International Journal of Business and Economy (IJBEC) eISSN: 2682-8359 [Vol. 4 No. 2 June 2022]
Journal website: http://myjms.mohe.gov.my/index.php/ijbec
THE EFFECT OF COORDINATION ON
ORGANIZATIONAL PERFORMANCE THROUGH PUBLIC SERVICE MOTIVATION AND ORGANIZATIONAL COMMITMENT AS AN INTERVENING VARIABLE
Darham1, Johannes2*, Edward3 and Syahmardi Yacob4
1 Doctorate Postgraduate Program, University of Jambi, INDONESIA
2 3 4 Post Graduate Program, University of Jambi, INDONESIA
*Corresponding author: [email protected]
Article Information:
Article history:
Received date : 24 May 2022 Revised date : 16 June 2022 Accepted date : 17 June 2022 Published date : 21 June 2022
To cite this document:
Darham, D., Johannes, J., Edward, E., &
Yacob, S. (2022).THE EFFECT OF COORDINATION ON
ORGANIZATIONAL
PERFORMANCE THROUGH PUBLIC SERVICE MOTIVATION AND ORGANIZATIONAL COMMITMENT AS AN INTERVENING VARIABLE.
International Journal of Business and Economy, 4(2), 97-112.
Abstract: This study aims to examine the direct and indirect effects of coordination on organizational performance through public service motivation and organizational commitment as mediating variables in the Bungo Regency Government. The research methodology uses a quantitative approach with a survey method and uses a questionnaire to obtain the main data. The sample consisted of 139 employees at the Bungo Regency Regional Apparatus Organization who were holding high-level leadership positions (Esselon II), administrator positions (Esselon III) and supervisory positions (Esselon IV). Hypothesis testing was carried out using Structural Equation Modeling using SmartPLS 3.0 software. The findings in this study indicate that coordination can significantly affect organizational performance directly and indirectly significantly affect organizational performance through public service motivation.
However, indirectly mediated by organizational commitment that coordination has no significant effect on organizational performance. The findings of this study are critical to successfully carry out development and improve organizational performance in the Bungo Regency Government.
Keywords: coordination, organizational performance, public service motivation and organizational commitment.
1. Background
Government agencies that have high performance will support the success of achieving agency goals. However, government agencies often face problems related to performance (Maharani
& Efendi, 2017). Performance can be influenced by coordination, service performance, professionalism and competence (Johannes & Erta, 2018; Kadarsih & Edward, 2014; Ridho &
Yacob, 2018). Performance is the result of work with the quality and quantity of employee work in carrying out their duties according to the responsibilities given to them (Mangkunegara, 2017). The higher the employee's performance, the higher the performance of the organization where the employee works.
Government organizations are public organizations that provide optimal services to the community. The success of public organizations in general can be seen from the performance of the organization. If an organization wants to progress or develop, it is required to be able to improve organizational performance or, more precisely, organizational performance.
The Bungo Regency Government Agency Performance Report 2019 is a clear and transparent portrait as the responsibility for the achievement of the Vision and Mission, as well as the targets and realization of the ten goals of the Bungo Government in 2019.
However, of the ten targets, there are two performance targets that are not very good, namely;
the quality of regional infrastructure and the quality of the residential environment. This is an important issue in strengthening targets and realizing performance. In addition, the current problem phenomenon is that the availability of employment opportunities is not comparable to the work force of job seekers, the limited funding capacity for the implementation of development programs, the limited facilities to support the implementation of activities, and the availability of urban/rural infrastructure that still requires improvement. .
Some of the factors that have caused the above-mentioned performance not to be maximized if drawn on a wider scope are problems: weak implementation of coordination, weak organizational commitment and still weak motivation of public service employees towards their duties. The importance of coordination in local government activities can facilitate organizational performance. In carrying out coordination, disturbances often occur, this is due to many factors that become obstacles. Factors that are often the source of problems in coordination are the lack of involvement in coordination and the lack of response from the participants in coordination (Geert Bouckaert et al., 2010).
Coordination is a process in which within the organization itself a group effort can be developed on a regular basis between each part to ensure unity of action in achieving common goals, organizational commitment is a very important thing that must be owned by every individual in working as an employee in an organization. Commitment is defined as the degree of identification and engagement that individuals have with their organization's mission, values, and goals (Raveendran & Gamage, 2019).
Meyer & Allen, (1996) define commitment into three parts, namely; affective commitment as an employee's emotional attachment to the organization, ongoing commitment based on the costs associated by members with the organization and normative commitment is defined as the feeling of obligation and loyalty of employees to remain with the organization and serve to its best potential.
The concept of public service motivation refers to the meaning of motivation that encourages an employee to provide the best service to the public (Perry, 1997). The concept of public service motivation is the concept of motivation in general refers to the forces that encourage and direct the behavior of an individual (Mulyani et al., 2017). In addition, public servants place a value on helping others at a higher level and working for the benefit of society (Zhu &
Wu, 2016).
