The current issue and full text archive of this journal is available on Emerald Insight at:

https://www.emerald.com/insight/1741-0401.htm

Factors affecting job satisfaction Indonesian

sharia property
and employee performance: a case companies

study in an Indonesian sharia

property companies
Istiqomah Nur Latifah Received 19 May 2021
Revised 18 January 2022
Postgraduated Program, Faculty of Industrial Engineering, Telkom University, 28 April 2022
Bandung, Indonesia, and 28 October 2022
Accepted 6 February 2023
Agus Achmad Suhendra and Ilma Mufidah
Telkom University Faculty of Industrial Engineering, Bandung, Indonesia

Abstract
Purpose – This study aimed to discover the factors affecting employee performance by testing the
relationship of change management, job satisfaction, organizational commitment and leadership style on
employee performance in Indonesian sharia property companies.
Design/methodology/approach – The study population was all members of “Sharia Property Developer”
(DPS) across Indonesia with criteria of having subordinates at least one person and is listed as a DPS member.
The samples used were 71 people from the 200 members of DPS across Indonesia. The sampling method used
was based on R2 value and significance level with an 80% statistical strength. Data analysis was carried out
using smartPLS software to test the relationship of change management, job satisfaction, organizational
commitment and leadership style on employee performance.
Findings – The utilization of SEM in Smart PLS for change management with the ADKAR method had a
negative value of 6.2% in affecting employee performance and 4.6% in affecting job satisfaction. Job
satisfaction insignificantly affected employee performance by 7.5%. Leadership style and organizational
commitment positively affected performance by 57.9% and 25.6%, respectively.
Research limitations/implications – This study did not limit respondents’ education levels. Twenty
percent of respondents were middle and high school graduates. Respondent’s position was mostly the highest
leader in the company by 58%. Indicators in the ADKAR model did not implement the construct validity test
since the researchers did not find precedent studies that discuss the indicators of the ADKAR model in detail.
Practical implications – Factors that positively and significantly affected employee performance can be
used to plan employee performance of DPS member companies.
Social implications – The company must create a program to produce meaning in working, shape leaders to
have discipline by putting appropriate employees as leaders.
Originality/value – This study used change management, organizational commitment, job satisfaction and
leadership style as exogenous variables, job satisfaction and leadership style as intervening variables. The study
model modified the previous study regarding employee performance improvement because it utilized the change
management with the ADKAR model. The study objects were sharia property companies, where the researchers
did not find previous studies discussing employee performance in sharia property companies.
Keywords Performance, Job satisfaction, Change management, Leadership,
Property an facilities management, Employees
Paper type Research paper

1. Background
Sharia Property Developer, abbreviated as DPS, is the community of property business
actors using the sharia scheme, located at Bogor, West Java. Muhammad Rosyid established
it in 2015 initiated by conducting training regarding sharia property. Each training International Journal of
participant was equipped with documents and process guidelines to build a sharia property Productivity and Performance
Management
business. Participants who have attended the sharia property training at DPS are commonly © Emerald Publishing Limited
1741-0401
known as DPS members. DPS members consist of two types, i.e. active and inactive members. DOI 10.1108/IJPPM-03-2021-0132
IJPPM Active members are those who still run sharia property projects until 2020. Inactive members
are those who do not have sharia property projects in 2020. The total DPS members until 2019
were 1,300, distributed all across Indonesia. DPS continues to evaluate its members,
particularly the number of active members incorporated from 2015 to 2020. The evaluation
result shows that the number of active members remains the same, observed from the
percentage that falls between 20% and 27% from the total members, i.e. 200 active members.
The active member percentage is one of the considerations to make decisions concerning
strategies to improve DPS projects in the future.
One of the DPS strategies to improve the number of active members is determining the
target to build one million house units by 2030. Furthermore, this target is determined from
observing the opportunity of increasing residential needs based on the prediction of
productive age growth in Indonesia until 2030 (Hackett et al., 2015, p. 74). The success of
achieving the target requires active members. Moore active members lead to a higher
possibility of achieving the DPS target. The success of achieving such a target depends on the
strong will of DPS members. The absence of strong commitment can be caused by DPS
members’ internal conditions that do not maximize employee performance (Mroueh and de
Waal, 2017).
Achieving employee performance of DPS member companies is performed through four
methods, i.e. finance, customers, internal process, and learning and growth. One of the factors
in improving employee performance through learning and growth is increasing the number
of DPS active members. The increased number of DPS active members may boost property
association performance, leading to the achievement of the DPS target (Eringa et al., 2008).
An association that considers the increased number of members continues to grow within
competition (Lam, 2009). However, within five years, the number of DPS active members has
not increased, obstructing the association’s growth (Mroueh and de Waal, 2017). DPS should
manage it by increasing the number of DPS active members by managing the human
resource management of DPS members. It is crucial to improve the association’s financial
feasibility and influences the continuity of association projects (Eringa et al., 2008). Human
resource management is a vital factor that plays a role in DPS growth, with employee
performance as the outcome (Meijerink et al., 2020). Improving employee performance of DPS
members can contribute to improving the company quality and achieving DPS target
(Eliyana et al., 2019).
In discovering the employee performance of DPS members, the researchers collected
employee performance data from active members. The data collection results are presented in
Table 1, showing result differences in target plan and achievement. Member companies that
fail to achieve the target were affected by the low employee performance because employee
performance plays a role in achieving company goals (Koopmans et al., 2014).
Based on the results of interviews (Table 2) in companies with employees in the process of
improving performance, it was found that 24% of employees conveyed the need for a change
in leadership style, 24% wanted a change in salary structure, increased employee competence
by 15%, the need for employee development strategies by 15%, reward importance by 10%
and availability of the SOP system by 5%. The interview results can be categorized into,

Activity Target (%) Realization (%)

Table 1. Finish one unit construction in 3 months 95 20

Target and realization Customer complaints 10 50
data of the DPS Employee punctual attendance 85 30
member Source(s): Author’s own creation
i.e. the need for change (Sparr, 2018), leadership style improvement (Riansari et al., 2016; Indonesian
Javidan et al., 2006), job satisfaction improvement (Pawirosumarto et al., 2017; Alrawahi et al., sharia property
2020) and increased commitment to the company (Hidayat, 2014).
Based on the company’s internal data, customer candidates who have submitted personal
companies
data to the agent up to the down payment (DP) process ranged between 0% and 11%, while
those who have paid the booking fee ranged between 11% and 48%. There was a difference
between the number of buyers paying the DP and booking with the company’s target, i.e.
booking payment of 75% and DP of 30%. These differences between the target and
realization were caused by ineffective leadership style, low organizational commitment, low
job satisfaction, and the absence of change management on the individual level based on
interview results with employees. DPS should encourage member companies to improve
employee performance to generate a high-quality company (Mroueh and de Waal, 2017). The
stagnant number of active members is a problem in achieving the target. The increased
number of active members relates to employee performance in DPS member companies
(Mroueh and de Waal, 2017; Xiang et al., 2018). Until recently, DPS is struggling to increase
the number of active members and selecting the target of building one million housing units
until 2025. Up to 2019, DPS had built 250 projects compared to the last five years, where it
built 50 projects annually. From 2021 to 2025, the target is to build one million units by
building 200,000 units annually. Starting from 2021, DPS targets to improve the speed in
building houses compared to 2015–2020. If the number of active members remains stagnant,
it will pose a problem for DPS to achieve its target. The current study is crucial to determine
which factors affect the improvement of DPS members’ employee performance to achieve
DPS goals (Xiang et al., 2018). Performance improvement was measured through change
management, job satisfaction, organizational commitment and leadership style as the
mediator. Moreover, the study also aimed to discover the appropriate mediator variable to
improve employee performance.

2. Literature review
The theoretical foundation of the study followed the expectancy theory (Vroom, 1964). The
expectancy theory is initially used in the working motivation aspect, such as motivation
training, turnover, work productivity loss, goal achieving commitment and determining goal
levels (Van Eerde and Thierry, 1996). Meanwhile, organizational behavior in the Vroom
(1964) theory is used to conduct innovations in developing a theory. According to Vroom
(1964), employee performance is created from the combination of performance, motivation
and ability. Porter and Lawler (1968) in Heneman and Schwab (1972) defined employee
performance as the combination of interactions between effort, motivation, ability and role
perceptions. Heneman and Schwab (1972) combined these two expectancy theories, stating
that employee performance is the combination of force or effort, ability and role perceptions.

Interview results
Category Result (%)

Reward importance 10
Salary increment 24
Leadership change 24
Competency development 15
The company’s system and SOP 5 Table 2.
Employee development strategy 22 Result of employee
Source(s): Author’s own creation interview
IJPPM Heneman and Schwab (1972) explain that valence and instrumentality, valence from a
performance level, force and ability have the same definition and differences from both
explanations concerning performance (Vroom, 1964; Porter and Lawler, 1968), in the role
perceptions as the inclusion to improve performance. Three keys in the expectancy theory are
the force of effort, ability and role perceptions in encouraging performance.
Force of effort is the combination of valence at each performance level and perception of
opportunities in achieving performance. Ability is one’s capability, including strength,
abilities and ability to complete the job, which is long-term individual characteristics. Role
perceptions create individual belief in executing similar efforts or activities by taking
directions from superiors to conduct activities to achieve success at their job. Evaluation of
each behavior from superior directions must be periodically executed since it can affect
individual perception in generating performance. This condition relates to how a superior
understand role perceptions regarding the job.
In this study, the authors employed constructs of change management, job satisfaction,
organization commitment and leadership styles. According to Mayfied and Mayfield (2010),
change management and culture are parts of organizational changes, including in the
foundation of traditional management literature and components of Motivation Language.
Vroom (1964) argued that motivation is an input to affect individual performance. Change
management is categorized as the force of effort because the awareness of performing
changes will support individuals to conduct improvement to achieve the predetermined
goals. Job satisfaction and organizational commitment can be categorized as ability, i.e. the
combination of individual characteristics and potential. Leadership style acts as the role of
perceptions, which can support subordinate behaviors and beliefs in achieving success at
their job.

