75 ABSTRACT The present paper attempted to determine the factors that might affect turnover inten- tion. Although the research participants consisted of 234 employees of PT Petrosea, only samples from 152 employees were used. The samples were derived by using the simple random sampling method and collected through a questionnaire. The collected data was then analyzed based on the Structural Equation Modeling (SEM) with an ap- plication software called Lisrell. The results showed that the following variables, ad- versity quotient, job satisfaction, and job motivation, did not have a significant effect on turnover intention. However, the regression equation showed that the higher scores of adversity quotient, job satisfaction, and job motivation would make turnover inten- tion lower. Thus, to prevent staff or labor turnover, a company is advised to select those prospective employees that have a higher score of adversity quotient since it has a significant effect on job satisfaction and motivation. This might result in decreasing turnover intention. Keywords: Adversity quotient, turnover intention, Structural Equation Modeling, Lisrell. Received: 07 May 2019 ; Accepted: 08 May 2019; Publish; December 2018 How to Cite: Prasetya, W., Akbar, M., & Tinas, B.. (2018). On Identifying the Factors that Affect Turnover Intention. Journal of Business and Behavioural Entrepreneurship, 2(2), 75- 93. https://doi.org/10.21009/JOBBE.002.2.04 On Identifying the Factors that Affect Turnover Intention Wibawa Prasetya Unika Atma Jaya Email: wibawaprasetya_im08s3@mahasiswa.unj.ac.id Ma’ruf Akbar Universitas Negeri Jakarta Billy Tunas Universitas Negeri Jakarta 76 INTRODUCTION Human resources play a very important role in the smooth operation of compa- nies. No matter how sophisticated the equipment owned by a company, the availabil- ity of human resources is much more important because they are the individuals that operate the equipment. Some companies even state that their employees are their as- sets and they play a determinant role in the success of a company (Robbins & Coul- ter, 2015). Because of this, a company will try its best to maintain its employees and to prevent staff or labor turnover. PT. Petrosea. Tbk is a company that is engaged in oil and coal businesses. Its headquarter is located in Tangerang, but its oil and coal businesses are located in Ka- limantan and Papua. One of the big problems faced by this company at present is its labor turnover that reaches 28%, while the standard labor turnover for coal mining companies is approximately 9-17% (AMMA, 2013). Thus, such a high level of labor turnover in this company is expected to have an effect on the employees’ perfor- mance. According to the performance report published in 2017 by the Ministry of In- dustry, labor productivity for the mining sector was, in general, decreasing from 9,83% (in 2014), to 7,65% (in 2015), and to 7,21% (in 2016). In addition, Indonesian economic growth only reached 5,06%. In terms of growth, the mining sector (oil, gas, and coal) contributed only a small percentage, namely 0,74% (Detik Finance, 2018). To improve employee performance, a company should try its best to decrease the rate of labor turnover. There are several factors that might affect labor turnover. One of them is adversity quotient, which has proved to have a significant negative correlation with turnover intention (Wirabrata, 2013). In addition, the adversity quo- tient has a significant relationship with job satisfaction (Mirza, R & Atrizka, D, 2018). Therefore, the management should be concerned with the following question: Have they given their employees suitable work that is motivating to improve their job satisfaction and job performance? If employees are given work that is motivating, this will improve their job satisfaction and will decrease turnover intention (Ting-Pang Huang, 2011). Research by Sajjad, Aseif., Ghazanfar, Hassan, and Ramzan (2013) demonstrated the effect of motivation on the turnover intention of the employees of a telephone and communication company in Pakistan. They showed that the higher the motivation was, the lower the turnover intention would be. In addition, a study con- ducted by Chao-Ying Shen (2014) on the adversity quotient (AQ), which measured how individuals responded to adversity, showed that the higher the AQ score was, the higher the employees’ ability to respond to adversity would be. This means employ- ees are able to manage job stress well and turn it into motivation. In other words, alt- hough such employees have higher stress related to their work, with a higher AQ score they are able to turn the stress into motivation. According to previous research, AQ has been shown to play an important role in reducing the rate of labor turnover. However, in hiring their new employees, many companies frequently take only Intelligence Quotient (IQ) and Emotional Quotient (EQ) into consideration. Someone who has high IQ and EQ scores does not automati- cally lead to the high AQ score. There are many cases in which people with the high IQ and EQ scores fail to overcome difficulties and obstacles in life, but there are peo- ple who are determined to overcome difficulties and obstacles they face and are suc- cessful in their lives. The AQ seems to distinguish one individual from another (Stoltz, 2000). Thus, the present research attempted to determine the extent of the effects of AQ, job satisfaction (JS), and job motivation (JM) on the turnover intention (TOI) of PT. Prasetya, W., Akbar, M., & Tinas, B.. (2018). Journal of Business and Behavioural Entrepreneurship Volume.2 Nomor.2 2018 p (75-93)  On Identifying the Factors that Affect Turnover Intention.  