Tourism Management 40 (2014) 436e446

Contents lists available at ScienceDirect

Tourism Management
journal homepage: www.elsevier.com/locate/tourman

Hotels’ environmental policies and employee personal environmental

beliefs: Interactions and outcomes
Chia-Jung Chou*
Department of Hospitality Management, Tajen University, 20, Wei-shin Rd. Shin-Ell Tsum, Yan-Pu Hsing, Pingtung 907, Taiwan

h i g h l i g h t s

The individual- and hotel-level variables interaction with hotel’s employees’ green behaviour were analysed.

The term “green organisational climate” was coined and defined.

An ’organizational climate’ variable moderates between personal green norms and behaviour.

Personal environmental norms have a stronger effect on employees’ green behaviour than other variables.

a r t i c l e i n f o a b s t r a c t

Article history: Recent trends in green consumerism are leading the hotel industry to assume corporate social re-
Received 21 May 2012 sponsibility that may place the industry at the forefront of green innovation. Research reveals that
Accepted 1 August 2013 adopting green practices is beneficial for the hotel and tourism industry. Nonetheless, a corporation’s
success in adopting green practices depends not only on corporate attitudes towards environmental
Keywords: issues but also on its employees’ personal beliefs and everyday actions. This study fills the gap in existing
Corporate environmentalism
research by adopting the concept of a “green organisational climate” and using personal belief variables
Eco-initiatives
to explore the contextual and individual variation in hotel employees’ environmental behaviour. The
Hospitality management
Organisational climate
results from two-level linear hierarchical models (HLM) show that individual- and group-level factors are
VBN theory significantly associated with the employees’ environmental beliefs and behaviour. In other words, per-
sonal environmental norms explain within-hotel variance, but green organisational climates explain
between-hotel variance and moderate the effect of personal environmental norms on employees’
environmental behaviour. Greater emphasis on intense corporate engagement in incorporating envi-
ronmental policies, human resources management and provision of environmental education for em-
ployees should be introduced and implemented.
Ó 2013 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.

1. Introduction Blanco, Rey-Maquieira, & Lozano, 2009; Eiadt, Kelly, Roche, &
Eyadat, 2008; Enz & Siguaw, 1999) through competitive advan-
In the face of a deteriorating ecological environment and global tages, innovations (Goodman, 2000) and customer satisfaction and
warming, the hotel industry has gradually adopted a “green” loyalty (Kassinis & Soteriou, 2003). In addition, the adoption of
imperative in recent years (Ayuso, 2007; Erdogan & Baris, 2007; green practices reduces carbon dioxide emissions (Bohdanowicz,
Kasim, 2009; Rahman, Reynolds, & Svaren, 2012). By assuming 2009).
corporate social responsibility and embracing green consumerism, Environmental management and performance in the hotel in-
the hotel industry has found itself at the centre stage of green dustry has attracted much research interest (Bohdanowicz, 2005;
innovation in the development of a winewin ‘green and competi- Chan, 2008; Chan & Hawkins, 2010; Chan, Wong, & Lo, 2008;
tive’ position (Porter & van der Linde, 1995). Empirical research López-Gamero, Claver-Cortés, & Molina-Azorín, 2011; Persic-
demonstrates that adopting green practices benefits the hotel and Zivadinov, 2009). However, most previous studies explore the
tourism industry financially (Álvarez, Burgos, & Ce cspedes, 2001; managers’ perception of implementation barriers or strategies; the
environmental practices of hotels and their employees’ environ-
mental behaviour remain unexplored. Nonetheless, a hotel’s suc-
* Tel.: þ886 87624002x3806, þ886 929396201(mobile). cess in adopting green practices depends not only on the corporate
E-mail addresses: [email protected], [email protected]. stance towards environmental issues but also on its employees’

0261-5177/$ e see front matter Ó 2013 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.
http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.tourman.2013.08.001
 C.-J. Chou / Tourism Management 40 (2014) 436e446 437

support of environmental protection (Ramus, 2001; Ramus & (Ferrell & Ferrell, 1997; Pichel, 2008; Ramus, 2001; Ramus &
Killmer, 2007). Sweetman (2007) states, “No matter how good Killmar, 2007; Ramus & Steger, 2000; Starik & Rands, 1995;
your policies and practices look on paper, you will change nothing Tudor, Barr, & Gilg, 2008).
without the active support of employees across the organization.” The logic of this study is the belief that the environmental ini-
Hotels that engage in green practices require individual “eco-ini- tiatives developed by an organisation influence its employees’
tiatives” (Ramus & Steger, 2000) or “eco-preneurship”, whereby environmental behaviour beyond their individual behavioural
employees’ participation, suggestions or actions contribute to the motivation. One way to organise these environmental practices in a
successful implementation of environmental practices (Pichel, hotel is around the concept of organisational climatedmore spe-
2008). Batstic and Goj ci
c (2012) find that the eco-behaviour of cifically, the organisational climate for greening a hotel. The
hotel staff is the most important influence on tourists’ perceptions organisational climate is a socially constructed consensus that can
of the quality of a hotel’s green practices. Furthermore, the behav- be perceived in a particular organisation, and the associated role
iour of hotel staff directly impact tourists’ recycling activities. Well- behaviour is informed by the environment (Bellou & Andronikidis,
informed, environmentally conscious attitudes among hotel staff 2009; Zohar, 1980). According to Smith-Crowe, Burke, and Landis
members indirectly influence tourists’ environmental behaviour. (2003), the organisational climate can play a moderating role be-
Employees may adopt green initiatives in the workplace out of tween the two individual variables.
social concern or because of the legitimacy of environmental issues Because a hotel’s implementation of environmental practices is
(Boiral & Paillé, 2012). However, subjective and objective (contex- voluntary in Taiwan, the extent to which a hotel adopts green
tual) constraints may deter employees from acting in an environ- policies is a measure of a hotel’s commitment to environmental
mentally appropriate manner in their workplace (Tanner, 1999). issues. This research utilises the concept of organisational climate
Carrico and Riemer (2011) find that there are more barriers pre- by assessing if hotels have a ‘green organisational climate’ and
venting employees from indulging in energy-conserving behaviour examines the extent to which hotel employees’ environmental
in the workplace than at home because there is no energy bill or behaviour is influenced by personal and organisational factors.
equipment to be shared. In addition, hotel employees may often be Further, HLMs are used to assess whether green organisational
averse and uninterested in environmental practices (Leondakis, climates moderate the relationship between individual environ-
2009). Chan and Hawkins (2010) illustrate how the implementa- mental beliefs, environmental norms and employees’ environ-
tion of environmental initiatives affects hotel employees; in mental behaviour in hotels (as shown in Fig. 1). HLM, or multi-level
particular, the general staff may have additional work in simulta- analysis, is used to disentangle the causal factors between em-
neously maintaining the service quality. Thus, the employee’s ployees and hotels insofar as hotels and their employees are
environmental behaviour in the workplace can be considered matched according to organisational grouping. The estimation of
“extraordinary” behaviour (Pichel, 2008; Ramus & Steger, 2000) or group effects is more accurate with the nested-model approach
as an example of organisational citizenship behaviour (Boiral & utilised in combination with HLM (Miller & Murdock, 2007).
Paillé, 2012). That is, the environmental behaviour of employees
is not described in the employee’s job requirements but is, to a
2. Theoretical background
certain extent, dependent on personal engagement (Boiral & Paillé,
2012; Pichel, 2008; Ramus & Steger, 2000).
2.1. Organisational climate
Employees’ environmental behaviour is one of four types of
environmentally significant behaviour (Stern, 2000), the other
Organisational climate is a shared personal valuation and in-
three types being environmental activism, non-activist behaviour
volves sense-making of the work environment (James et al., 2008),
in the public sphere (such as green purchasing), or private-sphere
within which individuals are expected to behave according to
environmentalism (daily environmental behaviour at home).
particular socially constructed influences that are exerted in the
Basically, employees’ environmental behaviour can range from
work environment (Bellou & Andronikidis, 2009). To a certain
daily green behaviour to initiating green ideas/actions (Boiral &
extent, organisational climate overlaps with organisational culture
Paillé, 2012; Pichel, 2008). Corporate environmental policies usu-
or the two terms are used interchangeably (e.g. Denison, 2003),
ally make general, elusive requests for the employee’s involvement
although they have distinct denotations. Organisational climate is
and stewardship, but do not usually specify detailed methods for
the shared perception of an individual’s interpretation of the im-
pursuing or assessing this involvement (Boiral & Paillé, 2012).
plications and significance of certain aspects in the work environ-
Therefore, for practical and measurement reasons, this study uti-
ment, while organisational culture is the normative beliefs and
lizes the daily environmental behaviour in the workplace, such as
systematic behavioural expectations designed by organisations
turning off lights when they are not in use or reducing the use of
(James et al., 2008).
paper, as the research target of employees’ environmental behav-
iour. Such behaviour is often requested but not demanded from
employees by companies that follow green policies and initiatives. Green
Such daily environmental behaviour may be displayed by every organizational
climates
employee and is in addition to the specific environmental actions
requested in particular task requirements, such as not wasting food Individual-level
material in the kitchen or minimising water usage when cleaning
Group-level
the bathroom for housekeeping.
Stern (2000) argues that employees’ environmental behaviour is Individual
environmental Employees’
influenced by contextual, attitudinal, socio-demographic and beliefs environmental
behaviours
habitual factors. Based on Stern, Dietz, Abel, Guagnano, and Kalof’s
(1999) value-belief-norm (VBN) theory, environmental beliefs and
Personal
environmental norms affect environmental behaviour. The litera- environmental
ture shows that employees’ ability to successfully conduct corpo- norms
rate environmental initiatives in the workplace is shaped by their
individual motivation and enhanced by their work environment Fig. 1. The research conceptual model.
438 C.-J. Chou / Tourism Management 40 (2014) 436e446

