Drawing on self-determination theory and social cognitive theory, this mixed-methods study examines how green transformational leadership (GTL) influences dimensions of employee pro-environmental behavior (PEB)—namely, eco-initiatives, eco-helping, and eco-civic engagement—in China’s new energy vehicle (NEV) sector. We propose that green motivation, comprising intrinsic green motivation (e.g., personal values and interests) and extrinsic green motivation (e.g., recognition and incentives), mediates the relationship between GTL and PEB. Quantitative data were analyzed using covariance-based structural equation modeling. Survey data from 504 employees in the Chinese NEV sector indicate that GTL positively relates to all three PEB dimensions, with green motivation serving as a significant mediator. Subsequently, in-depth interviews with 10 practitioners in the new energy sector provided complementary insights into mechanisms not fully captured in the quantitative phase. These findings help address underexplored mechanisms in the existing literature. Specifically, intrinsic motivation is significantly influenced by extrinsic motivation, and extrinsic motivation is closely related to factors such as organizational welfare policies, incentive mechanisms, specific measures, and return rates. Interview results show that articulating a compelling green vision and modeling environmental commitment enhance intrinsic motivation, whereas implementing structured incentive systems and public recognition activate extrinsic motivation. These motivational pathways collectively empower employees to undertake proactive, collaborative, and civic-oriented environmental actions. Although previous studies have demonstrated the importance of macro-economic performance and micro-foundations of sustainability in NEV firms, our study further examines the integration of leadership, motivation, and behavior, offering a nuanced framework for understanding how leaders’ motivational influence can differentially stimulate varied forms of green behavior in environmentally intensive industries.
China's new energy vehicle (NEV) sector has experienced exponential growth, making a substantial contribution to the nation's green economy strategy. As one of the largest NEV markets globally, Chinese enterprises face dual challenges: technological innovation and the adoption of sustainable organizational practices (Zhang et al., 2023). Existing research on NEVs has primarily examined pro-environmental behaviors (PEBs) from the perspective of consumers and adoption, focusing on green purchase intention, environmental values, and policy incentives (Lin & Shi, 2022; Su & Wan, 2024). Prior studies have shown that environmental concerns, perceived green value, and personal norms all positively influence NEV adoption behaviors. However, such impacts are often moderate in magnitude and constrained by contextual factors such as infrastructure, policy design, and perceived risk (Z. Chen & Liu, 2024; Panjaitan & Simanjuntak, 2025). Qualitative research has further highlighted the objective existence of the "intention-behavior gap," arguing that social norms, institutional arrangements, and incentive mechanisms influence whether environmental intentions are translated into actual behaviors (He et al., 2021).
Nevertheless, most existing studies remain consumer-centric, paying limited attention to employees' PEBs in NEV firms and to the leadership and motivational mechanisms that may foster such behaviors in organizational contexts. Mounting evidence indicates that the effects of leadership frequently manifest through intermediary psychological processes, rather than solely through direct influence (Farrukh et al., 2022). However, these underlying mechanisms have yet to be systematically conceptualized or empirically validated (San Román-Niaves et al., 2025). Green transformational leadership (GTL) has emerged to enhance employees' environmental awareness and PEBs, playing a crucial role in driving organizational green transformation. However, investigations into its underlying mechanisms have, to a large extent, been confined to general organizational settings (Alkandi, 2025; Ansari & Khan, 2024a). Knowledge about the functioning of GTL in high-growth, innovation-driven industries, exemplified by the NEV sector, is lacking, especially in emerging economies where rapid technological advancements and stringent environmental regulations coexist. The unique industrial and institutional attributes of these settings may shape how leadership behaviors are perceived and assimilated by employees; however, this remains largely uncharted territory. Drawing upon either social learning theory or psychological climate frameworks, we find that these perspectives consequently constrain a more holistic understanding of how cognitive and motivational processes synergistically influence employees' PEB (Sachdeva & Singh, 2024). Although integrative approaches—exemplified by the ability, motivation, opportunity (AMO) framework—have garnered recognition in green human resource management research, empirical investigations that systematically integrate multiple theories to elucidate leadership-induced PEB at the individual level remain notably lacking (Azizie et al., 2025). To address these identified research gaps, the current study employs an integrative approach that combines social cognitive theory (SCT) and self-determination theory (SDT) to investigate GTL and its influence on employees' PEB through green motivation, specifically within China's burgeoning NEV industry.
SCT posits that individuals acquire appropriate behaviors through observational learning and social modeling (Bandura, 1986). Within organizational settings, leaders emerge as prominent role models, whose values, priorities, and actions furnish employees with significant environmental cues. Graves et al. (2013) and Kim et al. (2016) have underscored that transformational leaders who actively exhibit environmental commitment can mold employees' environmental cognition and behavioral anticipations, thereby nurturing PEB through the mechanisms of role modeling and social learning. In light of theoretical considerations, complementing the cognitive lens provided by SCT, SDT offers a motivational framework to elucidate why employees engage in PEB. SDT delineates between autonomous motivation, propelled by internalized values and personal endorsement, and controlled motivation, instigated by external rewards, pressures, or obligations (Ryan & Deci, 2000). Within the environmental sphere, autonomous green motivation embodies employees' authentic concern for environmental sustainability, whereas controlled or extrinsic green motivation signifies adherence to organizational mandates, incentives, or external expectations. Afsar et al. (2016), Graves et al. (2013), and Zacher et al. (2023) clarified that green autonomous motivation is a pivotal mechanism linking leadership practices to employees' voluntary PEB. Nevertheless, the function of green extrinsic motivation has garnered comparatively less scholarly attention, especially concerning whether and how leadership behaviors concurrently stimulate distinct motivational pathways.
The AMO framework posits that employee behavior is a product of the interplay between employees' abilities, motivation, and opportunities to engage in particular actions (Appelbaum et al., 2001; Jiang et al., 2012). In alignment with this framework (Jiang et al., 2012), previous research in green human resource management has underscored motivation as a pivotal conduit through which leadership practices shape employees' voluntary environmental behaviors (Islam et al., 2025; Ma & Wang, 2024; San Román-Niaves et al., 2025; Widana et al., 2025). Drawing on this insight, the current study zeroes in on the motivational dimension of the AMO framework and delves deeply into theorizing this pathway by integrating SCT and SDT. This integrative approach not only preserves theoretical simplicity but also bolsters explanatory capacity. By amalgamating these perspectives, the study provides a more holistic account of how leadership-induced motivational processes are transformed into employees' environmentally innovative actions.
Empirically, this research employs a sequential mixed-methods design. Initially, a quantitative survey was conducted among employees of NEV companies in China. The purpose of this survey was to empirically test the hypothesized relationships. Subsequently, qualitative interviews were conducted to delve deeper and provide a contextual understanding of the quantitative results. This research design offers a dual advantage. It not only enables the study to pinpoint statistically significant relationships among the variables under investigation but also helps uncover underlying mechanisms, shedding light on the reasons for these relationships and the processes through which they manifest in real-world organizational settings.
Literature reviewGTL, green motivation, and pro-environmental behaviorRobertson (2018) introduced "GTL" by integrating transformational leadership into environmental stewardship. GTL is regarded as a key mechanism for fostering employees' voluntary PEB, as it embeds environmental values in leaders' vision, role modeling, and daily interactions (Iqbal et al., 2023; Malibari & Bajaba, 2022). It aligns employees' values, goals, and actions with organizational environmental objectives, especially when environmental performance relies on voluntary participation (Abourokbah et al., 2024; Du & Yan, 2022; Noor Faezah et al., 2024; Singh et al., 2020).
