JRSSEM 2022, Vol. 01, No. 11, 1830 – 1850

E-ISSN: 2807 - 6311, P-ISSN: 2807 - 6494

DOI : 10.36418/jrssem.v1i11.196 https://jrssem.publikasiindonesia.id/index.php/jrssem/index

THE INFLUENCE OF ORGANIZATIONAL CULTURE, WORK

MOTIVATION, TRANSFORMATIONAL LEADERSHIP ON

EMPLOYEE PERFORMANCE AND THE IMPLICATION ON

ORGANIZATIONAL PERFORMANCE

Nurmilasari Evi

1*

Yuliantini Tine

2

1,2

Mercu Buana University, Jakarta, Indonesia

e-mail: evin001@brin.go.id

1

, tine.yuliantini@mercubuana.ac.id

2

*Correspondence: evin00[email protected].id

Submitted: 26 May 2022, Revised: 04 June 2022, Accepted: 15 June 2022

Abstract. The purpose of this study was to identify and determine the effect of Organizational

Culture (OC), Work Motivation (WM) and Transformational Leadership (TL) on Employee

Performance (EP) and the implication on Organizational Performance (OP) in National Research

and Innovation Agency. The research was conducted through the distribution of questionnaires,

and the population of this study were employees of the National Research and Development

Agency. That was done to 179 respondents using a quantitative approach. The approach used in

this research is Structural Equation Model (SEM) based on variant or Partial Least Square (PLS) with

Smart-PLS analysis tools 3.3.9. The results of this study are that Organizational Culture, Work

Motivation has a significant positive effect on Employee Performance and Organizational

Performance. Transformational Leadership has a significant negative effect on Employee

Performance and Organizational Performance. Employee Performance has a significant positive

effect on Organizational Performance.

Keywords: organizational culture; work motivation; transformational leadership; employee

performance; organizational performance.

Nurmilasari Evi, Yuliantini Tine | 1831

DOI : 10.36418/jrssem.v1i11.196 https://jrssem.publikasiindonesia.id/index.php/jrssem/index

INTRODUCTION

Reliable Human resource management

is needed by organizations, both private

and government, because human

resources are the determining factor that

will greatly determining the success or

failure of an organization to achieve

effective and efficient organizational goals

(Husaini, 2017). Human resources are the

basic capital of national development that

must always be developed, directed and

improved so that they can develop and

maintain the survival of the organization in

accordance with the vision, mission and

goals of the organization (Septina, 2018).

The success of organizational

performance is strongly influenced by the

performance of its employees (Bauw &

Gunawati, 2018). The efficient and effective

government administration is a demand in

the era of globalization which is filled of

competition and limitations in all fields.

This fact demands the professionalism of

Civil Servant resources in the

implementation of government affairs.

Therefore, in line with the reform of

government organizations, various

changes in the government bureaucracy

have been carried out in order to achieve

efficiency and effectiveness of government

organizations, including prioritizing human

resource management (Ashari, 2017).

Organizational performance is an

achievement reflection the process of

implementing program or policy in

realizing the things listed in the strategic

goals of organizational growth with targets,

vision and mission to improve

development and good organizational

growth (Sunda et al., 2017).

The discussion about the performance

of civil servants in Indonesia is indeed very

interesting to debate. Many people think

that the performance of civil servants in

Indonesia has not yet shown optimal

performance. Of the approximately 4.7

million Civil Servants in Indonesia, only 40%

are truly professional, productive, and

qualified. This figure is not bad data, but it

would be even better if only 40% of civil

servants were not qualified (Nahidah,

2016). To support government

performance, it is necessary to know the

success factors of other countries

government systems in managing the

performance of civil servants. Therefore, a

more in-depth study of the system is

considered successful and then adapted to

Indonesian culture so that it can run well. It

is necessary to know the advantages and

disadvantages of other countries system

and then adjust them to Indonesia's

performance climate in order to improve

the performance of Indonesian Civil

Servants (Kurniati & Roesida, 2018).

Indonesia needs to look at the

performance mechanism of employees and

bureaucracy in Canada, one of the

countries that has been very successful in

good governance practices according to

the Worldwide Governance Indicators

(WGI). WGI data is released by the World

Bank and is sourced from government and

private data published every two years

from 1996 to 2002 and once a year in the

following year until now. WGI is

implemented by the World Bank in order to

assess government governance in more

than 220 countries as seen from six

indicators, namely Voice and

Accountability, Political Stability and

1832 | The Influence of Organizational Culture, Work Motivation, Tranformational Leadership

on Employee Performance and the Implication on Organizational Performance

Absence of Violence/Terrorism,

Government Effectiveness, Regulatory

Quality, Rule of Law and Control of

Corruption (The World Bank, 2021).

In Japan, the management of the

National Public Service is regulated in the

Japanese Constitution. The Japanese

constitution stipulates that "every civil

servant is a servant to the whole people,

not a servant to some particular group". In

Japan, there is a policy to control the

number of employees with a total number

of law staff based on an analysis of

employee needs. To support the

professionalism and competence of civil

servants in Japan, there is an NPA as a

special institution that is responsible for the

personnel system that is independent and

neutral from political influence (Herman,

2018).

In South Korea, the government has

made a technical manual for reforming the

culture of civil servants, which prioritizes

the development of ethical values,

character, and exploring the Confucian

culture so that it can be transformed into a

high work culture and work ethic in

government employees. Shame culture and

quilt culture must be highlighted in the

employee's work environment so that

employees feel ashamed and feel wrong if

they violate ethics and violate the law, such

as practicing corruption, collusion, and

nepotism. The development of social

sanctions in the community must also be

strengthened so if there are employees /

civil servants who abuse their authority,

they will receive social sanctions (Dongil et

al., 2021).

In order to improve the performance of

qualified and professional employees, one

of the factors that influence employee

performance is organizational culture.

Organizational culture can help

organizations to achieve organizational

goals. Cultural values are not visible, but

forces behavior to produce effective

performance. Organizational culture that

matches the environment and business

strategy will have relatively better job

performance than those that do not (Elmi

et al., 2016). Another factor that affects

employee performance is work motivation.

