Public leadership in multicultural societies in the era of Industrial Revolution 4.

0: A
psychometric review

Dr. Istiani1, Dr.Eri Hidayat2, Nurindah W. Hastuti, M.Han3

Abstract

This study aims to understand the dynamics of the reflective model of the personal attribute dimensions of
the concept of public leadership in a multicultural society in the era of the industrial revolution 4.0. This
research is the second phase of a series of leadership research in Indonesia. Previous research using
qualitative methods illustrates that there are two main dimensions of effective leadership in a multicultural
society in dealing with horizontal conflicts in Indonesia, namely the dimensions of personal attributes and
behavioral competencies. The dimensions of personal attributes include cognitive abilities, innate traits
and, while the behavioral dimensions of competence include personal and interpersonal competencies.
Data was collected online and obtained as many as 247 respondents from the Jakarta, Bogor, Depok,
Tangerang and Bekasi areas. In the internal consistency of the measuring instrument used for each
dimension 0.76 (cognitive ability), 0.844 (trait), and 0.88 (value). From analysis using confirmatory factor
analysis (CFA) it was found that the personal attribute model was significant with the GoF SRMR index
(0.099), d_ULS (12.9191). The magnitude of the contribution of each dimension is 0.776 (cognitive ability),
0.701 (innate/traits), and 0.936 (value). This research enable us to unlock the dimensions of personal
attributes that have a significant role because it shows the leadership potential of each individual that
needs to be considered in the process of selecting prospective leaders and which can then be used for the
preparation of leadership training programs. This is important, considering that there has been a rapid
demographic change in Indonesia, especially in the areas that are sources of economic growth, which
caused horizontal conflicts in various regions.

Keywords:

1
BINUS University, Jakarta
2
Defense University of Indonesia, Jakarta
3
Defense University of Indonesia, Jakarta
1
Background.
Erzen and Armagan (2015) who conducted extensive research on the influence of leadership on conflict resolution found that
leadership has a significant influence on conflict management, because leaders can play a constructive role to ensure that followers
have the same goal of overcoming or preventing conflict, or vice versa. it can be a source of conflict. In this case, Indonesia as a
country that has a high level of diversity, both in terms of culture, religion, race, social status, as well as groups and sects, of course,
harbors a large potential for conflict. This is because one of the main factors that can cause conflict is the perception of differences
which then creates "us" versus "them" and turns into horizontal conflict if it cannot be managed properly (Oakes, 2001). Associated
with diversity and differences, the many differentiating factors can ultimately be simplified into factors of cultural differences,
because for example differences in religion, social status, ethnicity and class can ultimately be translated through a cultural lens, or
"the point of view of a group of people in viewing a problem." (Pedersen, 2001). And in this context, various literatures on conflict
show that effective leadership factors for multicultural societies play an important role in overcoming conflicts caused by cultural
differences (Seiler, 2007).
Although there is a lot of literature on leadership, conflict resolution, and about a multicultural world, however, the limited literature
study over the last 10 years, with the search engine proquest database, found only a small amount of literature on effective leadership
for multicultural societies in the context of conflict management. This is inseparable from the study of peace and conflict resolution
which is still largely dominated by the Western approach. For example, Duffey (2000) who examined the failure of peacekeepers
under the United Nations Operation in Somalia (UNOSOM) led by the United States found that the approach and Standard
Operating Procedure (SOP) taken by the UNOSOM Command were basically oriented towards conflict resolution approaches
originating from the United Nations. of Western culture, in this case the United States. The same thing was stated by Findlay (2002)
who found that the doctrines, SOPs and theories of conflict resolution used in various UN peacekeeping operations basically came
from a “Western” perspective (Soeters et al. 2006; Rubinstein et al., 2008). These approaches were born out of study programs on
conflict resolution and peace that were born and developed by academics working at universities in Europe and North America.
Thus, it is not surprising that emerging approaches reflect Western intellectual traditions, including the expectations, value systems
and leadership concepts associated with Western culture. And a deeper problem is where the discipline of Peace and Conflict
Resolution has made the wrong assumption that the theories, methods and concepts of leadership that were born in universities in
Western countries, can be applied universally. In fact, as an example, observations of various parties regarding the implementation
of conflict resolution in Timor Leste (Bishop, 1999; Di Giovanni, 1999) show that non-Western approaches, such as the Asian
approach, are considered more cooperative and accepted by the local community.

