Environmental Corporate Social Responsibility, Green Talent Management, and Organization’s Sustainable Performance in the Banking Sector of Oman: The Role of Innovative Work Behavior and Green Performance

Abstract

While moving towards sustainable performance, organizations try to create a win-win situation not only for the organization itself but for the planet and society as well. The main aim of this study is to examine the linkage between environmental corporate social responsibility (ECSR), green talent management (GTM), and organization’s sustainable performance. The study also investigates the impact of ECSR and GTM towards sustainable performance through transformational leadership, employees’ innovative work behavior (IWB), and green performance (GP). The results of the present study show that ECSR directly influences the sustainable performance and GTM of an organization. Similarly, green hard and soft talent management (TM) both have direct and positive links with employees’ IWB and GP. Another important finding is the significant and direct relationship of both IWB and GP of employees towards the sustainable performance of an organization. The moderating role of transformational leadership exerts a significant moderating influence between green hard TM and IWB. However, the moderating role of transformational leadership between green soft TM and IWB and the moderating role of transformational leadership between GTM and employee’s GP proves insignificant. The findings of this study can help the organizations to understand the importance of engaging in environmentally sustainable activities and to support and recognize the significance of green values and competencies within their employees.

1. Introduction

In 2015, most countries vowed to achieve sustainable development goals (SDGs) and develop their sustainable development agendas to preserve a better living for future generations [1,2]. It resulted from the fact that conventionally, organizations were responsible for their shareholders, and their primary objective was to earn profit and maximize their wealth. Due to SDGs nowadays, the increasingly complex and ambiguous business environments not only demand a response to environmental concerns but also to take care of the needs of the stakeholders. It has become imperative for firms to be responsible for a wider group of stakeholders, and thus, they have certain responsibilities, which are known as corporate social responsibility (CSR).

CSR activities are considered one of the ways to improve a firm’s sustainable performance [3]. Organizations have adopted it as a core value and try to adopt initiatives that can show their commitment to multiple stakeholders [4]. Importantly, organizations’ focus is now on environmental corporate social responsibility (ECSR) at workplaces [5], and while delivering value to employees via CSR activities, organizations are now compelled to invest in their talent management (TM) practices. The TM challenge is imperative for the firms to gain a competitive advantage, therefore, they try to recruit and motivate such people who can respond and shape future challenges [6]. The global war for TM is one of the major challenges for organizations to respond to the United Nations’ SDGs to foster sustainable performance as organizational leaders face difficulty in developing and retaining talented staff for organizational sustainability [7]. Hence, it has been observed that the concept of TM needs to be updated to green talent management (GTM) to recognize sustainable performance and develop green human capital so that it could have the right talent to promote green initiatives at the workplace. GTM is an emerging concept by which leaders try to systematically attract, nurture, and retain the right talent [8]. It consists of “green soft TM” and “green hard TM” to help to attract, identify, select, nurture, retain, and put in place such employees that have green-centered skills and values along with the potential to promote green initiatives, green performance (GP), and innovative work behavior (IWB) [9] in an organization. Green practices are now an important part of certain functions in business organizations, and management tries to embrace the awareness of green sustainable practices among the employees [10]. It helps the firms to achieve sustainable performance and gain a competitive edge over other firms. Thus, within the organization, GTM can be a crucial strategic domain for the success and survival of the organization [7].

While moving towards sustainable performance, organizations try to create a win-win situation not only for the organization itself but for the planet and society as well. It has a close connection with the concept of ECSR as organizations that effectively integrate ecological, environmental, and social performance achieve a robust competitive advantage [3]. Increasing awareness of environmental concerns is imperative and can play a key role in sustainability and links with the ECSR concept. Today, ECSR has become an emerging area in management literature, therefore, its significance for society is continuously increasing. The intended outcomes of ECSR and GTM practices complement each other as many organizations with generic CSR also consider adopting exemplary TM strategies, policies, and programs [4]. These strategies will enhance organizational environmental performance and enhance sustainable performance. This process mainly involves linking business goals and objectives with systematic thinking and extensive collaborations of employees in certain green tasks. Throughout this process, the role of leadership is vital for developing a shared vision for constant organizational learning. For sustainable practices, ECSR and GTM would also complement each other in terms of sustainable performance.

