Conceptual Model of Leadership Communication, Collective Efficacy & Job Performance of Village Leader

The economic development and living standards of fishermen communities in coastal villages are much influenced by their leaders' performance. However, studies show that leadership competencies among leaders in coastal is still at an unsatisfactory level. This study was conducted to develop a conceptual model to improve the performance of village leaders. This paper was proposed leadership communication and collective efficacy as predictor variables to improve the leadership competence in coastal fishing villages. among leaders. This discussion attempts to identify the role of leadership communication variable and collective efficacy in the interaction.


Introduction
Malaysia as a successful developing country has always strived for the status of a high-income developed country by Vision 2020 (Economic Planning Unit, 2015). In parallel, the country development must be in tandem with the community progress and advancement, thus enhancing the competitiveness especially in raising the income. To achieve this goal, the government has introduced National Transformation Plan to improve the living standard of low-income people, including community of fisherman who living in traditional village along the coastal. For examples, the government has allocated RM100 million under Budget 2013 (Ministry of Finance, 2012) and RM634 million under NKEA in the Budget 2014 for economy improvement among fishermen (Najib, 2013). These government's efforts and responsibilities in reassuring the benefits of fishermen communities have been pursued with Fishermen Transformation Plan (PTN) under RMK-9 with the total allocation of RM3,718 million (Fisheries Development Authority of Malaysia, 2010).
To ensure the budget, funds and incentives are correctly delivered to the fishermen communities and targeted group, the leader of the Village Development and Security Committee (JKKK) should set the right goals to help these groups. As in the context of fishermen communities, JKKK's leaders is the most crucial element in the leadership and plays the main role in the effectiveness of aid delivery system, government funds or incentives for communities. It is because, the leaders of JKKK is the backbone of the village community (Mohd, 2008;Mohd Yusof, 2003). Thus, leadership is an attempt to influence a person that is directed through communication process, towards the attainment of one or several goals of the community were often associated with the effective communication (Raja Roslan et al., 2008). In other words, a leader is a charismatic anchor in leading organization (Khairunesa Isa, 2012).
By looking in more details, the issue of leadership communication of JKKK's chairman is seen to be worsening in the organization of fishermen community. Failure to handle problems and crises are still occurring in the organization due to ineffective management and planning in preventing disturbances and crises faced by fishermen communities (Mayer et al., 2008). Failure of effective communication among JKKK's chairman can cause various problems, including lack of information for organizational leadership in critical decision-making (Shaharudin, 2010). JKKK's chairman as the head of the village usually has a variety of plans to the village and the community such as the establishment of new rules, but the plan was not implemented (Mario, 2014). This can be seen when fishermen communities difficult to increase their revenue, not progressive and dependable on the unsatisfactory sea catches (Azima et al., 2011;Nik Fuad et al., 2007;Nor Hayati, 2011;Yahaya, 2007) (Nor Hayati, 2011. A lot of studies have been done on communication and leadership in organization and school by researchers (Ariffin and Robiah, 2002) but research on leadership communication of JKKK is still in scarce. Therefore, this study was conducted to identify the gaps that need to be filled to answer the issues and problems faced and to determine the models that have to be utilized since there is no models applied previously.

Background
This literature review is conducted to identify contributing factors to improve leadership performance variables among village leaders. This discussion attempts to identify the role of leadership communication variable and collective efficacy in the interaction.

Leadership Communication
Communication was defined as the transmission of meaning verbally or nonverbally from an individual to another (Barrett, 2008). Meanwhile, leadership is a leader, who guides, instructs, motivates or inspires others that could affect the organization and community. Leaders also persuade others to set goals for improving the performance of groups and organizations. Previous research was concluded that leadership effectiveness is determined by the effectiveness of communication (Barrett, 2008). Through effective communication, a leader would control, direct, motivate and inspire followers. Thus, Barrett (2008) has clarified leadership communication as control; to turn the point of leader influences a person, group, organization or community. Hence, it is stated that leadership communication since it has used the full range of communication skills and resources to overcome the interference, create and deliver messages to control, direct, motivate or inspire in making an action.
Leadership communication is crucial to the successful of an organization since it is the way for leaders to connect with their followers (Baldoni, 2004). This relationship would provide the impetus to bring along their followers towards the same aims and goals. Raja Roslan et al. (2008) then defined leadership communication as the ability to influence followers and involves the use of power by leaders and followers' acceptance. The ability to influence followers is related with the satisfaction and fulfilling the desire of followers. Mai and Akerson (2003) have asserted that leadership communication is more than delivering information with effective delivery while explaining the basic meaning of leadership communication is the participation of communication between leaders and community to ensure that any information received is delivered to the public. Wan Abd Aziz et al. (2009) reported that leadership communication is the leader that communicates by using certain symbols between each other through 258ehavioural change or character to share goals and common needs.
Studies conducted by scholars have found the concept of leadership communication, especially in the organization is how an organizational leader communicates with the upper (superior) of the organization and its customers (subordinated) to achieve organizational goals. Mai and Akerson (2003) emphasized the concept of leadership communication should include three major aspects such as what the leaders say and how the leaders deliver something, with whom they communicate, and how the leaders develop community and get to know the community. They said that leadership communication could not exist when there is no dialogue with the community. Power is given to the leader, but leadership is created with the members of the organization by sharing thoughts and making changes together to establish community relationship.

