ANALISIS PEMBERIAN SANKSI, PERILAKU MENYIMPANG, DAN SELF-EFFICACY STUDI PADA KARYAWAN PT. PLN (PERSERO) WILAYAH ACEH

Mahdani Ibrahim; Irma Suryani; Visma Pricilia Firanita

doi:10.32722/epi.v14i2.1096

About Journal

Focus and Scope

The proposed articles can come from the fields of languages, social sciences, cultures, and education.

Peer Review Process

Peer-reviewers assist the editors in making decisions to accept or reject articles that enter EPIGRAM (e-journal), peer-reviewed (a sustainable partner) to conduct a blind review and evaluation of papers that are reasonable in authors expertise. The reviewers do not know the author's name and the name of the author's institution as blind-review. It aims to avoid conflicts of interest and to assure the quality of the paper.

Each paper is reviewed at least by a reviewer using track change in the article. All comments and suggestions from the reviewers are written using track change. It is to facilitate the editor and writer teams in communicating the results of the review. Thus, EPIGRAM (e-journal) does not require any other form to deliver the results of the report from the reviewers to the editorial team.

Open Access Policy

This journal provides immediate open access to its contents on the principle to make research freely available to the public in order to support a greater global exchange of knowledge.

Publication Ethic

Publication Ethics Statement

CODE OF ETHICS FOR SCIENTIFIC PUBLICATIONS

Foreword

The ethics of scientific publications in EPIGRAM (e-journal) is used to guide that all the writings published in the journal have followed ethical principles in academic publications to prevent misunderstandings and conflicts. This paper presents several articles related to the field of language, social science, culture, and education on ethics in this journal publication (authors, editors, truthful partners, publishers, and readers).

Guidelines on Ethics in Journal Publications

EPIGRAM (e-journal) publishes articles from the results of scientific research in the field of language, social science, culture, education and has not been edited or in the process of submission in other publications.

The proposed articles can come from the fields of languages, social sciences, cultures, and education.

EPIGRAM (e-journal) is a peer-reviewed journal in the publication of an article in building a coherent and recognized network of knowledge about languages, social sciences, cultures, and education. The papers sent to EPIGRAM (e-journal) must be able to point the quality of the writing of the author. Therefore, it is essential to arrange standards in ethical behavior for all colleague engaged in the publication: authors, editors, partners, publishers, and journal sponsors.

AUTHOR'S ASSIGNMENT

Standard Article

Articles are original reports of research results and present accurate articles from research conducted by the objectives. The data presented in the paper must be accurate based on research results. Published articles must be adequate and detailed so that they can use as references or references for other researchers. The team editor will not accept presented data, not by ethical behavior in EPIGRAM (e-journal).

Plagiarism and Originality

The author has to ensure the article written is the original work of the author himself. If the author enters the results of the research or references from others, the author must admit the name of the author of the article. Plagiarism is an action of imitating and copying all items relating to what is written by another writer and claimed by another author without including the original author. This deed of plagiarism is unethical behavior in the publication and not able accepted in EPIGRAM (e-journal). Entering the same article to more than one journal is unethical behavior and is not acceptable.

The Authors and Co-authors of the Article

The author and co-authors of the article are who has engaged significantly to the concept of writing, those who have contributed to significant contributions registered as co-authors. The author must assure the conformity of the articles with the co-authors before submitting for EPIGRAM (e-journal).

Errors in Published Articles

When the author discovers a fundamental mistake or inaccuracy in the research that will be published by the EPIGRAM (e-journal), the author's obligation to immediately notify the journal editor or editorial board to retract the article and correct it.

EDITORIAL BOARD OF ASSIGNMENTS

Publication Decision and Justice in Publication

The editorial team of EPIGRAM (e-journal) is responsible for deciding which articles publish in EPIGRAM (e-journal). Sustainable reviewers work closely with the editorial team in determining which they are eligible to be published in EPIGRAM (e-journal). Editors and sustainable partners evaluate the articles for content regardless of gender, relatives, ethnic origin, religious beliefs, citizenship, or political philosophy of the writer.

Confidentiality of the Process Publication

The Editors and staff editors prevent the leak of author confidentiality and the writing before the article published in EPIGRAM (e-journal). The editorial team and editorial staff did not give the names and institutions of origin of all authors to sustainable reviewers to ensure that reviewing in the blinded review paper.

Information Disclosure and Conflict of Interest

Entered articles but not published in EPIGRAM (e-journal) may not be used by the editorial team in their research without the written approval of the author. Specific data obtained through peer review must be kept confidential and not used for personal concerns. The editorial team conducts appropriate actions in addressing this, such as publication.

Cooperation and Engagement in Publication

The editor will take steps when there is an ethics complaint in the paper. These steps start from contacting the author of the article and giving consideration to the claim in objection, but also including further communication with relevant agencies and research bodies, repairs to publications, and appropriate actions related to the charge.

