Employees’ Perceptions of Green Supply-Chain Management, Corporate Social Responsibility, and Sustainability in Organizations: Mediating Effect of Reflective Moral Attentiveness
Abstract
:1. Introduction
2. Literature Review
2.1. Sustainable Performance
2.2. Green Supply-Chain-Management Practices
2.2.1. Internal Environment Management (IEM) and Sustainable Performance
2.2.2. Green Purchasing and Sustainable Performance
2.2.3. Cooperation with Customers and Sustainable Performance
2.2.4. Eco-Design and Sustainable Performance
2.2.5. Investment Recovery and Sustainable Performance
2.3. Corporate Social Responsibility and Sustainable Performance
2.4. Mediating Role of Reflective Moral Attentiveness in GSCM, CSR, and Sustainable Performance
2.5. Theoretical Framework
3. Materials and Methods
3.1. Population, Sampling, and Data-Collection Methods
3.2. Measurement
3.3. Data-Analysis Techniques
3.4. Control Variables
3.5. Measurement Model
4. Structural Model
5. Discussion
6. Theoretical Contributions
7. Conclusions
8. Practical Implications
9. Limitations and Future Research Directions
Author Contributions
Funding
Institutional Review Board Statement
Informed Consent Statement
Data Availability Statement
Conflicts of Interest
Appendix A
Item Descriptions | Item No. | Loadings | Cronbach’s Alpha Values |
---|---|---|---|
Cross-functional cooperation for environmental improvements | IEM1 | 0.933 | 0.981 |
Special training for workers on environmental issues | IEM2 | 0.950 | |
ISO 14000 certification | IEM3 | 0.968 | |
Eco-labeling of products | IEM4 | 0.959 | |
The internal performance-evaluation system incorporates environmental factors | IEM5 | 0.958 | |
Generate environmental reports for internal evaluation | IEM6 | 0.966 | |
Cooperation with suppliers for environmental objectives | GP1 | 0.964 | |
Environmental audit for suppliers’ inner management | GP2 | 0.971 | |
Suppliers’ ISO 14000 certification | GP3 | 0.965 | 0.979 |
Suppliers are selected using environmental criteria | GP4 | 0.928 | |
Provision ofdesign specifications to suppliers that include environmental requirements for purchased items | GP5 | 0.970 | |
Cooperation with customers for cleaner production | CC1 | 0.925 | |
Cooperation with customers to useless energy during product transportation | CC2 | 0.911 | 0.919 |
Cooperation with customers for reverse logistical relationships | CC3 | 0.947 | |
Design of products for reuse, recycle, recovery of material, and component parts | ECO-D1 | 0.924 | |
Design of products to avoid or reduce use of hazardous products | ECO-D2 | 0.912 | 0.913 |
Design of processes for minimization of waste | ECO-D3 | 0.932 | |
Collection and recycling of end-of-life products and materials | IR1 | 0.985 | |
Investment recovery (sale) of excess inventories/materials | IR2 | 0.985 | 0.969 |
This firm is very concerned with environmental protection. | CSR1 | 0.954 | |
This firm is very concerned with customers’ benefits | CSR2 | 0.952 | 0.953 |
This firm actively participates in social initiatives | CSR3 | 0.963 | |
I regularly think about the ethical implications of my decisions | RMA1 | 0.748 | |
I think about the morality of my actions almost every day | RMA2 | 0.837 | |
I often find myself pondering about ethical issues | RMA3 | 0.818 | 0.856 |
I often reflect on the moral aspects of my decisions | RMA4 | 0.797 | |
I like to think about ethics | RMA5 | 0.779 | |
Improved compliance with environmental standards | ENP1 | 0.968 | |
Reduction in airborne emissions | ENP2 | 0.956 | |
Reduction in consumption of hazardous materials | ENP3 | 0.946 | 0.962 |
Reduction in energy consumption | ENP4 | 0.892 | |
Reduction in material usage | ENP5 | 0.893 | |
Decrease in costs for of purchases of materials. | ECP1 | 0.947 | |
Decrease in cost of energy consumption | ECP2 | 0.924 | |
