International Journal of Human Capital Management, Vol. 2 (2), December 2018 International Journal of Human Capital Management, Vol. 5 (2), December 2021 71 | P a g e International Journal of Human Capital Available online at Management http://journal.unj.ac.id/unj/index.php/ijhcm E-ISSN 2580-9164 Vol. 5, No. 2, December 2021, p 71-81 The linkage of Leadership, Psychological Empowerment, and Employee Engagement with Affective Commitment to Change: A study at public/state- owned organization Wustari L. Mangundjaya Email: wustari@ui.ac.id; wustari@gmail.com Faculty of Psychology, Universitas Indonesia Depok, Jawa Barat, Indonesia Seta A.Wicaksana Email: seta.wicaksana@gmail.com Faculty of Psychology, Universitas Pancasila Jakarta, Indonesia ABSTRACT The objective of the study is to identify the significant impact of Leadership, people’s engagement, and empowerment on affective commitment to change. The research conducted at a Public/State-Owned Organization with 539 respondents. Data was collected using employee engagement inventory, psychological empowerment, and commitment to change inventory, and was analysed using descriptive analysis and SEM. Results showed that change leadership has a significant and positive impact on affective commitment to change through employee engagement, but not through psychological empowerment. The implications of this result are beneficial for management, especially change agents. In this regard, they should create a conducive climate to develop engagement and providing many programs to increase people’s competence to establish employee commitment to change, which will be resulted in a stronger affective commitment to change. Keywords: Affective Commitment to Change, Change Leadership, Employee Engagement, Psychological Empowerment. Received: 19 July 2021 ; Accepted: 10 December 2021 ; Publish: December 2021. How to Cite: Mangundjaya, W.L., Wicaksana, S.A. (2021). The linkage of Leadership, Psychological Empowerment, and Employee Engagement with Affective Commitment to Change: A study at public/state-owned organization. International Journal of Human Capital Management, 5 (2), 71-81. https://doi.org/10.21009/IJHCM.05.02.7 http://journal.unj.ac.id/unj/index.php/ International Journal of Human Capital Management, Vol. 5 (2), December 2021 72 | P a g e INTRODUCTION During the era of VUCA (Volatility, Uncertainty, Complexity, and Ambiguity) as well as Revolution 4.0, the demand for organizations to change and adapt to the environment is getting more and more pressure. This condition not only applies to private enterprises but also applies to the state/public organization. As a result, many organizational change and transformation programs conducted in many organizations, and this change program needs to be successful. Meanwhile, researches showed that change leadership and employee commitment to change were significantly determined the successful implementation of organizational change (Gao-Urhahn, 2016) According to leadership theory, the success of organizational change depends on effective Leadership that can motivate the team’s vision so that they work together toward the same goal and organizational change (Higgs, 2000). Employees’ attitudes toward organizational change and their affective commitment also have a strong influence on the practical implementation of organizational change (Herscovitch, 2002). Various researches about organizational change showed that leaders (Gilley, 2008) and people (Mangundjaya, 2019) were two of the critical variables in term of the success of the organizational change. A leader is essential as he or she prepares, plans, and implements the change effectively. Without a good leader, the organizational change would not be as effective as it should be. There are arguments about the role of a leader and the role of people in organizational change. Is it people’s confidence or employee engagement that matters during organizational change? The study aims to identify which variables between psychological empowerment and employee engagement have a higher impact as a mediator on affective commitment to change. Researchers (Ling, 2018) studied the relationship of change leadership and employees’ commitment to change with the mediators of collective identity and change self-efficacy. LITERATURE REVIEW Affective Commitment to Change The concept of Commitment to Change by Herscovitch & Meyer (2002) was from the idea of organizational commitment of Meyer & Allen (1997) as an extension of the concept of organizational commitment at the unique condition of the organization, that is during the organizational change (Herscovitch, 2002). In this regard, Herscovitch & Meyer (2002) define commitment to change as a force (mindset) that binds an individual to a course of action deemed necessary for the successful implementation of a