Organisational climate researchers have identified different dimensions that determine the green climate include environ-
types of organisational climates (Patterson et al., 2005; Zohar & mental policy and management orientation (e.g. policy statements,
Luria, 2004) including safety climates (Zohar, 1980), service cli- training, information released to employees and supervisor’s
mates (Schneider, 1990; Wang, 2009), innovation climates behaviour) as well as specific environmental tasks (e.g. recycling,
(Anderson & West, 1998) and social climates (Tang & Tang, 2012). water resource management and chemical control). When the hotel
Relevant organisational policies, procedures and practices elucidate publishes its environmental policies, the employees become aware
specific organisational climates that influence employees’ percep- that the hotel is taking particular actions regarding environmental
tions of their expected collective behaviour and roles in the orga- issues that may affect them. In addition, Pichel (2008) notes that
nisation (Schneider, 1990; Wang, 2009; Zohar & Luria, 2004). transparency through communication and eco-specific training are
Several researchers have demonstrated that employees’ behaviour the two most important organisational facets for orienting em-
is influenced by specific organisational climates. For example, ployees’ eco-initiatives. The best way to transfer these environ-
ethics climates (Stewart, Volpone, Avery, & McKay, 2011) influence mental policies is by providing education and training to
turnover and retention, service climates influence customer- employees, thereby enabling employees to understand what the
oriented behaviour (Mechinda & Patterson, 2011), and justice cli- organisation expects from them and how they can comply with
mates influence job outcomes (Sora, Caballer, Peiró, Silla, & Gracia, these expectations.
2010).
In this study, a green organisational climate is considered a 2.3. Employees’ environmental behaviour
subtype of the organisational climate, in which the corporation
emphasises the implementation of environmental policies and Employees’ environmental behaviour is different from that of
measures and the employees may form a shared value regarding the green activists (e.g. advocacy, protest), and their environmental
corporate greening. behaviour on the job may differ from their daily behaviour at home
(Carrico & Riemer; 2011; Stern, 2000). As Carrico and Riemer (2011)
2.2. Green organisational climate note, there are more barriers that prevent employees from dis-
playing energy-conserving behaviour. At work, there is no incentive
Shrivastava (1995) argues that the role of corporations in of a decrease in electricity bill, for example, to remind them to
achieving ecological sustainability should revolve around imple- conserve electricity, such as there is in their homes. Multiple em-
menting environmentally responsible values, beliefs and behav- ployees share equipment in the workplace, which attenuates em-
iour, rather than focusing only on their practical aspects. Green ployees self-efficacy in conserving energy.
organisational climates should incorporate commitments to green Therefore, Ramus and Killmer (2007) argue that there are three
initiatives regarding corporate social responsibility, green organ- dimensions to employees’ environmental behaviour. First, envi-
isational culture and corporate environmentalism. According to ronmental behaviour is pro-social behaviour, which simulta-
Menon and Menon (1997), green initiatives in organisations are one neously supports the welfare of the individual and that of the
of the three pillars of the “triple-bottom line” in the expanded organisation they belong to. Second, environmental behaviour is
spectrum of social responsibility. Additionally, green initiatives discretionary behaviour, in which employees take charge to effect
respond to demands for more ethical corporations (Ferrell & Ferrell, corporate change and produce value-creating components. Third,
1997). Harris and Crane (2002) argue that “corporate greening” environmental behaviour is an extra-role behaviour that is “not
leads to the incorporation of environmental considerations across formally required for employees’ jobs” with rarely any clear goals or
all organisational operations and enables movement towards a reward systems to encourage environmentally beneficial behav-
green organisational culture. Further, Banerjee (2002) defines iour. Therefore, employees face conflicting time demands between
corporate environmentalism as the “recognition and integration of in-role behaviour and extra-role behaviour. Thus, an employee’s
environmental concerns into a firms’ decision-making process.” motivation to indulge in environmental behaviour is driven not
Banerjee identifies two components of corporate environmen- only by personal predisposition and environmental values (Pichel,
talism: corporate environmental orientation and environmental 2008; Ramus & Killmer, 2007) but also relies to some extent on
strategy focus. Corporate environmental orientation strengthens the organisational context, such as the corporate culture, empow-
internal values, ethical behaviour standards and commitment to erment and support from management (Boiral & Paillé, 2012).
environmental protection. Environmental strategy focus addresses Hoffman (1993) argues that when employees’ environmental
how to respond to the demands of external stakeholders with values match the organisation’s values, employees respond posi-
varying environmental perspectives. tively and have greater job satisfaction. Similarly, Pichel (2008)
Banerjee (2002) emphasises that managers play a key role in suggests that employees’ environmental behaviour is a personal
interpreting environmental issues and developing pro- commitment that can only be activated through encouragement
environmental programs that shape corporate behaviour. In addi- rather than through demands. Moreover, contextual, individual and
tion, the greening of corporations depends largely on a change in cultural factors may be critical in shaping employees’ environ-
the organisational culture that stems from the promotion of green mental behaviour.
values by management that are shared by organisation members Ramus (2002) argues that employees who take environmental
(Harris & Crane, 2002). action may be influenced by organisational and individual factors.
Employees hold a shared perception of the organisational pol- In particular, employees may hold intrinsic values that support
icies, practices and procedures that are developed to pursue envi- nature and environmental issues and therefore have more moti-
ronmental sustainability and that comprise the green initiatives of vation to take environmental action. With regard to organisational
the organisation, which is referred to as the “green climate”. Ramus influences, organisations’ environmental policies and support from
and Steger (2000) provide two ways that employees perceive the supervisors may induce employees to participate in environmental
organisationeenvironment relationship or the green climate: (1) initiatives. In addition, employees’ expected role in the success of
employees are knowledgeable regarding the existence of the corporate environmental policies may not be publicly stated, but
environmental policy and (2) employees’ are aware of the com- employees are aware if the company demands that they assist in
pany’s commitment to the policy. According to the criteria of accomplishing corporate environmental objectives (Hutchinson,
several well-known green hotel certification programs, the 1996; Ramus, 2002).
 C.-J. Chou / Tourism Management 40 (2014) 436e446 439

