Master’s thesis, 30 hp
Sustainable human
resources management
Constructed and negotiated by
HR professionals
Abstract
This present paper analyses how HR professionals construct and negotiate sustainable human resources management (HRM). The empirical data is collected through five interviews with six informants and in the Swedish working context. A Foucauldian inspired qualitative discourse analysis reveals how sustainability is seen as an important part of HR, and moreover, societal sustainability is seen as the main focus of HR. Contrary to most of the prior sustainability HR research, the discourse of ecological sustainability was not activated to the same extent as the other societal discourses. Instead, the study showed that in the Swedish work context, the matters of health promotion, equality and diversity are seen as more essential.
Acknowledgements
First and foremost, I would like to express sincere gratitude to my respondents for taking time to participate in this study, especially during the difficult times of global pandemic. Without your contribution, I have not been able to follow out this research.
Secondly, I want to give special thanks to my supervisor Ann-Louise Silfver for her dedicated guidance and support. Her being as inspiring supervisor as she was, motivated me to continue the writing process during changing circumstances. Your encouragement truly held me on the right track and our inspiring conversations around sustainability will always be remembered.
Last but not least, I want to thank my supportive friends and sister that have been there for me during this process. Your never ending support has been uplifting and meaningful during this time.
Thank you!
Aliisa Uotila
Introduction 1
Purpose 4
Contextualizing sustainability 5
Societal discourse of sustainability 5
Agenda 2030 6
Corporate Social responsibility (CSR) 6
The law of sustainability reports 7
Previous research 8
Strategic HR and sustainability 9
Green HRM 10
Operative HRM and sustainability 11
Organization culture 11
Employer branding 11
Leadership 11
Training 12
Analysis of the previous research 12
Methodology 14
Discourse theory 14
Foucault’s discourse theory 15
Sampling 16
Pilot study 17
Qualitative in-depth interviews 18
Data collection and processing 19
Trustworthiness and quality 22
Ethics 23
Sustainability as an unsure given 25
Sustainability as a good working environment 29
Sustainability as an organizational culture 31
Sustainability as health promotion 33
Sustainability as equality and diversity 34
Sustainability as employer branding 36
Sustainability as good leadership 39
Summary 41
Analysis and discussion 42
HR and social sustainability 42
HR and economic sustainability 44
Silences: HR and ecological sustainability 44
HR and CSR 45
How is sustainable HRM discursively constructed among HR professionals? 46 How do HR professionals negotiate what sustainable HRM means in the context of their own
companies? 47
Methodological reflection 47
Implication for further research and practice 49
References 50
Appendix 1 Information letter 57
Appendix 2 Interview guide 58
Introduction
This thesis explores the role of sustainability in Human Resources (HR). The debate of sustainability is not new, yet the term sustainability is still an equivocal term, with multiple meanings (Portney, 2015) and the concept of sustainability tends to be more confusing than clarifying (World Ocean Review, 2015). The World Commission on Environment and Development in 1987 stated that sustainability is an economic-development activity that “meets the needs of the present without compromising the ability of future generations to meet their own needs” (Portney, 2015, p. 2). To its core, sustainability is a concept that focuses on the condition of Planet Earth’s biophysical environment, especially concerning the use and consumption of natural resources. In other words, sustainability is about finding a steady-state where the Earth can support the human population and our economic growth without threatening the health of humans, animals, and plants. The basic assumption of sustainability is that the Earth’s resources cannot be used, consumed, and damaged endlessly (Portney, 2015). Sustainability in the context of the business world is implemented by a theory of Triple Bottom Line which was introduced by John Elkington (1994) to evaluate and measure the environmental and social business performance in addition to the financial one. The Triple Bottom Line is also called the three P’s: Profit, Planet and People. The profit element is about long-term financial health, the planet dimension is about not doing harm for the environment with the production and operations of the company and lastly, the people dimension encompasses how the company treats employees, regarding for instance working conditions and ethics. (Willard, 2012)
people can live productive, vibrant and peaceful lives on a healthy planet”. (United Nations, 2019) Agenda 2030 and global sustainability goals are integrated into three dimensions of sustainable development. The dimensions are economic, social, and environmental sustainability (Regeringskansliet, 2016). Climate change has been brought up broadly by different global actors but also created global movements like Fridays for Future. In August 2018, 15-year-old Greta Thunberg began a school strike for climate. She sat outside the Swedish Parliament demanding actions on the climate crisis and she sparked an international awakening. Fridays for Future is seen as part of a hopeful new wave of change. (Fridays for Future, 2020).
Agenda 2030 is the UN’s global goal for sustainable development and has the aim to create sustainable development all around the world. Agenda 2030 is seen as a framework in the Swedish politics since 2015 and it guides sustainable development in hole country from regional governance to municipalities (Regeringskansliet, 2018). To be able to measure the development in sustainability in Sweden, Swedish government has implemented different actions like naming an Agenda 2030-declaration. Several other authorities are also involved in the sustainability work. (Regeringskansliet, 2018) For example, the Swedish Work Environment Authority in collaboration with VINNOVA funded a platform called “the Sustainable Work 2020”. This collaboration platform is between researchers and community actors that promotes increased EU funding for research on specifically a sustainable working life. Promoting a sustainable working life is not only a challenge for Sweden, but for the whole EU and the rest of the world. (Arbetsmiljöverket, 2020)
Purpose
The aim of the thesis is to discursively explore and analyze how sustainable HRM is constructed and negotiated by HR professionals in the Swedish work context. The study is guided by the following research questions:
Contextualizing sustainability
In this section of the thesis I set out to trace three societal discourses of sustainability which, I argue, set the agenda for how sustainability is understood and negotiated. I further link these to corporate social responsibility (CSR) which is a discourse and practice developed to meet demands of sustainability in the corporate context. A final important contextualization deals with legal frameworks placing demands on companies in Sweden to, under certain circumstances, produce sustainability reports detailing how the company works with issues of sustainability.