change initiative. This mindset reflected in three dimensions: a) desire to provide support for the change based on a belief in its inherent benefits to change (affective commitment). b) a recognition that there are costs associated with failure to provide support for the change (continuance commitment to change), and c) sense of obligation to provide support for the difference (normative commitment to change. Moreover, Herscovitch & Meyer (2002) also stated that affective commitment to change is the most critical dimension in producing positive attitude and behaviour toward change, compares to the other two dimensions (normative and continuance commitment to change). Change Leadership Herold et al. (2008) and Liu (2010) stated that change leadership is the behaviours that target the specific change consist of visioning, enlisting, empowering, monitoring, and helping with individual adaptation. Liu (2010) finalized the concept of change leadership by mentioning that there are two factors in Change Leadership, namely: a) Leaders’ Change Selling Behaviour, which is an action that attempts to promote the change during the unfreezing stage, make it clear why the change was necessary. b) Leaders Change Implementing Behaviour, act to push a move International Journal of Human Capital Management, Vol. 5 (2), December 2021 73 | P a g e forward and consolidate success throughout the implementation. These two behaviours are essential for a leader in selling and directing employees toward organizational change. Change Leadership correlates significantly with employee commitment to change (Ling, 2018) Psychological Empowerment Spreitzer (2007) defined empowerment as ‘increased intrinsic task motivation manifested in a set of four cognitions reflecting an individual’s orientation to his or her work role: competence, impact, meaning, and self-determination.’ This perspective refers to empowerment as the personal beliefs that employees have about their role concerning the organization. There are four dimensions of psychological empowerment as follows: a) Competence refers to feelings of self- efficacy or personal mastery that one is capable of successfully performing a task (Spreitzer, 2007). Feeling of competence or self-efficacy is a belief in one’s capability to perform work activities (Spreitzer, 2007); b) Meaning refers to the weight individuals place on a given task based on an individual’s standards. Meaning involves a fit between the needs of one’s work role and one’s beliefs, values, and behaviors (Spreitzer, 2007); c) Self-determination is a sense of choice in initiating and regulating one’s actions (Spreitzer, 2007). It reflects a sense of autonomy in deciding work and processes (Spreitzer, 2007). d) Impact refers to the degree to which an individual’s work makes a difference in achieving the purpose of the task and the extent to which an individual believes he or she can influence organizational outcomes, or the degree to which one can influence strategic, administrative, or operating issues at work (Spreitzer, 2007). Employee Engagement Engagement, sometimes known as job engagement, is concerned with people and their work. It happens when people are caught up in, and interested in, even excited about, their jobs and are therefore prepared to exert discretionary effort in getting them done (Armstrong, 2007). Employee engagement is a positive, affective-motivational state of fulfilment that is characterized by vigour, dedication, and absorption (Schaufeli, 2004) Employee engagement, according to AON Hewitt (2011), is energy and passion that possesses by the employee to work according to their roles and status, which consisted of three dimensions. The three dimensions are: a) Stay, that is the willingness of the employee to continue as being part of the organization; b) Strive, the willingness of the employee to give maximum efforts to do things that increase the organization productivity and c) Say, the desire of the employee to express the pride of the organization. This study used the definition of employee engagement by AON Hewitt (2011). Change leadership, psychological empowerment on affective commitment to change. There are several types of research about the impact of psychological empowerment on affective commitment to change. However, there were plenty of studies done about psychological empowerment and organizational commitment (Malik, 2013;Hasmi, 2012:Ambad, 2012;Dehkordi, 2011) which have found that there was a positive and significant correlation between psychological empowerment and organizational commitment. Furthermore, the study conducted by Gunawan and Viyanita (2012) also showed that psychological empowerment has a positive and significant correlation with affective organizational commitment. Nikpour (2018), also revealed that psychological empowerment acted as