Decrease in fees for waste treatment | ECP3 | 0.952 | |
Decrease in fees for waste treatment | ECP4 | 0.943 | 0.967 |
Decrease in fines for environmental accidents | ECP5 | 0.936 | |
Improved overall stakeholder welfare | SCP1 | 0.903 | |
Improvement in community health and safety | SCP2 | 0.933 | 0.955 |
Reduction in environmental effects and risks to the general public. | SCP3 | 0.920 | |
Improved occupational health and safety of employees | SCP4 | 0.934 | |
Improved awareness and protection of the claims and rights of people in the community served | SCP5 | 0.912 | |
Second-Order SP | |||
ENP | 0.981 | 0.986 | |
ECP | 0.988 | ||
SCP | 0.981 |
Appendix B
References
- Yusliza, M.; Yong, J.Y.; Tanveer, M.I.; Ramayah, T.; Faezah, J.N.; Muhammad, Z. A structural model of the impact of green intellectual capital on sustainable performance. J. Clean. Prod. 2020, 249, 119334. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Micheli, G.J.; Cagno, E.; Mustillo, G.; Trianni, A. Green supply chain management drivers, practices and performance: A comprehensive study on the moderators. J. Clean. Prod. 2020, 259, 121024. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Silvestre, B.S.; Tîrca, D.M. Innovations for sustainable development: Moving toward a sustainable future. J. Clean. Prod. 2019, 208, 325–332. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Sarkis, J. (Ed.) Greener Manufacturing and Operations—From Design to Delivery and Back; Routledge: London, UK, 2017. [Google Scholar]
- Abbas, J.; Mahmood, S.; Ali, H.; Raza, M.A.; Ali, G.; Aman, J.; Bano, S.; Nurunnabi, M. The Effects of Corporate Social Responsibility Practices and Environmental Factors through a Moderating Role of Social Media Marketing on Sustainable Performance of Business Firms. Sustainability 2019, 11, 3434. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
- Tseng, M.-L.; Islam, M.S.; Karia, N.; Fauzi, F.A.; Afrin, S. A literature review on green supply chain management: Trends and future challenges. Res. Cons. Recycl. 2019, 141, 145–162. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Sarkis, J.; Gonzalez, E.D.S.; Koh, S.L. Effective multi-tier supply chain Management for sustainability. Int. J. Prod. Econ. 2019, 217, 1–10. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Farrukh, M.; Sajid, M.; Lee, J.W.C.; Shahzad, I.A. The perception of corporate social responsibility and employee engagement: Examining the underlying mechanism. Corp. Soc. Responsib. Environ. Manag. 2019, 27, 760–768. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Reynolds, S.J. Moral attentiveness: Who pays attention to the moral aspects of life? J. Appl. Psychol. 2008, 93, 1027–1041. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
- Garavan, T.; Ullah, I.; O’Brien, F.; Darcy, C.; Wisetsri, W.; Afshan, G.; Mughal, Y.H. Employee perceptions of individual green HRM practices and voluntary green work behaviour: A signalling theory perspective. Asia Pac. J. Hum. Resour. 2022, 61, 32–56. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- World Commission on Environment and Development (WCED); Brundtland, G.H. Presentation of the Report of the World Commission on Environment and Development to the Commission of the European Communities, the EC and EFTA Countries, 5 May 1987, Brussels; World Commission on Environment and Development: Brussels, Belgium, 1987. [Google Scholar]
- Elkington, J. Towards the sustainable corporation: Win-win-win business strategies for sustainable development. Calif. Manag. Rev. 1994, 36, 90–100. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Azam, T.; Malik, S.Y.; Ren, D.; Yuan, W.; Mughal, Y.H.; Ullah, I.; Fiaz, M.; Riaz, S. The Moderating Role of Organizational Citizenship Behavior toward Environment on Relationship between Green Supply Chain Management Practices and Sustainable Performance. Front. Psychol. 2022, 13, 1–14. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
