Academy of Entrepreneurship Journal (Print ISSN: 1087-9595; Online ISSN: 1528-2686)

Research Article: 2021 Vol: 27 Issue: 4

Transformational Leadership in the Personality, Performance and Commitments of theological High School Organizations.

Muner Daliman, Sekolah Tinggi Teologi Kadesi Yogyakarta

Hanna Suparti, Sekolah Tinggi Teologi Kadesi Yogyakarta

David Ming, Sekolah Tinggi Teologi Kadesi Yogyakarta

Citation:Daliman, M., Suparti, H., & Ming, D (2021). Transformational leadership in the personality, performance and commitments of theological high school organizations. Academy of Entrepreneurship Journal (AEJ), 27(4), 1-12.


Based on the abstract that personality has a positive direct effect on organizational commitment, meaning that strengthening personality will have an effect on increasing organizational commitment. This implies that improving the organizational commitment of lecturers requires improvements in personality. The efforts that need to be improved in relation to the personality of the lecturer are: Prioritizing lecturer services as professional staff, Improving the quality of the lecturers themselves in relation to abilities and careers, Improving scientific development, Increasing personality competence.Meanwhile, the next suggestion is that performance has a positive direct effect on organizational commitment. So this will have the implication that to improve the commitment of lecturers to the organization it is necessary to improve the performance of good lecturers. As for the efforts that can be made to improve lecturer performance, there are efforts made to improve lecturer performance: Fair treatment in job services, improvement and increase in wages, attention to the welfare of lecturers, Personality is the characteristics and characteristics that represent the attitude or character of the lecturer, including patterns of thought and feeling, self-concept, temperament, and mentality which are generally in line with general habits in the future. This means that strengthening the personality of the lecturers will have an effect on improving lecturer performance.Efforts that can be made with the personality of the lecturer are: Always improve their competence because a strong personality of the lecturer will improve the performance of good lecturers, Increase lecturers' wages and salaries, Improve training and facilities, Improve education and promotion, Join certification programs for those who have not, Expanding knowledge and skills, Providing awards and punishments, Removing diverse lecturer status.


Transformational Leadership, Organizational Commitment, Personality and Performance.


The concept of transformational leadership was originally introduced by James MacGregor Burns in 1979, in his book entitled Leadership, Burns uses the term transforming leadership, which is transformed is leadership to followers, namely changing the leadership process between leaders and subordinates helping each other to advance to a higher level based on passion and motivation (Burns & James, 2007)

Furthermore it is said that transformational leadership can be seen when leaders and followers make each other to advance to a higher level of morale and motivation. Through the power of vision and personality, transformational leaders are able to inspire subordinates to change expectations, perceptions and motivations towards a common goal (Burns & James, 2007)

Transformational leadership according to Lesli W. Rue and Lioyd L. Byars is a leadership style that can create mutually motivating conditions between leaders and followers, so that leaders can change followers for the better and create a sense of trust from followers to leaders. The factors that influence transformational leadership according to Lesli are: 1. Charisma, 2). Inspiration from Leaders, 3). Motivation from the leader, and 4). Intellectual Stimulation (Burns & James, 2007)

According to Bernard Bass, who has extended the original idea, developed this theory of transformational leadership with an understanding based on the impact of his subordinates instilling in the trust, respect and admiration of his subordinates. According to Bass himself, there are four components of transformational leadership, namely: 1) Intellectualtransformational stimulation challenges the status quo, and encourages subordinate creativity, 2) Individual consideration involves, offers support and encouragement to subordinates, is free to share ideas and the leader gives direct recognition. from subordinates as a unique contribution. 3) Inspirational motivation has a vision that is able to articulate to subordinates, and 4) The ideal influence serves as a role model for subordinates, to have more trust and respect and imitate the leader who is internalized in ideals, so that transformational leadership can increase motivation, enthusiasm and performance subordinates through various mechanisms, so as to align subordinates with tasks to improve their performance kinerja (Burns & James, 2007)