Motivation is an encouragement of needs

within employees so they can adapt to their

environment (Marlapa et al., 2019). Another

factor that can influence to improve

employee performance is transformational

leadership. The transformational leaders

must have a strong desire to achieve

organizational goals, namely diagnostic

skills and always pay attention in solving

problems (Wicaksono et al., 2020).

METHODS

The type of research used is quantitative

research. This method is the type of

research or scientific method that data is in

the form of numbers, can be processed and

analyzed using mathematical or statistical

calculations (Sekaran & Bogie, 2016).

Quantitative research methods are

methods for making accurate

measurements with the aim of testing the

established hypotheses.

The analytical method used is the

Structural Equation Model (SEM) analysis

based on variance or Partial Least Square

(PLS). SEM-PLS is a variance or component-

based SEM, in which the indicators of latent

variables are not correlated with indicators

of other latent variables in one research

Nurmilasari Evi, Yuliantini Tine | 1833

model. The author uses SEM-PLS because it

is non-parametric or does not require

various assumptions. SEM-PLS can analyze

constructs with normative and reflective

indicators.

The population in this study were all

employees of the National Research and

Innovation Agency (BRIN). Assuming the

population in this study is 324 employees

who are still active in the National Research

and Innovation Agency (BRIN). The

sampling technique used is probability with

the Simple Random Sampling technique.

RESULTS AND DISCUSSION

The characteristics of the research

sample in this study were 3 criteria

consisting of gender, last education group

and years of service.

Table 1. Respondents Characteristics Based on Gender

No.

Gender

Employee

Persentage

(%)

1

Man

96

53.63%

2

Woman

83

46.37%

Total

179

100%

Source: primary data processed by researchers (2022)

Table 2. Respondents Characteristics Based on Last

Education Group

Table 3. Respondents Characteristics Based on Years of Service

No

Years of Service

Employee

Percentage (%)

1

<5 year

35

19,55%

2

6-10 year

42

23,46%s

3

11-15 year

61

34,08%

4

16-20 year

28

15,64%

5

>21 year

13

7,26%

Total

179

100%

Source: primary data processed by researchers (2022)

No.

Last

Education

Employee

Persentage

(%)

1

Associate

Degree

13

7.26%

2

Bachelor

Degree

115

64.25%

3

Master

Degree

47

26.26%

4

Doctoral

Degree

4

2.23%

Total

179

100%

Nurmilasari Evi, Yuliantini Tine | 1834

DOI : 10.36418/jrssem.v1i11.196 https://jrssem.publikasiindonesia.id/index.php/jrssem/index

Based on the results of 179 respondents regarding the research variables, researchers

described the respondents' answers which were grouped in descriptive statistics.

Table 4. Descricptive Statistics per Variable

Variable/

Dimension/

Indicator

Descriptive Statistics

Average

per

Variable

N

Min

Max

Mean

Standard

Deviation

Organizational Culture (X1)

4.057

Self Awareness (X1.1)

X1.1.1

179

3

5

4.060

0.350

X1.1.2

179

2

5

4.055

0.374

X1.1.3

179

3

5

4.027

0.322

Aggressiveness (X1.2)

X1.2.1

179

3

5

4.060

0.408

X1.2.2

179

3

5

4.055

0.359

Personality (X1.3)

X1.3.1

179

3

5

4.099

0.380

X1.3.2

179

3

5

4.082

0.346

Performance (X1.4)

X1.4.1

179

3

5

4.082

0.361

X1.4.2

179

3

5

3.995

0.355

X1.4.3

179

3

5

4.044

0.329

Team Orientation (X1.5)

X1.5.1

179

3

5

4.055

0.359

X1.5.2

179

3

5

4.071

0.406

Work Motivation (X2)

4.067

Need for achievement (X2.1)

X2.1.1

179

2

5

4.055

0.416

X2.1.2

179

3

5

4.077

0.438

X2.1.3

179

3

5

3.995

0.385

Need to expand relationships (X2.2)

X2.2.1

179

3

5

4.137

0.403

X2.2.2

179

3

5

4.137

0.429

Need to master a job (X2.3)

X2.3.1

179

3

5

4.110

0.444

X2.3.2

179

3

5

3.956

0.553

Transformational Leadership (X3)

2.427

Idealized Influence (X3.1)

X3.1.1

179

1

4

2.467

0.856

X3.1.2

179

1

4

2.418

0.903

X3.1.3

179

1

4

2.396

0.876

Inspirational Motivation (X3.2)

X3.2.1

179

1

4

2.407

0.870

X3.2.2

179

1

4

2.401

0.876

Intellectual Simulation (X3.3)

X3.3.1

179

1

4

2.429

0.866

Nurmilasari Evi, Yuliantini Tine | 1835

X3.3.2

179

1

4

2.456

0.842

Individualized Consideration (X3.4)

X3.4.1

179

1

4

2.456

0.829

X3.4.2

179

1

4

2.451

0.829

X3.4.3

179

1

4

2.390

0.875

Table 4 (cont). Descriptive Statistics per Variable

Variabel/

Dimensi/

Indikator

Descriptive Statistics

Rata-

rata per

Variabel

N

Min

Max

Mean

Standard

Deviation

Employee Performance (Y)

4.059

Quality of Work (Y1)

Y1.1

179

3

5

4.060

0.350

Y1.2

179

3

5

4.082

0.418

Y1.3

179

3

5

4.044

0.390

Quantity of Work (Y2)

Y2.1

179

3

5

4.038

0.337

Y2.2

179

3

5

4.016

0.355

Responsibility (Y3)

Y3.1

179

3

5

4.077

0.385

Y3.2

179

3

5

4.049

0.352

Teamwork(Y4)

Y4.1

179

3

5

4.088

0.352

Y4.2

179

3

5

4.055

0.327

Initiative (Y5)

Y5.1

179

3

5

4.060

0.350

Organizational Performance (Z)

3.993

Input (Z1)

Z1.1

179

3

5

4.033

0.330

Z1.2

179

2

5

3.995

0.413

Process (Z2)

Z2.1

179

2

5

3.945

0.429

Z2.2

179

2

5

3.934

0.427

Outcome (Z3)

Z3.1

179

2

5

3.951

0.423

Output (Z4)

