Effects of Covid-19 Cultural Change on Employee Performance: A Cross-Sectional Study in Jakarta, Indonesia
1. Introduction
The COVID-19 pandemic has tremendously impacted people's lives, including organizational activities. For almost 2 years since the covid-19 pandemic, employees in various sectors have been required to work from home, impacting aspects of individual and institutional performance appraisals. Currently, research on the quality of work life is gaining momentum among scholars and academics, especially during the COVID-19 pandemic (Dhamija et al., 2019). Many studies have proven that high employee performance can be a secret weapon for companies to achieve a competitive advantage (Diamantidis & Chatzoglou, 2019). Employees with satisfactory performance have competitive implications for overall organizational performance because they are usually more responsible in carrying out their duties (Rizky & Ardian, 2019). However, the change in the system worked radically and comprehensively due to the long-lasting pandemic, making the performance appraisal map change. Several predictor variables influence employees during the COVID-19 pandemic, namely job satisfaction, work commitment, employee compassion, and employee involvement (Zefeiti & Noor Azmi, 2017). However, this study has not explained the final phase of the COVID-19 pandemic into a new era after the pandemic and is an important reason for this research for future industrial and organizational policies.
One of the predictor variables that affect employee performance is job satisfaction. Many employees who are truly satisfied with their jobs consider work an important part of their lives. However, not a few are forced to work to survive, especially during the COVID-19 pandemic; many countries are experiencing a recession, increasing unemployment and becoming the basis for employees to keep working (Dhamija et al., 2019). Satisfaction significantly impacts the performance of an employee and the organization. Thus, the study of the relationship between these two variables is undeniably an important and interesting topic for further analysis and research (Jamal Ali & Anwar, 2021). In addition, organizations need to be aware of how to find highly committed employees. Having highly committed employees can help the analysis achieve its vision and mission. Not surprisingly, many are trying to increase employee organizational commitment.
Organizations can use this concept to promote commitment-oriented human resource practices to achieve organizational goals, especially during the difficult times of the COVID-19 pandemic (Cesário & Chambel, 2017). It is expected that employees who feel psychologically
bound and fully committed to an organization can achieve job satisfaction, which has an impact on the desire to return the favor by being more productive. Recently organizational commitment has emerged as a promising research area as it plays a bridge role in employee performance. However, this situation contradicts one where Management is being tested daily on its ability to keep its employees engaged while also implementing established policies. Employee turnover has taken over many sectors in the industry, as employees are found to be constantly changing jobs. Therefore, managing employees in terms of Engagement and retention is a scourge in these unstable economic times (Chandani et al., 2016).
Business arrangements have also changed, considering the global COVID-19 pandemic. Human resource managers continue to develop innovative, creative, and effective ways to engage employees healthier during this difficult time (Bailey et al., 2017; Chanana & Sangeeta, 2021). Even in the last decade, employee engagement has become widely accepted as a crucial part of an organization so that they can leverage it for higher employee retention, greater customer satisfaction, improved financial performance, and overall organizational performance (Gupta & Sharma, 2016). In addition, the study of compassion in an organization is widely viewed as a positive trend (Simpson et al., 2014). Recently, researchers and practitioners in organizations have begun to pay more attention to workplace compassion after realizing that employees' suffering in an organization incurs considerable financial, psychological, and social costs. (Moon et al., 2015). Previous research found a positive correlation between job satisfaction, commitment, productivity, profits, security, and employee fluctuations. Job satisfaction can include different points of view, such as possibilities for advancement, working conditions, relationship with collaborators, work age, reputation, and salary (Vorina et al., 2017). With good job satisfaction, an individual can maintain loyalty to the work done (Azaliney Binti Mohd Amin et al., 2021).