This study makes some novel contributions to management and sustainability literature. Initially, to our best knowledge, this is the first study that attempts to understand the impact of ECSR, GTM practices, and leadership style towards employee IWB and green performance (GP) for sustainable performance. The focus of the previous research has mainly remained on treating the contributions of generic CSR and talent management in business as independent of each other [6,11,12,13]. Current debates could not pay sufficient attention to identify the linkage between ECSR and TM, which, in our case, is GTM, and to what extent they may be mutually supportive to each other. The outcomes of TM practices have been widely investigated in the literature in different sectors, including the manufacturing and services industry [8,14,15,16]. However, the impact of GTM through its dimensions (green hard and soft TM) on employees’ IWB and GP has not been mainly explored [9]. Due to the uncertain global environment, it is also crucial to learn how leadership style affects the relationship between GTM and employees’ IWB and their GP. In terms of sustainable performance, the previous literature has mainly focused on environmental, social, or economic performance separately [1]. This research paper integrates these three elements into one component to close this gap.

Lastly, it has also been observed that the majority of ECSR research has been undertaken in Western nations, highlighting the need for further studies in developing countries to improve the generalizability of the results [5]. In developing nations, such as Oman, where consumers are becoming more conscious of environmental degradation and related social concerns and want organizations to uphold their corporate social obligations, the concept of ECSR is becoming more prevalent. The Oman National Plan 2040 and its results provide considerable weight to the national objectives and sustainability standards [17]. Exploring the influence of ECSR on employees’ IWB and GP via GTM and its ultimate effect on sustainable performance in a developing nation (Oman) is focal in broadening the ECSR area. As a result, our empirical focus on Oman is both relevant and contemporary.

The above-mentioned facts and literature gaps have motivated the development of the framework of this study. The research intends to explore the influence of ECSR practices on sustainable performance. The main objective of the study is to examine the link between ECSR and GTM, which has been neglected in previous research. This study contributes to the literature by evaluating the role of ECSR and taking into consideration GTM, employees’ IWB, and GP toward sustainable performance. It also explores the moderating effect of transformational leadership between GTM to IWB and GTM to employees’ GP within the context of the banking sector. The outcome of this study will provide valuable insights to the professionals and management of organizations to incorporate ECSR and GTM for improving sustainable performance. The coming section of the paper will discuss the theoretical background and research framework with hypotheses development. After this, the methodology section, which will be followed by the results of the data analysis and implications. Lastly, the limitations, suggestions for future research, and conclusion of the study will be provided.

2. Conceptual Framework and Hypotheses

On the basis of the literature review, this paper attempts to develop a framework for direct and indirect relationships. The conceptual model, which is presented in Figure 1, contextualizes the interactions among different variables.

2.1. ECSR to Sustainable Performance

Nowadays, there is a dramatic shift toward the understanding of the role of CSR in certain business activities, and this concept received attention in discussions of sustainability and the environment. CSR is a broad notion as it can be defined from different viewpoints and approaches. It incorporates policies and procedures into management processes and operations to consider stakeholders’ long-term economic, social, and environmental interests [18]. The value of CSR increases with the emergence of and fast expansion of environmental management. Therefore, ECSR can be considered as the organizational responsibility to reconsider their operations, products, and facilities for not only minimizing their waste, emissions, and adverse effects but also to maximize the efficiency and productivity of the resources [5]. Worldwide, organizations initiate ECSR programs to minimize environmental effects, and these organizations consider that together, their financial and environmental performance will work to promote growth and social credibility and eventually improve their sustainable performance [19]. Within the context of stakeholder theory [20], the internal stakeholders of the organizations, including leaders and managers, can affect organization-wide strategies, including work efficiency and environmental performance. ECSR and sustainable performance literature can use this theoretical approach as it can guide how organizations can engage in social and environmental practices voluntarily [18]. By embedding social responsibility agendas and particularly ECSR activities, organizations can deal with the increasing concerns and demands of the stakeholders towards sustainability. Previous studies have supported the role of CSR in sustainable performance. It has been argued that CSR commitments are positively linked with the social and environmental performance of organizations [21]. It has also been observed that CSR has a significant positive impact on sustainable performance [22]. From this discussion, we propose the following hypothesis:

H1. 

The ECSR and the sustainable performance of an organization are positively related to each other.