Z4.1

179

3

5

4.038

0.337

Z4.2

179

3

5

3.989

0.296

Impact (Z5)

Z5.1

179

3

5

4.022

0.314

Z5.2

179

3

5

4.027

0.322

Source: Analysis Results Using SmartPLS 3.3.9 (2022)

Nurmilasari Evi, Yuliantini Tine | 1836

DOI : 10.36418/jrssem.v1i11.196 https://jrssem.publikasiindonesia.id/index.php/jrssem/index

Evaluation Results of the Measurement

Model (Outer Model)

The approach used in this research is

Structural Equation Model (SEM) with

Smart-PLS analysis tools. The attempt of

this validity testing is to find out the eligible

of the selected items including the overall

data collection process. The results of the

validity test are as follows:

Table 5. Convergent Validity Tes Result

Variable

Dimension

Indicator

Outer

Loading

Factor

Requirements

AVE

Requirements

Conclusion

Organizational

Culture

(X1)

X1.1

X1.1.1

0.884

> 0.7

0.599

> 0.5

Valid

X1.1.2

0.943

X1.1.3

0.856

X1.2

X1.2.1

0.930

X1.2.2

0.929

X1.3

X1.3.1

0.965

X1.3.2

0.964

X1.4

X1.4.1

0.847

X1.4.2

0.856

X1.4.3

0.861

X1.5

X1.5.1

0.914

X1.5.2

0.903

Work

Motivation

(X2)

X2.1

X2.1.1

0.795

> 0.7

0.542

> 0.5

Valid

X2.1.2

0.909

X2.1.3

0.828

X2.2

X2.2.1

0.944

X2.2.2

0.942

X2.3

X2.3.1

0.896

X2.3.2

0.868

Transformasional

Leadership

(X3)

X3.1

X3.1.1

0.963

> 0.7

0.902

> 0.5

Valid

X3.1.2

0.967

X3.1.3

0.969

X3.2

X3.2.1

0.960

X3.2.2

0.961

X3.3

X3.3.1

0.982

X3.3.2

0.982

X3.4

X3.4.1

0.970

X3.4.2

0.979

X3.4.3

0.975

Source: Analysis Results Using SmartPLS 3.3.9 (2022)

Nurmilasari Evi, Yuliantini Tine | 1837

Table 5 (cont). Convergent Validity Tes Result

Variable

Dimension

Indicator

Outer

Loading

Factor

Requirements

AVE

Requirements

Conclusion

Employee

Performance

(Y)

Y1

Y1.1

0.874

> 0.7

0.604

> 0.5

Valid

Y1.2

0.911

Y1.3

0.842

Y2

Y2.1

0.913

Y2.2

0.921

Y3

Y3.1

0.930

Y3.2

0.937

Y4

Y4.1

0.923

Y4.2

0.933

Y5

Y5.1

1.000

Organizational

Performance

(Z)

Z1

Z1.1

0.878

> 0.7

0.538

> 0.5

Valid

Z1.2

0.913

Z2

Z2.1

0.943

Z2.2

0.949

Z3

Z3.1

1.000

Z4

Z4.1

0.905

Z4.2

0.919

Z5

Z5.1

0.894

Z5.2

0.891

Source: Analysis Results Using SmartPLS 3.3.9 (2022)

Table 5 above shows that all research

indicators have a loading factor value of

> 0.7 and an Average Variant Extracted

(AVE) value of > 0.5. Thus, all indicators

used in this study have met convergent

validity or are considered valid.

Table 6. Discriminant Validity Test Results: Cross-Loading

Organizational

Culture

(X1)

Work

Motivation

(X2)

Transformasional

Leadership

(X3)

Employee

Performance

(Y)

Organizational

Performance

(Z)

X1.1.1

0.778

0.530

-0.333

0.608

0.572

X1.1.2

0.817

0.482

-0.326

0.604

0.495

X1.1.3

0.821

0.482

-0.384

0.619

0.486

X1.2.1

0.780

0.507

-0.394

0.561

0.560

X1.2.2

0.773

0.509

-0.334

0.501

0.477

X1.3.1

0.753

0.534

-0.371

0.565

0.494

X1.3.2

0.744

0.523

-0.340

0.578

0.493

X1.4.1

0.758

0.495

-0.338

0.561

0.476

X1.4.2

0.715

0.461

-0.324

0.514

0.499

X1.4.3

0.800

0.528

-0.392

0.639

0.585

1838 | The Influence of Organizational Culture, Work Motivation, Tranformational Leadership

on Employee Performance and the Implication on Organizational Performance

X1.5.1

0.790

0.535

-0.401

0.603

0.520

X1.5.2

0.747

0.534

-0.460

0.597

0.547

X2.1.1

0.510

0.666

-0.370

0.512

0.570

X2.1.2

0.523

0.745

-0.398

0.567

0.549

X2.1.3

0.528

0.753

-0.353

0.572

0.505

X2.2.1

0.469

0.778

-0.278

0.524

0.408

X2.2.2

0.422

0.767

-0.304

0.481

0.383

X2.3.1

0.448

0.759

-0.394

0.484

0.470

X2.3.2

0.504

0.680

-0.475

0.461

0.474

X3.1.1

-0.482

-0.499

0.951

-0.522

-0.489

X3.1.2

-0.465

-0.517

0.926

-0.535

-0.502

X3.1.3

-0.464

-0.479

0.945

-0.481

-0.479

X3.2.1

-0.419

0.937

-0.455

-0.468

X3.2.2

-0.450

-0.477

0.942

-0.529

-0.451

X3.3.1

-0.464

-0.484

0.956

-0.523

-0.465

X3.3.2

-0.470

-0.488

0.965

-0.530

-0.472

X3.4.1

-0.445

-0.461

0.962

-0.503

-0.480

X3.4.2

-0.409

-0.432

0.960

-0.471

-0.452

X3.4.3

-0.434

-0.463

0.950

-0.504

-0.469

Source: Analysis Results Using SmartPLS 3.3.9 (2022)

Table 6 (cont.) Discriminant Validity Test Results: Cross-Loading

Organizational

Culture

(X1)

Work

Motivation

(X2)

Transformasional

Leadership

(X3)

