Sustainable human resource management (SHRM) and corporate social responsibility (CSR): An Inte- grated Mediated Moderation Model of dynamic capabilities (DC) on family business industry

Article history: Received: February 2, 2020 Received in revised format: March 1


Introduction
present The Society for Human Resource Management (SHRM) as an integrative approach of human resource management which considers, at the same time, practices and strategies of human resource management to contribute on financial, social and ecological goals (sustainable development goals) added to an inside and outside impact on organization. In their study, they mentioned that SHRM "promotes proactive steps" which means action\reaction between employee and organization to ensure mutual benefits for both of them and for a long time called regenerate relationship'. The key factor here is the adoption of an ethical approach. Proportionally to the development of the idea of sustainability and the importance of business ethics, corporate social responsibility (CSR) has received increasing intension. Most researchers studied the link between HRM and CSR supposed that HRM assume the integration of practices and strategies of general corporate sustainability on organization (Ehnert et al., 2016) to define a sustainable business organization based on sustainable HRM systems. The link between CSR and its effect on HRM has been also studied by different researchers in different ways (e.g. Kim & Scullion, 2011;Buciuniene & Kazlauskaite, 2012;Berber, 2013) while we could not find papers related to the effect of sustainable HRM on CSR. Furthermore, the definition presented by Ehnert (2009a) suppose that the sustainable HRM can affect financial, ecological and social goals by the development of practices and strategies which serve the organization on external and internal level (Schuler & Jackson, 2014). Kramar (2014) considers that sustainable HRM deals with the development of high performance (practices and work system). Others models of sustainable HRM take on the account the best practices to build employees strengths and generate a good performance (Browning & Delahaye, 2011;Ehnert, 2009a;Guerci & Pedrini, 2014;Wells, 2011;Mazur, 2014).
Others researches have demonstrated that the implementation of sustainable human resource management can stimulate competitiveness with the guarantee of the development of responsibility towards environment, social responsibility and the responsibility of the employee towards his/herself and all of this can generate responsible organization. However, Babeľová et al. (2020) argue that the relationship exists between SHRM, motivation and performance but they demonstrate that this complementarity is based on an indirect effect by the development of competencies. So, we can suppose, also, that the SHRM affect CSR through the generation of specific competencies named dynamic capabilities.
This paper aims to explore the link between SHRM and CSR through the development of dynamic capabilities ad to test the effect of this link in different ways. It seems that a bidirectional and an indirect effect can exist between these concepts. This study extends researchers in the field of the development of new paradigm of HRM which can stimulate the sustainable goals especially the social goals. Here, four main parts are presented. We begin with the definition of the three main concepts: SHRM, corporate social responsibility and dynamic capabilities. Then, we have to develop hypothesis of research and dress the conceptual framework. After this, we will detail the methodology adopted for the hypothesis test. Finally, results are presented and discussed in order to define recommendations. Guerci et al. (2018), define sustainable human resource management (SHRM) as "HRM practices informed by the corporate sustainability principles, thus aiming at economic, social, environmental and human sustainability simultaneously" (p. 783). In the same field of idea Jarlstrom et al. (2018) state that SHRM is a "collaborative human resource development". By collaborative they mean the co-construction of the main two part of any organization function: employee and organization. They support the idea according to which this sustainable human resource management stimulate the development of special skills for employees such as participation, communication and work role to build strength human capital who generate and facilitate performance. We think that SHRM is different from strategic HRM. If a strategic approach supposes that human resource management is a partner for the organizational strategy and must contribute to the achievement of strategic objective (Saini, 2000), sustainable HRM inverses this process and considers that the beginning point of the strategic process will be a human capital since if we develop skills and competencies the ultimate and automatic consequence will be a good job and an efficient management of strategic process. Based on our literature review, the second difference between the strategic and the sustainable HRM will be the mutuality of this generative process. Both of them support a long time but we can certify that the sustainable will define an auto regenerative process. The relation between employee and organization in this sustainable approach can become a win-win relationship. The sustainability will guarantee progress and development of skills and competencies for the employee instead of sustainable work system for organizational and in consequence sustainable performance. To appreciate SHRM in practice we adopted the model of Zaugg et al. (2001) with three main objectives: employability, individual responsibility and work-life balance to play the role of facilitating, building and focusing (Järlström et al., 2018;Guerci & Pedrini, 2014). These roles constitute different modes of operations which affect design of organizational practices. To assess this idea, Cleveland et al. (2015) argue that SHRM improves organizational performance since it can be considered, as we mentioned in the beginning, a new model of organizational development in which human capital is the most important determinant. We can conclude, in this state, that sustainable human resource management contributes to the development and well-being of human resources who will contribute to the progress of organization. After this, organization will reward efforts in order to insure complementarity and mutuality with human capitals.