As a very multicultural country, Indonesia has experienced various horizontal conflicts, but it can also be said that it has shown
various successes in dealing with them. The problem is that not many studies have been conducted regarding indicators of effective
leadership to deal with conflict in a multicultural society that are in accordance with the real conditions in Indonesia, especially
related to demographic changes that occur rapidly, massively and continuously in contemporary Indonesia, which have the potential
to result in conflict. , especially in areas that are sources of high economic growth. This research is a continuation of qualitative
research that has been carried out previously and has succeeded in obtaining criteria for effective leadership to deal with conflicts in
the cities of Bandung, Bekasi and North Jakarta. From the criteria that have been obtained, an effective leadership model has been
obtained which consists of personal attributes and behavioral competencies. For personnel attributes, the factors found are cognitive
abilities, innate traits and values. Cognitive abilities consist of intelligence and creativity, while innate traits consist of character,
patience, assertiveness, courage and interest in resolving conflicts. The sub-factors of values are discipline, religiosity, sincerity and
holding on to principles. However, considering that in qualitative research, the resulting factors and sub-factors have not been
translated into indicator levels, it is necessary to develop behavioral indicators so that the validity of these factors and sub-factors can
be tested. And the aim of this research is to test the construct validity of personal attributes.

Multicultural Leadership Personal Attributes

From the discussion of the various theories above, it can be concluded that in general, effective leadership in a multicultural society
so that it can overcome conflict will require a leadership style that can show certain behavioral indicators that include the ability to
carry out conflict resolution in accordance with the existing culture. Public. Then, because the premise is effective leadership in a
multicultural society, the behavioral indicators must also show competencies related to cross-cultural competencies, in this case
cultural intelligence. However, considering that currently almost all references to conflict resolution and cultural intelligence come
from research in Western countries, it is necessary to conduct a grounded research that does not rely too much on established
theories, but tries to get a theory from the data obtained. After obtaining the criteria for effective leadership in Indonesia's
multicultural society qualitatively, it is necessary to formulate the leadership model through factor analysis.

From the results of interviews with research sources, and then an Expert Judgment assessment by psychologists at the Army
Psychology Service, then the criteria for an effective leadership profile in a multicultural society in Indonesia have been obtained to
deal with horizontal conflicts as shown in Table 1 below:

Tabel 1 Effective Leadership Profile

Personal Attributes Competency Behavior

Experience
Cognitive Abilities Innate Traits Values Personal Interpersonal

Intelligence Character Discipline Leadership Ability Desire to protect Cross cultural

society interaction

2
 Creativity (covert) Patience Religiosity Innovation Ability

Firmness Sincerity Consistency

Courage Hold the Courage (overt)

Principle

Interest Intuition
(Passion)

Compliance with
regulations

Creativity (overt)

Source: Report on the results of research on effective leadership for multicultural society in Indonesia (Hidayat et al, 2017)

Research Hypothesis
From the profile of effective leadership, effective leadership in a multicultural society in Indonesia to deal with this horizontal
conflict, then of course it is necessary to develop indicators that can be observed and assessed so that valid and reliable measuring
tools can then be developed to select potential leaders and then develop related leadership training materials. In this case, it is
necessary to test the construct validity of the factors of personal attributes and behavioral competencies through a quantitative study
through Confirmatory Factor Analysis (CFA) as the most appropriate method to test the validity of a measuring instrument (Brown,
2006). The research hypothesis proposed in this study is described as follows:
H1: Cognitive ability factor reflects effective leadership for multicultural society in overcoming horizontal conflict
H2: Traits reflect effective leadership for multicultural societies in dealing with horizontal conflicts
H3: Values factors reflect effective leadership for a multicultural society in overcoming horizontal conflicts

Research Measurement Tools

The results of previous qualitative research in the form of a leadership profile will be used to compile a survey questionnaire as a
research measuring tool. The purpose of making this measuring instrument is to be able to test the indicators that have been
compiled from the previous method. The measuring instrument in this research uses a Likert scale with two types of statements,
namely positive statements and negative statements. Each statement has four answer choices, namely agree, neutral, disagree, and
strongly disagree. Scores on the Likert scale consist of 4, 3, 2, and 1 for positive items, and scores of 1, 2, 3, and 4 for negative
items. The questionnaire in this study consisted of 118 positive and negative statement items. The results of the analysis show that of
the 118 tested items, 65 valid items were obtained. The results of the calculation of the reliability value for the cognitive ability
dimension are 0.760 (> 0.6), the innate trait dimension has a reliability of 0.844 (> 0.6), and the value dimension has a reliability of
0.880 (> 0.6).