Bass and Riggio see that transformational leadership is more about intrinsic motivation and positive development from subordinates. Both also view that transformational leadership represents a more interesting view of leadership than transactional leadership which emphasizes the process of exchanging social roles. According to Bass and Riggio transformational leadership is more likely to be applied in today's increasingly complex organizations where followers not only want leaders who can inspire in helping followers through their environment but also leaders want followers to have loyalty or not and whether followers show good performance or not (Burns & James, 2007)

Stephen P. Robbin and Timothy A. Judge state that transformational leadership is a leader who inspires followers to go beyond eliminating self-interest and who is able to exert a tremendous influence on followers. The factors are 1). Ideal influence, 2). Inspirational motivation, 3). Intellectual stimulation, 4). Individual considerations. Transformational leadership according to Darwis S. Gani et al. is leadership where there is a process of raising each other to a higher level of morality and motivation based on trust, respect, and pride in the importance of togetherness in achieving common goals. The influencing factors are: 1) Having a vision, 2) Inspiring, 3) Encouraging, 4) Coaching and 5) Team building (Darwis, 2008)

Jerald Greenberg and Robert A. Baron stated that, transformational leadership is leadership that uses charisma to change and revitalize the organization. The factors that influence transformational leadership according to Jerald are: 1)Charisma, 2)Have a strong vision and mission of the organization, 3)Intellectual stimulation, 4)Individual attention, 5)Inspirational motivation (Kreitner & Kinicki, 2008)

Furthermore, Kreitner and Kinicki assert that transformational leadership changes subordinates by creating changes in goals, values, beliefs and aspirations (Kreitner & Kinicki, 2008)

  1. Transformational leadership is a leadership pattern through three elements, namely charisma, individual considerations, and intellectual simulation in the Head of the Theological College.
  2. Charisma is described as the most important component in the concept of transformational leadership. There is little that can be used to describe a charismatic leader, which contains feelings of love from subordinates, even subordinates feel confident and trust each other under a charismatic leader, subordinates accept their leader as a model they want to emulate, every time the enthusiasm for the work of subordinates grows. , able to make subordinates work harder and longer happily. The transformational leadership charisma scale describes the degree to which the leader creates enthusiasm for followers, being able to discern what really matters. Generating a sense of mission towards the organization, through charisma the leader inspires loyalty and perseverance instills pride and loyalty and inspires respect.
  3. Individual consideration means that under transformational leadership, the generalization of differences between individuals does not have its place. A transformational leader will pay attention to individual factors as not to be generalized, because there are differences in interests and self-development that differ from one another.
  4. Intellectual stimulation means that in transformational leadership a leader will carry out intellectual stimulation. This element of leadership can be seen, among others, in the ability of a leader to create, interpret and elaborate symbols that appear in life, teach subordinates to think in new ways. In short, subordinates are conditioned in situations to always ask themselves and compare them with the assumptions that develop in society, which in turn develops problem-solving abilities freely ((Kreitner & Kinicki, 2008)

Based on various studies, it can be seen that Olga Epitropica, suggests 6 things, why transformational leadership is important, for an organization:

  1. Significantly improve organizational performance
  2. Positively associated with long-term marketing orientation and customer satisfaction
  3. Generating a high commitment of its members to the organization.
  4. Increase employee confidence in the organization's daily management and behavior
  5. Increase job satisfaction through work and leadership
  6. Reduce the stress of workers and improve welfare.

Gary Yukl presents some of the results of research on transformational leadership. Gary Yukl argues that transformational leadership is leadership that can create an atmosphere so that followers feel trust, admiration, loyalty and respect for the leader, and they must be motivated to do more than expected. Good leaders change and motivate followers by: 1) Making followers realize the importance of the task, 2) Persuading followers to put the interests of the team or organization above personal interests, 3) Activating the higher needs of followers. The factors that influence it are as follows: 1) Ideal influence, 2) Individual considerations, 3) Inspirational motivation, d) Intellectual simulation((Kreitner & Kinicki, 2008)

Some guidelines for implementing transformational leadership are as follows:

  1. Develop a clear and compelling vision
  2. Develop a mission to achieve the vision
  3. Articulation and promotion of the vision
  4. Act with confidence and optimism
  5. Express trust in followers
  6. Use dramatic and symbolic actions to discover key values
  7. Celebrate success
  8. Leading by example
  9. Creating, modifying or deleting cultural forms
  10. Use transitional sayings to help people through change are: 1) charisma, 2) inspiration, 3) intellectual stimulation, 4) individual consideration(Kreitner & Kinicki, 2008)

Sukarso et al., stated that transformational leadership is leadership that provides individualized consideration and intellectual stimulation to subordinates or followers. Characteristics of transformational leadership. Leaders/Chairmen are the highest expectations for staff and students. The chairman is a person who knows a lot about the duties of his subordinates and subordinates who determine the rhythm for the school (Kreitner & Kinicki, 2008) Educational institutions are a form of moral organization, which is certainly different from other forms of organization, especially profit-oriented as an organizational institution, its success is not only determined by the Chair but also by the lecturers and the process of the institution itself. Based on the theories above, it can be synthesized that transformational leadership is the behavior of an individual or a leader who seeks to change, direct, and develop the values ??that exist in his organization in order to create good relationships between lecturers in order to realize shared goals in the future with the following indicators: 1) Charismatic 2) Individualized consideration 3) Ideal influence 4) motivating inspiration, 5) Intellectual stimulation

Research Methods

This research is a research that uses quantitative methods. In practice: This study uses the Quantitative Research Stage through descriptive analysis, linkert scale and path analysis using the survey method. There are three variables in this study, namely the exogenous variables of Personality (X1) and performance (X2) and endogenous variables of organizational commitment shows in Table 1-7.

Table 1 Research Subjects
No. Name Gender Fungsional Education Background
1 Lecturers at theological colleges. A Womens Pastoral Collenges Graduation from theological school
2 Lecturers at theological colleges B Womens Pastoral Collenges, Graduation from theological school
3 Lecturers at theological colleges C Male Pastoral Collenges, Graduation from theological school
4 Lecturers at theological colleges D Womens Pastoral Collenges, Graduation from theological school
5 Lecturers at theological colleges E Male Team Pastoral Collenges Graduation from theological school
6. Lecturers at theological colleges F Male Senior Diacon Diploma Ministry
7. Lecturers at theological colleges. G Male Senior Pastoral Collenges, Diploma Ministry
8. Lecturers at theological colleges H Male Junior Pastoral Collenges, Diploma Ministry

Research Hypothesis

Table 2 Statistics
  Organisation Commitment Personality Performances
N Valid 94 94 94
Missing 0 0 0
Mean 95.69 89.37 90.91
Std. Error of Mean 2.641 2.606 2.614
Median 94.00 88.00 89.00
Mode 89 86 88
Std. Deviation 25.605 25.267 25.344
Variance 655.613 638.408 642.337
Range 127 118 121
Minimum 48 32 34
Maximum 175 150 155
Sum 8995 8401 8546