2.2. ECSR and GTM

Attracting and utilizing the abilities of talent is perceived as an important source of an organization’s competitiveness, and there is a concern for the managers and leaders to attract the right talent [23]. One important component of TM is to create an employer brand that can attract the best talent, and CSR can be considered to have the potential to not only build the image but to attract and retain the employees [13]. It has been observed that organizations with higher CSR activities tend to provide sustainable employability as compared to organizations with lower CSR activities [24]. Within the signaling theory [25,26], people tend to interpret information about an organization as a “signal” related to the working conditions and the profile of the organization and try to trace out what it would be like to be a part of that organization. Information about the organization helps people to form their opinions about the organization and its environment. It has been observed that organizations tend to give signals through CSR that they have concerns for their employees to attract prospective employees [6]. Importantly, within the context of ECSR, the organizations signal that they care for the environment, and individuals may interpret this signal as if the organizations have environmental concerns. This signal not only helps to provide norms and values of the organizations to prospective employees but enables them to attract the right talent. The CSR activities and TM practices are considered to complement each other as organizations with strong CSR performance outcomes are also known to have adopted exemplary TM strategies, programs, and policies [4]. At present, the development of ECSR and GTM are both crucial. The center of previous research has mostly remained the environmental stakeholders, and the relationship between employees and ECSR is less studied [27]. Moreover, previous studies on CSR mainly focused on macro-level exploration, and little emphasis is given to the internal stakeholders [28]. From the literature, it was found that there is a significant relationship between CSR and TM [12,13]. However, the empirical research on the concept and role of GTM through its dimensions of green hard and soft TM is inadequate and needs significant attention [9,29]. Green soft TM can be considered a significant component of TM, which aims to attract and retain employees who are environmentally conscious by using effective communication, involving the team in the decision-making process, and providing organizational support to the leaders [9]. Meanwhile, green hard TM is considered a systematic and goal-driven aspect where organizations manage their human resources using strict performance appraisal systems, a hierarchical organizational culture, and bureaucratic structures to gain a competitive edge and achieve environmental sustainability goals [29]. The present study will add to the literature on CSR and TM by examining the potential relationship between ECSR and GTM, and from the discussion, we propose the following hypotheses:

H2a. 

The ECSR and green hard TM are positively related to each other.

H2b. 

The ECSR and green soft TM are positively related to each other.

2.3. GTM, IWB, and Transformational Leadership

IWB is generally considered as how individuals could facilitate the achievement of intentional generation, promotion, and realization of new and useful ideas, processes, products, services, or processes within a work role, group, or organization [30]. In the service industry, the IWB of the people is a key factor that can positively contribute to the performance of the business. IWB can be achieved through a broad set of behaviors, including opportunity exploration, recognizing the problems, transferring ideas into results, and strategically planning these results into organizational commitments [31]. In today’s world, organizations need employees who are competent to develop, manage, and deploy smart technologies that will give support to organizations’ technical processes toward green initiatives [9]. IWB could be a drive behind organizational innovation, hence, motivating employees through TM can induce IWB among the staff [32]. An organization’s TM strategies define its TM practices that can help to improve performance. For sustainable development, IWB can be an important means to improve employees’ green engagement and eventually leads to sustainable organizational performance and competitive advantage. In some studies, the generic TM and employees’ job outcomes have been examined [33,34]. However, the impact of TM on employee’s job outcomes as IWB is yet unclear from their findings [9]. Particularly, it has been observed that there is limited research on the influence of GTM through its green hard and soft dimensions on job outcomes [7].

Moreover, effective leadership can have a crucial role in the IWB of the employees. Leadership support seems to be vital to endorse an enabling environment to cultivate talent. A transformational leadership style is needed to manage the talent and to initiate their IWB. Transformational leadership is intellectually stimulating to foster an innovative work environment [9]. It is a process where the leaders have the idealized role models, and they not only motivate and support their mentoring followers but also stimulate and encourage IWB to achieve organization-wide shared vision and goals to achieve organizational performance [35]. Transformational leaders can work positively toward the IWB of the employees for green initiatives of the organizations. Previous work has less focused on the role of leadership towards innovative behavior, and there are some studies with inconsistent results showing variation in the relationship between transformational leadership and IWB [31,35]. The limited studies have focused on the moderating role of transformational leadership between TM and IWB, as employees with talent might not necessarily translate to IWB, and this relationship could be strengthened or weakened by the leadership style. In the literature on GTM, the study of Odugbesan et al. [9] is the only study on the relationship of GTM, IWB, and transformational leadership and found that transformational leadership could only significantly moderate the relationship between green hard TM and employee’s IWB in higher education institutes but not between green soft TM and employee’s IWB. Hence, there is a need to explore this relationship in other sectors to find a better understanding. In line with these arguments, the present study provides an in-depth theoretical and empirical analysis of the relationship between TL, GTM, and IWB, and we propose the following hypotheses:

H3a. 