https://doi.org/10.21009/JOBBE.002.2.04 77 Petrosea employees. Our study was based on previous research, but we argued for the existence of intervening variables. In previous research, many researchers only con- ducted partial studies, for example, the effect of Adversity Quotient on Turnover In- tention, Job Motivation on Turnover Intention, Job Satisfaction on Turnover Intention, and they analyzed their data based on the regression equation with A mos. In our pre- sent research, we studied the effect of Adversity Quotient on Turnover Intention using two intervening variables, i.e., Job Satisfaction and Job Motivation, and we analyzed our data based on the Structural Equation Modeling with Lisrell. LITERATURE REVIEW Adversity Quotient (AQ) According to Stoltz (2005), AQ refers to one’s ability and perseverance in dealing with challenges and obstacles in daily life and one’s adherence to his principle and dream no matter what happens to him. The definition of AQ was also given by Ven- katesh and Shivaranjani (2016) who stated that AQ is the fundamental factor to suc- cess and is manifested in one’s ability and performance. According to Madelin (2001), AQ refers to an individual's ability to respond to adversity. A high score of AQ shows someone’s exceptional ability to respond to adversity, while a low score of AQ may indicate that the person gives up easily when facing adversity and obstacles. Based on several definitions of AQ above, we may conclude that AQ refers to someone’s ability to handle a problem, to question why and how the problem occurs, to identify the effects that the problem causes, and someone’s ability and resilience to solve the problem. According to Stoltz (2000), someone’s AQ can be categorized into several types of score, as shown in Table 1 below. Table 1. Types of AQ Score Prasetya, W., Akbar, M., & Tinas, B.. (2018). Journal of Business and Behavioural Entrepreneurship Volume.2 Nomor.2 2018 p (75-93)  On Identifying the Factors that Affect Turnover Intention.  https://doi.org/10.21009/JOBBE.002.2.04 Score Description 166 - 200 The individual has the ability to handle adversity and to move on with his life. 135 - 165 The individual is able to survive adversity by making use of the majority of his potential and can still improve himself by addressing several aspects of the AQ. 95 - 134 The individual is able to handle adversity ade- quately because he thinks everything is relatively fine. 60 - 94 The individual appears not to be able to make use of his potential. The adversity may cause him severe and unnecessary damage and makes it even more difficult for him to move on. 59 below The individual tends not to make use of his po- tential and he experiences unnecessary misery because of his lack of motivation, energy, health, vitality, performance, and resilience. 78 AQ has 4 dimensions (Stoltz, 2000), namely: a. Control This dimension refers to how much control the individual has over adver- sity. A score of 38-50 points indicates that someone has high control over adversity. High control has wide and positive implications and plays an im- portant role in improving someone's performance, productivity, and health in the long term. A score of 24-37 points shows that someone is able to respond to adversity and have control over it. A score of 10-23 points indicates that someone does not have control over adversity and there is little he can do to prevent or limit the damage. Low control makes someone less able to change the situation. b. Origin and Ownership This origin dimension explains who and what causes adversity, while the ownership dimension explains to what extent an individual recognizes the effects of the adversity. A score of 38-50 points reflects someone's ability to avoid blaming himself unnecessarily and places responsibility correctly to himself. A score of 24-37 points shows that someone responds to adversity as something that comes from outside and sometimes from within. The person will blame himself unnecessarily for the adversity. He will only be responsi- ble for his faults and will not contribute any further. A score of 10-23 points indicates that the individual views adversity as his own fault and if something good happens, it is considered as luck caused by external forces. c. Reach This dimension question to what extent adversity will affect certain aspects of an individual’s life. A score of 38-50 reflects someone's ability to respond to adversity as something specific and limited. If someone is able to limit the adversity, he will be more empowered and will feel less overwhelmed. This will make frustration as well as life difficulties and challenges easier for him to handle. For an individual with a high score in this dimension, a bad day is not a setback; a grueling meeting is not a failure, a conflict with someone close to him is just a misunderstanding, not a relationship breakdown. A score of 24-37 points indicates someone's ability to respond to adversity as something specific, but occasionally he lets adversity affect certain aspects of his life. When he is disappointed, he will consider adversity as a disaster and views adversity much larger than it is supposed to be. A score of 10-23 points indicates that the individual views adversity as something that destroys his life. Criticism from his superior will be viewed as career breakdown and fi- nancial loss as financial bankruptcy. d. Endurance This dimension questions how long the adversity and its causes will last. The lower the endurance is, the individual will feel that adversity will last long. A score of 38-50 points indicates that someone may consider success as something that lasts long or even permanently, while adversity is viewed as something temporary. A score of 24-37 points indicates that someone will respond to adversity and its causes as something bad and something that will last long. As a result, the person may delay making a constructive decision. Prasetya, W., Akbar, M., & Tinas, B.. (2018). Journal of Business and Behavioural Entrepreneurship Volume.2 Nomor.2 2018 p (75-93)  On Identifying the Factors that Affect Turnover Intention.  