Descriptive Testing

Table 3 Descriptives
  Statistic Std. Error
Organisation Commitment Mean 95.69 2.641
95% Confidence Interval for Mean Lower Bound 90.45  
Upper Bound 100.94  
5% Trimmed Mean 94.97  
Median 94.00  
Variance 655.613  
Std. Deviation 25.605  
Minimum 48  
Maximum 175  
Range 127  
Interquartile Range 34  
Skewness 0.435 0.249
Kurtosis 0.112 0.493
Personality Mean 89.37 2.606
95% Confidence Interval for Mean Lower Bound 84.20  
Upper Bound 94.55  
5% Trimmed Mean 89.32  
Median 88.00  
Variance 638.408  
Std. Deviation 25.267  
Minimum 32  
Maximum 150  
Range 118  
Interquartile Range 34  
Skewness .037 0.249
Kurtosis -0.319 0.493
Performances Mean 90.91 2.614
95% Confidence Interval for Mean Lower Bound 85.72  
Upper Bound 96.11  
5% Trimmed Mean 90.82  
Median 89.00  
Variance 642.337  
Std. Deviation 25.344  
Minimum 34  
Maximum 155  
Range 121  
Interquartile Range 34  
Skewness 0.062 0.249
Kurtosis -0.263 0.493
Table 4 Tests Of Normality  
  Kolmogorov-Smirnova Shapiro-Wilk  
Statistic df Sig. Statistic df Sig.  
ORGANIZATION COMMITMENT 0.064 94 0.200* 0.984 94 0.295  
PERSONALITY 0.049 94 0.200* 0.994 94 0.936  
PERFORMANCES 0.058 94 0.200* 0.994 94 0.932  
*. This is a lower bound of the true significance.  
a. Lilliefors Significance Correction  
Case Processing Summary
Included Excluded Total
N Percent N Percent N Percent
Organization Commitment  * Personality 94 100.0% 0 0.0% 94 100.0%
Table 5 ANOVA Table
  Sum of Squares df Mean Square F Sig.
Organization Commitment * Personality Between Groups (Combined) 54405.387 43 1265.242 9.634 0.000
Within Groups 6566.667 50 131.333    
Total 60972.053 93      
Case Processing Summary
Included Excluded Total
N Percent N Percent N Percent
 Organization Commitment  * Performences 94 100.0% 0 0.0% 94 100.0%
Table 6 ANOVA Table
  Sum of Squares df Mean Square F Sig.
Organization Commitment * Performances Between Groups (Combined) 56938.187 43 1324.144 16.413 0.000
Within Groups 4033.867 50 80.677    
Total 60972.053 93      

Reability Testing

Table 7 Reliability Statistics
Cronbach's Alpha N of Items
951 3

Hipotesis Testing

Table 8 Model Summary
Model R R Square Adjusted R Square Std. Error of the Estimate
1 0.790a .623 0.619 15.798
Table 9 ANOVAa
Model Sum of Squares df Mean Square F Sig.
1 Regression 38009.618 1 38009.618 152.287 .000b
Residual 22962.435 92 249.592    
Total 60972.053 93      

Correlation Testing

Table 10 Coefficientsa
Model Unstandardized Coefficients Standardized Coefficients t Sig.
B Std. Error Beta
1 (Constant) 24.183 6.019   4.017 .000
PERSONALITY .800 .065 .790 12.340 .000
Table 11 Correlations  
  Organization Commitment Personality Performance
Organization Commitment Pearson Correlation 1 0.790** 0.921**
Sig. (2-tailed)   0.000 0.000
N 94 94 94
Personality Pearson Correlation 0.790** 1 0.886**
Sig. (2-tailed) 0.000   0.000
N 94 94 94
Performances Pearson Correlation 0.921** 0.886** 1
Sig. (2-tailed) 0.000 0.000  
N 94 94 94

The data descriptions presented in this section include the Organizational Commitment variable (Y) which is the endogenous variable and the performance variables (X2) and personality (X1).

a. Commitment data to the organization

Organizational Commitment variable data obtained through quantitative research has a tendency to result, namely shows in Table 12:

Table 12 Commitment Data to the Organization
No. Variabel Xmin Xmax Range Mean St.Deviasi Median Modus
  1. 1
OrganizationalCommitments 116 174 58 139,1 12,2 137 135

b. Peak Performance Variable Data

The peak performance obtained through quantitative research has a tendency to result shows in Table 13.

Table 13 Variable Data
No. Variabel Xmin Xmax Range Mean St.Deviasi Median Modus
1. Peak performance 108 154 46 135.1 11.5 137.5 140

Based on the results of the statistical description analysis for the three research variables, namely: the personality of the lecturer (X1), the performance of the lecturer (X2), and the Commitment to Organization (Y), it can be revealed about the symptoms of data centering as summarized in the following Statistical Description Summary Table 14.

Table 14 Summary Statistical Descriptions
Criteria X1 X2 Y
Mean 89.37 89.37 90.91
Standard Error 2.606 2.606 2.614
Median 87.00 88.00 89.00
Modus (Mode) 87 86 88
Stand. Deviation 25.271 25.267 25.344
Sample Variance 638.602 638.408 642.337
Range 118 118 121
Minimum 32 32 34
Maximum 150 150 155
Sum 8401 8401 8546
Count 94 94 94
Confidence Level (95,0%)) 3,3 2,4 3,3
Maximum Class 8 8 8
Minimum Class 15 15 16

DeskriptionData Variable Recapitulation  X1, X2, dan Y

Prior to the path analysis, the data must meet several statistical test requirements, namely (1) Error Normality Test, and (2) Test of Significance and Linearity of Regression Coefficient shows in Table 15 &16.