DUTIES OF REVIEWERS

The Decision of the Editorial Team

Peer-reviews assists the editor in making decisions to be accepted or rejected by an article that enters EPIGRAM (e-journal), peer-reviewed (a sustainable partner) to conduct a blinded review and evaluation of papers that are reasonable in authors expertise. The reviewers do not know the author's name and the name of the author's institution as blind-review. It means to avoid conflicts of interest and to assure the quality of the paper.

Each paper is reviewed at least by two reviewers using track change in the article. All comments, suggestions, and reviewers' comments are written by using track change. It is to facilitate the editor and writer team in communicating the results of the review. Thus, EPIGRAM (e-journal) does not require any other form to deliver the results of the report from the reviewer to the editorial team.

Punctuality

The review process in EPIGRAM (e-journal) generally takes 1-4 months, and if the review process takes longer because of one reason or another, the editor will communicate to the author. The editor team expects the administrative review process, the improvement of the author and the publication of the article, taken out six months.

Confidentiality

Every received article treated as a confidential document. The section may not be discussed with other parties unless permitted by the editorial board.

The Review Must be Objective

The editor team strives to review articles objectively. The results of the analyses have to sharpen the writing, especially in strengthening the results and discussion of the research objectives so that it can support the improvement of the article.

Source / Reference Recognition

The reviewer should identify relevant research that will be published that there is no plagiarism by the author. The reviewer must observe, explore each statement in the discussion and report by the relevant quote. Reviewers must also provide an understanding of the editor regarding substantial similarities and overlap with the articles before the article is published.

Screening For Plagiarism

The documents must meet the maximum similarity limit of 20% to proceed to the review process. To check the possibility of plagiarism manuscript is submitted using the application Ithenticate

Published Apr 17, 2018

https://doi.org/10.32722/epi.v14i2.1096

Download

PDF (Bahasa Indonesia)

Statistic

Vol. 14 No. 2 (2017)

Mahdani Ibrahim

FEB Universitas Syiah Kuala Banda Aceh

Irma Suryani

FEB Universitas Syiah Kuala Banda Aceh

Visma Pricilia Firanita

FEB Universitas Syiah Kuala Banda Aceh

Abstract

This study aimed to analyze the effect of sanctions and severity of sanctions against deviant behavior of employees, while also analyzing the role of self-efficacy variable as a mediator in effect between sanctions and the severity of sanctions against deviant behavior. The study was conducted at PT. PLN (Persero) Aceh, the unit of analysis is the company's employees. These samples included 117 employees, defined by the formula Slovin. Primary data were obtained through questionnaires distributed to members of the sample were selected by simple random sampling method. Data were analyzed using Hierarchical Linear Modeling (Baron & Kenny, 1986). The results showed the effect of sanctions and the severity of sanctions against deviant behavior of employees at PT. PLN (Persero) Aceh, while also found the role of self-efficacy variable as a mediator in the relationship that effect.

Keywords: Sanction, deviant behavior, self-efficacy

Abstrak

Penelitian ini bertujuan untuk menganalisis pengaruh sanksi dan beratnya sanksi terhadap perilaku menyimpang karyawan, selain itu juga menganalisis peranan variabel self-efficacy sebagai mediator dalam pengaruh antara sanksi dan beratnya sanksi terhadap perilaku menyimpang. Penelitian dilakukan pada perusahaan PT. PLN (Persero) Aceh, dengan unit analisis adalah karyawan perusahaan tersebut. Sampel penelitian berjumlah 117 orang karyawan yang ditetapkan berdasarkan formula Slovin. Data primer diperoleh melalui pendistribusian kuisioner kepada anggota sampel yang dipilih dengan metode simple random sampling. Data dianalisis menggunakan metode Hierarchical Linear Modeling (Baron & Kenny, 1986). Hasil penelitian menunjukkan ada pengaruh sanksi dan beratnya sanksi terhadap perilaku menyimpang karyawan pada PT. PLN (Persero) Aceh, selain itu juga ditemukan adanya peranan variabel self-efficacy sebagai mediator dalam hubungan pengaruh tersebut.

Kata Kunci: Pemberian sanksi, perilaku menyimpang, keyakinan diri, PLN

How to Cite

Ibrahim, M., Suryani, I., & Firanita, V. P. (2018). ANALISIS PEMBERIAN SANKSI, PERILAKU MENYIMPANG, DAN SELF-EFFICACY STUDI PADA KARYAWAN PT. PLN (PERSERO) WILAYAH ACEH. EPIGRAM (e-Journal), 14(2). https://doi.org/10.32722/epi.v14i2.1096