https://doi.org/10.21009/JOBBE.002.2.04 79 His faith and the decision to move on may be fine, but on a certain occasion, he feels weakened, especially when he experiences a heavy setback. A score of 10-23 points shows someone’s feeling that adversity and obstacles will last long and something positive as a temporary thing. Job Satisfaction (JS) Robbins (2003) pointed out that JS refers to employees’ perception and attitude to- wards the differences between the rewards that are gained and the rewards that are ac- tually received. According to Mathis (2006), JS is the employees' good and positive emotional state based on their work experiences, while Handoko (2004) stated that JS refers to employees' opinions about their jobs, whether or not emotionally it is a pleas- ant one. Based on the above definitions, JS may be defined as the feeling or the emotional conditon experienced by employees when the extrinsic factor (e.g., supervision, ad- vancement, security, policy, working condition, colleague, compensation, social status, and recognition) and the intrinsic factor (e.g., activity, creativity, achievement, authori- ty, compentency use, responsibility, moral value, and social service) fall within the expectation of employees. The Minnesota Satisfaction Questionnaire (MSQ) is a research instrument wide- ly used to collect data on JS. This instrument has been used by many researchers in their studies on JS. According to Gibson (1996), the main reason for the popularity of this instrument is that it has the criteria or the attributes of a good survey, namely va- lidity (the instrument is able to measure what it is supposed to measure), reliability (the instrument shows consistency), content (the instrument contains factors that affect the working environment and organization effectiveness), language style (the instrument uses language that is easy to understand), norm (the instrument interprets the job satis- faction survey as absolute basis). Below in Table 2 are 20 aspects of JS included in the MSQ. Table 2. Job Satisfaction Items in MSQ Prasetya, W., Akbar, M., & Tinas, B.. (2018). Journal of Business and Behavioural Entrepreneurship Volume.2 Nomor.2 2018 p (75-93)  On Identifying the Factors that Affect Turnover Intention.  https://doi.org/10.21009/JOBBE.002.2.04 no item scale 1. Activity. The opportunity to keep busy all the time 1-5 2. Freedom. The opportunity to do work in one’s own way 1-5 3. Variation. The opportunity to do something different from time to time 1-5 4. Social status. The opportunity to become part of the work environ- ment 1-5 5. Relationship with Superior. The method used by superior to man- age subordinates 1-5 6. Technical supervision. The ability of superior to make correct de- cisions 1-5 7. Moral value. The ability to do things that are not against one’s own conscience 1-5 8. Security. The opportunity to feel securely employed 1-5 9. Social service. The opportunity to do things for other people 1-5 10. Authority. The opportunity to inform people about things to do 1-5 80 Source (Weiss et al. 1967) Motivation According to Robbins and Judge (2011), motivation refers to a process that is con- cerned with the intensity, direction, and resilience shown by an individual in achieving his goal. In general, motivation is related to all kinds of goals. One of them, the organi- zation goal, focuses on work behavior. According to Colquit, LePine, and Wesson (2011), motivation is defined as a group of energetic forces, both externally and inter- nally, shown by employees in their work efforts viewed in terms of direction, intensity, and resilience. Another definition was provided by Greenberg and Baron (2003) who stated that motivation is a series of processes that arouse, direct and maintain the hu- man behavior in achieving a certain goal. Based on the definitions by several scholars above, it can be concluded that job motivation (JM) refers to the internal push that en- courages someone to do what he is assigned to do by using his authority and skills to make his work bear fruit and there is company transparency in acknowledging the re- sults of his work. Someone’s motivation data can be collected through an instrument called the Job Diagnostic Survey (JDS) proposed by Lee and Ross (2007) and then converted into the MPS (Motivation Potential Score), as seen below. MPS = Motivation Potential Score According to Hackman and Oldham (1980), the MPS may reveal employees’ motiva- tion and their motivation can be classified into three groups as follows: 1. Low motivation group with an MPS score of 1 – 16 points 2. Medial motivation group with an MPS score of 17 – 43 points 3. High motivation group with an MPS score of 44 – 125 points Prasetya, W., Akbar, M., & Tinas, B.. (2018). Journal of Business and Behavioural Entrepreneurship Volume.2 Nomor.2 2018 p (75-93)  On Identifying the Factors that Affect Turnover Intention.  https://doi.org/10.21009/JOBBE.002.2.04 11. Competency use. The opportunity to do one’s best in work 1-5 12. Application of company policy. The company policy in practice 1-5 13. Compensation. The opportunity of being compensated in accord- ance with one's achievement 1-5 14. Advancement. The opportunity of advancement in one's work 1-5 15. Responsibility. The freedom to make one’s own decision 1-5 16. Creativity. The opportunity to use one’s own competency in work 1-5 17. Working condition. The condition at work 1-5 18. Colleague. The ability to get along well with colleagues 1-5 19 Recognition. The possibility of getting the reward for best work completed 1-5 20. Achievement. The opportunity for having a sense of achievement in one's work 1-5 81 Turnover Intention (TOI) A number of scholars provided their own definitions for TOI. For example, Jen Hung Wang., et al (2016) referred to it as the cognitive process experienced by unsat- isfied employees and has been viewed as a variable that may predict the actual staff or labor turnover. According to Haggala and Jayatilake (2017), TOI is a voluntary inten- tion to regard a company as a place of employment or to leave