The Journal of Social Sciences Research

ISSN(e): 2411-9458, ISSN(p): 2413-6670

Special Issue. 2, pp: 272-280, 2018 Academic Research Publishing
URL: https://arpgweb.com/journal/journal/7/special_issue Group
DOI: https://doi.org/10.32861/jssr.spi2.272.280

Original Research Open Access

Employee Pro-Environmental Behaviour: A Systematic Review and Suggestions

for Future Research
Faiq Aziz*
Azman Hashim International Business School, Level 10, Menara Razak, Universiti Teknologi Malaysia, Jalan Sultan Yahya Petra, 54100,
Kuala Lumpur, Malaysia

Nomahaza Mahadi
Azman Hashim International Business School, Level 10, Menara Razak, Universiti Teknologi Malaysia, Jalan Sultan Yahya Petra, 54100,
Kuala Lumpur, Malaysia

Jihad Mohammad
Azman Hashim International Business School, Level 10, Menara Razak, Universiti Teknologi Malaysia, Jalan Sultan Yahya Petra, 54100,
Kuala Lumpur, Malaysia

Abstract
Changing behaviour towards pro-environment will not only can contribute towards organization sustainability but
also will help to prevent further environment destruction. However, empirical research on developing model or
solution to foster employee pro-environmental behaviour in workplace is still lacking. Therefore, this paper
examines existing literature pertaining employee pro-environmental behaviour in the workplace from year 2008 to
2017 that (1) discussed individuals’ pro-environmental behaviour at workplace, (2) identified variables and
antecedence that lead to pro-environmental behaviour and (3) theories used towards this behaviour. This paper also
provides suggestions for future research to researchers that interested in this research topic. Based on information
gathered in this paper, the role of emotion and values of employee would encourage their decision to engage in
various types of pro-environmental behaviour in the workplace and provide important implications for organization
sustainability.
Keywords: Pro-environmental behaviour; Employee; Workplace.
CC BY: Creative Commons Attribution License 4.0

1. Introduction
2. Employee Pro-Environmental Behaviour
Basically, pro-environmental behaviour can be understood as actions contributing to environmental
conservation, or human activity intended to protect natural resources, or at least reduce environmental deterioration.
However, in related to workplace, researchers in management generally discuss pro-environmental behaviour in
wider scope. In general, pro-environmental behaviour at work comprises wide range of activities and this requires
significant class of employee behaviours, because it facilitates and may contribute towards organizational plan to
preserve natural resources and the environment (Anderson and Bateman, 2000). Besides that, Ramus and Steger
(2000) use the term eco-initiatives to describe action taken by employees who thought would improve the
environmental performance of the company. Kollmuss and Agyeman (2002) refers pro-environmental behaviour as
a cautious action that seeks to minimize the undesirable impact on the environment. In addition, Ramus and Killmer
(2007) define one of their dependent variable that is corporate greening behaviours as the changing of organizational
practices to more environmentally sound ones. Moreover, Ciocirlan (2017) used the term “green employee” in her
research that described green employee has an environmental identity, an intrinsic motivation to protect the
environment through work, and aims for consistency between home and work environmental behaviours.
While behaviour related to environment have proliferated over the years in parallel to the increasing interest in
environment concern, there are still lack of efforts to clarify the terms. In short, the aspect of pro-environmental
behaviour are broad. Study by Ones and Dilchert (2012) have supplied one of the most comprehensive
understanding regarding PEBs in organizational settings. They mentioned that the environmental behaviours are
scalable actions and behaviuors that employees engage in that are linked with and contribute to or detract from
environmental sustainability. In relation to this, Ones and Dilchert proposed that employees’ actions may impact the
natural environment through five main behaviours. The main behaviours include the following: conserving (reducing
use, reusing, repurposing and recycling); working sustainably (changing how work is done); avoiding harm (e.g.,
preventing pollution); influencing others (e.g., encouraging and supporting others); and taking initiative (e.g.,
initiating programs and policies). Thus, it can be proposed that conserving, working sustainably and avoiding harm
are direct PEBs and that influencing others and taking initiatives are indirect PEBs.
Employees tend to be pro-environmental behaviour by their own interest and feeling of care about the
environment without influence by other people or reward by the management (Boiral O.. , 2009). The effectiveness
of pro-environmental behaviour in an organization highly depends on the involvement of the employees in the
*Corresponding Author

