Edelweiss Applied Science and Technology ISSN: 2576-8484 Vol. 8, No. 6, 356-373 2024 Publisher: Learning Gate DOI: 10.55214/25768484.v8i6.2080 © 2024 by the authors; licensee Learning Gate © 2024 by the authors; licensee Learning Gate * Correspondence: primadicandrasusanto89@gmail.com Determinations of employee engagement and employee performance at international freight forwarding company Primadi Candra Susanto1*, Ni Nyoman Sawitri2, Hapzi Ali3, Zahara Tussoleha Rony4 1Student Doctoral Universitas Bhayangkara Jakarta Raya, Jakarta, Indonesia; primadicandrasusanto89@gmail.com, 202230151009@msw.ubharajaya.ac.id (P.C.S.) 2,3,4Universitas Bhayangkara Jakarta Raya, Jakarta, Indonesia; sawitrininyoman@dsn.ubharajaya.ac.id (N.N.S.) hapzi@dsn.ubharajaya.ac.id (H.A.) tussoleha@dsn.ubharajaya.ac.id (Z.T.R.). Abstract: Numerous companies have identified five determinations that contribute to low labor productivity in Indonesian freight forwarding companies. It highlights the necessity for comprehensive strategies to enhance employee performance. Therefore, this study investigates the determinations of servant leadership, training, self-efficacy, and discipline on employee performance in freight forwarding companies. The research involved 337 participants, including 164 operational seaport employees, and used purposive sampling. The study used SmartPLS as an analysis tool and conducted tests such as validity, reliability, inner model, outer model, and hypothesis test. The results showed that self-efficacy had no significant determination on employee engagement, discipline had a significant determination, servant leadership significantly impacted employee engagement, and training had a significant determination on performance. Self-efficacy was not significantly influenced by employee engagement and self-efficacy, but was mediated by employee engagement and self-efficacy. Employee engagement and discipline mediated the significant determination of discipline on employee performance, while employee engagement and servant leadership mediated the significant determination of servant leadership on employee performance. The study also found that factors like working conditions, culture, support, career development opportunities, workload, and work-life balance significantly affect employee performance in freight forwarding companies. Training and positive feedback were found to be crucial for self-efficacy development. The findings can help practitioners and organizational management design effective strategies and policies to improve employee engagement and performance. Keywords: Discipline, Employee engagement, Employee performance, Self-efficacy, Servant leadership, Training. 1. Introduction Employee performance is crucial for achieving company goals and is influenced by factors such as leadership, training, self-efficacy, and discipline. In Indonesia and other developing countries, employees feel connected to their work, indicating a problem with employee engagement [1], [2]. Meanwhile, servant leadership can foster a positive workplace culture, increasing staff engagement [3]. In addition, good training contributes to increased engagement, as employees who believe they have the opportunity to learn and develop are more dedicated to the company [4]. Indonesia labor productivity is low compared to other Southeast Asian countries. It highlights the need for a holistic approach to improve employee performance [5]. Self-efficacy, an individual's belief in their ability to achieve goals, is also important for employee success [6], [7]. Work discipline is also crucial, as disciplined employees are more productive and reliable [8], [9]. Understanding these relationships and the role of employee engagement can help companies develop effective policies to improve overall employee performance. 357 Edelweiss Applied Science and Technology ISSN: 2576-8484 Vol. 8, No. 6: 356-373, 2024 DOI: 10.55214/25768484.v8i6.2080 © 2024 by the author; licensee Learning Gate The research methodology for assessing employee performance is intricate because it incorporates elements such as servant leadership, training, self-efficacy, and discipline. Gaining insight into the functions of these variables and their interdependence can be a complex task, and distinguishing individual determination from causes can be a formidable challenge [10], [11]. Addressing these variables in different cultures can also be challenging [12], [13]. Inconsistencies in definitions and measurement tools can compromise the validity and reliability of the results [14]. Single factor approach studies often use common organizations or industries, limiting external validity [15]. Employee engagement, which has a mediating function, complicates the research design by addressing issues of mediation and moderation [16], [17]. Understanding a model that incorporates these variables may require more resources in terms of time, funding, and data collection [18], [19]. It means that properly parsing the variables studied in combination is crucial for meaningful impact. Furthermore, omitting the appropriate research design can mask confounding covariates in the analysis, negatively impacting the study's outcome. Therefore, understanding how employee engagement acts as a mediator is crucial to make claims about causality in mediation. Meanwhile, our pre-research identified several factors contributing to the decline in cargo operational employee performance. These include inadequate servant leadership, inadequate mentoring for loading and unloading goods, and minimal training for operational activity processes in the warehouse and port. The company's handling of goods during loading and unloading, including containers to storage areas and moving goods from containers to box cars, continues to cause damage. Personal protective equipment usage is also insufficient, with employees losing up to 3% of their goods within a month. The attendance recapitulation revealed that 20% of employees arrived at 09.00 instead of 08.00. Operational employees never achieved the 100% target in performance measurement using key performance indicators, with only 85% achieving this. Employee engagement with the company was low, with some employees not providing updates or being absent. Low productivity levels were observed, with daily goals set for completing six documents at customs and excise but only completing four export and import documents. The pre-research findings can serve as a basis for management evaluation to maintain and improve the performance of operational staff in freight forwarding companies. Figure 1. Diagram of causes of performance decline. Source: Survey of 6 freight forwarding companies in DKI Jakarta. 358 Edelweiss Applied Science and Technology ISSN: 2576-8484 Vol. 8, No. 6: 356-373, 2024 DOI: 10.55214/25768484.v8i6.2080 © 2024 by the author; licensee Learning Gate This study bases its development of dominant causes that influence the low performance of operational employees in freight forwarding companies on the five factors mentioned above. The researcher conducted interviews with 105 representative operational employee respondents from freight forwarding companies in DKI Jakarta to determine the dominant factors felt when carrying out tasks that have an impact on employee performance. The interview results showed that a decline in performance was caused by 5 factors, including: (1) As many as 46 people, or 43.8% of respondents, stated that servant leadership influenced the performance of operational employees. (2) As many as 5 people, or 4.76% of respondents, stated that training influenced the performance of operational employees. (3) As many as 16 people, or 15.23% of respondents, stated that self-efficacy influenced the performance of operational employees. (4) As many as nine people, or 8.57% of respondents, stated that discipline influenced the performance of operational employees. (5) As many as 29 people, or 27.61% of respondents, stated that employee engagement influenced the performance of operational employees. Leaders rarely provide direction before starting work activities; a percentage of 43.8% of respondents stated that servant leadership influenced employee performance. Low concern and service from superiors to subordinates results in low motivation and suboptimal work productivity. The company does not run continuous training programs for operational employees; 4.76% of respondents stated that training affects employee performance. Low knowledge or