Green hard TM has a direct and positive influence on the IWB of employees.

H3b. 

Green soft TM has a direct and positive influence on the IWB of employees.

H4a. 

The relationship between green hard TM and IWB of employees can be moderated by transformational leadership.

H4b. 

The relationship between green soft TM and IWB of employees can be moderated by transformational leadership.

2.4. GTM to GP of Employees

Performance can be a set of tasks or work behaviors that are designed to accomplish certain job requirements or organizational goals [36]. Employee performance is a function of several important factors, which can be generated by certain HRM practices [37], and it refers to the activities specified in the job description and mandated, monitored, and rewarded by their organizations [10]. To deal with environmental pressures, the traditional measures and criteria of employee job performance appear to be inadequate. Therefore, there is a dire need to generate the concept of employees’ GP of a job. In terms of green HRM context, employees’ GP can be those activities that are related to the environment and are described in the employees’ description and mandated, supervised, and rewarded by their organizations [37]. Employees’ GP is influenced by organizational cultures, required work behaviors, top management’s environmental support, and societal expectations [38]. Within organizations, traditional TM practices positively impact the employee’s performance [39,40]. Moreover, it is also observed that if employees are engaged in green activities, they will support the environment-friendly programs of the organization and will work accordingly to achieve environment-related goals, which will help to increase their performance [41]. However, the relationship between GTM and employees’ GP has not been explored.

Besides, leadership and HRM are both involved in developing an organization’s internal competencies and capabilities to manage the talent, and for sustainability, it has been emphasized that both are needed to create and support the internal competencies to achieve green practices [42]. The match between leaders and employees plays an integral role in achieving organization-wide goals, and talent can be retained if talented employees have a positive perception of their leaders [43]. Support from leadership is crucial for human capital development, and leadership styles have certain effects on employee’s skills, knowledge, capabilities, commitments, and performance [44]. Among the different leadership styles, transformational leadership is an effective style that can play a critical role in employee creativity and performance [45]. It is the style where the leaders are role models to inspire followers, challenge them to be creative, have concerns for their needs, and overall help to improve their performance [46]. In the case of sustainability, such leaders encourage, inspire, and support employees to explore new ideas to improve their GP [10], as the environmental commitments of top management influence employees’ commitments too. The empirical studies have found positive effects of transformational leadership and a range of outcomes, including green creativity of employees [38], green HRM practices [42], employee job satisfaction and psychological safety [46], TM [47], and green engagement and performance of employees [41]. Despite the aforesaid focus of the research on transformational leadership, its impact on GTM and GP of employees requires not only scholarly but also managerial attention. Therefore, the present study proposes the following hypotheses:

H5a. 

Green hard TM and GP of employees are directly related to each other.

H5b. 

Green soft TM and GP of employees are directly related to each other.

H6a. 

The relationship between green hard TM and GP of employees can be moderated by transformational leadership.

H6b. 

The relationship between green soft TM and GP of employees can be moderated by transformational leadership.

2.5. IWB to Sustainable Performance

Nowadays, organizations focus on competition, and they need to constantly adapt to changes for development [48]. Innovation is often a key indicator of how to improve the performance of an organization as it leads to sustainability by trying to utilize the available and pending technologies to defend against challenging business environments. The organizations try to cultivate innovation-supportive environment for the employees to enhance performance [49]. For sustainability, the employees try to extend their job tasks to include innovative ideas and activities to successfully influence the environmental impacts of the organization [50]. In the previous research, it was argued that the adoption of innovative green practices by employees would result in the improvement of green/environmental performance [37]. Company performance is reflected in employee performance, and it is worth emphasizing that high and low employee performance affects the company’s performance in general [43]. It has been observed that organizations that focus on the IWB of their employees are more successful in gaining market share [49]. Despite the recognition of IWB as an important element for an organization’s performance and success, limited work has been done to examine the relationship from an individual perspective [30]. There are some studies to understand the direct and indirect link between IWB and the performance of organizations [48,51,52], however, there is a dearth of research to understand the direct link between IWB and the sustainable performance of an organization. To fill this research gap, the present proposes the following hypothesis:

H7. 

IWB and the sustainable performance of an organization are directly related to each other.