Despite this enormous interdisciplinary study, there is a tremendous lack of research on how job satisfaction is affected by job change. However, no previous research explains job changes after the Covid-19 pandemic is almost endemic (Chadi & Hetschko, 2017). In addition, research results on the relationship between organizational commitment and work performance are still diverse. Organizational commitment is not related to performance (Zefeiti & Noor Azmi, 2017). Nevertheless, many researchers argue that there is a positive relationship between organizational commitment and performance (Al-Muallem & Al-Surimi, 2019; Irfan & Marzuki, 2018).
By looking at this gap, this study aims to find a better way to influence employee performance amid job changes as a transition from the COVID-19 pandemic to being endemic. This research focuses on analyzing how job changes affect Satisfaction, commitment, involvement, compassion, and employees. The findings of this study are expected to contribute to the organization's effective strategy for improving employee performance in terms of employee commitment, employee satisfaction, and compassion after the covid-19 pandemic ends.
2. Literature Review
2.1. Compassion
Compassion is a new concept adapted from the Buddhist philosophy of how to be compassionate towards oneself and also pay attention to oneself to be able to endure difficult circumstances. This construction was used as research by Kristin Neff, thus pioneering this concept. Compassion is related to the individual's openness to the suffering experienced so as to cause self-care and kindness, to understand and not judge shortcomings excessively, and to see this condition as an experience that is experienced throughout human life (Neff et al., 2007). Compassion can be defined as an organization's capacity that addresses human suffering. The 'suffering' refers to an expansive range of displeasing subjective incidents, including emotional and physical pain, psychological distress, and existential grief (Lilius et al., 2011). While compassion in the workplace is a feeling of affection, attention, and tenderness that is expressed to subordinates or co-workers without expecting certain organizational benefits (Eldor, 2018), compassion in organizations can be seen as a form of selective attention and non-attention that is embedded in a particular compassionate organizing process (Simpson et al., 2014). Employees experiencing distress can better cope with their difficulties and continue their work when showing compassion by reducing the anxiety and fear that weakens them and allows them to readjust emotionally after a traumatic experience (Moon et al., 2015). Therefore, compassion is important to apply to the organization. This can help employees get out of the burnout phase (Kim et al., 2017). Recent research in the managerial literature has explicitly shown that emotions present in the workplace can have a positive impact on employee effectiveness. For example, how feelings of compassion for public service officers have a positive effect on employee performance and Engagement (Eldor, 2018). Other research shows that compassion from supervisors has a contagious effect and has an impact on employees' human behavior towards customers, society, and other co-workers. Therefore, the feeling of human affection experienced does not stop at the front door of public services but forms the attitudes, emotions, behavior, and performance of service-oriented employees. This is also corroborated by research conducted by Nazir & Islam (2020), where compassion has benefits related to employee performance at work (Nazir & Islam, 2020). Loving Satisfaction enables employees to gain a sense of value, meaning, and purpose from their challenging work (Dwyer et al., 2021). Compassion in an organization can build positive emotions, which ultimately leads to a more substantial affective commitment to the organization (Ko & Choi, 2020). Likewise, organizational commitment will increase among staff members when they receive compassionate support during a critical incident (Zoghbi-Manrique-de-Lara & Guerra-Baez, 2014).