work skills hinder timely completion of work processes and lead to mistakes in task execution. We found that operational employees struggled to complete tasks quickly and correctly, and 15.23% of respondents stated that low self-efficacy negatively impacts employee performance. Low self-efficacy in employees can lead to performance that falls short of company expectations. Employees are not present on time according to the company's regulations; a percentage of respondents (8.57%) stated that discipline affects employee performance. Employees' unwillingness to adhere to company regulations indicates a low level of discipline, leading to disruptions in operational activities and performance. Many employees do not want to support the company's development program; 27.61% of respondents stated that employee engagement affects employee performance. Employees who fail to foster employee engagement at work often fail to maximize their contributions, leading to disruptions in the company's operational activities and performance. The results of the previously described questionnaire recapitulation align with the low operational performance phenomenon in freight forwarding companies. This aligns with the factors that influence operational performance in freight forwarding companies, which have had an impact on the decline in operational employee performance over the last few years. The relationship between employee engagement, leadership, training, individual capabilities, discipline, and performance is complex and requires longitudinal study designs. Understanding this relationship is crucial for improving organizational management systems and addressing leadership issues [20]–[22]. Therefore, this study aims to address the research gap in previous studies that show that empowering employees cannot improve performance. Previous studies explore the impact of servant leadership on various sectors, including the hospitality industry [23], [24], community health care centers [25], [26], banking sector [27], and customer service orientation [28], [29]. Therefore, this study also investigates the role of job crafting, training, motivation, self-efficacy, conscientiousness, and organizational citizenship behavior. It concludes that servant leadership can positively influence employee engagement and performance in various industries. A study has found that self-efficacy does not significantly impact employee performance or engagement in freight forwarding companies. Despite employees feeling confident in their abilities, this belief does not necessarily lead to increased or decreased work performance [30]. Factors such as working conditions [31], culture [32], support from superiors and coworkers [33], career development opportunities [34], play a more significant role. The self-efficacy variable does not significantly affect employee performance when mediated by employee engagement. The findings suggest that while efforts to improve employee performance without using the self-efficacy variable can be applied, it is not significant in other industries. The study's findings can provide new insights for 359 Edelweiss Applied Science and Technology ISSN: 2576-8484 Vol. 8, No. 6: 356-373, 2024 DOI: 10.55214/25768484.v8i6.2080 © 2024 by the author; licensee Learning Gate further research by combining indicators from various theories, such as servant leadership, training, self-efficacy, discipline, employee engagement, and performance. This combination can produce new perspectives in the context of freight forwarding companies and provide a strong basis for further studies in human resources. From reviewing some previous studied, this study has found that servant leadership, training, and discipline have an impact on employee engagement and performance. The research model aligns with the research rules aimed at improving operational employee performance at freight forwarding companies in DKI Jakarta. The management can improve servant leadership, training, and discipline to implement employee engagement programs effectively. The findings can serve as a reference for other researchers, as it combines variables that have not been widely studied in the same context. For instance, the combination of servant leadership, coaching, self-efficacy, discipline, and employee engagement in one study could be considered a novel approach in the research approach. 2. Material and Method To achieve the aims of this study, a quantitative descriptive approach was implemented in this investigation. A sample of 164 operational employees of the seaport was used to represent the population of 337 individuals in this study. Purposive sampling was implemented. The primary data utilized in this study was sourced from six freight forwarding companies in DKI Jakarta. SmartPLS is one of the analysis tools employed in this investigation. This investigation implements the Validity Test, Reliability Test, Inner Model, Outer Model, and Hypothesis Test. 3. Data Analysis The study investigates the impact of servant leadership, training, self-efficacy, and discipline on employee performance in DKI Jakarta freight forwarding companies. It reveals that these factors significantly influence employee engagement and performance. Self-efficacy doesn't significantly affect performance, but factors like working conditions, culture, support, career development opportunities, reward systems, workload, and work-life balance play a more significant role. The study suggests a holistic approach to improving employee performance, including servant leadership, training, self- efficacy, and discipline, can help companies develop effective policies. The research used a quantitative descriptive approach, involving 337 operational seaport employees from six companies in DKI Jakarta. 3.1. Data Analysis If the correlation coefficient > 1 or = 1, then the validity measure is considered high. In Table 1, below are the results of the outer model convergent validity test (Tahir et al., 2023). Table 1 presents the results of the convergent validity analysis. Table 1. Convergent validity analysis. Self- efficacy Discipline Servant leadership Employee engagement Employee performance Training X1.01 0.705 X1.02 0.770 X1.03 0.764 X1.04 0.762 X1.05 0.770 X1.06 0.763 X1.08 0.807 X1.09 0.784 X1.10 0.734 X2.01 0.755 360 Edelweiss Applied Science and Technology ISSN: 2576-8484 Vol. 8, No. 6: 356-373, 2024 DOI: 10.55214/25768484.v8i6.2080 © 2024 by the author; licensee Learning Gate X2.02 0.778 X2.03 0.751 X2.04 0.756 X2.05 0.741 X2.06 0.756 X2.07 0.775 X2.08 0.744 X2.09 0.741 X2.10 0.709 X3.01 0.803 X3.02 0.825 X3.03 0.719 X3.04 0.747 X3.05 0.732 X3.06 0.776 X3.07 0.757 X3.08 0.793 X3.09 0.797 X3.10 0.772 X4.02 0.752 X4.03 0.737 X4.04 0.763 X4.05 0.790 X4.06 0.758 X4.07 0.722 X4.08 0.735 X4.09 0.715 X4.10 0.773 Y1.02 0.730 Y1.03 0.736 Y1.04 0.743 Y1.05 0.716 Y1.06 0.752 Y1.07 0.739 Y1.08 0.731 Y1.09 0.755 Y1.10 0.784 Y2.01 0.756 Y2.02 0.749 Y2.03 0.764 Y2.04 0.754 Y2.05 0.714 Y2.06 0.792 Y2.07 0.777 Y2.08 0.718 Y2.09 0.740 Y2.10 0.702 361 Edelweiss Applied Science and Technology ISSN: 2576-8484 Vol. 8, No. 6: 356-373, 2024 DOI: 10.55214/25768484.v8i6.2080 © 2024 by the author; licensee Learning Gate Table 1 shows that the study's variables are considered valid as each indicator has a loading factor value > 0.60. It indicates that they meet the research requirements. Meanwhile, latent variables can explain on average more than half of the variance of their indicators. Table 2 presents the results of the AVE analysis. Table 2. AVE analysis. Variable Average variance extracted (AVE) Servant leadership 0.582 Training 0.564 Self-efficacy 0.597 Discipline 0.562 Employee engagement 0.552 Employee performance 0.558 Table 2 shows that the servant leadership variable, training, self-efficacy, discipline, employee engagement, and performance all have an AVE value of over 0.5. It indicates good discriminant validity. Furthermore, a reliability test is intended to measure how relevant and consistent a respondent is in answering or filling out the questionnaire, related to the questionnaire given. Table 3 presents the results of the composite reliability analysis. Table 3. Composite reliability analysis. Variable Composite reliability Servant leadership 0.926 Training 0.928 Self-efficacy 0.937 Discipline 0.920 Employee engagement 0.917 Employee performance 0.927 Table 3 shows that the composite reliability values of servant leadership, training, self-efficacy, discipline, employee engagement, and