2.4. The effect of environmental beliefs and norms on leads to social change. Such behaviour represents actions that are
environmental behaviour not considered normal if the social norms regarding environmen-
talism have not developed yet. The literature supports the re-
The primary theories used to examine the determinants of lationships between personal norms and personal environmental
people’s environmental behaviour are the theory of reasoned ac- acts (Fransson & Gärling, 1999; Oskamp et al., 1991). Nevertheless,
tion (TRA) and the theory of planned behaviour (TPB) by Fishbein Scherbaum, Popovich, and Finlinson (2008) find that personal
and Ajzen (1975) and Ajzen (1991), respectively, which establish environmental norms can predict employees’ energy-conservation
an expectancy-value motivational model in which attitude and behaviour and behavioural intentions in the workplace. In this
subjective norms are the basic factors that predict the intention of study, as distinguished from personal norms, social norms or social
behaviour. The Hines model of responsible environmental behav- pressure is assumed to exist in the hotel’s organisational green
iour (Hines, Hungerford, & Tomera, 1987) is consistent with the TPB climate, where corporate environmental policies and practices may
in that knowledge (environmental concern), skill and the internal pressurize employees to demonstrate responsible environmental
locus of control determine the intention of environmental behav- behaviour.
iour. In Hine’s model, it is assumed that situational factors, such as Based on previous studies, we propose the following hypotheses:
economic constraints, social pressure and other opportunities,
Hypothesis 1. Individual environmental beliefs positively influ-
would also influence environmental behaviour. According to Stern
ence employees’ environmental behaviour in the workplace.
(2000), individual environmental behaviour is affected by four
types of variables: contextual, attitudinal, socio-demographic and Hypothesis 2. Personal environmental norms positively influence
habitual. Correspondingly, from a constraint perspective, Tanner employees’ environmental behaviour in the workplace.
(1999) finds that subjective constraints, such as the personal
awareness of environmental problems or a sense of responsibility, 2.5. Cross-level organisational green climate effects
and objective constraints, such as socio-demographic and contex-
tual characteristics, have a significant influence on an individual’s Researchers show that employees’ green behaviour is affected
environmental behaviour. In terms of personal influences, an by both organisational and individual factors (Ramus, 2001; Starik
employee may be motivated to pursue green actions in the work- & Rands, 1995; Tudor et al., 2008). In addition, Ramus and Steger
place in accordance with their personal values and norms regarding (2000) note the effect of environmental policy and supervisory
nature and the environment (Ramus, 2001). support on employees’ ‘eco-initiatives’. In particular, published
The TRA or TPB is primarily employed to examine the “inten- environmental policy, creating environmental competence through
tion” of environmental behaviour, but there exists a gap between education, communication, rewards and recognition and innova-
intention and actual behaviour (e.g., Hsu & Huang, 2012; Sniehotta, tion affect employees’ green behaviour. Ramus (2002) also finds
2009). Stern et al. (1999) and Stern, (2000) proposed the VBN that when employees are aware of a company’s commitment to a
theory to describe and predict practiced environmental behaviour. written environmental policy statement, they are more willing to
The VBN model is rooted in the norm-activation theory given by take environmental action. In addition, written environmental
Schwartz (1977), which emphasises personal normsdthe feeling of policies are more influential than other policies, such as green
having a personal obligation to fulfil one’s self-expectationsdin purchasing and environmental management systems. In the hos-
influencing personal altruistic behaviour. To indulge in environ- pital context, Tudor et al. (2008) demonstrate that employees’
mental behaviour, including personal-sphere behaviour, is consid- environmental behaviour within a large organisation may not be
ered support for a social movement, and personal norms are influenced by isolated factors, but by a holistic, interrelated
important because the environmental behaviour follows normative framework that includes individual attitudes, organisational cul-
claims on environmental values and beliefs other than self-interest. ture, organisational focus, managerial support and training.
“individuals who accept a movement’s basic values, believe that According to Smith-Crowe et al. (2003), organisational climate
valued objects are threatened, and believe that their actions can can activate a third class of variables that interact with the rela-
help restore those values experience an obligation (personal norm) tionship between two individual difference variables. The role of
for pro-movement action that treats a predisposition to provide organisational climate as a moderator variable between individual
support” (Stern et al., 1999, p. 81). difference variables has been examined in several studies (Ehrhart,
In the full VBN model (Stern, 2000), the norm-activation theory, 2004; Liao & Chuang, 2004; Smith-Crowe et al., 2003; Walumbwa,
personal values theory and the New Ecological Paradigm (NEP) Hartnell, & Oke, 2010). Engaging in environmental behaviour
(Dunlap & Van Liere, 1978, 1984) are synthesised (Stern et al., 1999) would be emphasised to a certain extent in a hotel that takes
to explain the process of environmental behaviour activation. The environmental initiatives, but the organisational climates would
model specifies the effect of environmental beliefs and personal vary among different hotels. Behaviour emphasised in the work
norms on environmental behaviour. To be precise, personal envi- environment is similar to the notion of an organisational climate;
ronmental beliefs regarding an “ecological worldview” (e.g. NEP) within a positive organisational climate, personal performance is
are influenced by personal values, and the individually held NEP more strongly valued, while in a weaker organisational climate,
view is oriented towards how one considers “adverse conse- there is weaker emphasis on specific expectations and this reduces
quences” or the “perceived ability to reduce threat” and then trig- personal performance (Hofmann, Morgeson, & Gerra, 2003). With
gers personal norms. Finally, personal norms determine how regard to the interaction of individual variables, Liao and Chuang
people act in terms of various types of environmental behaviour. (2004), using the theory of situational strength proposed by
Several researchers who apply the VBN theory find it effective for Mischel (1977), explain the moderating effect of organisational
predicting environmental behaviour (Oreg & Katz-Gerro, 2006; climate on the relationship between personality and employee
Steg, Dreijerink, & Abrahamse, 2005). Research also shows that service performance. Liao and Chuang (2004) note that employees’
environmental concerns/beliefs influence environmental behav- behaviour is more consistent and uniform in a high service climate
iour (Casey & Scott, 2006; Moncaco, Bissonnettet & Contento, 2001; because strong expectations limit the behavioural range of an
Olli, Grendstad, & Wollebaek, 2001). employee. However, weak expectations would leave more discre-
Further, Stern et al. (1999) note that personal norms rather than tion to the employee, and individual differences in personality are
social norms are central to this model as environmental behaviour likely to have greater influence on the employee’s behaviour in
440 C.-J. Chou / Tourism Management 40 (2014) 436e446

such a situation. Thus, it is reasonable to assume that organisational 3.2.1.2. Personal environmental norms. Five items were used to
climate determines the employee’s environmental behaviour by indicate pro-environmental norms (Steg et al., 2005; Stern et al.,
demonstrating the company’s values, expectations and emphasised 1999). For example, “I feel a personal obligation to do whatever I
actions with regard to environmental issues; moreover, personal can to prevent environmental degradation,” or “I feel obliged to
environmental beliefs and norms would be influenced by the bear the environment and nature in mind in my daily behaviour.” A
strength of the green organisational climate. 5-point Likert scale was used to rate each item from “strongly
Based on the aforementioned literature, we propose the disagree (1)” to “strongly agree (5).”
following hypotheses:
3.2.1.3. Green organisational climate. The green organisational
Hypothesis 3. Green organisational climates moderate the rela-
climate was measured using Taiwan’s environmental hotel certifi-
tionship between individual environmental beliefs and employees’
cation criteria, which assesses the following seven dimensions:
environmental behaviour.
corporate environmental management and policies, energy sav-
Hypothesis 4. Green organisational climates moderate the rela- ings, water savings, green purchasing, reduction in the use of
tionship between personal environmental norms and employees’ disposable products, waste reduction and the control of harmful
environmental behaviour. materials, as well as some items from the corporate environmental
policies given by Ramus (2000); a total of fourteen items were
3. Methodology included. For example, policy statements such as “Our hotel has
publicly publicized environmental policies” or “Our hotel empha-
3.1. Respondents and procedure sises use of fewer chemicals” were used to assess green organisa-
tional climate. Each item was measured on a five-point scale from
The research was conducted among 65 hotels in Taiwan that “strongly disagree (1)” to “strongly agree (5).”
were either certified as environmental hotels, awarded for their
environmental performance or are currently participating in an 3.2.1.4. Employees’ environmental behaviour. Ten types of green
environmentally friendly hotel program supported by the Envi- behaviour in the workplace, such as turning off lights, taking the
ronmental Protection Authority (EPA). Further, 32 hotel employees stairs instead of the elevator and saving water, were used to
were selected to participate in pilot surveys that tested the wording investigate if employees’ take environmental actions in their
and meaning of questionnaire items. Thereafter, questionnaires workplace. These items were compared to the hotel’s policy lists
were administered to a fixed number of employees in the surveyed and hotel manager’s daily requests from hotel employees. Each
hotels. The number of solicited respondents was proportional to the item was measured on a scale that indicated frequency of behaviour
size of the hotel. For example, 15 respondents were solicited from including “always,” “often,” “sometimes,” “rare,” and “never.”
large tourist hotels (more than 150 rooms), 10 respondents were
solicited from medium-sized tourist hotels (more than 50 rooms) 3.2.1.5. Personal backgrounds. Respondents’ age, sex, job position,
and 5 respondents were solicited from small hotels (less than 50 education, etc. were investigated in the last part of the questionnaire.
rooms). A total of 500 questionnaires were distributed between
May and July 2011, thereby resulting in 254 valid surveys from 33 3.2.2. Scale descriptive statistics, reliability and correlations
hotels. The respondents voluntarily participated in the survey Descriptive statistics are reported in Table 1. All the scale vari-
following a public notice from human resources units in the ables were significantly correlated with each other. In addition,
respective hotels. The response rates were highest for women Cronbach’s alpha coefficients were computed for each scale, all of
(74.8%). The mean age of respondents is 33.8 years and 68.5% of the which were at appropriate levels (>0.7), except for individual
respondents were in non-management jobs. In addition, 66.5% of environmental belief (a ¼ .697). Thus, item 5 was excluded from
the respondents had taken courses related to environmental issues. environmental beliefs to maintain reliability (a ¼ .726).
In terms of the job positions of the respondents, 18.2% were from
the front office; 22.9% from administration and accounting; 15.7% 3.2.3. Group consensus and intra-class correlation
from restaurant and beverage; 12.5% from IT, engineering and se- A two-level model was specified using a dependent variable to
curity units; 10.7% from marketing and sales units; 9.8% from represent the “employees’ environmental behaviour” and an in-
housekeeping; and 9.3% from human resource units. dependent variable at the organisational-level to represent the
green organisational climate. In this analysis, the direct consensus
3.2. Measures model was used to assess the green organisational climate (Chan,
1988); that is, to calculate the within-group agreement in the
3.2.1. Questionnaire design employee’s climate perceptions for each hotel by aggregating the
Data were collected for five different measures: individual envi-
ronmental beliefs, personal environmental norms, green organisa-
tional climate, employees’ environmental behaviour and personal Table 1
backgrounds. The following account is a discussion of how the five Means, standard deviations and correlations of individual level variables.