Based on SCT, this study posits that leadership influences employee behavior through observational learning and social modeling (Bandura, 1986; Farooq et al., 2022). Leaders act as social references, shaping employees' behavioral norms through their environmentally conscientious actions and communication. Green transformational leaders demonstrate commitment to sustainability, articulate a clear environmental vision, and reinforce green values, encouraging employees to adopt PEBs (Alabdali et al., 2024; Graves et al., 2013; Hussain et al., 2022; Jerónimo et al., 2020; Noor Faezah et al., 2024). Beyond the realm of cognitive learning, the AMO framework further explains how GTL translates into PEB, suggesting that employee behavior results from the interplay of ability, motivation, and opportunity (Appelbaum et al., 2001; Jiang et al., 2012). Leadership activates motivational and opportunity conditions for discretionary behaviors, particularly in sustainability and green human resource management research (Al-Ghazali et al., 2022; Kloutsiniotis et al., 2023). GTL creates a motivational climate that encourages employees to engage in environmentally responsible actions.
PEB is inherently multifaceted, encompassing proactive eco-initiatives, eco-helping behaviors, and broader eco-civic engagement. GTL provides cues to encourage these dimensions by articulating an environmental vision, offering individualized consideration, and emphasizing collective responsibility (Begum et al., 2022; Farrukh et al., 2022; Mukonza & Swarts, 2019; Singh et al., 2020). These behaviors are largely discretionary and rely on employees’ willingness to act beyond formal environmental policies (Ansari & Khan, 2024b; Khan et al., 2024; Li et al., 2020; Priatna et al., 2025).
Theoretical foundationsThis study draws primarily on SCT, SDT, and the AMO framework to explain how GTL translates into employees’ PEB.
SCT posits that individuals acquire behavioral norms through observational learning and social modeling, highlighting the role of leaders as salient behavioral referents within organizations (Bandura, 1986; Gao et al., 2020). SDT further distinguishes between autonomous and controlled forms of motivation, emphasizing that leadership behaviors can differentially shape intrinsic and extrinsic motivational processes (Ryan & Deci, 2000). Drawing on SDT, green motivation is conceptualized as comprising two distinct yet interrelated forms: green intrinsic motivation and green extrinsic motivation (Hur et al., 2022; Ryan & Deci, 2000). SDT underscores not only the intensity but also the quality of motivation, proposing that leadership behaviors can differentially influence autonomous and controlled forms of environmental motivation. Within the environmental context, prior research has applied SDT to differentiate between green intrinsic motivation and green extrinsic motivation as two fundamental motivational mechanisms driving PEB (Li et al., 2020; Ullah Khan et al., 2023). Consequently, the subsequent sections delineate between green intrinsic and green extrinsic motivation to elucidate how GTL shapes employees' motivational underpinnings for environmental engagement. Complementarily, the AMO framework suggests that employee behavior emerges from the joint influence of motivational and contextual opportunities created by organizational systems and leadership practices (Appelbaum et al., 2001; Olalekan et al., 2026).
Together, these perspectives provide a coherent explanatory foundation for understanding how leadership behaviors shape employees’ motivation and, ultimately, their discretionary engagement in PEBs.
GTL and PEBA growing body of empirical research demonstrates a positive relationship between GTL and employees’ PEB. Leaders act as social references, shaping employees' behavioral norms through their environmentally conscientious actions and communication. Green transformational leaders demonstrate commitment to sustainability, articulate a clear environmental vision, and reinforce green values, encouraging employees to adopt PEBs (Graves et al., 2013; Hussain et al., 2022; Kareem & Kummitha, 2025; Noor Faezah et al., 2024; Tessema et al., 2025). Leadership activates motivational and opportunity conditions for discretionary behaviors, particularly in sustainability and green human resource management research (Al-Ghazali et al., 2022; Kloutsiniotis et al., 2023). GTL creates a motivational climate that encourages employees to engage in environmentally responsible actions.
The significance of GTL is particularly evident in high-growth, innovation-centric industries, as exemplified by China's burgeoning NEV sector. In such dynamic environments, employees are routinely confronted with uncertainties, rapid technological advancements, and conflicting performance imperatives. Under these circumstances, cognitive and motivational guidance from leadership becomes indispensable for harmonizing innovation endeavors with environmental sustainability objectives. Empirical research underscores that, within industries characterized by environmental regulations and innovation imperatives, leadership behaviors decisively shape employees' discretionary commitment to sustainability practices (Chen et al., 2025; Sun et al., 2022). Consequently, this study advances the following hypothesis:
H1 GTL is positively associated with employees’ PEB.
Organizational environmental strategies and green policies frequently fall short of achieving significant sustainability outcomes when these initiatives are not incorporated into their daily work routines (Farrukh et al., 2022; Renwick et al., 2013). This challenge is particularly pertinent because many workplaces' PEBs are voluntary rather than obligatory, rendering employee motivation a crucial mechanism linking leadership intentions to behavioral outcomes. Leadership is instrumental in shaping employees' motivational orientations by communicating priorities, imbuing tasks with meaning, and influencing the interpretation of environmental goals (Gilal et al., 2019; Khan et al., 2025). GTL, an extension of transformational leadership into the environmental sphere, focuses on articulating a persuasive environmental vision, exhibiting environmental leadership by example, and offering personalized support for employees' green endeavors (Chen & Chang, 2013). Through these actions, GTL serves as a vital social and contextual factor that promotes the internalization of organizational environmental values and boosts employees' motivation to participate in sustainability-related activities (Hasan et al., 2024).
Green intrinsic motivation embodies employees' innate pleasure, interest, and fulfilment derived from participating in environmentally sustainable activities, whereas green extrinsic motivation denotes engagement propelled by external incentives, recognition, or instrumental gains tied to environmental performance (W. Li et al., 2020). The extant literature consistently underscores the pivotal roles of both forms of green motivation in shaping environmentally responsible intentions and behaviors, albeit through distinct psychological mechanisms (Pham et al., 2022).
GTL is uniquely equipped to influence employees' green motivation by embedding environmental values into its leadership vision, role modeling, and personalized consideration practices. By articulating a compelling environmental vision and exhibiting personal commitment to sustainability, green transformational leaders facilitate employees' internalization of environmental goals, rendering environmental action meaningful and self-endorsed (Zhu et al., 2013). These leadership behaviors directly bolster employees' autonomy and competence needs, thereby nurturing green intrinsic motivation (Kaya & Atsan, 2025; Kefas et al., 2025).
Empirical studies within organizational and sustainability contexts indicate that leadership support and value-driven communication enhance employees' enjoyment of green tasks and their propensity to engage in environmentally responsible activities beyond formal job demands (Yang & Thøgersen, 2022).
Green transformational leaders frequently reinforce environmental behaviors through acknowledgment, commendation, performance evaluations, and symbolic or material rewards, thereby signaling that environmental engagement is valued and rewarded by the organization (Ali et al., 2020; Kaya & Atsan, 2025b). Such external cues heighten employees' perceptions that PEBs yield favorable outcomes, bolstering green extrinsic motivation (Ryan & Deci, 2000). Studies suggest that extrinsic incentives, when presented as informational rather than controlling, can effectively complement leadership efforts to foster environmental engagement (Pham et al., 2022; Schyns et al., 2020; Shanock et al., 2010).
Although extrinsic motivation is often perceived as less autonomous, in the realm of sustainability, green extrinsic motivation plays a crucial role in motivating employees to adhere to environmental standards and prioritize green behaviors amid competing work demands (Duong et al., 2023; Jerónimo et al., 2020).