Research Data Source

The source of this research data will be obtained from respondents as many as 247 people in the Greater Jakarta area as a
representation of pluralism in Indonesia. Respondents are Indonesian citizens who live in the areas of Jakarta, Bogor, Depok,
Tangerang, Bekasi, and Bandung and are at least 17 years old. Data collection will be carried out through an online survey, using the

Google platform, by distributing the survey page link to respondents who are the research targets .

Leadership Model Test Using Factor Analysis (FA)

FA is a data analysis technique that is widely considered to be contributing to the science of psychology, especially in
relation to latent variable testing (Royce, 1958). FA is a statistical technique used to investigate the relationship between manifest
and latent variables. The manifest variable is the variable that is observed as a representative indication of the latent variable or the
3
underlying latent construct. The procedure used depends on the research objectives, generally used to find out the variables/factors
from the data that are associated with certain items. Thus, it will be known the structure of the variables or factors that form the basis
of the theory behind the model that has been built.
Cronbach & Meehl (1955) in explaining the theoretical relationship of a psychological construct, emphasizes the
importance of separating the operational definition of the observed variable with the latent construct it represents and is described in
the model that has been built. FA as a technique to explain the theoretical relationship of a latent psychological concept or construct
such as personal attributes, can be divided into two ways, namely, Exploratory FA (EFA) and Confirmatory FA (CFA). EFA is used
to determine the relationship between the items being tested, while CFA is used to test hypotheses on the existing items whether they
really represent the latent variables that exist in the concept of personal attributes. In this case, CFA allows testing of the two
postulated models, namely the measurement model and the structural equation model (SEM). The measurement model is a model
that describes the relationship between item items and latent variables or between manifest variables and latent variables. While the
structural model is a set of hypothetical relationships between latent variables as a theoretical construction. Thus, FA allows
researchers to test the accuracy of the theoretical model (goodness of fit test) of personal attributes as a latent construct, test the
equivalence of the unit of measurement between items, test the reliability of the items on each latent variable or factor being
measured, and test the existence of invariance of items in the population studied. For the implementation of factor analysis will use
the SmartPLS software.

The Result
Data responden memperlihatkan gambaran berikut ini pada table 2:

Tabel 2: Descriptive of Respondens

Denographic Category number Percentage

Age 18-35 th 162 65.59%
35-55 th 73 29.55%
>55 th 12 4.86%
Gender Laki-laki 118 47.77%
Perempuan 128 51.82%
Lainnya 1 0.4%
Domicile Jakarta 55 22.27%
Jawa Barat 52 30.2%
Botabek 34 13.77%
Jawa Tengah 31 12.55%
Jawa Timur 29 11.74%
DI Yogyakarta 6 2.43%
Lainnya 39 15.79%
Kosong 2 0.81%
Race Jawa 88 35.63%
Sunda 76 30.77%
Keturunan Tionghoa 16 6.48%
Minang 14 5.67%
Batak 8 3.24%
Bali 4 1.62%
Betawi 8 3.24%
Lainnya 41 16.6%
Education Level SMA/SMK 5 2.02%
Diploma 5 2.02%
S1 173 70.04%
S2 55 22.28%
S3 9 3.64%
Kosong 1 0.4%
Profession Wiraswasta 44 17.81%
Perusahaan Swasta 33 13.36%
BUMN 4 1.62%

4
 PNS 36 14.57%
TNI 28 11.34%
POLRI 1 0.4%
Mahasiswa 95 38.46%
Ibu Rumah Tangga 3 1.21%
Pensiunan 1 0.4%

The respondent's data shows that the variation in terms of gender, origin of region, occupation is quite large. Meanwhile, from
gender and level of education and age grouping occurs enough.

Hypothesis Test Results

Testing the personal attribute model of multicultural leadership was done using Partial Least Square (PLS). PLS is a multivariate
statistical analysis technique that can be used to process data with many response variables and explanatory variables at once. This
analysis is a good alternative to the multiple regression analysis method and principal component regression, because this method is
more robust. The purpose of use is to confirm the theory, but it can also be used to explain whether or not there is a relationship
between latent variables. PLS can also analyze as well as constructs formed with reflective indicators. The Reflective Indicator
Model is often called the principal factor model where the covariance of indicator measurements is influenced by the latent construct
or reflects the variation of the latent construct.