2.6. GP to Sustainable Performance

An organization’s performance can be influenced by both internal and external factors. While dealing with internal factors, employees’ performance has critical value in achieving organizational goals and performance. Employees’ performance can be their ability to perform a skill in their work, and GP is the employees’ performance that supports the company’s environment-friendly activities and programs [41]. Such activities are specifically defined in the employees’ job description and are monitored and rewarded. For sustainability, organizations need to adopt GP standards for employees. In the presence of an organization’s environmental initiatives and green practices, employees try to contribute to these green practices and help to achieve sustainable development goals [53]. They not only try to work for sustainability, resource conservation, and avoid harm, but they also encourage others towards such initiatives [54]. All such efforts improve the sustainable performance of the organizations. The previous work has focused mainly on employees’ performance towards organizational performance [55]. Furthermore, attention has also been paid to employee commitment [56], the role of employees’ green behavior [57], and green teams’ performance [58] towards sustainable performance but not on the employees’ GP at the individual level within the organizations [50]. Since an organization’s sustainable performance cannot be achieved without the contributions of the individuals, a strong relationship between employees’ GP and organizational sustainable performance can be identified. Therefore, the GP of employees has critical importance and value to achieving sustainable goals and performance of an organization. Accordingly, GP is presumed to be positively associated with an organization’s sustainable performance. Hence, the present study proposes the following hypothesis:

H8. 

Employees’ GP is directly and positively associated with the sustainable performance of an organization.

In the next section, we will present the research methodology of the study.

3. Research Methodology

Due to the role of the banking community toward environment protection activities and sustainability, this study was carried out in the banking sector of Oman. The banking community can play an important role in creating and maintaining a green revolution. Financial institutions can create a “go-green” policy internally and encourage clients to embrace green technology by offering various incentives and penalty mechanisms [59]. As per the Oman National Plan 2040, the achievement of sustainability through green and environment-related policies is the priority of the nation [17,60]. The present study used primary data in the form of a survey of employees of the selected commercial banks from two cities. For the data collection, the selection of the banks was purposefully done based on their engagement with CSR initiatives. After the initial assessment, we approached the spokespersons of the selected banks in two cities and employees who decided to agree to participate in the survey.

Owing to the privacy concerns of the banks, the spokespersons of the selected branches managed to collect the data from employees of different work units on behalf of the researchers. The participants of the study were randomly selected. They had different managerial positions and had at least one year of working experience in this sector. They were knowledgeable about the key constructs of the study. Participation in the study was voluntary, anonymous, and confidential.

3.1. Survey Measurements

To measure dependent, independent, and moderating variables, the validated scales were adapted from previous studies, thus, reliability and validity of the instruments were already established. We used a five-point Likert scale with “1”: being “strongly disagree” and “5” being “strongly agree”.

Dimensions of the ECSR were measured by adapting the work of De Roeck and Farooq [61], whereas the dimensions of GTM were assessed by adjusting the scale used by Ogbeibu et al. [29]. Transformational Leadership was measured by a scale used by Lin et al. [62]. For IWB, we adapted the dimensions from the work of Tri et al. [63] and GP from the work of Pham et al. [37]. Finally, sustainable performance was measured by adapting a comprehensive scale from the work of Asadi et al. [64] (Appendix A). Two faculty members and three bank managers reviewed and approved the content validity, clarity, and accuracy. After pre-testing, some changes were made according to the comments from the reviewers.

3.2. Demographics

For the survey, 800 questionnaires were distributed in both cities (400 each). After some repeated visits, 259 (64.75%) were received back from one city, and 167 (41.75%) were received back from the other. This way, a total of 426 were received back from both cities, and, after initial screening, 389 were useful for data analysis. A total of 276 (71%) males and 113 (29%) females participated in the study. Most of the respondents were aged between 31–40 years, and about 42.67% had experience of 4–6 years in the banking sector.

4. Data Analysis and Results

In the present study, partial least squares structural equation modeling (PLS-SEM) using the SmartPLS (4.0) software was used to test the proposed hypotheses. This tool allowed the examination of a set of relationships between one or more independent and dependent variables, irrespective of the characteristics of the variables as continuous or discrete [65]. Furthermore, the reflective measurement model was evaluated, and then the structural model was tested.

4.1. Measurement Model

Initially, the measurement model for the reflective items was analyzed. As in

Table 1. Reliability and Validity.