a mediator for organizational commitment. Those findings based on the study between psychological empowerment and organizational commitment based on the concept of organizational commitment of Meyer & Allen (1997), and not based on the idea of commitment to change. However, based on the findings from Rashid & Zhao (2010) and Mangundjaya (2015), it showed that organizational commitment had a positive International Journal of Human Capital Management, Vol. 5 (2), December 2021 74 | P a g e and significant correlation with a commitment to change. Based on those discussions, the researcher proposes the following hypothesis as follows: H1: There is a positive and significant impact of change leadership on affective commitment to change with psychological empowerment as mediators. Change leadership, affective commitment to change, and employee engagement Employee’s engagement with the organization showed a secure attachment to the organization (Frank, 2004; Gibbons, 2006; Shuck, 2010). This attachment consists of three types of behaviours, namely: a) Stay, that is, the willingness of the employee to continue as being part of the organization due to his/her love for the organization or because there is no other place that he/she can work; b) Strive, the willingness of the employee to give maximum efforts to do things that increase the organization productivity; and c) Say, the desire of the employee to express the pride of the organization Loi, 20014; Baumruk, 2006; Heger, 2007). Discretionary behaviour refers to the choices that people at work often have on the way they do the job and the amount of effort, care, innovation, and productive behaviour they display. It can be positive when people ‘go the extra mile’ to achieve high levels of performance. Engagement and commitment are both states of being. From that discussion, it showed that employee engagement especially strives and say, might have a positive impact on affective commitment to change. Previous research showed that there was a positive correlation between employee engagement and affective organizational commitment (Alam, 2017; Saks, 2006;Albdour, 2014). Further, the study of Nazir and Islam (2017) also revealed that employee engagement as a mediator for organizational commitment. This correlation is between employee engagement and organizational commitment (including affective organizational commitment). However, according to previous research, it showed that there was a positive correlation between affective organizational commitment with affective commitment to change (Mangundjaya, 2012). Based on those discussions, the researcher proposes the following hypothesis as follows: H2: There is a positive and significant impact of change leadership on affective commitment to change with employee engagement as mediators. Psychological empowerment and employee engagement on affective commitment to change An engaged person can be committed to the organization, as well as involved with their work. People can be involved with their work so far as it allows them to use and develop their skills (Armstrong, 2007). In other words, it is the feeling of empowered, and competence (psychological empowerment), had positively correlated employee engagement. Meanwhile, previous researches showed that there was a positive correlation between employee engagement and affective organizational commitment (saks, 2006;Albdour, 2014; Nazir, 2017). Employee Engagement also involves the interaction of the three factors, namely: cognitive commitment, emotional attachment, and behavioral outcomes. Those three factors arise from an employee’s relationship with his or her organization (Frank, 2004; Gibbons, 2006, Shuck, 2010) . As a result, the feelings of meaning at work and impact on the environment (psychological empowerment) will develop a sense of emotional attachment for the people. Based on those above discussions, the followings hypothesis proposes: H3: Psychological Empowerment had a positive impact on affective commitment to change through Employee Engagement as mediators. International Journal of Human Capital Management, Vol. 5 (2), December 2021 75 | P a g e METHODOLOGY Sample and Sampling The sample collected from 2 public/state-owned companies that had undergone some organizational changed, such as restructuring the organizational, development of strategic marketing, and changes in overall system and procedures. Participants for this study were employees who worked at two financial public/state-owned enterprises. Samples were chosen by convenience sampling. The characteristics of respondents were as follows: a) Permanent employee; b) They had been working in the company at least for two years; and c) The minimum educational background were senior high school. All data were collected and administered on-site during work time. The profile of respondents consist of age is between 21−56 years old, male (61.97%), range of age between 25−44 years old (78.29%), bachelor’s degree (74.77%), staff (43.42%), length of works more than ten years (51.95%). Data Collection Data collected through 4 types of questionnaires, namely: 1) Affective Commitment to Change Inventory (Herscovitch and Meyer, 2002), consists of 6 items. 