Pengaruh Konflik Pekerjaan Dan Keluarga Serta Konflik Keluarga Dan Pekerjaan Terhadap Totalitas Kerja : Kepribadian Extraversion Dan Conscientiousness Sebagai Variabel Moderator Pada Kementerian X

Lieke Puspasari; Yunita Faela Nisa

doi:10.32722/epi.v17i1.3295

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 Oct 16, 2020

https://doi.org/10.32722/epi.v17i1.3295

Download

PDF (Bahasa Indonesia)

Statistic

Vol. 17 No. 1 (2020)

Lieke Puspasari

Politeknik Negeri Jakarta

Yunita Faela Nisa

Politeknik Negeri Jakarta

Abstract

This study aims to determine the effect of work and family conflicts as well as family and work conflicts on work engagement, and personality extraversion and conscientiousness as moderator variables in ministries x. Through this research, it is expected to know the significance of the influence of work and family conflicts and family and work conflicts on the work engagement, and whether conscientiousness and extraversion personalities can be moderator variables for Ministry X employees. The population studied in this study was PNS Ministry X. this study amounted to 210 respondents. Data collection instruments using the Utrecht Work Engagement Scale (UWES) were developed by Schaufeli and Bakker, work and family conflicts and family and work conflicts developed by Netemeyer et al., 1996. This study uses a quantitative approach with multiple regression analysis methods, and validation testing construct using the Confirmatory Factor Analysis (CFA) technique. The research sample was determined using convenient sampling technique. The results of this study indicate that there is a significant influence of the variable influence of work and family conflicts as well as family and work conflicts on work engagement. Extraversion and conscientiousness personality also affect work totality. Extraversion personality does not moderate the relationship of work and family conflicts and family and work conflicts to the totality of work. So that Hypothesis 05 and Hypothesis 06 are accepted. Personality conscientiousness moderates the relationship of work and family conflict and family and work conflict to work engagement.

How to Cite

Puspasari, L., & Nisa, Y. F. (2020). Pengaruh Konflik Pekerjaan Dan Keluarga Serta Konflik Keluarga Dan Pekerjaan Terhadap Totalitas Kerja : Kepribadian Extraversion Dan Conscientiousness Sebagai Variabel Moderator Pada Kementerian X. EPIGRAM (e-Journal), 17(1), 9–18. https://doi.org/10.32722/epi.v17i1.3295

References

Baltes, B. B., Zhdanova, L. S., & Clark, M. A. (2011). Examining the relationships between kepribadian, coping strategies, and work–family conflict. Journal of Business and Psychology, 26(4), 517–530.
doi:10.1007/s10869-010-9207-0
Duxbury, Linda & Higgins, Chris. (2001). Work-life Balance in the New Millennium: Where Are We? Where Do We Need to Go?. CPRN Discussion Paper, CPRN-DP-W/12,
Feist, J., & Feist, G.J. (2008). Theories of Personality. (Edisi 6). Jakarta: Salemba Humanika.
Friedman H.S., & Schustack M.W. (2008). Kepribadian: Teori klasik dan riset modern jilid 1 (Terj. Fransisca dkk). Jakarta: Erlangga
Frone, M. R., Russell, M., & Cooper, M. L. (1992). Antecedents and outcomes of work-family conflict: Testing a model of the workfamily interface. Journal of Applied Psychology, 77(1), 65-78.
doi: 10.1037/0021-9010.77.1.65
doi: 10.1006/jvbe.1996.1577
Frone, M. R. (2003). Work-family balance. In J. C. Quick & L. E. Tetrick (Eds.), Handbook of occupational health psychology (p. 143–162). American Psychological Association.
doi: 10.1037/10474-007
Greenhaus, J. H., & Beutell, N. J. (1985). Sources of conflict between work and family roles. Academy of Management Review, 10, 76-88.
doi: 10.2307/258214
Halbesleben, J. R. B., Harvey, J., & Bolino, M. C. (2009). Too engaged at work? A conservation of resources view of the relationship between work engagement and work interference with family. Journal of Applied Psychology, 94(6), 1452–1465.
doi: 10.1037/a0017595
Harter, J. K., Schmidt, F. L., & Hayes, T. L. (2002). Business-unit-level relationship between employee satisfaction, employee work engagement, and business outcomes: A meta-analysis. Journal of Applied Psychology, 87(2), 268–279.
doi: 10.1037/0021-9010.87.2.268
doi: 10.1016/j.ijhm.2008.06.001.
Langelaan, S., Bakker, A.B., van Doornen, L.J.P., & Schaufeli, W.B. (2006). Burnout and work engagement: do individual differences make a difference? Personality and Individual Differences, 40, 521-532.
Martin, April. (2013). Work/family Conflict as a Predictor of Employee Work Engagement of Extension. PhD Dissertation. University of Tennessee.
Netemeyer, R. G., Boles, J. S., & McMurrian, R. (1996). Development and validation of work–family conflict and family–work conflict scales. Journal of Applied Psychology, 81(4), 400–410.
doi: 10.1037/0021-9010.81.4.400
Noesgaard, M. S., & Hansen, J. R. (2017). Work Engagement in the Public Service Context: The Dual Perceptions of Job Characteristics. International Journal of Public Administration, 41(13), 1047–1060.
doi:10.1080/01900692.2017.131840
Omar, Alaa Amin Hassan., & Yusoff, Yusliza Mohd. (2016). Predictors of Employee work engagement. International Journal of Humanities and Management Sciences (IJHMS). Volume 4, Issue 2 (2016) ISSN
Opie, T., & Henn, C.M. (2013). Work-family conflict and totalitas kerja among mothers: Conscientiousness and neuroticism as moderators. SA Journal of Industrial Psychology.
doi: 10.4102/sajip.v39i1.1082
Reggie, T.C. (2012). Work Family Conflict and Work Engagement Among Working Mother: Personality as a Moderator. M.C. (Psychology). University of Johannesburg.
Robinson D., Perryman S.and Hayday S, 2004. “The Drivers of Employee Work Engagement”, UK: Institute for Employment Studies, IES Report 408.
Schaufeli, W. B., Salanova, M., González-Romá, V., & Bakker, A. B. (2002). The measurement of work engagement and burnout: A two sample confirmatory factor analytic approach. Journal of Happiness Studies: An Interdisciplinary Forum on Subjective Well-Being, 3(1), 71–92.
doi: 10.1023/A:1015630930326
Schaufeli, W.B. and Bakker, A.B. (2003) UWES-Utrecht Work Engagement Scale: Test Manual. Unpublished Manuscript, Department of Psychology, Utrecht University, Utrecht.
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.
doi:10.1002/job.248
Schaufeli, W. B., Bakker, A. B., & Van Rhenen, W. (2009). How changes in job demands and resources predict burnout, totalitas kerja, and sickness absenteeism. Journal of Organizational Behavior, 30(7), 893–917.
doi:10.1002/job.595
Vazirani, N. (2007). Employee totalitas kerja. Working paper series (05/07), SIES College of management studies.



	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.