a company totally. An- other definition proposed by Sager, et al (1998) argued that TOI is a mental decision that has to be made by someone whether he should keep his job or leave his job. Based on the definitions above, it can be concluded that TOI is someone's wish to leave his current job in order to find a better new job. The wish to leave a company is shown by behaviors such as thinking of leaving, searching for other alternative jobs, having the intention to leave, being repeatedly absent from work, feeling lazy to work, complaining to superior, and other negative behaviors. METHODOLOGY The research was conducted on the employees of PT. Petrosea located in Ke- lurahan Kariangau, Tanjung Batu, Balikpapan, East Kalimantan Timur, with a popula- tion consisting of 245 research participants. The number of samples was determined by applying the Slovin formula shown below. In this work, we used questioner based on several parameters, i.e., adversity quotient, job satisfaction, job motivation, and turno- ver intention. The number of questioner’s statement for each variable was 40 items, 20 items, 10 items, 8 items, respectively. To measure the adversity quotient, we used Stoltz’s Method. Meanwhile, the job satisfaction was based on Minnesota Satisfaction Questionnaire and the job motivation was based on Job Diagnostic Survey. (Solvin’s equation) where n is the number of sample, N is the number of population, and d is the estimated error. The samples were selected by using the simple random sampling method. The data was collected by requesting the research participants to fill out the questionnaires. Be- fore it was administered, the questionnaires were tested for validity and reliability with a sample consisting of 30 respondents. After the questionnaires had been proved to be valid and reliable, they were administered to collect the research data, resulting in a sample consisting of 152 respondents. The collected data was later analyzed based on the Structural Equation Modelling (SEM) with an application software named Lisrell. DISCUSSION Respondent Characteristics As stated earlier, a sample consisting of 152 respondents was collected from PT. Petrosea is located in Kelurahan Kariangau, Tanjung Batu, Balikpapan, East Kali- mantan. The sample has the characteristics shown in Table 3 below. , 1 2   dN N n Prasetya, W., Akbar, M., & Tinas, B.. (2018). Journal of Business and Behavioural Entrepreneurship Volume.2 Nomor.2 2018 p (75-93)  On Identifying the Factors that Affect Turnover Intention.  https://doi.org/10.21009/JOBBE.002.2.04 82 Table 3. Respondent Characteristics As we see in the above table, the majority of employees consisted of men (62%) and women (38%). The age of the employees was dominated by 21-35-year-old employees (73%), while the rest was more than 35 years old (27%). The length of the work con- sisted of 0 – 5 years (60%) and more than five years (40%). The adversity quotient (AQ) measurement The results of the AQ measurement from PT. Petrosea are shown in Table 4 below. Prasetya, W., Akbar, M., & Tinas, B.. (2018). Journal of Business and Behavioural Entrepreneurship Volume.2 Nomor.2 2018 p (75-93)  On Identifying the Factors that Affect Turnover Intention.  https://doi.org/10.21009/JOBBE.002.2.04 Characteristics Number of re- spondents percentages Gender male 94 62% female 58 38% total 152 100% Age 21-25 24 16% 26-30 52 34% 31-35 35 23% 36-40 20 13% 41-45 13 9% 46-50 6 4% 51-55 2 1% total 152 100% Length of work < 1 year 40 26% 1-5 years 51 34% 6-10 years 40 26% > 10 years 21 14% total 152 100% Variable Sub-Variable Questionnaire Item Score Average Total Score AQ Control The fact that my colleagues at work did not accept my idea is something that … (C1) 3,18 31,26 The fact that I had a violent quarrel with my colleagues at work is some- thing that … (C2) 2,94 The fact that my colleagues at work did not pay enough attention to me is some- thing that … (C3) 3,20 The fact that my colleagues at work were seriously sick is something that … (C4) 3,08 The fact that I did not get picked up by the company bus is something that … (C5) 3,16 83 Table 4. The AQ Scores of PT. Petrosea Employees Prasetya, W., Akbar, M., & Tinas, B.. (2018). Journal of Business and Behavioural Entrepreneurship Volume.2 Nomor.2 2018 p (75-93)  On Identifying the Factors that Affect Turnover Intention.  https://doi.org/10.21009/JOBBE.002.2.04 The fact that the company project that I was responsible for failed is something that … (C6) 3,05 The fact that I was forced to accept salary reduction is something that … (C7) 3,14 The fact that the doctor warned me about my health is something that … (C8) 3,16 The fact that I accepted the unfavorable results of my work evaluation is some- thing that … (C9) 3,26 The fact that I was not promoted is something that … (C10) 3,07 origin The reason why my colleagues did not accept my idea is completely related to … (Or1) 3,19 32,03 The reason why my colleagues did not pay enough attention to me is com- pletely related to … (Or2) 3,14 The reason why I did not get picked up by the company bus is completely relat- ed to … (Or3) 3,31 The reason why I was forced to accept salary reduction is completely related to … (Or4) 3,18 The reason why I was not promoted is completely related to … Or5) 3,30 Qwnership The fact that I had a violent quarrel with my colleagues at work is some- thing that I feel … (Ow1) 3,23 The fact that my colleagues at work were seriously sick is something that I feel … (Ow2) 3,18 The fact that the company project that I was responsible for failed is something that I feel … (Ow3). 