IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/ers/journl/vxxvy2022i4p308-322.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Evaluation of Corporate Sustainability Strategies and Practices in this Area in the Opinion of Employees – A Comparative Analysis in Poland and India

Author

Listed:
  • Teresa Kupczyk
  • Andrzej Wiatrak
  • Elwira Gross-Golacka
  • Joanna Kubicka

Abstract

Purpose: The purpose of the study was to identify and analyze the opiniions of employees regarding the existence of a sustainability strategy in their companies, included in the long-term strategy of the company, with specific indicators describing the results, in relation to the practices used, based on the experience in Poland and India. In particular, the research conducted was aimed at finding answers to the research problems posed, which took the form of the following questions: Q1. In the opinion of employees, is there a sustainability strategy in the companies, included in the long-term strategy of the company, with specified indicators describing the results? Q2. In this regard, are there differences in the opinions of employees from the point of view of various criteria such as country of origin, gender, age, education, place of residence, job position, size of the company and type of business? Q3. Is there a statistically significant relationship between the employees' evaluation of the existence of a sustainability strategy and their assessment of the degree of sustainability of the company's operations, their sense of trust in their employer and their perception of the benefits after the implementation of sustainable changes in the company. Design/Methodology/Approach: The method of analysis and criticism of the literature, the method of diagnostic survey and statistical methods were used to verify the theses and answer the research questions. A quantitative-qualitative study was conducted, based on a survey questionnaire among 449 employees of companies in Poland and India. Non-parametric tests were used to analyze the data. The results of the responses given on the rank scales according to the grouping variables were analyzed using the Mann-Whitney U test, and the Kruskal-Wallis ANOVA test. The existence of a trend for consecutive populations was measured by the Jonckheere-Terpstra test. Associations between variables were analyzed by estimating Spearman's Rank Correlation Coefficient. Statistical analyses were performed using the statistical package PQStat version 1.6.4.122. Findings: The opinions of employees regarding the existence of a sustainability strategy in companies and practices in this regard were determined based on examples from Poland and India. It turned out that only some employees perceive the existence of a sustainability strategy in the companies that employ them, included in the company's long-term strategy, with specified indicators describing the results. Smaller companies still have problems implementing proper sustainability strategies. Practical implication: The results of the research can support managers responsible for the implementation of companies' strategic plans related to sustainable development. This is because they will allow a better understanding of how employees evaluate existing strategies and what actions allow to increase this evaluation. Originality/value: It turned out that in India and Poland, employees' assessments of sustainability strategies in companies were significantly different with regard to their practices in this regard. On the basis of Spearman's rank correlation coefficient, it was found that there was no statistically significant relationship between employees' assessment of the existence of sustainability strategies and their evaluation of the degree of sustainability of the company's operations, their sense of trust in their employer and their perception of the benefits they perceive from making sustainable changes in the company.

