An organizational ethic of care and employee involvement in sustainability‐related behaviors: A social identity perspective

• Date: 01 November 2017
• Published date: 01 November 2017
• DOI: http://doi.org/10.1002/job.2185

SPECIAL ISSUE ARTICLE

An organizational ethic of care and employee involvement in

sustainability‐related behaviors: A social identity perspective

Abraham Carmeli

1

|Stephen Brammer

2

|Emanuel Gomes

3,4

|Shlomo Y. Tarba

3

1

Tel Aviv University, Tel Aviv, Israel

2

Macquarie University, Sydney, Australia

3

University of Birmingham, Birmingham, U.K.

4

Universidade Nova, Lisbon, Portugal

Correspondence

Abraham Carmeli, Tel Aviv University, Tel Aviv,

Israel.

Email: avic@post.tau.ac.il

Summary

We expand on the emergent research of an ethic of care (EoC) to theorize why and how an orga-

nizational EoC fosters employee involvement in sustainability‐related behaviors at work. Across

two studies, we explore the socio‐psychological mechanisms that link an EoC and involvement in

sustainability‐related behaviors. The results of Study 1, in which we applied an experimental

design, indicate that an EoC is significantly related, through employees' affective reaction

towards organizational sustainability, to involvement in sustainability‐related behaviors. In Study

2, in which we used time‐lagged data, we further drew on social identity theory to suggest that

an EoC is both directly and indirectly, through enhanced organizational identification, related to

employees' satisfaction with organizational sustainability. Through these two mechanisms, we

explain the process by which an EoC can drive employee involvement in sustainability‐related

behaviors. These theoretical developments and empirical findings help to better understand

the micro‐foundations of organizational sustainability by building upon the moral theorizing

of care.

KEYWORDS

an ethic of care, involvement, organizationalidentification, sustainability

1|INTRODUCTION

The scale, scope, and complexity of environmental issues pose a major

challenge for organizations and require them to mobilize substantial

resources and capabilities to achieve a transition towards greater sus-

tainability (Andersson, Jackson, & Russell, 2013; Zhu, Cordeiro &

Sarkis, 2013). In attempts to understand how organizations respond

to demands for sustainability, scholars tended to apply a macro‐level

approach and focus on the importance of formal management systems,

processes, structures, and certifications (Berrone, Cruz, Gomez‐Mejia,

& Larraza‐Kintana, 2010; Darnall, Henriques, & Sadorsky, 2010;

Delmas & Toffel, 2008; Reid & Toffel, 2009; Walls, Berrone, &

Phan, 2012).

However, a focus on formal structures and processes does not

allow us to fully capture the micro‐foundations of sustainability. An

emergent stream of research in the fields of organization theory and

strategy points to the importance of micro‐foundations in explaining

higher level phenomena (Barney & Felin, 2013; Felin & Foss, 2005;

Foss, 2011; Foss & Linderberg, 2013; Powell, Lovallo, & Fox, 2011).

Such a search for micro‐foundations of significant organizational and

strategic phenomena have begun to make significant contributions to

research in entrepreneurship (Dai, Roundy, Chok, Ding, & Byun,

2016), human resource management (Raffiee & Coff, 2016), organiza-

tion studies (Jones, 2016), and strategy (Aguinis & Molina‐Azorín,

2015; Felin, Foss, Heimeriks, & Madsen, 2012; Greve, 2013). Despite

the importance of a micro‐level perspective, research on “micro‐foun-

dations of CSR (i.e., foundations of CSR that are based on individual

actions and interactions)”has yet to be fully developed (Aguinis &

Glavas, 2012, p. 956). Specifically, we need to direct attention to

examine micro‐level mechanisms that help translate “higher level vari-

ables”into behaviors and actions that may benefit the organization

(Aguinis & Glavas, 2012; see also Carmeli, Gilat, & Waldman, 2007;

Graves, Sarkis, & Zhu, 2013; Ones & Dilchert, 2012; Ramus & Steger,

2000; Robertson & Barling, 2013).

Revealing what underpins one's involvement in sustainability ini-

tiatives can inform research and theory of organizational or corporate

sustainability and social responsibility (Aguinis & Glavas, 2012) for at

least two main reasons. First, we know that employees' involvement

and engagement at work play a crucial role in driving important organi-

zational‐level outcomes (Macey, Schneider, Barbera, & Young, 2009).

Second, driving and enhancing sustainability is a complex task, which

requires the collective effort and collaborative involvement of all

Received: 20 March 2016 Revised: 13 January 2017 Accepted: 16 January 2017

DOI: 10.1002/job.2185

1380 Copyright © 2017 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd. J. Organiz. Behav.. 2017;38:1380–1395.wileyonlinelibrary.com/journal/job

organizational actors (Daily, Bishop, & Govindarajulu, 2009; Norton,

Parker, Zacher, & Ashkanasy, 2015; Ones & Dilchert, 2012). Often-

times, however, driving sustainability depends on employees' discre-

tionary efforts and behaviors (Lamm, Tosti‐Kharas, & Williams, 2013;

Ramus, 2001; Ramus & Killmer, 2007), but their underlining drivers

remain relatively understudied (Tosti‐Kharas, Lamm, & Thomas,

2016). This led scholars to call for adopting a behavioral perspective

in examining how transitions to greater sustainability might be

achieved (Andersson et al., 2013; Norton et al., 2015; Paillé & Raineri,

2016). For example, research examined both the antecedents of

employee pro‐environmental behavior (Whillans & Dunn, 2015;

Wiernik, Dilchert, & Ones, 2016), as well as how attractive is organiza-

tional sustainability for newcomers (Jones, Willness, & Heller, 2016).