3,26 The fact that the doctor warned me about my health is something that I feel … (Ow4) 3,20 The fact that I accepted the unfavorable results of my work evaluation is some- thing that I feel … (Ow5) 3,04 Reach The fact that people did not pay atten- tion to my presentation is something that … (R1) 3,16 30,91 The fact that my relationship with col- leagues at work and with family did not work well is something that … (R2) 3,07 The fact that I was asked to move if I still wanted to work is something that … (R3) 2,97 The fact that I was not approved to do something important is something that … (R4) 3,06 The fact that I had negative feedback from my close friend is something that … (R5) 3,07 84 As seen in Table 4 above, the total score of control reached 31,26 points, which means it lies between 24-37 points. This score shows that the employees of PT. Petrosea ex- perienced adversity at work, but the adversity was still within their control. However, if the adversity got worse, they might not be able to maintain their control. The total score of both origin and ownership control reached 32,03 points, which means the score lies between 24-37 points. This score shows that on average the employees of PT. Petrosea responded to adversity as something caused by external forces and some- times brought about by their own faults. On average the employees of PT. Petrosea blamed themselves unnecessarily for the unfavorable effects of adversity and they would be responsible only for the adversity brought about by their own faults. They also did not want to offer more contributions. The total score of reach was 30,91 points, which means it lies between 24-37 points. This score shows that the employees of PT. Petrosea responded to adversity as something special or specific, but they sometimes embraced adversity and considered it part of their life. When they felt disappointed, they would consider adversity as a disaster and make it even worse than it was supposed to be. The total score of endur- ance reached 30,24 points, which means it lies between 24-37 points. This score indi- cates that the employees of PT. Petrosea responded to adversity as something that would last long. This sometimes made the employees delay making constructive deci- Prasetya, W., Akbar, M., & Tinas, B.. (2018). Journal of Business and Behavioural Entrepreneurship Volume.2 Nomor.2 2018 p (75-93)  On Identifying the Factors that Affect Turnover Intention.  https://doi.org/10.21009/JOBBE.002.2.04 The fact that my colleagues at work were seriously ill is something that … (R6) 3,09 The fact that my investment strategy failed is something that … (R7). 3,20 The fact that my car broke down on a trip is something that … (R8) 3,03 The fact that my friends did not reply to my messages is something that … (R9) 3,22 The fact that my cholesterol level was too high is something that … (R10) 3,04 Endurance The reason why people did not pay attention to my presentation ... (E1) 2,95 30,24 The reason why my relationship with someone I loved did not work well … (E2) 2,95 The reason why I was asked to move … (E3) 2,99 The reason why I was not approved to do something important … (E4) 2,95 The reason why I had negative feed- back from my close friend … (E5) 3,16 The reason why my colleagues at work were seriously ill … (E6) 3,07 The reason why my investment strategy failed … (E7) 3,04 The reason why my car broke down … (E8) 2,95 The reason why my cholesterol level was too high … (E9) 3,11 The reason why my friends did not reply to my messages ... (E10) 3,06 85 sions. It was good for them to maintain their faith and to step forward, but on a certain occasion, their spirit and hope might decrease or even disappear, especially when suf- fering a severe setback. The score of AQ in total reached 124,44 points, which lies between 95 – 134 points. This score indicates that the employees were quite good in their responding to all kinds of adversity at work because they thought everything seemed relatively fine. The job satisfaction (JS) measurement JS was measured based on the data collected from the Minnesota Satisfaction Questionaire (MSQ). The questionnaire consists of 20 items with responses ranging from completely satisfied (5), satisfied (4), neither satisfied nor unsatisfied (3), unsat- isfied (2), completely unsatisfied (1). The measurement results can be seen in Table 5 below. Prasetya, W., Akbar, M., & Tinas, B.. (2018). Journal of Business and Behavioural Entrepreneurship Volume.2 Nomor.2 2018 p (75-93)  On Identifying the Factors that Affect Turnover Intention.  https://doi.org/10.21009/JOBBE.002.2.04 No indicator average 1 Activity. The ability to keep busy all the time 3,04 2 Freedom. The opportunity to do work in one’s own way 3,14 3 Variation. The opportunity to do something different from time to time 2,86 4 Social status. The opportunity to become part of the work environment 2,63 5 Relationship with Superior. The method used by superior to manage subordinates 3,04 6 Technical supervision. The ability of superior to make correct decisions 2,93 7 Moral value. The ability to do things that are not against one’s own conscience 2,80 8 Security. The opportunity to feel securely employed 3,12 9 Social service. The opportunity to do things for other people 2,89 10 Authority. The opportunity to inform people about things to do. 2,96 11 Competency use. The opportunity to do one’s best in work 3,22 12 Application of company policy. The company policy in practice 2,99 13 Compensation. The opportunity of being compensated in accordance with one's achieve- ment 2,86 14 Advancement. The opportunity of advancement in one's work 3,14 15 Responsibility. The freedom to make one’s own decision 3,08 16 Creativity. The opportunity to use one’s own competency in work 2,88 17 Working condition. The condition at work 2,64 18 Colleague. The ability to get along well with colleagues 2,76 19 Recognition. The possibility of getting a reward for the best work completed 2,70 20 Achievement. The opportunity for having a sense of achievement in one's work 2,58 Total score 58,26 Total score average 2,913 86 Table 5. JS Scores The classification of employees’ JS can be measured by using the following formula: Scale Range (SR) = (Max Score-Min Score)/5 SR = (5-1)/5 = 0,8 Based on the scale range above, we can write a table containing the classification