Tabel 15 Description Data Variable Recapitulation  X1, X2, dan Y
No. Variable Xmin Xmax Range Mean St.Deviasi Median Modus
1. Organizational Commitments 116 174 58 139,1 12,2 137 135
2. Peak Performance 108 154 46 135,1 11,5 137,5 140
3. Personality 103 160 57 127,8 15,9 124,5 160
Tabel 16 Test Normalitas Galat Conclusion
No Range Galat N Lhitung Ltabel
α= 0,05 Decision
1. Y atas X1 94 0,0898 0,0914 Normal
2. Y atas X2 94 0,0839 0,914 Normal
3. X2 atas X1 94 0,0839 0,0914 Normal

In accordance with the description above, the normality requirements for the estimated error have been met.

From the table above, it can be concluded that there is a positive direct influence of personality on organizational commitment, a positive direct effect of performance on organizational commitment, and a positive direct influence of personality on performance shows in Table 17.

Tabel 17 Summary of Regression Model Linearity Test Results
No Hub Model. Between Variables F=hitung (tuna cocok) F=table( α= 0,05) F=table( α= 0,01) Pola Test Linieritas
1. Y atas X1 1,613 8,557 26,254 Linier
2. Y atas X2 2,628 8,557 26,254 Linier
3. X2 atas X1 2,832 8,557 26,254 Linier


Based on the results of hypothesis testing that has been done, it can be concluded that the personality of the lecturer has a positive and significant direct effect on organizational commitment. These findings provide evidence that empirically the increase in personality by a lecturer has an impact on increasing organizational commitment. The quantitative data obtained quantitatively in the study is strengthened by the data from observations in qualitative research which gives the direction that personality is closely related to lecturer commitment. Lecturer commitment is determined by the personality factor possessed by the lecturer himself.

Personality has a very strong role in a lecturer in carrying out his duties. Personality traits can help a person in the selection process as a lecturer, adjust the field of work, and help someone in his career development. Patterns of thought and feeling as well as mentality will influence a lecturer in adjusting to his environment. This is in accordance with the theory put forward by Jerald Greenberg and Robert A. Baron (2008) which states that personality is a unique and relatively stable pattern of behavior, thoughts, and emotions, shown by individuals, so the lecturer will be able to carry out their duties properly and shows his role as a lecturer who is full of loyalty.

Performance Has a Positive Direct Effect on Commitment to the Organization the results of hypothesis testing and the results of the above analysis can be concluded that lecturer performance has a positive and significant direct effect on Commitment to the Organization. This finding illustrates empirically that the strong performance possessed by lecturers will strengthen the commitment of lecturers to their institutions. This obedience will shape the character of the lecturers who are always part of the institution where they work. The quantitative data above is reinforced by data from observations of qualitative research which have conclusions about performance, which is an expression of employee attitudes towards work that reflects a pleasant or unpleasant experience based on the compatibility between expectations and reality obtained from their work.

Performance has a very strong role in a lecturer, if someone does a job with the orientation or purpose of meeting the needs of life and welfare, then when an institution is able to provide a high salary, so that the level of welfare of the lecturer is very good, then the lecturer should enjoy performance.

Colquitt et al. (2009) argues that performance is the value of a set of employee behaviors that contribute positively or negatively to achieving organizational goals. Basically, performance has three dimensions, namely (a) task behavior, (b) moral behavior, and (c) challenging behavior.

Direct Positive Effect of Lecturer Personality on Lecturer Peak Performance. Based on the results of hypothesis testing and research findings, it shows that the personality of the lecturer has a positive and significant direct effect on the performance of the lecturer. Thus, it is expected that lecturers are loyal and provide themselves to work with high enthusiasm in their work community and have a high sense of trust in the institution where they work. this shows that personality cannot be ignored in a person. The personality of the lecturer will determine how a person can work well. This means that in an institution if someone can feel satisfied at work, a strong self-confidence is needed, so that they can carry out their duties with full responsibility.

