A Study on Multi-Level Paradox of Sustainable HRM: A Comparative Case Study in Malaysia’s Private Higher Education & Hospitality Sectors

Sustainable human resource management (HRM) is increasingly central to corporate sustainability, yet its implementation is marked by persistent tensions between competing objectives — profitability vs. employee well-being, short-term imperatives vs. long-term societal goals. This thesis applies paradox theory to examine how such tensions manifest as multi-level paradoxes and how they are navigated in practice. Focusing on two Malaysian service sectors — private higher education and hospitality — the research addresses a gap in understanding the nested and systemic nature of sustainable HRM paradoxes. Rather than treating these challenges as isolated dilemmas, the study demonstrates that contradictions span institutional policies, organizational strategies, HRM practices, and individual values, forming interconnected webs of tension. A qualitative comparative case study design was adopted, analysing a leading private university and a prominent hotel. Data were collected through 36 semi-structured interviews across 4 hierarchical levels, complemented by observations and documents. This approach enabled a rich, multi-perspective account of sustainability tensions. Thematic analysis and cross-case comparison identified paradoxes at macro, corporate, functional (HRM), and individual levels, and traced their interdependencies. The findings reveal that macro-level tensions (e.g. national sustainability mandates vs. market imperatives) cascade into organizational paradoxes (e.g. strategic ambitions vs. operational constraints), which then materialize in HRM dilemmas (e.g. progressive initiatives vs. cost-driven policies), and finally, in employees’ daily struggles (e.g. personal sustainability values vs. work demands). These tensions are both horizontally misaligned within levels and vertically nested across levels, amplifying their complexity. The cross-sector comparison highlights contextual influences. In private higher education, paradoxes centre on balancing educational and social missions with financial self-sufficiency, where academic quality and sustainability commitments often collide with enrolment targets and ranking pressures. In hospitality, tensions emerge between luxury service standards and resource-intensive operations, versus environmental conservation and workforce sustainability in a labour-intensive industry. Both cases underscore that while the paradox of “sustainability vs. performance” is common, its manifestation is exclusive and sector contingent. The study also identifies strategies of paradox navigation. Leaders, HR professionals, and employees engaged in temporal separation, structural separation, and selective prioritisation. More integrative efforts included: sustainability committees, revised HR policies aligning incentives with sustainability goals, and cultural initiatives fostering innovation. Nonetheless, integrative solutions were difficult to sustain, often undermined by counteracting forces at other levels. Successful navigation depended on fostering a paradox mindset — accepting contradictions as enduring and seeking ways to engage both poles, rather than resolve them outright. Overall, this study reframes sustainable HRM challenges through a paradox lens. By documenting the nested, multi-level nature of paradoxes and the varied strategies used to navigate them, it contributes to paradox theory, sustainable HRM, and the practice of managing sustainability in organizations. The study underscores that sustainability cannot be achieved by resolving tensions but by embracing paradox — recognising contradictions as enduring features of organizational life and working with them as a source of resilience, innovation, and long-term sustainability.