- Cankaya, S.Y.; Sezen, B. Effects of green supply chain management practices on sustainability performance. J. Manuf. Technol. Manag. 2019, 30, 98–121. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Green, K.W.; Zelbst, P.J.; Meacham, J.; Bhadauria, V.S. Green supply chain management practices: Impact on performance. Supply Chain. Manag. Int. J. 2012, 17, 290–305. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Srivastava, S.K. Green supply-chain management: A state-of-the-art literature review. Int. J. Manag. Rev. 2007, 9, 53–80. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Mardani, A.; Kannan, D.; Hooker, R.E.; Ozkul, S.; Alrasheedi, M.; Tirkolaee, E.B. Evaluation of green and sustainable supply chain management using structural equation modelling: A systematic review of the state of the art literature and recommendations for future research. J. Clean. Prod. 2019, 249, 119383. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Sharma, V.K.; Chandana, P.; Bhardwaj, A. Critical factors analysis and its ranking for implementation of GSCM in Indian dairy industry. J. Manuf. Technol. Manag. 2015, 26, 911–922. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Luthra, S.; Garg, D.; Haleem, A. The impacts of critical success factors for implementing green supply chain management towards sustainability: An empirical investigation of Indian automobile industry. J. Clean. Prod. 2016, 121, 142–158. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Chan, R.Y.; He, H.; Chan, H.K.; Wang, W.Y. Environmental orientation and corporate performance: The mediation mechanism of green supply chain management and moderating effect of competitive intensity. Ind. Mark. Manag. 2012, 41, 621–630. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Zhu, Q.; Liu, J.; Lai, K.-H. Corporate social responsibility practices and performance improvement among Chinese national state-owned enterprises. Int. J. Prod. Econ. 2016, 171, 417–426. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Vanalle, R.M.; Ganga, G.M.D.; Godinho Filho, M.; Lucato, W.C. Green supply chain management: An investigation of pressures, practices, and performance within the Brazilian automotive supply chain. J. Clean. Prod. 2017, 151, 250–259. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Eltayeb, T.K.; Zailani, S.; Ramayah, T. Green supply chain initiatives among certified companies in Malaysia and environmental sustainability: Investigating the outcomes. Resour. Conserv. Recycl. 2011, 55, 495–506. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Kirchoff, J.F.; Tate, W.L.; Mollenkopf, D.A. The impact of strategic organizational orientations on green supply chain management and firm performance. Int. J. Phys. Distrib. Logist. Manag. 2016, 46, 269–292. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Zhu, Q.; Feng, Y.; Choi, S.-B. The role of customer relational governance in environmental and economic performance improvement through green supply chain management. J. Clean. Prod. 2017, 155, 46–53. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Saeed, A.; Jun, Y.; Nubuor, S.A.; Rasika Priyankara, H.P.; Jayasuriya, M.P.F. Institutional pressures, green supply chain management practices on environmental and economic performance: A two theory view. Sustainability 2018, 10, 1517. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