The criteria for the validity of the latent variable indicators are weights 0.5, in this study each latent variable was only taken a few
indicators with the largest and stable weight value (Ghazali, 2006). To minimize bias in parameter estimation, each construct is taken
at least 3 indicators with the largest weight (Gerbing and Anderson in Iacobucci, 2010). A model is said to have a good level of
conformity (Goodness of Fit) when the SRMR (The Standardized root mean square residual) has a value of 0.1 (Garson, 2016).
Based on data processing using SmartPLS Version 3, it produces the goodness of fit index indicator as follows as shown in the table
3:

Tabel 3: GoF index pengujian model reflektif Atribut Personal

  Saturated Model Estimated Model

SRMR 0.099 0.118
d_ULS 12.919 18.421
d_G1 n/a n/a
d_G2 n/a n/a
Chi-Square infinite infinite
NFI n/a n/a

Based on the GoF index in table 4, it can be concluded that the structural model of the Personal Attribute construct is significant at
the SRMR value of 0.099. The model is shown in the image below.

5
Figure 1: Reflective Model of Multicultural Leadership Personal Attributes

Figure 1: The Reflective Model of Personal Attributes of Multicultural Leadership shows that all hypotheses can be accepted,
namely that personal attributes are explained through the dimensions of Cognitive Ability, Traits, and Values. Specifically, the
hypothesis test can be seen in the following explanation:

1. The dimension of cognitive ability is significant at the coefficient of 0.881 explaining personal attributes of 0.776.
2. Trais dimension is significant at the coefficient of 0.837 explaining personal attributes of 0.701
3. Dimensions The significant value of the coefficient of 0.967 explains the personal attributes of 0.936.

At the aspect level, each dimension consists of several significant aspects, namely:

1. Dimensions of Cognitive Ability consist of two aspects, namely:

a. The intelligence aspect is significant at 0.862 and the contribution value is 0.742.
b. The creative aspect is significant at the coefficient of 0.942 and the contribution value is 0.887.
2. The Traits dimension consists of three aspects, namely:
a. Significant character aspect at 0.600 coefficient and the contribution value is 0.360;
b. Aspects of assertiveness are significant at the coefficient of 0.954 and the contribution value is 0.910; and
c. Passion aspect is significant at 0.565 and the contribution value is 0.319
3. The Value Dimension consists of 4 aspects, namely,
a. The discipline aspect is significant at 0.865 and the contribution value is 0.748
b. The Spirituality aspect is significant at 0.904 and the contribution value is 0.818
c. Sincerity aspect is significant at 0.887 and the contribution value is 0.787
d. The Aspect of Holding the Principles is significant at 0.820 and the contribution value is 0.673

Discussion
Based on the previous description, it can be concluded from the results of this study that the personal
attribute model of leadership that is effective for dealing with horizontal conflicts in multicultural society in
Indonesia has been tested for construct validity. The attribute dimension found to be the most dominant is
the value (0.936) with the highest score on the spirituality aspect (0.818). This is from previous research, it
was found that in ethno-religious conflicts, a leader must have a high level of religious understanding,
however, this understanding must be spiritual rather than doctrinal, so that the leader will be able to
criticize the religious fanaticism that arises. Next is the trait dimension (0.701) with the highest score on
the aspect of assertiveness (0.910). A multicultural leader who is effective in dealing with horizontal
conflicts must have firmness, especially firmness in enforcing regulations so that the leader will be
considered fair by different groups. In this study, it was found that the lowest dimension was cognitive
ability (0.776) with the highest score on the aspect of creativity (0.887). This shows that indeed an effective

6
leader is not always required to be a person who has a very high level of intelligence. It is enough for a
leader who has an average level of intelligence in his group, but the leader is still required to have
creativity in solving the various multicultural problems he faces. Finally, this multicultural leadership model
also has a good level of conformity with the Goodness of Fit (GOF) index of 0.099.

