14 ABSTRACT This study aims to analyze the direct and indirect effects of antecedent variables on employee engage- ment. The study involved 272 respondents from two regional companies in the water sector in the Bogor area. The study took place from April 2018 to May 2019. Analysis of the data used Structural Equation Modeling Partial Least Square (SEMPLS) on employee engagement variables as the first endogenous variable, employee job satisfaction as the second endogenous variable and as mediating variables, as well as organizational culture variables and work environment as an exogenous variable. The results showed that the organizational culture variables, directly and indirectly, did not have a significant effect on the endogenous variables of employee engagement. Exogenous variables of the work environment, directly and indirectly, have a positive and significant influence on the employee engagement variable. The implication of the results of this study is that the Regional Water Supply Company (PDAM) in the Bogor region needs to develop its work environment attributes that can improve employee job satisfac- tion. This needs to be done considering that employee job satisfaction will affect the degree of employee engagement. Keywords: Employee engagement, employee job satisfaction, organizational culture, work environment Received: 19 Juny 2019 ; Accepted: 19 Juny 2019 ; Publish; Julyi 2019 How to Cite: Firdaus, M. A., Hamidah, H., Sutanto, S.. (2019). Antecedent Direct And Indirect Of Employee Engage- ment. Journal of Business and Behavioural Entrepreneurship, 3(1), 14-26. https://doi.org/10.21009/JOBBE.003.1.02 Antecedent Direct And Indirect Of Employee Engagement Muhamad Azis Firdaus Universitas Negeri Jakarta, Indonesia E-mail: muhamadazisf_s3@mahasiswa.unj.ac.id Hamidah Universitas Negeri Jakarta, Indonesia E-mail: hamidah@unj.ac.id Slamet Sutanto Universitas Negeri Jakarta, Indonesia 15 INTRODUCTION Sukmana and Firmansyah's research (Sukmana & Firmansyah, 2014, pp. 48–69) shows the existence of BUMD problems in several regions such as Bekasi, Bandung, and Makassar where there are BUMDs with unhealthy conditions, even said that 40% of 1,113 BUMDs in Indonesia has poor performance Similarly, research on BUMD in Riau Province shows that of the 4 Regional Companies, only two have audit commis- sions (Darsa, Andreas, & Arifin, 2015, pp. 1–9). This shows that supervision of BUMD operations is still minimal. The strategic role of Regional BUMDs requires BUMDs to be able to do public services as well as possible and strive to be able to contribute to Regional Original Income (PAD). Siswadi (2012, p. 9) said that the carrying capacity of asset ownership and large scale businesses owned by BUMD such as Regional Water Companies (PDAMs) and Regional Development Banks (BPD) cannot fully contribute to PAD significantly. This can be caused by the wrong viewpoint on bureaucratization in BUMD so that BUMD operations become less professional. In order to increase the professionalism of BUMD employees, strategic policies are needed, especially in the field of Human Resources. One that can be developed is related to the degree of employees engage- ment. Every employee has a different degree of employee engagement with the compa- ny/organization. Employee engagement is a concept related to individuals (Dajani, 2015). How employees have a commitment to their company, employee loyalty, how employees are responsible in carrying out their duties, how employees are involved in the company, how employees are involved in corporate activities outside working hours, how employee loyalty is part of indicators that can describe employees' attach- ment to their company. In Truss et.al's conclusion that differences in 'doing' engage- ment and 'being' engaged show that employee engagement is a theme that needs to be implemented, it is necessary to do common perceptions, and need to be developed as a construction/concept (Truss et al ., 2011). There are many factors that can influence the degree of employee engagement and the consequences of the degree of engagement such as participative leadership and organizational context factors (Kim, 2011), self evaluation and Perceive Organization- al Support (Chhetri, 2017), Perceived Supervisor support, Perceived Organizational Support and Organizational Justice (Rasheed, Khan, & Ramzan, 