performance are all greater than 0.7. It indicates that all variables are declared reliable, with the overall value of each variable being greater than 0.7. It means that all variables are considered reliable. Reliability testing with composite reliability can be strengthened with Cronbach's alpha. The variable assessment criteria if the Cronbach's alpha value of each variable is > 0.7, then it can be declared reliable (Santosa, 2018). Table 4 presents the results of the Cronbach's Alpha analysis. Table 4. Cronbach's alpha analysis. Variable Cronbach’s alpha Servant leadership 0.910 Training 0.914 Self-efficacy 0.925 Discipline 0.903 Employee engagement 0.899 Employee performance 0.912 362 Edelweiss Applied Science and Technology ISSN: 2576-8484 Vol. 8, No. 6: 356-373, 2024 DOI: 10.55214/25768484.v8i6.2080 © 2024 by the author; licensee Learning Gate Table 4 shows that the cronbach's alpha values for servant leadership, training, self-efficacy, discipline, employee engagement, and performance are all greater than 0.7. It indicates that all variables are considered reliable, as they are greater than 0.7. It means that all variables are considered reliable. Meanwhile, this structural model test aims to see the relationship or influence between constructs, significant values and R Square. Figure 1 presents the results of the inner model output. Figure 2. Inner model output. Output path coefficients and indirect determinations are employed in the hypothesis testing. The objective of this bootstrapping test is to reduce the presence of abnormality in the research data. Table 5 presents the results of the bootstrapping test. Table 5. Hypothesis test results. Hypothesis Original sample (O) Sample mean (M) Standard deviation (STDEV) T statistics (|O/STDEV|) P values Self-Efficacy -> Employee engagement -0.023 -0.028 0.042 0.542 0.588 Self-Efficacy -> Employee performance 0.056 0.060 0.037 1.510 0.132 Discipline -> Employee 0.293 0.294 0.055 5.344 0.000 363 Edelweiss Applied Science and Technology ISSN: 2576-8484 Vol. 8, No. 6: 356-373, 2024 DOI: 10.55214/25768484.v8i6.2080 © 2024 by the author; licensee Learning Gate engagement Discipline -> Employee performance 0.277 0.279 0.048 5.815 0.000 Servant Leadership -> Employee engagement 0.366 0.373 0.058 6.258 0.000 Servant Leadership -> Employee performance 0.278 0.275 0.054 5.164 0.000 Employee Engagement -> Employee performance 0.344 0.347 0.081 4.269 0.000 Training -> Employee engagement 0.467 0.464 0.056 8.325 0.000 Training -> Employee performance 0.151 0.146 0.052 2.908 0.004 Self-efficacy -> Employee engagement -> Employee performance -0.008 -0.009 0.015 0.524 0.601 Discipline -> Employee engagement -> Employee performance 0.101 0.101 0.026 3.854 0.000 Servant leadership -> Employee engagement -> Employee performance 0.126 0.130 0.040 3.185 0.002 Training -> Employee engagement -> Employee performance 0.160 0.162 0.045 3.559 0.000 With regard to Structural Equation Modeling (SEM), the output path coefficients and indirect determinations serve as such test hypotheses in terms of how strong and the direction of the relationships amongst the variables. Their function is to establish the existence or the lack thereof of the basic postulates, hence confirming or denying the given hypotheses. Additionally, they help to assess the model by showing how relationships change, and what moderating factors may be present. After examining the results, reasonable conclusions and consequences can be reached. We have summarized the interpretation of the analysis results. 3.1.1. Self-Efficacy (SE) on Employee Engagement (EE) The first hypothesis test results indicate that self-efficacy does not have a significant determination on employee engagement in freight forwarder companies in DKI Jakarta. The path coefficient was - 0.023, with a T statistic value of 0.542 and a P Values value of 0.588. This value is smaller than the t table value (1.974) and greater than the P Values value (>0.05). It indicates that self-efficacy has no determination and is not significant. 3.1.2. Self-Efficacy (SE) on Employee Performance (EP) The second hypothesis test results indicate that self-efficacy does not significantly impact employee performance in freight forwarder companies in DKI Jakarta. The path coefficient was 0.056, with a T statistic value of 1.510 and a P Values value of 0.132. This value is smaller than the t table value (1.974) and greater than the P Values value (>) 0.05, indicating that self-efficacy has no determination and is not significant. 364 Edelweiss Applied Science and Technology ISSN: 2576-8484 Vol. 8, No. 6: 356-373, 2024 DOI: 10.55214/25768484.v8i6.2080 © 2024 by the author; licensee Learning Gate 3.1.3. Discipline (D) on Employee Engagement (EE) The third hypothesis test results indicate that discipline has a significant determination on employee engagement in freight forwarder companies in DKI Jakarta. The path coefficient was 0.293, with a T statistic value of 5.344 and a P Values value of 0.000, which is greater than the t table value (1.974) and smaller than the P Values value (>) 0.05. It indicates its significant determination. 3.1.4. Discipline (D) on Employee Performance (EP) The fourth hypothesis test results indicate that discipline has a significant determination on employee performance in freight forwarder companies in DKI Jakarta. The path coefficient was 0.277, with a T statistic value of 5.815 and a P Values value of 0.000, which is greater than the t table value (1.974) and smaller than the P Values value (>) 0.05. It indicates its significant determination. 3.1.5. Servant Leadership (SL) on Employee Engagement (EE) The fifth hypothesis test results indicate that servant leadership significantly influences employee engagement in freight forwarder companies in DKI Jakarta. The path coefficient was 0.366, with a T statistic value of 6.258 and a P Values value of 0.000, which is greater than the t table value (1.974) and smaller than the P Values value (>) 0.05. It indicates its influence and significance. 3.1.6. Servant Leadership (SL) on Employee Performance (EP) The sixth hypothesis test indicates that servant leadership has a significant determination on employee performance in freight forwarder companies in DKI Jakarta. The path coefficient was 0.278, with a T statistic value of 5.164 and a P Values value of 0.000, which is greater than the t table value (1.974) and smaller than the P Values value (>) 0.05, indicating its significant determination. 3.1.7. Employee Engagement (EE) on Employee Performance (EP) The seventh hypothesis test results indicate that employee engagement has a significant determination on employee performance in freight forwarder companies in DKI Jakarta. The path coefficient was 0.344, with a T statistic value of 4.269 and a P Values value of 0.000, which is greater than the t table value (1.974) and smaller than the P Values value (>) 0.05. It indicates a significant determination. 3.1.8. Training (T) on Employee Engagement (EE) The eighth hypothesis test results indicate that training has a significant determination on employee engagement in freight forwarder companies in DKI Jakarta. The path coefficient was 0.467, with a T statistic value of 8.325 and a P Values value of 0.000, which is greater than the t table value (1.974) and smaller than the P Values value (>) 0.05, indicating its significant determination. 3.1.9. Training (T) on Employee Performance (EP) The ninth hypothesis test results indicate that training has a significant determination on employee performance in freight forwarder companies in DKI Jakarta. The path coefficient was 0.151, with a T statistic value of 2.908 and a P Values value of 0.004, which is greater than the t table value (1.974) and smaller than the P Values value (>) 0.05. It indicates its significant determination. 3.1.10. Self-Efficacy (SE) on Employee Performance (EP) mediated by Employee Engagement (EE) The tenth hypothesis test results indicate that self-efficacy does not have a significant determination on employee performance, as it is mediated by employee engagement. The path coefficient was -0.008, with a T statistic value of 0.524 and a P Values value of 0.601. This value is smaller than the t table value (1.974) and greater than 0.05. It indicates that self-efficacy has no determination and is not significant in the context of freight forwarder companies. 