Empirical research indicates that leadership support and recognition amplify employees' willingness to engage in environmentally responsible behaviors when such behaviors are linked to career advancement, social recognition, or material rewards (Duong et al., 2023; Karatepe et al., 2025; Y. Khan et al., 2023). By integrating environmental goals into formal evaluation and reward systems, green transformational leaders reinforce external motivational mechanisms that encourage sustained participation in green initiatives. Therefore, this study proposes that GTL positively influences employees’ green extrinsic motivation by reinforcing external regulatory mechanisms that promote participation in green initiatives.
H2a GTL is positively associated with employees’ green intrinsic motivation.
H2b GTL is positively associated with employees’ green extrinsic motivation.
Green intrinsic motivation has been consistently linked to sustained and voluntary PEB, as intrinsically motivated employees are more likely to engage in green actions beyond formal requirements. Employees with robust green intrinsic motivation typically engage voluntarily in environmentally responsible actions and persist in these behaviors even in the absence of external incentives (Graves et al., 2013; A. N. Khan, 2024; Liaquat et al., 2024; Silvi & Padilla, 2021). In organizational settings, green intrinsic motivation has consistently emerged as a significant predictor of autonomous green behaviors, encompassing green creativity, eco-innovation, and extra-role environmental initiatives (Arici & Uysal, 2022; Halimtar & Saputra, 2026). Green extrinsic motivation also plays a critical role in organizational contexts by incentivizing compliance with environmental standards and initiating green behaviors, particularly when sustainability goals compete with short-term performance pressures (Dodds et al., 2022; Duong et al., 2023; Jerónimo et al., 2020).
In the environmental sphere, extrinsic incentives are widely used to motivate employees to adhere to environmental standards and adopt green behaviors, particularly when sustainability objectives conflict with short-term productivity pressures (Koo et al., 2015; Yang & Thøgersen, 2022; Yu et al., 2025). Empirical research demonstrates that rewards and recognition, such as bonuses, promotions, or symbolic incentives, can substantially boost employees' readiness to engage in environmental initiatives and adopt green practices (Aldabbas et al., 2025; Bardach & Murayama, 2025). However, extant research cautions that the effects of extrinsic motivation may diminish once external incentives are withdrawn, and that an overreliance on controlling rewards may erode intrinsic motivation (Dermer, 1975; Jovanovic & Matejevic, 2014; Pham et al., 2022).
Thus, this study proposes the following hypotheses:
H3a Green intrinsic motivation is positively associated with employees’ PEB.
H3b Green extrinsic motivation is positively associated with employees’ PEB.
By articulating a compelling environmental vision and demonstrating personal commitment to sustainability, green transformational leaders inspire employees to perceive environmental protection as meaningful and worthwhile rather than as an externally imposed obligation (Daily et al., 2009). Through such value-based leadership, employees are more inclined to internalize environmental goals and align them with their self-concept, thereby enhancing their motivation to engage in PEB (Turaga et al., 2010; Wesselink et al., 2017). Leaders who emphasize empowerment, encouragement, and environmental role modeling help employees feel ownership over green initiatives and confidence in their ability to contribute to environmental improvement (Boiral & Paillé, 2012a; Yuriev et al., 2018). Consequently, employees are more likely to develop green intrinsic motivation, viewing environmental activities as inherently satisfying and consistent with their personal values. Simultaneously, GTL also influences green extrinsic motivation by signaling that environmentally responsible behavior is acknowledged and valued by the organization. Through performance feedback, recognition, and symbolic or material rewards tied to environmental performance, green transformational leaders underscore the instrumental value of PEB and motivate employees to adhere to organizational sustainability expectations (Li et al., 2020; Suhartanto et al., 2022). Such extrinsic cues are particularly crucial for initiating green behaviors, especially when environmental actions conflict with short-term work demands. Intrinsic and extrinsic green motivation collectively contribute to environmentally responsible behavior, albeit through distinct psychological mechanisms (Gilal et al., 2020; Wu et al., 2019). Although intrinsic motivation sustains the persistence and self-regulation of PEB, extrinsic motivation can help activate and reinforce such behavior in organizational settings. GTL contributes to this motivational process by creating a context in which environmental values are both internally meaningful and externally supported.
Thus, green motivation serves as a pivotal psychological mechanism through which GTL translates into employees' PEB. By fostering employees' intrinsic green motivation and bolstering extrinsic green motivation, GTL increases the likelihood that employees will engage in environmentally responsible actions, such as energy conservation, waste reduction, and voluntary green initiatives (see Fig. 1).
Therefore, this study proposes the following hypothesis:
H4 Green motivation mediates the relationship between GTL and employees’ PEB.
Building on research by Duong et al. (2023), Farrukh et al. (2022), Li et al. (2020), and Pan et al. (2025), this study adopts a mixed methods approach to explore the relationships between GTL, green motivation (Creswell & Creswell, 2017), and employees' PEBs, drawing on SCT and SDT. The AMO framework was intentionally not used as the main analytical tool. A qualitative element was included to provide additional explanations and context for the quantitative findings by carefully exploring employees' perceptions and experiences related to green leadership and motivation.
The quantitative phase employed a cross-sectional survey to examine the proposed relationships and mediation effects within a structured theoretical model. Because the study focused on employees' perceptions of leadership, motivation, and voluntary environmental actions, a survey approach is appropriate for capturing individual psychological and behavioral characteristics in organizational settings. The cross-sectional design enables the analysis of these relationships at a specific point in time, consistent with earlier research on green leadership and workplace PEB.
The ensuing qualitative phase involved semi-structured interviews designed to elaborate on patterns identified in the quantitative results and deepen interpretive understanding. This approach aligns with prior organizational and sustainability research employing qualitative inquiry to support explanation rather than broad generalization (Creswell & Plano, 2017). Importantly, this study is positioned as an industry-specific investigation rather than aiming to generalize results to all Chinese companies. Focusing on China's NEV sector, known for its strict regulations, high innovation, and environmental importance, the research aims to provide detailed insights into how GTL influences employees' PEBs.
Quantitative research designThis research focused on full-time employees in indigenous NEV companies in Mainland China. The NEV sector is marked by its strong focus on environmental sustainability across regulations, strategic aims, and innovation, making it an ideal setting to explore green leadership and employees' PEBs. The study primarily focused on employees from China's top 10 indigenous NEV companies, as listed in the 2023 Automobile Industry Production and Sales Report by the China Association of Automobile Manufacturers (CAAM). These companies hold a considerable portion of China's NEV market and reflect the industry's technological and organizational diversity. Analyzing leading firms provides insight into GTL in environments where environmental policies are highly prioritized, and leadership messages about sustainability are prominent.
Owing to the absence of publicly available employee rosters and the fluctuating workforce in NEV firms, creating a comprehensive probabilistic sampling frame at the employee level was not feasible. Instead, the research employed an organizationally bounded sampling strategy based on firm membership, aligning with previous studies in large industrial environments. Although this approach limits statistical generalization to mid- and low-ranked NEV companies, it improves the potential for broader theoretical insights. The results are understood as insights into leadership-motivation-behavior mechanisms within environmentally intensive and innovation-driven settings, rather than as representative data for the entire NEV industry. Sample size adequacy was determined using Cochran’s (1954) formula, targeting approximately 550 questionnaires to account for non-response and data screening. Data collection occurred from January 1 to March 1, 2024, using a combination of on-site and online surveys. Snowball sampling was employed owing to access constraints, with initial respondents sharing the survey link with eligible colleagues. Safeguards, including eligibility screening and identity verification, were implemented to mitigate biases. A total of 551 questionnaires were returned, with 504 valid responses retained for analysis, exceeding the minimum requirement and satisfying thresholds for structural equation modeling.
