Addendum: Green human resource management and workplace cheating: a counterintuitive study

Since the publication of Ahmad I, Ullah M, Saif N, Sadiq M (2025), “Green human resource management and workplace cheating: a counterintuitive study”. Personnel Review, Vol. 54 No. 6 pp. 1478-1500, doi: https://doi.org/10.1108/PR-07-2024-0654, concerns have been raised to some issues surrounding the citations of Renwick et al. (2013) and Renwick et al. (2016) in the body of the article and in the reference list. These articles were incorrectly cited with duplicate DOIs; the correct citations for these articles are found below:Additionally, it has been brought to our attention that the following statement, “For example, companies like Toyota and Unilever have implemented green initiatives such as eco-focused employee training and green incentives that align environmental goals with performance outcomes (Renwick et al., 2013; Bano et al., 2022)”, was unintentionally attributed to Renwick et al. (2013). The text should have instead cited other works, including Bano et al. (2022) and the following two articles that were not cited in the final manuscript:Finally, the article unintentionally suggests that Renwick et al. (2013) posit that “eco-friendly HRM always leads to positive behavior”; This is not correct. The authors would like to correct this to state that Renwick et al. (2013) instead primarily advocates for the positive potential of GHRM and does not state that it “always” leads to positive behaviour. The publisher and authors apologise to readers for any confusion or inconvenience caused by these unintentional errors.