365 Edelweiss Applied Science and Technology ISSN: 2576-8484 Vol. 8, No. 6: 356-373, 2024 DOI: 10.55214/25768484.v8i6.2080 © 2024 by the author; licensee Learning Gate 3.1.11. Discipline (D) on Employee Performance (EP) mediated by Employee Engagement (EE) The eleventh hypothesis test reveals that discipline has a significant determination on employee performance, with employee engagement acting as a mediating variable. The path coefficient was 0.101, with a T statistic value of 3.854 and a P Values value of 0.000. This value is greater than the t table value (1.974) and smaller than the P Values value (>) 0.05, indicating that discipline has a significant determination on employee performance in freight forwarder companies. 3.1.12. Servant Leadership (SL) on Employee Performance (EP) mediated by Employee Engagement (EE) The twelfth hypothesis test reveals that servant leadership has a significant determination on employee performance, with employee engagement acting as a mediating variable. The path coefficient was 0.126, with a T statistic value of 3.185 and a P Value value of 0.002, which is greater than the t table value (1.974) and smaller than 0.05. Therefore, servant leadership has a significant determination on employee performance in freight forwarder companies. 3.1.13. Training (T) on Employee Performance (EP) mediated by Employee Engagement (EE) The thirteenth hypothesis test reveals that training has a significant determination on employee performance, with employee engagement acting as a mediating variable. The path coefficient was 0.160, with a T statistic value of 3.559 and a P Values value of 0.000. This value is greater than the t table value (1.974) and smaller than the P Values value (>) 0.05, indicating that training has a significant determination on employee performance in DKI Jakarta freight forwarder companies. 4. Discussion 4.1. Self-Efficacy (SE) on Employee Engagement (EE) Self-efficacy refers to an individual's belief in their capacity to achieve a particular goal. In an organizational setting, self-efficacy is essential to increasing employee engagement. According to Albrecht and Marty (2020), people with high levels of self-efficacy are more engaged with their work and feel more connected to the business. This study examines the relationship between employee engagement and self-efficacy in freight forwarder companies in DKI Jakarta. The results show that self- efficacy does not have a significant determination on employee engagement, with a path coefficient of - 0.023. The study suggests that organizational culture, leadership styles, job design elements, and employee traits can influence engagement. It means that self-efficacy plays a crucial role in employee responses to work-related issues and pressures, with high levels leading to increased engagement and connection to work, while low levels can result in disengagement and depression. The results suggest that companies should provide positive feedback and learning opportunities to foster self-efficacy development. Saks (2022) found that employees who believe in their abilities are more motivated to actively contribute to their tasks, which increases their engagement with the organization [4]. According to data from a survey by Na-Nan et al. (2021), organizations with high self-efficacy have higher levels of employee engagement, reaching 70% compared to 30% in companies with low self-efficacy [36]. This shows that self-efficacy not only affects how employees view themselves but also how they interact with their work environment. For example, employees who participated in a self-development program reported a significant increase in self-efficacy, which led to increased engagement with the company [37]. 4.2. Self-Efficacy (SE) on Employee Performance (EP) This study examines the relationship between self-efficacy and employee performance at Freight Forwarder Companies in DKI Jakarta. The results show that self-efficacy does not have a significant determination on employee performance, with a path coefficient of 0.056, a T statistic value of 1.510, and a P Values value of 0.132. This indicates that self-efficacy has no determination and is not significant. Employees with clear goals and confidence in their ability to achieve them tend to put in more effort to reach peak performance. It means that self-efficacy is a crucial factor affecting employees in the 366 Edelweiss Applied Science and Technology ISSN: 2576-8484 Vol. 8, No. 6: 356-373, 2024 DOI: 10.55214/25768484.v8i6.2080 © 2024 by the author; licensee Learning Gate workplace, leading to increased assurance, inner drive, and a positive view of completing tasks. It also influences employees' ability to deal with defeats, failures, and difficult situations, allowing them to respond quickly to disruptions and adjust to workplace changes. Self-efficacy-enabled individuals aim for positive goals, focus, and perseverance, resulting in higher performance levels. In line with this study, some previous studies show that self-efficacy has a significant determination on employee performance. Employees who feel confident in their capacity to perform tasks are more productive and efficient [38]. Na-Nan and Sanamthong (2020) found that self-efficacy can increase employee performance [39]. This correlates with heightened internal motivation and the capacity to surmount workplace challenges. A real-world example is a technology company that created a mentoring program to help new employees improve their self-efficacy. Employees who received help and direction from mentors outperformed those who did not. In this situation, mentors act as self-efficacy boosters, helping employees feel more confident in their ability to complete tasks. Thus, investing in self-efficacy development programs can result in significant improvements in employee performance. Furthermore, self-efficacy helps people make better decisions. Confident decision-makers are more likely to take initiative and embrace responsibility for their work. Hirschi and Spurk (2021) found that increased self- efficacy is associated with more ambitious goals and higher success [40]. 4.3. Discipline (D) on Employee Engagement (EE) The results of this study reveals that discipline have a significant effect on employee engagement in DKI Jakarta's Freight Forwarder Companies. The path coefficient was 0.293, with a T statistic value of 5.344 and a P Values value of 0.000. It indicates its significant effect. It means that discipline helps organizations achieve their goals by fostering a culture of responsibility, defined standards, justice, and equity. Therefore, disciplined employees are more focused and consistent, improving team performance. In addition, companies that establish a reward system for good discipline often see increased engagement. Discipline is not just about compliance; it also promotes a happy and productive work environment. It helps manage deviant behavior, supports performance improvement systems, and promotes organizational principles. This results in a loyal and effective workforce, achieving their mission in a safe and respectful environment, leading to increased productivity and overall success. Discipline is an important aspect in determining employee engagement. Disciplined employees have a more positive attitude towards their work and organization. Otaye-Ebede et al. (2016) found that discipline can increase employee affective engagement, which is when employees feel emotionally attached to their company. Discipline forms routines and procedures that make people more comfortable and engaged in their work [41]. A survey conducted by SHRM (Society for Human Resource Management) found that companies with a strong culture of discipline have better employee engagement levels. Disciplined employees feel appreciated and recognized for their achievements, which increases their sense of belonging to the company. 4.4. Discipline Effect on Employee Performance The results of this study indicate that discipline has a significant effect on employee performance in freight forwarder companies in DKI Jakarta. The path coefficient was 0.277, with a T statistic value of 5.815 and a P Values value of 0.000, which is greater than the t table value (1.974) and smaller than the P Values value (>) 0.05. It indicates its significant effect. It means that discipline can have a particular effect on how employees behave, their output, and performance results. It provides guidelines, builds up consequences, helps to improve performance, and enhances concentration, work results, and management of time. Fair and reasonable implementation of discipline-based policies nurtures the environment and builds the continuous need for improvement without interruptions. Organizations that emphasize on implementing effective discipline practices, encourage high standards of care, professional conduct along with an ethic of performance which leads to a more effective organization and its individuals. 