2) Change Leadership, developed by Liu (2010) consists of two dimensions, Selling and Implementing of 14 items. 3) Psychological Empowerment (Spreitzer, 1995) consists of 4 dimensions of 16 items, namely a) Competence; b) Meaning; c) Determination; and d) Impact of 16 items; and 4) Employee Engagement consists of 3 dimensions of 15 items. All the instruments translated and modified into Bahasa Indonesia with a 6 scale. The results of validity and reliability significances which were tested using Cronbach Alpha and Confirmatory Factor Analysis are shown in Table 1 and shown all the variables are valid and reliable. Table 1. Reliability and validity test result. Variable Numb er of items Reliabilit y (Alpha Cronbach ) Validity (CFA) Standardized t-values Affective Commitment to Change 6 0.83 0.55 – 0.81 12.59 – 20.14* Change Leadership 14 0.96 0.96 – 0.97 28.29 – 28.49** Psychological Empowerment 16 0.91 0.68 – 0.92 16.43 – 25.10** Employee Engagement 15 0.81 0.92 – 0.94 26.95 – 27.76** *Chi Square=7.41; df=6, p value=0.28442 (p-value>0.05); RMSEA=0.021, t >1.96 **Chi Square=52.74; df=38, p value=0.05640 (p-value>0.05); RMSEA=0.028, t >1.96 RESULTS AND DISCUSSION Intercorrelation Analysis To check whether there is a relationship of Change Leadership, Affective Commitment to Change, Psychological Empowerment and Employee Engagement; the results of intercorrelation analysis are shown in Table 2. International Journal of Human Capital Management, Vol. 5 (2), December 2021 76 | P a g e Table 2. Mean, SD, Correlation Analysis Variables Mea n SD AC2 C CL PE EE Affective Commitment to Change (AC2C) 4.87 .65 - - - - Change Leadership (CL) 4.40 .73 .31* * - - - Psychological Empowerment (PE) 4.60 .54 .40* * .46* * - - Employee Engagement (EE) 4.69 .52 .38* * .41* * .32* * - **l.o.s. = p<0.01 Notes: SD = Standard Deviation; AC2C= Affective Commitment to Change; CL = Change Leadership; PE = Psychological Empowerment; EE = Employee Engagement. Table 2 shows that there are positive correlations among Change Leadership, Affective Commitment to Change, Change Leadership, Psychological Empowerment, and Employee Engagement, with the relationship between Change Leadership and Psychological Empowerment is the strongest. Results of SEM Analysis Chi-Square = 30.92, df=22, p-value = 0.9768, RMSEA = 0.027 Legend: CL= Change Leadership; PE = Psychological Empowerment, EE = Employee Engagement; AC2C = Affective Commitment to Change 0.68 * 0.83* 0.90* 0.71* Impact Competence Meaning Determinant 0.61* 0.82 * 0.85* Strive Say Stay 0.69* 0.57* 0.45* AC2C EE -0.04 0.22* Selling CL Implementing 0.93* 1.00* Fig. 1. The result of SEM analysis PE International Journal of Human Capital Management, Vol. 5 (2), December 2021 77 | P a g e Based on the results SEM analysis above, it shows that Change Leadership had no significant impact on Affective Commitment to Change with Psychological Empowerment as mediator, as there is no significant impact between Psychological Empowerment on Affective Commitment to Change (t-value between PE to AC2C= <1.96). Hypothesis 1 was not supported. 1. Change Leadership had no significant impact on Affective Commitment to Change, with Psychological Empowerment as a mediator, as there is no significant impact between Psychological Empowerment on Affective Commitment to Change (t-value between PE to AC2C=<1.96). Hypothesis 1 was not supported. 2. Change Leadership had a positive and significant impact on Affective Commitment to Change with Employee Engagement as a mediator, Hypothesis 2 was supported. 3. Psychological Empowerment had a positive impact on Affective Commitment to Change through Employee Engagement as a mediator, Hypothesis 3 was supported. Descriptive Analysis The descriptive analysis statistics shows that a) age, position, and lengths of works had a positive and significant correlation with Psychological Empowerment (l.o.s. p<0.001), but no positive relationship with Affective Commitment to Change, Change Leadership, or Employee Engagement. It shows that the older persons, the higher of the position, and the longer they work in the company will result in the more top of their Psychological Empowerment. In terms of Commitment to Change, the results show that male and female have significant differences, in which male has a higher Commitment to Change than female. The results also show that the older persons, the higher the position, and the longer they work in the company, the more committed they are