Research Article: 2021 Vol: 20 Issue: 5
Nilawati Fiernaningsih, Malang State of Polytechnic
Pudji Herijanto, Malang State of Polytechnic
Maskur, Malang State of Polytechnic
The purpose of this study was to examine the effect of relational trust on self-efficacy, the effect of relational trust on innovative behavior, the effect of job autonomy on self-efficacy, the effect of job autonomy on innovative behavior, and the effect of self-efficacy on innovative behavior. Data was collected from 489 employees of Malang State Polytechnic, including lecturers and education staff, who then used proportionate random sampling to determine a sample of 221 people. Instruments in questionnaire research. Data were analyzed using Partial Least Square (PLS). The findings show that relational trust has a significant effect on self-efficacy, relational trust has a significant effect on innovative behavior, job autonomy has a significant effect on self-efficacy, job autonomy has a significant effect on innovative behavior, and self-efficacy has a significant effect on innovative behavior. These findings provide insight to the State Polytechnic of Malang, which is in the process of building resiliency during the Covid-19 pandemic by preparing various online learning models. Therefore, relational trust is needed in forming job autonomy, self-efficacy so that it is hoped that there will be an increase in innovative behavior among Lecturers in conducting Tri Dharma University. his study investigates the direct and indirect effects of relational trust and job autonomy on self-efficacy and innovative behavior. Research on the effect of relational trust and job autonomy on self-efficacy and innovative behavior in vocational educational institutions is still limited to support the principles of Affective Events Theory. This study extends the model to include the organizational environment's effects embeds cognitive processes for strategic decision-making processes.
Relational Trust, Self Efficacy, Job Autonomy, Innovative Behavior, Malang, Indonesia
COVID-19 has become a significant threat to all organizations globally, which causes changes in working methods and patterns of human interaction within organizations (Mustajab et al., 2020). The Indonesian government has implemented a restriction policy for activities and travel to areas including the red zone since 2020. With this limitation, it is the first time in modern history that workers are faced with a condition where they have to work from home every day. Workers are also faced with various disruptions in terms of technology that cannot be predicted. For example, due to the spread of telecommuting activities during a pandemic, workers must prepare equipment under standard specifications for holding virtual meetings, such as laptops and adequate internet access (Waizenegger et al., 2020).
According to the World Bank Organization (WHO) report written by Rogers & Sabarwal (2020), it is stated that higher education institutions will face several threats or threats. This includes a decrease in the quality of the learning process, an increase in the number of students who resign a health threat to education personnel and students due to the limited number of intra-school health personnel. So that it has an impact on decreasing the economic quality of the teaching staff. Charoensukmongkol & Phungsoonthorn (2020) added that higher education institutions focus on shifting offline learning to online learning. It will impact the emergence of financial risk due to additional budgets for internet connections and employment termination due to no face-to-face learning activities. This, of course, has a profound impact on the educational staff's psychology that, in addition to having to survive during a pandemic, changing learning media, they must also face the fear of the unclear status of educators (insecurity among the workforce in academic sectors).
Sahu (2020) argues that several key challenges must be mastered, especially by higher education institutions, especially in dealing with the impact of the Covid-19 crisis, including changing all components of education from teaching, research to assessment from offline to online. The ability to maintain psychological well-being among educators, academic staff, and students remain optimistic in facing the Covid-19 pandemic. Collaboration is needed that is systematic and needs a high foundation of trust to realize digital innovation that can help higher education organizations survive from the critical point of educational patterns caused by the pandemic. Educational innovation includes the act of looking for new ideas, fighting for ideas in the workplace (Hsiao et al., 2011). Therefore, innovative behavior will emerge with systematic cooperation, which is based on high mutual trust.
In a pandemic like today, relational trust is crucial to educational institutions dealing with this crisis, both the trust built between educators and students, between educators, and between workers in higher education institutions. As stated by de Jonge et al. (2020), there is a need for a sense of connection, especially for educators in terms of educational information due to the reduced uptake of information quality in online-based communication.