Employee

Performance

(Y)

Organizational

Performance

(Z)

Y1.1

0.633

0.532

-0.383

0.767

0.528

Y1.2

0.586

0.554

-0.426

0.719

0.530

Y1.3

0.549

0.521

-0.482

0.786

0.547

Y2.1

0.606

0.541

-0.417

0.750

0.505

Y2.2

0.608

0.622

-0.436

0.788

0.538

Y3.1

0.538

0.531

-0.418

0.791

0.582

Y3.2

0.618

0.553

-0.413

0.828

0.568

Y4.1

0.536

0.489

-0.399

0.761

0.535

Y4.2

0.581

0.511

-0.383

0.813

0.548

Y5.1

0.577

0.581

-0.385

0.764

0.478

Z1.1

0.436

0.452

-0.371

0.430

0.616

Z1.2

0.498

0.485

-0.395

0.506

0.723

Z2.1

0.413

0.442

-0.408

0.485

0.774

Z2.2

0.467

0.479

-0.400

0.503

0.817

Z3.1

0.455

0.444

-0.386

0.486

0.799

Z4.1

0.532

0.555

-0.372

0.474

0.705

Z4.2

0.538

0.499

-0.302

0.528

0.759

Z5.1

0.622

0.536

-0.333

0.601

0.695

Z5.2

0.469

0.407

-0.319

0.546

0.688

Source: Analysis Results Using SmartPLS 3.3.9 (2022)

Nurmilasari Evi, Yuliantini Tine | 1839

Based on table 6 above, it can be seen that the correlation value of the construct with its

indicators is greater than the correlation value with other constructs. It can be concluded that

all latent constructs show good discriminant validity because they can predict indicators in

their block better than indicators in other blocks. Thus, the convergent validity test and

discriminant validity test have been met, so it can be concluded that the research model is

valid.

Table 7. Reliability Test Results

Variable

Dimension

Cronbach's

Alpha

rho_A

Composite

Reliability

Result

Organizational

Culture

(X1)

X1

0.939

0.947

Reliable

X1.1

0.875

0.876

0.924

Reliable

X1.2

0.842

0.927

Reliable

X1.3

0.924

0.963

Reliable

X1.4

0.816

0.817

0.89

Reliable

X1.5

0.789

0.79

0.904

Reliable

Work

Motivation

(X2)

X2

0.859

0.86

0.892

Reliable

X2.1

0.799

0.804

0.882

Reliable

X2.2

0.876

0.942

Reliable

X2.3

0.716

0.722

0.875

Reliable

Transformasional

Leadership

(X3)

X3

0.988

0.989

Reliable

X3.1

0.964

0.965

0.977

Reliable

X3.2

0.916

0.96

Reliable

X3.3

0.963

0.982

Reliable

X3.4

0.974

0.983

Reliable

Employee

Performance

(Y)

Y

0.927

0.928

0.938

Reliable

Y1

0.848

0.908

Reliable

Y2

0.811

0.813

0.914

Reliable

Y3

0.853

0.854

0.931

Reliable

Y4

0.838

0.841

0.925

Reliable

Y5

1

Reliable

Organizational

Performance

(Z)

Z

0.891

0.895

0.912

Reliable

Z1

0.755

0.769

0.89

Reliable

Z2

0.883

0.885

0.945

Reliable

Z3

1

Reliable

Z4

0.798

0.801

0.908

Reliable

Z5

0.744

0.887

Reliable

Source: Analysis Results Using SmartPLS 3.3.9 (2022)

Nurmilasari Evi, Yuliantini Tine | 1840

DOI : 10.36418/jrssem.v1i11.196 https://jrssem.publikasiindonesia.id/index.php/jrssem/index

Based on table 7 above, it can be seen

that all composite reliability values have a

value > 0.7 and Cronbach's alpha > 0.7.

Thus, all variables in this study were

declared reliable or met the criteria for a

reliable and reliable measuring instrument.

Results of Evaluation of the Structural

Model (Inner Model)

This model is a specification of the

relationship between latent variables, also

known as inner relations. This test is a test

of the type and magnitude of the influence

of the independent latent variable on the

dependent latent variable.

Path Coefficients test results

Figure 1. Value Model Between Constructs Research Model

Source: Analysis Results Using SmartPLS 3.3.9 (2022)

Nurmilasari Evi, Yuliantini Tine | 1841

DOI : 10.36418/jrssem.v1i11.196 https://jrssem.publikasiindonesia.id/index.php/jrssem/index

Path coefficient is used to determine

the influence of the independent variable

on the dependent variable. The value of the

path coefficient is based on Figure 2 can be

interpreted as follows:

1. The path coefficient value of X1 to Y is

0.471, which means that the influence

of Organizational Culture on Employee

Performance is 47.1%.

2. The path coefficient value of X2 to Y is

0.312, which means the influence of

work motivation on employee

performance is 31.2%.

3. The path coefficient value of X3 to Y is

-0.154, which means the influence of

Transformational Leadership on

Employee Performance is 15.4%.

4. The path coefficient value of X1 to Z is

0.255, which means the influence of

Organizational Culture on

Organizational Performance is 25.5%.

5. The path coefficient value X2 to Z is

0.232, which means the influence of

work motivation on organizational

performance is 23.2%.

6. The path coefficient value of X3 to Z is

-0.116 which means the influence of

Transformational Leadership on

Organizational Perfomance is 11,6%.

Goodness of Fit Model Test Results

Coefficient Determination Test / R

Square (R

2

)

Table 8. Test Results R

2

(R square)

Construct

R-

Square

R Square Adjusted

Employee Performance

0.653

0.647

Organizational

Performance

0.568

0.558

Source: Analysis Results Using SmartPLS 3.3.9 (2022)

From table 8 it can be explained that

the relationship between constructs based

on the value of the Employee Performance

variable (Y) is 0.647, this shows that 64.7%

of the Employee Performance variable (Y)

can be influenced by the Organizational

Culture variable (X1), Work Motivation (X2),

and Transformational Leadership (X3), while

the remaining 35.3% is influenced by other

variables that are not the object of research

in this study.

