The Moderating Effect of Perceived Organizational Support in Relationship between Affective Commitment and Workforce Agility in Workplace

Abstract

The purpose of this research was examining the role of perceived organizational support as a moderator in the relationship of affective commitment and workforce agility in the workplace. This study was specific respondents to permanent employees in the manufacturing industry. Participants in this study numbered 154 permanent employees at one company. The researcher uses convenience sampling. This study adopted three instruments: perceived organizational support survey with 15 items, affective commitment questionnaire with 6 items, and 39 items of workforce agility questionnaire. Using regression, perceived organizational support as a positive moderator of the relationship between affective commitment and workforce agility in the workplace (r=.27, p<0.05). Some recommendations made are that management should improve employees related to being emotionally attached, having the same identification with the organization, and involving the organization's activities and management should support employees by providing supervisory support; reward and job conditions; and perceived fairness.

Determination of Knowledge Sharing as a Mediator for Workforce Agility on the Individual Innovation Capability of Professional Assistants Village in Kediri Regency

“…Therefore, there is a need to strengthen efforts to encourage and facilitate knowledge-sharing practices among professional assistants in rural areas by involving policy development, training, or communication platforms that support effective knowledge exchange. The research results are reinforced by arguments stating that knowledge sharing positively influences employees' innovation capabilities (Akbari & Ghaffari, 2017;Machado et al, 2022;Merten et al, 2022;Sya & Mangundjaya, 2020;Triaa et al, 2016). This research also aligns with the fact that knowledge sharing has a positive effect on the performance of human resources in companies (Afandy et al, 2022;Inkinen, 2016;Stary, 2014;Zhu et al, 2014).…”