2013), Distributive justice, absorptive capacity, and job design (Handayani, Anggraeni, & Rahardja, 2017), Reward System, Job enrichment, leadership Effective, Scope of advancement & self-development , Employment security, Self-managed team & decision making au- thority (Barik & Kochar, 2017), employee perceptions of work and everything related to their work (David, 2016), Organizational Culture (Kaliannan & Adjovu, 2015), Leadership (Suharti & Suliyanto, 2012) and Corporate Social Responsibility (Tariq, 2015). In addition to the antecedent variables of employee engagement, employee en- gagement variables can also influence organizational commitment variables (Hanaysha, 2016). Likewise, some variables that do not support increasing employee engagement are lack of understanding of the employee's engagement (Davis, Frolova, & Callahan, 2016). Based on these problems, the purpose of this study is to analyze the antecedent variables of employee engagement. With known antecedent variables, this study is sig- nificant with the needs of employees who have a high degree of employee engage- ment, so that it can improve the performance of BUMD in general. Firdaus, M. A., Hamidah, H., Sutanto, S.. (2019). Journal of Business and Behavioural Entrepreneurship Volume.3 Nomor.1 2019 p (14-26)  Antecedent Direct And Indirect Of Employee Engagement.  https://doi.org/10.21009/JOBBE.003.1.02 16 The antecedent variables used to predict the degree of employee engagement, namely organizational culture, work environment, and job satisfaction are new varia- bles that are analyzed using structural equation modeling partial least square (SEM- PLS) in the analysis unit of permanent employees in public corporation. LITERATURE REVIEW High labor turns over in a company shows a problem related to the employee's engagement to the company, which causes employees to move to work or resign. La- bor turn over can also indicate the absence or lack of ownership of employees towards their organization/company. The lack of commitment of employees, in addition to im- pacting labor turn over (Shuck, Twyford, Reio, & Shuck, 2014), can further impact on company performance (Anitha, 2014). With employee engagement have a significant role in a company or organization. Employee engagement is a potential that can influ- ence the performance of the company in general, including through the efficiency and effectiveness of the company's operations. Employee engagement is a characteristic feeling of commitment, desire, and en- ergy (Holbeche & Matthews, 2012, p. 7), a degree that shows a person's activeness in his work (Thomas, 2009, p. 11), positive feelings, fulfilling, work in relation to the mind with the characteristics of Vigor, Dedication, Absorption (Kalia & Verma, 2017), commitment, dedication and loyalty to the organization, to coworkers and to their su- pervisors (Marciano, 2010, p. 40). Alfes et al in Armstrong (2014, p. 194) mention that employee attachments regarding Intellectual Engagement, Affective Engagement, and Social Engagement. Noe (2011, p. 277) defines employee engagement is a degree of involvement of an employee in his work and is strongly committed to his work and his company. Likewise Kahn's definition in Armstrong (2014, p. 194), in Kahn's state- ment, can be interpreted that employee attachment as the utilization of organizational members for their own work roles is manifested in the form of physical, cognitive, and emotional involvement in their work. Employee satisfaction is defined as a positive feeling towards a job as a result of the characteristics of the job itself (Robbins & Judge, 2013, p. 74), concerning employ- ees' feelings for their work as a result of evaluating everything related to the work (Locke, 2009, p. 107). Armstrong and Taylor (2014, p. 177) mention the effects on the level of satisfaction and dissatisfaction. Saner (2015) in his research used the Minneso- ta Satisfaction Questionnaire (MSQ) questionnaire. Research Gu and Itoh (2015) used employee satisfaction variables arranged in 5 dimensions. The dimensions that deter- mine job satisfaction are also analyzed in Malaysia, four factors that determine job sat- isfaction are benefits, support from colleagues, managerial support and co-conditions supported by career development (Munir & Rahman, 2016). Research using Grounded theory published in 2016 