References

Azrin, N. H., dan Holz, W. C. (1966). Punishment. In W.K. Honig (Ed.), Operant behavior:Areas of research and application. New York: Appleton-Century- Crofts.
Bandura, A. (2000). Exercise of human agency through collective efficacy. Current Directions in Psychological Science, 9: 75-78.
Bandura, A. (1997). Self-Efficacy: The Exercise of Control. New. York: W.H Freedman and Company. http://search.proquest.com.ezaccess.libraries.psu.edu/docview/ 619147930? accountid=13158
Bandura, A., Barbaranelli, C, Caprara, G.V., dan Pastorelli, C. (1996). Multifaceted impact of self-efficacy beliefs on academic functioning. Child Development, 67: 1206-1222.
Baron, R.M.,dan Kenny, D.A. (1986). The moderator-mediator variable distinction in social psychological research: conceptual, strategic, and statistical considerations. Journal of Personality and SocialPsychology. 51(6), 1173-1182.
Calabuig, V., Fatas, E., Olcina, G., dan Lara, I. R. (2016). Carry a big stick, or no stick at all Punishment and endowment heterogeneity in the trust game. Journal of Economic Psychology. 57: 153–171.
Caprara, G. V; Regalia, C; dan Bandura, A. (2002). Longitudinal Impact of Perceived Self-Regulatory Efficacy on Violent Conduct. European Psychologist, 7, (1), 63 - 69.( DOI: 10.1027//1016-9040.7.1.63).
Cheung, S. L. (2014). New insights into conditional cooperation and punishment from a strategy method experiment. This article is published with open access at Springerlink.com, 17: 130-153.
Chowdhury S., dan Lanis T. (1999). Importance of self-efficacy of working in team environment in determining individual satisfaction and performance: does it depend on the team performance? https://wikispaces.psu.edu/download/attachments/.../08.pdf. akses 16-01-2017.
Costică, S. E. (2014). About rules, punishments and rewards in education. Procedia - Social and Behavioral Sciences. 112: 1160 – 1166.
Denant-Boemont, , Masclet, D., dan Noussair, C.N. (2007). Punishment, counterpunishment and sanction enforcement in a social dilemma experiment. Economic theory, 33 (1), 145–167.
Holth, P. (2005). Two Definitions of Punishment. The Behavior Analyst Today, 6 (1), 43-47.
Holtz, B. C dan Harold, C.M. (2013). Interpersonal justice and deviance: The moderating effects of interpersonal justice values and justice orientation. Journal of Management. 39 (2), 339-365. (DOI: 10.1177/0149206310390049).
Jones, D. A., dan Martens, M. L. (2009). The mediating role of overall fairness and the moderating role of trust certainty in justice-criteria relationships: The formation and use of fairness heuristics in the workplace. Journal of Organizational Behavior. 30: 1025-1051.
Judge, T. A., Scott, B. A., dan Ilies, R. (2006). Hostility, job attitudes, and workplace deviance: Test of a multilevel model. Journal of Applied Psychology, 91: 126-138.
Lawrence, T. B., dan Robinson, S. L. (2007). Ain't Misbehavin: Workplace Deviance as Organizational Resistance. Journal of Management. 33, (3), 378-394. (DOI: 10.1177/0149206307300816).
Mangkuprawira, T. S. (2009). Horison Bisnis, Manajemen, dan Sumber Daya Manusia. Bogor, ITB Press.
Pearson, C. M., dan Porath, C. L. (2005). On the nature, consequences and remedies of workplace incivility: No time for “nice”? Think again. Academy of Management Executive, 19, (1), 7-18.
Robinson, S. L., dan Bennett, R. J. (1995). A typology of deviant workplace behaviors: A multi-dimensional scaling study. Academy of ManagementJournal, 38, 555-572.
Robbins,S.P dan Judge. T. A.(2008). Perilaku Organisasi. Edisi ke-12. (Alih bahasa oleh Diana Agelica). Jakarta, Salemba Empat.
Sugiyono. (2013). MetodePenelitianKuantitatif, Kualitatifdan R&D. Bandung: Alfabeta.
Teti, D. M., dan Gelfand, D. M. (1991). Behavioral competence among mothers of infants in the first year: The mediational role of maternal self-efficacy. Child Development, 62 (5), 918-929. (doi:0009-3920/916205-0003).
Thau, S., Aquino, K., dan Wittek, R. (2007). An extension of uncertainty management theory to the self: The relationship between justice, social comparison orientation, and antisocial work behaviors. Journal of Applied Psychology, 92: 250-258.
Turnley, W. H., dan Feldman, D. C. (2000). Re-examining the effects of psychological contract violations: Unmet expectations and job dissatisfaction as mediators. Journal of Organizational Behaviour, 21(1), 25-42.
Zhao, H., Wayne, S. J., Glibkowski, B., dan Bravo, J. (2007). Impact of psychological contract breach on work-related outcomes: A meta analysis. Personnel Psychology, 60(2), 647-680.



	Published By	: Politeknik Negeri Jakarta
	Address	: Jl. Prof. DR. G.A. Siwabessy, Kukusan, Kecamatan Beji, Kota Depok, Jawa Barat 16424
	Phone	: +62-21-7863532
	E-Mail	: [email protected]
	URL	: https://jurnal.pnj.ac.id/index.php/epigram/index

	This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike 4.0 International License.

About Journal

Focus and Scope

Peer Review Process

Open Access Policy

Publication Ethic

Screening For Plagiarism

##plugins.themes.academic_pro.article.sidebar##

##plugins.themes.academic_pro.article.main##

Abstract

##plugins.themes.academic_pro.article.details##

References