Mutual trust (Relational Trust) is a trust that includes all expectations of beneficial action, regardless of personal interest or relational attributions. (Saparito et al., 2004). Bryk & Barbara Schneider (2002) stated that relational trust is a solid and unconditional trust based on a solid sense of identity and the expectation of benefiting from the relationship. Relational trust appears in the acuity of others' intentions, beliefs, and actions in a series of role relationships (Forsyth et al., 2006). If this relational trust occurs between superiors and employees, it will affect assignment autonomy by superiors. Orth & Volmer (2017) and Hughes et al. (2018) state that Job autonomy has a positive and significant effect on innovative behavior variables. In other words, if the perception of giving job autonomy by employees is getting better, it will increase the employee's innovative behavior. Self-efficacy is related to the completion of specific tasks. Thus it has something to do with job autonomy. This is like the research results of Sousa, Coelho & Guillamon-Saorin (2012), which state that job autonomy positively affects self-efficacy.
Malang State Polytechnic is one of Indonesia's vocational education institutions, which was also affected by the Covid-19 Pandemic. To realize the strategic plan, improve the quality of human resources and produce policies to improve lecturers' innovative behavior, which of course will significantly affect the success of the strategic plan that has been set. Thus, even during the pandemic, the lecturers were still productive in implementing their Tri Dharma.
This study contributes to providing empirical evidence on the role of relational trust and job autonomy in self-efficacy and innovative behavior, especially in vocational higher education institutions affected by the COVID-19 pandemic. This study aims to:
1) Investigating the effect of relational trust on self-efficacy
2) Investigating the effect of relational trust on innovative behavior
3) Investigating the effect of job autonomy on self-efficacy
4) Investigating the effect of job autonomy on innovative behavior
5) Investigating the effect of self-efficacy on innovative behavior
The social cognitive theory perspective appears based on Albert Bandura's theoretical criticism that it is not enough to explain and predict behavior. However, this principle needs to consider the phenomenon that the behaviorism paradigm ignores, namely about individuals who can think and can regulate their behavior. Bandura (1989) labels social cognitive theory based on several reasons that place a person with cognitive abilities to contribute to affection and motivation processes and see how humans motivate and regulate their behavior and create social systems to structure and organize their lives.
The principles of Affective Events Theory states that the environment is an essential factor in producing “affective events”, which cause emotional reactions in organizational members, which determine the attitudes and behavior of members. This study extends the model to include the effects of additional organizational environments and proposes that emotions “instill” cognitive processes that are critical to strategic decision-making processes (Härtel et al., 2015)
One of the factors of the employee's internal environment is other employees, including the leadership. In organizing, they communicate with each other to carry out their duties and functions, thus forming a relational trust. This condition will affect superiors in making job autonomy policies. On the other hand, employees will also carry out these tasks well based on positive self-efficacy. With apparent job autonomy and good self-efficacy, it will increase employees' innovative behavior. Employees with high innovative behavior are needed by organizations to deal with environmental changes that are always happening.
Relational trust can initiate information dissemination among educators to be involved in the educational institution reform agenda's success. At the individual level, relational trust can reduce the risk associated with change. When education personnel trust each other, they will feel safe to experiment with new practices and initiatives in the classroom. In carrying out educational reforms in an educational institution, it requires more than several parties such as educators and the work environment in the planning, implementation, and evaluation process of reforming the reform system. In the process, colleagues who have the same relational trust will consider each other that each can provide a morale boost and facilitate initial efforts to facilitate this increase.
Riaz et al. (2018) also revealed that if all colleagues in the organizational environment give attention and trust in doing the tasks carried out to achieve organizational goals, this can trigger workers to create innovations for the organization.
Specifically, Bryk et al. (2009), in their publication entitled “Survey Measures, Factors, Composite Variables, and Items Used in Organizing Schools for Improvement: Lessons from Chicago” revealed that there are six items that can be used to measure relational trust between teacher. The six items include: The ability of educators within the school institution to trust each other; Educators are allowed to tell about personal experiences during teaching activities; Educators respect other educators who are given the mandate to assume structural positions in the context of developing educational institutions; Most of the teaching staff at this institution are friendly; Most of the teaching staff in this institution are concerned with their peers; Most of the teaching staff in this institution have mutual respect.
Cropanzano & Mitchell (2005) state that job autonomy is defined as the extent to which the employees have substantial freedom, independence, and freedom as individuals in planning work and in determining the procedures used in carrying it out. Job autonomy has core characteristics such as; skill variation, task identity, task significance, and job feedback. Langfred & Moye (2004) stated that job autonomy could improve performance because they consider themselves capable and confident in carrying out their duties.