2. Literature Review
2.1 Organizational Performance
The concept of performance is gradually and applied by organizations with and the level of integration and organizational strategic planning is getting deeper, therefore how to achieve organizational performance by implementing organizational strategic planning is an urgent problem to be solved by organizational leaders (Yuan, 2020).
The importance of performance in organizations because it is a system that ensures that individuals and teams make a conscious effort to adjust their behavior to meet organizational goals. Best performance refers to the design, implementation and implementation of targets for the desired results, best performance involves setting goals, aligning goals, monitoring progress and providing feedback (Biron et al., 2011).
Performance is related to team efficiency and profitability for business sustainability, team performance is the responsibility of organizational management to improve organizational performance, effective team performance provides a good quality feedback mechanism for management and employees and is able to provide important information for individuals and teams in adjusting their behavior for the sake of interests of organizational performance (Nkeobuna & Ugoani, 2020).
The general idea of the concept of organizational performance is focused on efficiency or effectiveness, because organizations must be profitable in the long term to survive, organizational performance has been presented as an important dependent variable in research because it provides a means to establish organizational suitability and its contextual variables (Jusoh et al., 2008).
2.2 Coordination
Coordination has been a major concern in public administration for centuries, but the emphasis on coordination has increased over the last few decades. Despite the importance of coordination in contemporary public management, there is relatively little systematic knowledge about how it is managed in different political systems, or about how it is managed in different political systems. how coordination programs have evolved over time (Bouckaert et al., 2016).
The importance of coordination in a regional development plan is to facilitate the flow of communication, facilitate work that is a shared responsibility, increase each other's responsibilities in joint work, accelerate work that becomes joint work, agree on matters that will become development priorities and reduce risk. failure to use development funds.
Coordination is one of the oldest problems facing the public sector, several government organizations provide different coordination services, for example; the army and the navy, as long as the government is still relatively small, coordination can be handled relatively easily (Bouckaert et al., 2016).
Terry, (2001) explains coordination is a synchronous effort and directs the implementation of uniform and harmonious actions covering the amount of effort quantitatively and qualitatively qualitative, the exact time of the effort and determination of the direction of the effort. In addition, according to Terry, the conditions for coordination, according to Terry, include; mutual working feeling together, competing with each other for progress, mutual respect and enthusiasm.
Coordination in government is an instrument and mechanism that aims to improve the alignment of tasks within the public sector, this mechanism is used to create greater cohesion and reduce contradictions between policy and implementation (Bouckaert et al., 2010). A crucial challenge for coordination is how to motivate government organizations to contribute to policy programs designed to address cross-sectoral problems, it is very important for practitioners in organizations to study and value coordination (Molenveld et al., 2020).
Much of the discussion on coordination within the public sector has to do with the behavior of various public sector organizations, while these organizations might be expected to work together to deliver better services to society, there is also a clear and growing need and trend for organizations in the public sector to coordinate with organizations within the community, whether for-profit or non-profit organizations (Bouckaert et al., 2016).
2.3 Public Service Motivation
Public service is often used as a synonym for government service which includes all people working in the public sector (Staats, 1988). Public service motivation is a variable that will be influenced by transformational leadership and organizational culture directly or indirectly through the mediation of organizational culture.
This concept was originally initiated to identify the motivation of public service in the public sector employees and private sector employees, the idea is that public sector employees are more concerned with doing work that benefits society and helping others, while the private sector values more extrinsic rewards (Perry et al., 2010). However, the current view is that motivation Public service is not only for employees in public service organizations, but also for private sector employees (Ritz & Brewer, 2013; Wright et al., 2013).
In essence, the basis of the theory of public service motivation opposes the rational theory which stipulates that individuals act solely for self-interest, human behavior is more complex, people are motivated by several factors, namely; rational, normative processes and, the main motivator for public sector employees. is the interest that attracts them to serve the public (Perry, 1996).
Apart from that, it is in the form of beliefs, values and attitudes that go beyond personal interests and organizational interests that concern the interests of larger political entities, furthermore, the role of institutions in the social environment is also the development of motivation for public services (Vandenabeele, 2009). Identity is a core element in the development of public service motivation, although historically identity is not commonly discussed in motivation theory, but when someone internalizes public values, they will develop public service motivation to become part of their identity (Perry et al., 2010).
Public servant motivation in public employees is the result of the organizational environment around them (Camilleri, 2003). Public service motivation exists before a person enters service and continues to be further developed by institutional forces showing evidence of the importance and complexity of the interaction between individual and community factors depending on how individuals are socialized through social institutions, especially parental relationships, religion, observational learning and modeling throughout life experiences, professional education and training (Pandey et al., 2008).
2.4 Organizational Commitment
Commitment broadly in the form of organizational commitment is a three-dimensional concept consisting of; affective commitment, continuance commitment and normative commitment, commitment is considered to enable individuals to work and remain in the organization for organizational goals, commitment helps them to identify and understand the work environment in the organization, to a certain extent helps individuals to find their life goals (Meyer et al., 1993).