- Zhang, J.; Zhang, X.; Wang, Q.; Ma, Z. Relationship Between Institutional Pressures, Green Supply Chain Management Practices and Business Performance: An Empirical Research on Automobile Industry. In Proceedings of the Thirteenth International Conference on Management Science and Engineering Management, St. Catharines, ON, Canada, 5–8 August 2019; Springer International Publishing: Berlin/Heidelberg, Germany, 2019; Volume 2, pp. 430–449. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Geng, R.; Mansouri, S.A.; Aktas, E. The relationship between green supply chain management and performance: A meta-analysis of empirical evidences in Asian emerging economies. Int. J. Prod. Econ. 2017, 183, 245–258. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
- Schmidt, C.G.; Foerstl, K.; Schaltenbrand, B. The Supply Chain Position Paradox: Green Practices and Firm Performance. J. Supply Chain Manag. 2017, 53, 3–25. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Longoni, A.; Cagliano, R. Inclusive environmental disclosure practices and firm performance: The role of green supply chain management. Int. J. Oper. Prod. Manag. 2018, 38, 1815–1835. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
- Khan, S.A.R.; Qianli, D. Impact of green supply chain management practices on firms’ performance: An empirical study from the perspective of Pakistan. Environ. Sci. Pollut. Res. 2017, 24, 16829–16844. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Malik, S.Y.; Mughal, Y.H.; Azam, T.; Cao, Y.; Wan, Z.; Zhu, H.; Thurasamy, R. Corporate Social Responsibility, Green Human Resources Management, and Sustainable Performance: Is Organizational Citizenship Behavior towards Environment the Missing Link? Sustainability 2021, 13, 1044. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Mughal, Y.H.; Jehangir, M.; Khan, M.; Saeed, M. Nexus between corporate social responsibility and firm’s performance: A panel data approach. Int. J. Finance Econ. 2020, 26, 3173–3188. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Wurthmann, K. Implicit Theories and Issue Characteristics as Determinants of Moral Awareness and Intentions. J. Bus. Ethics 2015, 142, 93–116. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Barney, J.B. Firm resources and sustained competitive advantage. J. Manag. 1991, 17, 99–120. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Jabbour, A.B.L.d.S.; Vazquez-Brust, D.; Jabbour, C.J.C.; Latan, H. Green supply chain practices and environmental performance in Brazil: Survey, case studies, and implications for B2B. Ind. Mark. Manag. 2017, 66, 13–28. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
- Hart, S.L. A natural resource based view of the firm. Acad. Manag. Rev. 1995, 20, 986–1014. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
- Wijethilake, C. Proactive sustainability strategy and corporate sustainability performance: The mediating effect of sustainability control systems. J. Environ. Manag. 2017, 196, 569–582. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Freeman, R.E. The Politics of Stakeholder Theory: Some Future Directions. Bus. Ethics Q. 1994, 4, 409–421. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Yong, J.Y.; Yusliza, M.Y.; Ramayah, T.; Chiappetta Jabbour, C.J.; Sehnem, S.; Mani, V. Pathways toward sustainability in manufacturing organizations: Empirical evidence on the role of green human resource management. Bus. Strategy Environ. 2019, 29, 212–228. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Ringle, C.M.; Wende, S.; Becker, J.M. Smart PLS 3. Bönning Stedt: Smart PLS. 2015. Available online: http://www.smartpls.com (accessed on 16 March 2023).
- Ramayah, T.; Cheah, J.; Chuah, F.; Ting, H.; Memon, M.A. Partial Least Squares Structural Equation Modeling (PLS-SEM) Using Smart PLS 3.0: An Updated Guide and Practical Guide to Statistical Analysis, 2nd ed.; Pearson: Kuala Lumpur, Malaysia, 2018. [Google Scholar]