REFERENCE

Andrich, D. (1988). Rasch Models for Measurement. Newbury Park, CA: Sage Publications Inc.
Badan Pusat Statistik Kota Bandung (2017). Sosial dan Kependudukan. Diunduh pada tanggal 30
Desember 2017, dari https://bandungkota.bps.go.id/
Badan Pusat Statistik Kota Bekasi (2017). Sosial dan Kependudukan. Diunduh pada tanggal 30
Desember 2017, dari https://bekasikota.bps.go.id/
Badan Pusat Statistik Kota Jakarta Utara (2017). Sosial dan Kependudukan. Diunduh pada tanggal
30 Desember 2017, dari https://jakutkota.bps.go.id/
Bennis, W.G. (1989). On becoming a leader. Cambridge, MA :Perseus Books.
Bishop, P. (1999, September 23). Caution is the byword for Australian peacekeepers. The Daily
Telegraph, hal.17.
Bond, T.G. & Fox, C.M. (2007). Applying the Rasch Model: Fundamental Measurement in the
Human Sciences, 2nd Ed. Mahwah NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Assoc.
Brown, T.A. (2006). Confirmatory Factor Analysis for Applied Research. New York: The Guilford
Press.
Chan, K. J., Soh S, Ramaya R. (2011). Military leadership in the 21st century. Singapore: Cengage
Learning Asia.
Crocker, L.M. & Algina, J. (2008). Introduction to classical and modern test theory. Mason, Ohio :
Cengage Learning.
Cronbach, L. J., & Meehl, P. E. (1955).Construct validity in psychological tests, Psychological
Bulletin, 52, 281–302
Department of Behavioral Sciences and Leadership (1976). Leadership in Organizations. West
Point, NY: United States Military Academy.
Di Giovanni, J. (1999, September 25). Gurkhas tread softly in tense city. The Times, hal.13.
Duffey, T. (2000). Cultural issues in contemporary peacekeeping. Dalam T. Woodhouse & O.
Ramsbotham (Ed). Peacekeeping and conflict resolution. (hal. 142-168). London: Frank
Cass.
Duryea, M.L. (1992). Conflict and Culture: A Literature Review and Bibliography. Victoria :
Institute for Dispute Resolution, University of Victoria.
Erzen, E. & Armagan, Y. (2015). The effect of leadership on conflict management. Dalam Engin
Karadak (Eds). Leadership and organizational outcomes: Meta-analysis of empirical studies
(hal. 225-237). Switzerland: Springer International Publishing.
Findlay, T. (2002). The use of force in UN peace operations. New York, NY: Oxford University
Press.
Fitton, R. (1993). Development of Strategic-Level Leaders. Fort Lesley McNair, Washington, D.C.:
The Industrial College of the Armed Forces, National Defense University.
Fry, D.P. & Björkqvist, K. (1997). Cultural Variation in Conflict Resolution: Alternatives to
Violence. Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates
Graveter, F. J. & Forzano, L.B. (2015). Research methods for the behavioral sciences. Singapore:
Cengage Learning.
Harrington, D. (2009). Confirmatory factor analysis. Oxford : Oxford University Press
Hidayat, E.R. (2005). A case study of the use of a competency framework in the Australian army
for performance management and development. Master of Human Resources Management
and Coaching Research Report. University of Sydney, Sydney, Australia.
7
Hidayat, E.R. & Tjahjono, A.E. (2014). Adaptive Leadership Doctrine for the Indonesian Army
Transformation. Dalam D. Lindsay & D. Woycheshin (Eds). Adaptive Leadership in the
Military Context: International Perspectives (hal. 157-170). Kingston, Ontario: Canadian
Defence Academy Press.
Hidayat, E.R., Sumertha I.G., & Astawa, N. (2017). Kepemimpinan yang efektif untuk masyarakat
multikultur di Indonesia. Sentul: Universitas Pertahanan.
Horner, M. (1997). Leadership theory : Past, present and future. Team Performance Management,
3(4), 270-287.
House, R., Javidan, M., Hanges, P. & Dorfman, P. (2002). Understanding cultures and implicit
leadership theories across the globe: an introduction to project GLOBE. Journal of World
Business, 37, 3-10.
Hwang, K.K. (1998). Renqing and face: The Chinese power game. Dalam K.K. Hwang (Ed). The
Chinese power game (hal. 7-56). Taipei: Juliu.
Jöreskog, K.G. (2000). Latent Variable Scores and their Uses. Scientific Software International,
http://www.ssicentral.com/lisrel
Judge, T. A., Bono, J. E., Ilies, R., & Gerhardt, M. W. (2002). Personality and leadership: a
qualitative and quantitative review. Journal of Applied Psychology, Vol. 87, 765-780.
Kim, J. & Mueller, C.W. (1978). Factor Analysis: Statistical Methods and Practical Issues.
London: Sage Publications.
Linacre, J.M. (2012). A user's guide to WINSTEPS MINISTEP Rasch-model computer programs.
Chicago: Winsteps.com
Loehlin, John C. (2004). Latent Variable Model: An Introduction to Factor, Path, and Structural
Equation Analysis. Fourth Edition. New York: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
Lund, M.S. (1996). Preventing violent conflicts. Washington, DC : USIP Press.
Marsiela, A. (2016). Pemkot Bandung: Persyaratan Lengkap, IMB Gereja Rehoboth Berea Keluar.
Diunduh pada 10 November 2017 dari http://www.beritasatu.com/ nasional/354347-pemkot-
bandung-persyaratan-lengkap-imb-gereja-rehoboth-berea-keluar.html
Mumford, M. D., Marks, M. A., Connelly, M. S., Zaccaro, S. T., & Reiter-Palmon, R. (2000).
Development of leadership skills: experience and timing. Leadership Quarterly, 11(1), 87-
114.
Oakes, P. (2001). The root of all evil in intergroup relations? Unearthing the categorization process.
Dalam Rupert Brown & Sam Gaertner (Eds), Blackwell handbook of social psychology:
Intergroup processes (hal. 3-21). Malden, MA: Blackwell.
Ostini, R. & Nering, M.L. (2006). Polytomous item response theory models. Series of quantitative
applications in the social sciences. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publications.
Pedersen, P.B. (2001). The cultural context of peacemaking. Dalam Daniel J. Christie, Richard V.
Wagner, & Deborah A. Winter (Eds.), Peace, conflict, and violence: Peace psychology for
the 21st century (hal. 183-192). Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice-Hall.
Reise, S.P. & Waller, N.G. (1990). Fitting the two-parameter model to personality data. Journal
Applied Psychological Measurement, 14(1), 45-58.
Royce, J. R. (1958). The development of factor analysis. Journal of General Psychology, 58, 139-
164
Rubinstein, R.A., Keller, D.M. & Scherger, M.E. (2008). Culture and interoperability in integrated
missions. International Peacekeeping, 15(4), 540-555.
Rudi, A. (2017). Keteguhan Wali Kota Bekasi Pertahankan Gereja Santa Clara. Diunduh pada
tangal 18 November 2017 dari http://megapolitan.kompas.com/
read/2017/03/25/08254701/keteguhan.wali.kota.bekasi.pertahankan.gereja.santa.clara
Seiler, S. (2007). Determining factors of intercultural leadership: A theoretical framework. Dalam
C.M. Coops & T.S. Tresch (Eds). Cultural challenges in military operations (hal. 217-233).
Rome: NATO Defense College.