For the relationship between constructs

based on the value of the Organizational

Performance Performance variable (Z) is

0.558, this shows that 55.8% of the

Organizational Performance variable (Z)

can be influenced by Organizational

Culture (X1), Work Motivation (X2), and

Transformational Leadership (X3) variables,

while the remaining 44.2% is influenced by

other variables that are not the object of

research in this study. The Goodness of Fit

Index (GoF) test aims to validate the

combined performance of the

measurement model (outer model) and

structural model (inner model) obtained

through the following calculations:

GoF = √ (AVE x 𝑅

2

)

= √ ((0,599 + 0,542 + 0,902 +

1842 | The Influence of Organizational Culture, Work Motivation, Tranformational Leadership

on Employee Performance and the Implication on Organizational Performance

0,604+0,538) / 5) x ((0,647 +

0,558)/2)

= √ (0,637 x 0, 602)

= √ 0,383

= 0,618

From the calculation results, the GOF

Index value is considered large because the

value is more than 0.36. This indicates that

the overall model is appropriate.

Hypothesis Test Results

Table 9. Direct Effect Hypothesis Test Results

Variable

Original

Sample

Mean

Standard

Deviation

T

Statistics

P

Values

Organizational

Culture -> Employee

Performance

0.471

0.475

0.106

4.451

0.000

Work Motivation->

Employee

Performance

0.312

0.087

3.573

0.000

Transformasional

Leadership ->

Employee

Performance

-0.154

-0.148

0.046

3.339

0.001

Organizational

Culture->

Organizational

Performance

0.255

0.256

0.119

2.154

0.032

Work Motivation ->

Organizational

Performance

0.232

0.225

0.100

2.325

0.020

Transformasional

Leadership ->

Organizational

Performance

-0.116

-0.108

0.057

2.020

0.044

Employee

Performance ->

Organizational

Performance

0.274

0.284

0.120

2.281

0.023

Source: Analysis Results Using SmartPLS 3.3.9 (2022)

Nurmilasari Evi, Yuliantini Tine | 1843

The hypothesis testing of this research

was carried out with the help of SmartPLS

3.3.9 software. These values can be seen

from the bootstrapping results. The criteria

used in this study is a significance level of

p-value <0.05 (5%). The results of each

relationship between variables were

declared significant if the t-statistics value

> 1.96 and the p-value < 0.05.

It can be seen from table 9 that:

1. The Influence of Organizational Culture

on Employee Performance has a t-

statistics value of 4.451 which is greater

than 1.96 and a p-value of 0.000 which

is smaller than 0.05. With this it can be

stated that H1 is accepted or it means

that Organizational Culture has an

effect on Employee Performance.

2. The influence of work motivation on

employee performance has a

t-statistics value of 3.573 which is

greater than 1.96 and a p-value of 0.000

which is smaller than 0.05. With this it

can be stated that H2 is accepted or it

means that work motivation has an

effect on employee performance.

3. The Influence of Transformational

Leadership on Employee Performance

has a t-statistics value of 3.339 which is

greater than 1.96 and a p-value of 0.001

which is smaller than 0.05. With this it

can be stated that H3 is accepted or it

means that Transformational

Leadership has an effect on Employee

Performance.

4. The Influence of Organizational Culture

on Organizational Performance has a

t-statistics value of 2.154 which is

greater than 1.96 and a p-value of 0.032

which is smaller than 0.05. With this it

can be stated that H4 is accepted or it

means that Organizational Culture has

an effect on Organizational

Performance.

5. The Influence of Work Motivation on

Organizational Performance has a t-

statistics value of 2.325 which is greater

than 1.96 and a p-value of 0.020 which

is smaller than 0.05. With this it can be

stated that H5 is accepted or it means

that work motivation has an effect on

organizational performance.

6. The Influence of Transformational

Leadership on Organizational

Performance has a t-statistics value of

2.020 which is greater than 1.96 and a

p-value of 0.044 which is smaller than

0.05. With this it can be stated that H6

is accepted or it means that

Transformational Leadership has an

effect on Organizational Performance

7. The influence of employee

performance on organizational

performance has a t-statistics value of

2.281 which is greater than 1.96 and a

p-value of 0.023 which is smaller than

0.05. With this it can be stated that H7

is accepted or it means that Employee

Performance has an effect on

Organizational Performance.

The Influence of Organizational Culture

on Employee Performance

The results showed that the

organizational culture variable had a

positive and significant effect on employee

performance at the National Research and

Innovation Agency (BRIN). This is in line

1844 | The Influence of Organizational Culture, Work Motivation, Tranformational Leadership

on Employee Performance and the Implication on Organizational Performance

with research conducted by (Sudarman et

al., 2019), (Maamari & Saheb, 2018) and

(Ariawaty, 2020) which state that

organizational culture has a positive and

significant effect on employee

performance.

Based on these empirical facts and

supported by the results of previous

studies, it can be concluded that the

research hypothesis (H1) in this study which

states that "Organizational Culture has a

positive and significant effect on Employee

Performance" is accepted.

The Influence of Work Motivation on

Employee Performance

The results showed that the work

motivation variable had a positive and

significant effect on employee performance

at the National Research and Innovation

Agency (BRIN). This is in line with research

conducted by (Paais & Pattiruhu, 2020),

(Pancasila et al., 2020) and (Dewi, 2019)

which state that work motivation has a

positive and significant effect on employee

performance.

Based on these empirical facts and

supported by the results of previous

studies, it can be concluded that the

research hypothesis (H2) in this study which

states that "Work Motivation has a positive

and significant effect on Employee

Performance" is accepted.

The Influence of Transformational

Leadership on Employee Performance

Based on the results of research testing,

there is a negative and significant influence

between transformational leadership on

employee performance. This is in

accordance with the third hypothesis (H3)

which states that transformational

leadership has an effect on employee

performance. However, the direction of the

influence of the variable is significant

negative. This means that the better the

transformational leadership, the lower the

employee's performance.

This research is in line with research

conducted by (Sudiarta, 2018), (Supriyono,

2019), and (Vipraprastha et al., 2018) which

state that transformational leadership has a

negative and significant effect on

employee performance.

The better the transformational leadership

applied to BRIN, the lower the performance

of BRIN's employees. This indicates that the

transformational leadership implemented

at BRIN has not met the expectations of the

employees. So far, the leadership style in

the workplace has been a challenge in itself.

