Confirmatory Factor Analysis of Satisfaction, Commitment and

Performance of Lecturers in Higher Education Institutions

Pauzi, Putu Rani Susanthi, Hazriyanto, Asih Purwana Sari and Vincentius Ade Arianto Ciptoputro

STAIN Sultan Abdurrahman, Management Study Program, Galileo College of Economics Batam, Indonesia

adearianto@gmail.com

Keywords: CFA, Job Satisfaction, Lecturer Performance, Higher Education Institutions.

Abstract: Higher education institutions are a place for increasing quality human resources. Education at this time,

development attention is more towards developing and developing human resources in the tertiary

environment. The process involves various stakeholders: lecturers, universities, the community, industry, and

other educational organizations. The importance of job satisfaction and the commitment of lecturers in tertiary

institutions deserves greater attention. There still needs to be more research on job satisfaction, commitment,

and lecturer performance in higher education institutions because the existing research tends to be carried out

only in the industrial sector, so this study needs to be carried out among higher education institutions. This

study aims to confirm the item indicators of job satisfaction, commitment, and performance of lecturer

educators. The data was collected through a questionnaire that involved 76 lecturers from tertiary institutions,

particularly near the Riau Islands, Indonesia. The data were reviewed and analyzed with the Amos SEM tool.

The study found that satisfaction indicator items confirmed 11 indicator items, commitment 13 indicator items,

and performance 11 indicator items that measure satisfaction, commitment, and performance with acceptable

good of fit. Institutions, academics, and practitioners can use the study's results in making standards and

evaluating job satisfaction, commitment, and performance. In addition, higher education institutions should

consider these indicator items and pay attention to other factors outside the studies, such as demographic

factors, higher education management, culture, and other factors.

INTRODUCTION

The demands of the world of education today cannot

be denied that, like it or not, national tertiary

institutions must be able and able to compete in

responding to progress and changes according to the

demands of the times. The Indonesian Ministry,

specifically the Ministry of Education, Research and

Technology, is serious about addressing education

issues. This attention has led to various programs

designed to accelerate the growth and progress of

education, which is in line with the development of

national education discussed previously. The

attention of the Ministry of Research and Technology

to universities goes beyond just implementing the

national education program. However, more than

that, every university is encouraged to receive support

in the education system with clear goals to achieve

high performance. Furthermore, lecturers in tertiary

institutions are granted support and freedom to work

independently in the learning process, research, and

community service. The integrated program based on

the tri dharma of higher education has started to run.

This program can help tertiary institutions integrate

and synergize their available human resources.

Teachers who receive knowledge from research

and service can encourage academics in higher

education to think scientifically. It is beneficial in

creating a highly competitive national education at

the international level. Higher education performance

measurement indicators serve as indicators for

thinking and improving to meet progressive national

education standards. Likewise, with the measurement

of lecturer performance, apart from the tri dharma

measure, several additional indicators deserve to be

considered by making various adjustments and local

wisdom where the tertiary institution is located.

Studies are necessary to synchronize these

performance measures for this reason.

Teachers who are bolstered by knowledge derived

from research and service can encourage academics

in higher education to think scientifically. It is

136

Pauzi, ., Susanthi, P., Hazriyanto, ., Sari, A. and Ciptoputro, V.

Conﬁrmatory Factor Analysis of Satisfaction, Commitment and Performance of Lecturers in Higher Education Institutions.

DOI: 10.5220/0012647300003798

Paper published under CC license (CC BY-NC-ND 4.0)

In Proceedings of the 2nd Maritime, Economics and Business International Conference (MEBIC 2023) - Sustainable Recovery: Green Economy Based Action, pages 136-141

ISBN: 978-989-758-704-7

beneficial to create a highly competitive national

education at an international level. Higher education

performance measurement indicators serve as

indicators for thinking and improving to meet

progressive national education standards. Likewise,

with the measurement of lecturer performance, apart

from the tri dharma measure, several additional

indicators deserve to be considered by making

various adjustments and local wisdom where the

tertiary institution is located. For this reason, studies

are needed to synchronize these performance

measures.

2 LITERATURE REVIEW

2.1 Performance

Performance evaluation is a procedure or activity

used by individuals or groups within an organization

to evaluate and communicate how employees carry

out their duties by comparing results.