-Sustainable human resource management
To clarify this idea, we will present main definitions through our literature review (Table 1).

Table 1
Definitions of sustainable human resource management (SHRM)

Definitions
References Sustainable HR strategy can be defined as the management of human resources to meet the optimal needs of the company and community of the present without compromising the ability to meet the needs of the future. Sugumar (2003) (p. 910) "Sustainable HRM is the utilization of HR tools to help embed a sustainability strategy in the organization and the creation of an HRM system that contributes to the sustainable performance of the firm. Sustainable HRM creates the skills, motivation, values and trust to achieve a triple bottom line and at the same time ensures the long-term health and sustainability of both the organization's internal and external stakeholders, with policies that reflect equity, development and well-being and help support environmentally friendly practices." Cohen and al. (2012) (p. 3) The basic concept underlying the sustainable HRM discussion is that firms seek different kinds of outcomes to satisfy their stakeholders' expectations. These outcomes may be economic, social, human, and ecological, and firms often seek them simultaneously although any one of the outcomes may be more important to an organization than others." Järlström and al. (2018) (p. 4).
sustainable HRM is considered "as the adoption of HRM strategies and practices that enable the achievement of financial, social and ecological goals, with an impact inside and outside of the organisation and over a long-term time horizon while controlling for unintended side effects and negative feedback." Ehnert et al. (p. 90)