2.1 Change management

Change is not fixed and can be made according to expectations that occur or come without
being planned. Change management is a structured approach applied in organizations to
achieve long-term results (Grimolizzi-Jensen, 2018). The smallest change in the scope of the
individual sector and the largest scope is the organization/company’s aim to continuously
improve the organizational direction, structure and adaptability to meet external and internal
customers’ needs (Almanei et al., 2018). The important focus of change management is to
provide change on an individual or team scale, from current conditions to the future (Tang,
2019). Emphasizes change at the individual level and builds leadership in the organization at
all levels, including executive positions, senior leaders, managers, supervisors and staff
(Sparr, 2018). The individual change will contribute to the management performance process,
with the competence and readiness of individuals/employees that will lead to positive
collaboration within the company (Karambelkar and Bhattacharya, 2017). Changes are not
permanent things that can happen as expected, without adaptation, or come suddenly. It is a
way of life of the present that can be controlled according to organizational conditions (Kiani
and Shah, 2014).
There are two program types in change management, i.e. systematic organization-wide
range change initiative and specific internal change management or change control program.
Systematic organization-wide change initiative involves transformation efforts of the whole
organization, while specific internal change management or change control program is an
instrument and process to control operational or project changes occurring daily (Tang,
2019). These change management programs have different goals and priorities. It is in line
with organizational success. The change management program requires a leader to help
subordinates succeed, showing where and when the problems might happen and determining
the strategy to reduce risks and monitor developments (Rigby, 2017). Change management
requires a leader that focuses on results, overcoming restrictions in the transformation Indonesian
process, communicating simple and strong messages repeatedly to subordinates, and sharia property
monitoring advances.
The change management model developed by Jeff Hiatt in 2003 focuses on the individual
companies
level with tools known as ADKAR, which stands for Awareness, Desire, Knowledge, Ability
and Reinforcement. The model approach by Kotter with eight steps in change management is
carried out at the organizational level so that it can achieve high performance (Marchant,
1998). A company may reach 100 years of age because it continues to make changes (Krantz
and Swartz, 2011) so that it can survive and adapt to changes in the internal and external
environment (Price, 1997).
The change model with ADKAR is carried out by a team that focuses on achieving a
specific business outcome. According to Tang, ADKAR is a tool initially designed to
determine whether the changes in communication and training provide expected outcomes
during the organizational change. The drawback of this model is the absence of a leadership
role and program to provide clarity in determining the change direction (Kiani and Shah,
2014). Employees must have a strong reason why the changes must be performed. It is the
priority to foster awareness. Desire is different from motivation, but motivation is a
component creating desire. A manager must deliver opportunities and support toward
employees to anticipate their fear over uncertainties. Knowledge is the step to build trust
through knowledge regarding product, the process in online training form, mentoring,
training, coaching and school. Ability is the step to build capacity by implementing
knowledge and showing the ability to take over and be responsible for work tasks.
Reinforcement is the final step that focuses on building sustainable changes where employees
are responsible for their job. The activity to reinforce this matter is administering awards in
private or public. The ADKAR model of change management is applicable to make changes
at the organizational level requiring projects or program management to solve technical
problems concerning the human aspect. The ADKAR model can be applied to achieve the
success of one person or 20 people or 1,000 people or the whole organization (Karambel and
Bhattacharya, 2017).
The change model suggested by Lewin has three steps, i.e. unfreezing, changing and
refreezing, analogous to ice cubes. The unfreezing step focuses on preparing the organization
to accept changes by delivering messages of why the current condition cannot be continued
and requires changes, preparing the stakeholders and preparing the transformation plan
(Almanei et al., 2018; Tang, 2019). The success of the unfreezing step indicates the readiness
to enter the change step, where employees are willing to find new methods to finish their jobs,
start to trust the change, move following the new directions and perform the transformation
plan in the previous step. Change is the hardest step since there is rejection against
completing the change. When changes from the lower to the upper level have been accepted,
the organization is ready to enter the refreezing step, i.e. internalizing and maintaining the
change is to be applied continuously by creating standardizations and norms in new
procedures and practices, and others.
According to Vora (2013), there are three foundations in performing change management,
i.e. a directing leader, project management to maintain changes in the technical aspect and
people to be implemented. Change management, according to Kotter (1995), has eight
changed steps in the leadership aspect consisting of establishing a sense of urgency, creating
the guiding coalition, developing a vision and strategy, communicating the change vision,
empowering employees for broad-based action, generating short-term wins, consolidating
gains and produce more change, and anchoring new approaches in the culture. These steps
aim to produce sustainable change management to achieve business excellence (Vora, 2013).
The change model, according to Kotter, focuses on the leader-level change process
impacting bigger and more extensive changes in employees and building robust teamwork.
IJPPM The ADKAR and Lewin models focus on the individual-level change process, emphasizing a
smaller project size/limit to affect changes in employees on a smaller scale by improving
individual abilities (Almanei et al., 2018). Generating strong motivation at the individual level
is closely related to the ability to generate awareness and have a strong desire to change, such
as in the change management concept with the ADKAR method. Each organization
suggested pay attention to change management at the individual level with a strong positive
or negative influence on individual performance (Heneman and Schwab, 1972).
By using six dimensions and ten indicators in the change management box, it was
discovered that change management had a positive influence on employee performance
(Sinaga et al., 2018). According to Al-Jaradat et al. (2013), management changes in terms of
organizational structure, technology, and individuals affected and improved employee
performance. Change management is used to create a framework for the principal’s
compensation in improving performance (Kiani and Shah, 2014). Only 16 factors were used
from 24 factors in ADKAR (Kiani and Shah, 2014) after the exploratory factor analysis (EFA)
was carried out. The choice of factors used in the study based on the largest mean value of
each dimension (Kiani and Shah, 2014).

2.2 Organizational commitment

Organizational commitment is the individual attachment level to the organization with
characteristics of loyalty to the organization, the ability to do business on behalf of the
organization and the suitability of goals with the organization (Williams and Hazer, 1986).
Employees who commit to the company are better at getting work done, increase
productivity and are willing to achieve their targets (Renyut et al., 2017). A strong
commitment fulfills three things, namely having a strong belief in accepting organizational
goals and values; a strong desire to use business on behalf of the organization; and a strong
desire to continue as part of the organization (Mowday and Steers, 1979; Price, 1997). There
are three organizational commitment components, i.e. affective commitment, continuance
commitment and normative commitment (Meyer and Allen, 1997). Commitment consists of
three factors, i.e. a strong belief in accepting organizational goals and values; a strong desire
to use great effort on behalf of the organization; and a strong desire to remain a member of the
organization (Mowday and Steers, 1979; Price, 1997).

2.3 Job satisfaction

Job satisfaction is a combination of attitudes during work, feelings about work and
experiences that affect performance. Job satisfaction is very important for employees in the
service industry because employees who are satisfied with their work can provide good
quality service to customers to achieve customer satisfaction (George and Zakkariya, 2018,
p. 88). Each individual has a different level of work decision. This depends on the value held.
Higher job satisfaction is proportional to the desire to feel more satisfied with work activities
(Renyut et al., 2017). Employees who are satisfied with work will give the best performance at
work (Robbins et al., 2009). Individual attitudes toward work result in the perception of
conformity between individuals and organizations; this can be achieved by giving employees
the freedom to have more opportunities for work and decision making (George and
Zakkariya, 2018, p. 89).
There are five job satisfaction dimensions, i.e. work, supervision, wage, promotion and
coworker (Pawirosumarto et al., 2017). Several types of approaches used to measure job
satisfaction are the Minnesota Satisfaction Questionnaire (MSQ) (Weiss et al., 1967), Job
Satisfaction Survey (Spector, 1985) and the descriptive index. MSQ uses three types of
satisfaction measurement dimensions: intrinsic, extrinsic and general (Weiss et al., 1967).
This dimension can be changed according to the needs and conditions of the research object
(Martins and Proença, 2014) by adjusting the question items based on the validity Indonesian
test results. sharia property
Job satisfaction with indicators of job, oriented, target, settlement, allowances and rewards
positively affected employee performance (Eliyana et al., 2019). The effect of job satisfaction
companies
with the dimensions of work, supervision, wage, promotion and coworker showed that it did
not have a direct or indirect effect (Pawirosumarto et al., 2017). Comparing job satisfaction
between part-time and full-time employees shows that part-time employees had a higher level
of job satisfaction than full-time employees because part-time employees have more time to
do activities in the community and those closest to them (Al and Anil, 2016). Work
compensation had a direct positive effect on employee performance (Riansari et al., 2016). In
the government sector, it was found that job satisfaction affected performance (Renyut et al.,
2017), while employees who accepted boss-pubbing could reduce job satisfaction, so that
impacted performance (Roberts and David, 2020).

2.4 Leadership style

Leading is the art of clearly communicating the vision and empowering employees toward
company goals (Maamari and Saheb, 2018). Leadership style is defined as the leader’s
conceptual ability, dexterity, judgment, innovation, interpersonal sensitivity and knowledge
that include practical and technical knowledge of cultural and geographical awareness
(Igbaekemen, 2015). Leadership is the ability of an executive to direct, guide and influence
others’ behavior and work to achieve certain goals in certain situations (Iqbal et al., 2015).
Leadership style is the style of a leader when giving instructions, executing plans and
motivating the team (Tang, 2019). The leadership style that is considered negatively by
subordinates will affect company performance (Howell et al., 2007), create conflicts (Zhang
et al., 2011) caused by errors in providing information between superiors and subordinates
(Restubog et al., 2008) in Yang and Li (2017).
There are different leadership styles, as conveyed by Antonakis et al., (2003) with three
leadership styles and Tang (2019) with 14 leadership styles. Transformational, transactional
and passive are three types of leadership styles used in the Multifactor Leadership
Questionnaire (MLQ) (Antonakis et al., 2003). Political, business and other organizational
environments (Tang, 2019) are divided into 14 leadership styles: trait, authoritarian,
managerial, paternalistic, democratic, laissez-faire, transactional, transformational,
participatory, distributional, moral, emotional, postmodern and contingent. According to
Maamari and Saheb (2018), leadership style is divided into three, i.e. motivation
(transformational and transactional), path-goal and charismatic. The transformational
leadership style is to lead by influencing subordinates with conditions of trust, doubt, loyalty
and respect for the leader. Transactional emphasizes exchanges or transactions from
superiors to subordinates or between colleagues. Meanwhile, path-goal is defined as the
ability to lead by motivating employees in every condition by providing all the employees the
need to achieve company goals. From Iqbal et al. (2015), there are four leadership styles, i.e.
autocratic, traits, democratic/passive and participative.
A leadership style suitable to the company characteristics will promote individual roles in
providing inspirational motivation. Therefore, employees are encouraged to produce the best
performance. Moreover, leadership style is a penultimate factor than other factors in
improving employee performance to achieve effective and efficient working habits
(Pawirosumarto et al., 2017; Sinaga et al., 2018). Furthermore, a leadership style with the
ability to take the initiative and communicate and motivate subordinates significantly affects
employee performance (Mayfield and Mayfield, 2010). Effectively running an organization
requires managerial abilities that support employee behaviors to follow the company culture
to influence goal achievement in the organization. Managerial abilities of a leader, such as
IJPPM enforcing the rules, providing assistance, support, and direction to subordinates, and being
able to place oneself in various social environments, are affected by the leader’s leadership
style (Mulki et al., 2015).