Before the concept of commitment is operationalized, it is necessary to understand the process by which commitment is formed and how commitment can influence behavior in organizational settings (Steers, 1977). Commitment has been defined as the strength of the relationship between individual and organizational involvement, further the antecedent of commitment because of its existence; a strong belief in acceptance of the organization's goals and values, a willingness to go the extra mile on behalf of the organization, and a strong desire to improve membership in the organization (Porter et al., 1974)
Organizational commitment is an attitude related to work outcomes that has received extensive research attention in human resource management studies (Yeh, 2019). Commitment is related to the individual's attitude towards his organization, commitment is a balance between inputs and results, if an employee receives more from the organization than he invests or contributes, organizational commitment arises, ongoing commitment is based on work alternatives and personal sacrifices (Meyer et al., 1993).
From the point of view of Allen & Meyer, (1996) organizational commitment is a three- dimensional concept (affective, continuity and normative). Affective commitment refers to an employee's emotional attachment to the organization. Continuing commitment is the perceived cost of employees leaving their organization. This results from the potential loss in employee time and effort if they leave the organization. Normative commitment refers to an employee's perceived obligation to stay in their organization, or in other words, employee loyalty to an organization.
2.5 Hypothesis
Previous findings state that coordination is able to directly and indirectly affect organizational performance, motivation for public services and organizational commitment. From these findings, this paper provides hypotheses in the form of;
H1: Direct coordination has a significant effect on organizational performance, public service motivation and organizational commitment.
H2.: Indirectly coordination has a significant effect on organizational performance which is mediated by public service motivation.
H3.: Indirectly coordination has a significant effect on organizational performance which is mediated by organizational commitment.
3. Methodology
The population of this research is 629 government employees or State Civil Apparatus (ASN). The approach to determining the sample was designed from approach Yamane, (1973) was set at 139 respondents.
3.1 Descriptive Statistics
Descriptive statistics are used to describe the characteristics of respondents, sample and research variables as well as the average (mean) of the research variables.
3.2 Measurement and Structural Model
The analysis approach is based on structural equation modeling or SEM, so that first several tests of the measurement model are carried out which include the test of dimensional unity and reliability (Baldauf et al., 2001). The measurement model (outer model) uses validity tests (convergent validity & discriminant validity) and reliability tests (composite reliability
& Cronbach's alpha). Meanwhile, the structural measurement model (inner model) uses the R-square value, path coefficient test, t-statistical test, and mediation test.
3.3 Hypothesis Testing
The first submodel of this research is to examine directly between coordination, public service motivation and organizational commitment to organizational performance (hypothesis H1 – H2). The second submodel of this research is a study of the mediating role of public service motivation and organizational commitment between coordination and PSM organizational performance (H3).
3.4 Operationalization of Variables
This research study has three kinds of variables, namely variable X (free / dependent), variable M (mediation / mediating) and variable Y (bound / independent). The independent variable which is given the symbol (X) is coordination (G. Bouckaert et al., 2016), the mediation variable is given the symbol (M1) namely public service motivation (Perry, 1996) and (M2) namely and organizational commitment variable (Allen & Meyer, 1996), the dependent variable is given the symbol Y, namely organizational performance (Mustopadidjaja, 2002).
4. Results and Discussion 4.1 Results
4.1.1 Respondent Description
Descriptions of respondents are used to describe the number of respondents based on categories so that an overview of the number of Bungo Regency government employees is obtained based on age, gender, education, marital status, current position, rank/class, overall tenure and tenure.
The age of the respondents is dominated between 50 – 59 years (42.5%), the most gender is male 96 (69.06%), undergraduate education 90 respondents (64.75%), 137 marital status (98.4%), 83 respondents held supervisory positions (59.71%) and the most years of service were 21 – 30 years 56 respondents (40.29).
4.1.2 Statistics Description
The descriptive statistical variables were measured using the index value and the average value.
The results show that coordination with an index value of 86.91 and an average of 6.08 (high category). Public service motivation with an index value of 78.0 and an average of 6.17 in the high category). Organizational commitment with an index value of 76.0 and an average of 5.47 ((high category). Organizational performance with an index value of 85.2 and an average value of 6.13 (high category).
4.1.3 Measurement and Structural Models
The measurement model (outer model) uses a validity test (convergent validity & discriminant validity) and a reliability test (composite reliability & Cronbach's alpha). All indicators in each variable have a loading factor value of > 0.70 and an AVE value of > 0.50 (valid).
The results of the Fornel Larcker Criterion value show that the comparison value of the variable itself is greater than the value of other variables and fulfills the requirements to be included in the discriminant validity test category. The reliability test was estimated by calculating the composite reliability and Cronbach's alpha based on standard loading. All variables have composite reliability values and Cronbach's alpha > 0.70 (qualified).
The structural measurement model (inner model) uses the R-square value, path coefficient test, t- statistical test, and mediation test. R-square analysis shows that X1 is able to explain Y by 31.1%. At the same time, X1 and M1 were able to explain the variability of 6.3%. X1 to M2 by 2.1%. The relationship between X to M1 is 43.9% and X to M2 is 24.2%.