of PT. Petrosea employees' JS, as shown below. Table 6. Classifica- tion of JS The present research found that on average the score of PT. Petrosea employees' JS was above 2,913. This means the employees were fairly satisfied with their jobs. JS was one of the variables investigated in this study because it has proved to be one of the important factors that can trigger turnover intention. The job motivation (JM) measurement To determine the motivation level of PT. Petrosea employees, we measured it using the JDS (Job Diagnostic Survey). The JM measurement was done by totaling the score of each item and then counting the average score for the existing 5 aspects of motivation. The table below presents the average score of each aspect of JM. Prasetya, W., Akbar, M., & Tinas, B.. (2018). Journal of Business and Behavioural Entrepreneurship Volume.2 Nomor.2 2018 p (75-93)  On Identifying the Factors that Affect Turnover Intention.  https://doi.org/10.21009/JOBBE.002.2.04 index JS category 1 – 1.8 Completely unsatisfied 1.8 – 2.6 Unsatisfied 2.6 – 3.4 Fairly satisfied 3.4 – 4.2 Satisfied 4.2 - 5 Completely satisfied Indicator Item The average score of the item Average of in- dicator Variation of skills I think the work I do is quite simple and does not vary. 3,17 3,06 I think the work I do requires com- plex/complicated skills and compe- tence. 2,95 Work identity I think I am able to do my work from the beginning to the end with good results. 2,86 2,875 I think I am given chances to do my work until it is completed. 2,89 Work significance I think the results of my work can provide positive effects to my col- leagues. 2,99 2,925 I think the results of my work can provide positive effects on the compa- ny's progress. 2,86 Autonomy I think my work and my position at work do not restrict me when I make a decision or take an initiative. 2,76 2,69 87 Table 7. The score of 5 Aspects of JM To measure the employees’ JM, we used the JDS method with the following formula: The JM level of employees was measured based on the MPS (Motivational Potential Score) in the JDS (Job Design Survey) with the following types of classification: i) low level of motivation with the JDS scores of 1-16 points, ii) middle level of motiva- tion with the JDS scores of 17-43 points, iii) high level of motivation with the JDS scores of 44-125 points (Ramadhita, Setiawan, Ummi, 2017). The present research found that on average the score of PT. Petrosea employees' JM was 24,54, which means in terms of JM level, PT. Petrosea employees belonged to the middle level. It should be noted, however, that the company should not be satisfied with the employees' current level of JM. In other words, the company should keep improving the motivation of employees because the JM has proved to give a significant effect to the performance of employees (Qadir, Ghayyur., Saeed, Imran., Khan, Saif Ullah, 2017). If the JM keeps decreasing, it might hamper the performance of the company. Research conducted by Sajjad, Asif, Ghazanfar, Hassan, and Ramzan (2013) showed that JM can be used as a predictor for decreasing the level of staff or labor turnover. The Effects of the Adversity Quotient (AQ), Job Satisfaction (JS), and Job Motivation (JM) on Turnover Intention (TOI) After all the variables (AQ, JS, and JM) had been measured, we needed to de- termine how the variables affected the TOI of the employees. The measurement used in determining the correlation between the three variables and TOI was based on the Structural Equation Modeling that was generated by the application software LISREL 8.7. Before the relationship between variables was measured, an evaluation on good- ness of fit was conducted first. The modification process was done by adding covari- ants onto the variable that had the highest score of modification indices to improve the model. Below is the diagram containing the output modification indices. Prasetya, W., Akbar, M., & Tinas, B.. (2018). Journal of Business and Behavioural Entrepreneurship Volume.2 Nomor.2 2018 p (75-93)  On Identifying the Factors that Affect Turnover Intention.  https://doi.org/10.21009/JOBBE.002.2.04 I think my colleagues and superiors appreciate the decision I make or the initiative I take. 2,62 Feedback I think my work enables me to interact well with my colleagues, superiors, and anyone involved with my work. 3,02 3,095 I think my superiors and colleagues provide positive feedback for the re- sults of my work. 3,17 88 Figure 1. Path Diagram Model for T-value AQ17.98 AQ26.25 AQ35.87 AQ46.89 AQ TOI KK MO KK1 8.14 KK2 8.00 KK3 7.93 KK4 8.31 KK5 8.44 KK6 8.15 KK7 7.88 KK8 8.30 KK9 7.80 KK10 8.37 KK11 8.10 KK12 8.48 KK13 8.61 KK14 8.23 KK15 8.16 KK16 8.55 KK17 8.46 KK18 8.35 KK19 8.29 KK20 8.36 MO1 8.69 MO2 8.35 MO3 7.64 MO4 7.98 MO5 7.94 MO6 7.49 MO7 8.04 MO8 8.56 MO9 6.46 MO10 7.85 TOI1 6.61 TOI2 6.45 TOI3 7.42 TOI4 8.54 TOI5 8.25 TOI6 8.51 TOI7 6.44 Chi-Square=801.26, df=759, P-value=0.13957, RMSEA=0.019 5.34 5.66 6.11 4.56 3.70 5.26 6.25 4.58 6.65 4.37 5.48 3.67 2.22 4.74 5.26 2.90 3.56 4.51 4.54 4.78 -0.08 -3.59 -5.74 -4.92 -5.04 -6.00 -4.75 -2.32 -7.27 -5.27 5.65 5.04 2.70 3.59 2.45 5.78 3.54 5.70 5.95 5.17 -0.63 -0.39 2.91 -0.34 3.02 2.47 Prasetya, W., Akbar, M., & Tinas, B.. (2018). Journal of Business and Behavioural Entrepreneurship Volume.2 Nomor.2 2018 p (75-93)  On Identifying the Factors that Affect Turnover Intention.  https://doi.org/10.21009/JOBBE.002.2.04 89 A model is categorized fit if it has the p-value > 0,05 and the RMSEA value < 0,08. The output modification yielded the p-value 0,13957 and the RMSEA value 0,019. Therefore, our constructed model could be categorized as fit. The path diagram for the standardized solution yielded the output below. Figure 9. Structural Equation after Output Modification TOI = Turnover Intention MO = Motivation of Employees KK = Job Satisfaction of Employees Table 8 below shows the recapitulation of the goodness of fit resulting from modifica- tion. Table 8. Recapitulation of Goodness of Fit after Modification Prasetya, W., Akbar, M., & Tinas, B.. (2018). Journal of Business and Behavioural Entrepreneurship Volume.2 Nomor.2 2018 p (75-93)  On Identifying the Factors that Affect Turnover Intention.  