2.2. Employee Engagement
The term employee engagement was first popularized by Kahn (1990); employee engagement theory is the formal idea that by challenging, supporting, and inspiring employees, organizations increase Satisfaction and maximize staff output. According to this theory, companies with high levels of employee motivation and loyalty enjoy benefits of employee engagement, such as lower turnover and less absenteeism, higher customer satisfaction, higher profits, and increased creativity and innovation. Employee engagement can be defined as the capacity for employees to be involved with their work. Essential elements in employee engagement are work focus, power, and absorption in a job (Cesário & Chambel, 2017). Employee engagement is closely related to circumstances where employees have to approve and satisfy thoughts about the work they are doing, marked by the existence of belief, vigor, and absorption (Simbula et al., 2011). Engagement is making use of themselves for their work roles, where they use and express themselves physically, emotionally, and cognitively (Eldor & Vigoda-Gadot, 2016). Employee engagement can grow by instilling organizational values starting from the recruitment process, training, mentoring, and performance management evaluation (Pitaloka & Meirini Putri, 2021). Employee Engagement is a workplace approach designed to ensure that employees are committed to their organizational goals and values, motivated to contribute to organizational success, and at the same time, able to enhance their sense of well-being. Vorina et al., (2017)'s study shows that employee engagement will increase if life satisfaction increases. Engaged employees are those who work with passion towards organizational goals. An uninvolved employee appears to be participating but not with passion and energy toward the common goals of the organization (Chanana & Sangeeta, 2021). Uninvolved employees are unhappy in their jobs because of their unhappiness. The engagement was also found to have three different aspects which are intellectual Engagement, which refers to dedication towards better performance at one's work, affective Engagement or positive feelings after doing one's work and lastly, social Engagement, which involves having discussions with others about improving work-related improvements (Chandani et al., 2016). Employees will choose to engage themselves at different levels and in response to the resources they receive from their organization (Eldor & Vigoda-Gadot, 2016). Increased levels of employee engagement can lead to increased profitability and organizational competitiveness and are critical to employee performance and the success of a business or organization (Bailey et al., 2017; Eldor & Vigoda-Gadot, 2016). The importance of Engagement is because it will improve employee performance, increase job satisfaction, and consequently lead the organization to achieve goals (Islam, 2017). Conversely, decreased levels of employee engagement can impact productivity, customer service, and performance (Al Mehrzi & Singh, 2016). The results of previous studies indicate that employee engagement has a significant positive effect on organizational commitment and also find employee engagement as an important determinant of organizational commitment. When employees are engaged, they are more likely to commit (Islam, 2017). Research findings show that the more engaged employees are at work, the higher their commitment to the organization or institution (Chanana & Sangeeta, 2021; Macey & Schneider, 2008). Job satisfaction is a significant driver of job engagement (Chanana & Sangeeta, 2021). The results of previous research revealed a positive relationship between job satisfaction and job involvement. Further analysis shows that employee job satisfaction leads to employee engagement (Chanana & Sangeeta, 2021; Macey & Schneider, 2008).
2.3. Job Satisfaction
Job satisfaction theory has a strong overlap with theories that explain human motivation. Some of the most important theories of job satisfaction and their impact on workers are Maslow's Hierarchy of Needs Theory, Herzberg's Motivator-Hygiene Theory, the Job Characteristics Model, Dispositional Approach. Maslow’s needs hierarchy theory was one of the first theories to examine the important contributors to job satisfaction. The theory suggests that human needs form a five-level hierarchy consisting of physiological needs, safety, belongingness/love, esteem, and self-actualization. According to Herzberg’s Theory, merely the fulfillment of basic needs is not sufficient for job satisfaction. Man tries to actualize himself in his job. His self-actualization needs act as factors of job satisfaction. According to this theory, there are two types of work variables. Satisfiers and dissatisfiers (Jamal Ali & Anwar, 2021; Rachmawati & Suyatno, 2021; Saks, 2019). Job satisfaction can be defined as a state of mind that is determined by the extent to which an individual feels his job-related needs are being met (Toropova et al., 2020). When people talk about employees' work attitudes, they tend to refer to their job satisfaction (Kong et al., 2018). Job satisfaction can be grouped by various features (nature of work, supervision, benefits, contingent