Content uploaded by Setyo Riyanto
Author content
All content in this area was uploaded by Setyo Riyanto on Feb 15, 2021
Content may be subject to copyright.
Diana HAPSARI, Setyo RIYANTO, Endri ENDRI / Journal of Asian Finance, Economics and Business Vol 8 No 2 (2021) 0595–0604 595595
Print ISSN: 2288-4637 / Online ISSN 2288-4645
doi:10.13106/jafeb.2021.vol8.no2.0595
The Role of Transformational Leadership in Building Organizational
Citizenship: The Civil Servants of Indonesia*
Diana HAPSARI
1
, Setyo RIYANTO
2
, Endri ENDRI
3
Received: November 05, 2020 Revised: December 30, 2020 Accepted: January 08, 2021
Abstract
For civil servants in the legal sector, the best performance that must be shown is not how they carry out activities following standard
operational procedures but what is more important is how they show Organizational Citizenship Behavior (OCB) in daily activities.
This study aims to examine what factors influence the formation of OCB civil servants in the legal sector in Indonesia. The study was
conducted on 145 civil servant respondents who were involved in secretarial activities, each from the Judicial Commission Secretariat, the
Attorney General’s Office, the Ministry of Justice, the Supreme Court, the Police Headquarters, and the Constitutional Court. The research
methodology used Partial Least Square (PLS) Version 3.0. The empirical findings of the research show that organizational culture has a
significant influence in shaping transformational leadership that can build OCB among civil servants in Indonesia. This effect is much larger
and more significant than the compensation system, which is widely believed to be the main factor in forming OCB, such as the results
of previous studies. The results of this study imply that the formation of an organizational culture with values that can create high work
productivity which has an impact on transformational leadership styles in building OCB.
Keywords: Transformational Leadership, Organizational Citizenship, Organizational Culture, Compensation System
JEL Classification Code: D20, D23, M12, M14
the state civil apparatus in the field of law. They are not
only required to be competent, loyal, and productive and
maximize performance. However, the performance here is
not merely the level of conformity of what they do with what
is written in standard operating procedures alone.
Keeping in mind that for state civil servants who serve in
the legal field, their performance will be influenced by the
level of their Organizational Citizenship Behavior (OCB),
so through an observation process carried out from February
2020 to June 2020, we began to identify the aspects which
have a significant influence on the OCB of the country’s
civil servants. From several aspects we examined, the
preliminary study we conducted showed that OCB was
greatly influenced by how well superiors directly applied
transformational leadership values in their daily activities.
More in-depth research shows that transformational
leadership values are closely related to how organizational
culture and compensation systems are implemented
properly and fairly. Based on these considerations, this
research focuses on what state institutions in law should
make efforts to build transformational leadership abilities
as leaders to increase the supervised state civil servants’
OCB value.
*Acknowledgments:
1
This research was made possible because of the full support of the
Region III Education Service Institute (LL-DIKTI III), The Ministry
of Education and Culture of the Republic of Indonesia, and the
Research Center at Mercu Buana University, Jakarta.
1
First Author. Master of Management, Graduate Program, Universitas
Mercu Buana, Jakarta, Indonesia. Email: rr.diana.ch@gmail.com
2
Corresponding Author. Associate Professor, Master of Management,
Graduate Program, Universitas Mercu Buana, Jakarta, Indonesia
[Postal Address: P.O Box. 11650, Jl. Meruya Selatan No.1,
Kembangan, Jakarta Barat, Indonesia]
Email: setyo.riyanto@mercubuana.ac.id
3
Associate Professor, Master of Management, Graduate Program,
Universitas Mercu Buana, Jakarta, Indonesia.
Email: endri@mercubuana.ac.id
© Copyright: The Author(s)
This is an Open Access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution
Non-Commercial License (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/4.0/) which permits
unrestricted non-commercial use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the
original work is properly cited.
1. Introduction
Legal certainty that is a product of law servants will
never be separated from those who have been working,
supporting, and serving law enforcers’ activities, namely
Diana HAPSARI, Setyo RIYANTO, Endri ENDRI / Journal of Asian Finance, Economics and Business Vol 8 No 2 (2021) 0595–0604596
2. Literature Review
2.1. Organizational Citizenship Behavior
Structural workers’ perceptions of procedural justice
and international justice have a smart predictive role for
civilian structural behavior (Wang, 2011; Thanh & Toan,
2018).). Organizational Citizenship Behavior (OCB) as an
interest in independent work in some way or as expressly
recognized by formal reward systems combined with
effective organizational functioning (Bogler & Somech,
2005; Rayner et al., 2012). Structure of Citizenship
Behavior is described as the behavior that is beneficial to
others but can also harm actors and people’s behavior over
time (Kusumaningrum et al., 2020; Kutcher et al., 2010).
Respected and unsuccessful civic behavior structures are
put forward by supporting repayment (Zhang et al., 2011).
One potential pathway through exhibited OCB could trigger
structurally unhelpful outcomes by reducing workers’
perceptions of organizational fairness (Farrell & Finkelstein,
2011). One of OCB’s most consistent predictors is the
neglected mediating role of the specific meaning between
leadership and civic organizational behavior (Astuty &
Udin, 2020). Kutcher et al. (2000) suggested to take action
on OCB or organizational citizen behavior where they see
a benefit in a highly hierarchical trial and error reading in
favor of organization vs. damage to someone who has been
violated by denouncing job performance (Levine, 2010).