272
 The Journal of Social Sciences Research

programs and activities that implement in organization. Daily et al. (2009) stated that voluntary basis of employees
which act without concerning with any benefit and reward will contribute towards success of organization that aim
operate in their business in preserving nature. In other words, the success of fostering employee pro-environmental
behaviour in a person also depends on the factor where the person is required to be pro-environment or voluntary
basis. When a situation where the person is required to be pro-environmental, they are mandatory to perform that
behaviour. It usually happened in organization that operates in a greening environment that required their employees
to act environmentally in their practice and doing their task. In contrast, voluntary basis is important to influence
pro-environmental behaviour when this act is not include in the reward system of the organization. Moreover,
employees that independently motivate themselves can contribute towards the significant part in encouraging
voluntary pro-environmental behaviour in organization. Therefore, the effectiveness of person to be pro-
environmental behaviour is mostly depend on their own voluntary basis that can motivate them to have their own
environmental values or by their self-interest that they get when the acting environmentally.
Employees can implement their daily routine in such environmentally friendly behaviours during the process of
completing their own required tasks at the office and the employee may also aggressively participate broader
environmentally friendly changes in the policies and procedures in their organization (Pichel, 2008). This research
support the term pro-environmental behaviour in workplace by Ramus and Steger (2000) that stated, pro-
environmental behaviours are any action taken by employees that he or she thought would improve the
environmental performance of the company. The researcher belief that this definition is broad enough to capture a
wide range of behaviours, and enables the drawing together of theoretical and empirical evidence from both
environmental psychology and management. Referred to Ramus and Steger (2000), this definition includes
behaviours common in environmental management literature, such as environmental championing (Anderson and
Bateman, 2000), recycling, and pollution prevention (Egri and Herman, 2000). In line with this research, the term
employee pro-environmental behaviour (EPEB) are operationally define as any action taken by the employee in the
organization to support the sustainability of the company through preserving the environment. Parallel to this,
(Ciocirlan, 2017) mentioned that in the past few years, research on individual behaviours performed with a concern
for the natural environment at work has burgeoned.

3. Issues Related to Pro-Environmental Behaviour

Research on environmental sustainability suggested that the need for a long-term competitive advantage is what
drives firm’s engagement in environmental values, emphasis on sustainability and adoption of a proactive approach
to climate change (Nidumolu et al., 2009). Furthermore, sustainability is far more than an issue concerning
environmental consciousness and sustained growth of the economy. It is causally intertwined with deeply ethical
causes to make such a sustainable paradigm realisable (Hassan, 2016). The way how company put their change of
strategy into practice and connect sustainability with the way how they operate their business ecosystem (Seuring
and Gold, 2013) has been neglected by researchers despite the extensive body of literature concerning about
environmental practices (Green et al., 2012) Meanwhile, Rizk (2014) added that when applied to the natural
environment, a lack of awareness and understanding of Shari’ah prescriptions is not limited to the Western country
only, it is also low levels of environmental awareness and ethics of the Shari’ah principals in environmental
movements, despite evidence of an important association between tradition or religiosity and pro-environmental
behaviour in both the private and public spheres (Rizk, 2014).
Sustainability is instilled in the organizational practices in a business ecosystem (Rajala et al., 2016). Without
the understanding of this aspect, the discussion of environmental sustainability remains incomplete. The researcher
believes that the battle against environmental degradation has become one of the main topics all around the world
including Malaysia and it is currently recognized as one of the greatest challenges human has ever confronted.
Moreover, there is no doubt that Islamic principles may influences the whole human lifestyle, behaviour, attitude and
environment (Hassan, 2016). Besides, it is agreed by several researchers that organizations are consider to be one of
the highest contributor towards climate change and in the final analysis, preserving the environment only can be
done with individual behaviour because the problems of environmental degradation can be addressed only through
behavioural change of individuals (Ramus and Killmer, 2007). Thus, by changing behaviour of employee towards
environmental behaviour will not only can contribute towards greening organization but also will help to prevent
further environment destruction (Robertson and Barling, 2013).
Organization leaders recognizes opportunities which are substantial for their company in the pursuit of
enhanced environmentally sustainability which may reflect company’s long-term competitive reputation (Zibarras
and Coan, 2015). Zibarras and Coan (2015) mentioned that, environmental sustainability concept is discussed often
inside wider scope of sustainability framework which combining social aspect, economic considerations, and
environmental. However, the way organization can possibly achieve this level of sustainability still remain unclear;
therefore, it is critical to enhance research which is capable of uncovering the way how business can structure their
initiatives and policies to enhance their organization performance towards environmental sustainability (Renwick et
al., 2013). Linking employee behaviour to organizational efforts is the key approach; there is an argument on how
environmental degradation are mostly derived from human activity and that is by changing human behaviour is how
the issues should be tackled (Ones and Dilchert, 2012). However, while the change of individual behaviour and daily
task has been the fundamental reference behind most of environmental change programs outside of the organizations
(Uzzell and Moser, 2009), employee behavioural role in delivering environmental performance’s improvements
within organizations has largely been overlooked (Ones and Dilchert, 2012).