367 Edelweiss Applied Science and Technology ISSN: 2576-8484 Vol. 8, No. 6: 356-373, 2024 DOI: 10.55214/25768484.v8i6.2080 © 2024 by the author; licensee Learning Gate Discipline has a significant effect on employee performance. Disciplined employees tend to complete tasks on time and meet set work standards. Otaye-Ebede et al. (2016) found that highly disciplined employees outperformed their less disciplined co-workers [41]. This shows that discipline can be a key performance indicator in an organization. A real example is PT Keihin Indonesia, a manufacturing company that uses a strict monitoring system to enforce staff discipline. As a result, the company's productivity increased by 20% within six months. Disciplined staff not only complete their responsibilities properly but also help improve overall operational efficiency. This shows that discipline can be an important motivator in achieving organizational goals. In addition, discipline affects employee skill development. Disciplined employees are more likely to continue learning and developing their skills, which benefits their performance. 4.5. Servant Leadership Effect on Employee Engagement The results of this study reveal that servant leadership significantly influences employee engagement in DKI Jakarta's freight forwarder companies. The path coefficient was 0.366, with a T statistic value of 6.258 and a P value of 0.000, indicating its significance. It means that servant leadership improves interaction between leaders and staff, encouraging open communication and sharing ideas. It fosters a collaborative and innovative work environment, increasing employee engagement. Leaders should focus on developing trusting relationships with their teams and providing clear vision and purpose to employees. This approach encourages trust, psychological safety, and community sense within the workplace. Managers provide opportunities for learning and development, motivating purpose, communication, and a quickening pace. This approach enhances employee commitment, productivity, and organizational effectiveness. Servant leadership is a leadership style that prioritizes the needs of employees before the leader's personal interests. Servant leaders tend to listen, support, and empower their people, thereby increasing their engagement with the organization. Canavesi and Minelli (2022) found that servant leadership can foster a healthy work atmosphere where employees feel valued and respected [3]. In addition, companies with leaders who practice servant leadership have better employee engagement rates. People are more engaged and dedicated when they think their bosses care about them. Servant leaders can encourage employees to work towards common goals, increasing their sense of belonging and loyalty to the company. Saleem et al. (2020) found that servant leadership helps increase employee affective engagement, which improves their performance [12]. 4.6. Servant Leadership Effect on Employee Performance The study reveals that servant leadership has a significant effect on employee performance in freight forwarder companies in DKI Jakarta. The path coefficient was 0.278, with a T statistic value of 5.164 and a P value of 0.000. It indicates that it has a significant effect. According to the study, leaders can improve team motivation and performance by cultivating an organizational culture that encourages and empowers people. It suggests that investing in servant leadership benefits both people and the organization's long-term performance. In line with this research, a previous study shows that servant leadership is a leadership style that puts the needs of team members before the leader's own interests. Robert K. Greenleaf popularized the concept in the 1970s. In an organizational context, servant leadership focuses on employee growth and well-being, which can lead to improved performance. Servant leadership is a concept that fosters a healthy work environment where employees feel valued and motivated to perform at their best. Two previous studies [40], [42] shows that leaders who implement servant leadership have more engaged and satisfied staff, which is directly proportional to increased productivity and performance. Additionally, servant leadership encourages the development of employee interpersonal skills, making employees feel more comfortable speaking up and exchanging ideas. However, not all leaders are able to effectively implement servant leadership, as leaders must have a high level of self-awareness and empathy to understand and meet employee needs. Without this 368 Edelweiss Applied Science and Technology ISSN: 2576-8484 Vol. 8, No. 6: 356-373, 2024 DOI: 10.55214/25768484.v8i6.2080 © 2024 by the author; licensee Learning Gate ability, servant leadership may be perceived as fake, damaging the relationship between leaders and employees. 4.7. Employee Engagement Effect on Employee Performance The study reveals that employee engagement has a significant effect on performance in freight forwarder companies in DKI Jakarta. The path coefficient was 0.344, with a T statistic value of 4.269 and a P value of 0.000. This indicates a significant effect, suggesting that organizations can improve productivity, job happiness, and employee retention by fostering a culture that supports engagement. To achieve optimal performance, management must understand and implement ways to improve employee engagement. Employee engagement is a condition where people feel emotionally connected and dedicated to their workplace. High levels of engagement are 21% more productive than low engagement, demonstrating that employee engagement is not just a theoretical concept but also a practical effect on company performance. Engaged employees demonstrate higher levels of motivation, leading to improved individual performance. Alagarsamy et al. (2020) and Quek et al. (2021) discovered a positive correlation between employee engagement and job satisfaction, subsequently leading to enhanced performance [43], [44]. Furthermore, employee engagement has a significant effect on employee retention. Employees who feel connected to the organization are more likely to stay and contribute to the company’s goals. According to Fulmore et al. (2023), companies with high levels of engagement have lower employee turnover rates, which can help save money on hiring and training new staff [45]. However, it is important to realize that employee engagement does not happen by chance. Organizations must foster a supportive environment where employees feel valued and have the opportunity to grow. This involves open communication, recognition for accomplishments, and the possibility of decision-making [20]. Employees who do not make a continuous effort to improve engagement may feel alienated and less inspired to give their best. 4.8. Training Effect on Employee Engagement The study reveals that training has a significant effect on employee engagement in freight forwarder companies in DKI Jakarta. The path coefficient was 0.467, with a T statistic value of 8.325 and a P Values value of 0.000, indicating its significant effect. Training can improve employee engagement by providing learning and development opportunities, leading to improved performance. Therefore, investing in a successful training program is a strategic decision for every company. It means that training is an important aspect of increasing employee engagement. Furthermore, employees can improve their performance by developing the skills and knowledge needed for their jobs. Effective training can increase employee confidence and make them feel more engaged in their work. This helps increase employee engagement with the organization. Training is also a way for organizations to invest in their staff. When employees believe that the company is investing in their growth, they feel more valued and engaged with the organization. Saks (2022) found that employees who participate in relevant training programs are more engaged in their work and loyal to the organization [4]. Companies like Starbucks provide comprehensive training programs to their staff, which encourages engagement and job happiness. Furthermore, proper training can help employees understand the company's vision and goals. When employees understand the goals of the organization, they are more likely to feel connected and dedicated to achieving them. It can also help eliminate uncertainty and confusion, which are common barriers to employee engagement [46]. However, not all training programs produce identical results. Employees may feel bored and dissatisfied with training that is irrelevant or does not suit their needs. Therefore, companies need to design training programs that align with the needs and expectations of their employees. 