1

Andinasari, The Effect Transformational...

THE EFFECT OF TRANSFORMATIONAL LEADERSHIP, PERSONALITY AND

ACHIEVEMENT MOTIVATION ON JOB PERFORMANCE OF PGRI ADMINISTRATION
EMPLOYEES IN THE UNIVERSITY OF PALEMBANG

Andinasari
Doctorate in Educational Management Program, PPS State University of Jakarta
Andinasari_yulianto@yahoo.com

ABSTRACT

The purpose of this study was to determine the effect of transformational leadership,
personality and achievement motivation on job performance of PGRI administration
employees in the University of Palembang. This research tried to answer the problems about
job performance involving 144 administration employees that had been selected from the
target population of 223 employees by using quantitative approach with path analysis
methods. The reseach concluded that (1) Transformational Leadership has a direct positive
effect on job performance;(2) Personality has a direct positive effect on job performance;(3)
Achievement Motivation has a direct positive effect on job performance;(4) Transformational
Leadership has a direct positive effect on achievement motivation;(5) Personality has a
direct positive effect on job achievement motivation; therefore, they improved the job
performance of PGRI administration employees in the University of Palembang.
Keywords: transformational leadership, personality, achievement motivation, job
performance.

INTRODUCTION
In the current era of globalization competition is getting increasingly intense. To
handle this, qualified human resources are necessary so as to be able to face competitions and
changes. The quality of human resources is currently the main focus of various studies in the
field of organizational management because human resource is a factor that distinguishes
developing countries from underdeveloped countries. Therefore, the role of education
becomes very strategic in improving the quality of human resources as the actors of
 2

development. It refers to the educational goals, which among others is to establish qualified
human resources.
Efforts to improve the quality of human resources as a perpetrator of development is
determined by the quality of education. Especially PGRI Palembang University is one of the
educational institutions that prepare human resources in the field of education and non-
education. To prepare qualified human resources, a qualified process of academic and
administrative services is necessary as well. On the contrary, the unprofessional process of
academic and administrative services will hinder the organizational goals achievement. The
level of administrative services of an organization is a portrayal of the administrative staff
performance level of the institution concerned.
The administrative staff level of performance can be measured by the low level of
attenandce in the workplace which is an indicator of employee discipline performance and
the ineffective and inefficient use of time to carry out the work as a phenomena often found
in public service organizations. Low performance can also be caused by cultural aspects or by
working systems which are not supportive enough, such as unclear tasks and functions of an
employee, high workload (can be brought about by the lack number of employees, high work
volume, and the compatibility between the task with the personality). In this case,
achievement motivation becomes very important in encouraging the employees performance
to be in accorandce with the expected level. The high level performance of the employees
should be pursued, created and maintained, for it will affect the efforts of achieving
organizational goals in accorandce with the vision.
The success of a college as an organization can be measured by the level of
performance, organizational performance as well as the individual performance of
administrative staff who works effectively and efficiently in supporting and facilitating the
implementation of the teaching staff or lecturers duties, and also the lecturers as an
outstanding and productive teaching force in the field of teaching, research, and community
service.
The indicators of administrative personnel low performance, among others, are the
employees lack of discipline, such as late coming in the workplace, leaving the office early,
neglecting the task during office hours by playing games, chatting, lack of creativity at work,
demonstrate no initiative in carrying out the work, so that tasks are often delayed in
completion. Then, there is this tendency in which the employees concern about the
attenandce records only to earn the incentive rewards for attenandce. On the other hand, there
is also an inclination of the employees to always go home on time, they sometimes
 3