(Syamsuriansyah, 2021). Performance is a factor that

is connected to the tasks assigned. Performance is the

overall state that starts with input activities, output

processes, and even results, not just the culmination

of various work processes (Amir, Mohammad Faisal,

2015). To enhance a company or organization's

performance, performance management is a complete

process that includes the performance of each

employee and work group. The performance of an

employee is determined by their skill, interest,

understanding, acceptance of assigned duties, and

degree of motivation.

2.2 Commitment

A commitment is a promise to complete a task for

oneself, another person, a team, or an organization.

The degree to which a person acknowledges and is

dedicated to an organization's objectives is described

as organizational commitment. The indicators of

organizational commitment (

Yüzbasioglu, N. and

Dogan, O, 2018)

can include both the level of

participation and willingness of the employee to stay

with the organization. The idea of organizational

commitment involves loyalty to the organization and

mobilization to achieve organizational goals, as well

as the desire and willingness of an employee to

contribute to the success of the company (

Redondo,

R., Sparrow, P. and Hernandez-Lechuga, 2021)

2.3 Job Satisfaction

Each employee's performance reflects their level of

job satisfaction. When they do well, it shows that they

are happy with the work they are doing ( Tanjung, H,

2019). Psychological, social, physical, and financial

aspects all have an impact on job satisfaction

(Mangkunegara, 2014). The generalization of job

satisfaction stems from attitudes toward work, which

are of course expressed on a job-by-job basis (Aulia,

V., & Trianasari, N, 2021).

2.4 Relationship Between

Commitment, Job Satisfaction and

Performance

Previous results show that satisfaction and

performance have a clear and significant relationship.

The results of other studies also show that

organizational culture and work stress indirectly

significantly affect performance through job

satisfaction. The study's findings suggest that

organizational commitment to positive performance

is not crucial, but job satisfaction with positive

performance is significant, and commitment and

pride in positive performance are crucial. If

organizational commitment and job satisfaction are

high, performance will be high; that is what increases

lecturer performance correlates with their dedication

and pride.

The description related to this study can be simulated

based on the information found above. This study

aims to obtain item indicators that can explain the

variables referred to in the study. In addition, this

study analyzes the relationship between commitment,

satisfaction, and performance variables. Following is

the conceptual framework of the study.

Figure 1: Concept Framework.

Conﬁrmatory Factor Analysis of Satisfaction, Commitment and Performance of Lecturers in Higher Education Institutions

137

The Hypothesis of this Study:

H1: There is a relationship between commitment and

performance

H2: There is a relationship between commitment and

satisfaction

H3: There is a relationship between job satisfaction

and performance.

3 RESEARCH METHODS

This research has involved lecturers from several

universities. The variables in this study are

commitment, job satisfaction, and performance.

Scope of study in the college environment. The

sample in this study was 76 lecturers from various

tertiary institutions who responded to returning the

questionnaires that had been distributed. Data was

collected using a questionnaire distributed to lecturers

in tertiary institutions, and an analysis tool was used

with Amos SEM tools. The questionnaire indicator

items used were adopted and adapted from previous

research that had been conducted, which resulted in

13 items (Commitment), 12 items (Job Satisfaction),

and 11 items (Performance), the results of a study

with EFA (Hazriyanto, & Ibrahim, B, 2019). This

study analyzes the instrument items with CFA and the

relationship between the variables studied. This study

is a follow-up study of previous studies. Following

are the results of the study.

4 RESULTS AND DISCUSSION

4.1 Results

In this section, the results of the confirmatory factor

analysis study of each variable are presented. CFA

results can be seen in the figure and table below.

Figure 2: CFA Performance.

Table 1: Regression Weights: Performance.

Items Estimate S.E. C.R. P Label

perf1 <--- Performance 1.000

Valid

perf2 <--- Performance 1.277 .231 5.533 ***

perf3 <--- Performance .949 .211 4.507 ***

perf4 <--- Performance 1.150 .240 4.789 ***

perf5 <--- Performance 1.145 .224 5.121 ***

perf6 <--- Performance 1.148 .225 5.105 ***

perf7 <--- Performance 1.268 .261 4.863 ***

perf8 <--- Performance 1.495 .267 5.595 ***

perf9 <--- Performance 1.420 .256 5.536 ***

perf10 <--- Performance 1.563 .282 5.548 ***

perf11 <--- Performance 1.476 .292 5.047 ***

The picture and table above show that all

instrument items from the performance are in the valid

category, which includes 11 articles from the concert—

furthermore, the results of the commitment CFA can

be observed in the following figure and table.

