Corporate Sustainability and Employee Well - Being: An Analysis Between Domestic and International Hotel Firms

In the global hospitality sector, corporate sustainability has grown in importance as a comprehensive strategy for accomplishing long-term social, economic, and environmental goals (10). In the past, environmental techniques including energy efficiency, water conservation, waste reduction, and green building projects were the main focus of hotel sustainability. Recent study highlights that genuine sustainability goes beyond environmental stewardship to incorporate social and economic elements, especially with regard to employee well-being, ethical management, and organizational inclusion, even though these practices are still crucial (10, 9). Hotels that adopt comprehensive sustainability practices benefit not only from reduced operating costs and enhanced brand recognition, but also from higher employee engagement, retention, and satisfaction all of which are essential for maintaining service excellence in a highly competitive industry (1, 5).

Given the knowledge that workforce health, motivation, and happiness are unbreakably related to organizational performance and sustainability outcomes, employee well-being has become a crucial component of sustainable human resource management (1, 2, 5, 8). Physical and mental health, workplace safety, fair pay, work-life balance, opportunities for professional advancement, and an inclusive company culture are just a few of the many aspects that make up well-being (2, 6, 8). In addition to encouraging environmentally responsible behaviour, Sustainable HRM practices, such as green training programs, ecologically conscious performance management, equality and diversity initiatives, and ethical compensation systems also improve the psychological and social welfare of employees (4, 5, 9).

Chennai's hospitality industry is made up of a wide range of domestic and foreign hotel companies with very different institutional frameworks, operational standards, and resources. International hotels typically use organized systems for employee involvement and development, technologically sophisticated HR procedures, and defined sustainability policies. On the other hand, domestic hotels frequently implement informal sustainability initiatives, which may differ in terms of employee awareness and efficacy (4, 7). These contextual variations highlight how crucial it is to compare how employees in local and foreign hotels see sustainable HRM practices. These comparisons shed light on how employees' perceptions of sustainability activities, well-being, and general job satisfaction are impacted by organizational structures, resources, and cultural orientations (1, 3, 5).

This study intends to give managers useful insights to integrate sustainability initiatives with HR strategies, thereby fostering employee well-being, improving organizational performance, and contributing to broader sustainability goals in the hospitality sector. It does this by examining these dimensions (workplace safety, career development, inclusion, and compensation) across domestic and international hotel contexts (4, 5, 9).

OBJECTIVES OF THE STUDY

Primary Objective:

• To measure the impact of corporate sustainability practices on employee well-being between domestic and international hotel firms.

Secondary Objectives:

• To assess the level of workplace safety, health, and well-being practices between domestic and international hotel.
• To evaluate the effectiveness of training, career growth, and sustainability initiatives between domestic and international hotel.
• To examine equality, inclusion, and anti-discrimination practices in the workplace between domestic and international hotel.

SCOPE OF THE STUDY

In order to identify variations in organizational structures, resources, policies, and cultural orientations, this study compares one domestic hotel with one foreign hotel in order to examine employee perspectives on sustainable HRM practices in Chennai's hospitality industry. In order to match them with pertinent Sustainable Development Goals (SDG 3, 5, 8, and 10), it looks at important aspects such as workplace safety and health, training and career development, equality and inclusion, pay, work-life balance, and welfare facilities. Beyond policy evaluation, the study aims to comprehend how these activities are perceived by workers and how disparities in age, gender, and cultural, linguistic, and demographic characteristics affect perceptions of involvement and well-being.

The study's practical goal is to give hotel managers the knowledge they need to spot gaps, boost employee engagement, and carry out successful HR interventions that improve worker well-being and organizational sustainability. By comparing domestic and foreign hotels in Chennai, highlighting best practices, guiding future research, and promoting alignment between corporate sustainability initiatives and human resource strategies, it adds to the body of knowledge on sustainable HRM in emerging markets.

LIMITATIONS OF THE STUDY

1. Sample Scope: There is limited generalizability to other hotels in Chennai or throughout India because data were gathered from just two hotels, one domestic and one foreign, with 106 respondents from each hotel.
2. Demographic Variations: Respondent opinions of sustainable HRM procedures and employee well-being may have been impacted by differences in gender, age, cultural backgrounds, and language.
3. Contextual Limitations: Because the study is cross-sectional and depends on self-reported perceptions, it may be impacted by individual prejudices or transient employment circumstances.
4. Organizational Differences: Since just one hotel of each kind was examined, differences between other domestic or foreign hotels with various sustainability frameworks or policies were not recorded.

REVIEW OF LITERATURE

Herlina and Iskandar (2025) investigated the effects of AI, employee well-being, and sustainable HRM on employee engagement among 366 Jakartan workers. They discovered through statistical analysis and survey data that well-being and sustainable HRM practices greatly increase engagement, while AI plays a crucial moderating role by lowering workload and promoting improved career development and decision-making. The study highlights that involvement encompasses more than just monetary benefits, such as mental health and work-life balance. It comes to the conclusion that businesses should use an integrated strategy that incorporates AI, sustainability, and wellbeing. However, constraints including self-reported data and cross-sectional design point to the need for more investigation.