constructs were measured (see the Appendix for the questionnaire). Variables M (SD) 1 2 3 4

1.Individual environmental 4.04 (0.493) .697

3.2.1.1. Individual environmental beliefs. Eleven items from the beliefs
revised NEP (Dunlap, Van Liere, Mertig, & Jones, 2000) were used to 2.Personal environmental 4.68 (0.417) 0.466*** .880
examine individual environmental beliefs. The items include five norms
**
3.Green organizational 4.13 (0.547) 0.123 0.255*** .938
pro-NEP and six anti-NEP variables. For example, respondents were
climates
asked if they agreed that “The earth is like a spaceship with limited 4.Employees’ environmental 4.40 (0.483) 0.120* 0.264*** 0.362*** .820
room and resources”, or on the contrary, “The so-called ‘ecological behaviours
crisis’ facing humankind has been greatly exaggerated”. Each item Note: n ¼ 254, SD ¼ standard deviation. Individual-level scale reliability in bold
was rated on a five-point Likert scale ranging from “strongly along diagonal.
disagree (1)” to “strongly agree (5)” ***p < .001; **p < .05; *p < .10.
 C.-J. Chou / Tourism Management 40 (2014) 436e446 441

respective lower-level scores to represent the scores at the higher Table 2

level (González-Romá, Peiró, & Tordera, 2002). To confirm the Hierarchical linear model results for employees’ environmental behavioursa.

assumption of intercorrelation between individual responses in the Variables Null model Individual-level Slopes-as-
same hotel, a measurement of within-group consensus (James, predictors outcome model
Demaree, & Wolf, 1993) was calculated for each group (rwg). The (moderation)

rwg was 0.975, which is well above the recommended 0.7 necessary Level 1
to support the assumption that employees within hotels generally Intercept 4.39*** (0.06***) 4.39*** (0.07***) 4.39*** (0.06***)
Individual envi’ beliefs 0.02(0.12**) 0.04
agreed on their perception of green organisational climates.
Personal envi’ norms 0.25**(0.03) 0.22**
The intra-class correlation (ICC) was also calculated to ensure Cross level
that the data were suitable for multi-level analysis (Chan, 1988). Green organizational climates  individual envi’ beliefs .0.12
The ICC (1) coefficient of variables was calculated as the ratio of Green organizational climates  personal envi’ norms .0.26*
Level-1 residual variance 0.17 0.15 0.16
between-group variance to total variance to capture both within-
R2 within groupb 0.10
and between-group variation. The results showed that the ICC(1) 2
R between group c
0.01
value was 0.259 and significant (c2 ¼ 109.7, p < .001), thereby Model deviance 326.46 298.54 305.79
indicating that the between-group variance in the organisational
***p < .01; **p < .05; *p < .10.
green climate variable was sizeable. ICC(2) was calculated to justify a
Employee n ¼ 254, Hotels n ¼ 33. Entries are estimates of the fixed effects (gs)
data aggregation at the hotel level. The ICC(2) value was 0.700, with robust standard errors. Estimations of the random variance components (ss)
which provides evidence for the assumption that group means are are in parentheses. The ss for the intercepts also represneted the between-hotels
variance in employees’ environmental behaviours.
reliable (Raudenbuch & Bryk, 2002). b
The R2 was computed based on Snijers & Bosker (1999). Proportion of within-
hotel variance explained by level 1 predictors.
4. Results c
The R2 was computed based on Snijers & Bosker (1999). Proportion of between-
hotel variance explained by level 2 predictor (after level 1 variables are controlled
In this study, we hypothesised that individual-level variables for).

would be significantly related to employees’ environmental

behaviour and that green organisational climates would moderate
the level-two model. The R2 for the relationship between personal
the effect individual-level variables on behaviour. The computer
environmental beliefs and norms and employees’ environmental
program HLM 6, developed by Raudenbush, Bryk & Congdon in
behaviour accounted for 10.4% of the within-group variance. Spe-
2007, was used to estimate within-group and between-group re-
cifically, personal norms (g ¼ 0.288, p < .05) had a significant,
lationships and variance. The cross-level moderating procedure
positive relationship with employees’ environmental behaviour,
was tested using the method suggested by Baron and Kenny (1986).
but personal environmental beliefs were insignificant. Therefore,
First, the level-one null model was computed in which individual
hypothesis 2 is supported, but hypothesis 1 is not. The remaining
variables (individual personal beliefs and personal environmental
between-group variance (c2 ¼ 113.2, p < .001) was still significant
norms) predict employees’ environmental behaviour. The second
after taking individual-level predictors into account, which in-
step was to examine the random coefficient regression model
dicates that other, higher-level variables (e.g. green organisational
where the level-two variable, green organisational climate, was
climate) might help explain the remaining variance.
added. Finally, a slope-as-outcomes model was estimated to test
moderating effects with interaction terms between group-level
4.3. Slope-as-outcomes model (cross-level moderating model)
variables (green organisational climate) and level-one variables to
predict employees’ environmental behaviour. To prevent potential
To determine whether the variances in the slopes at level-one
multicollinearity (Hofmann & Gavin, 1998), group-mean centring
were related to group-level predictors (green organisational
was used for level-one independent variables and grand-mean
climate), we examined an intercept-as-outcomes model (Hofmann,
centring was applied to level-two variables. Table 2 presents the
1997). The results from the intercept-as-outcomes model showed
results from the hierarchical linear models and cross-level analyses.
that employees’ environmental behaviour was not significantly
influenced by green organisational climates (g ¼ 0.004, p ¼ .696).
4.1. Null model
Then, a slopes-as-outcomes model was estimated, as presented
in Table 2 and Fig. 2, and green organisational climate variables
To investigate the significance of the between-group variance
were multiplied with personal environmental beliefs and personal
using HLM, a null model was computed wherein no predictors were
environmental norms. The results showed that green organisa-
specified for the dependent variable. The significant chi-square
tional climate had a significant moderating effect on the
value (109.7, s00 ¼ 0.063, p ¼ .000) indicated that employees’
environmental behaviour could be potentially explained by the
percentage of the total between-group variance (Raudenbuch & Green
Bryk, 2002). The ICC(1) value was 0.259, thereby implying that organizational
climates
25.9% of the total variance in employees’ environmental behaviour
was explained by hotels and that 74.1% of the variance was within Individual-level
-.12
groups (i.e. at the individual level). The results from the null model
Group-level
demonstrated that there were significant differences among hotels
in terms of employees’ environmental behaviour, thereby justifying Individual
environmental Employees’
the inclusion of predictors at the group-level analysis. beliefs -.04 environmental
behaviours
-.26*
4.2. Random coefficient model (individual-level predictors only) .22**
Personal
environmental
To examine the effect of individual-level predictors, personal norms
environmental beliefs and personal environmental norms were
added to the level-one model without specifying any predictors for Fig. 2. The estimated multilevel model.
442 C.-J. Chou / Tourism Management 40 (2014) 436e446