Leaders rely on their perceptions of ‘motives for judging
employee structure’ of civic behavior. Thus, the source of
employee motivation is expected to have a good relationship
with organizational citizenship behavior (Pancasila et al.,
2020; Barbuto & Story, 2011). OCB differentiates task
and performance from Counterproductive Work Behavior
(CWB), which considers it to be three distinct classes of
behavior with two main classes that facilitate structures’
functioning. The latter adversely replaces them (Spector &
Fox, 2010). The WHO staff’s additional expertise follows
social exchange theory, which has suggested demonstrating
different civic behavior structures and higher job performance
due to behaviors that are useful to the organization (Shen et
al., 2014). There are two types of civic behavior structures
namely: Organizational Citizenship Behavior directed at
Organizations (OCBO) and Organizational Citizenship
Behavior directed at Individuals (OCBI), which is represented
in the literature. OCBO is connected to the organization to
be valuable to the organization, whereas OCBI is associated
directly with relevant people to staff and indirectly useful
to the organization (Raza et al., 2018). Some staff interacts
in the OCB out of concern for the organization and their
coworkers. Others are motivated to perform this behavior to
help them achieve their personal goals (Halbesleben et al.,
2010).
OCB fosters direct and interactive performance behavior
of individual workers, acting as a moderator to weaken the
relationship between worker role ambiguity and performance
behavior (Chen et al., 2013). Organizational Citizenship
Behavior (OCB) is a discretionary behavior that is not part of
the association’s formal work requirements that contribute to
the worker’s psychological and social atmosphere (Robbins
& Resolve, 2018). A happy staff is reflected in higher
performance and structured citizenship (OCB) behavior, less
CWB, and less turnover, especially after they feel supported
by their organization to do well in performance (Haerani et
al., 2020). Extra role performance includes structured civic
behavior and refers to aspects, such as personal initiative
(Pancasila et al., 2020). The initial known OCB scale
consists of 5 factors: selflessness, conscientiousness, civic
virtue, politeness, and justice (Barbuto & Story, 2011).
2.2. Organization Culture
Organizations exist for many reasons, and therefore
the reasons that cause them to re-emerge will drive their
culture in the way they work or work ethics (Rayner et
al., 2012). Organizational culture is an organizational
value and behavior that contributes to a unique social and
psychological environment (Wang, 2011). The definition
of organizational learning is a pattern of basic assumptions
developed by certain groups when learning problems of
external adaptation and internal integration that have worked
at a level sufficient to be considered valid. Therefore, to be
taught to new members, it is necessary to express gratitude for
seeing, thinking, and feeling from these problems (Kutcher,
2010). Meanwhile, culture is a way of getting things done
or implicit rules that govern how people behave through
their work (Haerani et al., 2020). Cultural development
usually takes years, with standard competency models that
influence strategic priorities applied to talent management
systems (Swalhi et al., 2017). The intentions to reduce the
characteristics of organizational culture include:
1. An organizational glue that is maintained by a
commitment to innovation and development,
2. Achievement of current resources and challenges, and
3. Define success through the latest or minimal ordinary
products and services.
Creating a culture allows us and others to grow, expanding our
capacities as leaders, employees, and citizens (Kusumaningrum
et al., 2020). Cultures that value entrepreneurship has more
entrepreneurship than societies where entrepreneurship is not
fostered or may not be valued (Stone et al., 2007). The informal
adoption of flexible working practices in small companies has
been designed to address individual circumstances that have
been shown to respond to diverse employee needs and build
a reciprocity culture (Atkinson & Hall, 2009). Lack of culture
indicates a lack of trust. If the organization has the right culture
Diana HAPSARI, Setyo RIYANTO, Endri ENDRI / Journal of Asian Finance, Economics and Business Vol 8 No 2 (2021) 0595–0604 597
and people, there is no need for rules (Meng & Berger, 2019).
Organizations make more intensive use of recruiting through
the organization’s website from countries with a higher level
of individualism.
Meanwhile, organizations from a culture with a high degree
of uncertainty tend to use less intensive corporate recruitment
websites (Silla., 2017). The components of various elegance
as components of employer culture are substantial variations
(Meng & Berger, 2019). Banks with a conservative risk
culture are simultaneously considered to have a more robust
risk management structure and lower risks (Karabay, 2014).
2.3. Compensation System
Compensation consists of the main incentive system
and is also important when obtaining the best talent
(Kusumaningrum et al., 2020). The processes described
include compensation analysis, performance management,
recruitment, selection, placement or training, and
development slips (Zhang et al., 2015). Traditional personnel
management involves a series of functions normally
performed by personnel offices in organizations dealing
with selection and recruitment, training, compensation
(salaries and benefits), performance appraisal, promotion,
motivation policy, retirement, etc. (Nurjanah et al.,2020).
The employee’s contribution may reduce compensation in
dismissal or if the worker does not comply with the minimum
complaint procedures under the law, including internal
appeals procedures, or if the employee unreasonably rejects
an acceptable re-employment offer (Dockery & Bawa, 2014).