deliberately delay or leave their jobs just to get home in time. If such things happen
continuously, it will result in an idle, and reward-oriented working culture, slow, not creative
and less productive administrative employees.
Some incidents that still happen are the occurrence of disciplinary violations cases by
administrative personnel that need to be brought up in the leadership meeting which could be
resulted in the penalty or punishment beginning with the coaching by the employee's
immediate supervisor or in this case the head of administration, moderate to heavy
disciplinary punishment sanctions. In reality, based on the fact that there are administrative
staff who exceed the tolerance limit of absence should be penalized. In the settlement of such
cases, the head of administration as his immediate supervisor usually feels reluctant to
directly report those disciplinary cases thus the leader could not act firmly. Some disciplinary
violations committed by administrative personnel that occurred from 2013 to 2016 can be
seen in table 1.1 below:
Table 1
Recapitulation of the Number of Disciplinary Offense by Administrative Staff of
PGRI Palembang University
YEAR TOTAL FACTS ABOUT PUNISHMENT
Year 2013 2 cases Receive coaching from the work unit head
Year 2014 10 cases 1Receive coaching from direct supervisor
4 cases 2Receive coaching from the work unit head for this
case
Year 2015 3 cases 2Moved to other work unit
2Receive coaching from the work unit head for this
case
Obtain sanctions and guiandce from the work unit
Year 2016 11 cases head

From table 1.1 it can be seen that disciplinary violations committed by administrative
staff always exist from year to year. The employment regulations in effect are applied to
achieve effective and efficient organizational goals.
In the implementation of the main tasks and functions that have not been maximized
is also a measure of the still low performance of the administrative staff of PGRI University
of Palembang. This is also evident as in the Annual Report of PGRI Palembang Year 2015
and Year 2016 retaining no complete report regarding this matter. This leads to the absence
of firm disciplinary action by the head of administration as a direct supervisor i.e. to
employees whose number of absentees in the workplace exceeds the tolerance limit. Based
 4

on the regulation, employees will get a verbal warning if they fail to turn up for work until 3
days without any news, and then if they again fail to report to work without news, they will
get a written warning from the leader. As for the absence on a daily basis for no valid reason
there will be a cut of transport allowance. Administrative staff whose total absence exceeds
the limit will have to face the demotion prospect.

METHODOLOGY
This research uses quantitative approach through survey method by using path
analysis technique and data collection technique using questionnaire to 144 people out of the
affordable population sample of 243 administrative personnel of PGRI University
Palembang. The sampling method is the proportional random sampling. This research
consists of three independent variable that is, transformational leadership, personality and
achievement motivation and one dependent variable, performance. Instrument validity test
and calculation of instrument reliability coefficient are based on the result of a test instrument
to 30 respondents.
Using the help of SPSS Version 22 program, this research consists of three
independent variables. Covering transformational leadership (X1), personality (X2),
achievement motivation (X3) and one dependent variable, employee performance (Y). The
variables causal relationship in this study is as follows:

Transformational
leadership (x1)

Achievement Performance (Y)

motivation (X3)

Personality (X2)

Figure 1 Constellation between research variables

RESULT AND DISCUSSION

The data collected from each variable in this study is arranged in tabulation in
accordance with the needs analysis. The results of data tabulation are used to provide an
overview of the allocation or distribution of data. Included in the descriptions of the proposed
 5

are mean (average), median, mode, range (scope), lowest score, highest score, distribution
and pictures of diagram in the form of histogram and scattered diagram. This data is obtained
after the research instrument is given to the research sample, the administrative staff at the
PGRI University, Palembang as many as 144 people. Further data is processed by using
descriptive statistical techniques. Data description about the research variables,
transformational leadership variable (X1), personality (X2), achievement motivation (X3) and
employee performance (Y) is presented comprehensively in table 4.1. Recapitulation of the
research data is as follows.
Table 2
Recapitulation of Research Data Description
Achievement Job
Statistics Transformational Personality
Motivation Performance
Value Leadership (X1) (X2)
(X3) (Y)
N 144 144 144 144
Mean 113,09 101,24 109,03 105,33
Median 114,00 102,00 109,50 106,50
Modus 113,00 104,00 112,00 108,00
Std Deviation 4,791 4,875 4,848 5,709
Variance 22,950 23,762 23,502 32,587
Maximum 124 87 121 116
Minimum 97 114 93 86
Range 27 27 28 30