relationship between personal environmental norms and em- moderating effect through personal environmental norms on per-
ployees’ environmental behaviour (g ¼ 0.266, p ¼ .095 < 0.10) but sonal environmental behaviour; thus, hypotheses 2 and 4 were
the moderating effect on the relationship between individual supported in this study. The results from a multi-level analysis also
environmental beliefs and employees’ environmental behaviour showed that individual- and hotel-level variables were significantly
was not significant (g ¼ 0.120, p ¼ .440). Approximately 1% of the associated with the employees’ green behaviour in the workplace.
variance in the level-one slopes was attributed to the addition of That is, the personal environmental norms explained the within-
the interaction terms. Therefore, these results do not support hy- hotel variance (individual), although the green organisational
pothesis 3, but support hypothesis 4. climate explained the between-hotel variance with a moderating
Compared to hotels with stronger green organisational climates, effect on the relationship between the personal environmental
Fig. 3 shows that in hotels with weak green organisational climates, norms and the employees’ environmental behaviour.
there is a stronger relationship between personal environmental The primary focus of this study was to explore the moderation
norms and employee’ environmental behaviour. When green effect of organisational climate; thus, in this study, “high” and “low”
organisational climate increases by 1 unit, the effect of personal levels of organisational climate refer to the extent of “the average
environmental norms on employees’ environmental behaviour score” of the green organisational climate perceived by employees.
decreases by 0.26. In other words, if green organisational climate However, the strength of the organisational climate refers to the
decreases by 1 unit, the influence of personal environmental norms dispersion of within-group consensus on shared values; it is
on employees’ environmental behaviour increases by 0.26. In brief, calculated by analysing the standard deviation of employee per-
the weaker a hotel’s green organisational climate, the stronger the ceptions of organisational climate (Schneider, Salvaggio, & Subirats,
effects of personal environmental norms are on employees’ green 2002). Moreover, Dickson, Resick, and Hanges (2006) argue that an
behaviour. In addition, Fig. 3 shows that there is a stronger rela- unambiguous climate yields more aggregated ratings with a small
tionship between personal environmental norms and employees’ standard deviation, thereby representing a strong green organisa-
environmental behaviour in hotels with weak green organisational tional climate. In this study, a higher level of organisational climate
climates as compared to those with strong green organisational (with the upper 25% of the mean) corresponded to a stronger
climates. climate with a smaller standard deviation (SD ¼ 0.39, average SD on
a 5-point scale) while a lower level of organisational climate cor-
5. Discussion and conclusions responded to a weaker climate with a larger standard deviation
(SD ¼ 0.47).
In this study, we investigated employees’ environmental The findings also imply that employees’ environmental behav-
behaviour in hotels in Taiwan by combining the concept of organ- iour in Taiwan’s hotels were explained more by individual norms
isational climates with the behavioural norm-activation theory. than by the organisational climate, although organisational green
Here, the term “green organisational climate” was assumed to action may slightly moderate the strength of the relationship be-
represent the influence of a hotel’s environmental policies and tween personal environmental norms and employees’ green
implemented practices; this assumption contributes to the behaviour. In addition, we found that under weaker organisational
research field as a new concept. The existence of the green climate climates, personal norms have a greater effect on the employees’
of each hotel was supported by the within-group consensus environmental behaviour than under stronger climates. These re-
(rwg ¼ 0.975), which demonstrates that the employees of the sur- sults implied that organisational pressures applied through envi-
veyed hotels agreed on their perception of the implemented ronmental policies, supervisors’ attitudes, training, information
environmental policies and practices. Previous literature (Ramus, and practical tasks may have a stronger effect on employees’
2001; Starik & Rands, 1995; Tudor et al., 2008) has mentioned the environmental behaviour if the employees have weak personal
effect of environmental management and policies on employees’ environmental norms. If the employees have stronger pro-
pro-environmental behaviour, but the mechanism has not been environmental attitudes, green organisational climates exert a
specified. This study provides a greater understanding of the effect weaker influence on their behaviour.
that organisational climate and personal disposition have on the Further, we also found that a weak green organisational climate
employees’ environmental behaviour in the workplace. did not necessarily reduce employees’ green behaviour, particularly
The results of this study indicate that the organisational cli- when personal norms were higher. This result is in contrast with
mates in Taiwan’s environmentally oriented hotels do have a slight that of Hofmann et al. (2003), who used perceived safety climate,
and Walumbwa et al. (2010), who adopted perceived service
climate. Both these prior studies found that stronger organisational
Moderating effect climates led to a higher level of personal environmental behaviour.
4.74
With regard to organisational justice, the multi-level analysis of Loi,
Employees' environmental behaviours

4.72 Yang, and Diefendorff (2009) shows that at low levels of perceived
4.70 distributive justice, the relationship between interpersonal justice
4.68 High green and job satisfaction was stronger than it was at high levels of
orgniazational perceived distributive justice, thereby demonstrating that personal
4.66 climates
Low green
cognition might have a stronger influence on personal behaviour
4.64
organizational when the organisational climate is weaker. The results of this study
climates
4.62 correspond to the theory of situational strength (Liao & Chuang,
4.60 2004; Meyer, Dalal, & Bonaccio, 2009; Mischel, 1977), in which
4.58
personal cognition/attitude has a stronger correlation with per-
sonal performance when the organisational climate is weaker. A
4.56
Low High weaker organisational climate leaves more discretionary room for
employees to take action; thus, the employee’s personal disposition
Personal environmental norms
tends to control the employee’s behaviour. Because this present
Fig. 3. Moderating effects of green organisational climate on the relationship between research was an exploratory attempt to examine the relationship
personal environmental norms and employees’ environmental behaviours. between organisational environmental policies, personal beliefs/
 C.-J. Chou / Tourism Management 40 (2014) 436e446 443

