, V.; Malik, A.; Sharma, K. Colliding employer-employee perspectives of employee turnover: Evidence from a born-global industry. Thunderbird Int. Bus. Rev. 2016, 58, 601–615. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
- Rehman, S.U.; Kraus, S.; Shah, S.A.; Khanin, D.; Mahto, R.V. Analyzing the relationship between green innovation and environmental performance in large manufacturing firms. Technol. Forecast. Soc. Chang. 2020, 163, 120481. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Jensen, J.M.; Patel, P.C.; Messersmith, J.G. High-performance work systems and job control: Consequences for anxiety, role overload, and turnover intentions. J. Manag. 2013, 39, 1699–1724. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Goodman, E.A.; Boss, R.W. The phase model of burnout and employee turnover. J. Health Hum. Serv. Adm. 2002, 25, 33–47. [Google Scholar] [PubMed]
- Kuranchie-Mensah, E.B.; Amponsah-Tawiah, K. Employee motivation and work performance: A comparative study of mining companies in Ghana. J. Ind. Eng. Manag. 2016, 9, 255–309. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
- Cameron, K. A study of organizational effectiveness and its predictors. Manag. Sci. 1986, 32, 87–112. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Delmas, M.A.; Nairn-Birch, N.S. Is the Tail Wagging the Dog? An Empirical Analysis of Corporate Carbon Footprints and Financial Performance. 2011. Available online: https://escholarship.org/uc/item/3k89n5b7 (accessed on 13 April 2021).
Measurements | Types | Numbers | Percentage |
---|---|---|---|
Gender | Female | 147 | 27.7 |
Male | 384 | 72.3 | |
Marriage | Married | 392 | 73.8 |
Not married | 139 | 26.2 | |
Type of industry | Iron or steel | 84 | 15.8 |
Construction | 91 | 17.1 | |
Mining or oil energy industry, thermal power | 149 | 28.2 | |
Transportation industry | 159 | 29.9 | |
Pharmaceutical or chemical Fertilizer industry | 48 | 9.0 | |
Age | 29 and under | 151 | 28.4 |
30–39 years | 312 | 58.8 | |
40 and above | 68 | 12.8 | |
Education | High school | 55 | 10.4 |
3–years college | 111 | 20.9 | |
4–years university | 158 | 29.8 | |
Master’s degree | 151 | 28.4 | |
Ph.D. | 56 | 10.5 | |
Income level | Less than RMB 5000 monthly | 48 | 9.0 |
Between RMB 5001 and 8000 | 156 | 29.4 | |
Between RMB 8001 and 11,000 | 165 | 31.1 | |
Between 11,001 and 14,000 | 120 | 22.6 | |
Over RMB 14,001 | 42 | 7.9 | |
Company size | 1–499 employees | 40 | 7.5 |
500–999 employees | 66 | 12.4 | |
1000–1499 employees | 210 | 39.6 | |
1500–1999 employees | 55 | 10.4 | |
Over 2000 employees | 160 | 30.1 | |
Location | East area | 255 | 48.0 |
Central area | 212 | 39.9 | |
West area | 64 | 12.1 | |
Job experience | More than 1 year but less than 5 years | 224 | 42.2 |
More than 5 years but less than 10 years | 245 | 46.1 | |
More than 10 years but less than 15 years | 40 | 7.5 | |
Over 15 years | 22 | 4.2 |
1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | 10 | 11 | 12 | 13 | |