2.5 Employee performance

Performance is a person’s success in completing work (Gupta and Sharma, 2016), which
forms a person’s ability to complete the company’s work and tasks. An attitude consistent
with the organizational goals (Koopmans et al., 2014) and everything about work and its
accomplishments (Eliyana et al., 2019) is another definition of performance. Companies that
will maximize productivity, reduce turnover and increase employee retention need to improve
employee performance (Maamari and Saheb, 2018). Employee performance is an important
component in the organization because it is related to organizational commitment; employees
who have high commitment will impact the organization’s success and development as a
whole (Kinoti, 2015). Employees who have satisfaction at work will be willing to provide good
service so that they exceed customer expectations and increase customer satisfaction with
the company (Kinoti, 2015).
There are eight performance indicators: quantity of work, quality of work, knowledge of
work, creativity, cooperation, trustworthiness, initiative and personal qualities (Riansari
et al., 2016), while Sinaga et al. (2018) provide 11 performance indicators. The approach used
to measure performance can use six dimensions of work quality, labor quality, time
efficiency, work effectiveness, supervision needs and self-influence (Pawirosumarto et al.,
2017) or four dimensions of task performance, contextual performance, adaptive performance
and counterproductive work behavior (Koopmans et al., 2012). A study conducted in 2014
discarded several question items for three types of workers so that the dimensions in
measuring performance were reduced to three, i.e. task performance, contextual performance
and counterproductive work behavior (Koopmans et al., 2014).

2.6 Structural equation modeling (SEM)

SEM is a statistical analysis tool for social science research, both exploratory and
confirmatory. In SEM, there are latent variables or constructs with stretching interval and
ratio scales that can be processed by the SEM method. This study used SEM Partial Least
Square (PLS-SEM), which begins with creating a path model consisting of an inner model (the
relationship between constructs) and an outer model (the relationship between constructs and
indicators). In general, the direction of the arrow in the path from left to right with the left as
the independent variable and the right as the dependent variable, indicating that the variable
on the left will be processed first, then the variable on the right. Determining the SEM sample
size used a multiple of 10 based on the number of arrow directions to the construct by
considering the significant level value and the R2 value. There are four main SEM processing
steps: specifying the path model, estimating the path model, evaluating measurement models
and evaluating the structural model (Hair et al., 2019).
The study type is explanatory since it developed an existing theory applied to different
objects. Moreover, the number of active members at DPS ranges from 50 to 150 in the study
samples. The population size under 200 is included in the small category (Israel, 1992;
Ingenhoff and Buhman, 2015). The software utilized to run data within a small study sample
size in implementing the SEM-PLS method is SmartPLS (Mayfield and Mayfield, 2010). The
SmartPLS software was selected for various reasons: the software is recommended in the
SEM-PLS book by Hair et al. (2014), and the data form should not always have to be
distributed normally. Therefore, SmartPLS is applicable (Hair et al., 2019). The study method
tested had two intervening variables. Hence, the study model became complex since the study
uses 5 constructs and 40 indicators (Akter et al., 2017). SmartPLS supports a complex study
model and provides testing analysis results that are easy to read and comprehend (Shahzad Indonesian
et al., 2018), powered by a simple and easily understood user–interface graph (Hair et al., sharia property
2014). This study would predict the constructed model by running tests on the study model. It
is mentioned in Hassanpour et al. (2021) that such a study using the SmartPLS software.
companies

2.7 Conceptual framework and research hypothesis

2.7.1 Relationship between change management and employee performance. Previous studies
conducted demonstrated that change management (various aspect) had a direct and positive
effect on employee performance Allen and McCarthy (2015), Yonnedi (2010), Sinaga et al.
(2018) and Budhiraja (2021). Schraub et al. (2011) stating that change management (extent of
change) has a negative indirect effect on adaptive performance. Kiani and Shah (2014) used
change management with the ADKAR method to arrange competencies of headmaster
change management. ADKAR in the wood processing industry is used to create edit values
adjusted from the Chain of Custody Certification (Gilani et al., 2017). Limited literature
acquired by the authors concerning the relationship between change management and
employee performance with the ADKAR method underlined the interest of the authors in
using change management with the ADKAR method as a study variable. Based on this
background, the authors generated hypotheses as follows:
H1. Change management positively and significantly affect the employee performance of
members in DPS (Sharia Property Developer) all across Indonesia.

2.8 Relationship between organizational commitment and employee performance

A study conducted on employees in the government sector showed that organizational
commitment correlated with improved employee performance (Renyut et al., 2017). The same
results were found on a moderate level in the Indonesian state-owned enterprise (BUMN)
sector, where organizational commitment affected employee performance (Eliyana et al.,
2019; Hendri, 2019) and acted as mediation to employee performance (Hendri, 2019). It utilized
three-question dimensions in organizational commitment (Koopmans et al., 2014). Employee’s
high commitment will encourage a high level of job satisfaction (Liu and Werblow, 2019)
because satisfied employees will boost their performance (Eliyana et al., 2019). Coaching
events for managers can improve organizational commitment that significantly affects
employee performance (Kalkavan and Katrinli, 2014). Based on this explanation, the authors
followed hypotheses as follows:
H2. Organizational commitment positively and significantly affects the employee
performance of member in DPS (Sharia Property Developer) member all across
Indonesia.

2.9 Relationship between job satisfaction and employee performance

A study by Roberts and David (2020) revealed that job satisfaction significantly affected
performance, where job satisfaction was directly affected by trust in superiors. According to
Sembiring et al. (2020), job satisfaction positively affected performance, where job satisfaction
was strongly affected by salary, career path opportunities and conducive work
environments. Using the Minnesota satisfaction questionnaire (1967), job satisfaction had
a negative effect on performance (Shahzad et al., 2018). In concluding all studies mentioned
above, we followed hypotheses as follows:
H3. Job satisfaction positively and significantly affects the employee performance of
member in DPS (Sharia Property Developer) member all across Indonesia.
IJPPM 2.10 Relationship between leadership style and employee performance
The leadership style had a positive influence on employee performance (Iqbal et al., 2015;
Nawoseing’ollan and Roussel, 2017; Pawirosumarto et al., 2017; Sinaga et al., 2018, Kia et al.,
2019; Buil et al., 2019), while the study results of Eliyana et al. (2019) suggested that leadership
style did not affect employee performance. There are two approaches in measuring
leadership style, i.e. the Leader-Member Exchange Theory (LMX) and the Multifactor
Leadership Questionnaire (MLQ). MLQ (Antonakis et al., 2003) used to measure three types of
leadership styles, namely transformational. Transactional and laissez-faire with a total of 21
indicators. LMX is used to measure the level of interaction between leaders and subordinates.
According to Robbins et al. (2009, pp. 373–374) in Pawirosumarto et al. (2017), there are three
dimensions in measuring the leadership style: leader–member relations, task structure and
position power. Based on this explanation, the authors followed hypotheses as follows:
H4. Leadership style positively and significantly affects the employees performance of
members in DPS (Sharia Property Developer) all across Indonesia.

2.11 Relationship between change management and job satisfaction

Mikkelsen and Olsen (2018) showed that change management, especially at the leader level,
had a positive effect on the job satisfaction of hospital employees. A study in a pharmacy
school discovered that change management positively affected job satisfaction in the faculty
(Cone and Unni, 2020). Based on this background, the authors generated hypotheses as
follows:
H5. Change management positively and significantly affect the job satisfaction of
employee members in DPS (Sharia Property Developer) all across Indonesia.

2.12 Relationship between organizational commitment and job satisfaction

Dhurup et al. (2016) discovered that organizational commitment in developing countries had a
positive effect on job satisfaction with the biggest contribution on normative commitment, i.e.
a sense of responsibility from employees to stay in the organization because they understand
that the organization has performed many invest-people activities. Job satisfaction of SME
employees was affected by organization commitment due to the association role that
promotes commitments, and thus, organizational success is easier to achieve (Soomro and
Shah, 2019). Yiing et al. (2009) revealed that organizational commitment negatively affected
the job satisfaction of students and researchers working part-time. Precedent studies
discovered that organizational commitment positively affected job satisfaction among
employees of service providers and public sector enterprises (Tuzun, 2009; Saha and Kumar,
2018). In concluding all studies mentioned above, we followed hypotheses as follows:
H6. Organizational commitment positively and significantly affects the job satisfaction
of employee members in DPS (Sharia Property Developer) member all across
Indonesia.

2.13 Relationship between leadership style and job satisfaction

A study by Mwesigwa et al. (2020) revealed that leadership styles positively affected job
satisfaction by providing freedom to make decisions and opportunities to join training,
counseling and career development. Alonderiene and Majauskaite (2016) demonstrated that
leadership styles positively affected job satisfaction intrinsically or extrinsically. Leadership
styles with task structure and supervision dimensions positively affected employee job
satisfaction (Pawirosumarto et al., 2017). Other studies revealed that different leadership
styles provided a positive effect on job satisfaction (Torlak and Kuzey, 2019; Jang et al., 2022). Indonesian
Based on this explanation, the authors followed hypotheses as follows: sharia property
H7. Leadership style positively and significantly affects the job satisfaction of employee companies
members in DPS (Sharia Property Developer) all across Indonesia.
The theoretical framework model based on expectancy theory and previous study mentioned
above described in Figure 1. Conceptual framework follows Hendri (2019) except
organizational learning and change management by Rieley and Clarkson (2010).

3. Research methodology
3.1 Sample and data collection
This study required primary data acquired by distributing questionnaires to DPS
administrators and members with a minimum of one subordinate. The study analysis unit
was employees with a minimum of 1 subordinate, using a cross-sectional survey of employees
at a minimum of supervisor-level positions.
The study population was 200 DPS members. The sampling standard of arrow numbers to
construct, significance level values and R2 values of minimum 0.25 generated a minimum
sample number of 65 with statistical strength of 80% (Hair et al., 2019, p. 21). The respondent
requirement is employees in DPS members with a minimum subordinate number of one person.
The study data were analyzed using SmartPLS 3.3 software. Previously, a validity test was

Figure 1.
Framework model
IJPPM performed using the product-moment correlation (Hendri, 2019). The instrument is valid if
r value > 0.23, and all indicators were valid because r calculation values were over 0.23.
Data were collected by gathering DPS administrators and members and calling them
individually to be study samples voluntarily. The questionnaires were distributed through
online media using Google Form. The number of business activities was not limited, and the
joining period with DPS was not limited. The respondents were distributed at 26 DPW from
Sumatra to Sulawesi. The questionnaires were distributed to 196 respondents, and 72
respondents returned the questionnaires. After examination, one data was eliminated
because it did not have subordinates; hence, it did not match the expected respondent criteria.
Based on the original data from 71 respondents, 16 had positions at DPS and 55 had no
positions at DPS. Based on the positions, respondents had various positions from Section
Head (21%), Civil Engineering (1%), Project Assistant (4%), Leader (4%), Manager (11%),
CEO (6%), Director (24%) and Business Owner (28%). The number of respondents with one
subordinate was 5.6% of the total respondent, where 94.37% of respondents had more than
one subordinate.