273
 The Journal of Social Sciences Research

As discussed, linking organizational efforts to employee behaviour is the key approach. The key part of the
solution to the issues of organizations addressing their environmental impacts is that organizations needs to
recognize their employees’ behaviour towards environmental (Temminck et al., 2015). Previous research on this
matter have been done in developed countries which operationalize in the western tradition. However, the motivation
of this study is to examine how well can the theories apply in nations from other part of the world like Malaysia with
different cultures compared to Western cultures. Changes in human behaviour is thought to be effective at tackling
the problem on environmental issues caused by human themselves (Robertson and Barling, 2013). This research
focuses on the developments and applies a measure based on the theory of planned behaviour (Ajzen, 1991) in order
to examine the employee pro-environmental behaviour in a workplace. This is a step towards the understanding of
how employee behaviour can be harnessed to achieve environmental improvements.
It is still remained a challenge on the implementation of an effective strategy to achieve a sustainable
organization event though many organization are starting to understand and acknowledge the importance of
sustainability (Galpin et al., 2015). Until now, the way in which an organization achieves the level of sustainability
still remains unclear. This scenario reflected the level of environmental behaviour of an employee in organizations is
low than supposed to care for the environment when performing their daily task. This is supported by Robertson and
Barling (2013), that revealed the major cause of environmental degradation today is caused by human activity within
organizations. Due to this, how business can able to structure their initiatives and policies to enhance the
opportunities for environmental sustainability is crucial to be covered by researchers (Renwick et al., 2013).
According to Ciocirlan (2017) research on individual behaviours performed that concern for the natural environment
at work has prospered, but the problem of environmental degradation specifically related to organizational outcome
still remain unsolved and there are still lacks of agreement regarding the appropriate model of antecedents and the
relative importance of variables in explaining the engagement in environmental behaviour at workplace (Lo et al.,
2012). Thus, the encouragement of pro-environmental behaviours at workplace such as conservation, waste
reduction behaviours, recycling and others will contribute to not only just towards greening process of organizations,
but will also affect climate change positively while preventing further environmental degradation (Robertson and
Barling, 2013).

Table-1. Previous Research on Pro-Environmental in Organization

Behavioural Theory/ Model
Author Context Method Findings
Examine Used
HEXACO
personality
Openness and
(Brick and Emission Adults survey framework, New Quantitative,
Conscientiousness predicted
Lewis, reduction through Amazon Ecological Online survey,
ERB as mediates by
2016) behaviour (ERB) MTurk (USA) Paradigm Scale N=345
environmental attitude.
(NEP) & Big Five
Personality Traits
Organizational
(Zientara Value-belief– Quantitative, Green organization climate
citizenship
and Hotel Industry norm theory self-report significantly moderate
behaviour for the
Zamojska, (Poland) (VBN) & Social questionnaire, environmental values and
environment
2016) exchange theory N= 249 OCBE
(OCBE)
IV = Organization Perceived
environmental behaviour,
organization environmental
Recycling friendly reputation, perceived
behaviour, Quantitative, incentives from organization,
Seven different
energy savings Email survey, perceived support from
(Manika et organizations
behaviour, and Not specified Self-report organization and general
al., 2015) (United
printing measurement, environmentally friendly
Kingdom)
reduction N=1204 attitudes. Result shows
behaviour printing reduction behaviours
were significantly higher than
recycling and energy saving
behaviours
Significant relationship
between (a) employees’
Organization Environmental concern for their environment
Quantitative,
citizenship Regulator and and OCBE,
New Ecological Online survey,
(Temminck behaviour Educational (b) perceived organizational
Paradigm Scale Self-report
et al., 2015) directed towards Institute support for environment
(NEP) measurement,
the environment (United efforts and OCBE and (c)
N=547
(OCBE) Kingdom) organizational
commitment and OCBE were
found.