One of the requirements in the use of parametric statistics is the normality test. This
test is conducted to ascertain whether the data collected from the respondents comes from a
population with normal distribution. Normality tests on the regression model are used to
assess whether residual values (random error) resulting from regression are normally
distributed. In this study, the normality test was performed on the residual values of the
regression model that correlated the exogenous variable scores against the endogenous
variable scores on each path using the Liliefors test.
The test criterion is if Lo <Ltable with α = 0.05 then Ho is accepted which means that the
random error is normally distributed. Based on the results of the attached calculation analysis,
the obtained Lcount = 0.0623, while the value of Ltable (Liliefors critical value) at α = 0.05 and n
= 144, is equal to 0.0738. From these results, it is known that the value of Lcount = 0.0623
<Ltable = 0.0738, so Ho is accepted. Thus, it can be concluded that the random error of the
transformational leadership variable regression model on employee performance of
employees comes from a normally distributed population.
 6

From the results of the normality random error test of the employees performance,
based on the results of the attached calculation analysis, the obtained Lcount = 0,0725, while
the value of Ltable (Liliefors critical value) at α = 0.05 and n = 144 is 0.0738. From these
results, it is known that the value of Lcount = 0.0725 <Ltable = 0.0738, so Ho is accepted. It can
be concluded that the random error of personality variable regression model to employees
performance comes from a normally distributed population.
From the result of random error test of regression model of achievement motivation
variable to employees performance variable, based on the results of the attached calculation
analysis, the obtained value of Lcount = 0,0576, while Ltable value (Liliefors critical value) at α
= 0,05 and n = 144, is equal to 0.0738. From these results, it is known that the value of Lcount
= 0.0576 <Ltable = 0.0738, so Ho is accepted. Thus, it can be concluded that the random error
regression model of achievement motivation variable toward employees performance comes
from a normally distributed population.
From the result of random error test of regression model from transformational
leadership variable to achievement motivation variable, based on the results of the attached
calculation analysis, the obtained value of Lcount = 0,0598, while Ltable value (Liliefors critical
value) at α = 0,05 and n = 144, is equal to 0.0738. From the results, it is known that the value
of Lcount = 0.0598 <Ltable = 0.0738, so Ho is accepted. Thus, it can be concluded that the
random error model of transformational leadership variable regression toward achievement
motivation variable comes from a normally distributed population.
The result of the random error test of regression model from the personality variable
to the achievement motivation variable, based on the results of the attached calculation
analysis, the obtained value of Lcount = 0,0517, while the Ltable value (Liliefors critical value) at
α = 0.05 and n = 144, is 0,0738. From these results, it is known that the value of Lcount =
0.0517 <Ltable = 0.0738, so Ho is accepted. Thus, it can be concluded that the random error
regression personality variable model to achievement motivation variable comes from a
normally distributed population.
Significance test regression effect aims at determining whether the independent
variable (X) has a significant influence to the dependent variable (Y). Based on the result of
regression equation calculation model between transformational leadership variable (X 1) to
employees performance variable (Y), it is obtained that the regression equation Y = -9,371 +
1,014 X1.
Based on the calculation results in the above table, the obtained F count = 373,429 and
the value of sig. (p-value) of 0.000, so at α = 0.05 sig <Α, hence H o is rejected. Thus, the
 7

coefficient regression of X1 variable to Y variable is noteworthy or significant. So, it can be

concluded that the transformational leadership variable (X1) has significant effect on
employee performance variable (Y).
Based on the results in table 4.9 above, obtained in the line deviation from linearity,
the value of Fcount = 1,112 and sig value. (p-value) is 0.344. So, at α = 0,05 the acquired sig
value. > Α, hence Ho is accepted or there is a linear relationship between X 2 and Y, so that
the regression model of the personality variable influence (X2) on employee performance
variable (Y) can be inferred linearly.
Based on the calculation in table 4:12 above, the obtained Fcount = 317,324 and the
value of sig. (p-value) of 0.000, then at α = 0.05 sig value. <Α, so H o is rejected. Thus, the
coefficient regression of X3 variable to Y variable is significant or noteworthy. So, it can be
concluded that the achievement motivation variable (X3) has significant effect on employee
performance variable (Y).
Based on the calculation results in the table, the obtained Fcount = 481.560 and the
value of sig. (p-value) of 0.000, then at α = 0.05 sig value. <Α, so Ho is rejected. Thus, the
coefficient regression of X1 variable to X3 variable is noteworthy or significant. So, it can be
concluded that transformational leadership variable (X1) has significant effect on
achievement motivation variable (X3).
Table 3
Summary of Linearity Test Results for All Variable Relationships
Interconnectio Regression Equation Fcount Value of Sig. α Conclusion
n (p-value)
Y and X1 Y^ =¿-9,371 + 1,014 X1 1,368 0,138 Sig. > α
Y and X2 Y^ =¿2,795 +1,013 X2 1,112 0,344 Sig. > α
Y and X3 Y^ =¿-1,382+0,979 X3 0,579 0,935 Sig. > α
0,05
X3 and X1 ^
X 3 =¿8,463 + 0,889 X1 1,167 0,286 Sig. > α
X3 and X2 ^
X 3 =¿19,274 + 0,887 X2 0,784 0,740 Sig. > α

Table 4
Test Results Summary of Regression Equations Significance
Interconnectio Regression Equation Fcount Value of Sig. α Conclusion
n (p-value)
Y and X1 Y^ =¿-9,371 + 1,014 X1 373,429 0,000 Sig. < α
Y and X2 Y^ =¿2,795 +1,013 X2 421,609 0,000 Sig. < α
Y and X3 Y^ =¿-1,382+0,979 X3 317,324 0,000 Sig.< α
0,05
X3 and X1 ^
X 3 =¿8,463 + 0,889 X1 481,560 0,000 Sig. < α
X3 and X2 ^
X 3 =¿19,274 + 0,887 X2 550,146 0,000 Sig. < α
 8

Hypothesis
1. First Hypothesis:
Transformational leadership (X1) has a direct positive effect on employee performance (Y).
Hypothesis test to prove that transformational leadership (X 1) have a direct positive effect on
employee performance (Y) is as follows:
Ho : βY.1 ≤ 0
H1 : βY.1 > 0
From the hypothesis result path, coefficient value obtained (βY.1) equals to = 0,264 (βY.1> 0)
with tcount 2,324 and sig value. (p-value) = 0.022 / 2 = 0.011. Whereas at α = 0,05 and dk =
142 the obtained ttable = 1.977, so the value of tcount> ttable or sig value. <Α thus, Ho is rejected. It
means it can be concluded that the transformational leadership variable (X 1) has a direct
positive effect on employee performance (Y). The results of this study are in accordance with
Luthans' view that "Transformational leadership leads to superior performance in
organization facing demands for renewal and change"
2. Second Hypothesis:
Personality (X2) has a direct positive effect on Employee Performance (Y). Hypothesis test
to prove that personality (X2) has a direct positive effect on employee performance (Y) is as
follows:
Ho : βY.2 ≤ 0
H1 : βY.2 > 0
From the calculation, result obtained by path coefficient value (βY.2) equals to 0,416 (βY.2> 0)
with tcount of 3,477 and sig value. (p-value) = 0.001 / 2 = 0.0005. Whereas at α = 0,05 and dk =
142 the obtained ttable = 1.977, so the value of tcount> ttable or sig value. <Α thus, Ho is rejected. It
means it can be concluded that the personality variable (X2) has a direct positive effect on
employee performance. The results of this study are in accordance with Barrick & Mount
who state that, "The relationship between personality and job performance has been a
frequently studied topic in industrial psychology in the past century.”
3. Third hypothesis:
Achievement Motivation (X3) has a direct positive effect on Employee Performance (Y).
Hypothesis test to prove that achievement motivation (X3) has a direct positive effect on
employee performance (Y) is as follows:
Ho : βY.3 ≤ 0
H1 : βY.3 > 0
 9

From the calculation, result obtained by path coefficient value (β Y.3) equals to = 0,4223 (βY.3>
0) with tcount 2,448 and sig value. (p-value) = 0.016 / 2 = 0.008. Whereas at α = 0,05 and dk =
142 the obtained ttable = 1.977, so the value of tcount> ttable or sig value. <Α thus, Ho is rejected. It
means it can be concluded that the variable achievement motivation (X 3) has a direct positive
effect on employee performance (Y). This is supported by a research conducted by Mosley
Jr., Mosley Sr., and Pietri who concluded that "employees who are more highly motivated
will have higher performance."
4. Fourth hypothesis:
Transformational leadership (X1) has a direct positive effect on Achievement Motivation
(X3). Hypothesis test to prove that transformational leadership (X 1) has a direct positive
effect on achievement motivation (X3) is as follows:
Ho : β3.1 ≤ 0
H1 : β3.1 > 0
From the calculation, result obtained by path coefficient value (β 3.1) equals to = 0,369 (β3.1>
0) with tcount equals to 3,761 and sig value. (p-value) = 0,000 / 2 = 0,000. Whereas at α = 0,05
and dk = 142 the obtained ttable = 1.977, so the value of tcount> ttable or sig value. <Α thus, Ho is
rejected. It means it can be concluded that the transformational leadership variable (X1) has a
direct positive effect on the achievement motivation. This is in accordance with the opinion
of lvancevich, Konopaske, and Matteson, saying that “Transformational leader motivates
followers to work for goal instead of short term self-interest and for achievement and self-
actualization instead of security is able to express a clear vision to strive to accomplish the
vision.”
5. Fifth hypothesis:
Personality (X2) has a direct positive effect on achievement motivation (X3). Hypothesis test
to prove that personality (X2) has a direct positive effect on achievement motivation (X3) is as
follows:
Ho : ρ3.2 ≤ 0
H1 : ρ3.2 > 0
From the calculation, result obtained by path coefficient value (β 3.2) equals to 0,549 (β3.2> 0)
with tcount of 5,586 and sig value. (p-value) = 0,000 / 2 = 0,000. Whereas at α = 0,05 and dk =
142 the obtained ttable = 1.977, so the value of tcount> ttable or sig value. <Α thus Ho is rejected. It
means it can be concluded that the personality variable (X 2) has direct positive effect on
achievement motivation (X3). Furthermore, according to Luthans: “Personality will mean
 10

how people affect others and how they understand and view themselves, as well as their
pattern of inner and outer measurable traits and the person situation interaction."
Based on the results of the previous hypothesis testing, the summary test results of each
hypothesis is presented in the following table 4:25:
Table 5
Summary of Hypothesis Testing Results
Hypothesis Path tcount Sig. ttable (α=0,05 Decision
Coefficient dk= 142)
First: There is a direct
0,264 2,324 0,011 1.977
βY.1 > 0 positive effect
Second: There is a direct
0,416 3,477 0,000 1.977
βY.2 > 0 positive effect
Third: There is a direct
0,423 2,448 0,008 1.977
βY.3 > 0 positive effect
Fourth: There is a direct
0,369 3,761 0,000 1.977
β3.1> 0 positive effect
Fifth: There is a direct
0,549 5,586 0,000 1.977
Β3.2 > 0 positive effect

The summary of the extent of the influence between research variables either directly (direct)
or indirectly (indirect effect) is presented in the following table:
Table 6
Summary of Direct and Indirect Influence
Path Coefficient Direct influence Indirect influence Total Influence
X1 towards X3 0,369 - 0,369
X2 towards X3 0,549 - 0,369
X1 towards Y 0,264 0,156 0.420
X2 towards Y 0,416 0,232 0,648
X3 towards Y 0,423 - 0,423

CONCLUSION
The findings of this study can be summarized as follows:
1. There is a positive direct effect of transformational leadership on performance. It means
that the strong transformational leadership of a firm, direct leader can precede to
improved performance of administrative personnel.
2. There is a direct positive influence of personality on the performance of administrative
personnel. It means that a good personality can lead to improved performance of
administrative staff.
 11

3. There is a positive direct influence of achievement motivation on the performance of

administrative personnel. It means that high achievers motivation can lead to improved
performance of administrative staff.
4. There is a positive direct effect of transformational leadership on achievement motivation
of administrative staff. It means that the strong transformational leadership of a firm
direct leader can precede to increased motivation of administrative staff achievers.
5. There is a direct positive influence of personality on achievement motivation. It means
that a good personality can lead to increased motivation of administrative staff achievers.
Based on the conclusion of the research stated above, the implications of the conclusion are
as follows:
1. Transformational leadership has a direct positive effect on the performance of
administrative staff; therefore, to improve the performance of administrative personnel of
PGRI University Palembang, it is necessary for leaders to apply effective
transformational leadership style, among others: (1) develop the image and provide
insight and awareness of vision and mission, stirring pride, cultivate respect, and give
trust to subordinates; (2) intellectual development; intelligence enhancement, rationality,
problem solving innovation; (3) pay attention to subordinates; coaching, fostering,
guiding, and training every subordinate, in this case the employees, specifically and
personally; (4) inspire as well as motivate; cultivate expectations, focus on effort, and
focus on important goals.
2. Personality has a positive direct effect on performance. The implication is that to improve
the performance of administrative personnel, it is necessary that the head of
administration (direct supervisor) help to generate the sincerity of the administrative staff
in working and pay attention to the employees by applying the humane approach as well
as the agreement between the administrative head as the leader and the employee as
subordinate. Besides, the administration head can also play a role in controlling the
emotional stability of administrative personnel in facing problems while performing their
duties. Administration head or direct supervisor should promote forthrightness between
the leader and subordinates, and provide the opportunities for employees to pose the
problems faced in doing the job.
3. Achievement motivation has a direct positive effect on the performance of the
administrative staff of PGRI University Palembang, so to improve the performance of the
administrative personnel, it is necessary to improve the achievement motivation by: (1)
encouraging the desire to complete the task with the best result; (2) fostering a sense of
 12

responsibility toward oneself and determining one’s future, so the goal can be achieved;
(3) using feedback to determine more effective actions to achieve accomplishment; (4)
encouraging administrative staff to take appropriate measures within their limits; (5)
fostering the creativity and innovation of administrative personnel to seek opportunities
and use the opportunities to demonstrate their potential; and (6) provide challenges with
competitive activities.
4. Transformational leadership has a direct positive effect on achievement motivation, so to
improve achievement motivation, it is necessary to improve transformational leadership
of administration head, by: (1) making them more aware of the importance of task result;
(2) persuade them to prioritize the interests of their team or organization against their own
interests, and (3) activate their greater needs.
Personality has a direct positive effect on achievement motivation. The implication is that the
sincerity of an employee at work can be an asset in generating the employees motivation that
they are actually able to achieve the results of their work. A leader is expected to maintain the
emotional stability of the employees his leadership and to prioritize cooperation or honesty in
every problem encountered. This will be able to generate achievement motivation of the
employees as the result of the atmosphere that encourages employees to complete their daily
tasks.

REFERENCES
Aandza, Esteta G., Florencio V Reys & Fe N. Martinez. Research Statistics for The Health
Profession. Manila: Rex Book Store, 2006.
Amstrong, Mischeal. Manajemen Sumber Daya Manusia. Terjemahan Sofyan and Haryanto.
Jakarta: PT. Elex Media Komputindo, 1999.
Jason.A., Jeffer A. Lepine, & Michael Wesson. Organization Behavior Improving
Performance and Commitment in Workplace 4 Edition. New York: McGraw-Hill, 2013.
Djaali. Psikologi Pendidikan. Jakarta: Bumi Aksara, 2008.
Driffin, Ricky W & Gregory Moorhead. Organizational Behavior Managing People and
Organizationas 11 edition. USA: South Western Cengage Learning, 2014.
Gibson, James L., et al. Organizations Behavior, Structure, Process. New York: McGraw-
Hill, 2012.
Hacker, Stephen, & Tammy Roberts. Transformational Leadership Creating Organizations
of Meaning. Winconsin: ASQ Quality Press, 2004.
 13

Hawkins, Peter. Leadership Team Coaching: developing collection transformation. London:

Kogan Pages, 2011.
Ivancevich, John.M., Robert Konospaske & Michael T. Matteson. Human Resource
Management. New York: McGraw-Hill, 2013.
Luthans, Fred. Organizational Behavior An Evidence Based Approach. New York: McGraw-
Hill, 2011.
Locke, Edwin A. Handbook of Principles of Organizational Behavior, 2 edition .
United Kingdom: Willey & Son, 2009.
Mangkunegara, AA. Anwar Prabu. Manajemen Sumber Daya Manusia. Bandung : Rosada
Karya, 2009.
McShane, Steven L., & Glinow. Organizational Behavior Emerging Realities For The
Workplace Revolution. New York: Mc Graw-Hill, 2008.
Moslow, Abraham H. Motivation and Personality. New York: Harper & Row Publisher,
1970.
Murphy, E Susan., & Rebecca Reichard (Uhl-Bien, Marrion, & McKelvey). Early
Development and Leadership: Building the Next Generation of Leaders. New York:
Taylor and Francie, 2011.
Newstrom, John W. Organizational Behavior Human Behavior at Work 14 edition. New
York: McGraw-Hill, 2014.
Rivai, Veithzal & Basri, Peformance Appraisal: Sistem yang tepat untuk Menilai Kinerja
Karyawan and Meningkatkan Daya Saing Perusahan. Jakarta: PT. Raja Grafindo Persada,
2005.
Robbins, Stephen H., & Timoty A. Judge. Organizational Behavior. USA: Pearson, 2015.
Rue, Leslie W & Lioyd L Byars. Human Resource Management. New York: McGraw-Hill
Companies,Inc., 2008.
Stephen, Robbins.H., & Mary Coulter. Management. New York San Francisco: Prentice Hall
Eleventh Edition, 2012.
Sugiyono. Metode Penelitian Kuantitatif, Kualitatif, and R & D. Bandung: Alphabeta, 2013.
Taylor, Bernard W. Introduction to Management Science, Jilid 2 Edisi ke 8. jakarta: Salemba
Empat, 2005.
Yulk, Gary A. Leadership in Organization 8 edition. New England: Pearson, 2013.
 14

Ali, Ali yassin Sheikh., Abdulkadir Mohamud Dahie & Ali Abdulkadir Ali. "Teacher
Motivation and School Performance, the Mediating Effect of Job Satisfaction: Survey from
Secondary School in Mogadishu." International Journal of Education and Social Science,
2016: 101-103.
Bello, Shukurat Moronke. "Impact of Ethical Leadhersip on Employee Job Performance."
International Journal of Business and Social Science, 2012: 11.
H.D. Fard, Rajabzedah A. & Hasin G.A. "Employees Morales in Public Sector is
Organinazational Rust an Important Factor?" European Journal of Scientific Research,
Vol. 46 (3), 2010: 378-390.
Hossein, Gholam., Entesar Foumany & Monireh Mehraban. "The effect of Ttansformational
Leadership on Innovation With the Mediating Role of Knowledge Management Among
High School Teachers in Saven City." Earch Joutnal of Fisheries and Hydrobiology,
2015: 67.
Kienlen, Laurie Pawlik. Changing Your Personality When You Change Your Personality
Traits, You Change Your Life. 2007. http://www.w3.org/TR/chtml1/DTD/xhtml1-
transitional.dtd (accessed August 14, 2016).
Lin, Rose Su-Jung, & Jui-Kuo Hsiao. "The Realationship Between Trasformational
Leadership, Knowledge Sharing, Trust and Organizational Citizenship Behavior."
International Journal on Innovation, management and Technology, Vol. 5 (3), 2014: 17.
Marker, Solomon. "Employee Engagement: the Key Improving Performance." International
Journal of Business and Management, 2010: 2.
Pramono, Suwito Eko. Pengaruh Budaya Organisasi, Kepemimpinan and Motivasi Terhadap
Kinerja. Studi Kasus pada SMP Negeri Kota Semarang. Disertasi, PPs UNJ, 2011.
Wagner, Kendra Van. What is Personality? 2008. http://wwww.abaout.com (accessed
Agustus 14, 2016).