Especially when the working team consists

of several age groups. Each generation has

its own character. The majority of

respondents in this study are between 20-

30 years old, so they are included in

generation Y (millennials) and generation Z

who are in their productive age. The current

demand is how to build a youth team with

transformational leadership that is faced

with generations Y (millennials) and Z who

have different characteristics from the

previous generation. There needs to be a

positive form of support from each

employee. It takes the right leadership and

management style to optimize the role of

this generation so as to improve employee

performance.

Based on these empirical facts and

supported by the results of previous

studies, it can be concluded that the

research hypothesis (H3) in this study which

states that "Transformational Leadership

has an effect on Employee Performance" is

accepted.

The Influence of Organizational Culture

on Organizational Performance

Nurmilasari Evi, Yuliantini Tine | 1845

The results showed that the

Organizational Culture variable had a

positive and significant effect on

Organizational Performance at the National

Research and Innovation Agency (BRIN).

This is in line with research conducted by

(Santoso et al., 2018) which states that work

motivation has a positive and significant

effect on organizational performance.

Based on these empirical facts and

supported by the results of previous

studies, it can be concluded that the

research hypothesis (H4) in this study which

states that "Organizational Culture has a

positive and significant effect on

Organizational Performance" is accepted.

The Influence of Work Motivation on

Organizational Performance

The results showed that the work

motivation variable had a positive and

significant effect on organizational

performance at the National Research and

Innovation Agency (BRIN). This is in line

with research conducted by (Geelmaale,

2019) which states that work motivation

has a positive and significant effect on

organizational performance.

Based on these empirical facts and

supported by the results of previous

studies, it can be concluded that the

research hypothesis (H5) in this study which

states that "Work Motivation has a positive

and significant effect on Organizational

Performance" is accepted.

The Influence of Transformational

Leadership on Organizational

Performance

Based on the results of research testing,

there is a negative and significant influence

between transformational leadership on

organizational performance. This is in

accordance with the sixth hypothesis (H6)

which states that transformational

leadership has an effect on organizational

performance. However, the direction of the

influence of the variable is significant

negative. This means that the better the

transformational leadership, the lower the

organizational performance.

This study is in line with research conducted

by (Alrowwad et al., 2017), (Suifan et al.,

2019) and (Indrayanto et al., 2021) which

state that transformational leadership has a

negative and significant effect on

organizational performance.

The better the transformational

leadership applied at BRIN, the lower the

organizational performance. This indicates

that the application of transformational

leadership at BRIN has not been able to

provide a solution to a problem so that the

organization can develop and progress.

The figure of a transformational leader is

really expected to be present in an

organization, including BRIN which is a

relatively new government institution.

Collaboration between leaders and

employees is not spared in achieving

organizational performance. This needs to

be a concern in order to create a conducive

and innovative organizational environment

that has an impact on

The Influence of Employee Performance

on Organizational Performance

The results showed that the Employee

Performance variable had a positive and

significant effect on Organizational

Performance at the National Research and

Innovation Agency (BRIN). This is in line

with research conducted by (Hidayati &

Syamyudi, 2017) which states that

employee performance has a positive and

significant effect on organizational

1846 | The Influence of Organizational Culture, Work Motivation, Tranformational Leadership

on Employee Performance and the Implication on Organizational Performance

performance.

Based on these empirical facts and

supported by the results of previous

studies, it can be concluded that the

research hypothesis (H7) in this study which

states that "Employee Performance has a

positive and significant effect on

Organizational Performance" is accepted.

CONCLUSIONS

Based on the results of research and

discussion in previous chapters, several

conclusions can be made as follows: 1)

Organizational Culture has a positive and

significant effect on Employee Performance

at the National Research and Innovation

Agency (BRIN). The better the

organizational culture, the better employee

performance will be. This is because

organizational culture can affect the

psychological factors of employees with

each other and become a separate

encouragement embedded in employees

to continue to contribute their best work to

the organization. 2) Work motivation has a

positive and significant effect on employee

performance at the National Research and

Innovation Agency (BRIN). The better the

work motivation, the better the

organizational performance will be. This

shows that with the need for achievement,

it can increase work motivation so that

employee performance will also increase. 3)

Transformational Leadership has a negative

and significant effect on Employee

Performance at the National Research and

Innovation Agency (BRIN). The better

transformational leadership, it will reduce

employee performance. Transformational

leadership is basically a leadership in which

the leader changes the values, beliefs,

attitudes, behaviors, emotions, and

demands of the followers to be better

oriented in the future. However, the

transformational leadership at BRIN has not

been able to achieve this. Organizational

Culture has a positive and significant

impact on Organizational Performance at

the National Research and Innovation

Agency (BRIN). The better the

organizational culture, the better the

organizational performance will be.

Organizational culture has a strong

relationship with the uniqueness of the

organization, its values, mission, goals,

objectives and ways of building shared

values. 4) Work Motivation has a positive

and significant effect on Organizational

Performance at the National Research and

Innovation Agency (BRIN). The better the

work motivation, the better the

organizational performance will be. Work

motivation plays one of the most important

parts in organizational performance and

contributes to the development and

prosperity of the organization itself. 5)

Transformational Leadership has a negative

and significant effect on Organizational

Performance at the National Research and

Innovation Agency (BRIN). The better

transformational leadership will actually

reduce organizational performance.

Transformational Leadership at BRIN

should have an important role in providing

policies that strengthen organizational

performance. 6) Employee Performance has

a positive and significant impact on

Organizational Performance at the National

Research and Innovation Agency (BRIN).

The better the employee's performance,

the better the organizational performance

will be. Successful organizations need a

Nurmilasari Evi, Yuliantini Tine                                                                                              | 1847 
good  organizational  culture  and 
transformational  leaders  to  provide  new 
things so that they can stimulate employee 
performance. With good performance from 
employees, the organization can achieve its 
success and goals. 
 