Failure tolerance, which requires rethinking how projects
are selected and financed, is an important point that is often
overlooked. The main reason for the inability to tolerate is
that the decision-maker cannot jeopardize any project’s long-
term funding (Carter et al., 2018). A good compensation
plan can impact the organization’s progress to new levels
of strategic and financial success (Pancasila et al., 2020).
Measuring human capital can be a difficult task, but several
actions can help investors understand an organization’s
strength. The mutual investment that organizations make for
future productivity is expenditure on training that has been
provided by the employer (Ugbomhe et al., 2016). At the
same time, compensation is a part of human resources that
handle payments made by an employer to its employees.
Salary factors include basic salary, variable salary, and
stocks (Zeb et al., 2019). Most of the compensation, for
now, is designed based on performance because of the costs
incurred by executives to manipulate their earnings and share
prices for personal gain (Susanto et al., 2020). At the same
time, this is partly a practical problem. In some markets, it is
difficult for managers to determine individual compensation
to understand exactly what market value is for human capital
(Kusumaningrum et al., 2020).
Regarding Compensation, Benefits, and Training, it
should be noted that it consists of 1/2 points for all workers,
and otherwise, workers are allocated evenly between work
environment and work ownership area (Astrauskaite et al.,
2015). The consequence of workers’ interests is more focused
on compensation issues such as salary, benefits, working hours,
shift patterns, and transportation (Sun & Anderson, 2012). The
emergence of statutory workers’ compensation schemes in the
late nineteenth and early twentieth centuries immensely helped
reduce the power referred to as work accident compensation
(Wright et al., 2012). The global approach to employment
and international recruitment requires comprehensive
compensation and immigration strategies to avoid delays in
obtaining visas for workers (Collings, 2012).
2.4. Transformational Leadership
Some authors say that leadership is an approach to develop
a conducive innovative environment (Kamariah et al., 2013)
and determine the attributes and behaviors. The personality
they reflect is an important aspect of leadership (Astuty &
Udin, 2020). Transformational leadership assumes that four
human needs cannot be negotiated; these needs must be met
if we are to become a healthy, happy, fully functioning group,
a need that the Leader will fulfill (Yuan & Lee, 2011). In
the leadership literature, this can be a significant correlation
between the amount of effort made by followers, Leader and
member satisfaction, employee performance, and overall
effectiveness (Biswas, 2009). In their empirical research,
Liaw et al. (2010) prove that transformational leadership
has a strong effect on various outcomes by considering the
characteristics of work as a mediator (Astrauskaite et al.,
2015). Based on the perception of followers, acceptance of
transformational leadership is determined by the specific
behavior of a pioneer and the characteristics of followers
(Felfe & Schyns, 2009). Transformational leadership has
two parallel effects: 1) transformational leaders are assumed
to positively influence followers’ creativity because they
provide intellectual stimulation and become role models.
Then 2) transformational leaders, thanks to their charisma
and narcissistic tendencies, tend to encourage follower
dependence, which can negatively impact follower creativity
(Eisenbeiß & Boerner, 2013). When a supervisor exhibits
this leadership style, employees can perceive this as support
from their supervisor, so they reciprocate the support by
maintaining a positive work attitude, such as customer
orientation. Moreover, it can activate mutual support among
their followers to achieve collective goals (Liaw et al.,
2010). Jiao et al. (2011) have presented proposals related
to four transformational leadership styles. 1. Idealized
influence: The Leader serves as a task model for others by
demonstrating high ethical standards and being trustworthy.
2. Inspirational motivation: Leaders inspire others by
Diana HAPSARI, Setyo RIYANTO, Endri ENDRI / Journal of Asian Finance, Economics and Business Vol 8 No 2 (2021) 0595–0604598
generating enthusiasm and optimism, showing shared
commitment to goals, and communicating expectations
clearly. 3. Intellectual stimulation: Leaders demonstrate
innovation by approaching old situations in innovative ways
and by encouraging others to present ideas and dare to be
criticized. 4. Individual consideration: The Leader acts as a
mentor or coach by reaching out to others and helping team
members develop skills so that they can reach their potential.
Transformational leadership factors consist of the
influence of ideal attributes, ideal behavior, inspirational
motivation, intellectual stimulation, and individual
considerations (Hsiao & Chang, 2011). Wright et al. (2012)
broaden the pseudo transformational conceptualization of
leadership by considering the relationship between leaders
and followers more broadly (Silitonga et al., 2020; Christie
et al., 2011). Given the importance of organizational mission
and outcomes, transformational leadership is also very useful
for public and non-profit organizations (Wright et al., 2012).
A leader’s positive mood can influence processes, such as:
explicit and implicit (Chi et al., 2011). Leadership is an
inherently social phenomenon, and the ability to understand
and effectively respond to complex social behavior is
considered a prototype for transformational leader behavior
(Sun & Anderson, 2012). Leadership is initially a source of
beliefs and values accepted by groups dealing with internal
and external problems (Yuan & Lee, 2011). The discussion of
the history of leadership is discussed in various ancient books
and manuscripts. Leadership was initially believed to be a
trait inherent in a person, arises with the birth of an individual,
cannot be learned, and is associated with genes or glory
(Mittal & Dhar, 2015). Continuous independent learning,
training, and accumulation of relevant leadership experiences
reflect good leadership. The following are experiences across
disciplines, such as organizational behavior, social and human
relations. Organizational leaders ready to change must have
the power to create transformatively (Chammas & Hernandez,
2019), including: 1. Having the vision to influence followers
to move up to the next level of consciousness. 2. Build a
vision of commitment and trust by communicating, which is
part of the organizational culture. 3. The Leader supports and
facilitates the continuous learning process.