Psychologically, it will make employees more motivated to do their best and lead to higher performance. Based on the definitions that have been put forward by the experts above, it can be concluded that job autonomy is the freedom and independence of an employee in determining the work. They will do and then complete it correctly by the employee's motivation, willingness, dedication, and overall ability to complete the job. It is charged against them.
According to Zhou & Shalley (2007), the indicators of job autonomy include Job description, which is a guide from the company to employees in carrying out their duties. The clearer the job description is given, the easier it will be for employees to carry out tasks following company goals. Discretion, namely making judgments, making policies, maintaining confidentiality, increasing abilities and the existence of freedom or flexibility in action, always following one's conscience; Expanded duties, namely active actions, namely always trying to expand knowledge and develop it on the duties, duties, and responsibilities of the company; Authority is a right to a responsibility, have power, authority, as an expert and can easily delegate.
High self-efficacy usually also has a high commitment to others' goals (goals that individuals/agencies impose on us). Some individuals may resist the assigned goals, but if they have self-efficacy, they will keep their personal goals and agency goals in balance. Self-efficacy is defined as people's beliefs about their ability to produce a determined level of performance that influences events that affect their lives... Bandura (2016) adds that educators who have a high sense of self-efficacy can usually provide a practical approach. The opinions above are corroborated by findings published by Brandmo et al. (2019) that a positive work environment (there is a relationship of mutual trust/relational trust) can form self-efficacy among academic staff. They were stated by Efendi (2013) states that social support can increase self-efficacy among Javanese teachers. High self-efficacy can have an impact on increasing teacher professionalism and increasing life satisfaction.
Bandura (2006) explains that precisely in education, there are guidelines that can be used to measure self-efficacy among educators. Self-efficacy can be measured using instructional self-efficacy, which consists of six points, including The teacher's ability to handle each student. The teacher's ability to invite students to learn continuously. The teacher's ability to motivate students to keep on doing assignments. The teacher's ability to make students remember and understand the material that has been delivered. The teacher's ability to motivate students who have low interest in lectures. The teacher's ability to make students work in groups, teachers' ability to overcome external influences that can be external influences that can adversely affect the quality of student learning.
Various studies have proven that workers' innovative behavior can be determined by their job autonomy, self-efficacy, and trust. In their research, Tams et al. (2018) explained that the high level of trust between workers in achieving common goals could increase self-efficacy so that it has an impact on creating innovations regularly. Uncertainty will appear when all parties cannot find solutions to various problems that have befallen their company. Hsiao et al. (2011) suggest that three indicators can measure innovative behavior specifically for teachers/educators, including idea generation, idea promotions, idea realizations.
Framework and Hypotheses
Relational trust and self efficacy
In organizing, employees communicate with each other in carrying out their duties and functions, thus forming a relational trust. On the other hand, some employees carry out their duties well because they are based on self-efficacy so that the employees' innovative behavior is created. Growing and maintaining the efforts needed to improve educational institutions' quality in the long term requires a strong foundation of relational trust among educators (Bryk et al., 2010).
Trust is the lifeblood of teaching and learning activities in educational institutions. The interaction pattern and exchange of information have significant consequences for its operation, especially when conditions require significant change (Bryk et al., 2010). With high self-efficacy, employees will automatically have a high commitment to achieving the goals set. When educators have strong self-efficacy, students tend to benefit the most from the educator. Furthermore, educators with solid self-efficacy beliefs will be better equipped to experiment and adopt new educational practices. The opinions above are corroborated by findings published by Brandmo et al. (2019) that a positive work environment (there is a relationship of mutual trust or relational trust) can form self-efficacy among educational personnel. So, hypothesis one is as follows:
H1 Relational Trust has a significant effect on Self Efficacy.
Relational Trust and Innovative Behavior
In their research, Tams et al. (2018) explained that the high level of trust between workers in achieving common goals could increase self-efficacy so that it has an impact on creating innovations regularly. This innovation-creating behavior also has implications for a low level of uncertainty because workers are always active in finding solutions to work problems. Then Orth & Volmer (2017) also argues that if a worker feels that organizational change is determined by a change in work patterns (automation of routine work). Then a worker will be encouraged to make daily incremental innovations hoping that the organization can achieve its aim faster. When combined with opinions (Brandmo et al., 2019), (Paradis et al., 2019), (Riaz et al., 2018), and Anand et al. (2012), relational trust affects innovative behavior. , hypothesis two is as follows:
H2 Relational Trust has a significant effect on Innovative Behavior.