 
REFERENCES 
Akbar,  R.,  Noermijati,  N.,  &  Troena,  E.  A. 
(2016).  Pengaruh  Gaya  Kepemimpinan 
Transformasional  dan  Stres  Kerja 
terhadap  Kinerja  Pegawai  dengan 
Dimediasi  oleh  Kepuasan  Kerja  (studi 
pada  KPPN  Makassar  1  dan  KPPN 
Makassar  2).  Jurnal  Aplikasi 
Manajemen,  14(3),  537–545. 
https://doi.org/10.18202/jam23026332
.14.3.14 
 
Aria Widjaja, M. Y., Yasid, M., & Misno, A. 
(2018).  Pengaruh  Budaya  Organisasi 
dan  Gaya  Kepemimpinan 
Transformasional-Transaksional 
terhadap  Kinerja  Karyawan  melalui 
Komitmen  Organisasi  dan  Kepuasan 
Kerja pada Yayasan Nurul Hayat. BISMA 
(Bisnis Dan Manajemen), 11(1), 77–103. 
https://doi.org/10.26740/bisma.v11n1.
p77-103 
 
Ariawaty, R. R. N. (2020). Improve Employee 
Performance  Through  Organizational 
Culture  and  Employee  Commitments. 
Jurnal Aplikasi Manajemen, 18(2), 318–
325. 
https://doi.org/10.21776/ub.jam.2020.
018.02.12 
 
Ashari, E. T. (2017). Reformasi Pengelolaan 
SDM  Aparatur,  Prasyarat  Tata  Kelola 
Birokrasi  Yang  Baik.  Jurnal 
Administrator  Borneo,  6(2),  1–17. 
https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.2425
8/jba.v6i2.60 
 
Bauw,  A.,  &  Gunawati,  N.  M.  D.  (2018). 
Faktor-Faktor  yang  Mempengaruhi 
Kinerja  Pegawai  Kementerian  Agama 
Kabupaten  Keerom.  Future:  Jurnal 
Manajemen Dan Akuntansi, 4(1), 18–33. 
https://core.ac.uk/download/pdf/2290
22592.pdf 
 
Dessler,  G.  (2015).  Manajemen  Sumber 
Daya Manusia. Salemba Empat. 
 
Dewi,  N.  N.  (2019).  Pengaruh  Komitmen 
Organisasi  dan  Motivasi  Terhadap 
Kinerja dan Kepuasan Kerja (Studi Kasus 
PT.  Jent  Tsong  Indonesia).  2(1),  13–16. 
https://doi.org/http://dx.doi.org/10.23
45/e12.v2i1.384 
 
Dongil, K., Erawan, I. K. P., & Mardika, I. M. 
(2021).  Perbandingan  Manajemen 
Pegawai  Negeri  Sipil  Indonesia  dan 
Korea.  Public  Inspiration:  Jurnal 
Administrasi  Publik,  6(1),  66–73. 
https://doi.org/10.22225/pi.6.1.2021.66
-73 
 
Edison, E., Anwar, Y., & Komariyah, I. (2016). 
Manajemen  sumber  daya  manusia : 
Strategi  dan  perubahan  dalam  rangka 
meningkatkan  kinerja  pegawai  dan 
organisasi (1st ed.). Alfabeta. 
 
Elmi,  F.,  Setyadi,  A.,  Regiana,  L.,  &  Ali,  H. 
(2016).  Effect  of  Leadership  Style  , 
Organizational  Culture  and  Emotional 
Intelligence  to  Learning.  International 

1848 | The Influence of Organizational Culture, Work Motivation, Tranformational Leadership 
on Employee Performance and the Implication on Organizational Performance 
Journal  of  Applied  Business  and 
Economic  Research  (IJABER),  13(8), 
3635–3654.  
 
Geelmaale,  A.  M.  A.  (2019).  Impact  of 
Employee  Motivation  on 
Organizational  Performance. 
International  Journal  of  Advanced 
Research,  7(10),  166–172. 
https://doi.org/10.21474/ijar01/9818 
 
Hasibuan,  M.  S.  .  (2016).  Manajemen 
Sumber  Daya  Manusia  (19th  ed.).  PT. 
Bumi Aksara. 
 
Herman.  (2018).  Sistem  Kepegawaian  Di 
Jepang :  Apa  Yang  Bisa  Dipetik  Untuk 
Sistem  Kepegawaian  Di  Indonesia ? 
Jurnal Kebijakan Dan Manajemen PNS, 
1(2),  39–54. 
https://jurnal.bkn.go.id/index.php/asn/
article/view/17/36 
 
Hidayati,  S.  N.,  &  Syamyudi,  S.  (2017). 
Analisis  Kinerja  Pegawai  guna 
Menunjang  Kinerja  Organisasi  dalam 
Memberikan  Pelayanan  Masyarakat. 
Jurnal  Maksipreneur:  Manajemen, 
Koperasi,  Dan  Entrepreneurship,  6(2), 
65. 
https://doi.org/10.30588/jmp.v6i2.303 
 
Husaini,  A.  (2017).  Peranan  manajemen 
sumberdaya manusia dalam organisasi. 
Jurnal  Warta,  51(4),  130. 
https://media.neliti.com/media/publica
tions/290763-peranan-manajemen-
sumberdaya-manusia-dal-
3cb59c90.pdf 
 
Kurniati, P. N., & Roesida, A. (2018). Urgensi 
Reformasi  Birokrasi  dan  Reformasi 
Regulasi  dalam  Membangun  Tata 
Kelola  Ekonomi  di  Indonesia.  Jurnal 
Analis  Kebijakan,  Vol.  2(1),  16–30. 
https://www.researchgate.net/publicati
on/328354503_Urgensi_Reformasi_Biro
krasi_Dan_Reformasi_Regulasi_Dalam_
Membangun_Tata_Kelola_Ekonomi_Di_I
ndonesia 
 
Lasrado, F., & Kassem, R. (2021). Let’s get 
everyone  involved!  The  effects  of 
transformational  leadership  and 
organizational  culture  on 
organizational excellence. International 
Journal  of  Quality  and  Reliability 
Management,  38(1),  169–194. 
https://doi.org/10.1108/IJQRM-11-
2019-0349 
 
Maamari,  B.  E.,  &  Saheb,  A.  (2018).  How 
organizational  culture  and  leadership 
style affect employees’ performance of 
genders.  International  Journal  of 
Organizational Analysis, 26(4), 630–651. 
https://doi.org/10.1108/IJOA-04-2017-
1151 
 
Mahsun,  M.  (2014).  Pengukuran  Kinerja 
Sektor Publik (1st ed.). BPFE. 
 