shows that there are several variables that significantly influ- ence job satisfaction (Izvercian, Potra, & Ivascu, 2016). An organization in which there are groups of people can certainly have a culture that can be different from other organizations. Culture in an organization needs to be formed and continue to be synchronized with environmental conditions, both internal and external. According to Bavik and Duncan (2014, pp. 55–66), the behavior of indi- viduals in organizations depends on internal and external forces that influence individ- uals, namely values, beliefs, and assumptions. Organizational culture is defined differently by several experts including organi- zational culture is a form of the basic assumptions that are shared and studied by a group and use it to solve problems in adaptation with external and internal integration, Firdaus, M. A., Hamidah, H., Sutanto, S.. (2019). Journal of Business and Behavioural Entrepreneurship Volume.3 Nomor.1 2019 p (14-26)  Antecedent Direct And Indirect Of Employee Engagement.  https://doi.org/10.21009/JOBBE.003.1.02 17 which runs quite well to be considered and then taught to new members in things that are correct in perception, thinking and feeling related to problems (Schein, 2010, p. 18), shared values, principles, traditions and ways of doing things that affect the way members of the organization act (Robbins & Coulter, 2012, p. 52), what employees perceive and how these perceptions shape trust, values and expectations (Gibson, 2011, pp. 31–32), describe organizational culture as a set of assumptions that are im- plicitly shared in an organization, which with the culture they make perceptions, think, and react i for various environments (Kinicki & Fugate, 2016, p. 480), ways to share experiences and membership in organizations that bind members informally and influ- ence what they think about themselves and their work (Wagner & Hollenbeck, 2010, p. 283), a set of values, norms and guidelines for shared trust and understanding / adopted by the members of the organization and taught to members as the right way of thinking, feeling and belonging to each other (Daft, 2010, p. 374), and shared values and beliefs that are used by members of the organization to understand the roles within the organization and organizational norms (Luthans, 2011, p. 169). Based on the Organizational Culture Assessment Instrument (OCAI), there are four types of organizational culture, namely hierarchic (bureaucratic) culture, market culture, clan culture, and adhocratic culture (Zavyalova & Kucherov, 2010). Charac- teristics of organizational culture according to Ghosh (2014) consist of seven charac- teristics, namely: Trust, Openness, Freedom to experiment, Individualism (versus col- lectivism), Attitude towards constructive dissent, Participation and Result orientation. Ali Bavik (2014) conducted research in the field of the hospitality industry using quali- tative methods with the development of definitions found based on the definition of organizational culture. the results of the study found that there are 9 factors that deter- mine organizational culture. A Hawthorne survey results show that the work environment can affect produc- tivity through better lighting (Entrekin & Scott-Ladd, 2014). Meanwhile, Armstrong (2009, p. 976) states that the work environment involves several things, namely the work system. Working conditions and how they behave with each other and their man- agers. Odedina et al. (2011) state that the work environment involves many variables that can significantly affect the organization. Olukunle S. Oludeyi (2015) that a work environment is a number of relation- ships that exist between employees and employers and the environment in which em- ployees work including technical, human and organizational environments. Mean- while, Jain and Kaur (2014) define a work environment as the environment in which people work. Jain and Kaur categorize the work environment into three parts, namely the physical work environment, mental work environment, and social work environ- ment. Kafui (2017) divides the work environment into three parts, namely physical work environment, psychological work environment, and social work environment. Jan Dul & Canan Ceylan (2011) states that the work environment consists of two di- mensions, namely the social-organizational