All constructs were measured using validated scales from existing literature. GTL was assessed with a six-item scale by Chen and Chang (2013). Green motivation was measured across two dimensions: intrinsic (six items) and extrinsic (three items), based on the measurement approaches and scales employed by Graves et al. (2013), Nduneseokwu and Harder (2023). PEB was evaluated using a 10-item scale from (Boiral & Paillé, 2012; Stein et al., 2025) that covers eco-initiatives, eco-helping, and eco-civic engagement. All items used a five-point Likert scale. The questionnaire was reviewed by domain experts and pre-tested with NEV industry employees to ensure clarity and validity.
To mitigate potential common method bias, procedural remedies were rigorously implemented during the data collection phase, including ensuring respondent anonymity, randomizing the order of items, and explicitly emphasizing that responses would be used strictly for academic purposes. For statistical post hoc evaluations, analyses involved both Harman’s single-factor test and the unmeasured common latent factor (CLF) technique.
As covariance-based structural equation modeling was chosen for theory confirmation, the analysis focused on model fit and measurement validity (Hair, 2014). The sample size and data met the assumptions for covariance-based structural equation modeling. Hypotheses were evaluated using standardized path coefficients (p < .05), and mediation effects were examined using bootstrapping. Firm-level characteristics were excluded from the model owing to the study's industry-specific focus and the homogeneity of leading NEV manufacturers. Individual-level demographic variables were examined descriptively but not included as controls to maintain model parsimony and theoretical clarity.
Qualitative research designThe qualitative part of this study was designed to provide contextual depth and interpretive enrichment rather than to statistically validate the quantitative findings. It involved purposive sampling to select interviewees with relevant experience in environmental management and leadership in NEV companies. Recruitment was conducted via REDnote, yielding an initial pool of 118 candidates. From these, 10 participants were selected for in-depth interviews based on their roles and industry relevance. To protect participants’ privacy, only coded identifiers were used in place of personal details when presenting the data (Gioia et al., 2013; Levitt, 2021).
Semi-structured interviews were conducted both online and in person, each lasting approximately 45–60 min (Husband, 2020). The discussions focused on participants' perspectives on green leadership behaviors, motivational factors, and environmental practices at their workplaces. An exploratory analysis was performed to examine the interview data, beginning with open coding, then axial coding to identify recurring clues, and culminating in the refinement and aggregation of higher-order dimensions. Coding continued until no new information emerged, reaching data saturation (Gioia et al., 2013; Xiong et al., 2023).
This study used a sequential explanatory mixed-methods approach, combining qualitative insights to provide context and interpret quantitative results (Edgar & Manz, 2017; Rachão et al., 2021; Shanka & Handley, 2011). Specifically, the qualitative data were used to elucidate how employees viewed leadership behaviors and how intrinsic and extrinsic motivational mechanisms operated in practice.
Results and discussionQuantitative resultsProfile of respondentsAppendix A provides the demographic characteristics of the respondents. The final sample comprised 504 full-time employees from indigenous NEV manufacturing firms in China. The gender distribution was relatively balanced, with male respondents accounting for 57.34% of the sample.
The majority of respondents were between 20 and 40 years old (74.01%) and held at least a bachelor’s degree (63.49%), reflecting the young and highly educated workforce typical of the NEV industry. In terms of organizational tenure, more than half of the respondents reported 1–-5 years of working experience, while a wide range of functional roles was represented, including managerial, administrative, marketing, operational, and technical positions. Overall, the sample characteristics suggest adequate diversity in demographic and job-related attributes, providing a suitable basis for subsequent statistical analyses (see, Appendix A).
Descriptive statistics and correlationsTable 1 provides the descriptive statistics and Pearson correlation coefficients among the key constructs examined in this study, including GTL, green intrinsic motivation, green extrinsic motivation, and the three dimensions of PEB: eco-initiatives, eco-civic engagement, and eco-helping. Overall, the mean values indicate moderate to high levels of perceived GTL, green motivation, and PEBs among respondents. The correlation analysis shows that GTL is positively and significantly associated with both dimensions of green motivation and all three dimensions of PEB. In addition, green intrinsic motivation and green extrinsic motivation are positively related to employees’ eco-initiatives, eco-civic engagement, and eco-helping behaviors.
Descriptive statistics and correlations.
| Mean | Standard deviation | GTL | GIM | GEM | EI | ECE | EH | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| GTL | 3.354 | 0.914 | - | |||||
| GIM | 3.365 | 0.964 | 0.397⁎⁎ | - | ||||
| GEM | 3.445 | 0.983 | 0.320⁎⁎ | 0.553⁎⁎ | - | |||
| EI | 3.421 | 1.004 | 0.352⁎⁎ | 0.397⁎⁎ | 0.380⁎⁎ | - | ||
| ECE | 3.394 | 1.016 | 0.463⁎⁎ | 0.442⁎⁎ | 0.399⁎⁎ | 0.548⁎⁎ | - | |
| EH | 3.471 | 1.046 | 0.353⁎⁎ | 0.444⁎⁎ | 0.339⁎⁎ | 0.492⁎⁎ | 0.525⁎⁎ | - |
*p<.05
Importantly, all correlation coefficients are below the commonly accepted threshold of 0.85, suggesting that multicollinearity is not a serious concern in the present study. These results provide preliminary evidence for the hypothesized relationships and justify proceeding with measurement and structural model analyses.
Measurement modelReliability and validity assessmentConfirmatory factor analysis was conducted using AMOS version 23 to assess the reliability and validity of the measurement model prior to testing the structural relationships. The measurement model included GTL, green intrinsic motivation, green extrinsic motivation, and the three dimensions of PEB: eco-initiatives, eco-civic engagement, and eco-helping.
The overall measurement model demonstrated a good fit to the data (χ²/df = 1.599, GFI = 0.940, RMSEA = 0.035, NFI = 0.939, TLI = 0.973, CFI = 0.976, SRMR = 0.104), indicating an acceptable to excellent fit across multiple commonly recommended thresholds (L. Hu & Bentler, 1999).
As listed in Table 2, all standardized factor loadings were statistically significant (p < .001) and exceeded the recommended minimum value of 0.50, indicating satisfactory item reliability. Composite reliability values ranged from 0.815 to 0.903, exceeding the suggested threshold of 0.70, and average variance extracted (AVE) values ranged from 0.572 to 0.637, surpassing the recommended minimum of 0.50. These results provide strong evidence of internal consistency and convergent validity.
Measurement model results.
Note. N = 504. All standardized factor loadings are significant at p < .001
Discriminant validity was assessed using the Fornell-Larcker criterion (Fornell & Larcker, 1981). As reported in Table 3, the square root of the AVE for each construct was greater than its correlations with other constructs, indicating adequate discriminant validity. Overall, the measurement model exhibited satisfactory psychometric properties and was suitable for subsequent structural model analysis.
Discriminant validity (Fornell-Larcker criterion).
| Construct | GTL | GIM | GEM | EI | ECE | EH |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| GTL | 0.756 | |||||
| GIM | 0.397 | 0.780 | ||||
| GEM | 0.320 | 0.553 | 0.773 | |||
| EI | 0.352 | 0.397 | 0.380 | 0.797 | ||
| ECE | 0.463 | 0.442 | 0.399 | 0.548 | 0.789 | |
| EH | 0.353 | 0.444 | 0.339 | 0.492 | 0.525 | 0.798 |
Note. Diagonal elements (in bold) represent the square root of the AVE. Off-diagonal elements are inter-construct correlations. All correlations are significant at p < .01.
Furthermore, to rigorously ensure discriminant validity, we followed recent methodological recommendations and assessed the heterotrait-monotrait ratio of correlations (HTMT). HTMT is considered a more robust criterion for discriminant validity than the conventional Fornell-Larcker criterion. As provided in Table 4, all HTMT values for the constructs range from 0.378 to 0.643. These values are well below the conservative threshold of 0.85 (Henseler et al., 2015), providing robust empirical evidence that each construct in the model is distinctly unique and discriminant validity is fully established.