Job Autonomy and Self Efficacy
In an organizational environment, it is crucial to have a conducive situation that is free and positive for employees at work that will make employees feel confident and can improve performance. Job autonomy can reduce pressure at work. Tai & Liu (2007) stated that job autonomy has a positive effect on employees who have an emotional imbalance when experiencing pressure and tension in an organization. The work environment should provide flexibility for employees who have high emotional levels to work better. With autonomy, they will be wiser in working without tension and pressure. The trust factor that is well maintained in the work environment impacts increasing self-efficacy and triggers workers to be more innovative at work. Cropanzano & Mitchell (2005) state that job autonomy is defined as the extent to which substantial freedom, independence, and the freedom of employees as individuals in planning work and determining the procedures that should be used in carrying it out. Job autonomy has core characteristics such as; skill variation, task identity, task significance, and job feedback. Important Based on the explanation above, the following hypothesis can be formulated:
H3 Job Autonomy has a significant effect on Self Efficacy.
Job Autonomy and Innovative Behaviour
The support provided by the company can overcome the effect of job autonomy on innovative behavior, where the increase in job autonomy can increase innovative ideas that can reduce the anxiety that is generated in uncertain conditions in the work environment. Furthermore, giving job autonomy will encourage employees to carry out explorations that can produce innovative work behavior through ideas in the work process when under stressful conditions. These findings are also corroborated by Tams et al. (2018), which state that job autonomy plays a vital role in shaping innovative behavior in the work environment. Based on the explanation above, the following hypothesis can be formulated:
H4 Job Autonomy has a significant effect on Innovative Behavior.
Self Efficacy and Innovative Behavior
Hsiao et al. (2011) stated that someone who has high innovative behavior also has high self-efficacy. An employee's self-efficacy increases, where the persistence, willingness, and consistency of work increase, it will impact innovative behavior. Educational personnel who feel they have high qualifications and place a high responsibility for their work will be able to increase innovative behavior to contribute to their organization so that they can compete or survive on a critical point pattern during the Covid -19 pandemic. Such as making learning quality, developing material knowledge, and new practices that can advance services to Malang State Polytechnic students. So, hypothesis five is as follows:
H5 Self Efficacy has a significant effect on Innovative Behavior.
The questionnaire was used as a research instrument. The questionnaire contains questions about the characteristics of the respondent and items related to the research variables. The measurement of relational trust has been suggested by Bryk et al. (2009), including: (1) Teacher to Teacher Trust. Meanwhile, according to Zhou & Shalley (2008), job autonomy indicators include: (1) Job description; (2) Direction; (3) Expanded duties; and (4) Authority. The Self-Efficacy indicator refers to Bandura (2006), namely: (1) Instructional Self-efficacy. The Innovative Behavior indicator refers to Hsiao et al. (2011), which includes idea generation, idea promotion, and idea realization. All research variables were measured using a Likert scale graded between a score of 1 to 5 (“strongly disagree” to “strongly agree”). Instrument testing was carried out on 30 respondents. The results showed that all items had a correction coefficient (validity) above 0.3 and Cronbach's Alpha (reliability) greater than 0.6 so that the questionnaire could be used for further data collection.
The unit of analysis of this research is the employees of the State Polytechnic of Malang, which includes lecturers and education staff from March - April 2021. It is known that the total population of the study was 489 employees. The sample size of 221 was determined based on the Slovin formula. Respondents were selected based on proportionate stratified random sampling. The questionnaire was given to respondents who had been previously selected randomly. Crosscheck validity and reliability using convergent validity and discriminant validity. Table 1 shows the results of the analysis of the 2nd order measurement model and all dimensions resulting in a loading factor greater than 0.6, and the root value of AVE for each dimension is greater than the correlation coefficient between dimensions. Thus, convergent validity and discriminant validity of all indicators are fulfilled.
|Table 1 Validity and Reliability Testing Results|
|Variables||Composite Reliability (CR)||Cronbach’s Alpha|
Research respondents can be classified based on gender, age, the department's origin, and the origin of the study program (Table 2). Based on data from 221 respondents, respondents' identity based on female gender is 127 people (57.5%) and male - 94 people (42.5%). From this data, it means that the employees of Malang State Polytechnic are mostly women. The highest respondent identity based on age was ≥ 41 - <45 years, as many as 62 (28.1%). The majority of respondents, with 221 people who work at State Polytechnic of Malang, are 49 people (22.2%) majoring in electrical engineering, and the lowest is chemical engineering with 17 people (7.7%). From the respondent's profile data, it is known that most of the Malang State Polytechnic employees do not have study programs, namely as many as 139 people (62.9%).
