Performance Assessment Through Job Satisfaction of Regional Secretariat Employee of South Buru Regency Reviewed from Charismatic Leadership and Work Motivation Factors

This study aimed to analyze the mediating effect of job satisfaction in affecting charismatic leadership and work motivation on employee performance.Sampling in this study was 35% of the existing population of 151 employees, so there were 53 samples of employees in the Regional Secretariat of South Buru Regency.The data were analyzed by path analysis. The results showed that job satisfaction mediated the effect of charismatic leadership and motivation on performance.


Introduction
The success of organization is affected by the performance of employees in carrying out tasks based on the responsibilities assigned. Employees are important resources because they have the talent, energy, and creativity needed by the organization to achieve its goals. Rifa'i and Fadhli (2013) required effective performance with three elements, such as individual competence, the functions and demands of the job, and the organizational environment where the job exists. For performance to be effective, all three elements must adapt to each other.If the company only pays attention to two elements of the three elements, it might not be able to produce consistently effective performance. Palan, also defined the effective performance of a job as the achievement of certain (specific) results required for a job through certain (specific) actions that are in line with the organization's policies, procedures, and environmental conditions.Specific results are determined based on organizational needs, whether directly contributed or through support for other job (Bismantara and Wirakusuma, 2019).
In general, employees are people who work in an organization that includes leaders and implementers (Nawawi, 2010). Leadership is an important part of management, but it is not the same as the management. Leadership is the ability a person has to influence others to work towards their goals and objectives (Handoko, 2013). Leadership has two aspects. The first aspect is the strength of individual leadership techniques.Someone who has good physical condition, has high skills, masters technology, has the right perception, has extensive knowledge, has good memory, and has a convincing imagination will be able to lead their subordinates.The second is personal excellence in terms of firmness, tenacity, awareness, and success, according to Chester (Siswanto, 2013).
Motivation is one thing, according to Mangkunegara (2012), motive is defined as a tendency to move, starting from the drive within and ending with adjustment, which is said to satisfy the motive.Motivation is a condition that moves people towards a certain goal. Based on the explanation above it can be concluded that the motive is an impulse of needs within the employee that needs to be met so that the employee can adjust to their environment, while motivation is a condition that moves the employee to be able to achieve the goals of their motive. Motivation is said to be the energy to generate impulses within (drive arousal). According to Gomes (2013)the main benefit of motivation is creating work passion, so work productivity increases. Meanwhile, the benefits gained from working with motivated people is that work can be completed appropriately.
Employee job satisfaction has a close relationship between leadership and motivation on employee performance, where employee job satisfaction is one of the keys to success (Claraini, 2017). One important element that affects employee job satisfaction other than leadership is work motivation. Employee job satisfaction is a special concern for organizations that will affect performance (Mouw and Nanuru, 2018). Based on empirical studies and some previous theoretical studies, this study aimed to analyze the mediating effect of job satisfaction in affecting charismatic leadership and work motivation on employee performance.

Method
The approach used in this study was a quantitative (positivism) approach. Based on the objectives to be achieved and the nature of the relationship between variables, this study was an explanatory research with data collection carried out simultaneously in one stage (one shot study) or in a cross-section through questionnaires.Sampling in this study was 35% of the existing population of 151 employees so there were 53 samples of employees in the Regional Secretariat of South Buru Regency. The data were analyzed by path analysis with SPSS 17.00 software.