- Hair, J.F.; Howard, M.C.; Nitzl, C. Assessing measurement model quality in PLS-SEM using confirmatory composite analysis. J. Bus. Res. 2020, 109, 101–110. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Kim, Y.J.; Kim, W.G.; Choi, H.-M.; Phetvaroon, K. The effect of green human resource management on hotel employees’ eco-friendly behavior and environmental performance. Int. J. Hosp. Manag. 2019, 76, 83–93. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Franke, G.; Sarstedt, M. Heuristics versus statistics in discriminant validity testing: A comparison of four procedures. Internet Res. 2019, 29, 430–447. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Cho, S.J.; Chung, C.Y.; Young, J. Study on the Relationship between CSR and Financial Performance. Sustainability 2019, 11, 343. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
- Malik, S.Y.; Cao, Y.; Mughal, Y.H.; Kundi, G.M.; Mughal, M.H.; Ramayah, T. Pathways towards Sustainability in Organizations: Empirical Evidence on the Role of Green Human Resource Management Practices and Green Intellectual Capital. Sustainability 2020, 12, 3228. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
- Zhang, J.; Zhao, S.; Cheng, T.C.E.; Hua, G. Optimisation of online retailer pricing and carrier capacity expansion during low-price promotions with coordination of a decentralised supply chain. Int. J. Prod. Res. 2019, 57, 2809–2827. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Esfahbodi, A.; Zhang, Y.; Watson, G.; Zhang, T. Governance pressures and performance outcomes of sustainable supply chain management—An empirical analysis of UK manufacturing industry. J. Clean. Prod. 2017, 155, 66–78. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
- Sturm, R.E. Decreasing Unethical Decisions: The Role of Morality-Based Individual Differences. J. Bus. Ethics 2015, 142, 37–57. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
Variables | n | % |
---|---|---|
Male | 344 | 90.5 |
Female | 36 | 9.5 |
25 to 30 years of age | 6 | 1.6 |
31–35 years of age | 49 | 12.9 |
36–40 years of age | 67 | 17.6 |
46–55 years of age | 140 | 36.8 |
56 and above | 118 | 31.1 |
Diploma education | 2 | 0.5 |
Undergraduate education | 71 | 18.7 |
Master’s education | 286 | 75.3 |
Doctoral education | 21 | 5.52 |
1–5 years of experience | 59 | 15.5 |
6–10 years of experience | 137 | 36.1 |
11–15 years of experience | 99 | 26.1 |
16–20 years of experience | 72 | 18.9 |
Over 20 years of experience | 13 | 3.4 |
Industry Type | ||
Sugar and cement | 95 | 25 |
Hospitality, tourism, and leisure | 57 | 15 |
Food and beverages | 68 | 18 |
Leather | 46 | 12 |
Textiles | 19 | 5 |
Agriculture and fruit processing | 53 | 14 |
Furniture | 27 | 7 |
Construction | 15 | 4 |
S# | Variables | No. of Items | Questioners Sources |
---|---|---|---|
1 | Internal environment management (IEM) | 6 | Micheli et al., 2020; Azam et al., 2022; Cankaya and Sezen, 2019 [2,13,14] |
2 | Green purchase (GP) | 5 | Micheli et al., 2020; Azam et al., 2022; Cankaya and Sezen, 2019 [2,13,14] |
3 | Eco-design (ECO-D) | 3 | Micheli et al., 2020; Azam et al., 2022 [2,13] |
4 | Care/cooperation with customers (CC) | 3 | Micheli et al., 2020; Azam et al., 2022 [2,13] |
5 | Investment recovery (IR) | 2 | Micheli et al., 2020; Azam et al., 2022; Cankaya and Sezen, 2019 [2,13,14] |
6 | Corporate social responsibility (CSR) | 3 | Abbas et al., 2019 [5] |
7 | Reflective moral attentiveness (RMA) | 5 | Garavan et al., 2022 [10] |
8 | Sustainable performance (SP) Economic performance (ECP), environmental performance (ENP) & Social performance (SCP) | 15 | Yong et al., 2019; [40] |
Constructs | Mean | Std Dev. | Kurtosis | Skewness | CR | AVE |
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
CC | 6.049 | 1.288 | −0.139 | −1.005 | 0.949 | 0.861 |
CSR | 5.732 | 1.582 | −0.472 | −0.982 | 0.970 | 0.915 |
ECO-D | 6.299 | 1.030 | 1.096 | −1.077 | 0.945 | 0.851 |
GP | 5.774 | 1.653 | −0.663 | −0.986 | 0.983 | 0.921 |