3. Researh Methodology
The data used in this study use primary data from the
survey results. Research, including quantitative analysis
with a basic view of the relationship between variables,
is causal research. The research variables used consisted
of four independent variables: Organizational Culture,
Compensation System, Transformational Leadership, and
Organizational Citizenship Behavior.
4. Results and Discussion
4.1. Validation Test
An indicator is declared valid if it has a loading factor
above 0.5 against the intended construct. First, we will
discuss the effect of indicators on each of the predetermined
variables:
1. In the Organizational Culture (OC) variable, it can be
seen that the feeling of calm and sincerity in work activities
(OC.9) has a more significant influence on Organizational
Culture by 0.751 and OC.03 Developing yourself to get
optimal results in completing work has a small effect which
is 0.564.
2. In the Compensation System (CS), the amount of
work accident insurance following the work risk (CS.9 =
0.732) has a significant effect on the Compensation System.
Simultaneously, the organization does not pay attention to
occupational accident insurance due to work risks (CS.12 =
0.382) is a point which requires smallest improvement in the
Compensation System.
3. In Transformational Leadership (TL), a Leader
can encourage employees to convey good ideas for the
organization (TL.13 = 0.889), and has a significant effect
on Transformational Leadership. In contrast (TL.8= 0.563),
Leaders are willing to listen to employee complaints if there
is a problem. The lowest indicator in giving influence to
Transformational Leadership. The results of the analysis
related to each variable show that Organizational Culture
has a positive and significant effect on Transformational
Leadership with a value of 0.349 compared to the
Compensation System with a value of 0.244. At the same
time, the Transformational Leadership variable has a
more positive and significant influence on Organizational
Citizenship Behavior (OCB) with a value of 0.510. In the
data above, there is still an effect of indicators on each
variable below 0.5, namely:
1. Salary received can meet the needs of life with a value
of 0.494,
2. Not all employees have the opportunity to get a higher
promotion with a value of 0.419,
3. Organization pays less attention to work accident
insurance due to occupational risks with a value of 0.382.
Another method to see discriminant validity is to look at
the square root of the Fornell-Lacker Criterium. The value
mentioned above is 0.5. However, all the variables tested
have a value above 0.5.
The discriminant validity table analysis results show that
the constructs in this research model can still be said to have
good discriminant validity.
Diana HAPSARI, Setyo RIYANTO, Endri ENDRI / Journal of Asian Finance, Economics and Business Vol 8 No 2 (2021) 0595–0604 599
Table 1: Research variables and Indicators
Variable Indicator (manifest variable)
Organizational
Culture
OC.1 Think innovatively and be brave in making decisions
OC.2 Pay attention to the accuracy of the work completion
OC.3 Get optimal results in completing work
OC.4 Do not dare to take risks in completing work
OC.5 Motivated to be a good employee
OC.6 Likes personal workers who prioritize teamwork
OC.7 Get work done with accuracy
OC.8 Often put off work
OC.9 Feel calm and sincerity in work activities
OC.10 Not driven to think creatively in doing work
OC.11 Attention and detail in doing the work.
OC.12 Feeling with the work that is currently being held
OC.13 Collaborating with others to improve the best results
OC.14 Often leaves work during working hours
OC.15 Comfortable with the organization conditions
OC.16 Often feel forced to finish work
OC.17 Encouraged to think creatively in doing work
OC.18 Often feel less than optimal in completing work
OC.19 Work following the specified target.
OC.20 The work environment is less conducive
OC.21 Come on time and be disciplined on time
OC.22 Teamworking and collaboration with other members
OC.23 Healthy competition between employees
OC.24 Lack of attention to details in completing work
OC.25 Trying to improve work effectiveness
OC.26 In completing work, it is often not on target
OC.27 Feeling required in working on getting maximum results
OC.28 The existence of unfair competition
Compensation
System
CS.1 The salary received can meet the needs of life
CS.2 The opportunity to get a higher promotion
CS.3 The bonus given can increased morale at work
CS.4 Benefits received are not as expected
CS.5 Opportunities to be promoted to higher positions.
CS.6 Bonus received does not make enthusiastic
CS.7 The organization gives awards to employees
CS.8 The awards no effect on improving performance
CS.9 Work accident insurance following work risk
Diana HAPSARI, Setyo RIYANTO, Endri ENDRI / Journal of Asian Finance, Economics and Business Vol 8 No 2 (2021) 0595–0604600
Variable Indicator (manifest variable)
CS.10 Salary is not sufficient for the needs of life
CS.11 Benefits received the following performance
CS.12 Organization pay less attention to the work accident
Transformational
Leadership
TL.1 Leaders are always role models for employee pride
TL.2 Leaders unable to generate enthusiasm
TL.3 Leaders motivate employees at work
TL.4 The Leader does not provide instructions
TL.5 Leaders earn respect from employees
TL.6 Leaders do not emphasize the importance of work goals
TL.7 Leaders always encourage employees innovatively
TL.8 Leaders willing to listen to employee complaints
TL.9 Leaders ignore their employees
TL.10 Unable to encourage employees to solve problems
TL.11 Able to foster employees’ self-confidence at work
TL.12 Give employees confidence the goals will be achieved
TL.13 Able to encourage employees to present good ideas
TL.14 Unable to see problems from multiple points of view
TL.15 Treat employees as individuals and different needs
TL.16 Never advise employees for self-development
Organizational
Citizenship
Behavior
OCB.1 Likes to help work colleagues voluntarily.