The path coefficient test is used to see the direction of the relationship between the independent variables and the dependent variable. The direction of the relationship seen from the positive or negative coefficient values in this study can be seen in Figure 1.
Figure 1: Path Coefficient Figure 2: T-Statistic Test
The results of the figure 1 path coefficient of the independent variable on the dependent variable have a value above zero and are positive. This means that the relationship has a positive value to the variables studied.
Furthermore, the t-statistic or significance test was used to investigate the direct effect of the independent variable on the dependent variable. The value of t-statistics with a deviation of 5% must be greater than the t-table (> 1.96). The results of the data management of the t-statistical test values in this study can be seen in Figure 2
Organizational commitment (M2) is not significant to organizational performance (Y) with a t-statistic value of 1.321 which is smaller than the t-table value (1.96). Coordination (X) is significant to organizational performance (Y) has a t-statistic value of 14.845 which is greater than 1.96 from the t-table value. Coordination (X) is significant to organizational commitment (M2) because the t-statistic value is 6.325 which is greater than 1.96 from the t-table. Public service motivation (M1) is significant to organizational performance (Y) because the t- statistic value is 2.362 which is greater than 1.96 from the t-table.
The p-value of commitment (M2) has no effect on organizational performance (Y) with a p-value of 0.187 which is greater than 0.05. Coordination (X) affects organizational performance (Y) has a p-value of 0.000 which is smaller than 0.05. Coordination (X) has an effect on commitment (M2) because the p-value is 0.000 which is smaller than 0.05.
Public service motivation (M1) affects organizational performance (Y) because the p- value is 0.019 which is smaller than 0.05.
The coefficient of the indirect effect of coordination (X) on organizational performance (Y) mediated by commitment (M2) is 0.05, which means that every one hundred percent increase in the mediation relationship can only affect an increase in the dependent variable by 5 percent. The coefficient value of the indirect relationship of coordination (X) on organizational performance (Y) mediated by public service motivation (M1) is 0.11 which means that every one hundred percent increase in the mediation relationship can only affect an increase in the dependent variable by 11 percent.
The T-statistic value of the indirect effect of coordination (X) on organizational performance (Y) mediated by commitment (M2) of 1.23 means that the indirect effect is not significant because it is below 1.96. The T-statistic value of the indirect effect of coordination (X) on organizational performance (Y) mediated by public service motivation (M1) of 2.09 means that the indirect effect is not significant because it is above 1.96.
Meanwhile, for p-values the indirect effect of coordination (X) on organizational performance (Y) mediated by commitment (M2) is 0.21 which explains that this indirect effect has no significant effect because the value is above 0.05. P-values indirect relationship of coordination (X) to organizational performance (Y) mediated by the motivation of public servants (M1) of 0.036 which explains that this indirect effect has a significant effect because the value is below 0.05.
Table 1: Mediation Value
The original sample value or the coefficient of the indirect effect of coordination (X) on organizational performance (Y) mediated by commitment (M2) is 0.05, which means that every one hundred percent increase in the mediation relationship is only able to affect an increase in the dependent variable by 5 percent. The coefficient value of the indirect relationship of coordination (X) on organizational performance (Y) mediated by public service motivation (M1) is 0.11 which means that every one hundred percent increase in the mediation relationship can only affect an increase in the dependent variable by 11 percent.
The T-statistic value of the indirect effect of coordination (X) on organizational performance (Y) mediated by commitment (M2) of 1.23 means that the indirect effect is not significant because it is below 1.96. The T-statistic value of the indirect effect of coordination (X) on organizational performance (Y) mediated by public service motivation (M1) of 2.09 means that the indirect effect is not significant because it is above 1.96.
4.1.4 Hypothesis Testing
From the results of hypothesis testing data, the direct significance value of the coordination variable (X) on organizational performance (Y) is 0.000 (significant), coordination (X) to commitment (M2) is 0.000 (significant), coordination (X) to motivation public service is 0.000 (significant) and public service motivation (M1) on organizational performance (Y) is 0.019.
This means that it greatly affects the relationship in research. However, the direct relationship between commitment (M2) to organizational performance (Y) has a value of 0.187 which has no significant effect because it is greater than 0.05.
4.2 Discussion
In this research, organizational performance is directly influenced by the coordination, commitment and motivation of public servants. In this paper, organizational performance is indirectly influenced by coordination which is mediated by the motivation of public servants and has no effect mediated by organizational commitment.
The importance of performance in organizations because it is a system that ensures that individuals and teams make a conscious effort to adjust their behavior to meet organizational goals. Best performance refers to the design, implementation and implementation of targets for the desired results, best performance involves setting goals, aligning goals, monitoring progress and providing feedback (Biron et al., 2011).
There is a strong relationship between organizational environment and performance, several studies have used theory to explain the influence of the environment on organizational internal processes that affect performance (Abane & Brenya, 2021). Organizational performance is very important and often faces critical conditions, therefore it is necessary to determine the influence of confounding factors and control organizational performance (Hashmi et al., 2021).