work environment and the physical work environment. The organizational social work environment refers to the social role of employees and their organizations in the context of job design, work groups, reward systems, and leadership styles. The physical environment refers to the physical context around it such as the workplace and around the building where they work. Foldspang, et. Al (2014) describes the physical environment and social environment. Abdul Raziq (2015) states that the work environment consists of two dimensions, namely work (Work) and Context (context). Firdaus, M. A., Hamidah, H., Sutanto, S.. (2019). Journal of Business and Behavioural Entrepreneurship Volume.3 Nomor.1 2019 p (14-26)  Antecedent Direct And Indirect Of Employee Engagement.  https://doi.org/10.21009/JOBBE.003.1.02 18 Idaya Husna Mohd (2016) states that working environment conditions will be able to attract prospective employees to apply to certain work environment conditions. Related to a positive work environment, a positive work environment such as a healthy workplace, a safe workplace, access to information needed for work completion can increase productivity and employee commitment to the company. One of the instruments used to measure the work environment is the Copenhagen Psychosocial Questionnaire (COPSOQ II) released in 2007. The instrument was by Zabrodska et.al (2014). Other instruments were also developed to measure Quality Work Life in five Malaysian multinational companies (Razak, Ma'amor, & Hassan, 2016). RESEARCH METHOD The study took place from April 2018 until April 2019 involving 272 permanent employees in Regional Owned Enterprises (BUMD) in the Bogor region. Structural Equation Modeling (SEM) analysis is used to analyze the relationship between varia- bles and measure the influence of one variable with another variable. There are two types of SEM, namely Covariance Base SEM (CB-SEM) and Variance Base SEM (VB -SEM). CB-SEM is used to confirm or reject a theory, through an explanation of the theoretical model by estimating covariance matrices for a number of data (Hair, 2014, p. 4). Based on what is conveyed by Hair related to the rule of thumb (Hair, 2014, p. 19) then the VB-SEM or Partial Least Square SEM method will be used in the next analysis phase. The collection of quantitative data is carried out directly from the re- spondents through the questionnaire instrument related to the variables in the study. The variables contained in the questionnaire are Employee Engagement Variables, Or- ganizational Culture, Work Environment, and Employee Satisfaction in unidimension- al first-order constructs, where the direction of the relationship is reflective between latent variables and indicators where all relationships are recursive. The dimensions of the endogenous and exogenous variables used in this study were developed from several kinds of literature as in table 1. Table 1 variable and dimension of research Firdaus, M. A., Hamidah, H., Sutanto, S.. (2019). Journal of Business and Behavioural Entrepreneurship Volume.3 Nomor.1 2019 p (14-26)  Antecedent Direct And Indirect Of Employee Engagement.  https://doi.org/10.21009/JOBBE.003.1.02 Variable Dimension sources Employee en- gagement intellectual Engagement, Social Engagement, and Affective Engagement (ISA) (Soane et al., 2012), (Armstrong & Taylor, 2014, p. 194) Job Satisfaction Hygien factors dan Motivator factors, Hertzberg (Robbins & Judge, 2013, pp. 204–205) Organization cul- ture Visible culture, espouse values, core value (Luis R. Gomez-Mejia & Bal- kin B., 2012, pp. 106–108) Work Environ- ment Physical Environment and Social Environ- ment (Bojadjiev, Petkovska, Misos- ka, & Stojanovska, 2015) 19 RESULT AND DISCUSSION The number of respondents was 272 divided into 2 regions, namely PDAM Tirta Pakuan, Bogor City, as many as 127 respondents where 72 respondents were male and 55 respondents were female. The other respondents were 145 respondents from PDAM Tirta Kahuripan, Bogor Regency, which consisted of 97 male respondents and 48 fe- male respondents. Last respondent's education, it can be seen that the highest educa- tion level of respondents is at the Bachelor level, where as many as 72 undergraduate respondents are in PDAM Tirta Pakuan, Bogor City, and 74 undergraduate respond- ents are in PDAM Tirta Kahuripan, Bogor Regency. There is 1 respondent