Societal discourse of sustainability
Agenda 2030
As presented in the introduction, Agenda 2030 is the UN's global sustainable development goals (United Nations, 2019). In the context of working-life and thereby HRM, the goals 3, 5, 8 and 10 are assessed to be especially meaningful and interesting. The global goal 3 is good
health and well-being which is about “Ensuring healthy lives and promoting well-being for all
at all ages”. (United Nations, 2019) The global goal 5 is gender equality (United Nations, 2019). Gender equality is one of the most important goals in Swedish context. The uneven distribution of unpaid work between the genders is argued to be one of the major obstacles to women's and girls’ participating in the labor market under the same conditions as boys and men. (Regeringskansliet, 2015) The global goal 8 decent work and economic growth where the goal is to ensure the inclusive and long-term sustainable economic growth (United Nations, 2019). Sustainable economic growth should include productive employment and decent working conditions for everyone. (Regeringskansliet, 2015) Lastly, global 10 reduced
inequalities (United Nations, 2019). Reducing inequalities is based on the principle of equal
society. Everyone should have equal rights regardless of for example, gender, sexual orientation, ethnicity or disability. (Regeringskansliet, 2015)
Corporate Social responsibility (CSR)
The law of sustainability reports
In the Swedish context, a final issue is important to highlight, namely the demand on certain companies to account for their sustainability work. In 2016 Sweden established a new sustainability law, which clarified the business responsibility in relation to sustainability work. In the annual act (SPF1995:1554) sixth chapter three new paragraphs have been added, 10-12 §, which states which businesses that are covered by the law and that sustainability reports should be conducted. The 10 § presents which companies are responsible to conduct a sustainability rapport. If the company has two of three of the following criteria, the company have the obligation to present a sustainability rapport:
(1) The average amount of employees are more than 250 persons (2) The company declared total liabilities is more than SEK 175 million (3) The company’s declared net income is more than SEK 350 million
Previous research
In this section, previous research regarding sustainable HRM will be reported. First, I will present the databases, keywords, and inclusion criteria used when identifying the previous research. Next, I present my approaches while reviewing the previous research. Thereafter, I will present my point of departure in choosing the concepts regarding sustainability and HR. This determination of what is included in this study is done because sustainability is a complex concept and further, to find a focus to the presentation of the previous research that supports the scope of the study. Lastly, an analysis of the previous research will be provided.
Web of Science and Scopus were used in the search for previous research. In addition, Umeå University’s database was used to get access to articles that were referenced in articles identified in the key word search. One of the inclusion criteria for the selected articles was the year of publication. The research articles reviewed in this paper are from the last ten years, 2010-2020. The ambition was to gain research articles from different fields of research to ensure the consideration of the different approaches to sustainability and HR. Therefore, I used three different databases. The articles reviewed were written within the fields of management, business, human resources management, and social sciences.
the relation between strategic HRM and sustainability. While examining articles concerning the association between strategic HR and sustainability, I used search words "strategic HRM" and "sustainability". When these key terms were applied at the same time they provided 14 articles from Web of Science and 19 articles from Scopus. Lastly, in operative HR and sustainability was included. I used key terms “operative HRM” and sustainability, that provided 2 hits from Web of Science and Scopus did not provide any hits at all. Therefore, I used those already reviewed articles that reviewed operational HR, even though they were not calling it by that term.
I started the reviewing of the articles by reflecting on the abstracts and conclusions from the chosen articles and ensuring that the articles would be in the scope of interest for this research. After reviewing the abstracts and conclusions of the articles, the articles that were relevant for this study were reviewed further. The articles chosen for this section will be presented and analysed in relation to each other. The aim with this section is to provide a reliable overview and validation of the previous research that has been done in the field of sustainable HR. While reviewing the previous studies, the challenge was to determine how to interpret the different concepts of sustainability. Therefore, I decided to include strategic HR and sustainability, green HRM, and finally operative HRM and sustainability into this research, which also are the thematic categories in this section. The choice of these thematic categories is based on the ambition to cover the whole spectrum of sustainability work in HR and the fact that these concepts showed to be connected to sustainable HR.
Strategic HR and sustainability
organizational development, which are seen as basic competencies of HR. In addition, the internal and external social structures are the main development targets of the sustainability efforts. HR has good management tools to effectively re-coordinate and mobilize employees and therefore, HR has a key role in putting sustainability processes in action. The social structures of a company are often seen as the key resource but also the possible roadblock and therefore, the transaction of sustainability goals is often seen as part of HR’s work. (DuBois and Dubois, 2012)
Green HRM
Operative HRM and sustainability
Organization culture
Organizational culture has shown to increase positive attitudes toward sustainability within organizations (Ahmad, 2015; Lo et al., 2012). The formal and informal structures relating to sustainability within organizations support awareness of and attitudes to sustainability among employees. Organizational structures and social norms supporting sustainability agendas are vital for implementation (Lo et al., 2012) since employees are more likely to implement sustainable behavior at their workplace if the employer takes action in developing organizational culture towards sustainability (Dumitru et al., 2016). When an employee shares the same values as the company, the employee is more likely to feel proud of working in a particular company (Tang et al., 2018). In addition, sustainability awareness among employees also sets expectations on the company and its sustainability agenda (Bombiak, 2019).
