Search results

Toward sustainable development, radical green innovation (RGI) is necessary. Despite extensive research on the factors influencing green innovation, few studies have been conducted on the precursors. Based on upper echelons (UE) theory, dynamic capability (DC) theory, “stimulus-organism-response” (SOR) theory, social information processing (SIP) theory and cognitive appraisal (CA) theory of emotion, the study explores how digital leadership (DL) affects RGI and investigates the mediating effects of green organizational identity (GOI) and the moderating effects of digital threat (DT) and technology for social good (TSG), as well as the multiple concurrent causalities that trigger high RGI.

The method of combining structural equation model (SEM) and fuzzy-set qualitative comparative analysis (fs QCA) is adopted in the study. Data from 233 questionnaires were collected at two different time points.

This study's findings indicate that the four dimensions of DL can positively influence RGI and GOI partially mediates between the four dimensions of DL and RGI. DT has a negative moderating effect between DL and GOI, while TSG is positively regulated between them, DT and TSG linkage moderates the partial mediating effect of GOI in DL and RGI. Further, fs QCA is used to analyze the causal complexity of DL dimensions and GOI to RGI and nine effective configuration paths are identified. It is found that the synergy of digital thinking ability (DTA), digital detection ability (DDA), digital social ability (DSA), digital reserve ability (DRA) and GOI is crucial to high RGI. Among them, GOI core appears the most times, indicating that GOI plays a vital role in improving enterprise RGI.

This study expands the literature on leadership and innovation by constructing a framework of “DL-GOI-RGI” and exploring the transmission of GOI and the boundary effect of DT and TSG. The study used fs QCA and SEM to better understand the statistical associations and the set relations between the conjunctions and conditions.

Organizations that prioritize humanistic responsibility create an environment of value for their employees as the most important stakeholders. However, despite the numerous corporate social responsibility (CSR) models and research highlighting stakeholder considerations, the long-standing “social” aspect of CSR has inhibited its humanism responsibility. In response, this study proposes to move beyond the antecedents and outcomes of CSR to explore how perceived CSR can promote its humanistic responsibility both inside and outside of organizations.

The authors followed Sendjaya et al. (2008) ’s methodology for developing and validating the perceived corporate humanistic responsibility (CHR) scale. Study 1 validated the CHR's content. Study 2 established the measure’ reliability, internal consistency, unidimensionality and discriminant validity. The authors describe each of the studies in the forthcoming sections.

This research has produced a comprehensive set of perceived CHR items for business leaders based on earlier CHR/humanism concepts. Through the deconstruction of CHR theory, the granular conceptualization provides employee-centric workplaces, healthy internal communication, holistic compensation, CSR-committed behaviors and holistic training and development, equipped to assess how their CHR fosters humanistic workplaces that encourage socially responsible behaviors. This, in turn, would have an immense impact on employee well-being that, in turn, flourishes societal well-being.

Although the perceived CHR scale's psychometric properties were confirmed using multiple tests ranging from qualitative to quantitative studies, this newly developed scale requires further investigation to explore whether internal or external relevance factors affect organizations' humanistic responsibility.

CSR is about caring for humans and the planet. The authors have unpacked what and how the human side of CSR operates for business leaders to advance their CHR practices and responsible management learning. The perceived CHR dimensions can guide business leaders to promote multidimensional humanistic behaviors inside and outside workplaces that transcend how to strengthen the humanistic responsibility behaviors of corporations to promote CHR by articulating how the “Social” aspect of CSR ought to function for employee well-being first.

This study responds to Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs) most aligned with the SDG 3 (good health and well-being) and SDG 8 (decent work and economic growth) by promoting humanistic workplaces with implications for United Nation's Principles for Responsible Management that encourages universities to educate students on humanism concepts in business management.

The originality lies in the empirical study of CHR. By incorporating the original concepts of humanism/humanistic management and CHR, the authors empirically articulate how CHR may be practically implemented as an elaborated humanistic synthesis for corporations.