with S3 ed- ucation level, namely in PDAM Tirta Pakuan, Bogor City. The lowest level of educa- tion in junior high school and lower, located in PDAM Tirta Kahuripan, Bogor Regen- cy, as many as 2 respondents. The age group of respondents, it is known that the age group 20-26 years amounted to 73 respondents consisting of 45 respondents in PDAM Tirta Pakuan, Bo- gor City, and 28 respondents were in PDAM Tirta Kahuripan Regency. Bogor. The age group of respondents, which is greater than 53 years, is in PDAM Tirta Kahuripan, which is 5 respondents. The lowest age of respondents was 20 years and the oldest age was 59 years, with an average age of 33.04 years. The working period of the most respondents was in groups of 1-5 years, namely as many as 149 respondents, followed by groups of 6-10 years, namely 60 respond- ents. The average working period of respondents is 7.92 years (8 years), where the working period is lowest, namely 1 year and the longest working period is 31 years. The next analysis is testing the structural equation model (Structural Equation Model) of exogenous variables and endogenous variables of the study. The Structural Analysis in question is based on the variance where the nature of predictive research. Testing is done through two stages, namely measurement model (outer model) and structural equation testing (Inner Model). Outer models include testing the outer load- ing, Average Variance Extraced (AVE), and Composite Reliability (Cronbach Alpha). Inner Model testing is done by looking at the R square value (goodness fit model), Path Coefficient, and significance two tail. Convergent validity test is used to see the correlation between latent variables and in- dicators. The criteria in this test are the greater the correlation value (original sample) the better the relationship between the indicator and the latent variable. Validity testing can also be done by analyzing the Value of Average Variance Extraced (AVE), where the value of AVE must be> 0.5. From table 1 it is known that all variable forming indi- cators are AVE> 0.5. This shows that all indicators are valid and can be used for the next research phase. Reliability (reliability) of the instrument is used to see the accura- cy, consistency of the instrument in determining the contract/variable. Measurement of reliability can be observed using Cronbach alpha and composite reliability. Table 2 Validity and Reliability Test Results Variables Cronbach's Alpha Composite Reliability Average Variance Extracted (AVE) Organization Culture 0.875 0.896 0.501 Job Satisfaction 0.922 0.933 0.500 Employee engagement 0.776 0.838 0.502 Wor Environment 0.903 0.917 0.511 Firdaus, M. A., Hamidah, H., Sutanto, S.. (2019). Journal of Business and Behavioural Entrepreneurship Volume.3 Nomor.1 2019 p (14-26)  Antecedent Direct And Indirect Of Employee Engagement.  https://doi.org/10.21009/JOBBE.003.1.02 20 That all variables can be reliable, so that they can be used for the next research phase. Reliability can also be used with Composite Reliability, where the value of Composite Reliability will be greater than Cronbach alpha. Table 1, shows that all var- iables have Composite Reliability> Cronbach alpha value. Thus, measurement with Composite Reliability shows all variables have high reliability and can be used for the next research stage. The inner model measurement is intended to see the suitability of the model and measure direct and indirect influences. To get the results of the inner model analysis, the research model needs to be bootstrapping. The inner model analysis uses R square (goodness fit model), Path Coefficient, and Indirect effect. R Square shows how much endogenous variables are affected by exogenous variables. The calculation results in table 3 show that the first endogenous variable is the variable Employee Job Satisfac- tion influenced by Organizational Culture Variables and Work Environment Variables of 71.3%. Endogenous Variables Employee Engagement is influenced by Organiza- tional Culture Variables, Work Environment Variables and Variable Job Satisfaction of 39.5%. Table 3 Rsquare The path coefficient of structural equations can be found through the values of Tstat and P Values. Table 4 shows that three paths have a positive and significant in- fluence that has a value of Tstat> 1.96, and P-value <0.05, which is the