Item Code	Factor Loading	Cronbach’s Alpha	Composite Reliability (CR)	Average Variance Extracted (AVE)	VIF
Environmental CSR
ECSR1	0.775	0.864	0.908	0.712	1.636
ECSR2	0.836				2.024
ECSR3	0.875				2.503
ECSR4	0.886				2.621
Employees’ Green Performance
EGPF1	0.845	0.804	0.885	0.719	1.806
EGPF2	0.825				1.600
EGPF3	0.873				1.881
Green Hard TM
GHTM1	0.775	0.833	0.875	0.503	3.200
GHTM2	0.755				3.574
GHTM3	0.752				3.980
GHTM4	0.745				2.035
GHTM5	0.637				2.052
GHTM6	0.648				2.240
GHTM7	0.635				2.387
Green Soft TM
GSTM1	0.764	0.858	0.895	0.591	1.922
GSTM2	0.838				3.347
GSTM3	0.858				3.465
GSTM4	0.826				2.321
GSTM5	0.615				1.489
GSTM6	0.683				1.650
Innovative Work Behavior
IWB1	0.771	0.809	0.861	0.51	2.301
IWB2	0.792				2.724
IWB3	0.778				2.278
IWB4	0.623				1.479
IWB5	0.665				3.189
IWB6	0.635				3.135
Sustainable Performance
SPERF1	0.617	0.917	0.929	0.504	1.938
SPERF2	0.723				2.783
SPERF3	0.747				2.320
SPERF4	0.651				1.799
SPERF5	0.691				1.962
SPERF6	0.712				2.052
SPERF7	0.735				2.096
SPERF8	0.759				2.351
SPERF9	0.660				1.899
SPERF10	0.690				2.098
SPERF11	0.796				3.082
SPERF12	0.685				2.282
SPERF13	0.744				2.464
Transformational Leadership
TRNLDER1	0.907	0.968	0.972	0.793	4.278
TRNLDER2	0.897				4.293
TRNLDER3	0.892				3.936
TRNLDER4	0.874				3.460
TRNLDER5	0.894				3.883
TRNLDER6	0.866				3.634
TRNLDER7	0.893				4.427
TRNLDER8	0.895				4.163
TRNLDER9	0.898				4.312

, the Cronbach’s Alphas, and composite reliability for all the constructs was above 0.7, which is considered as the threshold value for both [66]. The values of average variance extracted (AVE) and outer loadings were used to determine the convergent validity of the constructs. In the case of loadings, most of them were above the threshold value of 0.7, but few items had values close to 0.7. However, previous research argues that reflective items with loadings greater than 0.5 can be retained in the model [67]. Hence, these items were retained in the model except one item (GSTM7), as the loading was very low. AVE values for all the constructs were greater than 0.5, which is the threshold value of AVE [68]. It indicates that all the items were relevant to their respective constructs and explained more than 50% variance.

Discriminant validity was assessed using the Heterotrait–Monotrait ratio (HTMT). As shown in

Table 2. Discriminant Validity (HTMT Ratio).

Constructs	1	2	3	4	5	6	7
1. Environmental CSR
2. Employees’ Green Performance	0.631
3. Green Hard TM	0.527	0.561
4. Green Soft TM	0.633	0.703	0.627
5. IWB	0.560	0.532	0.701	0.677
6. Sustainable Performance	0.653	0.878	0.698	0.854	0.595
7. Transformational Leadership	0.023	0.033	0.056	0.054	0.095	0.118

, the values of the HTMT ratio were <0.90, which explains the discriminant validity of the constructs [69].

4.2. Structural Model

Next, the structural model was assessed, and the significance of path coefficients was checked. As in

Table 3. Hypothesis Testing (Bootstrapping @5000 subsample).

Path Description		β	SD	t	p Values	Conclusion
H1	ECSR → Sustainable Performance	0.193	0.063	3.083	0.002 ***	Accepted
H2a	ECSR → Green Hard TM	0.452	0.082	5.524	0.000 ***	Accepted
H2b	ECSR → Green Soft TM	0.548	0.061	8.931	0.000 ***	Accepted
H3a	Green Hard TM → IWB	0.386	0.066	5.808	0.000 ***	Accepted
H3b	Green Soft TM → IWB	0.400	0.060	6.713	0.000 ***	Accepted
H4a	Transformational Leadership × Green Hard TM → IWB	0.146	0.077	1.900	0.058 *	Accepted
H4b	Transformational Leadership × Green Soft TM → IWB	−0.065	0.064	1.009	0.313	Rejected
H5a	Green Hard TM → Employees’ GP	0.191	0.065	2.961	0.003 ***	Accepted
H5b	Green Soft TM → Employees’ GP	0.480	0.069	6.973	0.000 ***	Accepted
H6a	Transformational Leadership × Green Hard TM → Employees’ GP	−0.017	0.053	0.324	0.746	Rejected
H6b	Transformational Leadership × Green Soft TM → Employees’ GP	−0.068	0.061	1.126	0.260	Rejected
H7	IWB → Sustainable Performance	0.178	0.047	3.790	0.000 ***	Accepted
H8	Employees’ GP → Sustainable Performance	0.576	0.057	10.104	0.000 ***	Accepted

Note: * p < 0.10 and *** p < 0.001.