norms and employees’ green behaviour, a continued inquiry into environmental management systems and pursue certification, the
the nature of green organisational climate and its impact on em- nature of corporate environmental policies and practices may be
ployees’ environmental behaviour is necessary. “vague” or “elusive”, as stated by Boiral and Paillé (2012). This
In this study, the influence of environmental beliefs and per- vagueness may offer more discretionary room for the employees to
sonal norms of the VBN theory were examined in terms of the take green initiatives.
employees’ green behaviour. The results showed that personal The first practical implication of these results is that personal
environmental norms are a more influential predictor of em- norms are the crucial factor driving personal green behaviour; in
ployees’ green behaviour than individual environmental beliefs. other words, intrinsic motivation plays a greater role in employees’
Moreover, the NEP scale used in this study to measure environ- environmental behaviour. Based on the data collected in this study,
mental beliefs was a poor predictor of environmental behaviour in taking environmental courses (which may be taken before
certain situations (Dunlap, 2008). As examined by Ford, Kathryn, employment or outside the workplace) related to environmental
Williamsa, and Webbc (2009), individual environmental beliefs issues leads to a larger difference in employees’ environmental
are related to values that lead to the acceptance of environmental beliefs (p ¼ .083) than in their personal environmental norms
behaviour. Similarly, Nooney, Woodrum, Hoban, and Clifford (2003) (p ¼ .367). Although the statistical examination in our study did not
used an NEP-based scale as a worldview to examine the relation- show a significant effect of taking environmental courses, the re-
ship between environmental beliefs and actual behaviour, but the sults did imply that environmental education might have some
relationship is not significant. According to Pichel (2008), the influence on employees’ environmental beliefs; however, envi-
milder influence of individual valence in terms of nature and the ronmental norms were not easily changed through environmental
environment on people’s environmental actions in the workplace education. Personal environmental norms represent internalised
may be interpreted in the following manner: When an organisation personal values related to environmental behaviour, as expressed
pursues green action, it depends more on those who understand in the VBN model, in which personal environmental norms are the
why and how to act environmentally instead of depending on the products of adverse consequences to valued objects and perceived
green believers. Thus, it is argued that a gap exists between envi- ability to reduce threats (Stern, 2000; Stern et al., 1999). Thus,
ronmental belief and actual behaviour (Kollmuss & Agyeman, formal education and training sessions strengthen knowledge of
2002). consequences that flow from a lack of green behaviour and enable
This study makes an additional theoretical contribution by behavioural adjustment that is helpful in establishing personal
applying the VBN model and conducting a multilevel analysis, environmental norms and internalising green behaviour in general
which clarifies the influence of contextual and individual factors on situations or with regard to specific tasks. Informing employees of
employees’ green behaviour in the workplace. Unlike the expec- the consequences of their actions, such as high electricity bills as a
tance model applied by Ajzen (2002), Pichel (2008) or Ramus and consequence of high electricity usage, and training them in green
Killmer (2007), in this study, we divided the subjective norms behaviour is beneficial for both the company and the environment.
into social and personal norms. The organisational green climate Second, hotels should place greater emphasis on their corporate
was considered to be a social norm; that is, contextual pressures environmental policies and practices because higher green organ-
were exerted through environmental policies, supervisory support, isational climates would encourage more employees with higher
training, information and practical tasks, as suggested by Pichel personal environmental norms to become involved in green actions
(2008) and Ramus and Killmer (2007). Organisational pressures in the workplace, as discussed above. The daily environmental
were found to have a slightly moderating effect on personal norms behaviour in the workplace, as examined in this study, are all basic
and employees’ environmental behaviour. However, this study green initiatives that are part of the employees’ environmental
employed a norm-activation factordpersonal normsdwhich had a practices, which still depend on a supportive organisational culture
significantly positive influence on employee’s green behaviour. The (Boiral & Paillé, 2012). A strong environmental commitment in the
results also support the argument of Stern et al. (1999) that per- top levels of management is crucial in shaping stronger shared
sonal norms take precedence over social norms as the critical force values and an organisational climate that is focused on green ac-
for new action in social change. This distinction between contextual tion. Formal or informal events that showcase the willingness of
and individual factors will be helpful for future research. top management to support and undertake environmental sus-
Although the direct influence of the green organisational tainability, instead of just a cost-down approach, indicate a genuine
climate on the employees’ green behaviour was not the primary commitment to environmental issues and also enable employees to
issue in this study, it did have a significant effect on employees’ perceive a positive and strong environmental commitment on the
green behaviour. The slight moderating influence appeared to show part of the company. Based on the opinions of the interviewed hotel
that the green organisational climate in the hotels of Taiwan was employees, the hotels must be genuinely devoted to corporate
not strong. Banerjee (2002) observes that high-impact industries greening instead of simply paying lip service or creating an image,
(e.g. chemicals or pharmaceuticals) are more environmentally otherwise those employees who possess strong personal environ-
oriented than low-impact industries (e.g. services or consumer mental norms will find the hotel unworthy of their voluntary green
products). The green organisational climates in Taiwan’s hotels behaviour. For example, hotels can emphasise green innovation,
were not strongly formed, and where they did exist, environmental encourage employees to provide innovative green ideas and pro-
management was more concerned with engineering practices, such vide both budget and personnel to implement practical ideas.
as wastewater treatment and energy-saving facilities. The surveyed Further, hotels with a tradition of involvement in neighbouring
hotels had a more environmentally friendly orientation (although community services could encourage employees to participate in
most of them are not certified green hotels), but it appears that the them as well. Some good examples are found in Taiwan: employees
intensity of the environmental policies and practices have not yet are encouraged to eat vegetarian cuisine once a week in certain
created strong “green” climates. The corporate environmental hotels, the recycled materials from certain hotels are freely given to
policies proposed by Ramus and Steger (2000) demonstrate a “di- charities that can receive a refund for them and some hotels are
rection” towards corporate greening, while the certification re- very willing to organise environmental events for charities, gov-
quirements of Taiwan’s green hotels, which adopt the ISO14001 ernments and local groups.
principle, emphasise the “process” of pursuing green performance. Third, the fundamental beliefs and values underlying the busi-
Unless the hotels devote themselves to implementing a set of ness philosophy should be changed and incorporated into
444 C.-J. Chou / Tourism Management 40 (2014) 436e446

organisational culture and climate (Fernández, Junquera, & Ordiz, eco-initiatives, eco-civic engagement and eco-helping behaviour
2003; Harris & Crane, 2002), particularly through human re- can also be included in future research. Third, the samples from
sources departments (Bohdanowicz, Zientara, & Novotna, 2011). each hotel were not exactly proportionate to the size of the hotels,
Usually, environmental issues are included as technical aspects of thereby implying that the samples may not be perfectly represen-
these elements, but environmental sustainability is strengthened tative of the hotel employees. Fourth, this study only used cross-
just as much through changing personal values and beliefs (Harris sectional data that might neglect the extended influence of
& Crane, 2002). In attempting to create new managerial objectives organisational ‘climate diffusion’. Because hotels in Taiwan are just
and greening strategies in the hotel business, human resources beginning to implement environmental practices, the effect of
departments are expected to integrate environmental issues and environmental policies or programs might not yet be well-
actions into employee motivation and behaviour through educa- developed; thus, longitudinal analysis must be conducted in
tion, training, teamwork, practices, performance evaluations and future research. Fifth, the distinction between a weak or strong
feedback to establish employees’ green behaviour as routine prac- organisational climate can provide a more thorough exploration of
tice. When top management deems environmental sustainability to the relationship of a green organisational climate to employee
be imperative, beyond merely an economic concern, and employee beliefs and norms; future research should focus on the climate
involvement in green behaviour is valued and encouraged, a strong strength of multiple periods or groups. Furthermore, supervisor’s
green organisational climate is established that facilitates positive attitudes could be antecedents of employees’ environmental
contributions to both the business itself and society at large. behaviour. Finally, organisational structure, work environment and
In sum, the study found that employees’ green behaviour in environmental strategy could be used to investigate the predictors
hotels could be the outcome of employees’ perceptions of envi- of employees’ environmental behaviour.
ronmental practices and personal environmental beliefs/norms; in
addition, there is an interaction between green organisational Acknowledgements
climate and personal environmental values. Currently, environ-
mental behaviour in the workplace is considered organisational The author wishes to thank Professor Chris Ryan, Professor
citizenship behaviour, which implies that it is a discretionary and Chin-Fu Chen and three anonymous’ reviewers for their helpful
voluntary character trait in the organisation (Boiral & Paillé, 2012; comments on the earlier versions of this paper. The article is sup-
Ramus & Killmer, 2007). Although employees’ environmental ported by the research grant from National Science Council in
behaviour is not referenced in job descriptions, such behaviour Taiwan (NSC 99-2410-H-127 -005 -).
does contribute to corporate performance (Boiral & Paillé, 2012).
The results of this study also showed that personal environmental Appendix A. Supplementary data
norms had a strong influence on green employee behaviour in the
case of a weak organisational climate, thereby implying that those Supplementary data related to this article can be found at http://
who have higher environmental norms tend to behave in a “green” dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.tourman.2013.08.001.
fashion when they feel obliged to do so, without a mandatory
request. When corporate environmental policies were laid down References
with the hope that employees would comply, the employee
response was mixed. Interviews with hotel staff revealed that some Ajzen, I. (1991). The theory of planned behavior. Organizational Behavior & Human
employees found that green behaviour led to more difficulties in Decision Processes, 50, 179e211.
Ajzen, I. (2002). Perceived behavioral control, self-efficacy, locus of control, and the
the workplace; however, those employees who believed environ- theory of planned behavior. Journal of Applied Social Psychology, 32(4), 665e683.
mental protection to be imperative would happily abide by the Álvarez, M., Burgos, J., & Cecspedes, J. (2001). An analysis of environmental man-
policies and enjoy the environmentally aware organisational agement, organizational context and performance of Spanish hotels. Omega, 29,
457e471.
climate. Further, the hotel’s environmental polices might conflict
Anderson, N., & West, M. A. (1998). Measuring climate for work group innovation:
with employees’ green beliefs or norms; however, as a case in development and validation of the team climate inventory. Journal of Organi-
Taiwan shows, even if employees’ norms are not aligned with zational Behavior, 19, 235e258.
Ayuso, S. (2007). Comparing voluntary policy instruments for sustainable tourism:
environmental policies, they will not leave a hotel for that reason
the experience of the Spanish hotel sector. Journal of Sustainable Tourism, 15(2),
alone. With increased emphasis on environmental sustainability 144e159.
and corporate social responsibility in the hotel industry, hotels are Banerjee, S. B. (2002). Corporate environmentalism: the construct and its mea-
deeming environmental sustainability a corporate strategy as well surement. Journal of Business Research, 55, 177e191.
Baron, R. M., & Kenny, D. A. (1986). The moderator-mediator variable distinction in
as the core focus of business models (Bohdanowicz et al., 2011). social psychological research: conceptual, strategic, and statistical consider-
Hotel environmental policies are expected to encourage employees ations. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 51, 1173e1182.
to engage in green behaviour and be individually evaluated on their Batsti
c, M., & Goj ci
c, S. (2012). Measurement scale for eco-component of
hotel service quality. International Journal of Hospitality Management, 31(2),
compliance with the policy; that is, human resources training and 1012e1020.
management might require green environmental actions to be Bellou, V. M., & Andronikidis, A. I. (2009). Examine organizational climate in Greek
taken by employees. hotels from a service quality perspective. International Journal of Contemporary
Hospitality Management, 21(3), 294e307.
Although this study elucidates the influence of personal envi- Blanco, E., Rey-Maquieira, J., & Lozano, J. (2009). Economic incentives for tourism
ronmental values and green organisational climates on employees’ firms to undertake voluntary environmental management. Tourism Manage-
green behaviour in hotels, it has some limitations as an exploratory ment, 30(1), 112e122.
Bohdanowicz, P. (2005). European hoteliers’ environmental attitudes: greening the
research. First, the sample was selected from environmentally business. Cornell Hotel and Restaurant Administration Quarterly, 46, 188e204.
friendly hotels in Taiwan, excluding potentially different responses Bohdanowicz, P. (2009). Theory and practice of environmental management and
from employees working in other types of hotels and leading to monitoring in hotel chains. In S. Gössling, C. M. Hall, & D. B. Weaver (Eds.),
Sustainable tourism futures: Perspectives on systems, restructuring and in-
only partially generalisable results. Moreover, the samples were
novations (pp. 102e130). New York: Routledge.
drawn only from Taiwan. Second, the personal environmental Bohdanowicz, P., Zientara, P., & Novotna, E. (2011). International hotel chains and
behaviour considered in this research did not include voluntary environmental protection: an analysis of Hilton’s we care! programme (Europe,
suggestions or innovative ideas made by employees. Recently, 2006e2008). Journal of Sustainable Tourism, 19(7), 797e816.
Boiral, O., & Paillé, P. (2012). Organizational citizenship behaviour for the
Boiral and Paillé (2012) defined three types of employee organ- environment: measurement and validation. Journal of Business Ethics, 109(4),
isational citizenship behaviour for the environment. Other than 431e445.
 C.-J. Chou / Tourism Management 40 (2014) 436e446 445