Discriminant validity (HTMT criterion).
| GTL | GIM | GEM | EI | ECE | EH | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| GTL | - | |||||
| GIM | .483 | - | ||||
| GEM | .432 | .643 | - | |||
| EI | .471 | .475 | .432 | - | ||
| ECE | .448 | .450 | .406 | .610 | - | |
| EH | .427 | .433 | .378 | .582 | .615 | - |
Note: GTL = Green Transformational Leadership; GIM = Green Intrinsic Motivation; GEM = Green Extrinsic Motivation; EI = Eco-Initiatives; ECE = Eco-Civic Engagement; EH = Eco-Helping. All HTMT values are below the 0.85 threshold
Following the procedural remedies applied during data collection, statistical post hoc evaluations were conducted to assess the presence of Common Method Bias (CMB). Initially, Harman's single-factor test was performed, revealing that the first principal component accounted for only 37.11% of the total variance, which is well below the established 50% threshold.
Acknowledging the limitations of this conventional approach, we further applied the more robust unmeasured CLF technique using AMOS (Podsakoff et al., 2003). We introduced a CLF into our confirmatory factor analysis model, linking it to all 25 observational items with equally constrained loadings. As shown in Appendix B1, comparing the baseline confirmatory factor analysis model with the CLF model indicated a significant improvement in model fit (Δχ(1)2= 9.081, p < .01). Although this suggests the presence of some shared method variance, the analysis yielded a standardized CLF loading of 0.646. Consequently, the actual common method variance, calculated as the square of this loading, was 41.8% (0.6462=0.418). Because this variance falls below the strict 50% threshold recommended by Podsakoff et al. (2003), we conclude that while method variance is present, common method bias does not severely confound the interpretations drawn from this study (see Appendix B2, for the detailed CLF test summary).
Structural model and hypothesis testingDirect effectsThe structural path analysis results are provided in Table 5. As hypothesized, GTL exhibited a significant and positive effect on employees’ PEB (β= 0.354, p < .001), providing support for H1. This finding suggests that leaders who articulate and model environmental values directly encourage employees to engage in discretionary environmentally responsible behaviors.
Structural model results.
| Hypothesis | Structural Path | β | S.E. | C.R. | p-value | Result |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| H1 | GTL → PEB | 0.354 | 0.058 | 5.961 | ⁎⁎⁎ | Supported |
| H2a | GTL → GIM | 0.466 | 0.056 | 8.995 | ⁎⁎⁎ | Supported |
| H2b | GTL → GEM | 0.401 | 0.054 | 7.329 | ⁎⁎⁎ | Supported |
| H3a | GIM → PEB | 0.334 | 0.048 | 6.235 | ⁎⁎⁎ | Supported |
| H3b | GEM → PEB | 0.243 | 0.052 | 4.586 | ⁎⁎⁎ | Supported |
Note. N = 504. GTL = Green Transformational Leadership; GIM = Green Intrinsic Motivation; GEM = Green Extrinsic Motivation; PEB = Pro-Environmental Behavior.
Consistent with H2a and H2b, GTL was positively associated with both dimensions of green motivation. Specifically, GTL had a significant positive effect on green intrinsic motivation (β = 0.466, p < .001) and green extrinsic motivation (β = 0.401, p < .001). These results indicate that green transformational leaders foster employees’ internalized enjoyment while strengthening external motivational drivers such as recognition and rewards associated with environmental performance.
In line with H3a and H3b, both green intrinsic motivation and green extrinsic motivation were positively related to employees’ PEB. Green intrinsic motivation exerted a significant positive effect on PEB (β = 0.334, p < .001), indicating that employees who derive intrinsic satisfaction from environmental engagement are more likely to exhibit voluntary green behaviors. Similarly, green extrinsic motivation was positively associated with PEB (β = 0.243, p < .001). Results indicate that although both motivation types are effective, intrinsic motivation serves as a slightly stronger predictor in this model.
To assess the explanatory power and practical significance of our structural model, we examined the squared multiple correlations (R²) for the endogenous variables. The results demonstrate that the model accounts for a substantial proportion of the variance in the target constructs. Specifically, GTL explains 21.7% of the variance in green intrinsic motivation (R²=0.217) and 16.1% of the variance in green extrinsic motivation (R²=0.161). Importantly, the integrated model explains 50.6% of the variance in employees' PEB (R²=0.506), indicating robust explanatory power and substantial practical significance of the proposed mechanisms (see Appendix B for detailed variance explained across all dimensions).
Mediation effectsTo rigorously examine the parallel mediating roles of green intrinsic motivation and green extrinsic motivation in the relationship between GTL and PEB, we conducted a bootstrapping procedure with 5000 resamples. Specifically, we analyzed the specific indirect effects and generated bias-corrected 95% confidence intervals (BC-CIs) to ensure the robustness of the mediation paths. The detailed results are provided in Table 6.
Specific indirect effects of green motivation (bootstrapping results).
*Note. Bootstrap resampling = 5000. BC-CI = Bias-Corrected 95% Confidence Interval. LLCI = Lower Limit; ULCI = Upper Limit. GTL = Green Transformational Leadership; GIM = Green Intrinsic Motivation; GEM = Green Extrinsic Motivation; PEB = Pro-Environmental Behavior.
The analysis revealed that the total indirect effect of GTL on PEB through green motivation was significant (β = 0.248, p < .001, 95% BC-CI [0.185, 0.332]). Importantly, the specific indirect effect through green intrinsic motivation was significant (β = 0.153, p < .001), with a 95% confidence interval that did not include zero [0.100, 0.218]. Similarly, the specific indirect effect through green extrinsic motivation was also significant (β = 0.096, p < .001, 95% BC-CI [0.048, 0.156]). Simultaneously, the direct effect of GTL on PEB remained significant (β =0.354, p < .001). These robust findings confirm that green intrinsic and extrinsic motivation serve as parallel partial mediators between GTL and employees' PEB, fully supporting H4. (see, Fig. 2).
Taken together, the findings suggest that GTL influences employees’ PEB both directly and indirectly by enhancing employees’ green motivation. Although leadership-driven motivational processes account for a substantial portion of this relationship, GTL also exerts an independent effect on PEB beyond motivational mechanisms.
Qualitative research resultsFrom the quantitative findings, although intrinsic motivation offers significant advantages, numerous questions still remain. For example, what are the factors that hinder the full release of intrinsic motivation? With such questions in mind, we embarked on the qualitative research phase. We recruited respondents with relevant backgrounds to participate in this study. During the qualitative research process, we primarily focused on three key questions to complement the quantitative research results (covering cognitive, normative, and self-regulation aspects). The reason for adopting qualitative research as a subsequent exploration step was that it can uncover some latent factors “hidden behind the numbers” through textual content (Morgan, 1998). Qualitative research does not rely on large volumes of data; instead, it reveals the root causes of problems through meticulous observation and analysis (Guba & Lincoln, 1994; Mulisa, 2022). Continuous exploration ceases when the data no longer yield new information. In the data presentation phase, to protect respondents' privacy, anonymity was ensured, and all data included in the analysis were presented with coded identification numbers.
Cognitive frame activationThe sustainability vision circulating through China’s NEV ecosystem is neither a one-off slogan nor a poster on the wall; it is a choreographed chain of everyday interactions. Leaders embed this vision in the digital infrastructure, most commonly Feishu (in English: Lark), where environmental objectives, key performance indicators, and individual contributions are rendered visible in real time.
As elucidated by informant-3 (31 years old, female, Shanghai, bachelor's degree, operations, monthly salary of approximately 20,000 yuan): "We utilize the Feishu system to document the company's vision, ...as well as the collective and individual actions aligned with the goals, we aim to achieve".