274
 The Journal of Social Sciences Research

HRM practices (employee

214 organizations
life cycle; rewards; education
representing Environmental
General Mix Method and training; employee
(Zibarras different management
employee pro- (Survey and empowerment; and
and Coan, sizes and system (EMS).
environmental interview) management commitment)
2015) industry sectors Theory not
behaviour N=266 are not a great extent to
(United specified
encourage employees pro-
Kingdom)
environmental behaviour.
Results shows employees are
encouraged to engage in eco-
helping when they experience
General Quantitative.
Mexican relationships with their peers.
(Boiral O. employee pro- Social exchange Using survey
university Indicating that the social
et al., 2015) environmental theory (SET) form.
(Mexico) exchange framework
behaviour N=449
is appropriate for studying
pro-environmental
behaviours in the workplace
Organizational
sustainability policy
positively related to self-
Full time Theory of Quantitative. report task-related and
(Norton et Employee green
employees normative conduct Online survey, proactive EGB and fully
al., 2014) behaviour (EGB)
(Australia) (TNC) N=436 mediated by green work
climate perceptions of the
organization and of co-
workers
Quantitative.
Tested using
Theory of Planned Attitude is not always the
Four different confirmatory
(Lo et al., Energy saving Behaviour (TPB) strongest predictor of
organizations factor analysis
2014) behaviour and self-reported intention for office energy-
(Netherlands) (CFA) and
habit. saving behaviours.
SEM. N=not
specified
Different type of
Leader’s VWGBs appear to
company in
Voluntary Quantitative. increase employee advocacy
construction,
(Kim et al., workplace green Survey of such behaviour. Positive
information Not specified
2017) behaviour distribution. linkage between green
technology and
(VWGB) N=325 behaviours of leaders and
financial sector.
those of followers
(South Korea)
Found lower levels of
Higher Education implementation (i.e. reducing
(Kastner and Quantitative.
Energy saving Institutions the intervention materials)
Matthies, Not specified N=not
behaviour (HEIs). and lower levels of
2014) specified.
(Germany) participation to decrease
the interventions’ outcomes.
Theory of planned
behaviour (TPB), Found that organizational
Employees’ Value-belief– climate is a moderating effect
(Chou, environmental Hotel Industry norm theory Quantitative. through personal
2014) behaviour (Taiwan) (VBN) & N=254 environmental norms on
(General) Expectancy-value personal environmental
motivational behaviour.
model
Conclude that clear
differences between factors
influencing pro-
Pro- environmental behaviour in
environmental households and in the
(Blok et al., Green university Theory of planned Qualitative.
behaviour in the workplace. TPB is
2015) (Netherlands) behaviour (TPB) N=411
workplace insufficient to explain PEB in
(General) the workplace
completely since social norms
and leadership
support to act pro-

275
 The Journal of Social Sciences Research

environmentally have an
impact on PEB.
Employees Shows that personal norm
(Zhang et Employee energy working in Norm activation Quantitative. positively influences
al., 2014) saving behaviour Beijing. model (NAM) N=344 employee electricity saving
(China) behaviour
Employee will perform
Employees
Organization environmental efforts if they
enrolled in the
citizenship perceive that the organization
executive MBA Social
(Paillé et behaviour Quantitative. supports his/her supervisor by
programmes exchange theory
al., 2013) directed towards N=407 granting the decision-making
Canadian (SET)
the environment latitude and necessary
university
(OCBE) resources to engage in pro-
(Canada)
environmental behaviour.
Results show that employee
attitude toward electricity
saving and perceived
behavioural control positively
influence employee intention
to save electricity.
Employees Environmental benefit,
(Zhang et Electricity saving working in Theory of planned Quantitative. organizational benefit,
al., 2013) behaviour Beijing. behaviour (TPB) N=273 enjoyment, and
(China) organizational electricity
saving climate positively
influence employee attitude
toward electricity saving,
whereas the effect of
anticipated extrinsic benefit is
found insignificant.
UK-based TPB can be used to explain
Environmental
publicly funded Video-conferencing
(Greaves et behavioural Theory of planned Quantitative.
Organization behavioural, PC switch off
al., 2013) intentions in a behaviour (TPB) N=449
(United behavioural and recycling
workplace
Kingdom) behavioural.
1) Employees’ harmonious
environmental passion and
their leaders’ workplace pro-
Subordinates environmental behaviours
Employees’ from Study predicted their workplace
(Robertson Social comparison
environmental Response Quantitative. pro-environmental
and Barling, theory & Social
behaviour Program N=231 behaviours. 2) Leaders’
2013) learning theory
(General) (USA & environmental descriptive
Canada) norms and pro-environmental
behaviours play an important
role in the greening of
organizations.
1) Unactivated positive affect
was positively related to daily
Employees’ Employees
(Bissing‐ Broaden-and-build Quantitative. task-related pro-
environmental working in small
Olson et al., theory of positive N=not environmental behaviour. 2)
behaviour businesses.
2013) emotions specified Individuals’ incidental daily
(General) (Australia)
affect positively related to
PEB
1) Found that teleworking and
teleconferencing have the
4 organizations
Employee Pro- Qualitative. potential to reduce travel
(Lo et al., in two Dutch Theory of planned
environmental N=not frequency. 2) Financial
2013) provinces. behaviour (TPB)
travel behaviour specified incentive may change
(Netherlands)
employee travelling
behavioural mode.
Medium-sized 1) Attitude significantly
Mixed
(Murtagh et Energy use University related to energy use
Not specified Method.
al., 2013) behaviour (United behaviour. 2) Motivation is
N=83
Kingdom) needed to foster energy use