Employer branding
Sustainability has become a significant part of employer branding and, therefore, companies are willing to highlight their sustainability work. Job-seekers tend to search for information about a company's environmental performance and the found description is used to determine how the company is treating its employees. As a consequence, companies that have sustainability profiles attract job-seekers that share the same values. (Tang et al., 2018). Furthermore, a company that has a sustainability profile is attractive among young people and university graduates. Thoughtful employer branding with sustainability in focus has proved positive for the recruitment processes, which it is argued, supports the economic profit of the company (Grolleau et al., 2012). The companies face different societal challenges, for example demographic changes and the mismatch between current skills. These challenges have highlighted the importance of employer branding. Companies have to attract and retain the right competence in the company. Thus, it is important that HR implements long-term solutions, like attracting employees who share and are committed to a sustainability culture as well as values. (Stankevičiūtė and Savanevičienė, 2018)
Leadership
HR needs to work with all levels of management to ensure that every manager is in fact implementing the sustainability agenda and communicating it to the employees (DuBois and Dubois, 2012). Positive engagement from the leader or executive team supports the future development of corporate sustainability (Paillé et al., 2014). If a company’s leadership is open-minded towards innovative sustainability solutions, it supports the development of a sustainable mindset among the employees (Daily et al., 2012). While pursuing sustainability goals, organizational managers should address the needs and interests of employees to ensure the positive effect among the employees and their workplace performance (Shen et al., 2018). However, as DuBois and DuBois (2012) argues, HR does not have a proactive role in sustainability initiatives, since HR neither design nor leads the initiatives. HR’s main function is to support leader and company visions, and therefore, HRM cannot drive sustainability agendas if these are not initiated from the executive level (DuBois and Dubois, 2012).
Training
Employee training has shown to be a crucial part of creating involvement around sustainability work at the companies. Sustainability training increases consciousness among employees as well as leaders. Further, sustainability training has shown positive developments of internal relations, communication, and empowerment, motivating employees to develop ways of working and consequently improving job satisfaction. (Dumitru et al., 2016) Moreover, studies have shown that sustainability training has positive effects on job performance (Bin Saeed et al., 2019). To ensure empowerment and involvement, sustainability training should be executed at every organizational level (Daily et al., 2012).
Analysis of the previous research
Methodology
In this section, the methodological framework of the study is presented. Discourse theory and more specifically Foucauldian inspired discourse theory is applied in this study. The strategies for the data collection, informant sampling, and data processing are presented to ensure the trustworthiness and quality of the study. After the description of strategic methodological choices, ethical considerations will be addressed.
Discourse theory
As its most common definition, discourse analysis has the aim to analyze the patterns of language structures in different social contexts and to understand language as a system that constitutes the social world, identity, and relations. (Winther Jørgensen & Philips, 2002). Discourse analysis sets out to problematize the essence of phenomena and focuses on the pre-understanding underlying the social constructions of reality (Börjesson, 2002) and meaning-making in social life (Wetherell, Taylor and Yates, 2001). Discourse analysis is ontologically social constructivist. Social constructivism rests on some general philosophical assumptions, one being the skepticism of taken-for-granted knowledge. Our interpretation of our world and knowledge should not be handled as an objective truth. Knowledge and knowing are seen as products of our ways to categorize the world and products of discourses. (Winther Jørgensen & Philips, 2002) According to social constructionist premises, knowledge is not just a reflection of reality, rather it is discursively constructed in relation to both time and place (Wetherell, Taylor and Yates, 2001). Knowledge is created in the social processes as well as maintained through these, knowledge production is in other words a relational process. Because discourse analysis aims at gaining knowledge regarding consequential bits of social life (Wetherell, Taylor and Yates, 2001), social constructivism as an ontological point of departure is emphasized in this research.
analyze the taken-for-granted knowledge concerning sustainability and HR. In addition, the knowledge and understanding that HR specialists have regarding sustainable HR can be seen as a creation of social processes and social interaction, and therefore, discourse analysis that has the ambition to critically examine these social processes is suitable to accomplish the aim of the study. (Winther Jørgensen and Philips, 2002).
Foucault’s discourse theory
In this research, Michael Foucault's discourse theory is chosen to be the foundation for the analysis of sustainable HRM. Foucauldian discourse theory investigates the relation between power and knowledge, and how this establishes certain discourses as influential in certain times and contexts (Börjesson, 2003), and the theory adheres to the general social constructionist assumptions such as knowledge is not just a reflection of reality (Andersen, 2003; Winther Jørgensen and Phillips, 2002). According to Foucault’s theory, power creates both our social world and the ways the world can be talked about. Discourse is influenced by power, and discourse creates us as subjects and the objects that we know something about. In other words, our knowledge is related to power. (Winther Jørgensen and Phillips, 2002) Different from other discursive analytical approaches, Foucauldian discourse theory shifts the attention from ‘language’ to ‘discourse’. In other words, the focus is not on the analysis of language, but discourse as a system of presentations (Wetherell, Taylor and Yates, 2001).
ambition to break down the barriers around objectivity and subjectivity and instead focus on the discourses which are constructed in unconsciousness and by the individual in a specific context. (Larsson, 2001) In addition, when Foucauldian theory is implemented, the silences and tensions are seen as a reflection of the power relations and therefore interesting to analyze (Rönnblom, 2014). In the context of this research, the analysis is done from the point of departure of societal discourses regarding sustainability presented earlier under the heading
Contextualizing sustainability. By this, my point of departure is that the informants are seen to
understood as affected by the societal discourses of sustainability and moreover, activating and negotiating these discourses in relation to HR. In other words, the informants are understood to be influenced by these societal discourses and the context. These assumptions allow me to analyze these activations but also the silences and tensions in relation to the societal discourses.
Sampling
The sampling strategy used in this research is a purposeful sampling (Creswell and Poth, 2018; Bryman, 2012). Within purposeful sampling, the informant selection is based on criteria that determine how well they can produce useful information regarding the topic of interest. (Bryman, 2012). The selection of the companies was purposeful and based on the company's sustainability profile. The chosen companies’ sustainability profile or agenda was evaluated by reviewing available sustainability documents and the companies’ websites, where the sustainability work is represented. A sampling of the companies emphasized both heterogeneity (branch) as well as homogeneity (profiling as sustainable). The choice to select different companies was based on the ambition to examine the possibility for different discourses regarding sustainability in HR on different branches.
during the research. The informants received an information letter (appendix 1) with further information regarding the interviews and the study. Also, ethical considerations were presented at the beginning of every interview allowing the informant to invoke any considerations they might have. Five interviews were carried out using the online communication application Microsoft Teams and one was, due to technical issues, held over the phone. The informants 5 and 6 came from the same company and where therefore interviewed at the same time.