By leveraging online office systems, leaders can communicate the company's environmental vision and objectives more efficiently and transparently, ensuring that every employee is well-informed and actively involved in environmental initiatives.
Regarding the promotion and publicity of environmentally friendly products to highlight the company's unique attributes, informant-10 (30 years old, female, Hangzhou, bachelor's degree, marketing, monthly salary of approximately 20,000 yuan) provided the following insights: "Our primary focus is on technological innovation and environmental protection, such as the use of eco-friendly materials. Our batteries are lithium-ion batteries that can be recycled, and we have green factories. We also collaborate with car owners and regulatory departments to organize offline activities for green and low-carbon travel".
The company's products not only enhance employees' understanding of environmental concepts but also provide them with practical opportunities and inform corresponding actions. By emphasizing technological innovation and environmental protection, leaders encourage employees to participate in environmental activities, such as using recyclable materials and organizing green, low-carbon travel events, thereby further promoting the development of environmental awareness among employees. In the process of engaging employees in environmental activities, the researchers identified several salient indicators.
Informant-8 (25 years old, female, Guangzhou, junior college, entry-level staff, monthly salary of approximately 10,000 yuan) shared her experience with us as follows: "Clear environmental policies and standards were established, quantifiable targets were set, and specialized knowledge training and case analyses were conducted".
Regarding the implementation of environmental training, informant-9 (19 years old, female, Xi'an, bachelor's degree, sales, monthly salary of approximately 5000 yuan) observed: "Regular educational and publicity activities were carried out, such as a dedicated environmental cleaning event held by the company every Sunday afternoon. Most importantly, leaders must lead by example".
Some companies have implemented measures in the office area, as informant-7 (31 years old, female, Tai'an, bachelor's degree, frontline employees, monthly salary of approximately 8000 yuan) shared with us: "In the office area, trash bins were labeled for waste sorting, enabling the voluntary separation and disposal of beverage bottles and trash bags".
Environmental measures were closely integrated into daily work, including the adoption of paperless office practices and workplace waste sorting, which not only reduced resource waste but also enhanced work efficiency.
The company's products are designed not only to enhance employees' environmental awareness but also to provide practical opportunities for them to take environmental action. On this point, informant-2 (33 years old, female, Shanghai, bachelor's degree, sales, monthly salary of approximately 10,000 yuan) confided in us: "the leadership has proposed the idea of making every user a brand ambassador. Our sales team is encouraged to provide high-quality service to motivate customers to actively participate in and share activities such as city check-ins, ensuring that these initiatives are effectively implemented ".
By providing more practical opportunities, employees not only deepen their understanding of environmental products but also help disseminate environmental actions. The vision of "making every user a brand ambassador" not only encourages the sales team to provide high-quality service but also motivates customers to participate in environmental activities, thereby promoting the spread of environmental behavior (see Table 7).
Concepts, categories, and focus points of the data structure (cognitive frame activation).
The company incentivized employees to engage in environmentally friendly behaviors through material rewards, public recognition, and career development opportunities. As informant-10 shared during the interview: " We had certain work targets, and beyond these targets, there were additional rewards. We also participated in challenges related to new technological and environmental innovations, particularly for our engineers and maintenance staff ".
To achieve the dissemination of goals, appropriate rewards were deemed indispensable. The company established work targets and reward mechanisms to encourage employee participation in environmental activities, such as challenges related to new technological and environmental innovations, with successful task completion rewarded.
The promotional strategies focused more on employee-customer interactions, empowering employees with greater autonomy in green activities, as experienced by informant-3: " There were material rewards; for instance, achieving five test drives in a month would earn gift cards, such as JD.com cards (a gift card from Jingdong). There were also honors such as “Reading Star” and “Service Benchmark,” which were publicly recognized at internal commendation meetings and on official social media channels "
Public and material rewards directly motivated employees and instilled a sense of joy and honor in achieving the right direction. However, different companies adopted various reward measures. In the realm of green and environmentally friendly initiatives, one company garnered the attention of researchers.
Informant-4 (24 years old, male, Beijing, bachelor’s degree, IT development, monthly salary of approximately 4000 yuan) conveyed the following: "Our company has a “clean plate” campaign. There is a company cafeteria where, after finishing a meal, employees take a photo and check in, which may result in small physical rewards, but not monetary ones".
Some companies have launched food-saving activities as part of their green initiatives. These efforts not only mitigate the ecological pollution caused by food waste but also foster employee behavior in food conservation.
Regarding verbal commendation, informant-5 (25 years old, male, Bozhou, associate degree, finance, monthly salary of approximately 8000 yuan) confided in us: " Our leader mentioned that this car model is selling well, and it is a major car manufacturer. They encouraged us to work hard and not slack off (mō yú). Because our cars are selling well locally, there is potential, and we should aspire. It’s like they’re making empty promises (huà bǐng). Perhaps this type of car will become more popular in the future, and with stronger public acceptance, we might sell even better, which could positively impact our salaries "
Informant-2 provided another perspective: "There was a clear sales target set, for example, promoting our battery-swapping services and the sale of high-end models. …setting a reward direction, employees who successfully facilitated customer sign-ups for these services received tiered bonuses based on the number of successful promotions…".
By setting clear sales targets and specific rewards, employees were incentivized to promote environmental services, such as battery swapping and the sale of high-end models, with successful sign-ups yielding tiered bonuses. Various methods were employed to promote and motivate employees, with both material and non-material rewards serving as means for managers to advance green initiatives. Achieving environmental protection was recognized as a multidimensional endeavor, and fostering genuine environmental consciousness among employees was identified as fundamental to achieving green objectives (see Table 8.).
Concepts, categories, and focus points of the data structure (normative status signaling).
Measures for motivation were not the goal; rather, achieving green and sustainable development was the ultimate objective. Such actions not only enhanced the company's social image and market competitiveness but also incrementally strengthened employees' personal capabilities and environmental consciousness.
As informant-10 articulated her perspective: "It is highly pertinent to our work. Essentially, our company has developed a sophisticated energy-saving algorithm that leverages artificial intelligence (AI) technology to reduce the overall manufacturing losses of our vehicles, which is an environmentally friendly practice. Additionally, the materials we use in our automobiles, including the solar panels on the roofs, are all designed with environmental sustainability in mind, and we strive to incorporate these principles into both the manufacturing and marketing processes".
The advent of technology is intended to better serve society, and the informant provided us with an excellent idea: NEV enterprises are employing AI energy-saving algorithms, biobased materials, and solar panels to decrease manufacturing losses and promote environmentally friendly behaviors—measures that not only aid in environmental protection but also enhance the company's market competitiveness. Green activities are designed to mitigate the environmental impact on society.
Further, informant-2 disclosed to us: "There was a low-carbon city-type battery-swapping environmental challenge… Some car owners and potential test drive participants came to test drive our vehicles and complete a relay battery-swapping activity at designated stations…".
The low-carbon battery-swapping activity not only enhanced the company's social image but also boosted the environmental awareness of both employees and customers. An effective immersive environmental activity can not only increase employees' sense of belonging but also encourage them to practice green behaviors.
For example, informant-3 believed: " I follow a minimalist lifestyle, avoiding the purchase of excessive clothing and instead making the most of the clothes I already own by creating different outfits, thereby reducing my demand for new clothes. I also refrain from discarding old clothes and instead repurpose or restyle them, adhering to a circular economy philosophy that prioritizes environmentally friendly materials when making purchases ".
Employees' adoption of environmentally friendly behaviors in their daily lives, such as minimalist living and recycling of clothing, not only contributes to environmental protection but also enhances their quality of life.