Sustainable Human Resource Management (SHRM) and Corporate Social Responsibility (CSR)
The concept of CSR refers to the ability of organization to integrate ethics and social law to serve society and align its objectives with the need of society (Caroll, 1999) and contribute to the improvement of quality of life of employees' communities (Vlachos et al., 2017). The concept of CSR is considered as complex (McWilliams et al., 2006;Haigh & Jones, 2007). Orlitzky and Swanson (2006) consider that "Implementation of CSR policies and practices is highly dependent on employees in terms of cooperation, which also emphasizes the critical role of HRM" which means that HRM can determine CSR. In the same field, Aguilera et al. (2007) present CSR as a result which depends on employee's ability and determine the relationship between them and their managers. So, if we remember that SHRM is based and issued from HRM, we can admit that the effect of SHRM on CSR exist. Chamsa et al. (2019) state that the sustainable human resource management is committed to social and environmental outcomes and aim to develop an "innovative workplace". Social outcomes are in general related to the CSR. In this field, European Commission (2011) consider that CSR represent the contribution of organization to the society and as a main contribution on the sustainable development and on SHRM. This, in our sense depends on the individual responsibilities able to develop and stimulate innovation to fit social and environmental needs. Chamsa and García-Blandónb (2019, 112) propose three approaches of HRM and sustainable development : (1) responsibility-oriented approach (employees' well-being, community prosperity, and quality of work-life balance); (2) efficiency-oriented and innovation-oriented corporate purposes (linking economic and sustainability outcomes -changes in the environment, technological progress, and the quality of services and products); and (3) substance-oriented approach (responsible consumption and reproduction of resources for future organizational viability). If we remember the definition of CSR we can conclude that the relation between HRM and sustainability which define SHRM contain implicit reference to CSR with different aspects such as community prosperity, quality of services and products.
According to Cleveland et al. (2015, 150) "Organizations where HRM places a priority on the care of employees (by using alternative approaches to workforce reduction or cutbacks during tough economic times), and attending to the environmental sustainability of organizations (including green buildings that support the health of employees) will retain more highly committed, engaged, and productive employees because their overall health and well-being are secured -not just within themselves, but within their community and family realm". They insist on the importance of alignment of organizations need and employees needs for the definition of a sustainable organization. For them, work satisfaction, provided by SHRM by wellbeing affects organizational commitment and stimulate organizational citizenship behaviors which represent one of the determinants or roles of CSR. As a long-term perspective of SHRM, human resource which considered for a long time as a source of high costs will be adopted as a new approach with an added value for organization and it owns (Ehnert, 2009b). An effective recruitment for example can maintain an organizational success as well as motivation high skills which support organization for future challenges (Greening & Turban, 2000). Based on Deng et al. (2013), CSR behaviors are important to generate a high qualified staff able to innovate quickly according to a new vision oriented innovation through the development of innovative consciousness and abilities. Knowledges provided by human capital who are regulated by HRM process and practices are the base of innovation. Jarlstrom et al. (2018) and Carroll (1991) consider that responsibilities of corporate social responsibility lines with responsibilities of SHRM represented by legal responsibility, economic responsibility, ethical responsibility and philanthropic responsibility. Ethical responsibility is related to the treatment of humans which is the ultimate activity of HRM (greenwood, 2013) and it is integrated on this 'humanitarian approach' of SHRM. Waldman and Siegel (2008) studied the relationship between leadership and corporate social behavior. Aguilera et al. (2007) demonstrate the effect of CSR on the definition of organizational justice for employees. It can also have an impact on Organizational Citizenship Behavior (Swanson & Niehoff, 2001). In the same time employees on organization with a high or important level of CSR can develop satisfaction and will be more positive and more productive (Sirota Survey Intelligence, 2007). According to this, we can suppose that there is an indirect and bidirectional effect between SHRM and CSR. The majority of research have focused on the effect of CSR on SHRM or on strategic human resource management. But here we will admit that the inverse can be available too. Jamali et al. (2015, p. 126) consider that ''HRM can potentially provide a promising managerial framework that can support organizational efforts in translating CSR strategies into practical managerial actions and outcomes". This means that HRM can be considered as a tool to make CSR more operational. If we remember that HRM is included on SHRM we can admit in this state that SHRM is an antecedent for CSR. The question here still how. At this level of analyze we can consider that the generation of knowledge and high competencies constitute the key factor of success of this link. To make this idea more operational and efficient we adopted the concept of dynamic capabilities. Here, we haven't to define dynamic capabilities but to analyze this concept with its different dimensions in order to identify its role and different effects between variables mentioned here. Teece et al. (1997:516) define dynamic capabilities as "the firm 's ability to integrate, build, and reconfigure internal and external competences to address rapidly changing environments". Teece and Pisano (1994) consider that dynamic capabilities are a part of organizational capability which transform internal resources and environment to make a successful strategic management through integrated resources, skills and capabilities to generate a new process and align change and resources (Helfat et al., 2007;Gimzauskiene et al., 2015). Kindström et al. (2013) consider that dynamic capabilities can support the process enable the firms to identify service innovation needs. Involves employee representatives in many decision-making processes beyond those for which workers participation is a statutory requirement; financial and non-financial support Employee cooperation Teamwork; good relationships with managers and employees Fairness and equality Fostering diversity respectful relationships; fairness as regards as remuneration, career

-Sustainable Human Resource Management (SHRM) and Dynamic capabilities
Source : Stankeviciute and Savaneviciene (2018) We have to admit that the collect of literature review in this field was difficult to find. This is why we tried to look at different relations carefully and identify the impact of each dimensions to generate our hypothesis.