Performance is a result of the implementation of work actions carried out by humans within a certain period of time through the elements of action that are shown in an achievement that has been achieved (Sulfemi, 2020). This can be caused by competence, motivation and discipline factors (Pratiwi et al., 2021).
Performance is a description of the level of achievement of the implementation of an activity program or policy in realizing the goals, objectives, vision and mission as outlined through the strategic planning of an organization, performance is achieved by a person or group of people in an organization so that to assess an achievement or performance, indicators are needed that are able to provide an objective assessment of that performance (Moeheriono, 2014).The influence of individual communication and innovative behavior was found to be the cause of performance (Anjar et al., 2020; Rialmi & Morsen, 2020) on the other hand, organizational culture is the cause that moderates the work environment and performance (Jufrizen & Rahmadhani, 2020). Individual differences in the level of task processing will affect the level of coordination intra-individually, some individuals who prefer overlapping tasks to generate time gains and individuals who prefer serial processing modes to reduce the demands of multiple tasks (Brüning et al., 2020).
The task coordination relationship in multitasking is influenced by task switching with the preview paradigm and the dual task free paradigm, individual differences that arise in the two levels of task coordination affect the overall multitasking efficiency in tasks, where both tasks must be performed according to a set schedule or independently (Reissland &
Manzey, 2016). Performance management can affect coordination when combining team- related goals with performance management, referring to behaviors or attitudes related to individual contributions to the team and overall team performance (Thielen et al., 2020).
Organizations benefit from a level of coordination that reflects an awareness of the overall work process relationship with and other employees, coordination is a problem solving behavior with the right time to communicate, respect each other and share goals and knowledge (Gittell, 2000). Coordination predicts the importance of effective relationship and communication for team effectiveness, employees who demonstrate coordination are
able to create and maintain communication networks and relational relationships (McDermott et al., 2019).
Commitment is related to the individual's attitude towards his organization, commitment is a balance between inputs and results, if an employee receives more from the organization than he invests or contributes, organizational commitment arises, ongoing commitment is based on work alternatives and personal sacrifices. From the point of view of Allen &
Meyer, (1996), organizational commitment is a three-dimensional concept (affective, continuity and normative). Affective commitment refers to an employee's emotional attachment to the organization. Continuing commitment is the perceived cost of employees leaving their organization. This results from the potential loss in employee time and effort if they leave the organization. Normative commitment refers to an employee's perceived obligation to stay in their organization, or in other words, employee loyalty to an organization. The presence of commitment when an individual makes a bet with the desire for something outside of work that is associated with consistent work and the individual's nature of the job ( Meyer et al., 1993).
In essence, the basis of the theory of public service motivation opposes the rational theory which stipulates that individuals act solely for self-interest, human behavior is more complex, people are motivated by several factors, namely; rational, normative processes and, the main motivator for public sector employees. is the interest that attracts them to serve the public (Perry, 1996). Motivation of public service to contribute differently to social knowledge as well as the boundaries required. The theory of public service motivation has set clear boundaries and the motivation of public servants is different from the concepts of other disciplines (Vandenabeele et al., 2018; Wright et al., 2013).
5. Conclusion
Based on the results of data processing in this study, it can be concluded as follows;
1. In proving the five direct influence hypotheses, there is only one hypothesis which is stated to have no significant effect, namely organizational commitment has no significant effect on organizational performance.
2. In proving the two hypotheses, the indirect effect, namely coordination on organizational performance mediated by public service motivation, has a significant effect, but coordination on organizational performance mediated by organizational commitment has no significant effect.
3. Taking into account the position, duties, functions, authorities and organizational structure of the Regional Apparatus, the importance of implementing the coordination principle, each leader is obliged to apply the coordination principle based on the rules and work procedures, in addition to being obliged to supervise his subordinates so that if there is a deviation, it can be immediately addressed.
6. Acknowledgement
In this activity, the authors would like to thank the parties who took part in the completion of this study:
1. Academia Industry Networks which have provided the opportunity to participate in the 3rd International Conference on Management, Economy, Education, Technology and Social Science 2022, KUALA LUMPUR, Malaysia.
2. Prof. Johannes, Dr. Edward and Dr. Syahmardi Yacob who has guided the author in completing this research paper.
3. Prof. Syamsurijal Tan who has provided suggestions, input and criticism for the improvement of this research paper.
4. Doctoral Study Program, Faculty of Economics and Business, Jambi University, which has provided opportunities to learn science, especially human resource management.
5. Bungo Regency Government which has provided facilities and respondents for conducting this research.
6. Muara Bungo University which has provided the opportunity to provide knowledge for writers to students who study management science.
References
Abane, J. A., & Brenya, E. (2021). The relationship between organizational environment antecedents and performance management in local government: evidence from Ghana.