276
 The Journal of Social Sciences Research

behaviour.
1) Environmental
transformational leadership
(ETL) will increase in
Employees’ pro-
Four global Quantitative. employees’ autonomous and
(Graves et environmental Self-determination
organizations Cross Section external motivation. 2)
al., 2013) behaviours theory
(China) N=294 Autonomous motivation in
(General)
turn, positively related to
PEBs. 3) Motivation and
PEBs was moderated by ETL
1) Managers’ environmental
Organization
Quantitative. values are positively related
citizenship
Manufacturing Simple to OCBEs. 2) Environmental
(Boiral O. behaviour Theory of planned
sector Random management practices
et al., 2015) directed towards behaviour (TPB)
(Canada) Sampling mediate relationship between
the environment
N=304 OCBEs and environmental
(OCBE)
performance
Self-efficacy is the highest
Four Dutch Qualitative.
(Lo et al., Energy-Related Theory of planned salient and social norm is the
organisations. N=not
2012) Behaviours behaviour (TPB) lowest contributor towards
(Netherlands) specified
ERB.
Government, Supervisor support, training
Employee
academic, and Organizational and reward will influence
(Cantor et engagement in Quantitative.
environmental support theory employee perception and may
al., 2012) environmental N=317
industry (OST) lead towards employee
behaviours
(USA) environmental behaviour.
(Carrico and Employee Mid-sized private 1) Peer education and
Quantitative.
Riemer, conservation University. Not specified feedback manage to reduce
N=352
2011) behaviour (USA) energy use by employee.
1) TPB shows that employee
Non-academic satisfied with university
Quantitative.
staff within sustainability effort. 2) Need
Sustainable Cross-
(Davis et Griffith Theory of planned to increase respondents’
attitude and sectional
al., 2009) University, behaviour (TPB) awareness of inconsistencies
behaviour sample.
Queensland. between their reported
N=100
(Australia) attitudes and behaviours at
home and at work.
1) Environmental personal
norms predicted self-reported
energy-conservation
Employee
University Value-belief– behaviours. 2) Environmental
(Scherbaum energy- Quantitative.
employee. norm theory personal norms mediated the
et al., 2008) conservation N=154
(USA) (VBN) relationship of environmental
behaviours
worldviews and self-reported
energy-conservation
behaviours.

In summary, the table presented above is the previous study related to pro-environmental behaviour in the
context of workplace. Firstly, the table shows that the majority of the research has been done in Western countries
which United Kingdom and USA are the highest amount of research. Secondly, theories that has been used by
previous researcher to study environmental behaviours at workplace mainly Theory of Planned Behaviour (TPB),
Value Belief Norm theory (VBN) and Social Exchange Theory (SET). Thirdly, the majority of previous research
used quantitative method in conducting their research and on average, the sample size that being used by previous
researcher in determined their environmental behaviour in N = 450. Based on the findings from previous study
above, environmental attitude (Brick and Lewis, 2016), green work climate perception (Norton et al., 2014)
environmental management practice (Boiral O. et al., 2015) and environmental personal norms (Scherbaum et al.,
2008) were used as mediator variables in previous environmental behaviour research. Meanwhile, green organization
climate (Zientara and Zamojska, 2016) and organization climate (Chou, 2014) were used as moderator variables in
previous environmental behaviour research.

4. Conclusion and Recommendations

The solution to fostering employee pro-environmental behaviour remain unsolved because in previous study,
research have been contemplated in both private sphere and general society, but rarely in work setting despite of it’s
potential at contributing towards environmental sustainability (Ones and Dilchert, 2012). This is also supported by