Figure 3: CFA Commitment.

Table 2: Regression Weights: Commitment.

Items P Label

com1 - Commitment Valid

com2 - Commitment .029

com3 - Commitment .026

com4

-

Commitment .031

com5 - Commitment .025

com6 - Commitment .022

com7 - Commitment .025

com8

-

Commitment .020

com9 - Commitment .021

com10 - Commitment .021

com11

-

Commitment .023

com12 - Commitment .025

com13 - Commitment .027

The results of the CFA test in the figure and table

above indicate that each commitment item is also

valid. All items of commitment (11 items) are

MEBIC 2023 - MARITIME, ECONOMICS AND BUSINESSINTERNATIONAL CONFERENCE

138

accurate. Next, the results of the CFA of job

satisfaction are shown in the table and figure below.

Figure 4: CFA of Job Satisfaction.

Table 3: Regression Weights: Job Satisfaction.

Items Estimate S.E. C.R. P Label

js1

-

Satisfaction 1.000

Valid

js2 - Satisfaction 1.012 .253 3.995 ***

js3 - Satisfaction 1.361 .298 4.561 ***

js4 - Satisfaction 1.377 .311 4.431 ***

js5 - Satisfaction .837 .229 3.652 ***

js6 - Satisfaction 1.589 .356 4.458 ***

js7 - Satisfaction 1.599 .357 4.481 ***

js8

-

Satisfaction 1.100 .256 4.294 ***

js9 - Satisfaction .153 .242 .633 .527 Invalid

js10 - Satisfaction 1.408 .352 3.997 ***

Valid

js11 - Satisfaction 1.144 .280 4.092 ***

js12 - Satisfaction .737 .207 3.558 ***

The results of the CFA test in the figure and table

above provide information that out of 12 job

satisfaction items, one (js9) is invalid. Thus, the

results of the test indicate that the job satisfaction

items, which used to be 12 items, are only 11 items.

The overall results of objects and variables can be

seen in the following figures and tables, which

include all component and variable items.

Figure 5: Full Model of Commitment, Job Satisfaction,

Performance.

Table 4: Regression Weights: Commitment, Job

Satisfaction, and Performance.