Collective Efficacy
Collective efficacy was defined as a group's shared beliefs in its conjoint capabilities to achieve designated goals, group motivation, performance, and effectiveness (Bandura, 1997;Gully et al., 2002). Collective efficacy is a relatively new concept, finding its origins in the theory of self-efficacy. As Bandura (1997) suggests, collective efficacy refers to the self-efficacy of a group, team, or larger social system or entity. In other words, self and collective efficacies are similar constructs; they differ only in as much as the former is based on the individual, whereas the latter is based on group dynamics. Thus, approaches in raising self-efficacy will also likely help to promote collective efficacy (Wang and lin, 2007). It is related to, but distinct from group potency, because the latter reflects more generalized beliefs about a group's capability across tasks and situations (Guzzo et al., 1993). Collective efficacy also defined as the product of group-level cognitive processes (Gibson, 2001a) and cognitive phenomenon (Gibson and Earley, 2007), and the norms and networks that enable collective action (Cohen D. A. et al., 2006).
Collective efficacy is an intangible social construct, based on human resources. In contrast, features of the physical environment are tangible based on capital resources. Tangible features of the environment create the settings and context in which people interact with each other; therefore, it is plausible that exposure to their design and appearance would influence these social interactions (Cohen et al., 2008). The level of early collective efficacy in-groups is important for two reasons. First, any effects of collective efficacy in the early stages of a group project may set in motion a path-dependent chain of events that are difficult to reverse or undo (Ericksen and Dyer, 2004). Second, since early perceptions may not always be based on objective performance feedback, it is possible they may not necessarily have positive effects. Groups with high collective efficacy beliefs may exert more effort and show higher levels of perseverance toward their goals than the groups with low efficacy beliefs (George and Feltz, 1995) However, Goncalo et al. (2010) claimed that high levels of collective efficacy maybe particularly problematic in the early phases of a group project because excessive confidence may lead to tunnel vision regarding different long-term strategies or procedures those groups can use to approach complex tasks. Collective efficacy may develop through the formation of networks between institutional actors, which should enable the development of shared norms. Putnam (2000) argues that it is more likely that social norms of trustworthiness and reciprocity will be learned, exchanged, expanded, monitored and authorized through these networks. Networks may assist in building resilient communities with the ability to embrace change and adapt to large exogenous events (Argent, 2011;McManus et al., 2012).

Job Performance
Performance involves employee 258ehaviour that is part of the job observation (Cook, 2008). Previous studies stated that work performance as a level of achievement of an employee to perform the job that has been assigned (Ariffin, 1985). It was also defined as organizational interest because it is essential to improving the productivity of workers in the workplace (Hunter and Hunter, 1984). Birnbaum and Somers (1993) noted work performance as a supervisory assessment that is conducted as a part of an ongoing process of organizational performance assessment. Murphy (1989) proposed work performance as a function of individual's performance on a particular task, which consists of the description standard of the job scope. It is also influenced by variables such as maintaining good interpersonal relationships, absenteeism, abuse, and 259ehaviour that involves danger in the workplace. These aspects should be taken into account to ensure that the work is done wisely to improve work performance. Campbell (1990) suggested work performance as 259ehaviour observed in performing related work to achieve organizational goals and it is measured by observing the employee 259ehaviour towards the effectiveness and quality of the work done. Neely et al. (1995) assumed that evaluation of the performance could be defined as the metrics used to evaluate the efficiency or effectiveness of an action. Befort and Hattrup (2003) showed that the essence of work performance depends on the demand of work, goals, mission and the organizational beliefs about the behaviors evaluated. Gryn (2010) stated that work performance is an act that involves a process and product (output end) where the individual may be influenced by the overall operation of the organization. Nevertheless, Badriah (2013) explained job performance consists of the combination of three factors, namely the abilities and interests of the workers, the ability to accept the explanation of the tasks delegation, and also the role and motivation of employees. Performance of work can be seen by the quality possessed such as efficiency, skill, experience, and work environment (adaptability). Abd Hair et al. (2013) asserted job performance is a result of the work achieved in executing the tasks assigned based on the competence, experience, dedication and time (working hours).
Based on the previous study, work performance is the ability of an employee as a group member of organizations to solve a given task regarding the amount of work, quality, quantity, timeliness, positive attitude, etc. Campbell et al. (1993) proved that there are eight factors to be taken into account to explain the concept of behavioural work performance, namely: (i) the efficiency of certain tasks, (ii) mastery of task specialization, (iii) mastery of communications, (iv) efforts, (v) maintaining self-discipline, (vi) improving the team performance, (vii) leadership and (viii) work management. Interestingly, Barrick and Mount (1991) argued that the concept of prudence is related to job performance because it shows personal characteristics of continual planning, cautious, responsible and hardworking. Patricia et al. (1996) confirmed that the employee with high job performance focus on customer needs, fluent in communication, teamwork oriented, have technical expertise, able to lead and adapt and also innovative.

Conclusion
This concept model was proposing leadership communication and collective efficacy variables as predictors of job performance among leaders at the village community level. Based on these findings, job performance among them can be improved by manipulating both variables. It is recommended to the government that oversees the village organization to enhance leadership communication performance through training, courses and so on. They need to be trained to communicate well either in the organization, within the villagers as well as with the superior. The improvement in communication skills will improve the leadership performance amongst them, as proposed by this model.
The parties involved are also suggested to enhance activities that can promote collective efficacy in the organization. Increasing the collective efficacy will increase the job performance as proposed by this model. The activities that can be carried out such as family day, work visit, picnic and so on. For researchers, it is proposed to use this concept model to be tested in the further study. This concept model was developed based on theories and previous studies, suitable and appropriate to test the model's fitness with real data that will be collected from the field.