rewards, operating procedures, and co-workers) that complete the job profile (Dhamija et al., 2019). Job-related Satisfaction has become a robust research variable in the scope of organizational behavior because of its wide prevalence in individual employees' personal and professional lives. Various researchers have highlighted the importance of job satisfaction and its predecessors in their studies, where job satisfaction is more than just an attitude that explains a person's internal state, both qualitatively and quantitatively (Dhamija et al., 2019). Hoboubi et al., (2017) stated that job satisfaction is an affective orientation that an employee has toward his work. Satisfaction is a stepping stone to Engagement; therefore, the organization needs to match the objectives of the job with the individual purposes of the employee so that he can feel comfortable with his work (Chandani et al., 2016). Job satisfaction is considered a measure of worker welfare. Job satisfaction includes the well-being that people get from various aspects of their work, such as fulfillment, task characteristics, personal growth, promotion opportunities, managerial qualities, organizational support, and social relations at work. The meta-analysis summarizes a large body of evidence that job satisfaction correlates with employee performance (Chadi & Hetschko, 2017). If employees feel comfortable working alone, employee performance will be increased, and vice versa. Low job satisfaction will automatically reduce employee performance (Loan, 2020; Ramli, 2019) which is indicated by unwanted behavior such as delays, absenteeism, and turnover (Andrade et al., 2019). Job satisfaction affects high employee commitment and performance (Beloor et al., 2017). Job satisfaction leads to higher work performance. It can happen because job satisfaction hypothetically affects work performance indirectly through the aim and measure of an employee, and job satisfaction affects employee performance positively and significantly (Hendri, 2019). Employees who are satisfied with pay, fairness at work, promotion opportunities, and manager support tend to be committed to their organization (García Lirios, 2021; Loan, 2020). High job satisfaction will positively affect work commitment, lowering employee turnover (Chanana & Sangeeta, 2021). However, when employees feel uncertain, their urge to continue working in the company disperses (Beloor et al., 2017).
2.4. Work Commitment
The main theoretical framework on which organizational commitment is based is Homan's (Homans, 1958) exchange theory, in which organizational commitment is seen as the result of an exchange relationship between individuals and organizations. This theory suggests that as exchanges become more profitable from an individual's point of view, his commitment to the organization increases. The current study is based on that theoretical framework. Furthermore, work commitment refers to a set of moral and evaluative principles characteristic of leaders who, in their desire to achieve their goals, strongly believe in the ideals of productivity, order, and systematization of organizational functioning. (García Lirios, 2021). Employees who work in organizations whose values and goals are aligned with their professional values and goals are more likely to adopt positive behaviors to be consistent with the organization's mission, values, and goals, thereby developing a strong commitment to the organization and a high level of job involvement. (Beloor et al., 2017; Cesário & Chambel, 2017; Zefeiti & Noor Azmi, 2017). An organization must maintain employee commitment because success or failure is closely related to the motivation and efforts of its employees, who are often the product of employee work commitment (Liu & Mao, 2020). Several studies have shown a strong relationship between organizational commitment and job satisfaction and that people who are more committed to the organization are less likely to leave their jobs. Organizational commitment can be considered an extension of job satisfaction because it is related to an employee's positive attitude, not towards his work but the organization (Ćulibrk et al., 2018). Employees with high organizational commitment tend to feel they can manage a more significant workload. Committed employees also do their jobs better than those less committed because they participate and think more about the work. Commitment can increase or hinder employees' willingness to do work because it affects their productivity and quality of work. This study's findings align with previous findings regarding the impact of commitment on employee performance (Irfan & Marzuki, 2018; Loan, 2020). Employees who demonstrate a more outstanding value-based commitment to their organization are more likely to engage in knowledge sharing, decrease absenteeism and lead to higher performance levels (Beloor et al., 2017; Cesário & Chambel, 2017). The relationship between organizational commitment, job satisfaction, and job performance has been confirmed in various studies, but its strength varies. Most studies find a positive relationship between organizational commitment and job performance, with higher commitment leading to increased performance. (Loan, 2020).