3.2 Measurement
This study was a quantitative type because it aimed to examine the independent, dependent
and mediating variables and the relationship between variables based on certain theories.
The quantitative study variables describe an individual’s characteristics or attributes or an
organization that can be measured or observed, desired, knowledge, ability and
reinforcement (Hiatt, 2006). Six indicator items were used to measure each dimension,
choosing a factor from each dimension based on the highest mean value (Kiani and Shah,
2014). Organizational commitment is used in three dimensions, i.e. affective commitment,
continuance commitment and normative commitment (Meyer and Allen, 1997).
The leadership style consists of three dimensions, i.e. idealized influence, inspirational
motivation and contingent reward, which are taken from the Multifactor Leadership
Questionnaire (Avolio and Bass, 1999; Antonakis et al., 2003) as well as two dimensions of
position power and task structure (Pawirosumarto et al., 2017). Job satisfaction using items in
the Minnesota Satisfaction Questionnaire (Martins and Proença, 2014) with two dimensions,
namely task energy and leader and empowerment, item selection based on the factor loading
value with a value between 0.73 and 0.90, the other three dimensions are taken from
(Pawirosumarto et al., 2017) based on strong correlation values. Employee performance used
three dimensions (Koopmans et al., 2014), and the four dimensions are taken from
(Pawirosumarto et al., 2017).
The researchers employed 40 indicators noted in appendix, comprising six change
management indicators, five organization commitment indicators, eight job satisfaction
indicators, ten leadership style indicators and 11 performance indicators. The selection of
various indicator sources was based on the study object conditions. The survey was
performed using 5 Likert scales with answer choices of 1 5 strongly disagree, 2 5 disagree,
3 5 somewhat agree, 4 5 agree and 5 5 strongly agree.
The validity test used the convergent and discriminant validity in SEM, convergent
validity using the outer loading value in discriminant validity used the AVE square root
value of the latent variable correlation. AVE’s square root value must be greater than the
construct correlation value that has the largest value. The reliability test used Cronbach’s
alpha value to estimate the observed variable indicators’ reliability of internal correlations.
There is a disadvantage in using Cronbach’s alpha, which is sensitive to the number of items
on the measurement scale and tends to underestimate internal consistency reliability. In
overcoming this disadvantage, the outer loading of variable indicators was used (Hair et al.,
2019, pp. 167–185).
4. Results and discussion Indonesian
Respondent data were then statistically analyzed using PLS-SEM with SmartPLS 3.3 sharia property
software, initiated by drawing the path diagram and evaluating outer and inner models.
Drawing the path diagram was based on the conceptual model. The outer model evaluation
companies
was carried out using reflective indicators based on path coefficient values of 0.7, between 0.4
and 0.7 if the AVE value is over 0.5, and composite reliability is over 0.6. The end results after
eliminating unsuitable indicators show that the outer model fulfills reliability and validity
requirements (Tables 3 and 4). Fornell–Larcker construct value results were higher than
other construct relationships with VIF value > 1. Hypotheses were tested with the
bootstrapping process (Figure 2) with 5,000 samples. A hypothesis with p-value < 0.05 is
accepted, and vice versa.
Based on hypothesis testing in Table 5 using PL-SEM, acquired the following results:

4.1 The effect of change management on employee performance

Change management negatively and insignificantly affected performance. Based on the t-
statistic value of 0.609 and the difference of 0.05 from the t table limit (1.29), the influencing
value was 0.062. The results contrast the studies by Yonnedi (2010), Sinaga et al. (2018) and
Budhiraja (2021) stating that change management (change organization, change efficacy and
positive change) was significant for employee performance. The results show that change
management is insignificant for performance; however, the negative value emerged since the
DPS change management process was not systematic. The lowest loading value was 0.545,
and the highest was 0.857, indicating that questionnaire statements are categorized into the
agreed category. The average questionnaire result value of 3.769 was categorized into the
agreed category. This condition demonstrates that most employees agree upon the change
management statements. The analysis result reveals that employees perceived that change
management does not affect performance.
Change management negatively affects because since the vision, mission and values
have not been established in DPS. Therefore, it does affect negatively performance.
Bhatnagar et al. (2010) and Medina (2020) suggest that improvements in organizational
structure, technology and individual performance can be affected. This study has a
negative relationship since the organizational structure has not performed the
improvement process, and the job description is unclear. Thus, there are overlapping
limits of authority. There are changes to support the performance target achievement from
the marketing and finance departments from the technology aspect. Besides these
departments, technology utilization to monitor performance has not been implemented.
Hence, employee achievement cannot be monitored and documented well. Employees have
a low awareness level to change, while the need to change forces the company to grow to
achieve the company target (Sinha et al., 2021). Employees stand not to consider catching
the problems and weaknesses of the company that threaten business growth. Also,
a psychological obstacle such as fear to deliver suggestions pushes employees not to
make changes. A study by Sinaga et al. (2018) revealed that a company performed change
management by shaping employees following the vision, mission and value. Meanwhile,
such things have not been maximally implemented in DPS members, and the
implementation evaluation has not been carried out.
Change in improving knowledge and ability is conducted by regularly providing training
to improve employee skills and evaluating training’s effect on performance. The training may
involve internal or external parties. Organizational changes must be regularly evaluated to
provide positive and sustainable effects (Doolen et al., 2008) to monitor future changes in
performing measured and structured changes. Thus, it can deliver a positive effect on
employee performance.
 Table 3.
IJPPM

and validity test

The result of reliability
Variable Indicator Outer loading Indicator reliability Cronbach’s alpha Composite reliability AVE Discriminant validity Conclusion

CM CM2b 0.857 0.735 0.724 0.826 0.55 Yes Reliable and Valid
CM3 0.722 0.522
CM4 0.545 0.298
CM5 0.804 0.647
EP EP4 0.642 0.413 0.772 0.847 0.528 Yes
EP5 0.67 0.449
EP9 0.667 0.445
EP10 0.844 0.713
EP11 0.79 0.625
JS JS2 0.619 0.384 0.806 0.86 0.554 Yes Reliable and Valid
JS3 0.675 0.456
JS5 0.826 0.683
JS6 0.767 0.589
JS7 0.814 0.663
LS LS1 0.702 0.493 0.886 0.91 0.558 Yes Reliable and Valid
LS2 0.753 0.568
LS3 0.81 0.657
LS4 0.73 0.533
LS5 0.82 0.673
LS6 0.751 0.565
LS7 0.734 0.539
LS10 0.665 0.443
OC OC1 0.803 0.645 0.694 0.811 0.524 Yes Reliable and Valid
OC2 0.623 0.389
OC3 0.579 0.336
OC5 0.854 0.73
Source(s): Author’s own creation
4.2 The effect of organizational commitment on employee performance Indonesian
Organizational commitment from four indicators generated a positive and significant effect sharia property
on employee performance. The result directly influenced performance by 0.256. Testing with
a 5% significance level obtained a t-statistic value of 2.783 and p 5 0.003 < 0.05. This is in line
companies
with studies of Hendri (2019), Soomro and Shah (2019), Renyut et al. (2017) and Al and Anil
(2016) that organizational commitment positively and significantly affected performance.
The highest loading value was 0.854 in the statement of loyalty is crucial. The lowest value
was 0.579 in the statement of the heavy feeling of leaving the organization. This condition
demonstrates that most employees agreed with organizational commitment statements.
Employees also perceived that organizational commitment should be improved since it

Fornell–Larcker
CM EP JS LS OC

CM 0.742
EP 0.218 0.727
JS 0.198 0.459 0.745
LS 0.248 0.722 0.471 0.747 Table 4.
OC 0.473 0.541 0.481 0.479 0.724 Fornell–Larcker
Source(s): The data result using SmartPLS criterion

Figure 2.
Results of
bootstrapping process
IJPPM Direct effect
Hypothesis Independent Dependent Coefficient SE p-value t statistic

H1 CM EP 0.062 0.101 0.271* 0.609

H2 OC EP 0.256 0.092 0.003* 2.783
H3 JS EP 0.075 0.108 0.244* 0.694
H4 LS EP 0.579 0.107 <0.000* 5.419
H5 CM JS 0.046 0.174 0.395* 0.267
H6 OC JS 0.353 0.13 0.003* 2.713
H7 LS JS 0.314 0.157 0.023* 1.992
Table 5. Note(s): * p < 0.05
Hypothesis testing Source(s): Author’s own creation

affects performance. DPS member management should consider company strategies that will
improve organizational commitment.
This study supports the theory coined by Williams and Hazer (1986) that employees
conduct activities following the company objective. Strong individual engagement and
performing activities under the company’s name show that employees are committed to the
company. Employees have a moral responsibility to stay in various company conditions
following a theory delivered by Meyer and Allen because the company is meaningful to the
employees. This condition is generated since the company creates spiritual habits, leading
employees to have extensive goals in working and acquiring insights in life. The study result
supports Hendri (2019) statement that people with high commitment are loyal and positively
view the company. The commitment is displayed by the willingness to exert all efforts to
achieve company success. The study result contrasts Renyut et al. since employees working
as civil servants (PNS) have good commitment, although insignificant in achieving
performance.
The variable reflecting organization commitment is affective commitment and normative
commitment. The most affecting indicator is the creation of an emotional bond with the
company in loyalty to push moral responsibility to stay in the company. This condition is
enhanced by the sense of family built by superiors, and thus, employees are comfortable
working. Employees treated like family if they have a high responsibility toward work will
give their best performance. Conversely, if employees do not know responsibility, they will
neglect their duties and become a burden on the company. The company continues to incur
fixed costs, but the employees are not responsible for their work. In anticipating such a
condition, a leader with the courage to terminate/punish employees is necessary.

4.3 The effect of job satisfaction on employee performance

Job satisfaction measured through five indicators positively and insignificantly affected
performance. The test results with a 5% significance level had a t-statistic value of 0.694 < t
table and p 5 0.244 > 0.05. The study results contrast the studies by Renyut et al. (2017),
Hendri (2019) and Ye et al. (2019). A study by Pawirosumarto et al. (2017) discovered that job
satisfaction positively and insignificantly affected employee performance. The highest other
loading value was 0.826 in the statement of “My superior has the competence and expertise to
make an appropriate decision,” indicating that this statement has a high contribution in
explaining organizational commitment. The lowest loading of 0.619 was generated in the
statement of “I am satisfied under the surveillance/supervision by my superior,” indicating
that this statement has the lowest contribution to explain organizational commitment. The
relationship between organizational commitment and performance was mediated by job
satisfaction. The average value of questionnaire results was 3.769, categorized into the Indonesian
agreed category, and organizational commitment had the lowest value than other sharia property
independent variables. The study results demonstrate that job satisfaction was enough to
improve performance, and therefore, the management does not require strategic
companies
improvement.
The study result is not in line with a precedent study since the employees are part-timers.
Therefore, they have the opportunity to build a work–life balance (Dogan and Ali, 2016).
Meanwhile, in DPS, the employees are full-timers, thus allocating their time for work, where
they still work on Sunday, following the shift system, with a day-off on Friday. Most of their
family time is on weekends. Besides working time, the civil servant (PNS) status emerges
satisfaction due to acquiring a job in the governmental environment that is well-known for
providing prosperity in the financial aspect (Renyut et al., 2017). In comparison, DPS is a
private company, where prosperity depends on the company’s achievement. Having the
integrity to work independently without supervision boosts the best work result, producing
satisfaction and meaning in achieving the company target (Hendri, 2019). Meanwhile,
integrity is absent in DPS members, proven by not all employees exerting their best to
achieve the company target. Employees do not have the initiative to find the problem and
solution in their job, perceiving satisfaction with the current achievement. The study result
shows that the superior role, such as supervising, controlling and making decisions support a
study by Pawirosumarto et al. (2017). The most affecting factor toward job satisfaction is
clear career path and skills that the company has not facilitated.