Future Business Journal, 7(1). https://doi.org/10.1186/s43093-020-00049-2
Allen, N. J., & Meyer, J. P. (1996). Affective, continuance and normative commitment to the organization: an examination construct validity”,. Journal of Vocational Behavior, 49(3), 252–276. https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.1006/jvbe.1996.0043
Andersen, L. B., Bjørnholt, B., Bro, L. L., & Holm-Petersen, C. (2018). Leadership and motivation: a qualitative study of transformational leadership and public service motivation. International Review of Administrative Sciences, 84(4), 675–691.
https://doi.org/10.1177/0020852316654747
Anjar, A., Siregar, M., Ritonga, M. K., Harahap, H. S., & Siregar, Z. A. (2020). Pengaruh perilaku inovatif, terhadap kinerja kepala sekolah dasar di kabupaten labuhanbatu.
JURNAL EDUCATION AND DEVELOPMENT, 8(3), 26-26. https://doi.org/DOI https://doi.org/10.37081/ed.v8i3.1742
Arianty, N., Bahagia, R., Lubis, A. A., & Siswadi, Y. (2016). Manajemen Sumber Daya Manusia. Perdana Publishing.
Aslam, H. (2021). Pengaruh komitmen organisasi, lingkungan kerja terhadap kinerja
karyawan. Jurnal Ekonomi Efektif, 13(2), 114–123.
https://doi.org/http://dx.doi.org/10.32493/JEE.v3i2.8740
Baldauf, A., Cravens, D. W., & Piercy, N. F. (2001). Examining business strategy, sales management, and salesperson antecedents of sales organization effectiveness. Journal of Personal Selling and Sales Management, 21(2), 109–122.
https://doi.org/10.1080/08853134.2001.10754262
Biron, M., Farndale, E., & Paauwe, J. (2011). Performance management effectiveness: lessons from world-leading firms. Int J Hum Resour Manag Stud, 22(6), 1294–1311.
https://doi.org/https ://doi.org/10.1080/09585 192.2011.55910 0
Bouckaert, G., Peters, B. G., & Verhoest, K. (2016). Coordination of public sector organizations. Palgrave Macmillan.
Bouckaert, Geert, Peters, B. G., & Verhoest, K. (2010). The Coordination of Public Sector Organizations. Palgrave Macmillan. https://doi.org/10.1057/9780230275256
Brüning, J., Reissland, J., & Manzey, D. (2020). Individual preferences for task coordination strategies in multitasking : exploring the link between preferred modes of processing and strategies of response organization. Psychological Research, 0123456789.
https://doi.org/10.1007/s00426-020-01291-7
Camilleri, E. (2003). Antecedents affecting public service motivation. Personnel Review, 36(3), 356–377. https://doi.org/10.1108/00483480710731329
Gittell, J. H. (2000). Organizing work to support relational co-ordination. https://doi.
org/10.1080/095851900339747. The International Journal of Human Resource Management, 11(3), 517–539.
Greentree, V. W. (2011). Choosing to Serve : Modeling Antecedents of Public Service Motivation in Undergraduate Students [Old Dominion University].
https://doi.org/10.25777/pfrn-ns31
Hashmi, A. R., Amirah, N. A., & Yusof, Y. (2021). Management Science Letters. 11, 77–86.
https://doi.org/10.5267/j.msl.2020.8.028
Husna, & Mulyani, S. (2020). Pembinaan Pegawai Dalam Rangka Meningkatkan Kinerja Pelayanan Publik Di Rumah Sakit Umum Daerah Puri Husada Kabupaten …. MAP (Jurnal Manajemen Dan Administrasi Publik), 3(4), 2612–2142.
https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.37507/map.v3i4.287
Johannes, J., & Erta, A. C. (2018). Pengaruh orientasi pasar terhadap kinerja pemasaran wisata alam. Digest Marketing, 3(2), 1–7.
Jufrizen, J., & Rahmadhani, K. N. (2020). Pengaruh Budaya Organisasi Terhadap Kinerja Pegawai Dengan Lingkungan Kerja Sebagai Variabel Moderasi. Jurnal Riset Manajemen Dan Bisnis Dewantara (JMD), 3(1), 66-79.
Jusoh, R., Ibrahim, D. N., & Yuserrie, Z. (2008). The performance consequence of multiple performance measures usage: Evidence from the Malaysian manufacturers. International Journal of Productivity and Performance Management, 57(2), 119-136.
Kadarsih, & Edward. (2014). Pengaruh profesionalisme dan kompetensi terhadap kinerja auditor badan pengawas keuangan. Jurnal Dinamika Manajemen, 2(1), 47–58.
Kurnia, F. A., Suharyo, & Wahyudi, A. (2015). Pengaruh kecakapan kerja sumberdaya manusia (SDM) dan efektivitas koordinasi terhadap kinerja pegawai. Jurnal Visionist, 4(2), 25–31.
Leisink, P., & Steijn, B. (2009). Public service motivation and job performance of public sector employees in the Netherlands. International Review of Administrative Sciences, 75(1), 35–
52. https://doi.org/10.1177/0020852308099505
Maharani, I., & Efendi, S. (2017). Pengaruh Budaya Organisasi, Komitmen Organisasi, Kompensasi, Dan Etos Kerja Terhadap Kinerja Pegawai Kementerian Ketenagakerjaan Republik Indonesia. Ilmu Manajemen, 13(1), 49–61.