2.5. Employee Performance
Performance theory comes from a variety of fields but is most closely related to the work of Victor Turner (1988) and Richard Schechner (1985). Performance theory suggests that each of us performs well in our society. Whether through the clothes we wear, the conversations we have, or the food we eat, they are all performances designed as signal systems for ourselves and others in our place in our social group. Nowadays, employee performance is synonymous with activities related to the company. Employee Performance refers to the extent to which employees can meet objectives, procedures, or assignments assigned to the organization (Begenirbas, M and Caliskan, 2014). Employee performance is closely related to the person's capability to carry out activities that donate to the growth of the organization's technical core (Santos et al., 2018). Employee performance is becoming an increasingly crucial and strategic imperative for organizations in the current business circumstance. It’s safe to say that the organization's success or failure depends on employee performance (Hameed, Abdul, 2011). Thus, organizations need to be aware of their employees’ performance capabilities to be able to manage them and, in turn, align them with the firm’s overall business strategy (Diamantidis & Chatzoglou, 2019). Improving employee performance is one of the organizational focuses that must be considered. From various previous research results, it was found that many aspects are considered to increase employee performance, such as compassion, employee engagement, job satisfaction, and work commitment (Pawirosumarto et al., 2017). Some previous studies show that job satisfaction has a significant effect on employee performance effectively (Diamantidis & Chatzoglou, 2019; Matthews et al., 2018; Pawirosumarto et al., 2017). Other studies tell that, indeed, Enhancing employee performance in the organization can take diverse aspects, including organizational commitment, employee engagement, motivation, and consistent discipline (Amri et al., 2021). Theoretically, the employee with a high level of organizational commitment will show good behavior to the organization and provide the best they can to leverage their performance (Eliyana et al., 2019). Previous studies indicate that compassion in the work area allows employees to cultivate approving work attitudes and behaviors, leading to better performance (Ko & Choi, 2019).
3. Hypotheses
Based on the previous study literature above, we develop some hypothesis that analyzes severe factors that impact employee performance in transition time;
H1: Compassion affects Employee Performance
H2: Compassion affects Job Satisfaction
H3: Compassion affects Work Commitment
H4: Employee Engagement affects Job Satisfaction
H5: Employee Engagement affects Work Commitment
H6: Employee Engagement affects Employee Performance
H7: Job Satisfaction affects Employee Performance
H8: Work Commitment affects Employee Performance
4. Methodology
The research was conducted in Jakarta, which is Indonesia's capital city and the world's second-largest urban agglomeration. The location of this study was chosen because this city became the epicenter of the coronavirus outbreak in Indonesia, with 2,738 positive cases and more than 100 deaths in 2020 (Fachriansyah, 2020) and is currently one of the conducive zones for work. The research was conducted from March 2022 – June 2022. This study uses a quantitative approach using surveys and structural equation modeling (Structural Equation Modeling). Collecting data through research instruments by distributing questionnaires to employees who work in Jakarta using Google Forms. The results were then obtained using the Lisrel 8.5 program. The sampling technique used by the researcher is a nonprobability sampling method with a purposive sampling technique. The estimation used is the maximum likelihood (ML) and has a multivariate normal data distribution, so the sample size of 100-200 is good. For a sample size above 200, this test tends to reject Ho. On the other hand, if it is less than 100, this test tends to accept H0 (Hair et al., 2014; Sekaran & Bougie, 2016; Yamin & Kurniawan, 2009). The number of samples in this study was 200. To assess the feasibility of the model using the Goodness of fit method. This study uses a Likert scale of 1-5 (Strongly Disagree, Disagree, Neutral, Agree, Strongly Agree). Reject H0 if the t-value > 1.96 or not reject H0 if the t-value < 1.96 (Yamin & Kurniawan, 2009). For the measurement of employee engagement, we used a questionnaire adapted from Shotria and Danda (2020) and Vorina (2017). To assess compassion, we adapted a questionnaire from Neil (2008) and Thornhill (1996). Furthermore, to assess job satisfaction, we adapted a questionnaire from Hur (2016) and ZafarOn2021). Another side, we used a question that was adapted from Li et al. l (2021) and Redy et al. (2019) for a variable work commitment. Meanwhile, for Employee performance, we adapt a questionnaire from Hee et al. (2019) and Ramli (2019). The questionnaire in this study contained 22 items which were filled out and returned by all 100 respondents. This study followed ethical guidelines approved by the university's study ethics office on May 31st, 2022. This department ensures that the consent form defines the purpose of this study and ensures voluntary participation and confidentiality of responses. The descriptive statistics of the sample are shown in Table 1.