OCB.2 Very enthusiastic about doing work.
OCB.3 Have high loyalty to the institution
OCB.4 Always try to respect the institution
OCB.5 Reduce the emergence of interpersonal conflicts
OCB.6 Always help prevent work problems.
OCB.7 Never been absent
OCB.8 Talk only good things to outsiders.
OCB.9 Always think and be positive
OCB.9 Work-based on institutional procedures and policies
OCB.10 Prevent other employees from losing their morale.
OCB.11 Often arrive late to work and come home early.
OCB.12 Take precedence over institutional interests.
OCB.13 Uncomfortable when others have an initiative
OCB.14 Often do not obey the rules of the institution
OCB.15 Rarely encourage colleagues
OCB.16 My commitment to this institution is very low.
OCB.17 Not interested in maintaining an institution’s reputation.
OCB.18 Often complain to the institution about discomfort
OCB.19 Don’t care about what other people think of me.
Table 1: Continued
Diana HAPSARI, Setyo RIYANTO, Endri ENDRI / Journal of Asian Finance, Economics and Business Vol 8 No 2 (2021) 0595–0604 601
Table 2: Discriminant Validity (Fornell-Lacker Criterium)
Compensation
System
Organizational
Citizenship
Behavior
Organizational
Culture
Transformational
Leadership
Compensation System 0,630
Organizational
Citizenship Behavior 0,595 0,608
Organizational Culture 0,370 0,624 0,677
Transformational
Leadership 0,340 0,758 0,440 0,791
Table 3: Composite Reliability and Cronbach’s Alpha
Composite
Reliability
Cronbach’s
Alpha
Organizational
Culture 0,875 0,825
Compensation
System 0,925 0,925
Transformational
Leadership 0,975 0,975
Organizational
Citizenship
Behavior
0,975 0,975
Table 4: R-square
R Square R Square
Adjusted
Organizational Citizenship
Behavior 0,760 0,755
Transformational Leadership 0,230 0,219
Table 5: Fit Summary
Saturated Model Estimated
Model
SRMR 0,079 0,079
d_ULS 16,118 16,118
d_G 10,988 10,988
Chi-Square 5800,678 5800,678
NFI 0,459 0,459
4.2. Reliability Test
A reliability test is done by looking at the indicator block’s
composite reliability value that measures the construct. The
results of the composite reliability will show a good value if
it is above 0.7. The following are the composite reliability
values for the output:
It appears that all variables meet the desired composite
reliability value, which is above 0.7, which means that all
variables are realistic. The recommended value is above 0.6,
and the table above shows that Cronbach’s Alpha> 0.6 with
the lowest value of 0.825, meaning that it has met the desired
criteria.
4.3. Structural Model Testing (Inner Model)
After the estimated model meets the Outer Model
performance, the next step is testing the Structural Model
(Inner Model). Below are the R-Square values in construction.
It can be seen that the variables of organizational culture
and compensation systems affect organizational citizenship
behavior by 76.00%, while transformational leadership is
not very influential.
To determine whether a hypothesis is accepted or rejected, it
can be done by paying attention to the significance value between
the construct, t-statistic, and p-value. In this way, measurement
estimates and standard errors are no longer calculated using
statistical assumptions but are based on empirical observations.
In this study’s bootstrap resampling method, all the hypothesis
is accepted if the significance value of the t-value is greater than
1.96 and or the p-value is less than 0.05.
The table 6 shows that the relationship between the
compensation system and organizational citizenship
behavior is very significant, with a T statistic of 2.487 (>
1.96). The original sample’s estimated value is positive,
namely 0.109, which indicates that the relationship between
the compensation system and organizational citizenship
behavior is positive. The P-value obtained was 0.013 (<0.05).
Diana HAPSARI, Setyo RIYANTO, Endri ENDRI / Journal of Asian Finance, Economics and Business Vol 8 No 2 (2021) 0595–0604602
Thus there is an effect of the compensation system on the OCB.
Table 7 shows that the relationship between organizational
culture and OCB is significant, with a T statistic of 4.022
(> 1.96). The original sample’s estimated value is positive,
namely 0.193, which indicates that the relationship between
organizational culture and OCB is positive. The P-value
obtained was 0.000 (<0.05). So there is an influence of
organizational culture on organizational citizenship behavior.
The following is a diagram of the statistical T value based on
the output with Smart PLS.
Now the indicator can influence the variable. First, the
highest indicator for organizational culture is OC.9, with a
value of 18.343, and the lowest is OC.3, with a value of 6.447.