|Table 2 Profile of Respondents|
|Age||< 30 – < 35 years old||57||25.8|
|≥ 36 – < 40 years old||52||23.5|
|≥ 41 – < 45 years old||62||28.1|
|≥ 46 – < 50 years old||50||22.6|
The analytical tool used in this research is Partial Least Squares (PLS). Hypothesis testing in this study was carried out by analyzing the T statistical value or the probability (P) value on the Path Coefficient data processing results compared with the required statistical limits, namely the T Statistics value above 1.96 or the probability (P) value below 0.05. If the data processing results show a value that meets the requirements, then the proposed research hypothesis can be accepted (Figure 1).
Hypothesis testing is done by comparing the original sample estimate with a t-table of 1,960. The hypothesis is accepted if the original sample estimate has a value greater than the t-table. Hypothesis testing of the effect of relational trust on self-efficacy is 0.617 with significance below 5%, as indicated by the t-statistic value of 12.136. Therefore, it can be interpreted that there is a significant effect of relational trust on self-efficacy. This means that the better the relation trust, the more likely it is to increase self-efficacy. Thus, hypothesis 1 is accepted (Table 3).
|Table 3 Path Coefficients|
|Hypothesis||Variabel||Original Sample (O)||Sample Mean (M)||Standard Deviation (STDEV)||T Statistics (|O/STDEV|)||P Values|
|H1||Relational trust ->Self Efficacy||0.617||0.618||0.051||12.136||0.000|
|H2||Relational Trust -> Innovative Behavior||0.198||0.196||0.071||2.794||0.000|
|H3||Job Autonomy -> Self Efficacy||0.214||0.215||0.056||3.822||0.000|
|H4||Job Autonomy -> Innovative Behavior||0.355||0.360||0.076||4.693||0.000|
|H5||Self Efficacy -> Innovative Behavior||0.275||0.274||0.068||4.039||0.000|
The value relational trust variable for the innovative behavior variable with a path coefficient of 0.198 and a t-statistic of 2.794>1.960 has a p-value of 0.000<0.005. The relational trust variable has a direct and significant positive effect on the self-efficacy variable, and it can be concluded that hypothesis 2 is accepted. This shows that the relational trust variable has a direct effect on the innovative behavior variable. This means that when the relational trust variable is increased by one time, the innovative behavior variable will also increase by 27%.
Hypothesis testing of the effect of job autonomy on self-efficacy is 0.214. Therefore, it can be interpreted that there is a significant effect of job autonomy on self-efficacy. The t-statistic value is 3.882>1.960. Therefore, it means that there is a significant effect of job autonomy on self-efficacy. This means that the better the job autonomy, the more likely it is to increase self-efficacy. Thus, hypothesis 3 is accepted.
Hypothesis testing is done by comparing the original sample estimate with a t-table of 1,960. The hypothesis is accepted if the original sample estimate has a value greater than the t-table. Hypothesis testing the effect of job autonomy on innovative behavior is 0.355 with significance below 5%, as indicated by the t-statistic value of 4.693. Therefore, it can be interpreted that there is a significant effect of job autonomy on innovative behavior. This means that the better the job autonomy, the more likely it is to increase the innovative behavior. Thus, hypothesis 4 is accepted.
Hypothesis testing is done by comparing the original sample estimate with a t-table of 1,960. The hypothesis is accepted if the original sample estimate has a value greater than the t-table. Hypothesis testing of the effect of self-efficacy on innovative behavior is 0.275 with significance below 5%, as indicated by a t-statistic value of 4.039. Therefore, it can be interpreted that there is a significant effect of self-efficacy on innovative behavior. This means that the better the self-efficacy, the more likely it is to increase innovative behavior. Thus, hypothesis 5 is accepted.
This research shows several significant findings. First, relational trust has a positive and significant effect on self-efficacy. In the State Polytechnic of Malang, an educator's belief is seen in their own ability to plan and organize, then to carry out teaching and learning activities and activities needed to achieve educational goals. With an educator who has a perception of self-efficacy because of a strong relationship based on trust, the outcome that will emerge is providing a practical approach in the classroom. Students tend to get feedback and benefit from the learning process, namely being able to remember and understand the material that has been delivered. Polinema lecturers who have strong self-efficacy will be better prepared to express learning activities and formulate educational practice methods according to current conditions.