5. Results
5.1. Respondents
| Profile | Frequency | Percent | |
| Sex | Male | 43 | 22 |
| Woman | 157 | 78 | |
| Age | <26 | 176 | 88 |
| >41 | 0 | 0 | |
| 26–30 | 20 | 10 | |
| 31–35 | 3 | 1.5 | |
| 36–40 | 1 | 0.5 | |
| Marital Status | Unmarried | 190 | 95 |
| Married | 10 | 5 | |
| Level of Education Has Been Completed | High School | 101 | 50.5 |
| Diploma | 1 | 0.5 | |
| Under Graduate | 93 | 46.5 | |
| Graduate | 4 | 2 | |
| Post Graduate | 1 | 0.5 |
A total of 200 questionnaires were collected. Information about the respondents is shown in the table above.
5.2. Data Validity and Reliability Testing
| Construct | Indicator (Likert Scale 1-5) | t-value | Standardized loading factors | Adapted from |
| Employee Engagement | I know what is expected of me at work | 7.04 | 0.52 | (Shrotryia & Dhanda, 2020; Vorina et al., 2017) |
| I make every effort to create value for the organization where I work | 7.09 | 0.53 | ||
| I take opportunities that help me learn and grow at work | 7.60 | 0.56 | ||
| My personal goals are in line with the organization's vision and mission | 6.70 | 0.51 | ||
| My opinion counts in my workplace | 5.27 | 0.40 | ||
| Compassion | How often do you receive attention, care, and compassion from your organization? | 11.65 | 0.78 | (Hur et al., 2016; Nadim & Zafar, 2021) |
| How often do you get attention, care, and compassion from your boss? | 10.74 | 0.73 | ||
| How often do you receive attention, care, and compassion from your co-workers? | 10.06 | 0.69 | ||
| Job Satisfaction | At my work, I feel full of energy | 1.96 | 0.65 | (Ramli, 2019; Vorina et al., 2017) |
| I have the opportunity to advance in my work | 8.24 | 0.71 | ||
| I am enthusiastic about my work | 8.78 | 0.77 | ||
| My work inspires me | 6.73 | 0.55 | ||
| I have the opportunity to be responsible for determining and planning my work | 6.37 | 0.52 | ||
| Work Commitment | At work, I am willing to cooperate actively with other workers to complete tasks | 1.96 | 0.55 | (Li et al., 2021; Reddy et al., 2019) |
| I will continue to work in my organization and sincerely contribute my services to its development | 6.38 | 0.65 | ||
| I care about my organization | 5.86 | 0.57 | ||
| I am always active in learning and trying to improve my skills | 6.16 | 0.62 | ||
| Employee Performance | I am satisfied with my performance because most of it is very good | 1.96 | 0.66 | (Hee et al., 2019; Ramli, 2019) |
| I receive significant recognition for a job well done | 8.47 | 0.75 | ||
| I meet the formal performance requirements of the job | 7.37 | 0.62 | ||
| My hard work makes me do my job well | 6.95 | 0.58 | ||
| I take the initiative in doing my job | 6.37 | 0.53 |
| Construct | Construct Reliability | Average Variance Extracted |
| Employee Engagement | 0.96 | 0.83 |
| Compassion | 0.98 | 0.94 |
| Job Satisfaction | 0.96 | 0.85 |
| Work Commitment | 0.92 | 0.77 |
| Employee Performance | 0.96 | 0.83 |
A variable is said to have good validity on the construct or latent variable if the value of the loading factors is greater than the critical value > 1.96 and has a standardized factor loading (SLF) of 0.5, and it is more desirable that the SF value > 0.7 (Hair et al., 2014; Wijanto, 2008; Yamin & Kurniawan, 2009). From table 2, Convergent Validity, all items are valid because the value of loading factors is < 1.96 and has a standardized factor loading (SLF) < 0.5. In measuring reliability in SEM, the construct reliability measure and average variance extracted measure will be used. The expected CR value is CR > 0.7. The AVE value shows the meaning of the significant content of indicator variations that the construct can contain. The acceptable AVE value is a minimum of AVE > 0.5 (Hair et al., 2014; Wijanto, 2008; Yamin & Kurniawan, 2009). From table 3, construct reliability has been above the recommended level.