to the Organizational Change. At the educational level, the results show that the bachelor’s degree level of education had the lowest Committed to Change, and employees with diploma degree had the highest score. The results also revealed that Change Leadership alone could not directly be impacted by Affective Commitment to Change, but it should be mediated by Employee Engagement. As a result, change leaders should be able to inspire and motivate his/her subordinate to increase their engagement, which in return will also have a significant impact on Affective Commitment to Change. Concerning Psychological Empowerment, the results show that males and females have no significant differences. It also shows that the older the persons, the higher the position, and the longer they work in the company will have resulted in the higher the score of their Psychological Empowerment. It also shows that bachelor’s degrees had the lowest score on Psychological Empowerment, and employees with a master’s degree have the highest score. Discussion Overall, Employee Engagement was the critical variable on the development of Affective Commitment to Change. Findings showed that Change Leadership had no significant impact on Affective Commitment to Change with Psychological Empowerment as a mediator. This finding was not supported the previous results of the substantial role of Psychological Empowerment as a mediator between Change Leadership and Affective Commitment to Change (Mangundjaya, 2019). This finding is quite surprising as previous research showed that Psychological Empowerment had a significant impact on Affective Commitment to Change (Mangundjaya, 2019). It assumed that Employee Engagement has a stronger effect on Affective Commitment to Change. Future studies recommended. Findings also showed that Change Leadership had a positive and significant impact on Affective Commitment to Change with Employee Engagement as a mediator. The results showed that Employee Engagement plays a vital role in developing Affective Commitment to Change, International Journal of Human Capital Management, Vol. 5 (2), December 2021 78 | P a g e feeling of attachment with the organization will create a feeling of commitment to the organization, including the affective commitment to change. Results showed that Psychological Empowerment had a positive impact on Affective Commitment to Change through Employee Engagement as a mediator. In this regard, the leader should be able to foster the acceptance of change aimed at promoting change to be accepted by their subordinates. Organizational change, in general, make people feel stress, anxious, insecure, which then harms their commitment to change (Kalyal, 2008; Mangundjaya, 2015, Mangundjaya, 2012). Spreitzer (2007) stated that people with high psychological empowerment would have high self-confidence and high self-efficacy, which, as a result, they can influence and have an impact on their working environment. Consequently, they do not have a fear of changes that happened in their organization. However, in this study psychological empowerment had no significant contribution to the affective commitment to change with the mediator of employee engagement, psychological empowerment will have an impact on affective commitment to change. In other words, the psychological empowerment could have a significant effect on affective commitment only through employee engagement. As a result, people who had high psychological empowerment will develop a sense of engagement to the organization, and it will build their affective commitment to change. To conclude, employee engagement is a critical variable on developing affective commitment to change, as people with high employee engagement, whether direct or with mediating variables, will have an impact on affective commitment to change. Furthermore, according to Amstrong (2007), although highly engaged and committed people are motivated, people who are motivated are not necessarily engaged or committed. They may be pursuing their ends, not that of their job or the organization. The study also showed that a feeling of competence is essential during organizational change. This feeling of power will overcome fear and anxiety during the process of organizational change (Cartwright & Cooper, 1993), as the feeling of expertise at work similar to the opinions of self-efficacy (Robbins, 2010). Moreover, the study also showed that the sense of Say, the ability to say something about the organization will have a significant impact on the commitment to change, compares with the other two sub dimensions. Studying about commitment to change is essential, as through employee’s commitment to change it will lead to the implementation of change success and increasing performance (Parish,Et al, 2008). This study not only for the development of