Related to this research, the effect of personality on performance is reinforced by the theory put forward by Robbins and Judge, which states that proactive personality is an attitude that tends to be opportunistic, initiative, daring to act, and persevering until it achieves significant changes. It was continued that personality is explaining the factors that determine how a person's individual treatment of an institution such as theological schools so that the goals and objectives contained in this vision and mission are achieved properly.

Based on the analysis and discussion of the influence of transformational leadership, personality, performance on organizational commitment at theological schools in West Java, it can be concluded as follows:

  1. The higher the personality of the lecturer, the higher the results of commitment to the organization, and vice versa, the lower the personality of the lecturer, the lower the results of commitment to the organization.
  2. The greater the work performance, the stronger the results of the Commitment to the Organization, and vice versa, the lower the performance, the lower the results of the Commitment to the Organization.
  3. Personality has a positive direct effect on performance, meaning that empirically a stable personality will be able to improve performance.

Thus, if the organizational commitment of lecturers, personality, and performance is improved properly, it can give an optimal influence and contribution to the progress of  theological schools in West Java.


In behalf of this my purpose resulting, we give an appreciated and thanks so much for Bogor Theology Seminary in Faculty of Theology upon this opportunity who support or processing this education journal accomplished well.


  1. Buchanan, D.A., &amli; Huczynski, A. A. (2019). Organizational behaviour. liearson UK.
  2. Fred, L. (2011). Organizational behavior: an evidence-based aliliroach.
  3. Gibson, J.L., Ivancevich, J.M., &amli; Donnelly, J.H. (2009). Konoliaske R., Organizations, Behavior, Structure, lirocesses.
  4. Greenberg, J., &amli; Baron, R. A. (1995).&nbsli;Behavior in organizations: Understanding and managing the human side of work&nbsli;(Doctoral dissertation, Univerza v Mariboru, Ekonomsko-lioslovna fakulteta).liearson College Division.
  5. Janasz, D. (2006).&nbsli;Interliersonal skills in organisation. Tata McGraw-Hill Education.
  6. Luthans, F., &amli; Avolio, B.J. (2009). The “lioint” of liositive organizational behavior.&nbsli;Journal of Organizational Behavior: The International Journal of Industrial, Occuliational and Organizational lisychology and Behavior,&nbsli;30(2), 291-307.
  7. Mangkunegara,, &amli; lirabu, A. (2005). Manajemen SDM lierusahaan. Bandung: liT Remaja Rosdakarya.
  8. McShane, S., &amli; Von Glinow, M.A. (2010).&nbsli;Organizational behaviour: Emerging knowledge and liractice for the real world. McGraw-Hill/Irwin.
  9. Salami, S.O. (2008). Demogralihic and lisychological factors liredicting organizational commitment among industrial workers.&nbsli;The anthroliologist,&nbsli;10(1), 31-38. liredicting organizational commitment among industrial workers. The Anthroliologist, 10(1), 31-38.
  10. Schermerhorn, J.R., Hunt, J., Osborn, R., &amli; liassmore, J. (2006). Organizational behaviour. Langara College.
  11. Sliector, li.E. (2006). Industrial and organizational lisychology: Research and liractice. John Wiley &amli; Sons Inc.
  12. Tain-fung Wu. (2016). A study of the relationshili between manager’s leadershili style and organizational commitment in Taiwan’s international tourist hotels. Asian Journal of Management and Humanity Sciences 1(3), 434-452.
  13. Tondok, M.S., &amli; Andarika, R. (2004). Hubungan antara lierselisi gaya keliemimliinan transformasional dan transaksional dengan keliuasan kerja karyawan. lisyche, 1(1), 35-48.
  14. Wagner, J.A., &amli; Hollenbeck, J.R. (2020). Organizational behavior: Securing comlietitive advantage. Routledge.
Get the App