To ensure the anonymity of the company and the informants, the informants and the companies are anonymized. The representation of the informants provides a background to the analysis of the discourses, and therefore, it is important to provide information about the branches which are presented in the analysis section of the research. Like mentioned earlier, the selection of companies was based on their sustainability profile and the ambition was to interview HR professionals from different branches. The informants in this research are:
Informant 1: Head of HR for food industry
Informant 2: Head of HR for a manufacturing industry
Informant 3: Head of marketing and quality for a recruitment company Informant 4: HR-strategist in the water and waste industry
Informant 5: HR-generalist at a media company Informant 6: CEO at a media company
The number of informants were based on considerations of saturation (Bryman, 2012). After the last interview, the same topics were raised by the majority of the informants. Therefore, I decided to not carry out further interviews.
Pilot study
leading the informant to give answers that would be in most favor of the research. Based on the analysis, the interview techniques were discussed and developed together with the supervisor. Instead of directional questions, I focused on open questions allowing the informants to develop their thoughts instead of directing them. The interview questions turned out to provide the empirical data that was desired, and thus, the interview questions were not changed after the pilot interview.
Qualitative in-depth interviews
In-depth interviews are often described as a form of conversation with a purpose, influenced by postmodern thinking on the nature of interviewing. In this research, a heuristic approach where personal experiences are an essential part of the process and knowledge is created in collaboration between the researcher and the interviewee is implemented. In other words, empirics and knowledge are constructed in human interaction, although an in-depth interview has little resemblance to everyday human interaction. (Legard, Keegan and Ward, 2003) In-depth interviews comprehend knowledge as something that is created in a unique situation, and therefore, an in-depth interview is appropriate when studying discourses. (Legard, Keegan and Ward, 2003)
Open questions are applies in the interviews. One of the advantages is that the informants can share knowledge that the researcher might not have, and therefore, new aspects around the topics are accomplished. The informants can also answer on their terms, which creates rich data for the researcher. Therefore, open questions is an optimal choice while applying discourse theory. However, open questions do have their disadvantages. The method is time-consuming, which is a challenge when the time is a limitation. Also, while implementing open questions, one challenge for the researcher is not to influence the informant to give certain answers. (Bryman, 2012)
informants had not been able to answer the question in their native language. The interview started with personal factual questions, where the informants provided their personal information, such as name and occupation. As mentioned earlier, all of the interviews were carried out via Microsoft Teams or by phone. Face-to-face interaction was discouraged by the university because of an ongoing Coronavirus pandemic. The interviews were taped with a phone and a recorder to make the transcription process, and the coding, possible and more relevant. The informants were asked for their permission before taping, which follows a proper ethical framework in research.
Data collection and processing
The empirical data produced through the in-depth interviews were transcript and analyzed by the author. The interviews were transcript to be able to implement thoughtful coding of the data. The empirical data was deductively analyzed (Fejes & Thornberg, 2009) i.e. the analysis was theory-driven, guided by Foucault’s discourse theory. The analysis focused on identifying discourses activated by the respondents regarding sustainability and HR and how these discourses are established from the societal discourses of sustainability. As mentioned earlier, the discourse-analytical field is wide and has different approaches. However, Foucauldian’s theory does not provide a toolkit for analysis and therefore, a Foucauldian inspired analytical framework of discourse-power-knowledge is implemented in the data processing. The point of departure for the coding process was an assumption inspired by a Foucauldian perspective, namely that discussions of sustainability in HR relates to available societal discourses on sustainability. In other words, I have in my analysis focused on which societal discourses on sustainability the informants activated when making meaning of sustainability and HR, and I have also analyzed the tensions and negotiations in this process of activating. (Bäcktorp, 2007) In line with Bäcktorp (2007) I have understood the informants to simultaneously operate within available discourses as well as continuously negotiating the limits and borders of these.
Table 1: Example of the coding process
Examples from the interviews Condensation Discourses
Informant 2: Mmm… That is an
interesting question on how one should… see sustainability and
HR… It can be seen from different, well perspectives, everything from… that you think
little more practical today… I mean… How you do today, everything from how you work with marketing, digitalization,
meetup students, employer branding, and the whole that
part… so… yeah, it depends what you use for perspective…
Sustainability in HR has multiple perspectives and practices
Sustainability as unsure given
Informant 1: “... I think the
most difficult challenge is really to be… to find a sustainable
work environment for HR specialists and salary specialists,
we are working on our lives, there is so much to work with, it
never comes to an end with HR issues, their will only come more
and more matters we get involved, more questions from the organization… so you must
not be afraid to work… ”
A challenge for HR is that there is so much issues to work with
and the work load is never ending
Trustworthiness and quality
Reliability and validity are concepts that are often more used in quantitative research to estimate the quality of the research. These are not directly suitable to assess in qualitative research. (Fejes and Thornberg, 2009) Instead of the phrase reliability and validity, in qualitative research it often uses the term trustworthiness (Rolfe, 2006). The point of departure when the reliability and validity is evaluated in this research is the concept of trustworthiness presented by Graneheim and Lundman (2004). According to Graneheim and Lundman, (2004), trustworthiness includes the concepts of credibility, dependability, and transferability.
which allows the informants to tell their unique story, which is a strength in this research. (Graneheim and Lundman, 2004; Bryman, 2012)
Transferability is also included in the question of trustworthiness. Transferability anticipatethe extent that the findings can be transferred to other research settings. To ensure the transferability, I have provided a clear and distinct description of the context of the research. In addition, the selection and characteristics of participants, data collection and the analysis processes is presented thoroughly. (Graneheim and Lundman, 2004) Transferability can also be related to the theoretical understanding of discourses. I have based my discursive analysis on a starting point that assumes that the informants, like other members of society and members of the specific HR profession, relate to societal discourses of sustainability and the discourses that are activated are related to the professional practice. Thus, there is reason to assume that my results, although limited, can also be transferable to other similar activities, at least in a Swedish context.