knowledge about the commitment to change but also for practical benefit. In this regard, the results of the study are beneficial for management in implementing change management in their organization. Limitations of the study as follows: the data collections tool used questionnaires, which is self-report and quickly to have common method biases (Podsakoff, et.al, It recommends that a future study using many different kinds of data gathering tools. CONCLUSION Explicitly, this study fills the gap in the literature of employees’ engagement and commitment and their impact on overall organizational performance. The followings are the implications of this study for management and organizations involved in change implementation. In this regard, activities such as training, coaching, mentoring, and counselling, as well as developing a proper channel of communication during the process of organizational change will help to build trust between employees and organizations. This study held at state-owned organizations that conducted organizational change in terms of organizational structures, strategy, and operating procedures. However, it was not a large scale and basic types of organizational change. Further studies should be conducted in many kinds of organizations as well as in other types of organizational change, with different kinds of approach in data collection International Journal of Human Capital Management, Vol. 5 (2), December 2021 79 | P a g e REFERENCES Gao-Urhahn, X., Biemann, T., & Jaros, S.J.: (2016). How affective commitment to the organization changes over time: A longitudinal analysis of the reciprocal relationships between affective organizational commitment and income. Journal of Organizational Behavior. Vol. 37, pp. 515-536 Herold, D.M., Fedor, D.B., Caldwell, S., & Liu, Y.: (2008). The effects of transformational and change leadership on employees’ commitment to a change: A multilevel study. Journal of Applied Psychology. Vol. 93, pp. 346–357 Shin, J., Taylor, M.S., & Seo, M-G.: (2012). Resources for change: The relationships of organizational inducements and psychological resilience to employees’ attitudes and behaviors toward organizational change. Academy of Management Journal, 55, 727-748 Higgs, M. & Roland, D.: (2000). Building change leadership capability: The quest for change competence. Journal of Change Management. Vol. 1, no. 2. pp. 116-130 Choi M.: (2011) Employee attitudes toward organizational change: A literature review, Human resource management. Vol. 50, pp. 479-500. Herscovitch, L., & Meyer, J.P.: (2002) Commitment to organizational change: Extension of a three-component model. Journal of Applied Psychology. Vol. 87, pp. 474-487. Gilley, A., Dixon, P., & Gilley, J.W.: (2008).Characterist ic of leadership effectiveness: Implementing change and driving innovation in organizations. Human Resource Development Quarterly. Vol. 19, no. 2, pp. 153-169 Gilley, A., Gilley, J.W., & McMillan, H.S.: (2009).Organizational change: Motivation, communication and leadership effectiveness. Performance Improvement Quarterly. Vol. 47, no. 1, pp. 1-22 Kotter, J.P.: (2007).Leading change: Why transformation efforts fail? Harvard Business Review Mangundjaya, W.: (2019). Leadership, empowerment, and trust on affective commitment to change in state-owned organizations. Int. J. Public Sector Performance Management. Vol. 5, no. 1 Ling, B., Guo, Y., & Chen, D.: (2018). Change leadership and employees’ commitment to change: A multilevel motivation approach. Journal of Personnel Psychology. Vol. 17, no. 2, pp. 83- 93 Meyer, J.P. & Allen, N.J.: (1997). Commitment in the workplace. Sage, Thousand Oaks, California Liu, Y.: (2010) When change leadership impacts commitment to change and when it doesn’t: A multi-dimensional investigation. Dissertation. Georgia Institute of Technology, USA.. Spreitzer, G.M.: (2007).Taking stock: A review of more than twenty years of research on empowerment at work. In Cooper and Barling (Eds). The Handbook of Organizational Behavior. Sage Publications Amstrong, M.: (2007). The conceptual framework engagement and organizational commitment. Kogan Page, London Schaufeli, W. & Bakker, A. (2004). Utrecht work engagement scale. Occupational Health Psychology Unit Utrecht University AON Hewitt: (2011), Best employers in Australia and New Zealand: Driving high performance through employee engagement. Highlights report, AON Hewitt. Sydney (2011). International Journal of Human Capital Management, Vol. 5 (2), December 2021 80 | P a g e Malik, F., Chugtai, S., Iqbal, Z., & Muhammad, R.: (2013) Does psychological empowerment bring about employee commitment? Evidence from telecommunication sector of Pakistan. Journal of Business Studies Quarterly. Vol. 5, no 5, pp. 14-21. Hashmi, M.S.: (2012). Psychological empowerment to boost organizational commitment, evidence