4.4 The effect of leadership style on employee performance

Leadership style positively and significantly affected employee performance. Test results
with a 5% significance level acquired a path coefficient value of 0.579, t statistic of 5.419 > t
table, and p 5 0.000 < 0.05. Leadership style had the highest path coefficient value from all
exogenous variables and had a total effect of 0.579 on performance. The study results
reinforce predecessor studies suggesting that leadership style positively and significantly
affected performance (Nawoseing’ollan and Roussel, 2017; Pawirosumarto et al., 2017; Sinaga
et al., 2018; Buil et al., 2019; Eliyana et al., 2019). The influence from leadership style is major,
and hence, the management should consider strategies to improve leadership quality by
creating a leadership style that matches the company’s characters. Leadership style was the
only variable that did not undergo indicator elimination during data processing. The highest
loading value was 0.820, indicating that leaders are to build excellent communication with
employees about do and don’t in the company. Meanwhile, the lowest loading value of 0.665
indicates that leaders need to request a structured report on the work of employees about
their job. The average value of the questionnaire by 4.094 was categorized into the agreed
category, explaining that most employees agreed with leadership style statements.
The leadership style indicators that affect performance are building discipline, being able
to delegate tasks (Pawirosumarto et al., 2017), providing explanations regarding rewards,
encouraging employees to find meaning in work and providing clear direction about the job.
Training attended by DPS members held by DPS transforms the leadership style to follow the
business style in Sharia property. Every morning and afternoon, the superiors held a routine
briefing to control and evaluate each employee’s work plan and achievement. Thus,
employees have a clear direction in working. A leader who inspires/motivates and is sincere
toward employees (Eliyana et al., 2019) by avoiding conflicts comforts employees. Hence,
employees have high loyalty and are reluctant to leave the company. A leader always
motivates subordinates to achieve the target by providing directions or helping them to feel
valued and put in their best effort to achieve the company target. This statement follows a
study by Sinaga et al. (2018). A leader affects subordinates through religious value
IJPPM comprehension, but subordinates desire to achieve the job target. It is in line with Buil et al.
(2019). Leaders in DPS members have high religious value comprehension since DPS often
holds training on such a matter so that leaders can facilitate subordinates to find meaning in
work. As a result, employees are willing to achieve the predetermined goal (Steger and
Dik, 2010).

4.5 The effect change management on job satisfaction

Change management had a negative and insignificant effect on job satisfaction. Test results
based on a 5% significance level acquired a path coefficient value of 0.046, with t statistic of
0.267 < t table and p 5 0.395 > 0.05. The results of this study show that employees perceived
that change management affect job satisfaction and in line the study by Mikkelsen and Olsen
(2018) and Cone and Unni (2020). The company provides training and motivation to improve
skills at work. In addition, any suggestions for improvement from employees are responded
positively by superiors. Positive improvements that are in line with the company are
supported to be implemented. This makes employees feel satisfied with their work, the
changes that occur are in accordance with the expectations and suggestions of employees.

4.6 The effect of organizational commitment on job satisfaction

Organizational commitment positively and significantly affected job satisfaction. Test
results based on a 5% significance level obtained a path coefficient value of 0.353, t statistic of
2.713 > t table and p 5 0.003 < 0.05. The study results explain that employees with
organizational commitment will improve job satisfaction. It is in line with previous studies by
Renyut et al. (2017), Saha and Kumar (2018), Soomro and Shah (2019), Garcia-Rodriguez et al.
(2020) and Dhurup et al. (2016).
Commitment is built by having an emotional bond with the company, finding meaning at
working, and trusting that loyalty is vital. These are the components to produce job
satisfaction, following a study by Saha and Kumar (2018). Implementation in building loyalty
through affective commitment can encourage employees, such as improving emotional bond
and finding meanings in working to be the biggest factor in creating organization
commitment. This study supports precedent findings that affective commitment positively
and significantly affects job satisfaction (Dhurup et al., 2016).

4.7 The effect of leadership style on job satisfaction

Leadership style positively and significantly affected job satisfaction. Test results based on a
5% significance level obtained a path coefficient value of 0.314, t statistic of 1.992 > t table,
and p 5 0.023 < 0.05. This condition shows that leadership style had a pivotal role in
improving employee job satisfaction with a 0.317 increment of each leadership style value
unit. A precedent study demonstrated a negative and significant effect of task-oriented
leadership style on job satisfaction (Huynh and Hua, 2020). Other studies discovered that
leadership style had a positive and insignificant effect on job satisfaction (Paracha et al.,
2018). The study results are in line with Alonderiene and Majauskaite (2016), Torlak and
Kuzey (2019) and Jang et al. (2022) stating that different varieties of leadership styles
positively and significantly affected job satisfaction.
The study result contrasts Huynh and Hua (2020), asserting that a leader that orients
toward the job forces subordinates to finish the job following the superior way. Therefore,
leaders do not support subordinates nor consider individual conditions. Also, a leader
without knowledge of economic change misunderstands the problem source, makes a wrong
solution and triggers new problems. The leader does not take suggestions from subordinates,
leading employees unsatisfied. This study discovered that leaders must not force
subordinates to follow their way; however, a leader that focuses on providing support and is Indonesian
willing to listen to subordinate suggestions provide a positive and significant effect on job sharia property
satisfaction. The study result aligns with Paracha et al. (2018), stating that a leader providing
support and motivation affects job satisfaction.
companies

4.8 Implications
This study contributes to science, particularly in the performance management aspect,
including human resource management, to encourage employees to positively achieve company
success. This study proved the relationship between change management, organizational
commitment, job satisfaction, leadership style and employee performance of DPS members.
Change management must be structured, measured and directed to affect performance
positively. Leadership style has the biggest role in affecting employee performance, and
organizational commitment ranks second to affect employee performance. There are only
limited studies using change management in affecting employee performance. It is suggested to
conduct more studies on employee performance using change management.
The practical implication of this study for the Sharia property business and developing the
employee performance concept must consider positive and significant affecting factors, i.e.
leadership style and organizational commitment. Leadership style and organizational
commitment are implemented in creating a Key Performance Indicator (KPI). Activity plan
and achievement target for indicators in both factors must be made. KPI can be made using the
12-step balanced scorecard method following Roberts and David (2020). The balanced scorecard
method is selected to improve performance by 94% or maintain stable performance (Harvey
and Sotardi, 2018). Companies must consider a leadership style suitable with selected indicators
since leadership style suitability can be a mediator to improve employee performance.
Improving organization commitment can be performed by creating loyalty and emotional bond
of employees to improve performance. The arranged KPI must be regularly evaluated weekly or
monthly to administer appropriate and directed suggestions toward employees.
The social implication is that the company must create a program to produce meaning in
working, shape leaders to have discipline by putting appropriate employees as leaders. Most
essential, leaders should ask employees to give a structured report on their activities, job or
target to evaluate and provide positive feedback. The employee selection can use various job
placement instruments to fulfill the “right man in the right place: principle to achieve the
company target.” It can be carried out by providing regular training to have a suitable
leadership style to foster discipline, delegate tasks, communicate effectively and evaluate
subordinates periodically. Leadership style positively affects employee performance
compared to job satisfaction that does not affect performance. It builds comprehension
regarding the vision and mission of the company, accommodates employee aspiration and
explains the positive aspects provided by the company. Also, it creates positive emotions
from words and feelings by improving meaning that positively affects the company, creating
loyalty. Employees must generate initiatives to improve by building the habit to think about
the risks of the absence of improvements, immediately finishing the job and finding the
solutions to various problems through communication with superiors.
Employees must observe how non-property companies treat their employees since not all
employees make policies concerning the spiritual condition of employees. When leaders have
no firmness in making decisions, employees can support by carrying out all decisions. It can
reduce the concerns of the superiors in handling the decision risks. Comparing the salary/
reward/incentive given to the workload will encourage awareness to be grateful to the
company because the take-home salary is relatively larger than the workload received.
Employees need to build awareness of the importance of attending the office according to
regulations without waiting for a reprimand for violating company regulations; this
IJPPM condition will help the company focus more on achieving targets and forming teamwork.
Employees who are exhausted because they bear the workload of others will have a bad
impact on performance achievement (Roberts and David, 2020). Meanwhile, superiors who do
not dare to build discipline should collaborate or synergize with internal or external parties
who will help make regulations, norms and culture in building discipline in the company.

5. Conclusion
Based on study results and the discussion, leadership style and organizational commitment
positively and significantly affected performance. Leadership style had the biggest influence
on the performance of DPS members and mediated organization commitment and
performance. Leadership style with LS5 code had the biggest influence to shape leadership
style. Organizational commitment with OC3a code had the biggest influence to shape
organizational commitment in DPS members. Improving employee performance can facilitate
the company to achieve the determined goals (Koopmans et al., 2014), maximize productivity
and reduce employee turnover, i.e. the company’s main goals after achieving employee
performance (Mowday and Steers, 1979; Maamari and Saheb, 2018). This study considered
novel factors affecting employee performance so that the company should consider the
associated factors to improve customer satisfaction and company performance (Garcia-
Rodr
ıguez et al., 2020). The relationship between factors affecting performance positively and
significantly will be the suggestions for the management to plan employee performance.
Negative and significant factors should be the paramount consideration for the management
to improve the strategy in change management implementation of DPS members.

6. Suggestions
The researchers’ suggestion for future studies is to utilize the organizational commitment
variable as a performance mediator. It is also recommended to use other variables such as
building discipline in the workplace, training assignment delegation, loyalty, building an
emotional relationship in the model formulation process, and determining the respondent’s
education level to have a good perception in answering the questionnaire. Furthermore, it is
essential to develop the change management variable indicators with the ADKAR model that
has been subjected to the construct validity test to obtain accurate results. Another
suggestion is to use the same variable as in this study for various other studies and study
objects. It is expected for future studies to contribute to the human resource management
performance aspect that is beneficial for practitioners, academics and the public.