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
crp1 | 1.000 | ||||||||||||
ptr2 | 0.277 *** | 1.000 | |||||||||||
gtl3 | 0.278 *** | −0.350 *** | 1.000 | ||||||||||
ti4 | 0.316 *** | 0.620 *** | −0.255 *** | 1.000 | |||||||||
gender5 | 0.089 ** | 0.054 | 0.001 | 0.024 | 1.000 | ||||||||
marriage6 | −0.074 * | −0.086 ** | −0.061 | −0.116 *** | −0.014 | 1.000 | |||||||
industry7 | 0.062 | 0.0306 *** | −0.226 *** | 0.400 *** | −0.052 | −0.099 ** | 1.000 | ||||||
age8 | 0.082 * | −0.072 * | 0.133 *** | −0.006 | 0.027 | −0.291 *** | 0.048 | 1.000 | |||||
education9 | 0.105 ** | 0.323 *** | −0.238 *** | 0.432 *** | −0.024 | −0.015 | 0.224 *** | −0.175 *** | 1.000 | ||||
income10 | 0.108 ** | 0.242 *** | −0.091 | 0.333 | 0.071 | 0.104 | 0.189 | 0.115 *** | 0.171 *** | 1.000 | |||
size11 | −0.069 | 0.012 | −0.028 | 0.001 | −0.123 *** | 0.200 *** | −0.085 | −0.241 *** | 0.100 ** | −0.058 *** | 1.000 | ||
location12 | 0.088 | 0.013 | 0.027 | 0.101 | 0.048 | 0.069 | −0.241 | −0.114 | −0.119 | 0.105 | 0.082 | 1.000 | |
experience13 | 0.051 | −0.026 | 0.080* | −0.049 | −0.078 * | −0.508 *** | 0.111 ** | 0.613 *** | −0.132 *** | −0.069 | −0.231 *** | −0.283 | 1.00 |
mean | 3.47 | 3.24 | 2.72 | 3.43 | 1.28 | 1.26 | 2.99 | 1.84 | 3.08 | 2.91 | 3.43 | 1.64 | 1.73 |
sd | 0.63 | 0.78 | 0.72 | 0.70 | 0.45 | 0.44 | 1.21 | 0.62 | 1.15 | 1.09 | 1.25 | 0.69 | 0.77 |
Max | 5 | 5 | 5 | 5 | 2 | 2 | 5 | 3 | 5 | 5 | 5 | 3 | 4 |
Research Concepts and Measurements | Cronbach’s Alpha | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 |
---|---|---|---|---|---|
Carbon emission reduction policy (Variance = 23.68%) | |||||
[1] For energy intensive enterprises, government implemented specified energy conservation and emission reduction policy | α = 0.872 | 0.082 | 0.092 | 0.859 | 0.109 |
[2] For energy intensive enterprises, the government supervised specified policies on coal consumption usage | 0.194 | 0.226 | 0.718 | 0.108 | |
[3] For energy intensive enterprises, government implemented carbon emission trading | 0.124 | 0.121 | 0.745 | 0.149 | |
[4] For energy intensive enterprises, government implemented furthers taxation of carbon emissions | 0.180 | 0.031 | 0.856 | 0.083 | |
Turnover risk perception (Variance = 18.72%) | |||||
[1] Please indicate how often, after the implementation of emission reduction policies, I worried about this job further | α = 0.926 | −0.145 | 0.858 | 0.112 | 0.199 |
[2] In the past 1 year, I have worried and uncertainty about this job | −0.180 | 0.771 | 0.163 | 0.308 | |
[3] I have often concerned about this job’s further | −0.234 | 0.712 | 0.147 | 0.322 | |
[4] I have been perceived the risk of loss job | −0.151 | 0.859 | 0.109 | 0.194 | |
Green transformational leadership (Variance = 17.40%) | |||||
[1] Our organizational leader has a long−term ideal environmental vision | α = 0.898 | 0.819 | −0.196 | 0.166 | −0.125 |