influence of Job Satisfaction on Employee Engagement, Effect of Work Environment on Employee Satisfaction and Effect of Work Environment on Employee Engagement. The original sample value (O) shows a positive value, meaning that the effect that occurs is propor- tional/positive. The effect of Job Satisfaction on Work Engagement has the original sample value (O) 0.31, and the Effect of the Work Environment on Employee Entity the original sample value is 0.468 which falls into the Moderate category. While the influence of the work environment on job satisfaction the original sample value of 0.753 is included in the strong influence. This is in line with previous studies (Abraham, 2012; AbuAlRub, El-Jardali, Jamal, & Abu Al-Rub, 2016; Bin, 2015; Bojadjiev et al., 2015; Chaudhry, Jariko, Mushtaque, Mahesar, & Ghani, 2017 ; Di- mitrios, Kastanioti, Maria, & Dimitris, 2014; Mohd et al., 2016; Tio, 2014). There are 2 paths of insignificant influence, namely the Effect of Organizational Culture on Employee Job Satisfaction, and Organizational Culture with Employee En- gagement. This insignificant influence is indicated by the value of Tstat <1.96 and P value> 0.05. Table 4 Path Coeficient Firdaus, M. A., Hamidah, H., Sutanto, S.. (2019). Journal of Business and Behavioural Entrepreneurship Volume.3 Nomor.1 2019 p (14-26)  Antecedent Direct And Indirect Of Employee Engagement.  https://doi.org/10.21009/JOBBE.003.1.02 Endogenous variables R Square R Square Adjusted Job Satisfaction 0.713 0.711 Employee Engagement 0.395 0.388 Variables Original Sample (O) Sample Mean (M) Standard Deviation (STDEV) T Statistics (|O/ STDEV|) P Val- ues Organization Culture -> Job Satisfaction 0.108 0.120 0.076 1,417 0.157 Organization Culture -> Employee Engagement -0.156 -0.146 0.093 1,677 0.094 Job Satisfaction -> Employee Engagement 0.311 0.309 0.102 3,057 0.002 Work Environment-> Job Satisfaction 0.753 0.744 0.072 10,528 0.000 Work Environment -> Employee Engagement 0.468 0.467 0.119 3,944 0.000 21 The indirect effect of exogenous variables on endogenous variables Employee attachments can be seen in table 5. The effect of exogenous variables on Organization- al Culture on Employee Engagement variables through the mediating variable Kepuas- san Kerja is not significant because of the value of Tstat 1.162 <1.96 and P-value 0.246> 0.05. The results of this study are different from the results of other studies (Bigliardi, Ivo Dormio, Galati, & Schiuma, 2012; Biswas, 2015; Dimitrios et al., 2014; Jiony, Tanakinjal, Gom, & Siganul, 2015; Kalia & Verma, 2017). Table 5 Indirect influences The influence of the work environment on employee engagement through media- tion variables Job Satisfaction in table 5, shows a significant relationship where the value of Tstat 3.095> 1.96 and the P value of 0.002 <0.05. The Original Sample value shows the strength of influence and the nature of the relationship of exogenous varia- bles to endogenous variables. The original sample value of the Variable Linkgungan Work towards Employee Engagement through Job Satisfaction of 0.235 shows that relations are directly proportional to the strength of the relationship included in the Moderate category. CONCLUSION Conclusion of inference analysis for the whole sample using a confidence level of 95%. First, the influence of the Organizational Culture on the Engagement of Em- ployees of PDAMs in the Bogor region is not significant. Second, the influence of the work environment on the engagement of employees of PDAMs in the Bogor region is positive, moderate and significant. Third, the Influence of Organizational Culture on Job Satisfaction of PDAM employees in the Bogor region is not significant. Fourth, the Influence of the Work Environment on PDAM Job Satisfaction in the Bogor region is positive, strong and significant. Fifth, The Effect of Job Satisfaction on the Engage- ment of Employees of PDAMs in the Bogor region is positive, moderate and signifi- cant. Sixth, The Effect of Organizational Culture on Employee Engagement through Job Satisfaction of PDAMs in the Bogor region is insignificant. Seventh, The Effect of the Work Environment on Employee Engagement through Job Satisfaction of PDAMs in the Bogor region is positive, weak and significant. RECOMMENDATION Based on the research conclusions, the researcher recommends several things, namely first, Based on the conclusions and implications of the research results, where directly or indirectly (through employee job satisfaction), the work environment varia- ble will influence positively and significantly the PDAM employees' attitudes in the Bogor area. For this reason, in order to increase the degree of engagement of PDAM Firdaus, M. A., Hamidah, H., Sutanto, S.. (2019). Journal of Business and Behavioural Entrepreneurship Volume.3 Nomor.1 2019 p (14-26)  Antecedent Direct And Indirect Of Employee Engagement.  