Sheeran, Sutton, and Cooper-Thomas (2025) investigated how job performance in educational institutions in the United Arab Emirates and the United States is impacted by employee well-being and organizational environmental sustainability. The happy-productive worker hypothesis was supported by their survey of 199 workers, which revealed that increased well-being enhanced task and contextual performance and decreased counterproductive behaviours. The association between well-being and performance was largely mediated by perceptions of sustainability, which also improved contextual performance. According to the study, pro-organizational behaviours, cooperation, and motivation are all increased by sustainable practices. Although self-reported data and a cross-sectional methodology are limitations, the authors advise merging well-being programs with sustainability efforts and encourage more long-term study.

Guix et al. (2025) examined sustainability reporting in the 50 biggest international hotel groups between 2014 and 2021. The quality of reports increased with more stakeholder involvement, inclusivity, and materiality disclosure, even while the number of reporting hotels remained same. According to the study, stakeholder-oriented reporting which emphasizes social and environmental responsibilities replaces market-focused reasoning. Though some hotels continue to deliberately employ frameworks without full responsibility, materiality orientation emerged first, followed by inclusivity and transparency. Adoption of stakeholder reasoning generally improves the thoroughness and legitimacy of sustainability disclosures. The study examines employee well-being (EWB) at the individual, group, and organizational levels in the hospitality industry. Resources like resilience, optimism, and engagement practices help individuals cope with pressures including job demands and personality traits. Colleague support and supportive leadership help to mitigate interpersonal conflicts and inadequate management at the group level. While resources like psychological safety, leadership, and attractive work settings improve well-being, organizational stressors include unfavourable working conditions and insufficient HRM. In order to strengthen EWB in the hospitality industry, the study identifies gaps in team- and organization-level treatments and suggests adopting mixed-method techniques to apply theories like Stress and Coping, Social Identity, and Organizational Support.

Madero-Gómez et al. (2023) conducted a systematic analysis of thirty papers on Sustainable HRM in order to evaluate its impact on environmental sustainability, corporate profitability, and employee well-being. They discovered that while promoting SDGs like health, gender equality, decent work, sustainable cities, and climate action, methods like training, fair compensation, sustainable leadership, and selective hiring also enhance employee engagement, health, and productivity. The study stresses stakeholder impact in promoting responsible behaviours and draws attention to the shortcomings of using GDP as the only indicator of wellbeing. The suggested sustainable HRM emphasizes the importance of implementation of policies regarding workforce health, organizational performance, and sustainable development by connecting corporate viability, employee welfare, and sustainable HRM.

Shani Adams, Kageyama, and Barreda (2022) examined 27 important researchs. Although the majority concentrate on environmental methods like energy and water conservation, they discovered that hotel sustainability is based on social, economic, and environmental pillars. Adoption is hampered by high costs and sluggish returns, yet green activities improve finances, customer satisfaction, and business ratings while reducing carbon footprint. In addition to highlighting the importance of technology, CSR, and culturally driven innovations, the report identifies research gaps outside of the US, the paucity of social and economic impact studies, and the requirement for standardized sustainability indicators. All things considered, it provides a road map for sustainable hotel operations.

RESEARCH METHODOLOGY

1. RESEARCH DESIGN

The purpose of this study is to assess how employees at local and foreign hotels in Chennai perceive Sustainable HRM practices and employee well-being. In order to support the formulation of hypotheses, the study employs a structured quantitative approach and establishes a theoretical framework based on Sustainable HRM, business sustainability, and employee well-being. Because data were gathered from respondents at a specific point in time, the study uses a cross-sectional survey design. To investigate variations in important areas including workplace safety and health, training and career development, equality and inclusion, a descriptive and comparative research methodology is used. The developed hypotheses are tested and the distinctions between the two hotel groups are examined using statistical methods.

2. DATA COLLECTION

This study uses both primary and secondary data sources. A structured questionnaire that was created in accordance with the research objectives and factors found in the body of current literature was used to gather primary data. In order to adequately capture employee perceptions, the questionnaire included closed-ended items that were assessed using a Likert scale. Employees at a few Chennai hotels were given the survey immediately. A total of 212 respondents, 106 employees from each hotel participated in the study.

3. DATA ANALYSIS

Quantitative statistical methods suitable for a comparison analysis were used to examine the gathered data. The demographic features of the respondents, such as age, gender, and department were compiled and presented using percentage analysis. This approach made it easier to interpret the demographic variations between workers in domestic and foreign hotels and gave a clear picture of the sample composition.

