The Influential of Behaviors from Individual, Group, and Organization Levels toward the Polices’ Performance in Southern Border Provinces of Thailand
Article Sidebar
Main Article Content
Abstract
The purpose of this study was to examine the influential behaviors levels toward the polices’ performance in Southern Border Province. The study was undertaken in fifty-one police stations, the subjects consist of four hundred and eight policemen. Data was collected by questionnaires. This research has 5 variables; job performance, organizational justice, public service motivation, work engagement, and transformational leadership, and the reliability was between .65 and .96. The results revealed that public service motivation and work engagement at the behavioral individual level have direct effect on the polices’ performance (x = 0.67 and 0.29, respectively), and transformational leadership at the behavioral group level has indirect effect on the performance of the police through public service motivation (x= 0.48) at significance level .01. Particularly, public service motivation was apparently shown as the most influential factor.
Article Details
Copyright Notice articles, information, images, etc. was published in this Journal of Yala Rajabhat University is a copyright of the journal Yala Rajabhat University. If any person or deparment wants to bring all or part of it for publish or take any action. Authorization is required in written form from the Journal of Yala Rajabhat University only.
References
(หน้า 19-32). กรุงเทพฯ : สำนักงานเลขานุการคณะกรรมการพัฒนาระบบงานตำรวจ.
2.Bass, B. M. & Avolio, B. J. (1993). Transformational leadership: A response to critiques. In M. M. Chemers & R. Ayman (Eds.), Leadership theory and research:
Perspectives and directions (pp. 49-80). San Diego, CA: Academic Press.
3.Bollen, K. A. (1989). Structural equations with latent variables. New York: Wiley.
4.Christian, M. S., Garza, A. S. & Slaughter, J. E. (2011). Work engagement: A quantitative review and test of its relations with task and contextual performance. Personnel Psychology, 64(1), 89-136.
5.Greenberg, J. & Baron, R. A. (2003). Behavior in Organizations. (8th ed). Upper Saddle River, NJ: Pearson Education.
6.Hair, J. F., Black, W. C., Babin, B. J. & Anderson, R. E. (2010). Multivariate data analysis: A global perspective. (7th ed.). Upper Saddle River, NJ: Pearson Education.
7.Kim, S. (2006). Public service motivation and organizational citizenship behavior in Korea. International Journal of Manpower, 27(8), 722-740.
8.Kim, S. & Vandenabeele, W. (2010). A strategy for building public service motivation research internationally. Public Administration Review, 70(5), 701-709.
9.Motowidlo, S. J., Borman, W. C. & Schmit, M. J. (1997). A theory of individual differences in task and contextual performance. Human Performance, 10(2), 71-83.
10.Moynihan, D. P., Pandey, S. K. & Wright, B. E. (2009). Pulling the levers: Leadership, public service motivation and mission valence. Paper presented at the
International Public Service Motivation Research Conference, June 7-9, Bloomington, IN.
11.Rich, B. L., LePine, J. A. & Crawford, E. R. (2010). Job engagement: Antecedents and effects on job performance. Academy of Management Journal, 53(3), 617-635.
12.Robbins, S. P. & Judge, T. A. (2010). Organizational Behavior. (10th ed). Upper Saddle River, NJ: Prentice Hall.
13.Salanova, M., Agut, S. & Peiro, M. J. (2005). Linking organizational resources and work engagement to employee performance and customer loyalty: The mediation
of service climate. Journal of Applied Psychology, 90(6), 1217-1227.
14.Schumacker, R. E. & Lomax, R. G. (2010). A Beginner’s Guide to Structural Equation Modeling. (3rd ed). New York: Taylor & Francis.
15.Van Scotter, J. R. (2000). Relationships of task performance and contextual performance with turnover, job Satisfaction, and affective commitment. Human Resource Management Review, 10(1), 79-95.