The research model
The objective of this study is to investigate the interrelationships among sustainable human resource management, corporate social responsibility and dynamic capabilities (see Fig. 1). The main idea supposes that there is a relationship between SHRM and CSR which suppose that, SHRM by the development and the generation of dynamic capabilities, stimulate the CSR, after this, CSR will reinforce SHRM. A synergetic effect between these variables can exist. Furthermore, the moderating roles of some dynamic capabilities in the relationships among some SHRM practices and CSR aspects are explored. Finally, the mediating effects of others dimensions of dynamic capabilities on the relationship between SHRM practices and CSR are evaluated. Based on this analysis, we can admit that our research model can be adopted according to three levels of analyze: individual, organizational and the complementarity between them. This is related to the specificity of our variables as observed on the literature review. All hypotheses are summarized in Table 3.

Data collection and sampling frame
A quantitative approach was adopted here based on a questionnaire. Three main part was formulated based on items identified on literature review. The first part is related to objectives of SHRM, the second one deals with dynamic capabilities and the third and last part are associated with CSR dimensions. Out of 200 questionnaires distributed and we collected 182 questionnaires which were administrated to managers of industry business family on the region of Qassim and Riadh. In fact, we chose this field of business family due to the importance of CSR on the development of their competitive advantage and their survival if we remember that the sustainable development is one of the objectives of vision 2030 on Saudi Arabia and which is directly related to social development. Data were obtained on two ways of either a phone conversion or e-mail. The number of questionnaires collected is enough if we remember that the use of Structural equation model requires that the sample size be 5-10 times of the items used.

Construct measurement
Items related to SHRM was divided into three dimensions and extracted from Esfahan et al. (2016). Dynamic capabilities (DC) was appreciated by three dimensions: Resource Integration Capability (RIC), Organizational Learning Capability (OLC) and Innovation and Change Capability (ICC) defined by Pavlou andSawy (2011) andXu (2011). CSR is based on five dimensions: Public Charities, Employee Development, Fair Operation, Environmental Protection and customer orientation is used as mentioned by Maignan and Ralston (2002). A five-point likert scale was admitted to measure all items and ranged from strongly disagree (1), to greatly agree (5).

Data analysis
After a descriptive analysis, we conducted an exploratory to test the multidimensionality of our variables as identified on the literature. In this state, loadings, variance, KMO and alpha were calculated in order to appreciate the conformity of the scale used and the friability of items adopted. The hypothesis test was conducted by structural equation modelling (SEM) analyses by AMOS 24.0 with maximum-likelihood estimation. Two-stage approach was adopted according to Anderson and Gerbing (1988): the discriminant and convergent validity of the measurement model with a series of confirmatory factor analyses (CFA) and fit index were appreciated based on Bollen (1989) and Jöreskog and Sörbom (1982). The hypothesis test related to mediating and moderating effect on the structural model were established and verified too.

Results and discussion
Our sample is composed of employees on 182 family business on Ryadh and Qassim on Saudi Arabia. The majority of respondents are represented by 34.6 % of executive responsible, 23.6% of human resource reasonable and 18.7 % of general managers. This variety of profiles can be more appropriated here in order to appreciate the definition of CSR researched here. Added to this more than 78% of respondents are men due to the specificity of our sample and region studied here. The most important in this way is to identify and verify the validity of items adopted due to this specific context. We have to identify the composition of variables adopted in this research. This is way we have to elaborate a component factor analysis.