Second, relational trust has a positive and significant effect on innovative behavior. Higher education institutions experience many setbacks in terms of quality and enter into an era of competition. This is due to weak relational trust between educators and parents of students, external stakeholders, and even educators in the Polinema environment. Relational relationships based on trust and favorable emotional conditions, Polinema lecturers will be more motivated to innovate and reform educational activities in the Polinema environment on an ongoing basis.
Third, job autonomy has a positive and significant effect on self-efficacy. In the process, Lecturers will find challenges in online learning with the belief in their ability that by showing high work performance and work commitment, they will tolerate all forms of obstacles and feelings of anxiety and are always oriented towards achieving educational goals during the Covid19 pandemic. The more job autonomy given, the easier it will be for lecturers to develop their duties following the ability and flexibility to act in the Polinema environment. Lecturers who show high self-efficacy will tend to set plans and goals in challenging portions. This is because of high commitment to the organization's goals, in this case, is the authority of Polinema.
Fourth, job autonomy has a positive and significant effect on innovative behavior. Job autonomy roles have an impact on high and low innovative behavior. These three phases of the innovation process begin through idea generation, idea realization, and idea implementation. Where the three phases are interrelated in the decision-making strategy carried out by Polinema employees. Many decisions need to be made in the teaching and learning process during the Covid-19 pandemic, such as decisions to innovate, pursue specific ideas, and implement ideas. The implementation of the three phases requires a lot of focused and structured job autonomy because there is a need for division of tasks and decision-making to continue and implement ideas and decisions. If there is a low and unclear job autonomy, it can hinder the employee's work process in creating innovative behavior.
Fifth, self-efficacy has a positive and significant effect on innovative behavior. Polinema lecturers see that with a sense of confidence supported by colleagues to realize their innovative ideas, this can transform into helpful learning programs. These programs are a form of evaluation of the old learning system, where at present conditions more or less require innovative ideas adapted to online learning methods during the Covid19 pandemic. An individual's perception or belief that they can complete a specific task and this success is related to the commitment of goals so that innovative behavior will emerge and result in various innovations to realize the predetermined strategic plan.
The results of this study have relevant organizational variables and characteristics. Innovative behavior, especially in the educational environment during the pandemic. Innovative Behavior variables studied in research can contribute significantly to Polinema, which is struggling to improve performance and building education resilience during the Covid-19 pandemic. Even though Polinema's performance has achieved accreditation from BAN-PT, ranked A, the institutional performance must be maintained during a pandemic. This shows that Polinema must take policies related to innovative behavior for lecturers during this pandemic.
Some things that need to be considered in applying the most important research results are how Polinema lecturers motivate students who have low interest in the lecture process and create new ideas on current issues related to making learning programs that are useful for adjusting technology disruption and reform. Educational activities during the Covid 19 pandemic. Factors that directly influenced Malang State Polytechnic lecturers' innovative behavior who carried out Tri Dharma during the Covid-19 Pandemic. The factors referred to are relational trust between lecturers and their direct superiors, job autonomy from direct superiors, and lecturers' self-efficacy.
This study has several weaknesses, so that it provides recommendations for further research. First, this research focuses on teaching staff and lecturers at Malang State Polytechnic so that the research object under study does not involve other scales. The area coverage of the research location is not too broad, which cannot represent the population of education staff and lecturers. Second, this study is cross-sectional, so it is advisable to conduct a longitudinal study. Finally, the research model only tests the effect of constructs or variables linearly. The results are still possible to research by examining the relationship between variables and describing the effect as a whole.
Anand, G., Chhajed, D., & Delfin, L. (2012). Job autonomy, trust in leadership, and continuous improvement: An empirical study in health care. Operations Management Research, 5(3-4), 70-80.
Bandura, A. (1982). Self-efficacy mechanism in human agency. American Psychologist, 37(2), 122-147.
Bandura, A. (1989). Social cognitive theory. In R. Vasta (Ed.), Annals of Child Development (Vol. 6). JAI Press.
Bandura, A. (2006). Guiding for constructing self-efficacy scales. In F. Pajares & T. Urdan (Eds.), Self-Efficacy Beliefs of Adolescents (p. 337). Cambridge University Press.
Bandura, A. (2016). Moral disengagement: How people do harm and live with themselves. Worth publishers.