277
 The Journal of Social Sciences Research

Inoue and Alfaro‐Barrantes (2015) who mentioned that, this body of research currently suffers from the fact that no
systematic effort has been made to understand what the research collectively informs us related to the factors and
conditions affecting employee pro-environmental behaviour (EPEB). To generalize the research’s finding based in
the domestic sector to the workplace may be tempting, but the motivations to behave pro-environmental manner at
work and home might be different (Graves et al., 2013). Furthermore, Blok et al. (2015) mentioned that, the
problem of existing model is that they are not applied in the workplace sufficiently but it is applied to explain PEB in
household’s perspective. There is a literature gap in the explanation of PEB exclusively in the workplace due to this
problem. PEB in the workplace is expected to contribute to the minimization of the negative impact of actions taken
by the employee towards the natural and built environment because employees spend about one third of their daily
life in the office (Blok et al., 2015).
As mentioned, TPB is one of the theory that most widely used to examine human behaviour, but TPB is not
without criticism. Theoretically, the factors included in the TPB are not sufficient and it is possible to measure some
of other factors and add them to the theory in order to improve prediction (Ramayah et al., 2012). (Blok et al.,
2015) stated that, TPB is insufficient to explain PEB in the workplace completely, since other factors (e.g. values,
environmental awareness and personal norm) are also important in fostering PEB. Besides that, the antecedent of
attitude in TPB is not always the strongest predictor of intention that can lead towards behavior (Lo et al., 2014).
Besides that, although the relationship between intentions and behaviour are consistently correlated to one another,
the relationship it is not perfect. In fact, Anthony et al. (2016) suggested that to increase the predictability of
intention and behaviour, support adding more constructs (e.g. exogenous, mediating and moderating) to the TPB
when they are theoretically based. The inconsistency of TPB model allows for the incorporation of additional
variables in the model (Ramayah et al., 2012). Therefore, in line with this theoretical issue, the researcher belief that
there is a significant contribution towards TPB literature to examine other related variables or antecedences that may
strengthen the relationship within the construct of TPB model.
Recently, Inoue and Alfaro‐Barrantes (2015) revealed that most of study related to environmental behaviour in
workplace obtained data from employees within Western countries which are different with other countries in many
aspects. This is supported by Hassan (2016) that mentioned, businesses should be engaged in the sustainable
development activities so as to determine economic viability, social equality and environmental development in
adherence to Islamic ethical responsibilities for business organizations. No doubt that, Islamic principles may
influence the whole human personality, behaviour, lifestyle, tastes and preferences, attitudes towards human beings,
resources and environment (Hassan, 2016). Although there is lack of previous research, the study in Egypt
mentioned that Islamic religious teachings and religiosity have a positive relationship with pro-environmental
behavior (Rice, 2006). Ali and Al-Owaihan (2008) meanwhile, revealed that the orientation which inspire and forms
the involvement and contribution of believers in the workplace is the Islamic work ethic. According to Mohammad
et al. (2016), the majority of studies related to work ethic which express its relationship with individual and
organizational variables still focus on Western context, with Protestant work ethic (PWE) become the main attention.
Despite of the important role of Islamic thought about the importance of preserving the environment, research on
how Islamic work ethics may solve the environmental issues in organization has been neglected. Therefore, to better
understand the issues of work ethics, it is valuable to examine the role of IWE towards fostering employee pro-
environmental behaviour.
Meanwhile, research related to emotion may influence employee pro-environmental behaviour through various
processes which are different from other cognitive aspects of attitude, thus will lead towards generating numbers of
new research question. Along with these advancements in affective literature, emotion or affect, has been considered
as a motivational factor that may influencing environmental behaviour. In fact, Inoue and Alfaro‐Barrantes (2015)
suggested that study on examining emotions on the other hand, would like to enjoy opportunities to advance the
literature on pro-environmental behaviour in workplace. However, in most pro-environmental studies, the role of
emotion is largely absent. In short, employees will be energized, inspired to make a difference in the natural
environment quality, and are motivated to engage in workplace pro-environmental behaviours when the employees
influence by positive emotion (Robertson and Barling, 2013).
Accordingly, one of the main limitations of the problem examining pro-environmental behaviours using attitude
theories is that they largely neglected the emotional aspects because they are primarily focused on the cognitive
aspects of attitude. To the best of researcher knowledge, only few research in this context have the attempt to
understand how the effects of emotion can contribute towards environmental behavior (Bissing‐Olson et al., 2013).
Parallel to this, significant interest in a growing area of research has been generated through the construct of
“emotional intelligence” even though the analysis interaction between cognition, emotion and behaviour is not new.
In spite of the logic of this argument, there are, to the researcher knowledge, empirical studies have been done to
examined the role of emotional intelligence in predicting pro-environmental behaviour is still lacking. Therefore, this
research suggests to incorporated the additional variables in TPB construct to bridge the gap in pro-environmental
behaviour in the context of employee in organization.

References
Ajzen, I. (1991). The theory of planned behavior. Organizational behavior and decision processes. Academic Press.
Inc: University of Massachusetts at Amherst.
Ali, A. J. and Al-Owaihan, A. (2008). Islamic work ethic, A critical review. Cross cultural management. An
International Journal, 15(1): 5-19.