Items Estimate S.E. C.R. P Label

com1 <--- Commitmen 1.000

Valid

com2 <--- Commitmen 2.115 .859 2.461 .014

com3 <--- Commitmen 2.216 .888 2.496 .013

com4 <--- Commitmen 1.926 .795 2.423 .015

com5 <--- Commitmen 2.105 .843 2.496 .013

com6 <--- Commitmen 2.944 1.136 2.591 .010

com7 <--- Commitmen 2.510 .999 2.513 .012

com8 <--- Commitmen 2.759 1.048 2.633 .008

com9 <--- Commitmen 2.745 1.049 2.617 .009

com10 <--- Commitmen 3.352 1.282 2.616 .009

com11 <--- Commitmen 2.033 .784 2.592 .010

com12 <--- Commitmen 2.756 1.090 2.528 .011

com13 <--- Commitmen 2.161 .875 2.471 .013

js1 <--- Satisfaction 1.000

Valid

js2 <--- Satisfaction .994 .237 4.189 ***

js3 <--- Satisfaction 1.288 .269 4.790 ***

js4 <--- Satisfaction 1.328 .284 4.683 ***

js5 <--- Satisfaction .792 .206 3.842 ***

js6 <--- Satisfaction 1.501 .307 4.892 ***

js7 <--- Satisfaction 1.513 .307 4.928 ***

js8 <--- Satisfaction 1.011 .225 4.489 ***

js9 <--- Satisfaction .136 .229 .593 .553 InVali

js10 <--- Satisfaction 1.401 .322 4.355 ***

Valid

js11 <--- Satisfaction 1.159 .257 4.515 ***

js12 <--- Satisfaction .749 .195 3.840 ***

erf1 <--- Performance 1.000

Valid

erf2 <--- Performance 1.239 .215 5.755 ***

erf3 <--- Performance .950 .200 4.743 ***

erf4 <--- Performance 1.130 .227 4.984 ***

erf5 <--- Performance 1.119 .210 5.323 ***

erf6 <--- Performance 1.117 .211 5.292 ***

erf7 <--- Performance 1.217 .245 4.978 ***

erf8 <--- Performance 1.425 .247 5.763 ***

erf9 <--- Performance 1.355 .238 5.701 ***

erf10 <--- Performance 1.506 .262 5.758 ***

erf11 <--- Performance 1.451 .275 5.276 ***

The results of the overall model test show that of

the total items consisting of 36 items, there is one

Conﬁrmatory Factor Analysis of Satisfaction, Commitment and Performance of Lecturers in Higher Education Institutions

139

invalid item (js9). So that the variable objects in the

study totaled 35 items which were the results of the

CFA. Meanwhile, the results of Standardized

Regression Weights can be seen in the table below.

Table 5: Standardized Regression Weights: Commitment,

Job Satisfaction, and Performance.

Items Estimate Label

com1 <--- Commitmen .309 In Vali

com2 <--- Commitmen .579

Valid

com3 <--- Commitmen .600

com4 <--- Commitmen .571

com5 <--- Commitmen .640

com6 <--- Commitmen .773

com7 <--- Commitmen .673

com8 <--- Commitmen .805

com9 <--- Commitmen .805

com10 <--- Commitmen .780

com11 <--- Commitmen .737

com12 <--- Commitmen .674

com13 <--- Commitmen .610

js1 <--- Satisfaction .560

js2 <--- Satisfaction .580

js3 <--- Satisfaction .742

js4 <--- Satisfaction .711

js5 <--- Satisfaction .544

js6 <--- Satisfaction .809

js7 <--- Satisfaction .820

js8 <--- Satisfaction .685

js9 <--- Satisfaction .072 In Vali

js10 <--- Satisfaction .648

Valid

js11 <--- Satisfaction .693

js12 <--- Satisfaction .533

erf1 <--- Performance .626

erf2 <--- Performance .818

erf3 <--- Performance .619

erf4 <--- Performance .667

erf5 <--- Performance .714

erf6 <--- Performance .727

erf7 <--- Performance .681

erf8 <--- Performance .831

erf9 <--- Performance .821

erf10 <--- Performance .834

erf11 <--- Performance .728

The results of the Standardized Regression

Weights indicate two invalid items, which are < 0.5

(com1, js9). The effects can be observed in the

following table to answer the study hypothesis and

the relationship between variables.

Table 6: Correlations: Commitment, Job Satisfaction, and

Performance.

Variables Estimate

Commitmen



> Satisfaction .907

Satisfaction



> Performance .763

Commitmen



> Performance .686

Table 6 provides information that the relationship

between commitment and job satisfaction is 0.907

(90.7%), job satisfaction and performance are 0.763

(76.3%), and commitment to performance is 0.686

(68.6%). The correlation results indicate that the

relationship between positive variables is in the

medium and high categories.

5 CONCLUSION

In this section, the review of the study results can be

divided into multiple sections after they are obtained.

Confirmation of the commitment review items

contained 13 items, 11 items of job satisfaction, and

11 items of performance. The results of this study still

strengthen the results of previous studies carried out

with the EFA test. Differences that are not too

significant can be seen in job satisfaction items,

where previously, 12 articles were found in the EFA

study. In contrast, in this CFA study, 11 valid items

were found. (Hazriyanto & Badar, 2019). In the

analysis of the relationship between the variables in

this study, it was found that commitment has a

relationship with job satisfaction, job satisfaction has

a connection with performance, and dedication has a

relationship with performance. The correlation

between the variables is both positive and significant.

This finding is in line with previous studies that have

been and have been carried out by [12, 13, 14].

The relationship between commitment and

performance is 90.7%, job satisfaction is 76.3%, and

commitment is 68.6%. The relationship between the

variables is quite strong; for this reason, higher

education institutions are more focused and severe in

responding, responding, and paying attention to job

satisfaction and lecturer commitment, as well as

lecturer performance in the tertiary environment. Job

satisfaction, commitment, and lecturer performance

are related to the contribution to university

performance achievement.