IEM | 5.740 | 1.659 | −0.579 | −1.017 | 0.984 | 0.914 |
IR | 6.468 | 0.998 | 1.141 | −1.137 | 0.985 | 0.970 |
RMA | 5.405 | 0.952 | 3.347 | −1.771 | 0.896 | 0.633 |
SP | 6.013 | 1.210 | −1.176 | −0.717 | 0.987 | 0.821 |
ENP | 6.159 | 1.128 | 0.045 | −1.084 | 0.970 | 0.868 |
ECP | 5.758 | 1.509 | −1.078 | −0.733 | 0.975 | 0.885 |
SCP | 6.067 | 1.213 | −0.776 | −0.642 | 0.965 | 0.847 |
Variables | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 |
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
1. CC | |||||||||
2. CSR | 0.837 | ||||||||
3. ECOD | 0.888 | 0.731 | |||||||
4. ECP | 0.928 | 0.931 | 0.773 | ||||||
5. ENP | 0.948 | 0.917 | 0.856 | 0.990 | |||||
6. GP | 0.924 | 0.941 | 0.765 | 0.966 | 0.966 | ||||
7. IEM | 0.881 | 0.973 | 0.729 | 0.964 | 0.959 | 0.986 | |||
8. IR | 0.879 | 0.939 | 0.780 | 0.945 | 0.970 | 0.955 | 0.953 | ||
9. RMA | 0.048 | 0.113 | 0.030 | 0.063 | 0.056 | 0.079 | 0.084 | 0.064 | |
10. SCP | 0.943 | 0.937 | 0.799 | 0.996 | 0.975 | 0.972 | 0.971 | 0.948 | 0.051 |
Hypothesis | Relationship | Std Beta | S.E | t-Value | p-Value | BCI LL | BCI UL | Support |
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
H1 | IEM→SP | 0.407 | 0.093 | 4.380 | 0.000 | 0.259 | 0.566 | Yes |
H2 | GP→SP | 0.147 | 0.086 | 1.723 | 0.043 | 0.013 | 0.294 | Yes |
H3 | CC→SP | 0.283 | 0.055 | 5.168 | 0.000 | 0.207 | 0.376 | Yes |
H4 | ECOD→SP | 0.140 | 0.026 | 5.378 | 0.000 | 0.093 | 0.178 | Yes |
H5 | IR→SP | 0.040 | 0.025 | 1.605 | 0.055 | −0.004 | 0.075 | No |
H6 | GSCM→RMA | 0.221 | 0.05 | 4.427 | 0.000 | 0.128 | 0.137 | Yes |
H7 | CSR (SP) | 0.023 | 0.050 | 0.453 | 0.325 | −0.064 | 0.102 | No |
H8 | CSR (RMA) | 0.666 | 0.047 | 14.133 | 0.000 | 0.578 | 0.75 | Yes |
H9 | RMA (SP) | 0.852 | 0.018 | 47.97 | 0.000 | 0.817 | 0.886 | Yes |
Age (SP) | 0.063 | 0.045 | 1.40 | 0.161 | −0.02 | 0.159 | No | |
Control | Gender (SP) | 0.02 | 0.021 | 0.006 | 0.32 | −0.02 | 0.059 | No |
Variables | Experience (SP) | −0.091 | 0.049 | 1.833 | 0.067 | −0.2 | 0.002 | No |
Indirect Relationships | Std Beta | S.E | T | P | BCI LL | BCI UL | Support |
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
H10 GSCM→RMA→SP | 0.188 | 0.043 | 4.344 | 0.000 | 0.11 | 0.274 | Yes |
H11 CSR→RMA→SP | 0.568 | 0.042 | 13.671 | 0.000 | 0.494 | 0.649 | Yes |
Disclaimer/Publisher’s Note: The statements, opinions and data contained in all publications are solely those of the individual author(s) and contributor(s) and not of MDPI and/or the editor(s). MDPI and/or the editor(s) disclaim responsibility for any injury to people or property resulting from any ideas, methods, instructions or products referred to in the content. |
© 2023 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
Mughal, Y.H.; Nair, K.S.; Arif, M.; Albejaidi, F.; Thurasamy, R.; Chuadhry, M.A.; Malik, S.Y. Employees’ Perceptions of Green Supply-Chain Management, Corporate Social Responsibility, and Sustainability in Organizations: Mediating Effect of Reflective Moral Attentiveness. Sustainability 2023, 15, 10528. https://doi.org/10.3390/su151310528
Mughal YH, Nair KS, Arif M, Albejaidi F, Thurasamy R, Chuadhry MA, Malik SY. Employees’ Perceptions of Green Supply-Chain Management, Corporate Social Responsibility, and Sustainability in Organizations: Mediating Effect of Reflective Moral Attentiveness. Sustainability. 2023; 15(13):10528. https://doi.org/10.3390/su151310528
Chicago/Turabian StyleMughal, Yasir Hayat, Kesavan Sreekantan Nair, Muhammad Arif, Fahad Albejaidi, Ramayah Thurasamy, Muhammad Asif Chuadhry, and Saqib Yaqoob Malik. 2023. "Employees’ Perceptions of Green Supply-Chain Management, Corporate Social Responsibility, and Sustainability in Organizations: Mediating Effect of Reflective Moral Attentiveness" Sustainability 15, no. 13: 10528. https://doi.org/10.3390/su151310528