278
 The Journal of Social Sciences Research

Anderson, L. M. and Bateman, T. S. (2000). Individual environmental initiative, Championing natural environmental
issues in US business organizations. Academy of Management Journal, 43(4): 548-70.
Anthony, S. J., Anthony, S. J., Maloni, M. J., Maloni, M. J., Henley, A., Henley, A. and Campbell, S. (2016).
Motivational influences on supply manager environmental sustainability behavior. Supply Chain
Management, An International Journal, 21(3): 305-32.
Bissing‐Olson, M. J., Iyer, A., Fielding, K. S. and Zacher, H. (2013). Relationships between daily affect and pro‐
environmental behavior at work, The moderating role of pro‐environmental attitude. Journal of
Organizational Behavior, 34(2): 156-75.
Blok, V., Wesselink, R., Studynka, O. and Kemp, R. (2015). Encouraging sustainability in the workplace: a survey
on the pro-environmental behaviour of university employees. Journal of Cleaner Production, 106: 55-67.
Boiral, O. (2009). Greening the corporation through organizational citizenship behaviors. Journal Of Business
Ethics, 87(2): 221-36.
Boiral, O., Talbot, D. and Paillé, P. (2015). Leading by example: A model of organizational citizenship behavior for
the environment. Business Strategy and the Environment, 24(6): 532-50.
Brick, C. and Lewis, G. J. (2016). Unearthing the green, personality, Core traits predict environmentally friendly
behavior. Environment and Behavior, 48(5): 635-58.
Cantor, D. E., Morrow, P. C. and Montabon, F. (2012). Engagement in environmental behaviors among supply chain
management employees, An organizational support theoretical perspective. Journal of Supply Chain
Management, 48(3): 33-51.
Carrico, A. R. and Riemer, M. (2011). Motivating energy conservation in the workplace, An evaluation of the use of
group-level feedback and peer education. Journal of Environmental Psychology, 31(1): 1-13.
Chou, C.-J. (2014). Hotels' environmental policies and employee personal environmental beliefs, Interactions and
outcomes. Tourism Management, 40: 436-46.
Ciocirlan, C. E. (2017). Environmental workplace behaviors, Definition matter. Organization & Environment, 30(1):
51-70.
Daily, B. F., Bishop, J. W. and Govindarajulu, N. (2009). A conceptual model for organizational citizenship
behavior directed toward the environment. Business & Society, 48(2): 243-56.
Davis, G., O'Callaghan, F. and Knox, K. (2009). Sustainable attitudes and behaviours amongst a sample of non-
academic staff, A case study from an information services department, griffith university, brisbane.
International Journal of Sustainability in Higher Education, 10(2): 136-51.
Egri, C. P. and Herman, S. (2000). Leadership in the north american environmental sector, Values, leadership styles,
and contexts of environmental leaders and their organizations. Academy of Management Journal, 43(4):
571-604.
Galpin, T., Whitttington, J. L. and Bell, G. (2015). Is your sustainability strategy sustainable? Creating a culture of
sustainability. Corporate Governance, 15(1): 1-17.
Graves, L. M., Sarkis, J. and Zhu, Q. (2013). How transformational leadership and employee motivation combine to
predict employee proenvironmental behaviors in China. Journal of Environmental Psychology, 35: 81-91.
Greaves, M., Zibarras, L. D. and Stride, C. (2013). Using the theory of planned behavior to explore environmental
behavioral intentions in the workplace. Journal of Environmental Psychology, 34: 109-20.
Green, J. K. W., Zelbst, P. J., Meacham, J. and Bhadauria, V. S. (2012). Green supply chain management practices
Impact on performance. Supply chain management. An International Journal, 17(3): 290-305.
Hassan, A. (2016). Islamic ethical responsibilities for business and sustainable development. Humanomics, 32(1):
80-94.
Inoue, Y. and Alfaro‐Barrantes, P. (2015). Pro‐environmental behavior in the workplace, A review of empirical
studies and directions for future research. Business and Society Review, 120(1): 137-60.
Kastner, I. and Matthies, E. (2014). Implementing web-based interventions to promote energy efficient behavior at
organizations–a multi-level challenge. Journal of Cleaner Production, 62: 89-97.
Kim, A., Kim, Y., Han, K., Jackson, S. E. and Ployhart, R. E. (2017). Multilevel influences on voluntary workplace
green behavior, Individual differences, leader behavior, and coworker advocacy. Journal of Management,
43(5): 1335-58.
Kollmuss, A. and Agyeman, J. (2002). Mind the gap: why do people act environmentally and what are the barriers to
pro-environmental behavior. Environmental education research, 8(3): 239-60.
Lo, S. H., Peters, G. J. Y. and Kok, G. (2012). A review of determinants of and interventions for proenvironmental
behaviors in organizations. Journal of Applied Social Psychology, 42(12): 2933-67.
Lo, S. H., van, B., G. J., Peters, G.-J. Y. and Kok, G. (2013). Proenvironmental travel behavior among office
workers, A qualitative study of individual and organizational determinants. Transportation Research Part
A, Policy and Practice, 56: 11-22.
Lo, S. H., Peters, G.-J. Y., van, B. G. J. and Kok, G. (2014). Only reasoned action? An interorganizational study of
energy-saving behaviors in office buildings. Energy efficiency, 7(5): 761-75.
Manika, D., Wells, V. K., Gregory-Smith, D. and Gentry, M. (2015). The impact of individual attitudinal and
organisational variables on workplace environmentally friendly behaviours. Journal Of Business Ethics,
126(4): 663-84.
Mohammad, J., Quoquab, F. and Omar, R. (2016). Factors affecting organizational citizenship behavior among
malaysian bank employees, The moderating role of islamic work ethic. Procedia-Social and Behavioral
Sciences, 224: 562-70.