This stream of research sheds light on the conditions in which

employees are more likely to engage in discretionary pro‐sustainability

behaviors at work (Boiral, Talbot, & Paillé, 2013; Lamm et al., 2013). At

the same time, relatively little attention has been paid to the need to

more directly and explicitly examine the relationships and the ways

organizational‐level influences shape such employee discretionary

behaviors in the workplace (Aguinis & Glavas, 2012; Carmeli et al.,

2007). What is particularly lacking in the extant literature is an under-

standing of the “the mechanisms through which various personal and

contextual antecedents influence employee green behavior, the condi-

tions under which the antecedents are particularly influential…”

(Norton et al., 2015, p. 114).

This research aims to reveal how socio‐psychological mechanisms

through organizational‐level influences translate into employee

involvement in pro‐sustainability behaviors. We draw and expand on

recent developments in applications of ethical theory; these develop-

ments offer an alternative normative foundation for moral decision‐

making that is grounded in an ethic of care (Lawrence & Maitlis,

2012) and studies that point to the power of care and compassion

within organizations (Bolino, Hsiung, Harvey, & LePine, 2015; Kahn,

2005; Lilius et al., 2008; Mitchell & Boyle, 2015; Rynes, Bartunek,

Dutton, & Margolis, 2012; Snoeren, Raaijmakers, Niessen, & Abma,

2016; Watkins et al., 2015). However, this theoretical lens has yet to

be explored in relation to sustainability within organizations, and we

suggest here that an ethic of care (EoC) perspective may inform theory

and research of sustainability. Drawing from Lawrence and Maitlis'

(2012) research, we suggest that examining the contribution of an

organizational EoC to sustainability is potentially fruitful for a number

of reasons. First, an EoC perspective responds to limitations of justice‐

based perspectives to understanding engagement and behavior in rela-

tion to sustainability, especially by emphasizing the emotional rather

than the rational motives for moral reasoning and behavior (Held,

1990), and the importance of context, capacity, and situation to evalu-

ating morally appropriate conduct (Held, 2005; Noddings, 2003). Sec-

ond, an EoC perspective is well suited to informing sustainability

because the complexity and multi‐dimensionality of sustainability

means that its achievement is not susceptible to simple universal rules

and principles, whereas an EoC reflects a “concern about how to fulfill

conflicting responsibilities to different people”(Simola, 2003, p. 354).

Third, the emphasis on relationships within an EoC perspective, and

especially relationships characterized by inequalities of power and

position (Noddings, 2003), seems especially well suited to shedding

light on how individuals and organizations navigate relationships

between traditional economic outcomes and ecological outcomes

given the limited agency and capacity to influence the natural environ-

ment (Driscoll & Starik, 2004; Jacobs, 1997).

In light of this opportunity, our research aims to enhance our

understanding of how employees' perceptions of their organization's

ethic of care influence their involvement in sustainability‐related

behaviors. We advance a micro‐foundation lens to the study of the

micro‐mechanisms that translate an organizational EoC into higher

levels of employee involvement in sustainability behaviors. We

develop our theorizing that an EoC creates a caring and compassionate

organizational system that fuels employees' involvement in workplace

sustainability behaviors, both directly and indirectly via enhanced orga-

nizational identification and a higher level of satisfaction. We tested

this conceptualization in both an experimental and a time‐lagged study

that allowed us to better understand micro‐socio‐psychological mech-

anisms by which an organizational EoC helps enhance employee

involvement in sustainability‐related behaviors at work. In so doing,

we make three significant contributions. First, we propose an alterna-

tive conceptual micro‐foundation for sustainability within organiza-

tions grounded in an EoC and thus draw on distinct normative

processes relative to extant research to inform how greater sustain-

ability might be achieved in organizations. Second, we extend the very

limited amount of empirical work that has examined the organizational

implications of an EoC and contribute the first empirical study that

examines the potential of developing caring organizations for sustain-

ability. Third, using two empirical studies we explore how the influence

of an organizational EoC on employee sustainability behaviors is con-

tingent on employee organizational identification and affective reac-

tion to organizational sustainability efforts. Thus, we hope to expand

research that examines the situational and contextual factors that

shape employee sustainability attitudes and behaviors in the

workplace.

2|THEORY AND HYPOTHESIS

DEVELOPMENT

2.1 |An ethic of care and employee involvement in

sustainability activities

The EoC perspective emphasizes relationships, people's needs, and the

situations and realities in which dilemmas arise as a context for moral

judgment and decisions (Gilligan, 1982; Held, 2005; Noddings, 2003;

in Lawrence & Maitlis, 2012). Its origins can be traced to feminist moral

theory that challenges dominant models of moral maturity, such as

Kohlberg's (1969) stages of moral development, which proposes an

alternative normative basis for moral decision‐making grounded in a

“‘care perspective’that pays more attention to people's needs, to

how actual relations between people can be maintained and repaired,

and that values narrative and sensitivity to context in arriving at moral

judgments”(Gilligan, 1982, quoted in Held, 2005, p. 28). Thus,

Lawrence and Maitlis (2012) conclude that an EoC contrasts with

other moral perspectives that emphasize rational, universal, principle,

or rule‐based and impersonal approaches to ethics (Held, 2005), based

CARMELI ET AL.1381