Second, regarding the compensation system, the highest
indicator is CS.9 with a value of 16,707, and the lowest
is CS.7 with a value of 5,609. Third, in transformational
leadership, the highest indicator is TL.13 with a value of
41,524, and the lowest is TL.8 with a value of 6.807. Fourth,
regarding the behavior of community organizations, the
highest indicator is OCB.10 with a value of 15,868, and the
lowest is OCB.15 with a value of 6,569, so it can be said
that organizational culture has a more significant influence
on organizational citizenship behavior when compared to the
compensation system. Then the OCB is more significant and
is positively influenced by transformational leadership with
a value of 10.410, and the smallest is a compensation system
with a value of 5.811.
5. Conclusions
Organizational culture partially influences and reacts
violently to the OCB, especially in feeling calm and sincere
in work activities. Always think and be positive has the most
significant influence than have high loyalty to the institution.
Organizational culture still has less impact on the company
but amplifies the impact on the workers themselves.
Culture development usually takes years, with a standard
competency model that influences the management system’s
strategic priorities. If the organization has the right culture
and people, re-emerging both will encourage how they
work according to the created organizational culture. The
compensation system has a positive and strong reaction to the
OCB. However, Work accident insurance after occupational
risk gets more attention from workers than rewards from
the organization. The main organizational incentive system
is compensation given by the organization as a result of
employee contributions, so that the organization should pay
more attention to employee safety.
Transformational leadership positively influences and
reacts strongly to social organizations’ behavior, especially
leaders who can encourage employees to convey good ideas
for the organization. Leaders in this organization should be
able to encourage employees to convey good ideas but less
in listening to employee complaints. Leaders inspire others
by generating enthusiasm and optimism, showing shared
commitment to goals, and communicating expectations
clearly. The leader acts as a mentor or coach by reaching out to
others and helping team members develop skills to reach their
potential. Employees can perceive this as support from their
supervisor, so they reciprocate the support by maintaining
a positive work attitude. Transformational leadership,
Organization Culture, and Compensation systems have a
positive and significant influence on OCB, significantly
increasing employee awareness of their presence at work,
providing leaders can encourage employees to convey
good ideas thereby reducing the emergence of interpersonal
conflicts, meanwhile work accident insurance after work risk
can prevent employees from losing their enthusiasm for work.
References
Astrauskaite, M., Notelaers, G., Medisauskaite, A., & Kern,
R. M. (2015). Workplace harassment: Deterring role of
transformational leadership and core job characteristics.
Scandinavian Journal of Management, 31(1), 121–135. https://
doi.org/10.1016/j.scaman.2014.06.001
Astuty, I., & Udin, U. (2020). The Effect of Perceived
Organizational Support and Transformational Leadership on
Affective Commitment and Employee Performance. Journal
of Asian Finance, Economics and Business, 7(10), 401–411.
https://doi.org/10.13106/jafeb.2020.vol7.no10.401
Table 6: Summary of the structural model
Original
Sample (O)
Sample
Mean (M)
Standard
Deviation
(STDEV)
T Statistics
(|O/STDEV|) P Values
Compensation System →
Organizational Citizenship
Behavior
0,109 0, 111 0,044 2,487 0,013
Organizational Culture →
Organizational Citizenship
Behavior
0,193 0,194 0,048 4,022 0,000
Diana HAPSARI, Setyo RIYANTO, Endri ENDRI / Journal of Asian Finance, Economics and Business Vol 8 No 2 (2021) 0595–0604 603
Atkinson, C., & Hall, L. (2009). The role of gender in varying forms
of flexible working. Gender, Work, and Organization, 16(6),
650–666. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1468-0432.2009.00456.x
Barbuto, J. E., & Story, S. P. J. (2011). Work Motivation and
Organizational Citizenship Behaviorss. Journal of Leadership
Studies, 5(1), 23–34. https://doi.org/10.1002/jls
Biswas, S. (2009). HR practices as a mediator between organizational
culture and transformational leadership: Implications for
employee performance. Psychological Studies, 54(2), 114–123.
https://doi.org/10.1007/s12646-009-0014-5
Bogler, R., & Somech, A. (2005). Organizational citizenship
behavior in school: How does it relate to participation in
decision making?. Journal of Educational Administration,
43(5), 420–438. https://doi.org/10.1108/09578230510615215
Carter, W. R., Nesbit, P. L., Badham, R. J., Parker, S. K., &
Sung, L. K. (2018). The effects of employee engagement and
selfefficacy on job performance: A longitudinal field study.
The International Journal of Human Resource Management,
29(17), 2483–2502. https://doi.org/10.1080/09585192.2016.1
244096
Chammas, C. B., & Hernandez, J. M. D. C. (2019). Comparing
transformational and instrumental leadership. Innovation &
Management Review, 16(2), 143–160. https://doi.org/10.1108/
inmr-08-2018-0064
Chen, Z., Takeuchi, R., & Shum, C. (2013). A social information
processing perspective of coworker influence on a focal
employee. Organization Science, 24(6), 1618–1639. https://
doi.org/10.1287/orsc.2013.0820
Chi, N. W., Chung, Y. Y., & Tsai, W. C. (2011). How Do Happy
Leaders Enhance Team Success? The Mediating Roles of
Transformational Leadership, Group Affective Tone, and Team
Processes. Journal of Applied Social Psychology, 41(6), 1421–
1454. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1559-1816.2011.00767.x
Collings, D. G. (2012). International Human Resource Management:
Policies and Practices for Multinational Enterprises. The
International Journal of Human Resource Management
23(7),1509-1511. https://doi.org/10.1080/09585192.2012.659
050
Christie, A., Barling, J., & Turner, N. (2011). Pseudo-
Transformational Leadership: Model Specification and
Outcomes. Journal of Applied Social Psychology, 41(12),
2943–2984. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1559-1816.2011.00858.x
Dockery, A. M., & Bawa, S. (2014). Is Working from Home Good
Work or Bad Work?: Evidence from Australian Employees.