279
 The Journal of Social Sciences Research

Murtagh, N., Nati, M., Headley, W. R., Gatersleben, B., Gluhak, A., Imran, M. A. and Uzzell, D. (2013). Individual
energy use and feedback in an office setting, A field trial. Energy Policy, 62: 717-28.
Nidumolu, R., Prahalad, C. K. and Rangaswami, M. R. (2009). Why sustainability is now the key driver of
innovation. Harvard Business Review, 87(9): 56-64.
Norton, T. A., Zacher, H. and Ashkanasy, N. M. (2014). Organisational sustainability policies and employee green
behaviour, The mediating role of work climate perceptions. Journal of Environmental Psychology, 38: 49-
54.
Ones, D. S. and Dilchert, S. (2012). Environmental sustainability at work, A call to action. Industrial and
Organizational Psychology, 5(4): 444-66.
Paillé, P., Boiral, O. and Chen, Y. (2013). Linking environmental management practices and organizational
citizenship behaviour for the environment, A social exchange perspective. The International Journal of
Human Resource Management, 24(18): 3552-75.
Pichel, K. (2008). Enhancing ecopreneurship through an environmental management system, A longitudinal
analysis for factors leading to proactive environmental behavior. In sustainable innovation and
entrepreneurship. Edward Elgar Publishing. 141-89.
Rajala, R., Westerlund, M. and Lampikoski, T. (2016). Environmental sustainability in industrial manufacturingm,
Re-examining the greening of interface's business model. Journal of Cleaner Production, 115: 52-61.
Ramayah, T., Lee, J. W. C. and Lim, S. (2012). Sustaining the environment through recycling, An empirical study.
Journal of Environmental Management, 102: 141-47.
Ramus, C. A. and Steger, U. (2000). The roles of supervisory support behaviors and environmental policy in
employee ecoinitiatives,at leading-edge european companies. Academy of Management Journal, 43(4):
605-26.
Ramus, C. A. and Killmer, A. B. (2007). Corporate greening through prosocial extrarole behaviours–a conceptual
framework for employee motivation. Business Strategy and the Environment, 16(8): 554-70.
Renwick, D. W., Redman, T. and Maguire, S. (2013). Green human resource management, A review and research
agenda. International Journal of Management Reviews, 15(1): 1-14.
Rice, G. (2006). Pro-environmental behavior in egypt, Is there a role for islamic environmental ethics? Journal of
Business Ethics, 65(4): 373-90.
Rizk, R. R. (2014). Islamic environmental ethics. Journal of Islamic Accounting and Business Research, 5(2): 194-
204.
Robertson, J. L. and Barling, J. (2013). Greening organizations through leaders' influence on employees' pro‐
environmental behaviors. Journal of Organizational Behavior, 34(2): 176-94.
Scherbaum, C. A., Popovich, P. M. and Finlinson, S. (2008). Exploring individual‐level factors related to employee
energy‐conservation behaviors at work. Journal of Applied Social Psychology, 38(3): 818-35.
Seuring, S. and Gold, S. (2013). Sustainability management beyond corporate boundaries, From stakeholders to
performance. Journal of Cleaner Production, 56: 1-6.
Temminck, E., Mearns, K. and Fruhen, L. (2015). Motivating employees towards sustainable behaviour. Business
Strategy and the Environment, 24(6): 402-12.
Uzzell, D. and Moser, G. (2009). Introduction: Environmental psychology on the move. Academic Press.:
Zhang, Y., Wang, Z. and Zhou, G. (2013). Antecedents of employee electricity saving behavior in organizations, An
empirical study based on norm activation model. Energy Policy, 62: 1120-27.
Zhang, Y., Wang, Z. and Zhou, G. (2014). Determinants of employee electricity saving, The role of social benefits,
personal benefits and organizational electricity saving climate. Journal of Cleaner Production, 66: 280-87.
Zibarras, L. D. and Coan, P. (2015). Hrm practices used to promote pro-environmental behavior, A UK survey. . The
International Journal of Human Resource Management, 26(16): 2121-42.
Zientara, P. and Zamojska, A. (2016). Green organizational climates and employee pro-environmental behaviour in
the hotel industry. Journal of Sustainable Tourism: 1-18.

280