Ethics
Ethical considerations concern the research participants and data collection. The researcher has the responsibility towards informants and the researcher is expected to strive for high quality. The ethical requirements presented by the Swedish Research Council (2017) based on society’s general ethical norms and values, provided the ethical framework and is implemented in this research. This is in line with the ethical framework presented in Ritchie et al., (2014), who presents the following as a framework:
● A research should be justifiable and not make unreasonable demands on informants ● Participation in the research should be based on consent
● Participation should be voluntary and free from pressure
● Unfavorable consequences of participation should be avoided, and risks of harm known ● Confidentiality and anonymity should be respected
● When I had the first contact with the informants, I asked if they were interested to participate in the research. Therefore, participation in this research is voluntarily. ● The informant received full information regarding their rights and the intention of the
research in the information letter (appendix 2). The information provided in the information letter is based on the ethical framework by the Swedish Research Council (2017).
● The informants were informed at the beginning of the interview of their rights regarding end their participation at any time.
● In addition, they were informed about the anonymity of the informant and the company. To protect the identity of the informants and provide confidentiality (Swedish Research Council, 2017; Ritchie et al., 2014), informants’ names and companies are not revealed, and therefore, the anonymity was secured.
Results
In this section, the results are presented. The structure of this part of the research is based on founded discourses of sustainable HR that were activated by the informants. In presenting the result, I present quotes from the interviews, with the aim to reinforce the argumentation of the discourses. The quotes represented in the sections are translated from Swedish to English.
Sustainability as an unsure given
Sustainability was defined and discussed differently by the informants. They generally experienced challenges in activating all of the three societal discourses of sustainability (social, economic, and ecological). The majority of the informants did activate the discourses of social and economic sustainability. However, activation of the discourse regarding ecological sustainability seemed not to be as available or seen as important: “The economic and the environmental issues are in our thoughts with us of course, but maybe specially us, or our HR focuses more on the social and economic sustainability…” (Informant 2, 202-204) Also, the definition of sustainable HR proved to not be as widely known and thus equally difficult to relate to. As mentioned earlier, all of the companies in this study have an outspoken sustainability profile. However, sustainability was difficult to define by all of the HR professionals therefore, sustainability in HR emerged as an unsure given. Despite the not being able to clearly state what sustainability meant in their respective contexts, all of the informants argued that they are working with sustainability in HR. To exemplify this, a quote from informant 1 is provided. The informant describes how sustainability is not defined, but is seen more as a framework in the company:
But as an answer to the last question how we define it, we haven’t defined it (sustainability) like that, but it is more seen as a big framework, I think, in which you can accommodate this with transportation, quality of the products, food security, hygiene, good workplace. there are so many parts in it so… but I have to think about how to define it… yes, it is an input for me haha....(Informant 1,
137-141)
context of organizational culture. Informant 3 replied when asked about how the company’s sustainability profile affects the HR work:
Well everything we do is as part of our culture and the power comes from our employees so it's not ... it's ... it's like no other issue, sustainability is like a part of us, it's not a separate issue ... (Informant
3, 102-104)
However, prompted by my question, informant 1 feels the need to define sustainability and therefore indicates to take the matter further as an input to the company. Informant 2 also sees sustainability as being a guideline to multiple functions in the company:
Aaa… yes so...yes… I’m trying to think what you want me to answer to this… this with… so sustainability is about we have to take responsibility in economic perspective, take social responsibility, that we take our environmental responsibility and we can think from HR’s point of departure so then… maybe for me… even if I always think holistically it is a lot about the social responsibility... (Informant 2,
49-53)
Err… Yes, but it is part of the attractiveness, there is no way to deny the fact that everyone who changes jobs now, want to work with a company who work with sustainability for real, not just with “green washing” and therefore, we must to do a difference, it is a crucial part in being an attractive employer… like from the perspective of HR how I see it. Purely spontaneous. (Informant 3, 134-138)
Being aware is not enough, it is also important with communication regarding the sustainability work that the company engages in. Informant 3 also argues that the company should focus on matters where the company makes the biggest difference: “...we have decided to take focus on our area of expertise, and where we experience that we can do the biggest difference and that is why we see that we can do the most in inequality and equality… “ (22-24) Like the quote from informant 3 demonstrates, one challenge while working with sustainability is the fact that it includes many possible focus that the company can work with. Therefore, this company has decided to prioritize.. Like informant 3, informant 1 finds it difficult to give a specific field or function regarding how sustainability from the perspective of HR is important, and what sustainable HR in fact is:
Yes… but if I look at sustainability from the HR perspective we have good prerequisites to work with sustainability in HR… HR is a really wide field… Multiple different issues, everything from… employment, recruitment, introduction, orientation, training, rehabilitation processes… and payroll processes, closesure, so there is such a long long chain of HR tasks but as an addition to that comes the issues regarding culture, we have issues that refer to the labor law, we have issues that affect economy so…(Informant 1, 232-239)
That is an interesting question on how one should… see sustainability and HR… It can be seen from different, well perspectives, everything from… that you think little more practical today… I mean… How you do today, everything from how you work with marketing, digitalization, meetup students, employer branding, and the whole that part… so… yeah, it depends what you use for perspective… (Informant 2, 34-38)
When asked about ecological sustainability, all of the informants, except informant 4, expressed uncertainty. Ecological sustainability was argued to be something that is not on the agenda of HR, or not being the focus of HR, as described by informant 2: “The economic and even the environmental part of course, that we have those thoughts with us, but maybe specially us or our HR focuses more on the social and economic (sustainability)...” (202-204) Despite the uncertainty, most of the informants did state that they have good possibilities to work with ecological sustainability in HR. The examples given of ecological sustainability was in most cases about purchases, such as office supplies and foods.