Independent Sample t-tests were used to assess the developed hypotheses and the research objectives. Because the study examines employee views of Sustainable HRM practices and its impact on the employee well-being across two different groups such as domestic and hotels. To ascertain whether there were statistically significant differences between the two groups, p-values were assessed and all analyses were performed at a 5% significance level.

The findings of these analyses promote the connection of corporate sustainability objectives with human resource strategy by shedding light on how sustainable HRM practices differ among hotel types and how they affect employee well-being.

RESULT AND DISCUSSION

1. DEMOGRAPHIC ANALYSIS

1.1 AGE

Table 1

Figure 1

The age distribution of the respondents shows that the majority of employees in both domestic and international hotels fall within the younger to early mid-career age groups. Specifically, 44% of respondents are aged 18–25, while 45% are aged 26–35, together accounting for 89% of the total sample. This indicates that most hotel employees are relatively young, which is typical for the hospitality industry, where entry-level and early-career positions often attract younger staff.

The proportion of employees aged 36–45 is 8%, and only 2% are 45 years or above, suggesting that senior and long-tenured employees constitute a small segment of the workforce.

1.2 GENDER ANALYSIS

Table 2

Figure 2

The gender distribution of the respondents indicates a predominantly male workforce in the selected hotels. 74% of the respondents are male, while 26% are female, highlighting a significant gender imbalance. This trend is consistent with many operational roles in the hospitality industry, particularly in areas such as housekeeping, kitchen, maintenance, and front-of-house operations, where male employees are often more represented.

1.3 DEPARTMENT ANALYSIS

Table 3

Figure 3

The distribution of respondents across departments reflects the operational structure of the selected hotels. The largest proportions of employees are in F&B Production and F&B Service, each accounting for 25% of respondents, highlighting the central role of food and beverage operations in hotel services. Housekeeping constitutes 16%, Front Office 11%, and Engineering 10%, indicating moderate staffing levels in support and technical functions. Administration and Security account for the smallest shares, 9% and 5% respectively, reflecting a limited number of employees in managerial and protective services compared to operational roles.

2. STATISTICAL ANALYSIS

2.1 DESCRIPTIVE STATISTICS

Figure 5

The overall mean rating across all respondents is 3.95 on the scale used (likely a 5-point Likert scale). The standard deviation of 0.958 indicates moderate variability in responses, meaning most responses are fairly close to the mean but with some spread.

Figure 6

The domestic hotel mean of particular respondents is 3.27 and the standard deviation of 0.602.

Figure 7

The international hotel mean of particular respondents is 4.62 and the standard deviation of 0.747.

There is a noticeable difference between local and foreign hotels when it comes to Sustainable HRM practices and employee well-being. While certain HR practices are in place, there is potential for improvement in workplace safety, organized training, career development, and inclusive policies to increase well-being and engagement, according to the somewhat favourable attitudes of domestic hotel employees (mean = 3.27, SD = 0.602). The effective application of sustainable HRM practices, such as thorough training, safety precautions, and inclusive initiatives, which greatly support employee satisfaction and well-being, is reflected in the very positive perceptions reported by international hotel employees (mean = 4.62, SD = 0.747). All things considered, these results show that domestic hotels must improve their HR procedures in order to better match the standards seen in foreign hotels.

2.2 INDEPENDENT T-TEST

Objective 1: To measure the impact of corporate sustainability practices on employee well-being between domestic and international hotel firms.

Figure 6

• H0₁: There is no significant difference in the impact of corporate sustainability on employee well-being between domestic and international hotels.
• H1₁: There is a significant difference in the impact of corporate sustainability on employee well-being between domestic and international hotels.

The p value is 0.028 which is lesser than the significance value 0.05 hence alternative hypothesis H1₁ is accepted and null hypothesis H0 is rejected. Therefore, there is a significant difference in the impact of corporate sustainability on employee well-being between domestic and international hotels.

Objective 2: To assess the level of workplace safety, health, and well-being practices between domestic and international hotel.

Figure 7

• H1: There is a significant difference in employee perception of workplace safety and health practices between domestic and international hotels.

The p value is 0.010 which is lesser than the significance value 0.05 hence alternative hypothesis H1₁ is accepted and null hypothesis H0 is rejected. Therefore, there is a significant difference in employee perception of workplace safety and health practices between domestic and international hotels.

Objective 3: To evaluate the effectiveness of training, career growth, and sustainability initiatives between domestic and international hotel.

Figure 8

• H1: There is a significant difference in training and career development opportunities between domestic and international hotels.

The p value is 0.020 which is lesser than the significance value 0.05 hence alternative hypothesis H1₁ is accepted and null hypothesis H0 is rejected. Therefore, there is a significant difference in training and career development opportunities between domestic and international hotels.

Objective 4: To examine equality, inclusion, and anti-discrimination practices in the workplace between domestic and international hotel.

Figure 9