369 Edelweiss Applied Science and Technology ISSN: 2576-8484 Vol. 8, No. 6: 356-373, 2024 DOI: 10.55214/25768484.v8i6.2080 © 2024 by the author; licensee Learning Gate 4.9. Training Effect on Employee Performance Training is crucial for employees to adapt to changing corporate environments and stay competitive. Companies like Microsoft often provide training to keep their employees updated with technological advancements. However, it must be organized and systematic to yield optimal results. Well-designed training combined with appropriate assistance can lead to significant performance improvements. Companies should tailor their training programs to individual employee needs and organizational goals. This study found that training has a significant effect on employee performance in freight forwarder companies in DKI Jakarta, with a path coefficient of 0.151. It indicates that training significantly improves employee capabilities and contributes to the achievement of company goals. Investing in good training is a strategic move that can enhance employee performance and company success. Therefore, companies must ensure their training programs are tailored to individual needs and organizational goals. Training is one of the most important parts of human resource development because it directly affects employee performance. Employees who receive good training can acquire new skills and knowledge that will increase their ability to complete tasks. According to research, good training can increase staff productivity [11]. This explains why many companies view training as an important investment. The hospitality business provides a real picture of how training affects employee performance. Hotels that implemented comprehensive training programs for frontline employees experienced significant increases in customer satisfaction and financial success [47]. This shows that training not only improves technical skills but also helps provide a better customer experience. 4.10. Self-Efficacy Effect on Employee Performance mediated by Employee Engagement Self-efficacy is a crucial factor in employee performance, and it cannot be developed overnight. Organizations should create a supportive environment where employees feel comfortable trying new things and learning from failure. Successful experiences, social support, and good feedback can increase self-efficacy. A culture that encourages employee participation can also boost self-efficacy. However, the results of this study show that self-efficacy does not have a significant effect on employee performance, as it is mediated by employee engagement. This suggests that self-efficacy has a significant effect on employee performance, and employee engagement serves as a mediator. To improve employee self- efficacy and performance, organizations should provide a supportive and empowering atmosphere. Management must understand the importance of self-efficacy and engagement in relation to employee performance. Self-efficacy is an individual's belief in their ability to complete tasks and achieve goals. Albert Bandura's self-efficacy theory suggests that individuals with high self-efficacy are better at handling problems and performing better. Research shows that self-efficacy is positively related to employee performance, with employee engagement acting as a mediator [29]. Employees with strong self-efficacy are more confident in their work, take initiative, and contribute constructively to the team. Employee engagement is essential for building self-efficacy, as employees who feel connected to the organization feel supported and respected, increasing their confidence in their talents. Companies that organize mentoring programs can increase employee self-efficacy, leading to increased performance. Employees who feel supported and confident in their talents are more actively involved in the workplace. 4.11. Discipline Effect on Employee Performance mediated by Employee Engagement Discipline is crucial for employee performance in organizations, and effective human resource management strategies can enhance it. Employee engagement serves as a mediator in this relationship, with a path coefficient of 0.101, indicating a significant effect on performance. The results of this study found that discipline has a significant effect on employee performance in freight forwarder companies, with employee engagement acting as a mediator. Therefore, to achieve company goals, the management must understand and implement steps that improve employee discipline and engagement. Establishing clear norms, providing positive feedback, and implementing good human resource management 370 Edelweiss Applied Science and Technology ISSN: 2576-8484 Vol. 8, No. 6: 356-373, 2024 DOI: 10.55214/25768484.v8i6.2080 © 2024 by the author; licensee Learning Gate strategies can help create a disciplined and engaged workplace, ultimately improving overall employee performance. Discipline is an important aspect in determining employee performance. Disciplined employees are more structured in carrying out their duties and responsibilities, which leads to increased production. Research indicates a positive relationship between discipline and employee performance, with employee engagement serving as a mediating factor in this relationship. Employees who feel attached to the organization are more disciplined in carrying out their responsibilities. This attachment instills a sense of responsibility and dedication to organizational goals. Otaye-Ebede et al. (2016) found that individuals with strong emotional ties to the organization are more likely to engage in disciplined behavior [41]. This implies that employee engagement can improve discipline, which leads to improved performance. Companies that have implemented a compensation system for disciplined employees provide a real- world example. Employees who receive recognition for their discipline are more likely to feel appreciated and inspired to continue the behavior. Mihardjo et al. (2021) found that rewards and recognition can improve employee engagement, which leads to better discipline and performance [48]. 4.12. Servant Leadership Effect on Employee Performance mediated by Employee Engagement Servant leadership is a crucial skill for leaders, as it requires strong interpersonal skills and understanding of staff needs. Inauthentic leaders can damage relationships, leading to low engagement and poor performance. A study by Saleem et al. (2020) found that servant leadership has a significant effect on employee performance, with employee engagement acting as a mediator [12]. Meanwhile, the hypothesis test results of this study reveal that servant leadership has a significant effect on employee performance, with employee engagement acting as a mediating variable. The path coefficient was 0.126, with a T statistic value of 3.185 and a P Value value of 0.002. It indicates its significant effect on freight forwarder companies. Leaders can improve team engagement and performance by creating a supportive and empowering atmosphere. Investing in developing servant leadership qualities is a strategic decision for every company. Servant leadership strongly influences employee performance, with employee engagement acting as a mediator in this relationship. Leaders who follow the concept of servant leadership tend to foster an environment that encourages employee engagement. When employees feel encouraged and respected by their leaders, they are more likely to actively participate in their work, which improves performance [3]. Zeeshan et al. (2021) discovered a positive correlation between servant leadership and employee engagement [27] Zeeshan et al. (2021). Employees led by servant leaders feel more connected to the organization and are inspired to perform to the best of their ability. This implies that servant leadership can increase staff engagement, leading to improved performance. Companies that implement servant leadership provide a real-world example. 