Makena,  J.  E.  (2017).  Pengaruh 
Kepemimpinan  Transformasional 
Terhadap  Kinerja  Organisasi  Melalui 
Pembelajaran  Organisasi  dan  Inovasi 
Pada  Hotel  Prama  Sanur  Beach  Bali. 
JAGADHITA:Jurnal  Ekonomi  &  Bisnis, 
4(2),  76–88. 
https://doi.org/10.22225/jj.4.2.135.76-
88 
 

Nurmilasari Evi, Yuliantini Tine                                                                                              | 1849 
Mangkunegara,  &  Prabu,  A.  (2017). 
Manajemen  Sumber  Daya  Manusia 
Perusahaan  (14th  ed.).  PT.  Remaja 
Rosdakarya. 
 
Marlapa, E., Yuliantini, T., & Ramadhan, F. S. 
(2019).  Effect  of  Work  Discipline  and 
Work  Motivation  on  Employee 
Productivity  of  PT.  Denso  Indonesia 
Plan  2  Cibitung  Bekasi  West  Java. 
Journal of  Resources Development  and 
Management,  60(10),  55–63. 
https://doi.org/10.7176/jrdm/60-07 
 
Nahidah.  (2016).  Analisis  Perencanaan 
Rekrutmen  Aparatur  Sipil  Negara 
Kabupaten  Mamuju  Utara  (Studi  Pada 
Badan Kepegawaian Dan Diklat Daerah 
Kabupaten  Mamuju  Utara).  E  Jurnal 
Katalogis,  4(5),  87–97. 
https://media.neliti.com/media/publica
tions/144588-ID-analisis-perencanaan-
rekrutmen-aparatur.pdf 
 
Paais, M., & Pattiruhu, J. R. (2020). Effect of 
Motivation,  Leadership,  and 
Organizational  Culture  on  Satisfaction 
and Employee Performance. Journal of 
Asian Finance, Economics and Business, 
7(8),  577–588. 
https://doi.org/10.13106/JAFEB.2020.V
OL7.NO8.577 
 
Pancasila,  I.,  Haryono,  S., &  Sulistyo,  B. A. 
(2020). Effects of work motivation and 
leadership toward work satisfaction and 
employee performance: Evidence from 
Indonesia.  Journal  of  Asian  Finance, 
Economics and Business, 7(6), 387–397. 
https://doi.org/10.13106/jafeb.2020.vol
7.no6.387 
 
Park, J., Han, S. J., Kim, J., & Kim, W. (2021). 
Structural  relationships  among 
transformational  leadership,  affective 
organizational  commitment,  and  job 
performance:  the  mediating  role  of 
employee  engagement.  European 
Journal  of  Training  and  Development. 
https://doi.org/10.1108/EJTD-10-2020-
0149 
 
Robbins, P. S., Judge, T. A., Saraswati, R., & 
Sirait,  F.  (2015).  Perilaku  organisasi 
(16th ed.). Salemba Empat. 
 
Rudianto.  (2018).  Akuntansi  Manajemen: 
Informasi  untuk  Pengambilan 
Keputusan (10th ed.). Erlangga. 
 
Santoso,  E.  B.,  Fiernaningsih,  N.,  & 
Murtiyono,  R.  K.  (2018).  Pengaruh 
Budaya  Organisasi  Terhadap  Kinerja 
Organisasi.  Jurnal  Administrasi  Dan 
Bisnis,  12(1),  40–45. 
https://doi.org/10.34149/jmbr.v11i1.55 
 
Sedarmayanti.  (2018).  Manajemen  Sumber 
Daya Manusia; Reformasi Birokrasi dan 
Manajemen  Pegawai  Negeri  Sipil  (D. 
Sumayyah (Ed.)). Refika Aditama. 
 
Sekaran,  U.,  &  Bogie,  R.  (2016).  Research 
Methods  for  Business:  A  Skill-Building 
Approach (7th ed.). John Wiley & Sons 
Ltd.  https://doi.org/10.1007/978-94-
007-0753-5_102084 
 
Septina,  R.  (2018).  Membangun  sumber 
daya  manusia  berbasis  science  dan 
teknologi.  Prosiding  Seminar  Nasional 
Universitas  PGRI  Palembang,  21,  477–

1850 | The Influence of Organizational Culture, Work Motivation, Tranformational Leadership

on Employee Performance and the Implication on Organizational Performance

481. https://jurnal.univpgri-

palembang.ac.id/index.php/Prosidingp

ps/article/view/1917

Sudarman, S. D., Perizade, B., & Widiyanti,

M. (2019). the Impact of Organizational

Culture and Transactional Leadership

Style on Employee Performance in Pt.

Pegadaian (Persero) Office Region III

Palembang. International Journal of

Scientific and Research Publications

(IJSRP), 9(8), 232–238.

https://doi.org/10.29322/ijsrp.9.08.201

9.p9236

Sudaryono. (2017). Pengantar manajemen:

Teori dan kasus (B. Seda (Ed.); 1st ed.).

CAPS (Center For Academic Publishing

Service).

Sunda, C. M., Lumolos, J., & Sambiran, S.

(2017). Kinerja Aparatur Sipil Negara

Dalam Pelayanan Publik Di Kelurahan

Talikuran Kecamatan Kawangkoan

Utara. Jurnal Eksekutif, 1(1), 1–12.

https://ejournal.unsrat.ac.id/index.php/

jurnaleksekutif/article/view/15431/149

78

Wicaksono, T., Elmi, F., & Aima, M. H.

(2020). The Fffect of Competence and

Transformational Leadership Style on

The Motivation and It’s Implication on

Teachers Performance at 01 and 02

North Petukangan Elementary School.

Dinasti International Journal of

Education Management And Social

Science (DIJEMSS), 1(3), 249–261.

https://doi.org/10.31933/DIJEMSS

for possible open access publication

under the terms and conditions of the Creative

Commons Attribution (CC BY SA) license

(https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/4.0/).