7. Study limitations
The study was conducted following the study design plan and was performed maximally.
However, several limitations remained present in this study, i.e. 58% of total respondents
were the highest leader in their companies, and 20% of the respondents were middle and high
school graduates. Moreover, the change management variable indicators with the ADKAR
model were not subjected to construct validity before usage because the researchers could not
find precedent studies discussing ADKAR model indicators in detail. Precedent studies
regarding the ADKAR model only delivered dimensions without discussing the indicators.

References
Akter, S., Fosso Wamba, S. and Dewan, S. (2017), “Why PLS-SEM is suitable for complex modelling?
An empirical illustration in big data analytics quality”, Production Planning and Control The
Management of Operations, Vol. 28 Nos 11-12, pp. 1011-1021, doi: 10.1080/09537287.2016.
1267411.
Al, A.D. and Anil, I. (2016), “The comparison of the individual performance levels between full-time Indonesian
and part-time employees: the role of job satisfaction”, 12th International Strategic Management
Conference ISMC 2016, Antalya Turkey, Elsevier, London, 28-30 October 2016, pp. 382-391, sharia property
doi: 10.1016/j.sbspro.2016.11.048. companies
Al-Jaradat, O., Nagresh, M., Shegran, A. and Jadellah, Nl. (2013), “Impact of change management on
the performance of employees in university libraries in Jordan”, European Journal of Business
and Management, Vol. 5 No. 2, pp. 169-179.
Allen, M.S. and McCarthy, P.J. (2015), “Be happy in your work: the role of positive psychology in
working with change and performance”, Journal of Change Management, Vol. 7017, pp. 1-20,
doi: 10.1080/14697017.2015.1128471.
Almanei, M., Salonitis, K. and Tsinopoulos, C. (2018), “A conceptual lean implementation framework
based on change management theory”, 51st CIRP Conference on Manufacturing Systems,
Elsevier B.V, Amsterdam, pp. 1160-1165, doi: 10.1016/j.procir.2018.03.141.
Alonderiene, R. and Majauskaite, M. (2016), “Leadership style and job satisfaction in higher
education institutions”, International Journal of Educational Management, Vol. 30 No. 1,
pp. 140-164, doi: 10.1108/IJEM-08-2014-0106.
Alrawahi, S., Sellgren, S.F., Altouby, S. and Alwahaibi, N. (2020), “The application of Herzberg’s two-
factor theory of motivation to job satisfaction in clinical laboratories in Omani hospitals”,
Heliyon, Vol. 6 No. 9, pp. 1-9, doi: 10.1016/j.heliyon.2020.e04829.
Antonakis, J., Avolio, B.J. and Sivasubramaniam, N. (2003), “Context and leadership: an examination
of the nine-factor full-range leadership theory using the Multifactor Leadership Questionnaire”,
Leadership Quarterly, Vol. 14 No. 3, pp. 261-295, doi: 10.1016/S1048-9843(03)00030-4.
Avolio, B.J. and Bass, B.M. (1999), “Re-examining the components of transformational and
transactional leadership using the Multifactor Leadership Questionnaire”, Journal of
Occupational and Organizational Psychology, Vol. 72, pp. 441-462.
Bhatnagar, J., Budhwar, P., Srivastava, P. and Saini, D.S. (2010), “Organizational change and
development in India A case of strategic of organizational change transformation”, Journal of
Organizational Change Management, Vol. 23, pp. 485-499.
Budhiraja, S. (2021), “Can continuous learning amplify employees’ change-efficacy and contextual
performance? Evidence from post-merger Indian organization”, International Journal of
Manpower, Vol. 42, pp. 114-1158.
Buil, I., Martinez, E. and Matute, J. (2019), “Transformational leadership and employee performance :
the role of identification, engagement and proactive personality”, International Journal of
Hospitality Management, Vol. 77, pp. 64-75, doi: 10.1016/j.ijhm.2018.06.014.
Cone, C. and Unni, E. (2020), “Achieving consensus using a modified Delphi Technique embedded in Lewin’s
change management model designed to improve faculty satisfaction in a pharmacy school”, Research
in Social and Administrative Pharmacy, Vol. 16 No. 12, pp. 1-7, doi: 10.1016/j.sapharm.2020.02.007.
Dhurup, M., Sueujlal, J. and Kabongo, D.M. (2016), “Finding synergic relationship in teamwork,
organizational commitment and job satisfaction: a case study of a construction organization in
developing country”, 7th International Economics and Business Management Conference,
Malaysia, 5th and 6th October 2015, pp. 485-492, Procedia Economics and Finance, University
Tenaga Nasional, doi: 10.1016/S2212-5671(16)00060-5.
Doolen, T.L., Aken, E.M., Farris, J.A., Worley, J.M. and Huwe, J. (2008), “Kaizen events and
organizational performance: a field study”, International Journal of Productivity and
Performance Management, Vol. 57 No. 8, pp. 637-658, doi: 10.1108/17410400810916062.
Eliyana, A., Ma’arif, S. and Muzakki (2019), “Job satisfaction and organizational commitment effect in the
transformational leadership towards employee performance”, European Research on Management
and Business Economics, Vol. 25 No. 3, pp. 144-150, doi: 10.1016/j.iedeen.2019.05.001.
Eringa, K., Spring, F., Anda, F., Memmot, P., Long, S. and West, M. (2008), “Scoping the capacity of
indigenous community housing organisations”, AHURI Final Report, Vol. 125, pp. i-159.
IJPPM Garc
ıa-Rodr
ıguez, F.J., Dorta-Afonso, D. and Gonz
alez-de-la-Rosa, M. (2020), “Hospitality diversity
management and job satisfaction: the mediating role of organizational commitment across
individual differences”, International Journal of Hospitality Management, Vol. 91, 102698, doi:
10.1016/j.ijhm.2020.102698.
George, E. and Zakkariya, K.A. (2018), Psychological Empowerment and Job Satisfaction in the Banking
Sector in Psychological Empowerment and Job Satisfaction in the Banking Sector, Palgrave Pivot,
Cham, doi: 10.1007/978-3-319-94259-9.
Gilani, H.R., Kozak, R.A. and Innes, J.L. (2017), “A change management model for the adoption of
chain of custody certification in the British Columbia value-added wood products sector”,
Journal of Change Management, Vol. 18 No. 3, pp. 240-256.
Grimolizzi-Jensen, C.J. (2018), “Organizational change: effect of motivational interviewing on readiness
to change”, Journal of Change Management, Vol. 18 No. 1, pp. 54-69, doi: 10.1080/14697017.2017.
1349162.
Gupta, N. and Sharma, V. (2016), “Exploring employee engagement—a way to better business
performance”, Global Business Review, Vol. 17, pp. 45S-63S, doi: 10.1177/0972150916631082.
Hackett, C., Cooperman, A. and Ritchey, K. (2015), “The future of world religions : population growth
projections”, available at: https://assets.pewresearch.org/wpcontent/uploads/sites/11/2015/03/
PF_15.04.02_ProjectionsFullReport.pdf (accessed 15 September 2020).
Hair, J.F., Hult, G.T.M. and Sarstedt, M. (2014), A Primer on Partial Least Squares Structural
Equation Modeling, SAGE, Thousand Oaks, CA.
Hair, J.F., Risher, J.J., Sarstedt, M. and Ringle, C.M. (2019), “When to use and how to report the
results of PLS-SEM”, European Business Review, Vol. 31 No. 1, pp. 2-24, doi: 10.1108/EBR-11-
2018-9203.
Harvey, H.B. and Sotardi, S.T. (2018), “Key performance indicators and the balanced scorecard”,
Journal of the American College of Radiology, Vol. 15 No. 7, pp. 1-2, doi: 10.1016/j.jacr.2018.
04.006.
Hassanpour, N., Barzoki, A.S., Javadi, M.H.M. and Safari, A. (2021), “Designing employee performance
evaluation model in Isfahan municipality: an interorganizational experience”, International
Journal of Productivity and Performance Management, Vol. 71 No. 6, pp. 1741-0401, doi: 10.1108/
IJPPM-08-2020-0411.
Hendri, M.I. (2019), “The mediation effect of job satisfaction and organizational commitment on the
organizational learning effect of the employee performance”, International Journal of
Productivity and Performance Management, Vol. 68 No. 7, pp. 1208-1234, doi: 10.1108/IJPPM-
05-2018-0174.
Heneman, H.G. and Schwab, D.P. (1972), “Evolution of research on expectancy theory predictions of
employee performance”, Psychological Bulletin, The American Psychological Association, Vol. 78
No. 1, pp. 1-9.
Hiatt, J.M. (2006), “The Essence of ADKAR: a model for individual change management”, available at:
http://www.yashada.org/yash/ttt_new/static_pgs/TC/The-Essence-of-ADKAR.pdf%0Awww.
change-management.com
Hidayat (2014), “Faktor-Faktor Komitmen Organisasi Serta Pengaruhnya Terhadap organizational
citizenship behavior (OCB) (studi pada Karyawan PT . Nusa Tama Furniture)”, Journal NeO-
Bis, Vol. 8 No. 1, pp. 1-14, doi: 10.21107/nbs.v8i1.513.g481.
Howell, J.P., Cerda, J.D., Martı
nez, S.M., Prieto, L., Bautista, J.A., OrtizDorfman, J.P. and Me
ndez, M.J.
(2007), “Leadership and culture in Mexico”, Journal of World Business, Vol. 42 No. 4,
pp. 449-462, doi: 10.1016/j.jwb.2007.06.006.
Huynh, T.N. and Hua, N.T.A. (2020), “The relationship between task-oriented leadership style,
psychological capital, job satisfaction and organizational commitment: evidence from
Vietnamese small and medium-sized enterprises”, Journal of Advances in Management
Research, Vol. 17 No. 4, pp. 583-604, doi: 10.1108/JAMR-03-2020-0036.
Igbaekemen, G.O. (2015), “Impact of leadership style on organization performance: a strategic Indonesian
literature review”, Public Policy and Administration Research, Vol. 4 No. 9, pp. 126-135.
sharia property
Igenhoff, D. and Buhman, A. (2015), “Advancing PR measurement and evaluation: demonstrating the
properties and assessment of variance-based structural equation models using an example
companies
study on corporate reputation”, Public Relations Review, Vol. 42, pp. 418-431, doi: 10.1016/j.
pubrev.2015.11.010.
Iqbal, N., Anwar, S. and Haider, N. (2015), “Arabian journal of business and”, Arabian Journal of
Business and Management Review, Vol. 5 No. 5, pp. 1-6, doi: 10.4172/2223-5833.1000146.
Israel, G.D. (1992), Determining Sample Size, Fact Sheet PEOD-6, Florida Cooperative Extension
Service, University of Florida, Vol. 25, pp. 1-5.
Jang, S., Chung, Y. and Son, H. (2022), “Employee participation in performance measurement system:
focusing on job satisfaction and leadership”, International Journal of Productivity and
Performance Management, No. 1741-401, doi: 10.1108/IJPPM-08-2021-0448.
Javidan, M., House, R.J., Dorfman, P.W., Hanges, P.J. and De Luque, M.S. (2006), “Conceptualizing and
measuring cultures and their consequences: a comparative review of GLOBE’s and Hofstede’s
approaches”, Journal of International Business Studies, Vol. 37 No. 6, pp. 897-914, doi: 10.1057/
palgrave.jibs.8400234.
Kalkavan, S. and Katrinli, A. (2014), “The Effects of managerial coaching behaviors on the employees’
perception of job satisfaction, organisational commitment, and job performance: case study on
insurance industry in Turkey”, 10th International Strategic Management Conference, Istanbul
Aydin University, Turkey, Vol. 150, pp. 1137-1147, doi: 10.1016/j.sbspro.2014.09.129.
Karambelkar, M. and Bhattacharya, S. (2017), “Onboarding is a change: applying change management
model ADKAR to onboarding”, Human Resource Management International Digest, Vol. 25
No. 7, pp. 5-8, doi: 10.1108/HRMID-04-2017-0073.
Kia, N., Halvorsen, B. and Bartram, T. (2019), “Ethical leadership and employee in role performance.
The mediating roles of organisational identification, customer orientation, service climate, and
ethical climate”, Personnel Review, Vol. 48 No. 7, pp. 1716-1733.
Kiani, A. and Shah, M.H. (2014), “An Application of ADKAR change model for the change
management competencies of school heads in Pakistan”, Journal of Managerial Sciences, Vol. 8
No. 1, pp. 77-95.
Kinoti, D.K. (2015), Effects of Change Management on Employee Performance in Co-operative Bank of
Kenya Limited, University of Nairobi, Kenya, doi: 10.1039/C0LC00684J.
Koopmans, L., Bernaards, C., Hildebrandt, V., van Buuren, S., van der Beek, A.J. and de Vet, H.C.W.,
A.J. and de Vet, H.C.W. (2012), “Development of an individual work performance questionnaire”,
International Journal of Productivity and Performance Management, Vol. 62 No. 1, pp. 6-28, doi:
10.1108/17410401311285273.
Koopmans, L., Bernaards, C., Hildebrandt, V., van Buuren, S., van der Beek, A.J. and de Vet, H.C.W.
(2014), “Construct validity of the individual work performance questionnaire”, Journal of
Occupational and Environmental Medicine, Vol. 56 No. 3, pp. 331-337, doi: 10.1097/JOM.
0000000000000113.
Kotter, J.P. (1995), “Leading change : why transformation efforts fail”, Harvard Business Review, Vol. 6