4.13. Training Effect on Employee Performance mediated by Employee Engagement Training should be aligned with employee requirements and company goals to prevent boredom and dissatisfaction. Companies should provide appropriate training programs and constructive feedback to employees. The results of this study reveal that training has a significant effect on employee performance, with employee engagement acting as a mediator. The path coefficient was 0.160, with a T statistic value of 3.559 and a P Values value of 0.000. This value is greater than the t table value (1.974) and smaller than the P Values value (>) 0.05. Organizations can improve employee engagement and performance by providing learning and development opportunities. Investing in a successful training program is a strategic decision for every company. Training has a significant effect on employee performance, and employee engagement can act as a bridge in this relationship. When employees receive relevant and effective training, they not only learn new skills but also become more engaged in their work. According to research, effective training can increase employee engagement, which leads to better performance [4]. Invested employees are more likely to apply the skills they have acquired during training. They believe that the organization's 371 Edelweiss Applied Science and Technology ISSN: 2576-8484 Vol. 8, No. 6: 356-373, 2024 DOI: 10.55214/25768484.v8i6.2080 © 2024 by the author; licensee Learning Gate commitment to their growth is a form of recognition and support. Engaged employees are more likely to apply their learned skills, leading to higher performance [1]. Companies that adopt ongoing training programs provide a concrete example. Employees at companies like IBM have the option to receive frequent training, which not only improves their skills but also increases their engagement with the organization. 5. Conclusion The study examines the correlation between employee engagement, leadership, training, self- efficacy, and performance in various industries. It reveals that self-efficacy doesn't significantly affect performance in freight forwarding companies, but factors like working conditions, culture, support from superiors, career development opportunities, reward and recognition systems, workload, and balance between work and personal life play a more significant role. Self-efficacy can increase performance by up to 38%, and investing in self-efficacy development programs can lead to significant improvements. Discipline fosters a culture of responsibility, defined standards, justice, and equity, contributing to a more productive work environment. Servant leadership improves interaction between leaders and staff, encourages open communication, and fosters a collaborative and innovative work environment. High levels of engagement are 21% more productive than low engagement, leading to improved individual performance and job satisfaction. Training has a significant effect on employee engagement in DKI Jakarta's freight forwarder companies, providing learning and development opportunities, and acting as a mediator. Companies adopting ongoing training programs can increase job satisfaction and engagement, highlighting the importance of these factors in enhancing employee performance. This study has limitations that must be addressed in future research. The research posits that in order to promote the development of self-efficacy, it is imperative that companies offer positive feedback and learning opportunities, as it is a critical factor in employees' responses to work-related issues. Employees who possess a clear sense of purpose and are confident in their capacity to accomplish them are more likely to exert themselves in order to achieve their optimal performance. Employees' capacity to adapt to workplace changes and respond promptly to disruptions is influenced by their self-efficacy, which enables them to manage difficult situations, failures, and defeats. It also underscores the necessity for organizations to cultivate a supportive environment in which employees feel appreciated and have the chance to develop. The research also indicates that employee performance is not significantly influenced by self-efficacy, as it is mediated by employee engagement. Organizations should establish an environment that is both supportive and empowering in order to enhance employee self-efficacy and performance. Copyright: © 2024 by the authors. This article is an open access article distributed under the terms and conditions of the Creative Commons Attribution (CC BY) license (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/). References [1] C. A. Barreiro and L. Treglown, “What makes an engaged employee? A facet-level approach to trait emotional intelligence as a predictor of employee engagement,” Pers. Individ. Dif., vol. 159, p. 109892, 2020, doi: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.paid.2020.109892. [2] V. G. Rahmadani and W. B. Schaufeli, “Engaging leadership and work engagement as moderated by ‘diuwongke’: an Indonesian study,” Int. J. Hum. Resour. Manag., vol. 33, no. 7, pp. 1267–1295, Mar. 2022, doi: 10.1080/09585192.2020.1799234. [3] A. Canavesi and E. Minelli, “Servant leadership and employee engagement: A qualitative study,” Empl. Responsib. Rights J., vol. 34, no. 4, pp. 413–435, 2022, doi: 10.1007/s10672-021-09389-9. [4] A. M. Saks, “Caring human resources management and employee engagement,” Hum. Resour. Manag. Rev., vol. 32, no. 3, p. 100835, 2022, doi: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.hrmr.2021.100835. [5] A. of S. A. N. ASEAN, Regional Study on Labour Productivity in ASEAN. Jakarta, Indonesia: The ASEAN Secretariat, 2023. https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/ 372 Edelweiss Applied Science and Technology ISSN: 2576-8484 Vol. 8, No. 6: 356-373, 2024 DOI: 10.55214/25768484.v8i6.2080 © 2024 by the author; licensee Learning Gate [6] D. H. Schunk and M. K. DiBenedetto, “Chapter Four - Self-efficacy and human motivation,” in Advances in Motivation Science, vol. 8, A. J. B. T.-A. in M. S. Elliot, Ed. Elsevier, 2021, pp. 153–179. [7] A. M. R. Alnoor, H. Al-Abrrow, H. Abdullah, and S. Abbas, “The impact of self-efficacy on employees’ ability to accept new technology in an Iraqi university,” Glob. Bus. Organ. Excell., vol. 39, no. 2, pp. 41–50, Jan. 2020, doi: https://doi.org/10.1002/joe.21984. [8] M. Ángeles López-Cabarcos, P. Vázquez-Rodríguez, and L. M. Quiñoá-Piñeiro, “An approach to employees’ job performance through work environmental variables and leadership behaviours,” J. Bus. Res., vol. 140, pp. 361–369, 2022, doi: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jbusres.2021.11.006. [9] P. V Kloutsiniotis and D. M. Mihail, “The effects of high performance work systems in employees’ service-oriented OCB,” Int. J. Hosp. Manag., vol. 90, p. 102610, 2020, doi: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijhm.2020.102610. [10] G. E. Roberts, “The Role and Value of Servant Leadership in Improving Performance Appraisal Practices,” in The Palgrave Handbook of Servant Leadership, S. Dhiman and G. E. Roberts, Eds. Cham: Springer International Publishing, 2021, pp. 1–28. [11] Z. Alikhani and M. Shahriari, “The effect of servant leadership on competitiveness of startups: The mediating role of entrepreneurial orientation and self-efficacy,” Int. J. Entrep. Innov., p. 14657503221134512, Nov. 2022, doi: 10.1177/14657503221134511. [12] F. Saleem, Y. Z. Zhang, C. Gopinath, and A. Adeel, “Impact of servant leadership on performance: The mediating role of affective and cognitive trust,” Sage Open, vol. 10, no. 1, p. 2158244019900562, Jan. 2020, doi: 10.1177/2158244019900562. [13] S. Nauman, S. H. Bhatti, H. Imam, and M. S. Khan, “How servant leadership drives project team performance through collaborative culture and knowledge sharing,” Proj. Manag. J., vol. 53, no. 1, pp. 17–32, Sep. 2021, doi: 10.1177/87569728211037777. [14] J. W. Wesevich, “Servant Leadership Impact on Organizational Performance,” Liberty University, School of Business, 2022. [15] M. Bakkaloglu, “Exploring the Impact of Servant Leadership on Thriving at Work and Adaptive Performance,” Carleton University, Ottawa, 2023. [16] P. Kaur, K. Malhotra, and S. K. Sharma, “Moderation-mediation framework connecting internal branding, affective commitment, employee engagement and job satisfaction: an empirical study of BPO employees in Indian context,” Asia-Pacific J. Bus. Adm., vol. 12, no. 3/4, pp. 327–348, Jan. 2020, doi: 10.1108/APJBA-10-2019-0217. [17] Y. Shin, W.