Mangkunegara, A. A. P. (2017). Manajemen Sumber Daya Manusia. Remaja Rosdakarya.
Marks, M. A., Mathieu, J. E., & Zaccaro, S. J. (2001). A temporally based framework and taxonomy of team processes. Academy of Management Review, 26, 356–376.
https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.2307/259182
McDermott, A. M., Conway, E., Cafferkey, K., Bosak, J., & Flood, P. C. (2019). Performance management in context: Formative cross-functional performance monitoring for improvement and the mediating role of relational coordination in hospitals. The International Journal of Human Resource Management, 30(3), 436–456 https://
Meyer, J.P., Allen, N. ., & Smith, C. . (1993). Commitment to organizations and occupations:
Extension and test of a three-component conceptualization. Journal of Applied Psychology, 78, 538–551. https://doi.org/http://dx.doi.org/10.1037/0021-9010.78.4.538 Meyer, John P., & Allen, N. J. (1988). Links between work experiences and organizational
commitment during the first year of employment: A longitudinal analysis. Journal of Occupational Psychology, 61(3), 195–209. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.2044- 8325.1988.tb00284.x
Meyer, John P., & Allen, N. J. (1996). Affective, Continuance, and Normative Commitment to the Organization: An Examination of Construct Validity. Journal of Vocational Behavior, 49(3), 252–276. http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/8980084
Moeheriono, M. (2014). Pengukuran Kinerja Berbasis Kompetensi (Revisi). PT Raja Grafindo Persada.
Molenveld, A., Verhoest, K., Voets, J., & Steen, T. (2020). Images of Coordination: How Implementing Organizations Perceive Coordination Arrangements. Public Administration Review, 80(1), 9–22. https://doi.org/10.1111/puar.13136
Mulyani, N. M. A. R., Sinarwati, N. K., & Yuniarta, G. A. (2017). Analisis pengaruh motivasi pelayanan publik dan kualitas sistem informasi akuntansi terhadap kinerja organisasi sektor publik dengan akuntabilitas sebagai variabel moderasi (Studi kasus pada Dinas Kesehatan Kabupaten Buleleng). E-Journal S1 Ak Universitas Pendidikan Ganesha, 7(1), 1–11.
Mustopadidjaja. (2002). Manajemen Proses Kebijakan Publik. Lembaga Administrasi Negara.
Ningrum, N. (2020). Pengaruh Koordinasi terhadap Efektivitas Pelayanan Kampung Keluarga Berencana Kabupaten Sumedang. PERSPEKTIF, 9(1), 46–54.
https://doi.org/http://dx.doi.org/10.31289/perspektif.v9i1.2835
Nkeobuna, J., & Ugoani, N. (2020). Team Performance Management and Effect on Organizational Performance. 1(3), 88–96.
Nursyamsi, I. (2012). Pengaruh kepemimpinan, pemberdayaan dan stres kerja terhadap komitmen organisasional serta dampaknya terhadap kinerja. Proceedings of Conference In Business, Accounting and Management (CBAM), 1, 405–423.
Ondi, & Aris. (2010). Etika Profesi Keguruan. PT. Refika Aditama.
Pandey, S. K., Wright, B. E., & Moynihan, D. P. (2008). Public service motivation and interpersonal citizenship behavior in public organizations: Testing a preliminary model.
International Public Management Journal, 11(1), 89–108.
https://doi.org/doi:10.1080/10967490801887947
Perry, J. L. (1996). Measuring public service motivation: An assessment of construct reliability and validity. Journal of Public Administration Research and Theory, 6(1), 5–22.
https://doi.org/10.1093/oxfordjournals.jpart.a024303
Perry, J. L. (1997). Antecedents of Public Service Motivation. ’Journal of Public Administration Research and Theory, 2, 181–197.
Perry, J. L., Annie, H., & Louis, R. W. (2010). Revisiting the Motivational Bases of Public Service: Twenty Years of Research and an Agenda for the Future. Public Administration Review, 70(5), 681–690.
Porter, L. W., Steers, R. M., Mowday, R. T., & Boulian, P. V. (1974). Organizational commitment, job satisfaction, and turnover among psychiatric technicians. Journal of Applied Psychology, 59(5), 603–609. https://doi.org/10.1037/h0037335
Pratiwi, W. A., Prasetyo, I., & Shabrina, M. N. (2021). Faktor-Faktor yang Berpengaruh terhadap Kinerja Guru Taman Kanak-Kanak. Jurnal Obsesi: Jurnal Pendidikan Anak Usia Dini, 5(2), 1741–1753. https://doi.org/10.31004/obsesi.v5i2.970
Ramli, A. H., & Yudhistira, R. (2018). Pengaruh Pengembangan Karir terhadap Kinerja Karyawan melalui Komitmen Organisasi pada PT . Infomedia Solusi Humanika di Jakarta.