The results of the existing study variable

instrument items can be further strengthened by

researchers and academics to continue this study. And

survey with a broader scope. This study still needs

several repeated examinations to ensure that the built

MEBIC 2023 - MARITIME, ECONOMICS AND BUSINESSINTERNATIONAL CONFERENCE

140

instrument items can represent the study variables. In

the long term, researchers will continue to carry out

this study in stages and continuously adjust to the

demands of the times.

ACKNOWLEDGMENT

The authors thank STIE Galileo, Partners lecturer,

Yayasan Unggul Mulia Dharma (YUMD) Batam,

and FEBM MEBIC.

REFERENCES

Syamsuriansyah. 2021. Kinerja Karyawan. Bandung:

Widina Bakti Persada Bandung.

Amir, Mohammad Faisal. (2015). Memahami Evaluasi

Kinerja Karyawan, Konsep, dan Penilaian Kinerja di

Perusahaan. Penerbit Mitra Wacana Media, Jakarta.

Zainal, Veithzal Rivai, dkk. 2014. Manajemen Sumber

Daya Manusia Untuk Perusahaan Dari Teori Ke Praktik.

Depok. PT Rajagrafindo Persada.

Muis, Muhammad Ras, J. Jufrizen, And Muhammad Fahmi.

2018. “Pengaruh Budaya Organisasi Dan Komitmen

Organisasi Terhadap Kinerja Karyawan.” Jesya (Jurnal

Ekonomi & Ekonomi Syariah) 1(1):9–25.

Kreitner, R., & Kinicki Angelo. (2014). Organizational

Behaviour (9th ed.). Mc graw Hill.

Yüzbasioglu, N. and Dogan, O. (2018), “Relationship

between paternalistic leadership and organizational

commitment in hospitality industry: case of Antalya,

Turkey”, Academic Journal of Interdisciplinary

Studies, Vol. 7 No. 1, pp. 163-173.

Redondo, R., Sparrow, P. and Hernandez-Lechuga, G.

(2021), “The effect of protean careers on talent

retention: examining the relationship between protean

career orientation, organizational commitment, job

satisfaction and intention to quit for talented workers”,

The International Journal of Human Resource

Management, Vol. 32 No. 9, pp. 2046-2069.

Tanjung, H. (2019). Pengaruh Keterlibatan Kerja Dan

Kepuasan Kerja Terhadap Komitmen Organisasi

Pegawai. Jurnal Humaniora: Jurnal Ilmu Sosial,

Ekonomi dan Hukum, 4(2), 36–49.

Mangkunegara, A. A. (2014). Evaluasi Kinerja Sumber

Daya Manusia. Bandung: Refika Aditama.

Aulia, V., & Trianasari, N. (2021). Pengaruh Disiplin Kerja

Dan Kepuasan Kerja Terhadap Kinerja Karyawan Pada

Hotel Banyualit Spa’N Resort Lovina. Jurnal

Manajemen Perhotelan dan Pariwisata, 4(1), 21.

https://doi.org/10.23887/jmpp.v4i1.29577

Hazriyanto, Firdiyansyah, I., & Ibrahim, B. (2019). The

model of job satisfaction and performance of university

lecturers in Batam city with sem smart PLS.

International Journal of Recent Technology and

Engineering, 8(2 Special Issue), 366–371.

Harahap, F. A., & Nasution, A. E. (2023). Studi Kinerja

Karyawan : Budaya Organisasi dan Stres Kerja Melalui

Kepuasan Kerja Pada PT . Perkebunan Nusantara II (

Persero ) Medan. Jurnal Ekonomi & Ekonomi Syariah,

6(2), 2317–2330.

Hazriyanto, Ibrahim, B., & Silitonga, F. (2019).

Organizational Commitment, Satisfaction and

Performance of Lecturer ( Model Regression by Gender

of Man ). International Review of Management and

Marketing, 9(2), 40–44.

Hazriyanto, & Ibrahim, B. (2019). The Factor Analysis of

Organizational Commitment, Job Satisfaction and

Performance among Lecturers in Batam. Journal of

Technical Education and Training, 11(1), 151–158.

https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.30880/jtet.2019.11.01

.19

Conﬁrmatory Factor Analysis of Satisfaction, Commitment and Performance of Lecturers in Higher Education Institutions

141