https://doi.org/10.21009/JOBBE.003.1.02 Variables Original Sample (O) Sample Mean (M) Standard Deviation (STDEV) T Statistics (|O/STDEV|) P Val- ues Organization Culture -> Job SAtisfaction -> Em- ployee Engagement 0.034 0.038 0.029 1,162 0.246 Work Environment -> Job SAtisfaction -> Employee Engagement 0.235 0.229 0.076 3,095 0.002 22 employees, the PDAM Management needs to carry out activities that can create a con- ducive work environment, both in the physical environment and social environment. Second, the creation of a work environment in the physical work environment and so- cial environment will foster employee job satisfaction, which in turn fosters employee engagement with the company. The physical environment that can be improved is the environment outside the company building, the environment in the building, ventila- tion in the workspace, complete security in the workplace, lighting in the workspace, and equipment and equipment to work. The social environment that needs to be devel- oped is Recognition of employee achievements, The work itself, Opportunities to grow and develop, Relationships with coworkers, Supervision of supervisors, Reward sys- tems, Corporate values, Responsibility for work, Positive feelings towards the organi- zation, Justice in determination salary and core value of the company. Third, Organiza- tional Cultural Variables that do not have an influence on employee attachments can be developed towards the formation of company image to gain stakeholder trust. As a regional government-owned company, PDAMs need to carry out strategic policies to build a corporate culture, especially on the visible dimension of culture, espoused val- ues, and core values. Fourth, PDAM Tirta Pakuan, Bogor and Tirta Kahuripan PDAM, Bogor Regency, need to carry out operational strategies to improve the performance of the indicators that have the lowest mean value is to encourage employees to pay atten- tion to their work when outside working hours (item number 5 variable employee en- gagement), compile a carrier path that matches the expertise (item number 17 variable employee job satisfaction), make policy compensation in accordance with employee performance (item number 9 organizational culture variables), as well as operational policies in employee career development (item number 10 work environment varia- bles). Fifth, the policy in maintaining and improving the performance of indicators that have the highest mean value needs to be done as well. These indicators are encourag- ing employees to have conformity of action with company objectives (item number 8 variable employee attachment), salary payment system / mechanism every month (item number 7 variable employee job satisfaction), synchronization of company vision with individual goals of employees working in PDAM (item number 15 variable organiza- tional culture), and maintain the cleanliness of places of worship (item number 3 varia- ble work environment). BIBLIOGRAPHY Abraham, S. (2012). Job Satisfaction as an Antecedent to Employee Engagement. SIES Journal of Management, 8(2). AbuAlRub, R., El-Jardali, F., Jamal, D., & Abu Al-Rub, N. (2016). Exploring the rela- tionship between work environment, job satisfaction, and intent to stay of Jorda- nian nurses in underserved areas. Applied Nursing Research, 31, 19–23. https:// doi.org/10.1016/j.apnr.2015.11.014 Anitha, J. (2014). Determinants of employee engagement and their impact on employ- ee performance. International Journal of Productivity and Performance Man- agement, 63(3), 308–323. https://doi.org/10.1108/IJPPM-01-2013-0008 Armstrong, M. (2009). Armstrong’s handbook of human resource management prac- tice (Eleventh ed). London ; Philadelphia: Kogan Page. Armstrong, M., & Taylor, S. (2014). Armstrong’s handbook of human resource man- agement practice (13th Edition). Philadelphia, PA: Kogan Page Ltd. Barik, S., & Kochar, A. (2017). Antecedents and Consequences of Employee Engage- Firdaus, M. A., Hamidah, H., Sutanto, S.. (2019). Journal of Business and Behavioural Entrepreneurship Volume.3 Nomor.1 2019 p (14-26)  Antecedent Direct And Indirect Of Employee Engagement.  