from banking sector of Pakistan. International Journal of Human Resource Studies. Vol. 2, no. 2, pp. 2162-3058 Ambad, S.N.A., & Bahron, A.: (2012).Psychological eempowerment: The influence on organizational commitment among employees in the construction sector. The Journal of Global Business Management. Vol. 8, no. 2, pp. 73-81 Dehkordi, L.F., Kamrani, M.N., Ardestani, H.A., & Abdolmanafi, S.: (2011). Correlation between psychological empowerment with job satisfaction and organizational commitment. Interdisciplinary Journal of Contemporary Research in Business. Vol. 3, no. 7, pp. 808- 822. Jha, S.: (2007).Influence of psychological empowerment on affective, normative and continuance commitment: A study in Indian IT industry. International Journal of Organizational Behavior. Vol. 15, no. 1, pp. 52-72 (2008). Vol. 8, no. 2, pp. 92-107 Gunawan, A.W., & Viyanita, O.: (2012).Pemberdayaan psikologi: Hubungannya dengan kepuasan kerja dan komitmen afektif. Media Riset Bisnis & Manajemen. Vol. 12, no. 1, pp. 1-17 Nikpour, A.: (2018).Psychological empowerment and organizational innovation: Mediating role of job satisfaction and organizational commitment. International Journal of Organizational Leadership. Vol. 7, issue 2, pp. 106-119 Rashid, H. & Zhao, L.: (2010).The significance of career commitment in generating commitment to organizational change among information technology personnel. Academy of Information and Management Sciences Journal. Vol. 13, no. 1, pp. 111-131 Mangundjaya, W.L.: (2015).The role of employee management on the commitment to change (during large-scale organizational change in Indonesia.) International Journal of Multidiciplinary thought. Vol. 4, no. 1, pp. 375-383 Frank, F.D., Finnegan, R.P. & Taylor, C.R.: (2004).The race for talent: Retaining and engaging workers in the 21st century. Human Resource Planning. Vol. 27, no. 3, pp. 12-25 Gibbons, J.: Employee engagement: (2006).A review of current research and its implications. The Conference Board. New York Shuck, B. & Wollard, K.: Employee engagement and HRD: (2010).A seminal review of the foundations. Human Resource Development Review. Vol. 9, no. 1, pp. 89-110 Looi, W., Marusarz, T., & Baumruk, R.: (2004).What makes a best employer? (2004). Baumruk, R., Gorman, B. Jr, Gorman, R.E. & Ingham, J.: (2006). Why managers are crucial to increasing engagement. Strategic HR Review. Vol. 5, no. 2, pp. 24-27 International Journal of Human Capital Management, Vol. 5 (2), December 2021 81 | P a g e Heger, B.K.: (2007). Linking the employment value proposition to employee engagement and business outcomes: Preliminary findings from a linkage research pilot study. Organization Development Journal. Vol. 25, no. 2, pp. 121-132 Alam, A.A.S.: (2017). The effect of employee engagement on organizational commitment: A survey on junior executive working in the private sector of Bangladesh. Management Development. Vol. 31, no. 1, pp. 54-76 Saks, A.M.: (2006). Antecedents and consequences of employee engagement. Journal of Managerial Psychology. Vol. 21, no. 7, pp. 600-619 Albdour, A.A., Altarawneh, I.I.: (2014).Employee engagement and organizational commitment: Evidence from Jordan. International Journal of Business. Vol. 19, no. 2, pp. 192-212 Nazir, O. & Islam, J.U.: (2017). Enhancing organizational commitment and employee performance through employee engagement: An empirical check. South Asian Journal of Business Studies. Vol. 6, no. 1, pp. 98-114 Mangundjaya, W.L.H.: (2012)Are organizational commitment and employee engagement important in achieving individual readiness for change. Humanitas. Vol. IX, no. 2, pp. 185- 192 (2012). Kalyal, H.J., Saha, S., & Kumar: (2008). Factors affecting commitment to organizational change in a public sector organization. NUST Journal of Business and Economic. Vol. 1, no. 1, pp. 1-10 Cartwright, S. & Cooper, C.: (1993).The psychological impact of merger and acquisition on the individual: A study of building society managers. Human Relations. Vol. 46, no. 3, pp. 327 Robbins, S.: (2010).Organizational behavior. McGraw Hill, USA Parish, J.T., Cadwallader, S., & Busch, P.: (2008) Want to, need to, ought to: Employee commitment to organizational change. Journal of Organizational Change Management. Vol. 21, no. 1, pp. 32-52. Podsakoff, P.M., MacKenzie, S.B., Lee, J.Y., & Podsakoff, N.P.: (2003). Common method biases in behavioral research: A critical review of the literature and recommended remedies. Journal of Applied Psychology. Vol. 88, no. 5, pp. 879-903 Shuck, B. & Wollard, K.: Employee engagement and HRD: (2010).A seminal review of the foundations. Human Resource Development Review. Vol. 9, no. 1, pp. 89-110 Saks, A.M.: (2006). Antecedents and consequences of employee engagement. Journal of Managerial Psychology. Vol. 21, no. 7, pp. 600-619 Robbins, S.: (2010).Organizational behavior. McGraw Hill, USA