Ifzal Ahmad

Purpose: This paper develops a conceptual methodological framework for governing the use of artificial intelligence in the grounded theory. It addresses the risk that AI-generated outputs may be mistaken for qualitative evidence, interpretation or theory. Design/methodology/approach: The paper synthesizes grounded theory traditions, computational grounded theory, large language model supported coding, human in the loop research, qualitative trustworthiness and critical AI scholarship. It develops a validation gate framework and uses a worked methodological vignette to show how AI suggestions can be documented, checked and bounded. Findings: The paper argues that AI can support retrieval, organization, candidate coding, comparison and adversarial audit, but cannot authorize meaning, categories or theory. It identifies seven validation gates and four modes of AI use: assistive, dialogic, generative and adversarial audit. Originality/value: The paper differentiates epistemic governance from reflexivity, trustworthiness, auditability and human in the loop design by focusing on the epistemic status of AI outputs before they enter the analytic record. It offers operational pass criteria for preserving theoretical sensitivity, reflexivity, auditability and researcher accountability when grounded theory is scaled through AI.

This study introduces and validates the Green HR Accountability and Redistribution Mechanisms model, a new framework for understanding the unintended consequences of Green Human Resource Management. Drawing on the labor process tradition, Green HR Accountability and Redistribution Mechanisms conceptualizes three dimensions, that is, eco-intensification, eco-surveillance, and supplier cost-shifting, that explain how accountability for environmental targets and the redistribution of responsibilities can create hidden costs for employees and suppliers. Scale items were developed through theory-driven generation and expert review, then refined in a pilot study (N = 155), and validated with two additional survey data from 432 and 487 respondents subsequently across diverse industries. Exploratory and confirmatory factor analyses confirmed a robust three-factor structure with strong reliability and validity. Structural equation modeling demonstrated that eco-intensification and eco-surveillance heighten strain, burnout, and turnover intentions while reducing trust and voice, whereas supplier cost-shifting predicts perceptions of precarity. Bright-side Green Human Resource Management practices buffered these adverse effects. Practically, Green HR Accountability and Redistribution Mechanisms is designed as a survey-based diagnostic and audit instrument that organizations can administer to employees and supply chain partners to identify where green HR practices intensify work, extend surveillance, or externalize environmental costs, thereby enabling managers to redesign sustainability initiatives before they undermine employee well-being or labor justice. The Green HR Accountability and Redistribution Mechanisms model thus advances human resource management and sustainability research and offers managers a diagnostic tool for balancing environmental and social goals. JEL Classification: M12, M14, and Q56

This study examines how supervisor bottom-line mentality (SBLM) shapes the ethical climate needed for environmental responsibility in logistics firms. Drawing on ethical climate theory (ECT) and self-determination theory (SDT), it argues that performance-focused supervisory signals weaken the moral conditions through which employees uphold environmental and compliance duties. Using time-lagged survey data from 379 employees in Pakistan’s logistics sector and partial least squares structural equation modeling (PLS-SEM), results show that SBLM weakens workplace ethical climate directly and indirectly through moral disengagement. Job autonomy buffers these effects by reducing employees’ tendency to justify questionable operational choices under pressure. The findings reposition ethical climate as a workplace foundation for managing organizations’ environmental impact, showing that sustainability implementation depends not only on policies and reporting systems but also on moral regulation and autonomy in daily operations.

Purpose: This paper reconceptualizes sustainability leadership as a process of decision-making under value pluralism, where leaders must navigate persistent trade-offs among legitimate but incommensurable economic, social and environmental values. It aims to advance sustainability leadership theory by demonstrating how leaders recognize, interpret and respond to conflicting demands. Design/methodology/approach: A conceptual framework is created that identifies three trade-off domains, i.e. internal, external and temporal, and proposes four typical decision-making strategies, i.e. integrative, compromise, sacrificial and symbolic. To demonstrate and improve the theory, a vignette-based experiment with 412 managers manipulated regulatory enforcement, stakeholder pressure and organizational slack to see how these factors influence strategic decision-making. Findings: The results demonstrate that strong enforcement increased sacrificial decisions, organizational slack enabled integrative solutions and stakeholder pressure reduced symbolic responses. Integrative and sacrificial strategies were consistently judged as more legitimate and beneficial for long-term reputation and performance than compromise or symbolic approaches. These findings provide behavioral evidence that leadership decisions in sustainability are contingent upon institutional, organizational and individual contexts. Originality/value: By embedding leadership within the dynamics of decision-making under value conflict, this paper shifts the focus from harmonization to trade-offs. It specifies multilevel mechanisms and boundary conditions that shape the effectiveness of different decision strategies, offering a more realistic, context-sensitive and pluralistic account of sustainability leadership. This contribution enriches decision-making theory in management by explaining how leaders handle complex, ambiguous and morally significant choices in sustainability contexts.