https://doi.org/10.21009/JOBBE.002.2.04 category Gof measure- ment fitness target estimation result fitness value 1 Chi-square small value 801,26 Not fit P- value ≥ 0,05 0,14 fit NCP small value 42,26 fit 2 RMSEA ≤ 0,05 0,019 Fit P- value ≥ 0,05 1 Fit 3 ECVI ≤ saturated model and approximate model 6,66; saturat- ed 11,40; independ- ent 18,82 fit 4 AIC ≤ saturated model and approximate model 1005,26; saturated 1722; independence 2841,27 fit CAIC ≤ saturated model and approximate model 1415,70; saturated 3006,45; independence 5186,56 Fit 5 NFI ≥ 0,90 0,67 Not fit NNFI ≥ 0,90 0,92 fit CFI ≥ 0,90 0,92 fit IFI ≥ 0,90 0,93 fit RFI ≥ 0,90 0,65 Not fit 6 CN > 200 143,02 Not fit 7 RMR ≤ 0,05 0,076 Marginally fit AGFI ≥ 0,90 0,77 Marginally fit GFI ≥ 0,90 0,70 Not fit 90 As seen in the table above, based on the 17 parameters of Goodness of Fit, there were 10 fit parameters and 2 marginally fit. Parameters. Therefore, our constructed model could be categorized as fit. Based on the path diagram, if T-value > 1,96 or T-value < -1,96, it means there is a significant effect of the independent variable on the dependent variable. The re- sults of the present research showed that there was a significant effect of the AQ varia- ble on the JS variable shown by 3,02 T-value, which means T-value > 1,96. The pre- sent research supported the previous study by Jung Hee Song and Hae-Young Woo (2015) who argued that there was a correlation between the AQ variable and the JS variable. As for the effect of AQ on TOI, the results of the present research showed that the T-value was -0,34, which means it was larger than - 1,96 and smaller than 1,96. This means there was no direct and negative effect of AQ on TOI. The structural equa- tion, however, showed that the higher the score of AQ is, the lower the TOI will be, while the lower the score of AQ is, the higher the TOI will be. The present research supported the previous study by Yan Tian and Xia Zhen Fan (2014) who argued that the AQ has a positive relationship with the level of adaptation with the work environ- ment. The ability to adapt would decrease TOI. The AQ had a positive and significant effect on job motivation (JM). As shown by the path diagram, in the present research the T-value yielded was 2,47, which means T-value > 1,96. The research results showed that the ability shown by the em- ployees of PT. Petrosea to control adversity, to identify the causes of adversity, and to solve adversity increased their JM. The AQ indicates an individual’s ability to re- spond to adversity. A high AQ score indicates someone's exceptional ability to re- spond to adversity. The stress at work that is well managed may be turned into JM. Although employees have high stress at work, those who have high AQ scores will be able to turn it into JM (Chao-Ying Shen, 2014). There is a positive and significant effect of JS on JM. This was shown by the T- value in the path diagram that reached 2,91, which means it was higher than 1,96. The present research supported the previous study by Prof. S.K. Singh & Vivek Tiwari (2011) who argued that there was a positive correlation between JS and JM. That is, the higher the JS is, the higher the JM will be. JS did not affect TOI. This was shown in the path diagram with -0,63 T-value, which means this T-value was larger than – 1,96 and smaller than 1,96. Therefore, the results of the present research showed that there was no significant effect of JS on TOI. Using the data collected with the Minnesota Satisfaction Questionaire, the JS score of PT. Petrosea employees reached 2,913, which means the employees were quite satisfied with the jobs they had and therefore did not have a significant effect on TOI. It should be noted, however, that the structural equation TOI = - 0,077 KK - 0,048 MO - 0,052 AQ showed that the higher the JS of PT. Petrosea employees was, the lower their TOI would be. The present research supported the previous study by Shields & Ward (2001) who stated that the employees who reported their dissatisfac- tion at work had 65% higher possibility of quitting their jobs than those who reported their satisfaction. Prasetya, W., Akbar, M., & Tinas, B.. (2018). Journal of Business and Behavioural Entrepreneurship Volume.2 Nomor.2 2018 p (75-93)  On Identifying the Factors that Affect Turnover Intention.  https://doi.org/10.21009/JOBBE.002.2.04 91 The JM of PT. Petrosea employees did not affect TOI, as shown in the path di- agram with -0,39 T-value. Thus, this T-value was higher than -1,96 and smaller than 1,96, which means there was no significant effect of JS on TOI. It should be noted, however, that the structural equation TOI = - 0,077 KK - 0,048 MO - 0,052 AQ showed that the higher the JM of PT. Petrosea employees was, the lower their TOI would be. The present research supported the previous study by Anders Dyvik & Bard Kuwaas (2008) who pointed out that JM is a predictor of TOI. That is, the level of TOI will increase if employees’ JM is low. CONCLUSIONS AND SUGGESTIONS Based on our research results, we concluded that there was a positive and significant effect of AQ on JS. Furthermore, the AQ of PT. Petrosea employees did not have a significant effect on TOI, but it should be noted that the higher the employees’ AQ is, the lower the TOI will be. The AQ had a positive and significant effect on the JM of PT. Petrosea employees. JS had a positive and significant effect on the JM of PT. Pe- trosea employees. JS did not affect TOI, but it should be noted that the higher the em- ployees’ JS is, the lower the TOI will be. JM did not affect TOI, but it should be noted that the higher the employees’ JM is, the lower the TOI will be. When recruiting new employees, it is suggested that the company