, the nine direct relationships were significant. The moderating effect of transformational leadership between green hard TM and IWB was significant, but the moderating effect of transformational leadership between green soft TM and IWB was not significant. It indicates that transformational leadership can strengthen the relationship between green hard TM and IWB.

The moderating effect of transformational leadership between green hard TM and GP was not significant. Similarly, the moderating effect of transformational between green soft TM and GP was also not significant. It shows that transformational leadership cannot strengthen the relationship between green TM and GP.

After this, the levels of R² (Coefficient of determination) were assessed. The R² value of 0.64 for sustainable performance indicates that together ECSR, employees’ IWB, and GP account for a 64% variance in sustainable performance. Similarly, the R² value of 0.471 indicates that green hard and soft TM accounts for 47.1% variance in IWB. Moreover, R² value of 0.381 shows that green hard and soft TM accounts for 38.1% variance in the GP of the employees. Finally, the R² values 0.204 and 0.300 show that ECR accounts for 20.4% and 30% variance in green soft and hard TM, respectively. The R² values of 0.26, 0.13, and 0.02 are described as substantial, moderate, and weak, respectively [70]. Hence, we can assume that the relationships between our endogenous constructs and their respective exogenous constructs are substantial and moderate.

The effect size (f²) was used to evaluate the changes in R² values when the exogenous variables were omitted from the structural model. The effect sizes for the present study were calculated based on the f² score interpretation of Cohen [70], which is 0.35 as a large effect, 0.15 as a medium, 0.02 as a small, and <0.02 as a trivial effect. ECSR had a medium effect of 0.257 and 0.071 on green hard TM and sustainable performance, while ECSR had a large effect of 0.429 on green soft TM. Green hard TM had a medium effect of 0.040 and 0.192 on employees’ GP and IWB. Similarly, green soft TM had a medium effect of 0.253 and 0.206 on employees’ GP and IWB, respectively. Next, the employee’s GP had a large effect of 0.609, and IWB had a medium effect size of 0.065 on the sustainable performance of an organization.

In the end, the predictive relevance (Q²) was assessed for the validity of the model [71]. All the values for the endogenous constructs were more than zero, which indicates the predictive relevance and validity of the model.

5. Discussion

The banking sector represents an important sector of the service industry in achieving the sustainable goals of a country by adopting sustainable practices and supporting environment-friendly initiatives. Organizations have realized the necessity of ECSR practices to obtain a competitive edge as the general public’s awareness of environmental issues has grown [5]. This study is novel as it tried to investigate the relationship between ECSR, GTM, and an organization’s sustainable performance through IWB, employees’ GP, and transformational leadership. Initially, we found that ECSR directly influences the sustainable performance and GTM of an organization. The finding is congruent with the findings of some other studies [13,18,19,21,28]. Importantly, the previous work examined mainly the significance of the context of generic CSR on sustainable performance and TM. Similarly, the present study found that green hard and soft TM both have direct and positive links with employees’ IWB and GP. These findings are similar to some previous studies that found a positive influence of TM on different job outcomes, including IWB, turnover intentions, and employees’ performance [8,9,29,55,72]. Another important finding is the significant and direct relationship of both employees’ IWB and GP towards the sustainable performance of an organization. These findings are similar to some studies that found IWB, and employees’ individual and team performance can impact organizational environmental performance [49,51,58,73]. These findings indicate that adopting environmentally friendly initiatives and enabling a creative environment can help an organization achieve sustainable performance.

While taking into consideration the contribution of leadership to fostering innovative behavior and performance of the employees, this study found that the moderating role of transformational leadership exerts a significant moderating influence between green hard TM and IWB. This result is different from the work done by Odugbesan et al. [9], where they found that transformational leadership can weaken the relationship between green hard TM and IWB. However, the moderating role of transformational leadership between green soft TM and IWB was insignificant. This result is similar to the work done by Odugbesan et al. [9]. These results indicate that exhibiting foster communion, inclusiveness in decisions and flexible controls, transformational leadership can help to neutralize the green hard TM and will enable the employees to exhibit their creativity. While talking about the moderating role of transformational leadership between GTM and GP, the study found an insignificant relationship. These findings are different from the findings of Obedgiu et al. [74], who found that transformational leadership moderates the relationship between TM and employees’ performance. These results indicate that within the organizations, instead of indirect involvement, transformational leaders can directly influence their employees by having flexible controls and involving them in the decision-making process related to sustainable goals and achievements. It will not only enable them to exhibit their creative ideas but will also foster their green performance.