No. 1, pp. 60-67, doi: 10.1016/0029-1021(73)90084-4.
Krantz, B.M. and Swartz, J. (2011), “IBM joins elite group of 100-year-old companies”, available at:
http://usatoday30.usatoday.com/money/companies/management/2011-06-15-ibm-corporate-
longevity_n.htm (accessed 17 September 2020).
Lam, T.Y.M. (2009), “International journal of housing markets and analysis housing associations a
total change management model for successful growth of housing associations”, International
Journal of Housing Markets and Analysis, Vol. 2 No. 3, pp. 262-275, doi: 10.1108/
17538270910977554.
IJPPM Liu, Y. and Werblow, J. (2019), “The operation of distributed leadership and the relationship with
organizational commitment and job satisfaction of principals and teachers: a multi-level model
and meta-analysis using the 2013 TALIS data”, International Journal of Educational Research,
Vol. 96 May, pp. 41-55, doi: 10.1016/j.ijer.2019.05.005.
Maamari, B.E. and Saheb, A. (2018), “How organizational culture and leadership style affect
employees’ performance of genders”, International Journal of Organizational Analysis, Vol. 26
No. 4, pp. 630-651, doi: 10.1108/IJOA-04-2017-1151.
Marchant, T. (1998), “Strategies for improving individual performance and job satisfaction at
Meadowvale health”, Journal of Management Practice, Vol. 2 No. 3, pp. 63-70.
Martins, H. and Proença, M.T. (2014), “Minnesota satisfaction questionnaire: psychometric properties
and validation in a population of Portuguese hospital workers”, working paper [471], Faculdade
de Engenheria da Universidade do Porto, University of Porto, Portugal, October 2021, doi: 10.
26537/iirh.v0i3.1825.
Mayfield, J. and Mayfield, M. (2010), “Leader-level influence on motivating language a two-level model
investigation on worker performance and job satisfaction”, International Business Journal,
Vol. 20 No. 5, pp. 407-422, doi: 10.1108/10595421011080788.
Medina, P.S.S. (2020), “Organizational capability for change and performance in artisanal businesses
in Mexico”, Journal of Organizational Change Management, Vol. 22 No. 2, pp. 415-431.
Meijerink, J.G., Beijer, S.E. and Bos-Nehles, A.C. (2020), “A meta-analysis of mediating mechanisms
between employee reports of human resource management and employee performance:
different pathways for descriptive and evaluative reports?”, International Journal of Human
Resource Management, Vol. 0 No. 0, pp. 1-49, doi: 10.1080/09585192.2020.1810737.
Meyer, J.P. and Allen, N.J. (1997), “Multiple commitments in the workplace”, in Meyer, J.P. and Allen,
N.J. (Eds), Commitment in the Workplace, Theory, Research and Application, Sage Publications,
Thousand Oaks, p. 151.
Mikkelsen, A. and Olsen, E. (2018), “The influence of change-oriented leadership on work performance
and job satisfaction in hospitals-the mediating roles of learning demands and job involvement”,
Leadership in Health Services, Vol. 32, pp. 37-53, doi: 10.1108/LHS-12-2016-0063.
Mowday, R. and Steers, R. (1979), “The measurement of organizational commitment”, Vocational
Behavior, Vol. 14 No. 1, pp. 224-247, doi: 10.1016/0041-008X(75)90174-X.
Mroueh, M. and de Waal, A. (2017), “Applicability of the HPO framework in non-profit organizations:
the case of the Emirates insurance association”, International Journal of Organizational
Analysis, Vol. 25 No. 3, pp. 468-484, doi: 10.1108/IJOA-12-2015-0958.
Mulki, J.P., Caemerer, B. and Heggde, G.S. (2015), “Leadership style, salesperson’s work effort and job
performance: the influence of power distance”, Journal of Personal Selling and Sales
Management, Vol. 35 No. 1, pp. 3-22.
Mwesigwa, R., Tusiime, I. and Ssekiziyu, B. (2020), “Leadership styles, job satisfaction and
organizational commitment among academic staff in public universities”, Journal of
Management Development, Vol. 39 No. 2, pp. 253-268.
Nawoseing’ollan, D. and Roussel, J. (2017), “Influence of leadership styles on employees performance: a
study of Turkana county, Kenya”, International Journal of Business and Social Science, Vol. 8
No. 7, pp. 82-98, available at: www.ijbssnet.com
Paracha, M.U., Qamar, A., Mirza, A., Hassan, I. and Waqas, H. (2018), “Impact of leadership style
(transformational and transactional leadership) on employee performance and mediating role of
job satisfaction study of private school (Educator) in Pakistan”, Global Journal of Management
and Business Research, Vol. 12 No. 4, pp. 55-64.
Pawirosumarto, S., Sarjana, P.K. and Gunawan, R. (2017), “The effect of work environment, leadership
style, and organizational culture towards job satisfaction and its implication towards employee
performance in Parador hotels and resorts, Indonesia”, International Journal of Law and
Management, Vol. 59 No. 6, pp. 1337-1358, doi: 10.1108/IJLMA-10-2016-0085.
Porter, L.W. and Lawler, E.E. (1986), “Managerial attitudes and performance, Homewood, IL, Irwin- Indonesian
Dorsey. Psychological empowerment on job performance: the mediating effects of
organizational citizenship behaviour”, International Journal of Hospitality Management, sharia property
Vol. 31, pp. 180-190. companies
Price, J.L. (1997), “Handbook of organizational measurement”, International Journal of Manpower,
Vol. 18 No. 4, pp. 305-558, doi: 10.1108/01437729710182260.
Renyut, B.C., Modding, H.B., Bima, J. and Sukmawati, St. (2017), “The effect of organizational
commitment, competence on job satisfaction and employees performance in Maluku Governor’s
Office”, IOSR Journal of Business and Management, Vol. 19 No. 11, pp. 18-29, doi: 10.31227/osf.
io/hnwdt.
Restubog, S.L.D., Hornsey, M.J., Bordia, P. and Esposo, S.R. (2008), “Effects of psychological contract
breach on organizational citizenship behaviour: insights from the group value model”, Journal
of Management Studies, Vol. 45 No. 8, pp. 1377-1400, doi: 10.1111/j.1467-6486.2008.00792.x.
Riansari, T., Sudiro, A. and Rofiaty (2016), “Pengaruh kompensasi dan lingkungan kerja terhadap
semangat kerja dan kinerja karyawan (studi kasus PT Bank Tabungan Pensiunan Nasional,
TbkCabang Malang)”, Vol. 66, pp. 811-820.
Rieley, J. and Clarkson, I. (2010), “The impact of change on performance”, Journal of Change
Management, Vol. 2 No. 2, pp. 160-172.
Rigby, D.K. (2017), Management Tools 20017 an Executive’s Guide, Bain & Company, available at:
http://www.bain.com/Images/Bain_Management_Tools_2011.pdf (26 September 2020).
Robbins, S.T., Judge, T.A. and Hasham, E.S. (2009), Organizational Behavior, (Arab World Edition),
Gibbons, F., Pearson Education, Edinburgh, available at: http://www.pearsonmiddleeastawe.
com/pdfs/OB-SAMPLE.pdf
Roberts, J.A. and David, M.E. (2020), “Bos phubbing, trust, job satisfaction and employee
performance”, Personality and Individual Differences, Vol. 155 No. 10, pp. 1-8, doi: 10.1016/j.
paid.2019.109702.
Saha, S. and Kumar, S.P. (2018), “Organizational culture as a moderator between affective
commitment and job satisfaction: empirical evidence from Indian public sector enterprises”,
International Journal of Public Sector Management, Vol. 31 No. 2, pp. 184-206, doi: 10.1108/
IJPSM-03-2017-0078.
Schraub, E.M., Stegmair, R. and Sonntag, K. (2011), “The effect of change on adaptive performance:
does expressive suppression moderate the indirect effect strain?”, Journal of Change
Management, Vol. 11 No. 1, pp. 21-44.
Sembiring, N., Nimran, U., Astuti, E.S. and Utami, H.N. (2020), “The effects of emotional intelligence
and organizational justice on job satisfaction, caring climate, and criminal investigation officers’
performance”, International Journal of Organizational Analysis, Vol. 28 No. 5, pp. 1113-1130.
Shahzad, K., Ali, T., Takala, J., Helo, P. and Zaefarian, G. (2018), “The varying roles of governance
mechanisms on ex-post transaction cost and relationship commitment in buyer-supplier
relationships”, Industrial Marketing Management, Vol. 71, pp. 135-146, doi: 10.1016/j.
indmarman.2017.12.012.
Sinaga, H.G., Asmawi, M., Madhakumala, R. and Suratman, A. (2018), “Effect of change in
management, organizational culture and transformational leadership on employee performance
PT. AdhyaTirta Batam (PT. ATB)”, International Review of Management and Marketing, Vol. 8
No. 6, pp. 15-23, available at: https://ideas.repec.org/a/eco/journ3/2018-06-3.html
Sinha, A.K., Misrha, A.K. and Manogma, R.I. (2021), “Examining the determinants of small firms’
performance in India”, International Journal of Productivity and Performance Management,
No. 1741-401, doi: 10.1108/IJPPM-10-2020-0508.
Soomro, B.A. and Shah, N. (2019), “Determining the impact of entrepreneurial orientation and
organizational culture on job satisfaction, organizational commitment, and employee’s
performance”, South Asian Journal of Business Studies, Vol. 8 No. 3, pp. 266-282.
IJPPM Sparr, J.L. (2018), “Paradoxes in organizational change: the crucial role of leaders’ sensegiving”,
Journal of Change Management, Vol. 18 No. 2, pp. 162-180, doi: 10.1080/14697017.2018.1446696.
Spector, P.E. (1985), “Measurement of human service staff satisfaction: development of the
job satisfaction survey”, American Journal of Community Psychology, Vol. 13 No. 6,
pp. 693-713, doi: 10.1007/BF00929796.
Steger, M.F. and Dik, B.J. (2010), “Work as meaning: individual and organizational benefits of
engaging in meaningful work”, in Linley, P.A., Harrington, S. and Garcea, N. (Eds), Oxford
Handbook of Positive Psychology and Work, Oxford University Press, pp. 131-142, doi: 10.1093/
oxfordhb/9780195335446.013.0011.
Tang, K.N. (2019), Leadership and Change Management, Springer Imprint, Singapore, doi: 10.1007/978-
981-13-8902-3.
Torlak, N.G. and Kuzey, C. (2019), “Leadership, job satisfaction and performance links in private
education institutes of Pakistan”, International Journal of Productivity and Performance
Management, Vol. 68 No. 2, pp. 276-295.
Tuzun, I.K. (2009), “The impact of identification and commitment on job satisfaction”, Management
Research News, Vol. 32 No. 8, pp. 728-738.
Van Eerde, W. and Thierry, H. (1996), “Vroom’s expectancy models and work-related criteria: a meta-
analysis”, Journal of Applied Psychology, Vol. 81 No. 5, pp. 574-586.
Vora, M.K. (2013), “Business excellence through sustainable change management”, The TQM Journal,
Vol. 25 No. 6, pp. 625-640, doi: 10.1108/TQM-07-2013-0080.
Vroom, V.H.M. (1964), Work and Motivation, Wiley, New York.
Weiss, D.J., Dawis, R.V., England, G.W. and Loiquist, L.H. (1967), Manual for the Minnesota
Satisfaction Questionnaire, University of Minnesota, Washington.
Williams, L.J. and Hazer, J.T. (1986), “Antecedents and consequences of satisfaction and commitment
in turnover models. A reanalysis using latent variable structural equation methods”, Journal of
Applied Psychology, Vol. 71 No. 2, pp. 219-231, doi: 10.1037/0021-9010.71.2.219.
Xiang, S., Chen, G. and Liu, W. (2018), “A study of perceived team learning on individual performance:
the mediating role of individual reflection and the moderating role of psychological safety”,
Nankai Business Review International, Vol. 9 No. 2, pp. 162-178, doi: 10.1108/NBRI-01-2018-0006.
Yang, I. and Li, M. (2017), “Can absent leadership be positive in team conflicts?: an examination of
leaders’ avoidance behavior in China”, International Journal of Conflict Management, Vol. 28
No. 2, pp. 146-165, doi: 10.1108/IJCMA-12-2015-0083.
Ye, Z., Liu, H. and Gu, J. (2019), “Relationships between conflicts and employee perceived job
performance: job satisfaction as mediator and collectivism as moderator”, International Journal
of Conflict Management, Vol. 30 No. 5, pp. 706-728, doi: 10.1108/IJCMA-01-2019-0010.
Yiing, L.H., Zaman, K. and Ahmad, B. (2009), “The moderating effects of organizational culture on the
relationships between leadership behaviour and organizational commitment and between
organizational commitment and job satisfaction and performance”, International and
Organization Development Journal, Vol. 30 No. 1, pp. 53-86, doi: 10.1108/01437730910927106.
Yonnedi, E. (2010), “Privatization, organizational change and performance: evidence from Indonesia”,
Journal of Organizational Change Management, Vol. 23 No. 5, pp. 537-563.
Zhang, X., Cao, Q. and Tjosvold, D. (2011), “Linking transformational leadership and team
performance: a conflict management approach”, Journal of Management Studies, Vol. 48 No. 7,
pp. 1586-1611, doi: 10.1111/j.1467-6486.2010.00974.x.