Carrico, A. R., & Riemer, M. (2011). Motivating energy conservation in the work- James, L. R., Demaree, R. G., & Wolf, G. (1993). An assessment of within-group
place: an evaluation of the use of group-level feedback and peer education. interrater agreement. The Journal of Applied Psychology, 78(2), 306e309.
Journal of Environmental Psychology, 31(1), 1e13. Kasim, A. (2009). Managerial attitudes towards environmental management among
Casey, P. J., & Scott, K. (2006). Environmental concern and behavior in an Australian small and medium hotels in Kuala Lumpur. Journal of Sustainable Tourism, 17(6),
sample within an ecocentric-anthropocentric framework. Australian Journal of 709e725.
Psychology, 58, 57e67. Kassinis, G., & Soteriou, A. (2003). Greening the service profit chain: the impact of
Chan, D. (1988). Functional relationships among constructs in the same content environmental management practices. Production and Operations Management,
domain at different levels of analysis: a typology of composition models. Journal 12(3), 386e403.
of Applied Psychology, 83, 234e246. Kollmuss, A., & Agyeman, J. (2002). Mind the gap: why do people act environ-
Chan, S. W. (2008). Barriers to EMS in the hotel industry. International Journal of mentally and what are the barriers to pro-environmental behavior? Environ-
Hospitality Management, 27(2), 187e196. mental Education Research, 8(3), 239e260.
Chan, E. S. W., & Hawkins, R. (2010). Attitude towards EMSs in an international Leondakis, N. (August 2009). The green room. Association Meetings, 35.
hotel: an exploratory case study. International Journal of Hospitality Manage- Liao, H., & Chuang, A. (2004). A multilevel investigation of factors influencing
ment, 29(4), 641e651. employee service performance and customer outcomes. Academy of Manage-
Chan, W. W., Wong, K. K. F., & Lo, J. Y. (2008). Environmental quality index for the ment Journal, 47(1), 41e58.
Hong Kong hotel sector. Tourism Economics, 14(4), 857e870. Loi, R., Yang, J., & Diefendorff, J. M. (2009). Four-factor justice and daily job
Denison, D. (2003). The handbook of organizational culture and climate. Adminis- satisfaction: a multilevel investigation. Journal of Applied Psychology, 94(3),
trative Science Quarterly, 48(1), 119e127. 770e781.
Dickson, M. W., Resick, C. J., & Hanges, P. J. (2006). When organizational climate is López-Gamero, M. D., Claver-Cortés, E., & Molina-Azorín, J. F. (2011). Environmental
unambiguous, it is also strong. Journal of Applied Psychology, 91(2), 351e364. perception, management, and competitive opportunity in Spanish hotels. Cor-
Dunlap, R. E. (2008). The new environmental paradigm scale: from marginality to nell Hospitality Quarterly, 52(4), 480e500.
worldwide use. The Journal of Environmental Education, 40(1), 3e18. Mechinda, P., & Patterson, P. G. (2011). The impact of service climate and service
Dunlap, R. E., & Van Liere, K. D. (1978). The “new environmental paradigm”: a provider personality on employees’ customer-oriented behavior in a high-
proposed measuring instrument and preliminary results. Journal of Environ- contact setting. Journal of Services Marketing, 25(2e3), 101e113.
mental Education, 9, 10e19. Menon, A., & Menon, A. (1997). Enviropreneurial marketing strategy: the emer-
Dunlap, R. E., & Van Liere, K. D. (1984). Commitment to the dominant social gence of corporate environmentalism as market strategy. Journal of Marketing,
paradigm and concern for environmental quality. Social Science Quarterly, 65, 61(1), 51e67.
1013e1028. Meyer, R. D., Dalal, R. S., & Bonaccio, S. (2009). A meta-analytic investigation into the
Dunlap, R. E., Van Liere, K. D., Mertig, A. G., & Jones, R. E. (2000). Measuring moderating effects of situational strength on the conscientiousness-
endorsement of the new ecological paradigm: a revised NEP scale. Journal of performance relationship. Journal of Organizational Behavior, 30(8), 1077e1102.
Social Issues, 56, 425e442. Miller, A. D., & Murdock, T. B. (2007). Modeling latent true scores to determine the
Ehrhart, M. G. (2004). Leadership and procedural justice climate as antecedents of utility of aggregate student perceptions as classroom indicators in HLM: the
unit-level organizational citizenship behavior. Personnel Psychology, 57, 61e94. case of classroom goal structures. Contemporary Educational Psychology, 32(1),
Eiadt, Y., Kelly, A., Roche, F., & Eyadat, H. (2008). Green and competitive? an 83e104.
empirical test of the mediating role of environmental innovation strategy. Mischel, W. (1977). The interaction of person and situation. In D. Magnusson, &
Journal of World Business, 43(2), 131e145. N. S. Endler (Eds.), Personality at the crossroads: Current issues in interactional
Enz, C. A., & Siguaw, J. A. (1999). Best hotel environmental practices. Cornell Hotel psychology (pp. 333e352). Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.
and Restaurant Administration Quarterly, 40(5), 72e77. Monaco Bissonnette, M., & Contento, I. R. (2001). Adolescents’ perspectives and
Erdogan, N., & Baris, E. (2007). Environmental protection programs and con- food choice behaviors in terms of the environmental impacts of food produc-
servation practices of hotels in Ankara, Turkey. Tourism Management, 28(2), tion practices: application of a psychosocial model. Journal of Nutrition Educa-
604e614. tion, 33(2), 72e82.
Fernández, E., Junquera, B., & Ordiz, M. (2003). Organizational culture and human Nooney, J. G., Woodrum, E., Hoban, T. J., & Clifford, W. B. (2003). Environmental
resources in the environmental issue: a review of the literature. International worldview and behavior: consequences of dimensionality in a survey of North
Journal of Human Resource Management, 14(4), 634e656. Carolinians. Environment and Behavior, 35(6), 763e783.
Ferrell, O. C., & Ferrell, L. A. (1997). Environmental activities related to social re- Olli, E., Grendstad, G., & Wollebaek, D. (2001). Correlates of environmental behav-
sponsibility and ethical climate. The Journal of Marketing Management, 7(2), 1e13. iors: bringing back social context. Environment and Behavior, 33, 181e208.
Fishbein, M., & Ajzen, I. (1975). Belief, attitude, intention and behavior: An intro- Oreg, S., & Katz-Gerro, T. (2006). Predicting proenvironmental behavior cross-
duction to theory and research. Reading, MA: Addison-Wesley. nationally e values, the theory of planned behavior, and value-belief-norm
Ford, R. M., Kathryn, J. H., Williamsa, I. D., & Webbc, B. T. (2009). A value basis for the theory. Environment and Behavior, 38(4), 462e483.
social acceptability of clearfelling in Tasmania, Australia. Landscape and Urban Oskamp, S., Harrington, M., Edwards, T., Sherwood, P. L., Okuda, S. M., &
Planning, 90, 196e206. Swanson, D. L. (1991). Factors influencing household recycling behavior. Envi-
Fransson, N., & Gärling, T. (1999). Environmental concern: conceptual definitions, ronment and Behavior, 23, 494e519.
measurement methods, and research findings. Journal of Environmental Psy- Patterson, M. G., West, M. A., Shackleton, V. J., Dawson, J. F., Lawthom, R., Maitlis, S.,
chology, 19, 369e382. et al. (2005). Validating the organizational climate measure: links to managerial
González-Romá, C., Peiró, J. M., & Tordera, N. (2002). An examination of the ante- practices, productivity and innovation. Journal of Organizational Behavior, 26,
cedents and moderator influences of climate strength. Journal of Applied Psy- 379e408.
chology, 87(3), 465e473. Persic-Zivadinov, I. (2009). The environmental and economic impact of sustainable
Goodman, A. (2000). Implementing sustainability in service operations at Scandic hotels. Ekonomska Istrazivanja-Economic Research, 22(2), 98e110.
hotels. Interfaces, 30, 202e214. Pichel, K. (2008). Enhancing ecopreneurship through an environmental manage-
Harris, L. C., & Crane, A. (2002). The greening of organizational culture: manage- ment system: a longitudinal analysis of factors leading to proactive employee
ment views on the depth, degree and diffusion of change. Journal of Organi- behaviour. In R. Wüstenhagen, J. Hamschmidt, S. Sharma, & M. Starik (Eds.),
zational Change Management, 15(3), 214e234. Sustainable innovation and entrepreneurship (pp. 141e189). Edward Elgar
Hines, J. M., Hungerford, H. R., & Tomera, A. N. (1987). Analysis and synthesis of Publishing.
research on responsible environmental behavior: a meta-analysis. Journal of Porter, M., & van der Linde, C. (SepeOct 1995). Green and competitive: ending the
Environmental Education, 18, 1e18. stalemate. Harvard Business Review, 120e134.
Hoffman, A. J. (1993). The importance of fit between individual values and orga- Rahman, I., Reynolds, E., & Svaren, S. (2012). How “green” are North American
nizational culture in the greening of industry. Business Strategy and the Envi- hotels? An exploration of low-cost adoption practices. International Journal of
ronment, 2(4), 10e18. Hospitality Management, 31(3), 720e727.
Hofmann, D. A. (1997). An overview of the logic and rationale of hierarchical linear Ramus, C. A. (2001). Organizational support for employees: encouraging creative
models. Journal of Management, 23(6), 723e744. ideas for environmental sustainability. California Management Review, 43(3),
Hofmann, D. A., & Gavin, M. B. (1998). Centering decisions in hierarchical linear 85e105.
models: implications for research in organizations. Journal of Management, Ramus, C. A. (2002). Encouraging innovative environmental actions: what com-
24(5), 623e641. panies and managers must do. Journal of World Business, 37, 151e164.
Hofmann, D. A., Morgeson, F. P., & Gerra, S. J. (2003). Climate as a moderator of Ramus, C. A., & Killmer, A. B. (2007). Corporate greening through prosocial extrarole
the relationship between leader-member exchange and content specific citi- behaviours e a conceptual framework for employee motivation. Business
zenship: safety climate as an exemplar. Journal of Applied Psychology, 88(1), Strategy and the Environment, 16, 554e570.
170e178. Ramus, C. A., & Steger, U. (2000). The roles of supervisory support behaviors and
Hsu, C. H. C., & Huang, S. (2012). An extension of the theory of planned behavior environmental policy in employee “eco-initiatives” at leading-edge European
model for tourists. Journal of Hospitality & Tourism Research, 36(3), 390e417. companies. Academy of Management Journal, 43(4), 605e626.
Hutchinson, C. (1996). Corporate strategy and the environment. In R. Welford, & Raudenbuch, S. W., & Bryk, A. S. (2002). Hierarchical linear models: Applications and
R. Starkey (Eds.), Business and the environment (pp. 85e104). London: Earthsan. data analysis methods (2nd ed.). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
James, L. R., Chou, C. C., Ko, C.-H. E., McNeil, M. K. M., Wright, M. A., & Kim, K.-I. Scherbaum, C. A., Popovich, P. M., & Finlinson, S. (2008). Exploring individual-level
(2008). Organizational and psychological climate: a review of theory and factors related to employee energy-conservation behaviors at work. Journal of
research. European Journal of Work and Organizational Psychology, 17(1), 5e32. Applied Social Psychology, 38(3), 818e835.
446 C.-J. Chou / Tourism Management 40 (2014) 436e446