In terms of conservation actions, informant-9 implemented the following measures in their personal green initiatives: “in the office, I cut down on paper through double-sided printing. I would turn off the lights and computers to save electricity. For commuting, I would take public transit, bike, or walk, and carpool if I had to drive. These moves boosted the company's reputation and attracted customers and investors. I loved sharing these green actions with others, sparking positive environmental chats and strengthening team bonds”.
Employees' green behaviors were long-term commitments related to personal willingness, as informant-8 believed: "Participating in these promotional activities made us feel that our work was particularly meaningful, as we could contribute to environmental protection… Rewards were indeed motivating, but I did not participate solely for them. Of course, receiving rewards was a happy thing… It was also a form of motivation, recognizing my efforts. In the process of participating in environmental protection, it was more about our heartfelt desire to protect the environment and our love for it".
These behaviors did not initially drive employees' green actions, as informant-7 described the evolution of their attitude toward green behavior: " I was motivated by the potential rewards, but later, these actions became a habit, and I found myself doing them unconsciously in my daily life. Over time, these actions became a part of who I am… Through my actions, I hoped to gradually influence the public's environmental consciousness. If everyone could make small changes, it would lead to significant improvements in our overall environment, resulting in better living conditions for all ".
Green environmental activities were not only about conservation but also about promoting environmental and health benefits, as informant-6 (25 years old, male, Luoyang, bachelor's degree, customer service, monthly salary of approximately 6000 yuan) shared with us: "I often participate in tree-planting activities and sometimes in cycling competitions".
The multifaceted impact of environmentally friendly actions, which enhances the company's social image and market competitiveness while also strengthening employees' personal capabilities and environmental awareness, underscores the positive significance of such actions for both the company and individuals (see Table 9).
Concepts, categories, and focus points of the data structure (Self-regulated circularity identity-based habit transformation).
Through interviews with employees in the NEV industry, this study explored the relationship between green leadership and employee PEB. The findings reveal that the leadership's guiding role, the effectiveness of incentive mechanisms, the multifaceted impact of environmental behavior, the interaction between individuals and the company, and the importance of continuous improvement are key factors in promoting employee participation in environmental actions. Specifically, leaders conveyed the company's environmental goals and vision through meetings, training sessions, and internal systems, emphasizing the alignment between individual employee objectives and the company's environmental targets. The company incentivized employees to engage in environmental actions through project bonuses, performance bonuses, and gift cards, and enhanced employees' sense of honor and identification through internal commendation meetings and public praise on official social media channels. Additionally, the company provided training and promotion opportunities to help employees enhance their professional skills and advance their careers. Environmental actions not only enhanced the company's social image and market competitiveness but also strengthened employees' personal capabilities and environmental awareness. Employees improved their professional skills and problem-solving abilities through participation in environmental projects and adopted more environmentally friendly behaviors in their daily lives, such as reducing the use of disposable plastic bags and practicing waste sorting. The interaction between employees and the company was a significant factor in promoting environmental actions. Through effective communication and feedback mechanisms, employees actively participated in company-organized environmental activities and shared environmental knowledge and experiences, thereby enhancing the team's overall environmental awareness.
Continuous learning and innovation were crucial in driving continuous improvement in environmental actions. The company regularly organized environmental training sessions to enhance employees' professional knowledge and skills, encouraged employees to propose innovative environmental suggestions and solutions, and adjusted environmental policies and measures in a timely manner based on employee feedback and market changes to ensure continuous improvement in environmental actions.
This study, based on feedback data, reveals that all intrinsic motivations show significant responses. However, clearly attributing observed PEB to employees' autonomous awareness is challenging. Instead, extrinsic motivation has a more noticeable response among the behaviors demonstrated. Notably, the interaction between extrinsic and intrinsic motivation is relatively significant, largely influenced by the company's welfare policies, incentive mechanisms, specific measures, return rates, and related schemes. Although most types of intrinsic motivation are activated by types of extrinsic motivation, both their motivating and inhibiting effects indirectly influence employees' engagement in PEB. The qualitative results complement the quantitative findings, suggesting that the interaction between intrinsic and extrinsic motivation in employees' PEB behaviors is closely linked to factors such as environmental protection measures, activities, incentive mechanisms, employee effort returns, and the social identity positioning within NEV companies.
Integrating quantitative and qualitative resultsTo enhance the interpretability of the findings and address concerns regarding the clarity of the results, this study integrates quantitative and qualitative evidence to provide a more comprehensive explanation of how GTL influences employees’ PEB.
The quantitative results demonstrate that GTL exerts both a significant direct effect on PEB and indirect effects through green intrinsic motivation and green extrinsic motivation, with the mediation being partial. Importantly, the standardized effects indicate that green extrinsic motivation plays a stronger role than green intrinsic motivation in predicting employees’ PEB. Although these findings establish the strength and direction of relationships, the qualitative findings elucidate the underlying mechanisms driving these effects.
Interview evidence reveals that leaders’ articulation of a compelling green vision and consistent environmental role modeling enhance employees’ intrinsic motivation by fostering value alignment, moral identification, and personal meaning in environmental actions. Meanwhile, employees repeatedly emphasized the decisive role of extrinsic mechanisms, such as formal policies, performance standards, incentive schemes, public recognition, and welfare-linked rewards, in shaping their day-to-day environmental behaviors. These institutionalized incentives were perceived as concrete signals that environmental behavior is organizationally valued and rewarded, thereby activating and reinforcing green extrinsic motivation.
Moreover, qualitative findings suggest that intrinsic and extrinsic motivation do not operate in isolation. Instead, extrinsic motivational structures appear to moderate and strengthen intrinsic motivation by legitimizing environmental engagement and reducing the perceived costs of discretionary green behavior. Training programs and structured implementation measures further function as catalytic mechanisms that translate leadership intentions into coordinated, proactive, and civic-oriented environmental actions.
Taken together, the integrated findings indicate that GTL influences employees’ PEB through dual and complementary pathways. Extrinsic motivation plays a dominant role in activating and sustaining environmental behavior in a highly regulated and performance-oriented context, whereas intrinsic motivation supports deeper internalization and long-term engagement. This integration of quantitative and qualitative evidence provides a nuanced understanding of why green extrinsic motivation exhibits a stronger effect size, while still affirming the critical role of intrinsic motivation in sustaining PEB over time (see Table 10).
Integration of quantitative and qualitative findings.
Note. Quantitative findings are based on CB-SEM analysis; qualitative findings are derived from semi-structured interviews with employees in China’s NEV manufacturing sector; GTL= Green Transformational Leadership; GIM=Green Intrinsic Motivation; GEM = Green Extrinsic Motivation; PEB = Pro-Environmental Behavior
This study deepens our understanding of sustainability-focused leadership by thoroughly examining the impact of GTL on employees' PEB within China's rapidly expanding NEV sector. By integrating perspectives from SCT and SDT and utilizing survey data from 504 employees, it demonstrates that GTL has a direct and statistically significant positive effect on PEB. Through their environmentally conscious values and actions, leaders serve as role models, directly influencing employees' voluntary ecological behaviors through observational learning and the establishment of social norms that endorse PEB (Faraz et al., 2021; Farrukh et al., 2022; Fawehinmi et al., 2024; W. Li et al., 2020; Sharpe et al., 2022; Ying et al., 2020).
