The review, conducted by Meenakshi Bisla of The NorthCap University and the University of Petroleum and Energy Studies, together with Deepti Prakash and Yashika Baniwal of Guru Gobind Singh Indraprastha University, set out to organize a literature that has grown rapidly but unevenly. As organizations worldwide face mounting pressure to improve their sustainability performance, many have discovered that formal environmental policies alone are not enough. Real progress often depends on the small, unprompted actions of individual employees, the everyday decisions to print less, sort waste properly, switch off equipment, or speak up about wasteful practices. Capturing and cultivating that discretionary behavior is what the OCBE literature is all about, and the new study aims to bring its scattered findings into coherent focus.

Methodologically, the research follows the rigorous standards of modern evidence synthesis. The authors applied the PRISMA approach, the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses, to identify, screen, and select relevant studies, ultimately drawing data from 221 papers. This structured pipeline is designed to reduce selection bias by making each stage of inclusion and exclusion explicit and reproducible, a crucial safeguard when the goal is to characterize an entire research field rather than cherry-pick supportive findings. The scale of the corpus matters: with more than two hundred studies in the sample, the synthesis can reveal patterns that any single primary study, typically conducted in one industry, one country, or one type of organization, would be unable to detect on its own.

Once the 221 papers were assembled, the team turned to thematic analysis, a qualitative technique that systematically codes textual data and groups the codes into recurring themes. The analysis was performed using NVivo, a widely used software platform for qualitative data management that allows researchers to tag, query, and cross-reference large volumes of coded material. Out of this process emerged eleven distinct themes, each representing a recurring driver or mechanism that the underlying literature associates with environmentally friendly citizenship behavior at work. The sheer number of themes underscores how multifaceted the phenomenon is; there is no single lever that reliably turns employees into environmental champions.

The crucial analytical move came next. Rather than treating the eleven themes as an undifferentiated list, the authors organized them into two major categories of initiatives that stimulate OCBE within organizations: individual-level drivers and strategic-level drivers. This two-tier structure forms the backbone of the model the study proposes for enhancing environmental performance, and it reflects a long-standing insight from organizational psychology that behavior in workplaces is shaped simultaneously by what happens inside a person and by the systems that surround them.

At the individual level, the review’s framing connects with well-established constructs in the broader literature on workplace environmental behavior, including the intrinsic motivation of employees, their personal environmental values and attitudes, and their sense of psychological ownership over environmental outcomes. Employees who genuinely care about the natural world, who feel a personal responsibility for it, and who find satisfaction in acting on that care are more likely to engage in voluntary green behavior. The machine-learning-assisted subject classifications accompanying the article, which include intrinsic motivation and organizational climate, hint at the conceptual territory the synthesis covers: the internal engine of motivation on one side and the atmospheric conditions of the workplace on the other.

At the strategic level, the review points to the role of organizational architecture in making individual green behavior possible and sustainable over time. This encompasses the organizational climate that signals what leadership truly values, corporate environmental management systems that translate intent into routine, corporate social responsibility commitments that embed environmental concerns into the organization’s identity, and broader environmental management practices that give employees the tools, information, and encouragement to act. The underlying logic is straightforward but powerful: even intrinsically motivated employees will struggle to behave sustainably if the strategic environment offers no support, no feedback, and no recognition for their efforts. Conversely, well-designed strategic initiatives can activate latent motivation in employees who might otherwise remain passive.

The model that emerges from the synthesis is explicitly performance-oriented. The authors frame it as a pathway through which organizations can enhance their environmental performance, in other words their sustainability outcomes, by effectively managing their workforce through OCBE. This framing matters because it speaks directly to a persistent tension in corporate sustainability: environmental performance metrics are typically measured at the level of the organization, in emissions, waste volumes, energy use, and resource efficiency, while the behaviors that drive those metrics are enacted at the level of the individual. Bridging that gap requires a theory of how individual discretionary actions aggregate into measurable organizational outcomes, and the proposed model is intended to serve exactly that bridging function. For managers, the practical implication is that workforce management and environmental management are not separate silos; the levers of human resource practice and the levers of environmental strategy intersect in the daily choices of employees.

The study also contributes by looking forward. Beyond consolidating what is known, the authors articulate a future research agenda, identifying where the field needs further empirical attention. Systematic reviews of this kind serve an important cartographic role in maturing research areas: they expose which relationships have been studied extensively, which have been examined only in narrow contexts, and which remain speculative. By categorizing drivers into individual and strategic initiatives, the review gives researchers a shared vocabulary and a structural scaffold on which new hypotheses can be built and tested, potentially across industries, cultures, and regulatory environments that the existing 221 papers do not fully represent.

Published open access on 11 October 2026, the article arrives at a moment when the gap between organizational sustainability ambitions and everyday workplace behavior has never been more visible. Companies announce net-zero targets, yet the achievement of those targets depends on countless unglamorous, voluntary acts by people whose formal jobs may have nothing to do with the environment. The review’s central message is that these acts do not arise spontaneously in a vacuum. They are cultivated by a combination of personal motivation and strategic design, and organizations that understand both halves of that equation are better positioned to convert good intentions into measurable environmental performance. For a field that has grown paper by paper over many years, the synthesis of 221 studies into eleven themes and two coherent initiative categories represents a significant step toward a unified science of the green workplace, one that promises to benefit organizations seeking to manage their workforce effectively while advancing environmental sustainability.

Subject of Research: Systematic review of individual and strategic drivers of organizational citizenship behavior for the environment

Article Title: A systematic synthesis of individual and strategic drivers of organizational citizenship behavior for the environment

Article References: Bisla, M., Prakash, D., & Baniwal, Y. (2026). A systematic synthesis of individual and strategic drivers of organizational citizenship behavior for the environment. Discover Sustainability. https://doi.org/10.1007/s43621-026-04970-4

Image Credits: AI Generated

DOI: 10.1007/s43621-026-04970-4

Keywords: organizational citizenship behavior for the environment, OCBE, systematic review, PRISMA, thematic analysis, NVivo, environmental performance, sustainability, corporate environmental management, intrinsic motivation, organizational climate, corporate social responsibility