Further reading
Creswell, J. (2017), Research Design Qualitative, Quantities and Mixed Methods Approaches, 4th ed.,
SAGE, Thousand Oaks, CA.
Neher, A. and Maley, J. (2020), “Improving the effectiveness of the employee performance management Indonesian
process a managerial values approach”, International Journal Productivity and Performance
Management, Vol. 69 No. 6, pp. 1129-1152, doi: 10.1108/IJPPM-04-2019-0201. sharia property
Parmenter, D. (2019), Key Performance Indicators: Developing, Implementing, and Using Winning
companies
KPIs, 4th ed., Wiley, New Jersey.
Priarso, M.T., Diatmono, P. and Mariam, S. (2018), “The effect of transformational leadership style,
work Motivation, and work environment on employee performance that in mediation by job
Satisfaction variables in PT.Gyunura Consulindo”, Business and Entrepreneurial Review,
Vol. 18 No. 2, pp. 165-176.
Ruckd€aschel, S. and Jungwirth, C. (2015), Leadership of Networks and Performance: A Qualitative and
Quantitative Analysis, Springer Gabler, Germany, doi: 10.1007/978-3-658-07033-5.
Wagiman, S. and Sutanto, H.A. (2019), “Job satisfaction mediates relationship between organizational
commitments and employee performance”, Daya Saing Jurnal Ekonomi Manajemen Sumber
Daya, Vol. 21 No. 2, pp. 132-143.
Yahyazadeh, S. (2012), “Satisfaction and performance: path analysis for tested of competence,
commitment and discipline from employee in New Delhi India”, Research Journal of Recent
Sciences, Vol. 1 No. 7, pp. 59-67.

(The Appendix follows overleaf)

IJPPM Appendix

Change
management Indicator Reference

CM1 The company has been running like this since I join Kiani and Shah (2014), Hiatt
CM2a The leader/superior gives support for change (e.g. (2006)
gives presents, changes the organization culture, or
gives directions)
CM2b I have the desire to change because I am motivated
by the expectations of success achieved in the
company
CM3 The company provides training and educational
programs to support the change process
CM4 I have trauma/fears and psychological barriers that
prevent me from unleashing my potential and
abilities at work (Negative)
CM5 The company has a system to monitor performance
and measure the progress of the change process in
each employee
Organizational Commitment
OC1 I don’t feel emotionally attached to the company Meyer and Allen (1997)
(Negative)
OC2 This company is meaningful in my life
OC3 I feel burdened if I leave the company even though I
have the desire to leave/resign
OC4 I don’t believe that someone should be devoted and
have high loyalty to the company (negative)
OC5 One of the biggest reasons for me to continue
working at this company is because I believe that
loyalty is crucial, so I have a moral responsibility to
stay afloat
Job Satisfaction
JS1 I am satisfied with my current job Martins and Proença (2014),
JS2 I am satisfied with the supervision carried out by Pawirosumarto et al. (2017)
my superiors
JS3 My superior controls work effectively
JS4 I am satisfied with the salary
JS5 I am satisfied with the career path opportunities
JS6 The company provides an opportunity to use my
skills
JS7 My supervisor has competence and expertise in
making the right decisions
JS8 I am satisfied to do things that don’t go against my
Table A1. heart
Measurement
scale item (continued )
Change
Indonesian
management Indicator Reference sharia property
companies
Leadership Style
LS1 My subordinates or team have high confidence in Avolio and Bass (1999),
my leadership Pawirosumarto et al. (2017)
LS2 Subordinates are very proud to be in the same team
with me
LS3 I explain in a simple way to be easily understood in
giving directions about what needs to be done and
how to do it
LS4 I enjoy helping subordinates to find meaning in the
work they do
LS5 I explain what subordinates must do if they want to
get awards/rewards
LS6 I give awards/rewards when employees succeed in
carrying out their duties or achieving targets
LS7 I have the courage to lay off an employee if they
don’t comply with the company
LS8 I have courage and strength in building discipline
in the company
LS9 I am able to delegate tasks to subordinates in
accordance with company targets to be achieved
LS10 I request a structured job report
Performance
EP1 I set a plan in work to finish on time Koopmans et al. (2014),
EP2 I always remember the results of the work I have to Pawirosumarto et al. (2017)
achieve
EP3 I immediately start working on a new task when
the previous work has been completed
EP4 I am willing to accept a job that has more
considerable challenges
EP5 I talk to coworkers at work about the negativity in
my job. (Negative)
EP6 I explain what subordinates must do if they want to
get awards/rewards
EP7 I work as I wish
EP8 I feel satisfied when I finish the job
EP9 I can work to complete tasks without being
supervised by superiors
EP10 I have the ability to maintain a good reputation at
work
EP11 I have the ability to maintain teamwork Table A1.
IJPPM About the authors
Istiqomah Nur Latifah M.eng is postgraduate student Industrial Engineering and working as a
consultant for nine years, who services at various type of company in Indonesia especially in business
management, leadership also training. Istiqomah Nur Latifah can be contacted at: Sakura.peradaban@
gmail.com
Dr. Agus Achmad Suhendra – Working at Telkom University as a Faculty Dean of Industrial
Engineering. He has written research paper from 2014 and has published in the various journal and he is
also a speaker in research scientific seminar.
Dr. Ilma Mufidah – Working at Telkom University as Head of the study program of Postgraduate
Industrial Engineering.

For instructions on how to order reprints of this article, please visit our website:
www.emeraldgrouppublishing.com/licensing/reprints.htm
Or contact us for further details: permissions@emeraldinsight.com