Moreover, GTL is found to positively affect both green intrinsic motivation and green extrinsic motivation, aligning with SDT's dual-pathway framework. Transformational leaders foster intrinsic motivation by facilitating the internalization of environmental values and enhancing extrinsic motivation through recognition, rewards, and welfare-related policies. Contrary to previous research suggesting that extrinsic motivation might diminish intrinsic motivation (Ali et al., 2020; Li et al., 2020; Wang et al., 2022), our findings reveal that, within a well-structured organizational environment, extrinsic motivation can complement and reinforce intrinsic motivation. Quantitative results indicate that both motivation types play significant roles, with intrinsic motivation showing a slightly stronger influence, while extrinsic motivation remains a crucial driver for reinforcement. Qualitative interviews further suggest that incentives, training, and clearly defined green objectives bolster intrinsic motivation rather than erode it, thereby creating integrated and mutually reinforcing motivational pathways.
Mediation analyses uncover a partial mediation effect, suggesting that leadership influences PEB both directly through social-cognitive processes and indirectly through complementary motivational channels. This dual mechanism underscores the interactive and synergistic relationship between intrinsic and extrinsic motivation, offering a more sophisticated understanding of how transformational leadership translates organizational sustainability goals into employees' daily environmental actions.
This study makes two significant contributions to the field. First, it confirms previous findings that GTL enhances employees' intrinsic motivation, which in turn fosters green creativity and PEB (Hu et al., 2022; Li et al., 2020; Shafi et al., 2020; Sharma et al., 2025; Sharpe et al., 2022). Second, it extends existing literature by revealing the novel insight that extrinsic motivation can reinforce intrinsic motivation rather than diminish it, demonstrating a synergistic dual-pathway mechanism that prior research has not systematically explored.
From a practical standpoint, these findings emphasize the importance of leadership development, incentive system design, and strategic guidance in promoting sustainable employee behaviors. Overall, this research contributes to the expanding body of literature on green leadership by elucidating the integrated motivational mechanisms through which transformational leadership effectively encourages voluntary PEBs, particularly in innovation-driven and environmentally regulated industries.
Theoretical significanceThis study makes significant theoretical contributions to the fields of green leadership, employee motivation, and PEB. First, it advances GTL research by empirically elucidating a dual-pathway mechanism through which GTL influences employees' PEB, demonstrating that GTL operates concurrently through motivational and non-motivational pathways, such as role modeling and norm signaling, thereby offering a more comprehensive explanation than single-mechanism approaches. Second, the study enriches SDT by revealing that GTL can simultaneously foster both green intrinsic and extrinsic motivation without undermining their efficacy, challenging the prevailing view that intrinsic motivation is the sole driver of voluntary PEB and highlighting the complementary roles of different motivational regulations in organizational sustainability initiatives. Third, by validating the applicability of leadership and motivational mechanisms across multiple dimensions of employee green behavior, including eco-initiatives, eco-civic engagement, and eco-helping, the study responds to calls for more nuanced examinations of workplace environmental behavior, thus it enhances theoretical understanding of how leadership-driven motivational processes translate into diverse patterns of employee environmental engagement and broadens the explanatory scope of existing PEB frameworks.
Practical significanceThe results of this study yield several practical implications for organizations, especially within the framework of China's NEV sector. First, organizations should motivate their leaders to explicitly communicate and exemplify environmental values, as leadership by example has a direct bearing on employees' propensity to participate in voluntary PEBs.
Second, managers ought to devise motivational frameworks that concurrently bolster both green intrinsic and extrinsic motivation. Acknowledging and offering moderate incentives for environmental endeavors, while highlighting their broader ecological relevance, could serve to maintain employee commitment without compromising intrinsic motivation.
Third, organizations stand to gain by incorporating environmental metrics into their performance assessment and advancement protocols, thereby conveying that PEB is esteemed both symbolically and practically. Although these insights are primarily derived from the NEV industry, they may also inform sustainability-oriented leadership strategies in other innovation-driven sectors—provided that contextual differences, such as regulatory environments, market dynamics, and cultural factors, are carefully considered to guide related interpretations.
Limitations and future research directionsThis study reveals a strong correlation between the interplay of intrinsic and extrinsic motivation in employees' PEBs and factors such as environmental protection measures, activities, incentive mechanisms, returns on employee efforts, and the social identity positioning of NEV firms. Although contributing valuable insights, the study has several limitations that open up promising research avenues, as some potential influencing factors remain underexplored. Key unaddressed issues include the long-term impact of the company's reward mechanism implementation on employees' sustainable PEBs, the differential effects of green practice measures or activities on employees of various age groups, and whether activity intensity can prompt employees to spread green environmental protection practices.
The study also has inherent limitations: the cross-sectional design hinders causal inference; self-reported data may cause common method bias; uncontrolled organizational factors could skew results; potential endogeneity calls for advanced methods (e.g., applying Gaussian copulas or instrumental variable approaches in future variance-based partial least squares structural equation modeling studies); and alternative mediators/boundary conditions need exploration (e.g., firm size, environmental policy intensity, innovation climate, and green identity). Although a mixed methods approach with quantitative research followed by qualitative supplementation is adopted, partially mitigating these limitations, some potential factors could still influence the findings. Specifically, macro-economic changes such as policy adjustments and market demand fluctuations may indirectly affect a company's green strategy implementation and employees' PEB choices. Rapid technological innovation in the industry can quickly make existing green practices obsolete, altering the functioning and effectiveness of GTL. Moreover, personal life events such as family changes and health problems may temporarily impact employees' work attitudes and PEB, which are hard to comprehensively account for in this study. As this study is China-based, future research could expand to more regions to enrich findings and address these limitations, thereby refining theory and practice in sustainability-oriented leadership.
Ethics declarationsThis study has obtained approval from the Research Ethics Committee of Xi’an International University, Reference No. XAIU25020-2025-918 (This study also received approval following the Index of Item-Objective Congruence (IOC) review conducted by Rajamangala University of Technology Tawan-ok). The procedures employed in this research adhere to the principles outlined in the Declaration of Helsinki. Each participant provided informed consent before the interview.
Informed consentThe entire procedure was conducted in accordance with the Declaration of Helsinki: after a comprehensive oral disclosure of all research parameters, verbal consent was obtained. Before each interview, every participant received an oral explanation covering the study’s purpose, the voluntary nature of participation, the right to withdraw without penalty, and the measures taken to safeguard privacy, which further strengthens the ethical norms of the research process and provides a solid institutional guarantee for the protection of participants' privacy.
Funding sourceNo financial support was received for this research.
CRediT authorship contribution statementYidi Zhang: Writing – original draft, Visualization, Validation, Software, Methodology, Investigation, Formal analysis, Data curation, Conceptualization. Bo Xia: Writing – original draft, Visualization, Validation, Supervision, Software, Project administration, Methodology, Investigation, Formal analysis, Data curation, Conceptualization. Haihui Dong: Writing – review & editing, Resources, Project administration. Ruihui (Allan) Pu: Writing – review & editing, Validation, Methodology, Formal analysis, Conceptualization. Muhammad Khalid Anser: Writing – review & editing, Conceptualization.
The author(s) declare no competing interests.
| Model | χ² | df | p | CFI | TLI | RMSEA |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| CFA (without CLF) | 286.468 | 260 | .125 | .996 | .995 | .014 |
| CFA (with CLF) | 277.387 | 259 | .207 | .997 | .997 | .012 |
| Δχ² | 9.081 | 1 | .003** | - | - | - |
Note. p < .01. The inclusion of the CLF significantly improved model fit; however, the actual variance explained by the common latent factor remains below the critical threshold (see Table A2).
| Test Metric | Value | Explanation |
|---|---|---|
| Standardized CLF Loading | 0.646 | Equally constrained loading for all 25 observed variables |
| Common Method Variance (CMV) | 41.8 % | Calculated as CLF loading squared (0.646² = 0.418) |
| Threshold Criterion | < 50 % | Based on Podsakoff et al. (2003) |
| Conclusion | Passed | No severe common method bias detected |
Appendix C. Squared multiple correlations (R²) for endogenous variables