Suggested Citation

  • Teresa Kupczyk & Andrzej Wiatrak & Elwira Gross-Golacka & Joanna Kubicka, 2022. "Evaluation of Corporate Sustainability Strategies and Practices in this Area in the Opinion of Employees – A Comparative Analysis in Poland and India," European Research Studies Journal, European Research Studies Journal, vol. 0(4), pages 308-322.
    • Handle: RePEc:ers:journl:v:xxv:y:2022:i:4:p:308-322
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://ersj.eu/journal/3083/download
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Elwira Gross-Gołacka & Ewa Szkudlarek & Agnieszka Brzegowy & Teresa Kupczyk & Magdalena Ligaj, 2022. "Well-being among IT Employees Working Remotely: Post Covid-19 Reality from the Perspective of IT Industry," European Research Studies Journal, European Research Studies Journal, vol. 0(2), pages 223-235.
    2. Sugumar Mariappanadar & Ina Aust, 2017. "The Dark Side of Overwork: An Empirical Evidence of Social Harm of Work from a Sustainable HRM Perspective," International Studies of Management & Organization, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 47(4), pages 372-387, September.
    3. Gunasekaran, Angappa & Spalanzani, Alain, 2012. "Sustainability of manufacturing and services: Investigations for research and applications," International Journal of Production Economics, Elsevier, vol. 140(1), pages 35-47.
    4. Robert B. Gibson, 2006. "Beyond The Pillars: Sustainability Assessment As A Framework For Effective Integration Of Social, Economic And Ecological Considerations In Significant Decision-Making," Journal of Environmental Assessment Policy and Management (JEAPM), World Scientific Publishing Co. Pte. Ltd., vol. 8(03), pages 259-280.
    5. Pfeffer, Jeffrey, 2010. "Building Sustainable Organizations: The Human Factor," Research Papers 2017r, Stanford University, Graduate School of Business.
    6. Nilsson, Måns & Persson, Åsa, 2012. "Reprint of “Can Earth system interactions be governed? Governance functions for linking climate change mitigation with land use, freshwater and biodiversity protection”," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 81(C), pages 10-20.
    7. Nilsson, Måns & Persson, Åsa, 2012. "Can Earth system interactions be governed? Governance functions for linking climate change mitigation with land use, freshwater and biodiversity protection," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 75(C), pages 61-71.
    8. Therese Fagerlind & Martin Stefanicki & Andreas Feldmann & Jouni Korhonen, 2019. "The Distribution of Sustainable Decision-Making in Multinational Manufacturing Enterprises," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 11(18), pages 1-17, September.
    9. Frances Drake & Martin Purvis & Jane Hunt, 2004. "Meeting the environmental challenge: a case of win–win or lose–win? A study of the UK baking and refrigeration industries," Business Strategy and the Environment, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 13(3), pages 172-186, May.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Teresa Kupczyk & Elwira Gross-Golacka & Joanna Kubicka, 2023. "Training Employees in Sustainability and Assessing their Ability to Implement Bottom-up Changes in Companies for the Green Revolution – A Comparative Analysis in Poland and India," European Research Studies Journal, European Research Studies Journal, vol. 0(1), pages 94-107.
    2. Frantzeskaki, Niki & Buchel, Sophie & Spork, Charlie & Ludwig, Kathrin & Kok, Marcel T.J., 2019. "The Multiple Roles of ICLEI: Intermediating to Innovate Urban Biodiversity Governance," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 164(C), pages 1-1.
    3. Agata Gurzawska & Markus Mäkinen & Philip Brey, 2017. "Implementation of Responsible Research and Innovation (RRI) Practices in Industry: Providing the Right Incentives," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 9(10), pages 1-26, September.
    4. Daniel Kiel & Julian M. Müller & Christian Arnold & Kai-Ingo Voigt, 2017. "Sustainable Industrial Value Creation: Benefits And Challenges Of Industry 4.0," International Journal of Innovation Management (ijim), World Scientific Publishing Co. Pte. Ltd., vol. 21(08), pages 1-34, December.
    5. Michelle Scobie, 2018. "Accountability in climate change governance and Caribbean SIDS," Environment, Development and Sustainability: A Multidisciplinary Approach to the Theory and Practice of Sustainable Development, Springer, vol. 20(2), pages 769-787, April.
    6. Galaz, Victor & Biermann, Frank & Folke, Carl & Nilsson, Måns & Olsson, Per, 2012. "Global environmental governance and planetary boundaries: An introduction," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 81(C), pages 1-3.
    7. Brian G. Fitzgerald & Travis O'Doherty & Richard Moles & Bernadette O'Regan, 2015. "Quantitative Evaluation of Settlement Sustainability Policy (QESSP); Forward Planning for 26 Irish Settlements," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 7(2), pages 1-21, February.
    8. Anastasiia Moldavska & Torgeir Welo, 2018. "Testing and Verification of a New Corporate Sustainability Assessment Method for Manufacturing: A Multiple Case Research Study," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 10(11), pages 1-40, November.
    9. Xuemei Bai & Syezlin Hasan & Lauren Seaby Andersen & Anders Bjørn & Şiir Kilkiş & Daniel Ospina & Jianguo Liu & Sarah E. Cornell & Oscar Sabag Muñoz & Ariane Bremond & Beatrice Crona & Fabrice DeClerc, 2024. "Translating Earth system boundaries for cities and businesses," Nature Sustainability, Nature, vol. 7(2), pages 108-119, February.
    10. Vaissière, Anne-Charlotte & Levrel, Harold & Pioch, Sylvain & Carlier, Antoine, 2014. "Biodiversity offsets for offshore wind farm projects: The current situation in Europe," Marine Policy, Elsevier, vol. 48(C), pages 172-183.
    11. Živilė Stankevičiūtė & Asta Savanevičienė, 2018. "Designing Sustainable HRM: The Core Characteristics of Emerging Field," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 10(12), pages 1-23, December.
    12. Dona Azizi, 0. "Access and allocation in food governance, a decadal view 2008–2018," International Environmental Agreements: Politics, Law and Economics, Springer, vol. 0, pages 1-16.
    13. Christian Voegtlin & Andreas Georg Scherer, 2017. "Responsible Innovation and the Innovation of Responsibility: Governing Sustainable Development in a Globalized World," Journal of Business Ethics, Springer, vol. 143(2), pages 227-243, June.
    14. Živilė Stankevičiūtė & Asta Savanevičienė, 2018. "Raising the Curtain in People Management by Exploring How Sustainable HRM Translates to Practice: The Case of Lithuanian Organizations," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 10(12), pages 1-31, November.
    15. Ashton, Lisa, 2022. "A framework for promoting natural climate solutions in the agriculture sector," Land Use Policy, Elsevier, vol. 122(C).
    16. Shaikh, M. Abdullah & Hadjikakou, Michalis & Geyik, Ozge & Bryan, Brett A., 2024. "Assessing global agri-food system exceedance of national cropland limits for linking responsible consumption and production under SDG 12," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 215(C).
    17. Verbruggen, Aviel, 2013. "Revocability and reversibility in societal decision-making," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 85(C), pages 20-27.
    18. Christian Voegtlin & Andreas Georg Scherer & Günter K. Stahl & Olga Hawn, 2022. "Grand Societal Challenges and Responsible Innovation," Journal of Management Studies, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 59(1), pages 1-28, January.
    19. Christian Voegtlin & Andreas Georg Scherer & Günter K Stahl & Olga Hawn, 2022. "Grand Societal Challenges and Responsible Innovation," Post-Print hal-03466563, HAL.
    20. Dona Azizi, 2020. "Access and allocation in food governance, a decadal view 2008–2018," International Environmental Agreements: Politics, Law and Economics, Springer, vol. 20(2), pages 323-338, June.

    More about this item

    Keywords

    Generation Z; salary; expectations; requirements.;
    All these keywords.

    JEL classification:

    • J24 - Labor and Demographic Economics - - Demand and Supply of Labor - - - Human Capital; Skills; Occupational Choice; Labor Productivity
    • M12 - Business Administration and Business Economics; Marketing; Accounting; Personnel Economics - - Business Administration - - - Personnel Management; Executives; Executive Compensation

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:ers:journl:v:xxv:y:2022:i:4:p:308-322. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Marios Agiomavritis (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://ersj.eu/ .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.