Purpose: This study examines how sustainability discourse within Green Human Resource Management (GHRM) is constructed, legitimised and experienced in organisational contexts. Moving beyond dominant “win–win” assumptions, it investigates how sustainability narratives shape managerial expectations and employee responses through moral framing. Design/methodology/approach: The study adopts a qualitative research design based on multi-source data collected from five organisations across banking, telecommunications and manufacturing sectors. Data include semi-structured interviews, organisational documents and sustainability reports. The analysis is guided by an integrated theoretical framework combining Labour Process Theory and Neo-Institutional Theory. Findings: The findings show that sustainability discourse is actively moralised, framing organisational expectations as ethical obligations rather than formal requirements. Employees not only internalise these expectations as moral responsibilities, leading to self-regulation, but also experience tension, guilt and subtle forms of resistance. Institutional pressures play a key role in shaping these dynamics by embedding sustainability within broader legitimacy narratives. The study identifies a mechanism termed “moral camouflage”, through which organisational control is reframed and internalised as ethical responsibility. Research limitations/implications: The study is contextually situated in Pakistan, limiting generalisability to non-religious or less collectivist cultures. Future research should explore cross-national moral variations and examine how moral legitimacy influences psychological outcomes such as guilt or moral fatigue. Originality/value: This study contributes to GHRM and critical HRM literature by introducing the concept of moral camouflage and by integrating Labour Process Theory and Neo-Institutional Theory to explain how sustainability discourse operates as both a legitimacy mechanism and a form of control. It offers a process-based understanding of GHRM that complements existing outcome-focused research.

This study examines the direct and indirect effects of green human resource management (GHRM) on job satisfaction, with organizational pride as a mediator and ethical leadership and psychological empowerment as moderators. Data were collected in three waves from 308 respondents in Pakistan’s logistics industry, with hypotheses tested using PLS-SEM through SmartPLS. Findings reveal that GHRM positively influences employee job satisfaction, with organizational pride playing a significant mediating role. Ethical leadership further strengthens the GHRM-job satisfaction link by amplifying the positive effects of organizational pride, while psychological empowerment enhances the pride-satisfaction relationship, underscoring the importance of an empowering workplace culture. This research contributes to GHRM literature by addressing its less-discussed non-green outcomes, particularly in the logistics sector. By integrating organizational pride, ethical leadership, and psychological empowerment, the study provides a comprehensive understanding of factors influencing GHRM’s effectiveness. These insights help organizations balance sustainability goals with employee-centric approaches, offering actionable strategies to benchmark practices and gain a competitive edge in fostering both environmental responsibility and employee well-being. For policy makers, the findings suggest that promoting GHRM frameworks in logistic industries, particularly in the vulnerable developing countries not only advances environmental goals but also improves employees’ well-being.

In the evolving landscape of leadership, criticism has traditionally been viewed as a reputational risk to be avoided or carefully managed. This Perspective challenges that assumption by introducing the Elevatory Paradox —a counterintuitive phenomenon in which public criticism by established leaders can inadvertently enhance the visibility, status and perceived legitimacy of emerging figures. This article explains how media amplification, public curiosity and narrative reframing can convert reputational criticisms into unexpected elevation. This paradox operates through several psychological and sociological mechanisms, including paradox mindset, social comparison theory, media agenda-setting and narrative identity construction. Recent scholarship on resilience, digital discourse and ethical leadership is integrated to show how public criticism may function as an unintended endorsement—particularly when the target responds with composure and narrative control. Ethical and practical implications are explored, with recommendations for both critics and targets. Ultimately, the Elevatory Paradox provides a novel framework for understanding how influence is shaped, not only by credentials and performance but also by how individuals are perceived under public scrutiny.

Purpose: This novel study aims to investigate the often-overlooked negative impacts of Green Human Resource Management (Green HRM) on workplace behavior, specifically focusing on the emergence of workplace cheating behaviors. By examining the mediating role of emotional exhaustion and the moderating influence of Supervisor’s Bottom-Line Mentality (SBLM), this research fills a crucial gap in the existing literature.Design/methodology/approach: Leveraging the Job Demands-Resources (JD-R) and Conservation of Resources (COR) theories, this quantitative study provides a robust theoretical framework for understanding the proposed relationships. Data were meticulously gathered through a two-staged survey involving 419 employees from Pakistan’s banking sector. Hypotheses were rigorously tested using SmartPLS4, ensuring the reliability and validity of the results.Findings: Our findings reveal that Green HRM, while beneficial in many respects, can inadvertently lead to increased workplace cheating behaviors through the pathway of emotional exhaustion. Furthermore, SBLM significantly exacerbates these effects, both directly and through its impact on the mediating mechanism of emotional exhaustion. These results underscore the complex and sometimes detrimental consequences of Green HRM practices.Research limitations/implications: While the study is contextually bound to the banking sector in Pakistan, its implications are profound and far-reaching. Future research should expand to diverse sectors and regions to validate and extend these findings. Practically, the study offers critical insights for organizations adopting Green HRM, emphasizing the necessity of mitigating emotional exhaustion to prevent unethical behaviors.Originality/value: This research offers a novel and compelling perspective on Green HRM, challenging the predominantly positive narrative and highlighting significant unintended consequences. By integrating JD-R and COR theories, it provides a comprehensive understanding of the dynamics at play, offering valuable guidance for both scholars and practitioners.