This study integrates bibliometric and empirical evidence to explain how green human resource management (GHRM) and digital readiness are associated with employee engagement and employee-perceived organisational performance. A hybrid design was used. In the bibliometric phase, an initial Scopus search identified 49 records published between 2015 and 2025; after screening for relevance and data quality, 26 publications were retained for analysis to map the convergence of green and digital HRM themes. The empirical phase tested the proposed Green–Digital–Engagement Framework (GDEF) using Partial Least Squares Structural Equation Modelling (PLS-SEM) based on 280 valid responses obtained through purposive sampling from selected green-oriented organisational settings in Indonesia. The findings indicate that both GHRM and digital readiness are positively associated with employee engagement, with digital readiness showing the stronger relationship in the present sample. Employee engagement is also positively associated with employee-perceived organisational performance and significantly mediates the relationships of GHRM and digital readiness with that outcome. These results support the role of employee engagement as a behavioural mechanism linking sustainability-oriented HR practices and digital readiness with employees’ perceptions of organisational functioning and effectiveness. The study contributes to digital-sustainable HRM by integrating bibliometric evidence, theoretical reasoning, and employee-level empirical findings within a single explanatory framework. Practically, the findings suggest that organisations may benefit from aligning green-oriented HR practices with digital readiness initiatives and implementing both in ways that strengthen employee participation, clarity, and involvement. The findings should be interpreted within the study’s purposive, context-specific, and employee-perception-based design rather than as evidence of objective firm-level performance or unrestricted generalisability.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Josiah et al. (2026) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: