The Effect of Job Embeddedness on Work Engagement and Innovative

Behavior
(Track Name: Management, Human Resource Management and organization)

Sunu Widianto*, Rizki Abdullah**, Angga PK**, S.Meiyanti**

Faculty of Economics and Business*, Faculty of Pharmacy**
Universitas Padjadjaran, Bandung, Indonesia

Abstract

Hospitals are always required in order to improve the quality of service in accordance with professional standards in accordance
with their code of ethics. Therefore, health workers in hospitals, especially pharmacists, are required to continuously improve its
service to the community. To improve health services to the community, then the pharmacist must interact and be accepted by other
professional health personnel in hospitals. The purpose of this study was to determine the effect of viscosity of the pharmacist in the
hospital organization, namely the impact of job embeddedness on innovative behavior and attachment to his work with self-efficacy
as a mediator pharmacist. This study uses a quantitative measurement that is an observational using a sample of the population
as an object of measurement by using a questionnaire instrument. The results measured by the number, the data can be any value,
rank, and frequencies were analyzed by using statistics to answer the research question or hypothesis to predict that a particular
variable affects another variable by using the software smartPLS. The results showed that a statistically significant effect of job
embeddedness on work engagement and self efficacy, also self-efficacy (as mediator) have significant to the work engagement and
the innovation behavior of pharmacists in hospitals. A pharmacist who has high job embeddedness will obviously have a high self-
efficacy and influence on innovation behavior and the higher work engagement of the pharmacist in the hospital.

Keywords: Job embededness, self efficacy, innovative behavior, work engagement, hospital’s pharmacist

Introduction

Job embededdness is valuable lens through which to evaluate employee retention in

healhcare organization (Brooks and Bonnie, 2004). Research on the job embededdness in the
fields of pharmaceuticals that examined relationship and compatibility of a pharmacist to
communities and organizations as well as the sacrifice of himself in the work environment
specifically focused on the reasons of those who remained within the working environment that
builds on their Job embeddedness Mitchell et al. (2001). Job embeddedness itself has three key
aspects, first, the extent to which an individual has a relationship to others and work. Secondly,
the extent of work and community aspects of an individual match with life. Thirdly, a sacrifice
for what an individual to a community and its work Mitchell et al. (2001)
Sun et al (2011) was examined job embeddedness could has impact towards self-efficacy
or a belief in the ability to execute the duties of a pharmacist which showed an association
between self-efficacy are positively related to job embeddedness someone. A selection of live,

Electronic
Electroniccopy
copyavailable
availableat:
at:https://ssrn.com/abstract=2180736
http://ssrn.com/abstract=2180736
high motivation, resistance to stress, and the quality of an individual can be influenced by a sense
of confidence in his ability in performing job duties. Self-efficacy is based on a larger theoretical
framework known as social cognitive theory, which defines that human achievement depends on
the interaction between a person's behavior, personal factors (eg, thoughts, beliefs), and
environmental conditions (Bandura, 1997).
According to Janssen (2005) interaction effects in one's work environment can influence
innovation behavior while Eisenberger et al., (1990) in Noefer (2009), that person feel valued
within the organization, they will show a sense of loyalty to the shedding of new ideas in their
job. In addition, the presence of environmental influences (such as communities and
organizations in a job) can affect the work of an attachment to a pharmacist in a hospital.
Attachment to the work, expressed by Schaufeli and Bakker (2004), has a relationship between a
support in the job resource (such as social environment, performance feedback, and job control)
with commitment and job performance.
In these study we are would examine the linkage of theory of job embededness, social
cognitive theory and engagement. Hyun et al. (2011) argued that many studies support the theory
of job embeddedness, self-efficacy, work engagement, and organizational citizenship behavior
But there are no studies linking these relationships are tested empirically. This is what can be
appointed by the researchers in this study in such matters relation the pharmacist at the hospital
because they interact with other health professionals such as doctors, nurses, and nutritionists as
a community and as a hospital organization. In addition, the study was conducted in the hospital
because every hospital has a standard operating on a different arrangement between the role of
pharmacists and other health professionals. Moreover. this study would examines its value in
predicting work engagement in ahealthcare setting and second, assesses whether the factors that
influence the innovation behavior of pharmacist are systematically different from those
influencing other healthcare workers

Literature review

Uzzi (1996) in Mitchell et al. (2001) the term embeddedness is the process by which social
relationships affect and limit the economic measures. This process reflects the idea of social
networking as a constraint. Mitchell et al. (2001) has focused on the reasons a person to remain
in his job by looking at the idea of his job embeddedness. Job embeddedness has several key
aspects, including: (1) the extent to which an individual has a relationship to others and work. (2)
the extent to which employment and community aspects of an individual match with life, and (3)
a sacrifice for what an individual to a community and its work. Individuals can be tied to their
organization through various types of links and investment in affective and cognitive. Individuals
who have high embedded would be less likely to voluntarily exit the organization. Mitchell et al.
(2004) mentions that there are three-dimensional fit, relationship (link), and sacrifice in which all
three dimensions is an important factor in a job and outside of work. Thus, all three dimensions
have two matrices that can be made into six dimensions: relationship, conformity, and sacrifice
that go into an organization and its community (Mitchell et al., 2004).

Fit to community

Climate, facilities, and public culture in these locations is an example that may affect
compatibility with the environment. Change the location of the work can interfere with the

Electronic
Electroniccopy
copyavailable
availableat:
at:https://ssrn.com/abstract=2180736
http://ssrn.com/abstract=2180736
general patterns that have been created such as the new working hours or at a different way to
work (Mitchell et al., 2001). Adjustment to the organization's values will finish the job faster so
workers who fit the organization's values, is approximately only about 20 months of work
(O'Reilly et al., 1991 in Mitchell et al., 2001 ). Chatman (1991) in Mitchell et al. (2001) states
that when an organization produces people who do not fit with the organizational culture of a
job, workers tend to leave the organization in its work. In addition, Chan (1996) in Mitchell et al.
(2001) also showed that workers who have a match with the job can reduce intention to quit his
job.

link
someone who fits the job and the organization will bind tightly to the organization. Links
(relationships) as a formal or informal relationship between the worker with an organization.
People who are more embedded to work harder, to do better, as not many absences, work harder,
perform better and more involved in organizational citizenship behavior, rather than the less
embedded (Mitchell et al., 2001).

Link to community
Link to connect a community of individuals formally and informally with the community. It can
be measured by the value of connecting employees and their families socially, psychologically,
and co-workers include financial and non-working partner, group, community, and the physical
environment in which one lives. The higher the value of a link between people and their
networks, the higher an employee is bound to the job and the organization where she worked.
According Maertz et al. 1996; Prestholdt, Lane and Mathews, 1987 Various studies have shown
that there is normative pressure to remain in their jobs, which come from family members, and
other colleagues. Links (relationships) as a formal or informal relationship between the worker
with an organization. People who are more embedded to work harder, to do better, as not many
absences, work harder, perform better and more involved in organizational citizenship behavior,
rather than the less embedded (Mitchell et al., 2001)
A wide range of studies show that there is normative pressure to remain in their jobs, it may
come from family members, and other colleagues (Maertz et al., 1996; Prestholdt., 1987 in
Mitchell et al., 2001). With the use of social integration, a worker can be described as part of the
process related to the other fellow workers at work (O'Reilly et al., 1989 in Mitchell et al., 2001).
Abelson (1987) in Mitchell et al. (2001) used this variable is associated with on-the-job links and
off-the-job links. Hobbies and religious activities is one factor that can influence the commitment
in the work.

Sacrifice
Sacrifice illustrates the cost of material or psychological benefits that may be forfeited by
leaving a job. For example, leaving an organization of fun. More and more people give, the more
difficult to work with the organization decides, according to Shaw et al. (1998) in Mitchell et al.
(2001). This can be due to a comparable salary and expenses are real and relevant as health and
pension costs. These factors have been shown to be associated with the release of workers from
their jobs (Gupta and Jenkins, 1980 in Mitchell et al., 2001). Less visible but important, potential
sacrifices occur when there is opportunity for advancement and job stability (Shaw et al., 1998 in
Mitchell et al., 2001). In addition, the profit would accrue to an individual who remains in his

Electronic copy available at: https://ssrn.com/abstract=2180736

work (Mitchell et al., 2001). Sacrifice in a community is a problem that occurs if the worker had
to move. Leave a community of interest, and the person who feels liked or respected can make a
difficult decision. Allowances that give effect to one's personal life such as daily care or a
vehicle provided by the company may also be lost. Although off-the-job embeddedness may be
more important when the relocation occurs, Mitchell et al. (2001) thought it would be important
for situations that only require a change in employment. If people who feel they may be
embedded alternative would eliminate the need to consider relocating their work place settings
(Mitchell et al., 2001). Mitchell et al. (2001) suggests that the benefits of an effect on one's
personal life such as daily care or a vehicle provided by the company may be missing. Feldman
and Bolino (1998) (in Wijayanto and Kismono, 2004) reinforces the notion that someone would
lose a lot of things when it left the organization where he works. A person can leave his job when
it is not stable in the new revenue, the uncertainty with a new job, and also renggangnya
relationship between old colleagues.

Self-efficacy is based on a larger theoretical framework known as social cognitive theory,

which defines that human achievement depends on the interaction between behavior, personal
factors (eg, thoughts, beliefs), and the condition of one's environment, according to Bandura
(1997) in Bandura (1994) . In Bandura (1994) that self-efficacy beliefs can influence the choice
of task, effort, perseverance, endurance, and a person's achievements. According to Gist (1992)
self-efficacy related to the job such as work attitude, skills training and job performance.
Trudeau and Devlin (1996) in Reeb et al. (1998) characterize self-efficacy into the motives
(spiritual, affiliation, and social interests), personality traits (such as self-interested and self-
centered human rights), political and social values (sex).
Bandura (1994) also defines self-efficacy as the belief in the ability of someone to produce a
performance level that can affect their lives. According to him, that belief produces four
processes that influence cognitive processes, motivational, affective, and selective. Much of
human behavior that aims to realize the ideas are appreciated. Personal goal setting is influenced
by self-assessment capabilities. The stronger the perceived self-efficacy, the higher purpose of
the challenges for themselves and their firm is committed to them. It requires a strong sense of
the success of a person to remain oriented to the tasks they face the demands of situational
pressures, while the failures and setbacks that have a significant impact. When people are faced
with the task of managing a heavy demand in the state, people are plagued by doubts about their
efficacy, may be more chaotic in their analytical thinking, their aspirations to be low and the
quality of their performance deteriorates. Conversely, those who maintain a sense of a successful
resilient they set themselves challenging goals and use good analytic thinking that will pay off in
performance accomplishments (Bandura, 1994).

In general, the definition of innovation, which is intended by Osborne (1998) in Verhoest

et al. (2007), is an introduction of a system (but not always a system) of the application of a new
idea. According to Janssen (2003) Behavior of innovation can be defined as a concern the
generation, promotion and realization of an idea by using the rules work, group or organization
(Kanter, 1988; Scott and Bruce, 1994; West, 1989; West and Farr, 1989; Woodman et al., 1993).
According to Axtell et al. (2000) innovation is the result of the development and implementation
of a new idea that are influential powerful than a theory and practice, up to the scale of the
smallest new ideas related to improvements in work processes and work everyday designs

Electronic copy available at: https://ssrn.com/abstract=2180736

(Janssen,2003) .
Innovation behavior is also mentioned in Noefer et al. (2009) is a new idea to the public (such
as developing and improving the structure, procedures, new products), as well as an
implementation of the ideas (such as introducing and implementing the structure, procedures,
and product yng) that are expected of a worker the challenges in this globalization era
(Dorenbosch et al., 2005). Behavior of these innovations is a challenge on a number of
organizations in helping the development of the ability of employees to manage and implement a
new idea (Anderson et al., 2004 in Noefer et al., 2009). According to Axtell et al. (2000) and
Ohly et al. (2006) in Noefer et al. (2009) found a correlation in workers who have an idea of the
diverse capabilities of the new ideas and implementation. Not only has the diverse skills, but also
the situation of working environment (like a boss who gives creative support workers) can make
a worker increases the value of creativity, Shalley et al. (2004) in Noefer et al. (2009) This is
also confirmed by Eisenberger et al. (1990) that an employee who feels valued by the
organization's work will show an affective value of an idea to create a new idea at work (Noever
et al, 2009). This study is concerned with the relations of ideas generated or managed by the idea
implemented. Theoretical models and empirical findings highlight the need to distinguish the
idea and implementation of ideas generated as a behavior that is influenced by individual and
situational variables are different (Axtell et al. 2000 in Janssen, 2005). According to Anderson et
al. (2004) in Noefer et al. (2009) produced by one's ideas can be considered as a prerequisite for
implementing an idea, namely the correlation between two aspects of innovation behavior is
expected and demonstrated in the current study.

Having a variety of skills that can menunujukan complexity of the work with job
satisfaction and openness to change have a positive correlation (Axtell et al., 2002). Positive
correlation was also found by Hatcher, Ross, & Collins (1989); Ohly et al. (2006) regarding the
complexity of the work and ideas generated (Noefer et al., 2009). Research shows that the rate of
generation of ideas depends on workers' cognitive style, level of complexity of the work, and
extrinsic rewards. When extrinsic rewards increases, workers with an adaptive cognitive style
showed greater creativity in their work in a simple (Baer et al., 2003 in Noefer et al., 2009). In
addition, according to Axtell et al. (2000); and Axtell and Parker (2003) in Janssen (2005)
mentions the complexities of work and ideas that are implemented also showed a positive
correlation. Workers with complex jobs may feel responsible for improving work procedures,
and therefore they can contribute to their innovative capabilities within an organization

But there are other things about the risk of a worker's innovative, usually they fall into conflict
with a resistant strain of the co-worker, an assumption which has a long history in organizational
studies. Some new ideas can be promoted by an innovative worker who may be accepted by his
colleagues, especially when they seek new ways to adapt to emerging problems or new
situations. But creative ideas can initially welcomed by her coworkers, but it can give
disagreements within the next innovation. Innovation is new ideas that should be promoted
further elaborated and eventually work into a specific change (Jones, 2001; Kanter, 1988 in
Janssen, 2003).

Electronic copy available at: https://ssrn.com/abstract=2180736

 A development of new products and services may be indicated as an indicator of innovation
for an organization. The important thing is, whether or not developing a new product and service
induced by the political leadership of an organization. Theory of innovation that is formed from a
spontaneous adaptation has been muted, now a product or service will be able to develop when
there is pressure from the political leadership (Barzelay and Campbell, 2003, in Janssen, 2003).
Schaufeli and Bakker (2004) conceptualized attachment to work as a continuation of the studies
to be developed using psychology and business literature. According to them, attachment work
can be interpreted positively to the persistent and pervarsive the employment relationship. They
also found that attachment work has a strong relationship with a consistency of a worker. It has
been agreed, work engagement is a combination of ability to work (energy, vigour) and
willingness to work (dedication, involvement) (Bakker et al., 2011).
Schaufeli and Bakker (2004) in Giallonardo et al. (2010) classified his entanglement in
vigour work, dedication, and absorption. Vigour is characterized by high levels of energy and
mental resilience while working, a willingness to invest effort in work and perseverance, even in
the face of adversity. Dedication refers to become very involved in the work of someone feel
important, enthusiasm, proud of his inspiration, and courage to face challenges. Absorption is
characterized by full concentration and happy, so comfortable in his job, cause one to feel the
time pass quickly and have difficulty separating themselves from work. According to Schaufeli
and Bakker (2004), engagement (engagement) is the result of sources of work and serves as an
impetus to improve job satisfaction and decreased turnover.

Conceptualized as an attachment to the work of the optimal functioning of individuals in the

workplace (Hallberg and Schaufeli, 2006 in Kuhnel et al., 2009), while the work involvement is
defined as the beliefs, cognitive specific about one's relationship with work (Kanungo, 1982 in
Kuhnel et al. , 2009). In the study Wee and Thomas (2008) in the Kuhnel et al. (2009) also said
that the involvement of the work is considered as a relatively stable work attitudes, a cognitive
assessment of the need for the ability of job satisfaction, whereas work engagement is considered
as the experience of the spirit, dedication, and absorption in the workplace that can fluctuate
from day to day. Kahn (1990) states that a physical, emotional, and psychological derived from a
pre-requisite to show attachment to the job. Thus, in tapping the resources should facilitate the
attachment of an individual for a job. In Addition Avolio et al. (2004) in Giallonardo (2010)
reported an authentic leadership is able to bind and satisfy their employees by promoting hope,
confidence, optimism, and positive emotions. Authentic leadership is involved on an ongoing
process between leaders and employees in an open, transparent, and the reliability of each other.
Authentic leaders as an act according to what they believe and act with whom they interact in an
open and transparent to others.

Hypotheses

Self-efficacy was introduced by Bandura (1994), is one of the core aspects of social-
cognitive theory. Self-efficacy, according to Bandura (1994), may affect how individuals can
best manage the needs and challenges in a job retention. Choosing a career and develop options
is one example of the power of self-efficacy beliefs. In the Sun, et al. (2011) mentioned that the

Electronic copy available at: https://ssrn.com/abstract=2180736

psychology of a person's sense of self is based on efficacy, optimistic, happines, and high
expectations. Sun et al. (2011) also showed an association between these psychological elements,
eg, one of which is self-efficacy are positively related to job embeddedness. Therefore, in this
context, a pharmacist who has a high job embeddedness will lead to high self-efficacy as well.

H1: Job embeddedness effect on self-efficacy in hospital pharmacist.

Mitchell et al. (2001) argued that individuals who are embedded in the work, initially may
question whether they should remain loyal. Because they are embedded, they usually decide to
stay. The more workers match the environment, the higher the likelihood that an employee will
feel professionally and bound by an organization (Mitchell et al., 2001).
Job embeddedness can be related to other dependent variables, although specially designed to
find out the reasons why people stay in work. Job embeddedness also to know the variables that
are equally beneficial to the organization. People who are more embedded to work harder, to do
better, as not many absences, work harder, perform better and more involved in organizational
citizenship behavior, rather than the less embedded (Mitchell et al., 2001).
In Halbesleben et al. (2008) job embeddedness and engagement to the empirical work described
in the related but distinct constructs. That is, in both constructs showed a positive relationship
with retention and performance of the hospital pharmacist. Job embeddedness and engagement to
the work of a pharmacist is a matter that relates as to be comfortable or compatible with the
community and the organization of a pharmacist can do more than his job duties at the hospital.

H2: Job embeddedness effect on the work engagement at the hospital pharmacist jobs.

According to Axtell et al. (2000) and Ohly et al. (2006) in Noefer et al. (2009) with the situation
of working environment (like a boss who gives creative support workers) can make a worker
increases the value of creativity. This is also confirmed by Eisenberger et al. (1990) that an
employee who feels valued by the organization's work will show an affective value of an idea to
create a new idea at work (Noefer et al., 2009). Job embeddedness and innovation behavior has
been thoroughly by Eisenberger et al. (1990), where both variables have a significant effect.
However, no studies have examined the effect of job embeddedness and innovation in the
context of the behavior of pharmacists in hospitals.

H3: Job embeddedness effect on innovation behavior in the hospital pharmacist.

Entanglement is defined as a positive engagement, could meet the work related to the state of
mind characterized by the spirit, dedication, and absorption (Schaufeli et al., 2002 in Shimazu et
al., 2008). It is agreed that work engagement is a combination of ability to work (energy, power)
and a willingness to work (involvement, dedication) (Bekker et al., 2011).
Self-efficacy and attachment to the work someone has clearly had a positive influence.
Mentioned in Lorente (2009) that self-efficacy was positively related to emotional and mental
competence, job control, and support the social environment that can affect a person's attachment

Electronic copy available at: https://ssrn.com/abstract=2180736

to and involvement in its work. In this case, self-efficacy of a pharmacist in a hospital is a source
of personal worker who is very influential on the job attachment. This is confirmed by the study
of Bakker et al. (2007) that personal sources, such as self-efficacy, was positively related to
attachment to work through the competency of the pharmacist in the hospital.

H4.Self-efficacy affects engagement at the hospital pharmacist jobs.

Entanglement is defined as a positive engagement, could meet the work related to the state of
mind characterized by the spirit, dedication, and absorption (Schaufeli et al., 2002 in Shimazu et
al., 2008). It is agreed that work engagement is a combination of ability to work (energy, power)
and a willingness to work (involvement, dedication) (Bekker et al., 2011).
Self-efficacy and attachment to the work someone has clearly had a positive influence.
Mentioned in Lorente (2009) that self-efficacy was positively related to emotional and mental
competence, job control, and support the social environment that can affect a person's attachment
to and involvement in its work. In this case, self-efficacy of a pharmacist in a hospital is a source
of personal worker who is very influential on the job attachment. This is confirmed by the study
of Bakker et al. (2007) that personal sources, such as self-efficacy, was positively related to
attachment to work through the competency of the pharmacist in the hospital.Many studies have
shown that self-efficacy affects motivation, learning, and academic achievement (Pajares, 1996;
Schunk, 1995). SE is believed to influence the selection of tasks, effort, perseverance, joy and
achievement (Schunk, 1995). Innovative itself requires a sense of accomplishment from a
effikasi resilient. Innovation requires a great effort for a long period but with uncertain outcomes
(Bandura, 1994). Hsiao et al. (2011) have clearly suggested a positive relationship between self-
efficacy and behavioral innovations of teachers in Taiwan. There has been no previous studies
examining the relationship self-efficacy and behavioral innovations in the hospital pharmacist.
According to researchers, the relationship between self-efficacy and behavioral innovations a
pharmacist in hospitals may occur because of a creativity based on an internal motivation within
myself that comes from his self-efficacy.

H5: Self-efficacy affects the innovation behavior

Work Engagement

+ +
Job Self efficacy
embeddedness

Electronic copy available at: https://ssrn.com/abstract=2180736

 + Innovative
Behavior

Figure 1.1. Theoretical framework model

Methods

Sample

The sample of this study is pharmacist in hospital instalation amount 160 sample. The
survey distributed through cooperation with human resource division at hospital and
disseminating via online questionnaire to several community mailing list.

Measurements

Someone who feels connected, fit, and can sacrifice anything for the community and
organizations can have an impact on his work. It can make a person feel sure of its capabilities,
so as to affect the behavior of innovation and higher job attachment.
Measurement of Job Embededness, adopted from Mitchell et al 2001, has 32 questions that
measure six dimensions into community and fit within the organization, link ) in the community
and organizations, and sacrifice in the community and the organization (Mitchell et al., 2001).
Likert scale used was from 1 (stronglu disagree) to 5 (strongly agree). Examples of questions
from one of its dimensions, the relationship of the organization (links to organization) is
personally, “I feel valued in this hospital”

Self-efficacy beliefs can influence the choice of task, effort, perseverance, endurance, and
one's accomplishments (Bandura, 1997; Schunk, 1995). According to Gist (1992) self-efficacy
related to the job such as work attitude, skills training and job performance. self-efficacy can also
affect the innovative behavior and engagement of a worker. Measurement of self-efficacy has
seven questions, derived from Chen et al. (2004), which can measure a person that he is
confident in its ability to carry out their duties in a job. Likert scale used was from 1 (strongly
disagree) to 5 (strongly agree). Examples of variable question is this: “My work in accordance
with the scope of my ability”.
Innovation behavior is a new idea that the public (such as developing and improving the
structure, procedures, new products), as an implementation of the ideas (such as introducing and
implementing the structure, procedures, and new yng product) is expected from a worker in the
face of challenges on era of globalization (Dorenvosch et al., 2005 in Noefer et al., 2009). By the
because it, innovation behavior can be caused because the job embeddedness of his and self

Electronic copy available at: https://ssrn.com/abstract=2180736

efficacy who high, which can cause the the behavior of innovation matter of high.
Measurement of innovation behavior has six questions to measure the extent to which a
person has done an innovation in his work. Likert scale used was from 1 (strongly disagree) to 5
(strongly agree). Example the question is: “I generate creative ideas”.

Engagement to work is a combination of ability to work (energy, vigour) and willingness to

work (dedication, involvement) (Bakker et al., 2011). Therefore, clear that the job embeddedness
and self-efficacy has to do with someone who feels bound by his work. Measurement of job
engagement has nine questions in the measure of how dependent of a worker on the job. Likert
scale used was 1 (never) to 7 (every day). Examples of the question, taken from the Utrecht
Work Engagement Scale (UWES) (Shchaufeli and Bakker, 2003), “I am committed to my job”.

The findings

In this study, testing the hypothesis using a technique Partial Least Square (PLS) with the
application SmartPLS v.2.0. This technique is used to test the measurement model and structural
model. PLS can be used for the measurement of many of the independent variable and depneden.
PLS can be used with the sample size is not large and can be applied to all scales of data
(Ghozali, 2006). Researchers using the PLS because this technique can be used to measure the
relationship between latent variables (Bookstein, 1986 in Avolio et al., 1999) and is suitable for
analyzing predictive research models that are ditahap early development of the theory (Barclay et
al., 1995 in Avolio et al ., 1999). In addition researchers using PLS as it can build a relationship
that has been no basis for testing theories or preposition. PLS is also a more appropriate
approach for prediction purposes, it is mainly on the conditions under which the indicators are
formative, or when the research is still uncertain because of the variable should be included in a
model or between the variables associated with the model or among variables associated with
miss-specified models will produce inferior estimates of variance explained according to the
PLS. Missing variables and other miss-specification has little effect estimates made by the PLS
(Ghozali, 2006).

Mean SD JE SE IB WE AVE

JE 3.1412 0.25694 1 0.6639

SE 3.673 0.34884 0.273** 1 0.5267

IB 3.747 0.35513 0.209* 0.331** 1 0.5070

WE 6.3452 0.81559 0.222** 0.174* 0.318** 1 0.6049

Table 1. Descriptive statistic, correlation and AVE

Electronic copy available at: https://ssrn.com/abstract=2180736

Table 4.4 shows the descriptive analysis, where correlations and AVE for each variable in this
study. Judging from the mean descriptive analysis above, it appears that job embeddedness has a
pretty good mean value is 3.1412. Self-efficacy has a mean value of 3.673 and behavioral
innovation has a mean value of 3.747 means that is good enough for that value. Meanwhile,
work engagement has a good value with a mean of 6.345.

From Table 4.4 it can be deduced first hypothesis against self efficay job embeddedness
significantly associated (H1; β = 0.307 p <0.05). The second hypothesis of the job embeddedness
significantly attachment works (H2; β = 0.226 p <0.05). The third hypothesis job embeddedness
on innovation behavior does not affect significantly (H3; β = 0.157 p> 0.05). The fourth
hypothesis of self-efficacy on work attachment significantly (H4; β = 0.254 p <0.05). And the
fourth hypothesis of self-efficacy to significantly influence innovation behavior (H5; β = 0.564 p
<0.05)

On the test results of structural path models construct hypotheses of this study, the first is the
path between job embeddedness with self-efficacy has a beta coefficient of 0.3079 and a t-value
of 2.2529. Since the t-value> 1.645 (95% confidence level, one-tailed in the table). Therefore,
statistically job embeddedness effect on self-efficacy. Path between job embeddedness and
behavioral innovation has a beta coefficient of 0.1579 and a t-value of 1.2612. Since the t-value
<1.645 (95% confidence level, one tiled in the table), then statistically job embeddedness has no
effect on the behavior of innovation. Path between job embeddedness with job attachment has a
beta coefficient of 0.2264 and a t-value of 2.0818. Since the t-value> 1.645 (95% confidence
level, one tiled in the table), then the statistical effect on job embeddedness job attachment. Path
between self-efficacy with behavioral innovation has a beta coefficient 0.5647 and the t-value of
7.802. Since the t-value> 1.645 (95% confidence level, one tiled in the table), then the statistical
self-efficacy effect on innovation behavior. Path between self-efficacy with job attachment has a
beta coefficient of 0.2549 and the value of the t-value 2.6223. Since the t-value> 1.645 (95%
confidence level, one tiled in the table), it is statistically self-efficacy effect on job attachment.

Discussion

The first hypothesis states that job embeddedness associated with self-efficacy in the
hospital pharmacist.Job embeddedness significantly associated with self efficacy indicated by the
beta coefficient and t-value 0.3079 2.2529 indicating statistical significance. The study is
consistent with the findings of Sun et al. (2011) which showed an association between self-
efficacy and job embeddedness. In the study states that a worker who has high self-efficacy will
be more easily connected (linked) and feel comfortable (fit) with organizational pekerjaannnya
so that more competent in doing their jobs. This means that the pharmacists have a high self-
efficacy will have a tendency to be able to feel happy and comfortable in hospital organization or
environment. Like for example, if the pharmacist was embedded in the work environment, it can
increase their confidence to be able to deal with and anticipate problems well in working in a
hospital.

Electronic copy available at: https://ssrn.com/abstract=2180736

 The second hypothesis states that the effect of job embeddedness with engagement
pharmacists work in hospitals. Job embeddedness and job attachment with a beta coefficient of
0.2264 and a t-value (2.0818). According Halbesleben et al. (2008) work engagement and job
embeddedness described empirically related. That is, the job embeddedness and work
engagement showed some positive correlation with the performance of the hospital pharmacist.
Besides this finding is also supported by Mitchell et al. (2001) which states that people who are
more embedded to work harder to do the show attachments work. For example, with not a lot of
absences, work more enthusiasm and high spirits, as well as more involved is the attachment
shows the pharmacist job in hospital. Pharmacists can feel bound in his job as a pharmacist at the
hospital because the pharmacist was appreciated by his colleagues and loved their authority and
responsibility in the hospital.

The third hypothesis states that job embeddedness influence innovation behavior of
hospital pharmacists. Based on the beta coefficients job embeddedness did not significantly
influence innovation behavior. Value t-value on job embeddedness and behavioral innovation is
the beta coefficient was 1.2612 and 0.1579, while t count for one-tailed table is 1.64. This means
that the value of t value (1.2612) <t count (1.64) then it is not significant. However, these results
contradict the theory of Ng et al. (2010) which states that job embeddedness and innovation
behavior has a significant relationship. According to the study, a worker who has embedded high
will affect the behavior of innovation due to a motivation that comes from a comfortable
working environment (fit), personal relationships with colleagues who either (link), and the fear
of loss of job benefits (sacrifice). A behavioral motivation will show their innovations, because
they feel committed and instill success in their organization. In contrast to the present study,
based on hypothesis test job embeddedness and innovation behavior towards professional
pharmacists will have an impact if the pharmacist has a good self-efficacy. If the pharmacist
feels accepted by other health professionals, the pharmacist will obviously increase self-efficacy
in him, such as the ability to communicate and implement their ideas to other health
professionals at the hospital. This is supported Kunar and Uzkurt (2010) which states that the
balance between self-efficacy an employee teamwork and collaboration can lead to an optimal
environment for innovation. It is the underlying research that self-efficacy plays as a full
mediator of job embeddedness of a pharmacist to influence the behavior of their innovations in
the hospital.

The fourth hypothesis states that self-efficacy has an influence on work attachment in a
hospital pharmacist. This is supported by the results of hypothesis testing that showed statistical
significance between self-efficacy and attachment pharmacists work in hospitals with a beta
coefficient of 0.2549 and a t-value (2.6223). The findings of this study fit in Bakker et al. (2007)
which states that self-efficacy is positively related to employee engagement through
competencies owned by employees. Lorente (2009) also noted that self-efficacy has a direct
influence on the work of an employee engagement. According to Lorente (2009), emotional and
mental competency, job control, and social support environment can influence job attachment.

Electronic copy available at: https://ssrn.com/abstract=2180736

Thus it can be concluded, a hospital pharmacist who has a high self-efficacy also high
engagement work as a pharmacist in a hospital. Self-efficacy can make a pharmacist has the
enthusiasm and high spirit of working as pharmacist believe it or uncertain of his ability to do his
job at the hospital. Therefore, self-efficacy can be predicted attachment pharmacist jobs through
quality resources in a pharmacist working in a hospital.

The fifth hypothesis is the relationship self-efficacy in their influence on innovation

behavior of a pharmacist in a hospital. The results of testing this hypothesis has provided a
statistically significant effect that can be seen from the beta coefficients and t-value 0.5647
(7.6802). Previously discussed the relevance of self-efficacy and behavioral innovation and
existing research on self-efficacy and behavioral innovation. However, no studies have examined
the self-efficacy and behavioral innovation in the hospital pharmacist. The results of this
hypothesis is consistent with the hypothesis in Hsiao et al. (2011) and Kunar and Uzkurt (2010),
which reported an effect of a positive relationship between self-efficacy and behavioral
innovation. According to them, a worker who has a high innovation behavior means having a
high self-efficacy as well. These findings are also present in Hsio et al. (2011) which suggested a
positive relationship between self-efficacy and behavioral innovation. According to Gibbs (2003)
in Hsio et al. (2011), if a worker self efficacy increase, perseverance, willingness, and increased
resistance to work, it will have an impact on the behavior of their innovations. Thus, highly
qualified pharmacists who felt his work would improve the behavior of innovation so as to create
a contr ibution by the hospital pharmacist in the global competition. Such as to contribute to
improving the quality, and the development of knowledge and paktik new practices that promote
hospital pharmacy services in the global competition.

Conclusion and limitation

The present study attempted to test the self-efficacy variables that may contribute to the
effect of job embeddedness on job attachment and behavioral innovation in the hospital
pharmacist. The results showed that self-efficacy of a pharmacist in a hospital has a role sebegai
pemediasi between job embeddedness of a pharmacist to conduct innovative work. It can be seen
from the job embeddedness pharmacist does not directly influence the behavior of their
innovations. Additionally in this study, the statistical job embeddedness significantly influence a
pharmacist pharmacists self efficacy and their attachment to work at the hospital. While self-
efficacy significantly influence work engagement and innovative behavior in the hospital
pharmacist.This study has several limitations. First, this study possible occurrence of common
method bias, since respondents answered the view of respondents themselves. Second, this study
only for a specific background, therefore this study can not be generalized in different
backgrounds. Third, the number of samples in this study insufficient to power a higher level so
that when the sample size is greater then the research results will be different. And fourth, this
research needs to be done further to include other variables that can affect the behavior of job
embeddedness on innovation and job attachment.

Electronic copy available at: https://ssrn.com/abstract=2180736

 Refferences

Avolio, Howell & Sosik. 1999. A funny thing happened on the way to the bottom line: humor as a
moderator of leadership style effect. Academy of Manajement Journal, 42 (2),219-227.
Axtell, C. M., Wall, T., Stride, C., Clegg, C., Gardner, P., & Bolden, R. 2002. Familiarity breeds
content: The impact of exposure to change on employee openness and well-being. Journal of
Occupational and Organizational Psychology, 75, 217–231.
Bakker,Arnold B., Albrecht, Simon L., Leiter Michael P. 2011. Work engagement: Further reflections
on the state of play. European Journal of Work and Organizational Psychology, 20 (1), 74–88.
Bandura, A. 1994. Self-efficacy. In V. S. Ramachaudran (Ed.), Encyclopedia of human behavior (Vol. 4,
pp. 71-81). New York: Academic Press.
Bandura, A. 1997. Self-efficacy: The exercise of control. New York: Freeman.
Chen et al. 2004. General self efficacy and self esteem: Toward theoretical and empirical distinction
between correlated self evaluations. Journal of Organizational Behavior. Vol.25, pp. 375-
395.Cooper D.R & Schindler. 2006. Business Research Methods. New York: McGraw Hill
Gist, M.E. & Mitchell, T.R. 1992. Self-efficacy: A theoretical analysis of its determinants and
malleability. Academy of Management Review. 17, 183-211.
Gozali, I. 2006. Structural Equation Modelling: Metode Alternatif dengan Partial Least Square – PLS. Badan
Penerbit Universitas Diponegoro; 2006.
Halbesleben, J. R. B., & Wheeler, A. R. 2008. The relative roles of engagement and embeddedness in
predicting job performance and intention to leave. Work and Stress, 22,242–256.
Hyun, Sung-Hyup., Ryu, Ji-Ho., Lee, Eun-Ryog. 2011. Examining Structure Relation Between
Organizational Embeddedness and Turnover Intention in The Hotel Industry. Pusan
National University Research Grant,26,4,489-512.
Hsiao, His-Chi., Chang, Jen-chia., Tu, Ya-Ling., Chen, Su-Chang. 2011. The Influence of Teachers’
Self-efficacy on Innovative Work Behavior. International Conference on Social Science and
Humanity IPEDR, 5,233-237.
Janssen, O. 2005. The joint impact of perceived influence and supervisor supportiveness on
employee innovative behavior. Journal of Occupational and Organizational Psychology, 78, 573–
579.
Janssen, O. 2003. Innovative behavior and job involvement at the price of conflict and less
satisfactory relations with co-workers. The Netherlands journal of Occupational and Organizational
Psychology , 76, 347-364.
Khan, W. A. 1990. An excerccise of authority. Organizational Behaviour Teaching Review, 14(2), 28-42.
Kumar, Rachna., Uzkurt, Cevahir. 2010. Investigating the effects of self efficacy on innovativeness
and the moderating impact of cultural dimensions. Journal of International Business and Cultural
Studies,1-15.
Lorente, Laura. 2009. Exploring the Power of Self-efficacy at Work: Some Empirical Studies from
the Social Cognitive Perspective. Departamento de Psicología Evolutiva, Educativa, Social y
Metodología: Spanyol.
Mitchell, T. R., Holtom, B. C., Lee, T. W., Sablynski, C. J., & Erez, M. 2001. Why people stay: Using
job embeddedness to predict voluntary turnover. Academy of Management Journal, 44, 1102-
1121.
Mitchell, T. R., Lee, T. W., Sablynski, C. J., Burton, J. P., & Holtom, B. C. 2004. The effects of Job
Embeddedness On Organizational Citizenship, Job Performance, Volitional Absences, and
Voluntary Turnover. Academy of Management Journal. Vol. 47, 711-722.
Noefer Katrin, Stegmaier Ralf, Molter Beate, and Sonntag Karlheinz. 2009. A Great Many Things to
Do and Not a Minute to Spare: Can Feedback From Supervisors Moderate the Relationship
Between Skill Variety, Time Pressure, and Employees’ Innovative Behavior?. Creativity
Research Journal, 21(4), 384–393.
Pajares, F. 1996. Self-efficacy beliefs in achievement settings. Review of Educational Research, 66, 543-
578.

Electronic copy available at: https://ssrn.com/abstract=2180736

Reeb, R. N., Katsuyama, R. M., Sammon, J., & Yoder, D. 1998. The Community Service Self-
Efficacy Scale: Evidence of Reliability, Construct Validity, and Pragmatic Utility. Michigan
Journal of Community Service Learning,48-57.
Schaufeli, W. B., & Bakker. A. B. 2004. Job demands, job resources, and their relationship with
burnout and engagement: A multi-sample study. Journal of Organizational Behavior, 25, 293-
315.
Schaufeli W.B. & Bakker A.B. 2003. Utrecht Work Engagement Scale (UWES) Preliminary Manual.
Occupational Health Psychology Unit, Utrecht University, ND.
Schaufeli, W. B., Salanova, M., González-Romá, V., & Biikker, A. B. 2002. The measurement of
engagement and burnout: A two sample confirmatory factor analytic approach. Journal of
Happiness Studies, J, 71-92.
Schunk, D. H. 1995. Self-efficacy and education and instruction. In J. E. Maddux (Ed.),Self-efficacy, adaptation,
and adjustment: Theory, research, and application (pp. 281-303). New York: Plenum Press.
Shimazu, A., Schaufeli, W. B., Kosugi and Suzuki, Nashiwa, H., Kato, A., Sakamoto M., Irimajiri, H.,
Amano, S., Hirohata and Goto. 2008. Work Engagement in Japan: Validation of the
Japanese Version of the Utrecht Work Engagement Scale. Journal Compilation International
Association of Applied Psychology. 57(3),510-523.
Sun, Tao, Zhao, X. W., Yang, L. B., Fan, H. L. 2011. The impact of psychological capital on job
embeddedness and job performance among nurses: a structural equation approach. Journal
of Advance Nursing, 69-79.
Verhoest, K., Verschuere, B., Bouckaert, G. 2007. Pressure, Legitimacy, and Innovative Behavior by
Public Organizations. An International Journal of Policy, Administration, and Institutions, 20,3,
469-497.
West, M. A. 2002. Sparkling fountains or stagnant ponds: An integrative model of creativity and
innovation implementation in work groups. Applied Psychology: An International Review, 51,
355–424.

Electronic copy available at: https://ssrn.com/abstract=2180736