[2] Our organizational leader provides a clear environmental plan to follow | 0.799 | −0.150 | 0.118 | −0.151 | |
[3] Our organizational leader encourages employees to achieve environmental goals | 0.879 | −0.092 | 0.113 | −0.059 | |
[4] Our organizational leader stimulates employees to think about green ideas | 0.877 | −0.109 | 0.078 | −0.056 | |
[5] Our organization leader encourages employees to achieve low carbon innovation | 0.815 | −0.152 | 0.19 | −0.053 | |
Turnover intention (Variance = 14.26%) | |||||
[1] In the past 6 month to 1 year, I have been often looking for a new job opportunity | α = 0.850 | −0.191 | 0.300 | 0.193 | 0.765 |
[2] I am planning to leave my current company within 6 months or 1 year | −0.073 | 0.263 | 0.161 | 0.812 | |
[3] I do not have a intention for a long−term work in this company | −0.101 | 0.284 | 0.104 | 0.814 |
Research Variables | Factor Loading | Standard Loading | Variances | t−Value | CR | AVE | Square Root of AVE |
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
Carbon emission reduction policy | 1 | 0.864 | 0.16 | − | 0.904 | 0.707 | 0.841 |
0.72 | 0.646 | 0.341 | 15.894 | ||||
0.695 | 0.638 | 0.332 | 15.645 | ||||
0.954 | 0.873 | 0.133 | 22.832 | ||||
Turnover risk perception | 1 | 0.848 | 0.234 | − | 0.914 | 0.727 | 0.853 |
0.921 | 0.821 | 0.246 | 22.523 | ||||
0.919 | 0.781 | 0.323 | 20.944 | ||||
0.963 | 0.848 | 0.217 | 23.624 | ||||
Green transformational leadership | 1 | 0.812 | 0.235 | − | 0.950 | 0.724 | 0.851 |
1.031 | 0.82 | 0.235 | 19.792 | ||||
1.038 | 0.817 | 0.244 | 19.416 | ||||
0.987 | 0.789 | 0.269 | 18.622 | ||||
0.919 | 0.78 | 0.246 | 28.251 | ||||
Turnover intention | 1.054 | 0.815 | 0.236 | 18.512 | 0.889 | 0.729 | 0.854 |
1.02 | 0.783 | 0.254 | 17.885 | ||||
1 | 0.789 | 0.218 | − |
Summary of the Hypothesis Path | Estimate Coefficient | Bias−Corrected 95% CI | Result | |
---|---|---|---|---|
Lower | Upper | |||
Carbon emission reduction policy → employees’ turnover intention | 0.202 *** | 0.103 | 0.298 | Supported |
Carbon emission reduction policy → employees’ turnover risk perception | 0.392 *** | 0.285 | 0.485 | Supported |
Employees’ turnover risk perception → turnover intention | 0.593 *** | 0.462 | 0.684 | Supported |
Carbon emission reduction policy → employees’ turnover risk perception → turnover intention | 0.232 *** | 0.308 | 0.178 | Supported |
Green transformational leadership → employees’ turnover risk perception | −0.481 *** | −0.568 | −0.381 | Supported |
Green transformational leadership → turnover intention | −0.129 ** | −0.234 | −0.018 | Supported |
Green transformational leadership → employees’ turnover risk perception → turnover intention | −0.285 *** | −0.360 | −0.220 | Supported |
Variables | Model (1–1) Tintention | Model (1–2) Tintention | Model (2) Ptrisk | Model (3–1) Ptrisk | Model (3–2) Tintention |
---|---|---|---|---|---|
logmcrp1 | 0.345 *** | 0.265 *** | 0.370 *** | 0.296 *** | 0.153 *** |
(0.0491) | (0.0428) | (0.0585) | (0.056) | (0.0384) | |