-Component factor analysis
Items with low loadings were delated. We can notice that 19 items were delated because their loadings are less than 0.5. These items are all related to the SHRM. This is related according to our point of view to the difficulty of the concept. We can note that this one still misunderstands and difficult to operate due to its specificity which can be hard to assimilate but benefit for both organization and employee. Appendix 1 retraces all items adopted here according to our variables and dimensions. For each item loading we have mentioned and discussed. KMO and Alpha Cronbach is, also, represented in this table after the determination of different factor based on Variance.
Based on our results, SHRM can be appreciated by three factors as mentioned on the literature review: the first is represented by employability (8.44%) then personal responsibility (7.17%) and Well-being balance (5.82%). The total information explained here is about 21.44 %. This confirms that this conception of human resource management is still non applicated in our sample as a practice. It is simply an idea. Corporate social responsibility is represented by four axes: the first factor contains items related to environment protection (15.03%), the second public charities (10.94%), then employee development (9.54%) and customer orientation (8.27%). The fifth axis related to fair operation was delated. Items of dynamic capabilities can be appreciated by two dimensions: the first was research integration capability with an explained variance of 31.22 % and the second is about 15.81% related to organizational learning capability. Innovation and change capability were delated. Items related to this dimension are non-representative and can be associated to the second factor. Two hypothesis here are nonavailable in this case these. Only three hypotheses will be tested. Hypothesis which contains fair operation in the third level of analysis is delated added to the hypothesis developed on the organizational level which contains innovation and change capability. Only two levels will be appreciated: individual and interaction between individual and organization. As we can see two mediating hypotheses and one moderating effect will be discussed.

Confirmatory factor analyses
We have to elaborate two levels of confirmatory analyses (CFA). The first level is related to the measurement model and the second is related to the structural model.  All indicators of fit are acceptable. And we can proceed to the second step with the hypothesis test.

Hypothesis test: the structural model
Three hypotheses were defined after our literature review and the exploratory approach. One is related to the moderator effect, the second and the third are about mediating effect.

H1.
Organizational learning capacity moderates the effect of individual responsibility on employee development.

H2.
Resource integration capacity mediates the relationship between well life balance and environment protection.

Fig. 7. Structural model H3
The direct effect between work life balance and environment protection was calculated. The integration of resource integration capacities ameliorates this relation. We passed from 0.06 to 0.09, which can confirm our hypothesis related to the mediating effect.

H3.
Resource integration capacity mediates the relation between well life balance and public charity.
The objective of this research was to identify the impact of SHRM on CSR by the development of dynamic capabilities. The main idea was to determine how CSR can be built on internal and can constitute a direct output of the development of sustainable human resource management. In the beginning some variables were delated since they were non representative. We also passed from five hypotheses to only three hypotheses. This finding can provide specificities related to the perception of business family to the concept of CSR on Saudi Arabia. Dimensions eliminated are not representative for our sample such as innovation and change capacities on related to dynamic capabilities and fair operation on corporate social responsibility. Two hypotheses are confirmed. Hypothesis related to the moderator effect of OLC was rejected. The link between individual responsibility and environment protection exists (0.59) and significative but it is clear that the organizational learning capacity did not affect this link and the structural model based on interaction between variables was non significative. We can suppose the existence of others variables which can stimulate the environmental development. In fact, this variable can be related much more to a social awareness more than an individual effort.

Conclusion
On the majority of research, CSR was treated as an explicative variable of performance or as a provider of new social actions or practices. In this research, we reached to define CSR as a result, as latent variable. We adopted the opposite of some studies about the relation of HRM and CSR. Added to this, we used the sustainable human resource management instead of HRM. This concept is used on recent research related to human resources as a new way to manage human capital with a double contribution: organization and employees. Hence, the main objective was to link and identify this effect between sustainable human resource management and corporate social responsibility. Our literature review confirms the existence of this indirect effect through the development of dynamic capabilities. As a multidimensional concept dynamic capability was used as mediating and moderating variable in the same time. We identify learning organizational learning as a moderator variable and resource integration capability as a mediating variable. Both of them are defined as a dimension of DC. All our hypotheses were confirmed after the elimination of some variables. This is due to the restrictive vision of CSR which can be concluded in this study. The result of this research can increase and enrich knowledge about sustainable HRM, its practices and its effect on corporate social responsibility. The sample has made our research very useful due to the importance of sustainability on Saudi Arabia in general and its necessity to the business family in particular.
Our findings can be used as a solution in terms of the development of CSR. In other words, it provides a useful roadmap for managers to generate CSR with a specific process to manage people especially through the development of sustainable human resources management practices. The theorical research developed here must be tested with others samples in order to make results more operational.