So well… and ecological… so those matters we can affect, it is a lot… it is like these...well purchases of things we are... responsible for like… fruits and things like that and where we can make sure that they are… local (Informant 5, 400-402)
This might be a result of the informant being aware of the importance of ecological sustainability in general and thus, refusing to admit that maybe these matters are not core activities of HR. In addition, informant 3 got confused when asked about ecological sustainability and environmental goals. The informant answered the question by referring to equality and diversity work done in the company:
Aliisa: Yeah okay… err… exactly… you told me earlier about your
environmental goals, could you tell me a little bit more about what kind of environmental goals you have?
Informant 3: … some of these [goals] are about them carrying out an
secondly, it is about that we should change our suppliers to a supplier that has sustainability as a focus, so these goals that we are working with are pretty diverse, I can’t describe everything, but they are local smaller goals that everyone in that office is working towards…
(107-119)
To summarize, the informants indicate sustainability to be an important and obvious part in the work of HR. The informants seem to be aware of the societal discourses of sustainability and relate to these to some extent. Despite ecological sustainability being a significant matter in the discussion of sustainability, the informants do not activate these discourses. In addition, the informants struggle to give an extensive definition or name core functions of sustainability in HR. Therefore, it can be argued that sustainability is everything but also nothing at the same time and moreover, an unsure given.
Sustainability as a good working environment
Working environment was found to be the main focus of sustainable HR and was discussed by all of the informants. Informant 1 describes that HR took “ [...] major responsibility in the matter of a good workplace, in other words, if we have a good working environment which is good for our employees, the employees enjoy working here and we live up to our employer promise”. The good working environment was discussed in relation to social sustainability and supporting it. A good working environment was argued to get the employees to enjoy working and motivate the employees to work in the company. Having fun at work was also described as important to the general work environment as was “work-life balance”. Informant 3 also argued that the attractiveness of the company contributes to a good working environment, a view that was not expressed by the other informants. Informant 3 described the company’s working environment work as follows:
themselves and enjoy working with us because we work with these issues… (Informant 3, 38-43)
The sustainability work of HR was argued to be one of the key elements in the creation of a good working environment. In the quote above, informant 3 tells how it is important to create a working environment where the employees can enjoy themselves. However, while developing the working environment, HR also faces challenges. One of the significant challenges is the lack of resources given to HR. This was discussed by all of the informants and especially in relation to health promotion and development of the working environment. Informant 6 describes the challenge in the following way:
Every company has its limitations to how much money they can provide to health promotion [...] but I think it is a lot about preventing things too, that you put something more… those resources the company has into the prevention as much as possible rather than just get the resources… (Informant 6, 223-229)
The lack of resources can also be seen in the working environment of HR professionals. According to informant 1, the workload in HR is never-ending, and being more active in HR processes and company matters can result in even more work for the HR-professionals:
… I think the most difficult challenge is actually to be… to find a sustainable working environment for HR specialist and wage specialists, we are working ourselves to death, there is so much to work with, HR questions never end, there is always new questions to work with, and the more we get engaged, the more questions we get from the organization…So you cannot be afraid to work… (Informant 1,
240-245)
good working environment for HR professionals, while they are ensuring a good working environment for the company and its employees. The working environment discourse was found to be the most common discourse on sustainability in the material, but the discourse of organizational culture as sustainability was also activated, when discussing issues closely related to but also differing from issues of work environment. .
Sustainability as an organizational culture
Culture creation was argued to be a significant and important part of sustainability: “...to us it is extremely important to work with the questions regarding core values, and I will return to it, it is one of the company's overall goals ” (Informant 2, 143-145). As well as the good working environment, a discourse of organizational culture was activated in relation to the social sustainability. The culture of the company was based on the values of the company often expressed through value words, logos, or slogans. Informant 2 talks about value creation, and its importance for working environment, and how this is part of the work with social sustainability:
“... we even have a logo that symbolize our company and that ... you really know ... that we have a certain culture in the company. It is very important that people feel good and feel comfortable with us and we can see that because we measure that people actually do it. You have to work a lot with these questions all the time, and it is clear, if we have a lot of focus on sustainability and the social part of it, we get a lot of credit but also possibilities to work with these questions...” (Informant
2, 146-152)
foundation of the company culture. Informant 1 uses the term “culture trip” which can be argued to refer to the ongoing development of the culture:
So that work has a very, very big role in the HR department, but then we enter something we call for a “culture trip”. How we are to each other [...] what are our value words, […] what does it mean to our employees and for the employer, how we as an employer live up to this, that is the huge HR issue, soft values. (Informant 1, 64-67)
Informant 1 also underlined the importance for the company to live up to its values. The organizational culture is also something the employees should be proud of and HR has the responsibility for these “soft values”. This quote exemplifies sustainability being everything and nothing at the same time. However, the informant does note, the importance of including employees in the development of the culture and working environment. Taking social responsibility by developing the culture can also be argued to be part of sustainability, which was also exemplified by informant 2:
… we take our social responsibility by serving “fika” every day, it is super important! It may sound banal, but it is extremely important, it is not only about getting “fika”, you get the sandwich, you get a cup of coffee, it is about you getting away from your desk, you meet your colleagues from other departments, you relax one minute. You talk about something else, because when you then come back and continue with the work, you have gotten new energy and, this sounds trivial, but it is extremely important… (Informant 2, 155-161)
the challenges while working with the development of and with organizational culture is that it might not be seen as important.
Sustainability as health promotion
The importance of sustainability and health was brought up by most of the informants. Informant 5 discussed the importance of having healthy employees and how HR can support the health of the employees in the long term: “...like our work with health promotion, everything is based on the creation of healthy employees who are feeling well and who are given the conditions to do a good job in the long-term...“ (Informant 5, 90-92). Also, informant 4 argued that health promotion is important and is one of the approaches to ensure a healthy work-life balance. Employees should be able to cope with the work and also have the energy to do other things in life. Informant 4 also saw that HR has a significant responsibility in health promotion, which is important to ensure good health also after retirement. Therefore, it was argued that HR should work long-term with health promotion but also work-life balance:
We work, especially from the HR’s perspective, much with health promotion. And then it has, what our CEO often says, is that everyone that works in our company, that you have to manage with your work days but you also have to have energy to manage your free time as well which is… Positive. And with that said, also work life as a whole, should be in that way that when you go home with pension so you should not be so worn-out that you don’t… (Informant 4, 55-60)
As informant 4 argued, HR has a significant part in developing long term health promotion in the company. Informant 5 supported the argument that long-term health promotion contributes to healthier employees, but also to employees who can perform better at their work:
...like our work with health promotion, everything is based on the creation of healthy employees in the long-term who are doing well and get prerequisites to be able to do good work… (Informant 5, 90-92)
everyday work and in that way, contribute to a good working environment and also better work-life balance. Therefore, informant 4’s company had decided to give employees the possibility to exercise during the workday. In informant 4’s company, the office has its own gym and different types of health promoters instructing activities during and after the workday (Informant 4, 61-71). The HR involvement in health promotion and physical activity was argued to be a result of the societal discourse of workplace health and health in general. This is how informant 4 describes why health promotion and working environment have become so important in companies:
Yeah, it really feels like a positive organization that takes these matters into account, these matters are a trend in the society, to be more active and exercise more, but that a company gets so involved and helps the employees, helps employees to be that (active) for real. (Informant 4,
86-88)
The societal trend of a healthy lifestyle might be seen as one of the reasons why HR sees the importance in it. However, it seems clear that the main motivator is the fact that good health promotes better work results and maintaining good balance between work and free time, thus it is activated as a discourse of sustainability.
Sustainability as equality and diversity
Gender equality and equal treatment..…the payroll processes, it is associated with equality and equal treatment and to ensure that the employees at the company have the same conditions and opportunities when it comes to, really all the issues related to work and the workplace, and that we work with it in many different ways, also based on our, our department and the processes we have ... so there is a lot that is linked to sustainability…(Informant 5, 49-55)
Equality and diversity are, according to the informants, implemented in multiple operational HR functions, like recruitment and wages. In addition, the equality and diversity work is about prevention of maltreatments and grounded in the legal requirements put on employers:
From the perspective of HR we have … well one of the processes is that for example our equality and diversity work that we carry on and it is in accordance with the discrimination grounds and the discrimination law but we look at different areas, such as salary levels, recruitment and the areas, where we are bound by law to look into it, but there we do ensure that women and men really do have the same opportunities but also on the basis of other discrimination grounds that we work preventively and with active measures and with activities… (Informant
5, 74-85)
Equality and diversity work is also seen as an important part of the employer brand. This was brought up by informant 2 who is the head of HR at a male dominated manufacturing company aiming to be an attractive employer for women as well as men:
really important for us that we strive towards equality, we are one … quite male dominant world but we do have over 20 % women who work in this company and it is because we work with employer branding…
(Informant 2, 177-186)
Informant 2 told how the company has a goal to support the development of equality in the branch and the society. According to informant 2, one way to do it is to highlight equality while marketing the company. Informant 2 also argues that this is important to be able to make a difference in the male dominant field. In the matter of informant 2’s company, more girls and women want to participate in technical education and therefore, the company sees an opportunity to support the development of equality in the branch. The CSR work is done by sponsorships and being active in different settings, where female students are participating. Informant 2 describes the CSR work the company is involved in:
When we sponsor we always think about equality. We go into projects where we motivate girls to seek technical education. We took part on a mentorship program last year, so we work really broadly with these issues (170-172) [...] it is something that we need to work with in general to get women to apply for a bit more male jobs, when we look for certain type of operators so it's clear that we have more men than women but we have a few women and it's because we are so involved in school from the second grade, but sure, we have the same challenges that everyone else has today…(Informant 2, 238-242)
The equality work is both an internal and external matter of sustainability and was discussed in the relation to social sustainability and CSR. It is seen important to ensure the same opportunities to everyone in the company, but also, it is seen as a long-term societal involvement. Informant 2 also recognized that equality is a global issue and should be on the agenda in companies generally.
Sustainability as employer branding
our way of living up to the employer promise… (Informant 1, 90-91). Employer branding was seen as a part of the social and economic sustainability of the company. The matter of employer branding was constructed by informants as internal communication of the sustainability work and the external employer brand that is becoming increasingly important because of increased competition for competent employees. With the internal employer branding, the informants referred to the importance of knowing their own companies’ values and the ability to transfer these values to everyday work at the company. How these values were transmitted to the workplace, were in most cases measured through employee surveys. The internal employer branding was described as:
“...our way of living up to the employer promise and then the question is what promises we give. We have done a survey 2018-2019 and we have looked at our err ... what you see with us as an employer from outside, what do you think internally and how we control the management, the management team that we promise as the employer and it is clear, a lot is related to leadership, work environment issues… ” (Informant 1, 92-95)
As the quote exemplifies, the sustainability agenda is important to communicate both internally and externally, and HR has an important role in this communication. However, the main focus of the employer branding proved to be the external employer branding. The external employer branding that the informants discussed was in relation to the expectations of being a good sustainable employer. The informants expressed that sustainability work is important to communicate externally because companies are expected to take action regarding sustainability:
...we also need to make these issues much more visible and highlight them, because people think that these are very important issues, so we always have to be able to communicate what we do because we do very good things… (Informant 5, 211-213)
because of the lack of a competent workforce. Therefore, the employer branding is seen as more significant than earlier and HR plays a significant part in the creation of an attractive employer brand:
I also thought from the outset as well… thus this whole challenge considering the competent workforce that exists in society so that… that many companies, not only within the same industry but generally as well… need to retain and engage but also attract the right competence... so there you also see big (changes)... so when it comes to how to work with those questions it has become so much more important and a priority, more than ever before ... and, HR has a significant role, it is us who runs different processes regarding how it is at the workplace, how it is to work right there… (Informant 5, 246-253)
As the quotes above show the sustainability agenda is important to communicate as a part of the employer brand. It can also be argued that motivation for the development of employer branding is part of the economical sustainability of the company. When implemented successfully, the employer branding improves possibilities for more successful recruitments with the right competence, and people are feeling more trust towards the employer, which results in employees being more likely to work at the company longer. The informants evaluate that HR has good opportunities to work with employer branding.