Brandmo, C., Tiplic, D., & Elstad, E. (2019). Antecedents of department heads’ job autonomy, role clarity, and self-efficacy for instructional leadership. International Journal of Leadership in Education, 1-20.
Bryk, A., & Schneider, B. (2002). Trust in schools: A core resource for improvement. Russell Sage Foundation.
Bryk, A.S., Sebring, P.B., & Allensworth, E.L.S., & Easton, J.Q. (2010). Organizing schools for improvement: Lessons from Chicago.
Bryk, A.S., Sebring, P.B., Allensworth, E., Luppescu, S., & Easton, J.Q. (2009). Survey measures, factors, composite variables, and items used in organizing schools for improvement: Lessons from Chicago.
Charoensukmongkol, P., & Phungsoonthorn, T. (2020). The effectiveness of supervisor support in lessening perceived uncertainties and emotional exhaustion of university employees during the COVID-19 crisis: the constraining role of organizational intransigence. The Journal of General Psychology, 1-20.
Cropanzano, R., & Mitchell, M.S. (2005). Social exchange theory: An Interdisciplinary review. Journal of Management, 31(6), 874-900.
de Jonge, E., Kloppenburg, R., & Hendriks, P. (2020). The impact of the COVID-19 pandemic on social work education and practice in the Netherlands. Social Work Education, 39(8), 1027-1036.
Efendi, R. (2013). Self efficacy: studi idigenous pada guru bersuku jawa. Journal of Social and Industrial Psychology, 2(2), 61-67.
Forsyth, P.B., Barnes, L.L.B., & Adams, C.M. (2006). Trust-effectiveness patterns in schools. Journal of Educational Administration, 44(2), 122-141.
Hsiao, H.C., Chang, J.C., Tu, Y.L., & Chen, S.C. (2011). The impact of self-efficacy on innovative work behavior for teachers. International Journal of Social Science and Humanity, 1(1), 31-36.
Hughes, M., Rigtering, J.P.C., Covin, J.G., Bouncken, R.B., & Kraus, S. (2018). Innovative Behaviour, Trust and Perceived Workplace Performance. British Journal of Management, 29(4), 750-768.
Langfred, C.W., & Moye, N.A. (2004). Effects of task autonomy on performance: An extended model considering motivational, informational, and structural mechanisms. Journal of Applied Psychology, 89(6), 934-945.
Orth, M., & Volmer, J. (2017). Daily within-person effects of job autonomy and work engagement on innovative behaviour: The cross-level moderating role of creative self-efficacy. European Journal of Work and Organizational Psychology, 26(4), 601-612.
Paradis, A., Lutovac, S., Jokikokko, K., & Kaasila, R. (2019). Towards a relational understanding of teacher autonomy: The role of trust for Canadian and Finnish teachers. Research in Comparative and No. Education, 14(3), 394-411.
Riaz, S., Xu, Y., & Hussain, S. (2018). Understanding employee innovative behavior and thriving at work: A Chinese perspective. Administrative Sciences, 8(3), 46.
Rogers, H., & Sabarwal, S. (2020). The COVID-19 Pandemic: Shocks to Education and Policy Responses. World Bank Group, May 2020, 49.
Sahu, P. (2020). Closure of universities due to coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19): Impact on education and mental health of students and academic staff. Cureus, 2019(4), 4-9.
Saparito, P.A., Chen, C.C., & Sapienza, H.J. (2004). The role of relational trust in bank-small firm relationships. Academy of Management Journal, 47(3), 400-410.
Tai, W.T., & Liu, S.C. (2007). An investigation of the influences of job autonomy and neuroticism on job stressor-strain relations. Social Behavior and Personality, 35(8), 1007-1020.
Tams, S., Thatcher, J.B., & Craig, K. (2018). How and why trust matters in post-adoptive usage: The mediating roles of internal and external self-efficacy. Journal of Strategic Information Systems, 27(2), 170-190.
Waizenegger, L., McKenna, B., Cai, W., & Bendz, T. (2020). An affordance perspective of team collaboration and enforced working from home during COVID-19. European Journal of Information Systems, 29(4), 429-442.
Zerbe, W.J., Härtel, C.E., & Ashkanasy, N.M. (2008). Emotions, ethics and decision-making. Emerald Group Publishing.
Zhou, J., & Shalley, C.E. (2007). Handbook of organizational creativity. Lawrence Erlbaum Associates