5.1. Theoretical Implications

Prior research on TM has yielded meaningful results. However, only a handful of studies have examined GTM via its hard and soft dimensions. In the previous work, the outcomes of CSR, TM, and the antecedents to organizational performance were investigated. The present study is the first one to simultaneously investigate the ECSR, GTM, employees’ IWB, and GP as the antecedents of sustainable performance of an organization, together with the moderating role of transformational leadership. Moreover, previously sustainable performance was mainly limited to environmental, social, or economic performance individually [21,42,48,73]. This study tries to fill this gap by investigating all three domains of sustainable performance and extending previous literature by investigating antecedents of sustainable performance. The findings confirmed that the ECSR, GTM, IWB, and GP of the employees are significant antecedents of the sustainable performance of an organization. Importantly, it is worth underlining that the focus of the previous work was on the role of generic CSR, TM, and green HRM instead of ECSR and GTM [3,11,12,13,19]. The inclusion of these two aspects is an important theoretical contribution that can also have a valuable practical contribution. Finally, the moderating role of transformational leadership towards GTM and IWB provides insight into the indirect role of leadership to attract, develop, and retain a knowledgeable workforce to gain long-term benefits.

5.2. Practical Implications

The findings of the study provide some meaningful implications for practitioners and policymakers to establish guidelines for promoting ECSR and GTM in the banking sector. It is identified that through ECSR and GTM, the organizations can stimulate the IWB and GP of employees to lead to sustainable performance and competitive advantage of the organizations. These findings suggest that organizations need to nurture and retain their talent to promote environmental sustainability. Organizations should not only be engaged in environmentally sustainable activities but should encourage and recognize the importance of green values and competencies among their employees. They should educate, train, and involve their employees regarding environmental issues and organizational initiatives. Employees with green skills and commitments need to be recognized as vital organizational sources and should be supported to develop and disseminate green initiatives within the organizations. By doing this, employees will be motivated, and this will be helpful to nurture their IWB and GP.

On the basis of the indirect role of leadership, organizations, particularly the banking sector, need to develop intense leadership patterns to support green skills developments and sustainability values among their employees. Organizational control should be able to foster staff mentoring, skill development programs, and the inclusion of green objectives and goals in performance management systems. The key divisions and subsidiaries should also be linked with the green objectives and goals of the organizations. These initiatives will help to increase the innovative behavior and job performance of the employees.

6. Limitations and Future Research

The present study examines the effect of ECSR on all three aspects of sustainable performance collectively. Other studies can conduct a separate analysis of the three aspects to get a deeper insight. The demographic data for this study was skewed toward male respondents, which can be one of the potential limitations. Due to the importance of female employees in the workforce [75], future studies can consider having equal representation of male and female respondents for better generalizability of the results. Another promising direction for future research concerns using an exploratory qualitative approach to build industry specific measures [76]. Moreover, the findings of this study may have limited applicability to non-financial organizations as the ESG (environmental, social, and governance) perspective of the service industry differs significantly from that of the manufacturing industry and hence limits the generalization of the findings. Future studies can use the model for a comparative study of financial and non-financial organizations.

7. Conclusions

A noteworthy concept of GTM was examined in this study in the context of the banking sector of Oman and attempted to position it within the context of the ECSR of an organization to achieve sustainable organizational performance through IWB and GP of employees. Due to the awareness in terms of environmental issues and the importance of sustainability, people prefer those organizations that show social responsibility for the betterment of both external and internal stakeholders. The results of the present study provide theoretical contributions mainly to the domain of sustainability, specifically ECSR and GTM. Globally, and particularly in the majority of developing nations, ECSR is becoming increasingly important, and Oman is no different. Both the public and private sectors work to improve ECSR and advance sustainable development. The government’s aims and needs for sustainability are carefully regarded in the Oman National Plan 2040 and its consequences. The government works on implementation activities connected to Oman Vision 2040. However, to develop effective ECSR programs in Oman, there is a need for additional help and direction from the Omani government. Moreover, organizations need to take part in environmental management programs by devising policies and procedures to attract and retain green talent with the help of GTM.