It is argued that the companies have to work with employer branding because of the new requirements from the society and job-seekers. Competent workforce is seen as a limited resource that the companies have to impress by an employer brand that is attractive. The sustainability aspect is seen to be the economic sustainability, but also the sustainability work is one aspect that the companies do highlight.
Sustainability as good leadership
Lastly, the discourse of sustainability as good leadership is presented. This discourse was discussed in relation to social sustainability. Good leadership was argued in HR to be important and it was further argued that HR has a significant function to support leadership. Informant 6 evaluates the support: “...and even in leadership I think is important to include to the aspect that it is about… today so we discuss a lot of sustainable leadership and not only leaders but also the support to the leaders which HR function also have” (Informant 6, 61-63) The support of the leadership was not something new to HR, but the discourse of sustainable leadership is more novel and only activated by informants 5 and 6. Other informants focus on different ways of supporting leadership and how efficient support to the leaders affects the company and the employees. Informant 2 told about the different approaches taken to ensure the quality of leadership in the company:
Oh, we work a lot with questions regarding leadership, we started a big leadership program regarding leadership development… err… and it is something that HR work is incredibly focused around, is that they strategically work with developing the leaders, also in our daily work we coach leaders but strategically so with a lot of leadership development, we want to have a "one voice leadership" in terms of leadership in our company and what is important to us … (Informant 2,
82-87)
improve the leadership and working environment. Informant 5 described the role of employee surveys as following:
...it is important in many aspects, when it comes to sustainability, especially with the employee survey, because there we investigate everything from the working environment to how people experience jargons and possibly to have people exposed to harassment but also the leadership so we have so obviously an own index that we are looking at and where again the same managers different managers may need support in the work and the results in different ways and there we also come in as one as a partner in that job… (Informant 5, 145-151)
To ensure the good leadership in the companies, the leaders are able to attend different leadership training programs. Further, informant 5 argues that good leadership creates a so-called “sustainability chain” because good leadership advocates a better working environment and health at the company:
...the support that the leaders receive and the conditions the leaders have for being a good leader in turn can be good leaders for their team. It becomes like a sustainable chain in some way, like from the work environment aspects and health aspect as well… (Informant 5, 65-67)
HR’s role in sustainable leadership is to support the leader and work proactive. Thus, HR has to be attentive at all times. As an example, informant 5 talked about preventing sick leaves of the employees by having different strategies for these types of situations. Informant 5 explained:
HR’s role in the support of leadership showed to be mostly predict situations in long-term, where leaders might need support. One aspect of this is to measure the experiences of employees or to use statistics from the employees. By supporting the leaders, HR argues it to be one factor to improving the sustainability and well-being of the employees.
Summary
Analysis and discussion
In this section, the results will be discussed and the research questions will be answered. Firstly, a general discussion of the results in relation to theory and previous research is carried out under the headings social, economic, ecological sustainability, and CSR. Secondly, the research questions are answered. Lastly, I reflect on my methodological choices and suggestions for future research.
HR and social sustainability
Social sustainability relates to the sustainable social development that ensures good health, education, justice, human rights and the needs of the individual. The results show that the activated discourses are overwhelmingly related to and negotiated in relations to social sustainability. The fact that HR’s main focus is in fact social sustainability, is supported by previous research, (Stankevičiūtė and Savanevičienė, 2018). Developing the culture, employer branding and leadership are contributing factors in creation of a good working environment and moreover, social sustainability of the company. Sustainability as working environment was commonly discussed and here HR had an important operative role in maintaining and developing structures and practices. The improvement of the working environment showed to be driven by company’s values and culture. This showed to be in line with Lo et al., (2012) who argue that social norms support sustainability agendas and are vital for implementation of sustainability. An important part of a good working environment was the employees’ well-being, and organizational culture the informants argued, supported this. Health promotion is also argued to be important because health is seen as important in the society today. Working environment, culture creation and health promotion was constructed to be the main focus of socially sustainable HR, but it can be questioned if the aspect of sustainability has changed how these matters are operationalized or implemented.
HR is often anticipated to promote soft skills and therefore, their suggestions can be easily overlooked. Hence, the informants argued that employee surveys are important for the employees and leaders, but also for the HR. The employee surveys were used as a tool for HR to gain more legitimacy for their suggestions. For example, by reviewing the employee surveys, HR can determine if leaders are in need of support with challenges they might face and get the resources needed to ensure the support. Moreover, a challenge regarding the leadership is according to DuBois and Dubois, (2012) if the company’s preferred leadership style is not successfully implemented on every level of the company. None of the informants discussed this challenge. After analyzing how the informants discuss the role of HR in relation to leaders and employees, it can be argued that the informants see the HR role to be supporting the employees rather than the leadership. The focus of HR seemed to be in the improvement of the environment of the work and the personal health of employees. The leadership seemed something that should be evaluated and developed to ensure the good environment for the employers. This is not supported by the previous studies, rather the opposite, for example in DuBois and Dubois (2012) research, it is argued that the main function of the HR is in fact to support the leadership.
The discourses of health promotion, diversity and equality was much more activated by the informants than previous research would suggest. One possible reason for this is the context of this research contra the context of the previous research. The only reviewed study that gave support to the health promotion and matters of diversity and equality was the Finnish study by Järlström et al., (2018). Sweden and Finland are both Nordic countries and have ranks high in surveys of social welfare and equality and therefore, it can be argued that the context of the study possibly has an impact on how sustainable HR is constructed (Järlström et al., 2018). In addition, the informants did not activate a discourse of training in the context of sustainability. Training was reviewed in previous studies and indicated to be one of the ways to implement sustainability in the companies (Bin Saeed et al., 2019; Daily et al., 2012; Dumitru et al., 2016). Training was only activated in relation to development of leadership.