8
Soeters, J. L., Poponete, C., Page Jr., J.T. (2006). Culture's consequences in the military. Dalam
T.W. Britt, A.B. Adler & C.A. Castro (Eds). Military life: The psychology of serving in peace
and combat, Vol. 4 Military Culture (hal. 13-34). Wesport, CT: Praeger.
Suryohadiprojo, S. (1996). Kepemimpinan ABRI dalam sejarah dan perjuangannya. Jakarta:
Intermasa.
Tennant, A., McKenna, S.P. & Hagell, P. (2004). Application of Rasch analysis in the development
and application of quality of life instruments. Value in Health, 7(Supp, 1), S22-S26.
Waller, N.G., & Reise, S.P. (1989). Computerized adaptive personality assessment: An illustration
with the Absorption Scale. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 57, 1051–1058.
Wulandari, C.R. (2016). Ini 10 Pernyataan Ridwan Kamil Soal Pembubaran KKR Natal 2016 di
Sabuga, Pikiran Rakyat, 7 Desember, 2016.
Zaccaro, S. J., Dubrow, S., & Kolze, M. (2018). Leader traits and attributes. Dalam J. Antonakis, &
D. V. Day (Eds), The nature of leadership 3rd editions (29-55). Thousand Oaks, CA, US:
Sage Publications, Inc.
Zaccaro, S. J., Kemp C., & Bader, P. (2004). Leader traits and attributes. Dalam J. Antonakis, A. T.
Cianciolo, & R. J. Sternberg (Eds). The nature of Ledership (101-124). Thousand Oaks, CA,
US: Sage Publications, Inc.