Seminar Nasional Cendekiawan, 811–816. https://www.trijurnal.lemlit.trisakti.ac.id/
semnas/article/viewFile/3339/2833
Raveendran, T., & Gamage, A. S. (2019). The Mediating Effect of Organizational Commitment in the Impact of Transformational Leadership Style on Employee Performance: A Study of Divisional Secretariats in the Jaffna District. International Journal of Human Resource Studies, 9(2), 116. https://doi.org/10.5296/ijhrs.v9i2.14623
Reissland, J., & Manzey, D. (2016). Serial or overlapping process- ing in multitasking as individual preference: Effects of stimulus preview on task switching and concurrent dual- task performance. Acta Psychologica, 168, 27–40. https://doi.org/https ://doi.org/
10.1016/j.actps y.2016.04.010
Rialmi, Z., & Morsen, M. (2020). Pengaruh Komunikasi Terhadap Kinerja Karyawan PT Utama Metal Abadi. JENIUS (Jurnal Ilmiah Manajemen Sumber Daya Manusia), 3(2), 221-227. JENIUS (Jurnal Ilmiah Manajemen Sumber Daya Manusia), 3(2), 221-227.
https://doi.org/DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.32493/JJSDM.v3i2.3940
Ridho, R. M., & Yacob, S. (2018). Pengaruh kinerja layanan dan citra merk terhadap kepuasan pelanggan pemasang iklan. Digest Marketing, 3(2), 30–37.
Ritz, A., & Brewer, G. A. (2013). Does Societal Culture Affect Public Service Motivation ? Evidence of Sub- national Differences in Switzerland. International Public Management Journal, 16(2), 224–251. https://doi.org/10.1080/10967494.2013.817249
Saipullah, Slamet, A. ., & Rizal, M. (2021). Pengaruh Komitmen Organisasi, Gaya Kepemimpinan Dan Komunikasi Kerja Terhadap Kinerja Karyawan (Studi Kasus CV.
Engkok Soki). E – Jurnal Riset Manajemen, 10(2), 15–25.
Sari, E. P., Setiawan, S., & Adilah, A. R. (2018). Analisis Penilaian Kinerja Organisasi Perangkat Daerah Di Kota Bandung (Studi Kasus Pada Dinas Pemakaman & Pertamanan;
Dinas Kependudukan & Pencatatan Sipil dan Dinas Pemuda dan Olahraga). Jurnal Akuntansi Maranatha, 9(2), 146–157. https://doi.org/10.28932/jam.v9i2.483
Staats, E. B. (1988). Public Service and the Public Interest. American Society for Public Administration, 48(2), 601–605.
Steers, R. M. (1977). Antecedents and outcomes of organizational commitment. Administrative Science Quarterly, 22(1), 46–56. https://doi.org/10.2307/2391745
Sulfemi, W. B. (2020). Pengaruh Rasa Percaya Diri dan Gaya Kepemimpinan Kepala Sekolah terhadap Kinerja Guru di Kecamatan Ciampea Kabupaten Bogor. Nidomul Haq: Jurnal Manjemen Pendidikan Islam, 5, 157–179. https: //doi.org/10.31538/ndh.v5i2.557
Terry. (2001). Prilaku Organisasi, Salemba Empat, Jakarta. Salemba Empat.
Thielen, T. Van, Decramer, A., Vanderstraeten, A., & Thielen, T. Van. (2020). The effects of performance management on relational coordination in policing : the roles of content and process. The International Journal of Human Resource Management, 0(0), 1–26.
https://doi.org/10.1080/09585192.2020.1779779
Vandenabeele, W. (2009). The mediating effect of job satisfaction and organizational commitment on self-reported performance: more robust evidence of the PSM—
performance relationship. Int Rev Adm, 1, 13–14.
Vandenabeele, W., Ritz, A., & Neumann, O. (2018). Public service motivation: state of the art and conceptual cleanup In: Book: the palgrave Handbook of public Administration and Management in europe. Palgrave Macmillan.
Wahyu, D. (2021). Pengaruh koordnasi terhadap efektivitas kerja pemungut pajak bumi dan
Wright, B. E., Christensen, R. K., & Pandey, S. K. (2013). Measuring Public Service Motivation: Exploring the Equivalence of Existing Global Measures. International Public Management Journal, 16(2), 197–223. https://doi.org/10.1080/10967494.2013.817242 Yamane, T. (1973). Statistics: An introduction analysis. Harper & Row.
Yeh, C. M. (2019). The relationship between tourism involvement, organizational commitment and organizational citizenship behaviors in the hotel industry. Tourism and Hospitality Management, 25(1), 75–93. https://doi.org/10.20867/thm.25.1.10
Yuan, Q. (2020). Research on the Construction Path of Organizational Performance Management System Based on “ Strategic Orientation .” IEESASM, 901–908.
https://doi.org/10.25236/ieesasm.2020.174
Zhu, C., & Wu, C. (2016). Public service motivation and organizational performance in Chinese provincial governments. Chinese Management Studies, 10(4), 770–786.
https://doi.org/10.1108/CMS-08-2016-0168