Australian Journal of Labour Economics, 17(2), 163–190.
Eisenbeiß, S. A., & Boerner, S. (2013). A Double-edged Sword:
Transformational Leadership and Individual Creativity. British
Journal of Management, 24(1), 54–68. https://doi.org/10.1111/
j.1467-8551.2011.00786.x
Farrell, S. K., & Finkelstein, L. M. (2011). The Impact of Motive
Attributions on Coworker Justice Perceptions of Rewarded
Organizational Citizenship Behavior. Journal of Business and
Psychology, 26(1), 57–69. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10869-010-
9174-5
Felfe, J., & Schyns, B. (2009). Followers’ personality and the
perception of transformational leadership: Further evidence for
the similarity hypothesis. British Journal of Management, 21(2),
393–410. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-8551.2009.00649.x
Haerani, S., Sumardi, Hakim, W., Hartini, & Putra, A. H. P. K.
(2020). Structural Model of Developing Human Resources
Performance: Empirical Study of Indonesia States Owned
Enterprises. Journal of Asian Finance, Economics and
Business, 7(3), 211–221. https://doi.org/10.13106/jafeb.2020.
vol7.no3.211
Halbesleben, J. R. B., Bowler, W. M., Bolino, M. C., & Turnley,
W. H. (2010). Organizational concern, prosocial values, or
impression management? How supervisors attribute motives to
organizational citizenship behavior. Journal of Applied Social
Psychology, 40(6), 1450–1489. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1559-
1816.2010.00625.x
Hsiao, H. C., & Chang, J. C. (2011). The role of organizational
learning in transformational leadership and organizational
innovation. Asia Pacific Education Review, 12(4), 621–631.
https://doi.org/10.1007/s12564-011-9165-x
Jiao, C., Richards, D. A., & Zhang, K. (2011). Leadership and
Organizational Citizenship Behavior: OCB-Specific Meanings
as Mediators. Journal of Business and Psychology, 26(1), 11–
25. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10869-010-9168-3
Kamariah, N., Idrus, M., Asdar, M., & Sudirman, I. (2013).
An Inquiry on the Effect of Knowledge Management and
Strategic Leadership on Dynamic Capability, Entrepreneurship
Strategy, and Organizational Performance in the General Public
Hospitals. IOSR Journal of Business and Management, 12(1),
01–12. https://doi.org/10.9790/487x-1210112
Karabay, M. E. (2014). An investigation of the effects of work-
related stress and organizational commitment on organizational
citizenship behavior: A research on banking industry. Journal of
Business Research - Turk, 6(1), 282-302. http://doi: 10.20491/
isader.2014115975
Kusumaningrum, G., Haryono, S., & Handari, S. R. (2020).
Employee Performance Optimization Through Transfor-
mational Leadership, Procedural Justice, and Training: The
Role of Self-Efficacy. Journal of Asian Finance, Economics
and Business, 7(12), 995-1004. http://doi.org/10.13106/
jafeb.2020. vol7.no12.995
Kutcher, E. J., Bragger, J. D., Rodriguez-Srednicki, O., & Masco,
J. L. (2010). The role of religiosity in stress, job attitudes, and
organizational citizenship behavior. Journal of Business Ethics,
95(2), 319–337. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10551-009-0362-z
Liaw, Y. J., Chi, N. W., & Chuang, A. (2010). Examining the
mechanisms linking transformational leadership, employee-
customer orientation, and service performance: The mediating
roles of perceived supervisor and coworker support. Journal
of Business and Psychology, 25(3), 477–492. https://doi.
org/10.1007/s10869-009-9145-x
Diana HAPSARI, Setyo RIYANTO, Endri ENDRI / Journal of Asian Finance, Economics and Business Vol 8 No 2 (2021) 0595–0604604
Levine, E. L. (2010). Emotion and power (as a social influence): Their
impact on organizational citizenship and counterproductive
individual and organizational behavior. Human Resource
Management Review, 20(1), 4–17. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.
hrmr.2009.03.011
Mittal, S., & Dhar, R. L. (2015). Transformational leadership and
employee creativity. Management Decision, 53(5), 894–910.
https://doi.org/10.1108/md-07-2014-0464
Meng, J., & Berger, B. K. (2019). The impact of organizational
culture and leadership performance on PR professionals’ job
satisfaction: Testing the joint mediating effects of engagement
and trust. Public Relations Review, 45(1), 64-75.https://doi.