should not just prioritize IQ and EQ, but also AQ. This is because AQ may affect employees' JS and JM. These two variables might improve their job performance, which in the end bene- fits the company. In this way, the possibility of staff or labor turnover can be decreased or even prevented. REFERENCES AMMA. (2013). A MMA Research Paper: Labour Turnover. p.16. Anonim. (2018). Sektor Tambang Hanya Tumbuh 0,74% di kuartal 1-2018 (online).https://finance.detik.com/berita-ekonomi-bisnis. (Retrieved on Septem- ber 4, 2018). Colquit, Jason A, Jeffery A. LePine & Michael J Wesson. (2011). Organizational Be- haviour. New York: McGraw-Hill Gibson,et al. (1996). Orgazational Behaviour, Structure, Process. Sevent Edition. Bos- ton: Erwin Homewood. Greenberg, Jerald & Baron, Robert A. (2003). Behavior in Organization. New Jersey: Prentice Hall. Hackman, J.R & Oldham, Greg. (1976). Motivation Through The Design of Work: Test of a Theory. Organizational Behaviour and Performance, 16. p. 258. Handoko, T. Hani. (2004). Manajemen Personalia dan Sumber Daya Manu- sia.Yogyakarta: BPFE. Haggala, K.H.Yasas Udara, Jayatilake, Lakmini V.K. Study on Organizational Culture and Turnover Intention in International Information Technology Firm in Srilan- Prasetya, W., Akbar, M., & Tinas, B.. (2018). Journal of Business and Behavioural Entrepreneurship Volume.2 Nomor.2 2018 p (75-93)  On Identifying the Factors that Affect Turnover Intention.  https://doi.org/10.21009/JOBBE.002.2.04 92 ka. International Journal of Scientific Research and Inovative Technology. Vol. 4, No. 2, pp. 48-63. Huang, Ting-Pang. (2011). Comparing Motivating Work Charateristic, Job Satisfac- tion and Turnover Intention of Knowledge Workers and Blue Collar Workers and Testing a Structural Model of The Variables Relationships in China and Ja- pan. The International Journal of Human resource Management.924- 944.doi:1080/09585192.2011.555134 Madelin, B.(2001). Les Femmes-relais, les “ San-papiers”du Travail Social?. V Elen- jeux. Vol. 124 : pp. 81-91. Mathis, Robert L & Jacskon, John H. (2006). Human Resources Management.Jakarta: Salemba Empat. Mirza, R & Atrizka, D. (2018). Job Satisfaction in Term of Adversity Quotient and Work Family Conflict on Married Female Nurses in RSUD Dr. Djoelham, Bin- jai. Jurnal Diversita Vol.4. No.2. Desember 2018.doi:http//dx.doi.org/10.31289/ diversita-v4i2.2049 Qadir, Ghayyur., Saeed, Imran., Khan, Saif Ullah.(2017). Re;ationship Between Moti- vation and Employee Performance, Organizational Goals: Moderating Role of Employee Empowerment. Journal of Business and Tourism.Vol. 3, No. 1. Ramadhita, Shinta., Setiawan, Hadi., Ummi, Nurul(2017). Pengaruh Motivasi dan Kepuasan Kerja Terhadap Kinerja. Jurnal Teknik Industri. Vol. 5, No. 2. Robbins, Stephen P. (2003). Organizational Behavior (9th Edition). New Jersey: Pear- son Education Inc. Robbins, Stephen P & Coulter, Mary. (2015). Management (13th edition). New Jersey: Pearson. Robbins, Stephen P & Judge, Timothy A. (2011). Organizational Behavior. New Jer- sey: Pearson Education Inc. Sager, J.K., Yi, J & Futrel, C.M. (1998). A Model Depicting Sales People’s Percep- tion. Journal of Personal Selling and Sales Management. Vol.18, pp. 1-18. Sajjad, Aseif., Ghazanfar, Hasan., Ramzan, M, Dr (2013). Impact of Motivation on Employee Turnover In Telecom Sector of Pakistan. Journal of Business Studies Quarterly. Vol.3, No.1, pp.76-92. Shen, Chao Ying. (2014). The relative Study of Gender Roles and Job Stress and Ad- versity Quotient.The Journal of Global Business Management.Vol.10, No.1. Shieds, Michael A & Ward, Melanie. (2001). Improving Nurse Retention in The Na- tional Health Service in England : The Impact of Job Satisfaction on Intention to Quit. Journal of Health Economics.Vol.20, pp. 677-701. Singh, S.K & Tivari, Vivek.(2011). Relationship Between Motivation and Job Satis- faction of The White Colar Employee : A Case Study. Management Insight.Vol. VII, No. 2, pp. 31-39. Prasetya, W., Akbar, M., & Tinas, B.. (2018). Journal of Business and Behavioural Entrepreneurship Volume.2 Nomor.2 2018 p (75-93)  On Identifying the Factors that Affect Turnover Intention.  https://doi.org/10.21009/JOBBE.002.2.04 93 Song, Jung Hee & Woo, Hae Young. (2015). A Study on Adversity Quotient, Job Saisfaction and Turnover Intention According to Work Units of Clinical Nurs- ing Staff in Korea. Indian Journal of Science and Technology. Vol. 8, pp. 74- 78. Stoltz, Paul.G. (2000). A dversity Quotient, Mengubah Hambatan Jadi Peluang. Jakar- ta: PT. Grasindo. Stoltz, Paul G. (2005). A dversity Quotient. Jakarta: PT. Grasindo. Tian, Yan & Fan, Xia Zhen. (2014). Environmental Variable and Career Adaptability in Student Nurses. Journal of V ocational Behaviour.85.2014.251-257. DOI:http://dx.doi.org /10.1016/jvb.2014.07.006. Venkatesh, J & Shivaranjani, G. (2016). Adversity Quotient : A Universal Retention Strategy For Nascent Organizations Engineering & Tecnology. www.engineeringandtechnology inindia.com. Vol. 1 (Retrieved on December 5, 2016). Wang, Jen Hung., Tsai, Kuan Chen., Lei, Luo Jia Ru. (2016). Relationship Among Job Satisfaction, Organizational Commitment and Turnover Intention : Evidence From The Gambling Industry In Macau. Business and Management Studies. Vol.2, No. 1., pp. 104-110. Wirabrata, Dewa Gede Firstia & Fajrianti. (2013). Hubungan Adversity Quotient dengan Turnover Intention Pada Perawat di Instalasi Gawat Darurat RSUP San- glah. Journal Psikologi Industri Organisasi. Vol.2, No. 2. Weiss, David J. (1967). Manual for The Minnesota Satisfaction Questionaire. Wash- ington: Uniniversity of Minnesota. Ying Shen, Chao. (2014). The Relative Study of Gender Roles and Job Stress and Ad- versity Quotient. The Jounal of Global Business Management. Vol. 10, No. 1. Prasetya, W., Akbar, M., & Tinas, B.. (2018). Journal of Business and Behavioural Entrepreneurship Volume.2 Nomor.2 2018 p (75-93)  On Identifying the Factors that Affect Turnover Intention.  https://doi.org/10.21009/JOBBE.002.2.04