logmtrp2 | 0.379 *** | ||||
(0.0295) | |||||
gender3 | 0.001 | −0.007 | 0.0276 | 0.02785 | −0.0181 |
(0.0220) | (0.0193) | (0.0262) | (0.0250) | (0.0168) | |
marriage4 | −0.066 *** | −0.0888 *** | −0.0632 ** | −0.0535 ** | −0.0685 ** |
(0.0232) | (0.0228) | (0.0278) | (0.0296) | (0.0200) | |
age5 | −0.018 | 0.108 | −0.0465 ** | −0.0496 ** | −0.0296 * |
(0.0165) | (0.018) | (0.020) | (0.0232) | (0.0156) | |
education6 | 0.074 *** | 0.0618 *** | 0.0051 *** | ||
(0.0079) | (0.0102) | (0.0071) | |||
income7 | 0.056 *** | 0.0469 *** | 0.0383 *** | ||
(0.0082) | (0.0023) | (0.00730) | |||
size8 | 0.0006 | 0.0030 | −0.0005 | ||
(0.0072) | (0.0093) | (0.0063) | |||
location9 | 0.032) ** | 0.0588 *** | 0.0099 | ||
(0.0032) | (0.0172) | (0.0117) | |||
experience10 | −0.0119 | 0.0347 | −0.0326 ** | ||
(0.016) | (0.0212) | (0.0143) | |||
Constant | 0.9034 | 0.574 | 0.819 | 0.4093 | 0.4186 |
(0.0800) | (0.0088) | (0.0954) | (0.1147) | (0.0783) | |
Observations | 531 | 531 | 531 | 531 | 531 |
R−squared | 0.102 | 0.338 | 0.081 | 0.208 | 0.497 |
Variables | Model (4–1) Tintention | Model (4–2) Tintention | Model (5) Ptrisk | Model (6–1) Tintention | Model (6–2) Tintention |
---|---|---|---|---|---|
logmcrp | 0.446 *** | 0.345 *** | 0.437 *** | 0.221 *** | 0.191 *** |
(0.0478) | (0.0431) | (0.0538) | (0.0447) | (0.0412) | |
logmtrp | 0.434 *** | 0.350 *** | |||
(0.0327) | (0.0317) | ||||
logmgtl | −0.303 *** | −0.214 *** | −0.382 *** | −0.111 *** | −0.080 ** |
(0.0366) | (0.033) | (0.0205) | (0.0348) | (0.0324) | |
gender | −0.005 | −0.011 | 0.020 | −0.0133 | 0.189 |
(0.0207) | (0.0186) | (0.0232) | (0.0179) | (0.0168) | |
marriage | −0.067 ** | −0.0929 *** | −0.061 ** | −0.038 ** | −0.0716 *** |
(0.0212) | (0.022) | (0.028) | (0.0191) | (0.0199) | |
age | −0.003 | 0.021 | −0.031 | −0.007 | 0.0321 ** |
(0.0156) | (0.1730) | (0.0210) | (0.0135) | (0.0156) | |
education | 0.0633 *** | 0.042 *** | 0.048 *** | ||
(0.0078) | (0.0967) | (0.072) | |||
income | 0.0521 *** | 0.0398 *** | 0.0381 *** | ||
(0.0794) | (0.0100) | (0.0073) | |||
size | 0.0019 | 0.005 | 0.0001 | ||
(0.007) | (0.009) | (0.0063) | |||
location | 0.0325 ** | 0.059 *** | 0.0117 | ||
(0.0128) | (0.016) | (0.0116) | |||
experience | −0.023 | 0.028 | −0.0329 ** | ||
(0.0158) | (0.0190) | (0.0143) | |||
Constant | 1.053 *** | 0.720 *** | 0.671 *** | 0.603 *** | 0.485 *** |
(0.077) | (0.088) | (0.110) | (0.075) | (0.260) | |
Observations | 531 | 531 | 531 | 531 | 531 |
R-squared | 0.198 | 0.375 | 0.305 | 0.398 | 0.493 |
Variables | Model (1) logmturn1 | Model (2) logmturn1 | Model (3) logmturn1 | Model (4) logmturn1 | Model (5) logmturn1 |
---|---|---|---|---|---|
Steel Industry | Construction | Mining and Oil Energy Industry | Auto Industry | Chemical Industry | |
logmcrp | 0.0713 | 0.462 *** | 0.141 ** | 0.0659 | 0.144 * |
(−0.152) | (−0.111) | (−0.0691) | (−0.0505) | (−0.0835) | |
logmtrp | 0.458 *** | 0.215 *** | 0.179 *** | 0.150 *** | 0.368 *** |