6. Hypothesis Testing
| No | Goodness of Fit | Cut-Off Value | Table | Ket |
| 1 | P-Value for RMSEA | > 0.05 | 0.00 | Close Fit |
| 2 | Parsimonious Normed Fit Index (PNFI) | > 0.6 | 0.77 | Good Fit |
| 3 | Comparative Fit Index (CFI) | > 0.9 | 0.93 | Good Fit |
| 4 | Incremental Fit Index (IFI) | > 0.9 | 0.93 | Good Fit |
The Goodness of fit results generated in this model can be accepted based on the measurement results above, which show that this model is good. These results are used to estimate the initial measurement model (CFA) simultaneously and then evaluate the measurement model.
Figure 1.
Figure 1: Structural Model (t-value)
Figure 2.
Figure 2: Structural Model (Standardized Solution) EG: Employee Engagement, CO: Compassion, JS: Job Satisfaction, WC: Work Commitment, EP: Employee Performance.
| No | Path | Standardization Coefficient | t-value | t-table | Remarks |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | Compassion → Employee Performance | 0.15 | 1.50 | 1.96 | Not Significance |
| 2 | Compassion → Job Satisfaction | 0.23 | 2.12 | 1.96 | Significance |
| 3 | Compassion → Work Commitment | 0.00 | 0.01 | 1.96 | Not Significance |
| 4 | Employee Engagement → Job Satisfaction | 0.60 | 5.06 | 1.96 | Significance |
| 5 | Employee Engagement → Work Commitment | 0.90 | 5.51 | 1.96 | Significance |
| 6 | Employee Engagement → Employee Performance | -0.02 | -0.06 | 1.96 | Not Significance |
| 7 | Job Satisfaction → Employee Performance | 0.41 | 2.88 | 1.96 | Significance |
| 8 | Work Commitment → Employee Performance | 0.39 | 1.13 | 1.96 | Not Significance |
Table 5 shows the results of the study that in hypothesis 1, compassion has no effect on employee performance (t-value = 1.50), hypothesis 2 shows that compassion has an effect on job satisfaction (t-value = 2.12), hypothesis 3 shows that compassion has no effect on work commitment (t-value = 0.01), hypothesis 4 shows that employee engagement has an effect on job satisfaction (t-value = 5.06), hypothesis 5 shows that employee engagement has an effect on work commitment (t-value = 5.51), hypothesis 6 shows that employee engagement has no effect on employee performance (t-value = -0.06), hypothesis 7 shows that job satisfaction has an effect on employee performance (t-value = 2.88), hypothesis 8 shows that work commitment has no effect on employee performance (t-value = 1.13).