Results
This study seeks to examine the extent of the effect of charismatic leadership variables and motivation on job satisfaction and performance. For this reason, a statistical analysis of path analysis is performed which is stated with the following equation: Substructure equation 1: Y 1 = py1.1.X 1 + py1.2.X 2 + e1 Where: Y 1 = Job satisfaction X 1 = Leadership X 2 = Work motivation Py1.1 = X 1 path coefficient Py1.2 = X 2 path coefficient e 1 = Errror term Substructure equation 2 : Y 2 = py2.1.X 1 + py2.2.X 2 + py2.3.X 3 + e 1 Where: Y 2 = Job satisfaction X 1 = Leadership X 2 = Work motivation py2.1 = X 1 Path coefficient py2.2 = X 2 Path coefficient py2.3 = X 3 Path coefficient e 1 = Error term To prove the hypothesis proposed in Chapter II, an analysis was made of the research data, as shown in the following table: The table above shows that there is a real correlation between variables, where the correlation between charismatic leadership variable and motivation variablewas 0.115. Structurally, it can be seen in the following figure: Furthermore, to find out the magnitude of the path coefficient between variable X1 and X2 to Y1, and the path coefficient from Y1 to Y2, it can be seen in the following table: The results of the analysis in the table show that the path coefficient of the test results simultaneously was significant, so that a decision can be made to reject H 0 and to acccept H 1 which means it can be forwarded to individual testing. From the results of individual testing, it turned out that the path coefficients of the variable X1 and X2 to Y1 were statistically significant, so that H 0 was rejected and H a was accecpted.
Furthermore, the analysis results in the table above are translated into the path diagram as the following diagram:  The table above shows that the biggest direct effect was the effect of motivation variable on job satisfaction, which was 0.404; which indicates that every 1 percent increase in employee motivation will increase job satisfaction by 40.4%. Meanwhile, the direct effect of charismatic leadership on job satisfaction was 0.136 which shows that every 1 percent increase in charismatic leadership will increase satisfaction by 13.6%; assuming that other variables are in a constant state or are not changing.Moreover, the direct effect of job satisfaction on performance was 0.09, indicating that every 1 percent increase in satisfaction will increase performance by 9.0%; assuming that other variables are in a constant state or are not changing.
The total effect of charismatic leadership, motivation and job satisfaction variables on performance was 99.2% which indicates that job satisfaction was an intervening variable that reinforced the effect of charismatic leadership and motivation on the performance of employees of Setda Pinrang.This means that employee performance will improve if leadership is more charismatic and work motivation is high, thereby increasing job satisfaction and ultimately improving employee performance.