(−0.0883) | (−0.0794) | (−0.0628) | (−0.0407) | (−0.12) | |
logmgtl | −0.204 * | −0.0259 | −0.0573 | −0.0465 | 0.111 |
(−0.106) | (−0.078) | (−0.0567 | (−0.0382) | (−0.111) | |
gender | 0.00308 | −0.00766 | −0.0585 * | 0.0158 | 0.014 |
(−0.0511) | (−0.0469) | (−0.0346) | (−0.0249) | (−0.0588) | |
marriage | −0.284 *** | −0.0696 | −0.0459 * | 0.0196 | 0.00642 |
(−0.0777) | (−0.0478) | (−0.0265) | (−0.0188) | (−0.0554) | |
age | 0.144 ** | −0.00644 | 0.0223 | 0.0122 | 0.0278 |
(−0.0627) | (−0.0405) | (−0.0247) | (−0.0182) | (−0.0409) | |
education | 0.0536 ** | 0.103 *** | 0.0399 ** | 0.00705 | 0.0412 *** |
(−0.0228) | (−0.0208) | (−0.0165) | (−0.00781 | (−0.0132) | |
income | 0.0692 *** | 0.0157 | 0.0135 | 0.00832 | 0.0119 |
(−0.0238 | (−0.02) | (−0.0159) | (−0.0078) | (−0.0153) | |
size | 0.0084 | 0.0118 | −0.00416 | −0.000281 | −0.00114 |
(−0.0201) | (−0.016) | (−0.0112) | (−0.00857) | (−0.0136) | |
location | 0.00867 | 0.112 ** | 0.0267 | 0.00203 | −0.0159 |
(−0.0356) | (−0.0447) | (−0.0205) | (−0.0137) | (−0.0345) | |
experience | −0.186 *** | −0.00742 | −0.0214 | −0.0146 | −0.0179 |
(−0.0543) | (−0.0418) | (−0.0236) | (−0.018) | (−0.032) | |
Constant | 0.753 *** | −0.129 | 0.809 *** | 0.992 *** | 0.423 * |
(−0.251) | (−0.196) | (−0.16) | (−0.113) | (−0.297) | |
Observations | 84 | 91 | 149 | 159 | 48 |
R-squared | 0.655 | 0.695 | 0.265 | 0.178 | 0.548 |
Variables | Model (1) logmturn1 | Model (2) logmturn1 | Model (3) logmturn1 | Model (4) logmturn1 | Model (5) logmturn1 | Model (6) logmturn1 |
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
Males | Females | Less 1500 | Over 1500 | Under University | Above University | |
logmcrp | 0.239 *** | 0.123 | 0.128 ** | 0.350 *** | 0.201 *** | 0.143 *** |
(0.0479) | (0.100) | (0.0544) | (0.0702) | (0.0634) | (0.0456) | |
logmtrp | 0.374 *** | 0.473 *** | 0.398 *** | 0.388 *** | 0.363 *** | 0.252 *** |
(0.0371) | (0.0716) | (0.0409) | (0.0534) | (0.0445) | (0.0415) | |
logmgtl | −0.103 ** | −0.114 * | −0.0870 ** | −0.115 ** | −0.0989 ** | 0.0129 |
(0.0399) | (0.0668) | (0.0427) | (0.0553) | (0.0448) | (0.0436) | |
marrige | −0.0898 *** | −0.0763 * | −0.0744 ** | −0.0573 * | −0.115 *** | −0.0144 |
(0.0242) | (0.0406) | (0.0308) | (0.0321) | (0.0296) | (0.0225) | |
age | 0.0110 | 0.0509 | 0.0335 | −0.0225 | 0.0378 * | −0.0229 |
(0.0192) | (0.0319) | (0.0229) | (0.0287) | (0.0224) | (0.0185) | |
income | 0.0526 *** | 0.0280 ** | 0.0456 *** | 0.0381 *** | 0.0660 *** | 0.0184 ** |
(0.00907) | (0.0135) | (0.0103) | (0.0110) | (0.0121) | (0.00728) | |
location | −0.00607 | 0.00175 | −0.00308 | 0.00735 | −0.00661 | 0.0100 |
(0.0150) | (0.0197) | (0.0138) | (0.0286) | (0.0152) | (0.0171) | |
jobexp | −0.0399 ** | −0.0645 | −0.0200 | −0.0354 | −0.0506 ** | −0.00896 |
(0.0164) | (0.0415) | (0.0224) | (0.0236) | (0.0200) | (0.0179) | |
Constant | 0.616 *** | 0.640 *** | 0.616 *** | 0.492 *** | 0.595 *** | 0.822 *** |