-M. Hur, and W.-H. Choi, “Coworker support as a double-edged sword: a moderated mediation model of job crafting, work engagement, and job performance,” Int. J. Hum. Resour. Manag., vol. 31, no. 11, pp. 1417–1438, Jun. 2020, doi: 10.1080/09585192.2017.1407352. [18] K. Kwon and T. Kim, “An integrative literature review of employee engagement and innovative behavior: Revisiting the JD-R model,” Hum. Resour. Manag. Rev., vol. 30, no. 2, p. 100704, 2020, doi: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.hrmr.2019.100704. [19] P. Malik and P. Garg, “Learning organization and work engagement: the mediating role of employee resilience,” Int. J. Hum. Resour. Manag., vol. 31, no. 8, pp. 1071–1094, Apr. 2020, doi: 10.1080/09585192.2017.1396549. [20] G. Michelle and B. M. H.R., “ Performance management and employee engagement : a South African perspective ,” SA J. Hum. Resour. Manag., vol. 18, no. 1, pp. 1–19, Jan. 2020, doi: 10.4102/sajhrm.v18i0.1215. [21] Y. Zheng, L. Graham, O. Epitropaki, and E. Snape, “Service leadership, work engagement, and service performance: The moderating role of leader skills,” Gr. Organ. Manag., vol. 45, no. 1, pp. 43–74, Jun. 2019, doi: 10.1177/1059601119851978. [22] M. M. Pellegrini, F. Ciampi, G. Marzi, and B. Orlando, “The relationship between knowledge management and leadership: mapping the field and providing future research avenues,” J. Knowl. Manag., vol. 24, no. 6, pp. 1445–1492, Jan. 2020, doi: 10.1108/JKM-01-2020-0034. [23] M. Q. Zia, M. Naveed, M. A. Bashir, and A. Iqbal, “The influence of servant leadership on employees’ outcomes via job embeddedness in hospitality industry,” J. Hosp. Tour. Insights, vol. 5, no. 3, pp. 612–628, Jan. 2022, doi: 10.1108/JHTI- 01-2021-0003. [24] A. Bavik, “A systematic review of the servant leadership literature in management and hospitality,” Int. J. Contemp. Hosp. Manag., vol. 32, no. 1, pp. 347–382, Jan. 2020, doi: 10.1108/IJCHM-10-2018-0788. [25] S. P. Omanwar and R. K. Agrawal, “Servant leadership, organizational identification and turnover intention: an empirical study in hospitals,” Int. J. Organ. Anal., vol. 30, no. 2, pp. 239–258, Jan. 2022, doi: 10.1108/IJOA-08-2020- 2374. [26] J. D. Meuser and J. Smallfield, “Servant leadership: The missing community component,” Bus. Horiz., vol. 66, no. 2, pp. 251–264, 2023, doi: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.bushor.2022.07.002. [27] S. Zeeshan, S. I. Ng, J. A. Ho, and A. H. Jantan, “Assessing the impact of servant leadership on employee engagement through the mediating role of self-efficacy in the Pakistani banking sector,” Cogent Bus. Manag., vol. 8, no. 1, p. 1963029, Jan. 2021, doi: 10.1080/23311975.2021.1963029. [28] M. Yuan, W. Cai, X. Gao, and J. Fu, “How servant leadership leads to employees’ customer-oriented behavior in the service industry? A dual-mechanism model,” International Journal of Environmental Research and Public Health, vol. 17, no. 7. 2020, doi: 10.3390/ijerph17072296. 373 Edelweiss Applied Science and Technology ISSN: 2576-8484 Vol. 8, No. 6: 356-373, 2024 DOI: 10.55214/25768484.v8i6.2080 © 2024 by the author; licensee Learning Gate [29] M. K. Rabiul, A. K. Patwary, and I. M. Panha, “The role of servant leadership, self-efficacy, high performance work systems, and work engagement in increasing service-oriented behavior,” J. Hosp. Mark. Manag., vol. 31, no. 4, pp. 504– 526, May 2022, doi: 10.1080/19368623.2022.1990169. [30] L. M. Washington, “Exploring Employee Self-Efficacy Through the Optimization of Internal Talent Acquisition,” Northcentral University, 2023. [31] R. H. Taheri, M. S. Miah, and M. Kamaruzzaman, “Impact of working environment on job satisfaction,” Eur. J. Bus. Manag. Res., vol. 5, no. 6 SE-Articles, Dec. 2020, doi: 10.24018/ejbmr.2020.5.6.643. [32] B. Afsar, B. M. Al-Ghazali, S. Cheema, and F. Javed, “Cultural intelligence and innovative work behavior: the role of work engagement and interpersonal trust,” Eur. J. Innov. Manag., vol. 24, no. 4, pp. 1082–1109, Jan. 2021, doi: 10.1108/EJIM-01-2020-0008. [33] S. Naz, C. Li, Q. A. Nisar, M. A. S. Khan, N. Ahmad, and F. Anwar, “A Study in the relationship between supportive work environment and employee retention: Role of organizational commitment and person–organization fit as mediators,” Sage Open, vol. 10, no. 2, p. 2158244020924694, Apr. 2020, doi: 10.1177/2158244020924694. [34] E. Sugiarti, “The influence of training, work environment and career development on work motivation that has an impact on employee performance at PT. Suryamas Elsindo Primatama In West Jakarta,” Int. J. Artif. Intell. Res., vol. 6, no. 1, 2021, doi: 10.29099/ijair.v6i1.304. [35] S. L. Albrecht and A. Marty, “Personality, self-efficacy and job resources and their associations with employee engagement, affective commitment and turnover intentions,” Int. J. Hum. Resour. Manag., vol. 31, no. 5, pp. 657–681, Mar. 2020, doi: 10.1080/09585192.2017.1362660. [36] K. Na-Nan, S. Kanthong, and J. Joungtrakul, “An empirical study on the model of self-efficacy and organizational citizenship behavior transmitted through employee engagement, organizational commitment and job satisfaction in the thai automobile parts manufacturing industry,” J. Open Innov. Technol. Mark. Complex., vol. 7, no. 3, p. 170, 2021, doi: https://doi.org/10.3390/joitmc7030170. [37] M. Q. Zia, J. Decius, M. Naveed, and A. Anwar, “Transformational leadership promoting employees’ informal learning and job involvement: the moderating role of self-efficacy,” Leadersh. Organ. Dev. J., vol. 43, no. 3, pp. 333–349, Jan. 2022, doi: 10.1108/LODJ-06-2021-0286. [38] P. Warr, “Age and job performance,” in Work and Aging, 1st ed., CRC Press, 1995. [39] K. Na-Nan and E. Sanamthong, “Self-efficacy and employee job performance,” Int. J. Qual. Reliab. Manag., vol. 37, no. 1, pp. 1–17, Jan. 2020, doi: 10.1108/IJQRM-01-2019-0013. [40] A. Hirschi and D. Spurk, “Ambitious employees: Why and when ambition relates to performance and organizational commitment,” J. Vocat. Behav., vol. 127, p. 103576, 2021, doi: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jvb.2021.103576. [41] L. Otaye-Ebede, P. Sparrow, and W. Wong, “The changing contours of fairness: using multiple lenses to focus the HRM research agenda,” J. Organ. Eff. People Perform., vol. 3, no. 1, pp. 70–90, 2016, doi: http://dx.doi.org/10.1108/JOEPP-01-2016-0004. [42] Sudarmo, P. D. Suhartanti, and W. E. Prasetyanto, “Servant leadership and employee productivity: a mediating and moderating role,” Int. J. Product. Perform. Manag., vol. 71, no. 8, pp. 3488–3506, Jan. 2022, doi: 10.1108/IJPPM-12- 2020-0658. [43] S. Alagarsamy, S. Mehrolia, and R. H. Aranha, “The Mediating Effect of Employee Engagement: How Employee Psychological Empowerment Impacts the Employee Satisfaction? A Study of Maldivian Tourism Sector,” Glob. Bus. Rev., vol. 24, no. 4, pp. 768–786, Apr. 2020, doi: 10.1177/0972150920915315. [44] S. J. Quek, L. Thomson, R. Houghton, L. Bramley, S. Davis, and J. Cooper, “Distributed leadership as a predictor of employee engagement, job satisfaction and turnover intention in UK nursing staff,” J. Nurs. Manag., vol. 29, no. 6, pp. 1544–1553, Sep. 2021, doi: https://doi.org/10.1111/jonm.13321. [45] J. A. Fulmore, A. L. Fulmore, M. Mull, and J. N. Cooper, “Reducing employee turnover intentions in the service sector: The connection between human resource development practices and employee engagement,” Hum. Resour. Dev. Q., vol. 34, no. 2, pp. 127–153, May 2023, doi: https://doi.org/10.1002/hrdq.21471. [46] S. S and S. M M, “Influence of empowerment, psychological contract and employee engagement on voluntary turnover intentions,” Int. J. Product. Perform. Manag., vol. 70, no. 2, pp. 325–349, Jan. 2021, doi: 10.1108/IJPPM-04-2019-0189. [47] I. K. A. Wong, S. Xu, S. H. G. Chan, and M. He, “A cross-level investigation of the role of human resources practices: Does brand equity matter?,” Tour. Manag., vol. 75, no. April, pp. 418–426, 2019, doi: 10.1016/j.tourman.2019.04.013. [48] L. W. W. Mihardjo, K. Jermsittiparsert, U. Ahmed, T. Chankoson, and H. Iqbal Hussain, “Impact of key HR practices (human capital, training and rewards) on service recovery performance with mediating role of employee commitment of the Takaful industry of the Southeast Asian region,” Educ. Train., vol. 63, no. 1, pp. 1–21, 2021, doi: 10.1108/ET- 08-2019-0188.