Discussion
Based on the above calculation, it is known that the direct effect of charismatic leadership on job satisfaction was 0.136 or 13.6%, with a t count value> t table value of 2.576> 1.671. This was also reinforced by the significance value of 0.001 which was smaller than the 0.05 confidence level. So the first hypothesis was accepted.This is in line with research by Fandi and Triandi (2017), which concluded that charismatic leadership and organizational culture significantly affect employee performance, and job satisfaction has a significant effect as an intervening variable between charismatic leadership on employee performance and between organizational culture on employee performance. Similarly, the results of research by Nursyifa (2015) concluded that the charismatic leadership style has a positive effct on job satisfaction and work motivation has a positive effect on job satisfaction.
The direct effect of motivation on job satisfaction Was 0.404 or 40.4% with a t count value> t table value of 3.312> 1.671. This was also reinforced by the significance value of 0.002 whcih was smaller than the 0.05 confidence level. So the second hypothesis was accepted. This is in line with research by Devie (2013) which concluded that motivation has an effect on job satisfaction in KPRI "Pertaguma" employees in Madiun City. With the high motivation from an individual, employees can work in earnest so that job satisfaction also increases. This wasstrengthened by the results of the study of the F test results, obtained from the Fisher value, with a F count value of 64.792> F table value of 4.54; or the Sig count value of 0,000 <Standard Sig value of 0.05; and from the t test with the t count value of 8.049> t table of 2.131, or the Sig count value of 0.000 <Sig0.05. From all the above tests it can be concluded that H was rejected, meaning that motivation has an effect on job satisfaction, especially in KPRI "Pertaguma" employees in Madiun City.
It also supported the results of research conducted by Sanuddin and Rosa (2013) which concluded that motivation really affects Job Satisfaction. This means that the Faculty of Economics of the University "T" must maintain the motivation of each lecturer who teaches there so that their job satisfaction also continues to increase. With the value of increased job satisfaction, it is expected that outstanding performance and work performance will also be obtained by the Faculty of Economics at the University "T". Conversely, if the Faculty of Economics, University "T" does not maintain the motivation of each lecturer to work, this can be indicated to cause a situation that is less conducive in the teaching and learning process in the classroom.
The direct effect of job satisfaction on performance was 0.09 or 69.3% with a t count value > t table value which was 5.414> 1.671. This was also reinforced by a significance value of 0,000 that was smaller than the 0.05 level of confidence, so that the third hypothesis was accepted. This is in line with research by Sari & Heru Santoso (2018), which concluded that job satisfaction has a significant effect on employee performance with a path coefficient of 0.395 and significant t of 0.040. Organizational Citizenship Behavior (OCB) does not mediate job satisfaction on employee performance with a value of direct effect greater than the indirect effect.
The direct effect of charismatic leadership on performance was 0.04 or 4.0% with a t count value> t table value of 2.107> 1.671. This was also reinforced by the significance value of 0,000 which was smaller than the 0.05 confidence level. So the fourth hypothesis was accepted. This is in line with research by Anisa Umaroh (2014) which concluded that the variable attributes of charismatic leadership behaviors consisting of the ability to empathize, actions that reflect the mission, self-confidence, self-image development behavior, confidence in subordinate competencies, and opportunity creation behavior for the subordinates to experience success has an effect on employee performance.
The direct effect of motivation on performance was 0.045 or 4.5% with a t count value> t table value of 2.584> 1.671. This was also reinforced by the significance value of 0.000 which was smaller than the 0.05 confidence level.
So the fifth hypothesis was accepted.This is in line with research by Lidia and Siagian (2017) which concluded that; (1) work motivation has a positive effect on employee performance, (2) work motivation has a positive effect on employee job satisfaction, (3) job satisfaction has a positive effect on employee performance, and (4) job satisfaction acts as a mediating variable between work motivation on employee performance .
The indirect effect of charismatic leadership and motivation on performance through employee job satisfaction was 0.832 or 83.2% with a t count value > t table value of 5.414> 1.671. This shows that job satisfaction mediated the effect of charismatic leadership and motivation on performance. This was also reinforced by a significance value of 0.000, which was smaller than the 0.05 level of confidence, so the sixth hypothesis was accepted. This indicated that job satisfaction becomes a mediating variable for charismatic leadership and motivation to improve employee performance. This is in line with research by Sanuddin and Rosa (2013) starting that an increase in job satisfaction and work motivation can improve employee performance, but an increase in job satisfaction has a higher effect when compared to work motivation.Based on this, the HRM party is expected to focus more on increasing job satisfaction. Prospective researchers who are interested in researching about improving employee performance are expected to add other variables besides job satisfaction and work motivation. This is also in line with the research of (Ilyas (2014))which highlighted that leadership style and organizational culture positively affect employee job satisfaction, and leadership style and organizational culture have a positive effect on employee performance both directly and indirectly through job satisfaction.In this study it was found that organizational culture had the most powerful effect on job satisfaction and employee performance. Based on the results of the data, the model proposed in this study can be accepted.On the basis of these results, managerial implications that can be suggested are that increased job satisfaction and employee performance can be achieved by creating and maintaining a culture of involvement in the organizational culture of the company, and applying participatory leadership styles in line with providing salary levels that are deemed satisfactory to employees.

Conclusion
Based on the results of the analysis of the problem and test the hypothesis by using path analysis, several things below were concluded: 1. Charismatic leadership had a direct effect on employee job satisfaction at the Regional Secretariat of South Buru Regency. 2. Motivation directly affected employee job satisfaction at the Regional Secretariat of South Buru Regency. 3. Job satisfaction had a direct effect on employee performance at the Regional Secretariat of South Buru Regency. 4. Charismatic leadership directly affected the performance of employees at the Regional Secretariat of South Buru Regency. 5. Motivation directly affected the performance of employees at the Regional Secretariat of South Buru Regency. 6. Job satisfaction mediated the effect of charismatic leadership and motivation on performance. Based on the conclusions that show the effect of charismatic leadership variables and motivation on job satisfaction and employee performance, several things related to efforts to improve performance are suggested, such as: 1. To make this charismatic leadership indicator the next indicator of leadership 2. In order to develop charismatic leadership research using indicators that researchers find with a qualitative approach. 3. To increase job satisfaction and employee performance, which can be done by providing motivation for employees to work and by being creative in their work.