(0.0890) | (0.151) | (0.101) | (0.134) | (0.104) | (0.0907) | |
Observations | 384 | 147 | 316 | 215 | 324 | 207 |
R-squared | 0.476 | 0.423 | 0.433 | 0.517 | 0.452 | 0.312 |
Variables | Model (1) logmturn1 | Model (2) logmturn1 | Model (3) logmturn1 | Model (4) logmturn1 | Model (5) logmturn1 |
---|---|---|---|---|---|
East | Central | West | Less 5 Years | More 5 Years | |
logmcrp | 0.113 * | 0.309 *** | 0.146 * | 0.342 *** | 0.0400 |
(0.0632) | (0.0637) | (0.0845) | (0.0617) | (0.0548) | |
logmtrp | 0.306 *** | 0.343 *** | 0.118 | 0.340 *** | 0.340 *** |
(0.0462) | (0.0485) | (0.105) | (0.0469) | (0.0415) | |
logmgtl | −0.0328 | −0.151 *** | −0.105 * | −0.139 *** | −0.00735 |
(0.0466) | (0.0575) | (0.0619) | (0.0523) | (0.0413) | |
gender | −0.00745 | −0.0194 | 0.0347 | −0.00675 | −0.0137 |
(0.0256) | (0.0279) | (0.0269) | (0.0262) | (0.0212) | |
marrige | −0.0661 * | 0.00490 | 0.0034 | −0.0266 | −0.0195 |
(0.0372) | (0.0259) | (0.0002) | (0.0257) | (0.0522) | |
age | 0.00693 | −0.00307 | 0.0259 | 0.0211 | −0.00137 |
(0.0228) | (0.0208) | (0.0337) | (0.0260) | (0.0211) | |
edu | 0.0441 *** | 0.0750 *** | 0.0116 | 0.0766 *** | 0.0297 *** |
(0.0117) | (0.0119) | (0.0118) | (0.0121) | (0.00860) | |
income | 0.0662 *** | 0.0174 * | 0.00837 | 0.0238 ** | 0.0455 *** |
(0.0127) | (0.0100) | (0.0196) | (0.0107) | (0.0101) | |
size | −0.00150 | 0.000923 | 0.00371 | 0.00547 | −0.00466 |
(0.0123) | (0.00929) | (0.0128) | (0.00978) | (0.00916) | |
Constant | 0.497 *** | 0.303 ** | 1.034 *** | 0.207 * | 0.621 *** |
(0.130) | (0.123) | (0.181) | (0.114) | (0.121) | |
Observations | 255 | 212 | 64 | 224 | 307 |
R-squared | 0.442 | 0.628 | 0.159 | 0.653 | 0.352 |
Publisher’s Note: MDPI stays neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations. |
© 2021 by the authors. Licensee MDPI, Basel, Switzerland. This article is an open access article distributed under the terms and conditions of the Creative Commons Attribution (CC BY) license (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/).
Share and Cite
Li, L.; Zhu, B.; Che, X.; Sun, H.; Tan, M. Examining Effect of Green Transformational Leadership and Environmental Regulation through Emission Reduction Policy on Energy-Intensive Industry’s Employee Turnover Intention in China. Sustainability 2021, 13, 6530. https://doi.org/10.3390/su13126530
Li L, Zhu B, Che X, Sun H, Tan M. Examining Effect of Green Transformational Leadership and Environmental Regulation through Emission Reduction Policy on Energy-Intensive Industry’s Employee Turnover Intention in China. Sustainability. 2021; 13(12):6530. https://doi.org/10.3390/su13126530
Chicago/Turabian StyleLi, Liang, Bangzhu Zhu, Xiahui Che, Huaping Sun, and Meixuen Tan. 2021. "Examining Effect of Green Transformational Leadership and Environmental Regulation through Emission Reduction Policy on Energy-Intensive Industry’s Employee Turnover Intention in China" Sustainability 13, no. 12: 6530. https://doi.org/10.3390/su13126530