7. Discussion
The results of the first and third hypotheses show that compassion has no effect on employee performance and work commitment. The results of our study prove that compassion by the organization does not necessarily affect employee performance and commitment. This finding contradicts previous research where organizations that have high compassion can improve employee performance (Lilius et al., 2011; Rhee et al., 2017). We argue this happened because it was outside the context of the work being done. The company can give any form of attention; as long as it is not related to work, it will not affect the performance and commitment of the employee. Although compassion is not significant in shaping employee commitment, some strategic recommendations can be made to foster employee commitment. Some things that can be done include promoting a complementary and progressive work ethic and strengthening commitment to collaboration (Yong-hui et al., 2011). Creating a work environment based on love is also believed to help increase employee commitment and commitment to the organization, which in turn has implications for strengthening employee commitment (Ko & Choi, 2020; Moon et al., 2014; Nisar et al., 2020). The opposite is shown in the results of the second hypothesis; namely, compassion has an effect on employee job satisfaction. Previous research has stated that affection has a significant effect on employee work pleasure (Eliyana et al., 2019; Vaillancourt & Wasylkiw, 2020). Maintaining employee satisfaction to reduce turnover is one of the company's important responsibilities (Chadi & Hetschko, 2017). Managers should build a corporate culture that engages and supports employee activities with compassion to expand their job satisfaction (Kong et al., 2018). Managers can cultivate a culture where compassion is expected, recognized, valued, and celebrated within the organization. Here, managers need to create an atmosphere where employees can talk about their pain, give meaning to the experience, and begin to heal. Compassion in organizations can occur at all levels—from leaders dealing with employee pain to employees listening supportively to their colleagues discussing complex cases. CSR is an important human resource management intervention that can maintain meaningfulness and compassion among employees vis-a-vis involving them in their work (Nazir & Islam, 2020). The results of the fourth and fifth hypotheses indicate that employee engagement has an effect on employee job satisfaction and work commitment. Employee engagement positively and significantly creates opportunities for increased job satisfaction (Amri et al., 2021). Employees with high emotional attachment to the company are easier to form job satisfaction (Vorina et al., 2017). The results of our study also prove that employee attachment is significant in building employee commitment. The more employees are psychologically and emotionally involved, the stronger their dedication to the organization (Macey & Schneider, 2008). Some of the proposed employee engagement activities for employees are reward schemes, communication activities, team building, and leadership activities. More of their abilities and potential can be nurtured through a two-way communication process to motivate them toward their work (Osborne & Hammoud, 2017). Organizations need to implement specific engagement plans and create an inclusive environment to instill a higher level of trust and enthusiasm to learn and innovate for successful job roles (Jha & Kumar, 2016). Second, organizations need to help create meaning for employees in their work and resolve any difficulties they face. This can be achieved by making employees understand the relationship between their job contributions and overall business objectives (Al Mehrzi & Singh, 2016; Chandani et al., 2016). In addition, clear guidance and direction should be given to employees to empower them to feel that their contribution is valued and relevant to the success of their organization (Al Mehrzi & Singh, 2016). The opposite is shown in the results of the sixth hypothesis; namely, employee engagement has no effect on performance. This result is inversely proportional to previous research, which explains that the more employees are involved, the more performance and productivity will increase (Eldor & Vigoda-Gadot, 2016). We conclude that by working from home, lack of employee interaction has no effect on employee performance. This is due to training programs, employee development, and certification programs, which they should be involved in and improve performance but had to be abolished due to the pandemic (Vorina et al., 2017). The results of the seventh hypothesis show that job satisfaction has an effect on employee performance. Research conducted by Al Mehrzi (2016) states that satisfied employees will have good performance. In contrast, the opposite result is stated in the eighth hypothesis, which shows that work commitment has no effect on employee performance. This result contradicts research conducted by Chandani (2016) which states that employees who are committed to the company will have good performance. This could be based on the prolonged period of the covid-19 pandemic, and requires them to work from home without strong controls. On the one hand, they are satisfied and comfortable, but on the other hand, employees are not committed to their work, even trying to find companies that are more profitable for employees.
8. Conclusions
This study found that employee engagement has an effect on employee job satisfaction and work commitment. Likewise, compassion has an effect on employee job satisfaction. Likewise, job satisfaction affects employee performance. However, on the other hand, compassion has no effect on employee performance and work commitment. Likewise, employee engagement has no effect on performance. Likewise, work commitment has no effect on employee performance. The results of the study have relevant implications for practitioners that employee involvement should also be considered to increase job satisfaction and employee commitment. Employee engagement should not be done just once but must be integrated into the corporate culture to encourage employee development and the organization as a whole. The same goes for compassion, a form of application that companies can take to acknowledge their accomplishments, point out their mistakes politely, build bonds with employees, help, and provide support and coaching guidance.
9. Research Limitation and Future Research
This study has a limited sample in one area with a sample of two hundred. Future research is expected to be able to explore more areas with a larger sample. Then, it can be investigated using other variables outside of this research to add to the treasures of knowledge.