Schneider, B. (1990). The climate for service: an application of the climate construct. practices and organizational social climates. International Journal of Hospitality
In B. Schneider (Ed.), Organizational climate and culture (pp. 383e412). San Management, 31(2), 885e895.
Francisco, CA: Joseey-Bass. Tanner, C. (1999). Constraints on environmental behaviour. Journal of Environmental
Schneider, B., Salvaggio, A. N., & Subirats, M. (2002). Climate strength: a new di- Psychology, 19, 145e157.
rection for climate research. Journal of Applied Psychology, 87(2), 220e229. Tudor, T. L., Barr, W. W., & Gilg, A. W. (2008). A novel conceptual framework for
Schwartz, S. H. (1977). Normative influences on altruism. In L. Berkowitz (Ed.), examining environmental behavior in large organizations: a case study of the
Advances in experimental social psychology (Vol. 10; pp. 221e279). New York: Cornwall National Health Service (NHS) in the United Kingdom. Environment
Academic Press. and Behavior, 40(3), 426e450.
Shrivastava, P. (1995). The role of corporations in achieving ecological sustainability. Walumbwa, F. O., Hartnell, C. A., & Oke, A. (2010). Servant leadership, procedural
The Academy of Management Review, 20(4), 936e960. justice climate, service climate, employee attitudes, and organizational citi-
Smith-Crowe, K., Burke, M. J., & Landis, R. S. (2003). Organizational climate as a zenship behavior: a cross-level investigation. Journal of Applied Psychology, 95,
moderator of safety knowledge-safety performance relationships. Journal of 517e529.
Organizational Behavior, 24, 861e876. Wang, M. L. (2009). Does organizational support promote citizenship in service
Sniehotta, F. F. (2009). Towards a theory of intentional behaviour change: plans, settings? The moderating role of service climate. The Journal of Social Psychol-
planning, and self-regulation. British Journal of Health Psychology, 14(2), 261e273. ogy, 149(6), 648e676.
Sora, B., Caballer, A., Peiró, J. M., Silla, I., & Gracia, F. (2010). Moderating influence of Zohar, D. (1980). Safety climate in industrial organizations: theoretical and applied
organizational justice on the relationship between job insecurity and its out- implications. Journal of Applied Psychology, 65, 96e102.
comes: a multilevel analysis. Economic and Industrial Democracy, 31(4), 613e637. Zohar, D., & Luria, G. (2004). Climate as a social-cognitive construction of super-
Starik, M., & Rands, G. P. (1995). Weaving and integrated web: multilevel and visory safety practices: scripts as proxy of behavior patterns. Journal of Applied
multisystem perspectives of ecological sustainable organizations. The Academy Psychology, 89(2), 322e333.
of Management Review, 20(4), 908e935.
Steg, L., Dreijerink, L., & Abrahamse, W. (2005). Factors influencing the acceptability
of energy policies: a test of VBN theory. Journal of Environmental Psychology, 25,
415e425. Chia-jung Chou is currently an Associate Professor in the
Stern, P. C. (2000). Toward a coherent theory of environmentally significant Department of Hospitality Management at Tajen Univer-
behavior. Journal of Social Issue, 56(3), 407e424. sity. Her research interests are in the areas of green hos-
Stern, P. C., Dietz, T., Abel, T., Guagnano, G. A., & Kalof, L. (1999). A Value-Belief-Norm pitality, sustainable tourism, tourist psychology and
theory of support for social movements: the case of environmentalism. Human marketing. She has published some articles in Tourism
Ecology Review, 6(2), 81e97. Management, International Journal of Hospitality Man-
Stewart, R., Volpone, S., Avery, D. R., & McKay, P. (2011). You support diversity, but agement and Journal of Tourism and Travel Marketing.
are you ethical? Examining the interactive effects of diversity and ethical
climate perceptions on turnover intentions. Journal of Business Ethics, 100(4),
581e593.
Sweetman, P. (2007). Engage employees in green issues. People Management,
September, 42e43.
Tang, T. W., & Tang, Y. Y. (2012). Promoting service-oriented organizational citi-
zenship behaviors in hotels: the role of high-performance human resource