org/10.1016/j.pubrev.2018.11.002
Nurjanah, S., Pebianti, V., & Handaru, A.W. (2020). The
influence of transformational leadership, job satisfaction,
and organizational commitments on Organizational
Citizenship Behavior (OCB) in the inspectorate general of
the Ministry of Education and Culture. Cogent Business &
Management, 7(1), 1793521. https://doi.org/10.1080/23311
975.2020.1793521
Pancasila, I., Haryono, S., & Sulistyo, B. A. (2020). Effects of
work motivation and leadership toward work satisfaction and
employee performance: Evidence from Indonesia. Journal
of Asian Finance, Economics and Business, 7(6), 387–397.
https://doi.org/10.13106/jafeb.2020.vol7.no6.387
Raza, B., Ali, M., Ahmed, S., & Ahmad, J. (2018). Impact of
Managerial Coaching on Organizational Citizenship Behavior:
The Mediation and Moderation Model. International Journal
of Organizational Leadership, 7(1), 27–46. https://doi.
org/10.33844/ijol.2018.60360
Rayner, J., Lawton, A., & Williams, H. M. (2012). Organizational
Citizenship Behavior and the Public Service Ethos: Whither the
Organization?. Journal of Business Ethics, 106(2), 117–130.
https://doi.org/10.1007/s10551-011-0991-x
Shen, Y., Jackson, T., Ding, C., Yuan, D., Zhao, L., Dou, Y.,
& Zhang, Q. (2014). Linking perceived organizational
support with employee work outcomes in a Chinese context:
Organizational identification as a mediator. European
Management Journal, 32(3), 406–412. https://doi.org/10.
1016/j.emj.2013.08.004
Silitonga, T. B., Sujanto, B., Luddin, M. R., & Susita, D., & Endri,
E. (2020). Evaluation of Overseas Field Study Program at
the Indonesia Defense University. International Journal of
Innovation, Creativity and Change, 12(10), 554-573.
Silla, I., Navajas, J., & Koves, G. K. (2017). Organizational culture
and a safety-conscious work environment: The mediating
role of employee communication satisfaction. Journal of
Safety Research, 61(June), 121-127. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.
jsr.2017.02.005
Spector, P. E., & Fox, S. (2010). Theorizing about the deviant citizen:
An attributional explanation of the interplay of organizational
citizenship and counterproductive work behavior. Human
Resource Management Review, 20(2), 132–143. https://doi.
org/10.1016/j.hrmr.2009.06.002
Sun, P. Y. T., & Anderson, M. H. (2012). The Importance of
Attributional Complexity for Transformational Leadership
Studies. Journal of Management Studies, 49(6), 1001–1022.
https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-6486.2011.01037.x
Stone, D. L., Stone-Romero, E. F., & Lukaszewski, K. M.
(2007). The impact of cultural values on the acceptance and
effectiveness of human resource management policies and
practices. Human Resource Management Review, 17(2), 152-
165. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.hrmr.2007.04.003
Susanto, Y., Nuraini., Sutanta., Gunadi., Basrie., Mulyadi., &
Endri, E. (2020). The Effect of Task Complexity, Independence
and Competence on the Quality of Audit Results with Auditor
Integrity as a Moderating Variable. International Journal of
Innovation, Creativity and Change, 12(12), 742-755.
Swalhi, A., Zgoulli, S., & Hofaidhllaoui, M. (2017). The influence
of organizational justice on job performance. Journal of
Management Development, 36(4), 542–559. https://doi.
org/10.1108/jmd-11-2015-0162
Ugbomhe, U. O., Osagie, G. N., & Egwu, E. U. (2016). Impact
of Training and Development on Employee Performance in
Selected Banks in Edo North Senatorial District. Nigeria. Indian
Journal of Commerce & Management Studies, 7(3), 48–55.
Wang, G. (2011). The study on the relationship between employees’
sense of organizational justice and organizational citizenship
behavior in private enterprises. Energy Procedia, 5, 2030–
2034. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.egypro.2011.03.350
Wright, B. E., Moynihan, D. P., & Pandey, S. K. (2012). Pulling
the Levers: Transformational Leadership, Public Service
Motivation, and Mission Valence. Public Administration
Review, 72(2), 206–215. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1540-
6210.2011.02496.x
Thanh, V. B., & Toan, N. V. (2018). The Relationship between
Organizational Justice and Social Loafing in Ho Chi Minh
City, Vietnam. Journal of Asian Finance, Economics and
Business, 5(3), 179–183. http://doi.org/10.13106/jafeb.2018.
vol5.no3.179
Yuan, C. K., & Lee, C. Y. (2011). Exploration of a construct model
linking leadership types, organization culture, employee
performance, and leadership performance. Procedia-Social
and Behavioral Sciences, 25, 123–136. https://doi.org/10.1016/
j.sbspro.2011.10.534
Zeb, A., Abdullah, N. H., Othayman, M. B., & Ali, M. (2019).
The Role of LMX in Explaining Relationships between
Organizational Justice and Job Performance. Journal of
Competitiveness, 11, 144–160. https://doi.org/10.7441/
joc.2019.02.10
Zhang, Y., Liao, J., & Zhao, J. (2011). Research on organizational
citizenship behavior continuum and its consequences. Frontiers
of Business Research in China, 5(3), 364–379. https://doi.
org/10.1007/s11782-011-0135-2
Zhang, Y., Long, L., & Zhang, J. (2015). Pay for performance and
employee creativity. Management Decision, 53(7), 1378–1397.
https://doi.org/10.1108/md-11-2013-0596