https://doi.org/10.21009/JOBBE.003.1.02 23 ment: A Literature review. International Journal of Latest Technology in Engi- neering, Management & Applied Science (IJLTEMAS), VI(IV), 33–38. Bavik, A., & Duncan, T. (2014). Organizational Culture and Scale Development: Methodological Challenges and Future Directions. Nang Yan Business Journal, 3(1), 55–66. Bigliardi, B., Ivo Dormio, A., Galati, F., & Schiuma, G. (2012). The impact of organi- zational culture on the job satisfaction of knowledge workers. VINE, 42(1), 36– 51. https://doi.org/10.1108/03055721211207752 Bin, A. S. (2015). The relationship between job satisfaction, job performance and em- ployee engagement: An explorative study. Issues in Business Management and Economics, 4(1), 1–8. Biswas, W. (2015). Impact of Organization Culture on Job Satisfaction and Corporate Performance. Journal of Research in Humanities and Social Science, 3(8). Bojadjiev, M., Petkovska, S., Misoska, T., & Stojanovska, J. (2015). Perceived work environment and job satisfaction among public administration employees. The European Journal of Applied Economics, 12(1), 10–18. https://doi.org/10.5937/ ejae12-8154 Chaudhry, N. I., Jariko, M. A., Mushtaque, T., Mahesar, H. A., & Ghani, Z. (2017). Impact of Working Environment and Training & Development on Organization Performance Through Mediating Role of Employee Engagement and Job Satis- faction. European Journal of Training and Development Studies, 4(2), 33–48. Chhetri, S. B. (2017). Antecedents and Consequences of Job Engagement: Empirical Study of Bank Employees. Business Perspectives and Research, 5(2), 167–179. https://doi.org/10.1177/2278533717692919 Daft, R. L. (2010). Organization theory and design (10th ed). Mason, Ohio: South- Western Cengage Learning. Dajani, M. A. Z. (2015). The Impact of Employee Engagement on Job Performance and Organisational Commitment in the Egyptian Banking Sector. Journal of Business and Management Sciences, 3(5), 138–147. Darsa, T., Andreas, A., & Arifin, K. (2015). Pengaruh Tata Kelola Internal Terhadap Kinerja BUMD Provinsi Riau. Jurnal Akuntansi Keuangan dan Bisnis, 8(0), 1–9. Daud, N. (2016). Determinants of Job Satisfaction: How Satisfied are the New Genera- tion Employees in Malaysia? Procedia - Social and Behavioral Sciences, 219, 208–213. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.sbspro.2016.05.007 Davis, P. J., Frolova, Y., & Callahan, W. T. (2016). Perceptions, Antecedents and Consequents of Employee Engagement Initiatives in Australian Organizations. American Journal of Management, 16(1), 42–53. Dimitrios, B., Kastanioti, C., Maria, T., & Dimitris, N. (2014). The Influence of Or- ganizational Culture on Job Satisfaction of Administrative Employees at a Public Hospital: The Case of General Hospital of Larissa. Journal of Health Manage- ment, 16(2), 217–231. https://doi.org/10.1177/0972063414526108 Dul, J., & Ceylan, C. (2011). Work environments for employee creativity. Ergonom- ics, 54(1), 12–20. https://doi.org/10.1080/00140139.2010.542833 Entrekin, L., & Scott-Ladd, B. D. (2014). Human resouce management and change: a practising manager’s guide. London ; New York: Routledge, Taylor & Francis Group. Foldspang, L., Mark, M., Rants, L. L., Hjorth, L. R., & Langholz-Carstensen, C. (Eds.). (2014). Working environment and productivity: a register-based analysis of Nordic enterprises. Copenhagen: Nordic Council of Ministers. Ghosh, S., & Srivastava, B. K. (2014). Construction of a Reliable and Valid Scale for Firdaus, M. A., Hamidah, H., Sutanto, S.. (2019). Journal of Business and Behavioural Entrepreneurship Volume.3 Nomor.1 2019 p (14-26)  Antecedent Direct And Indirect Of Employee Engagement.  https://doi.org/10.21009/JOBBE.003.1.02 24 Measuring Organizational Culture. Global Business Review, 15(3), 583–596. https://doi.org/10.1177/0972150914535145 Gibson, J. L. (Ed.). (2011). Organizations: behavior, structure, processes (14th ed). Dubuque, IA: McGraw-Hill. Gu, X., & Itoh, K. (2015). Construct of Dialysis Employee Satisfaction: Acquiring Satisfaction Factors and Their Contributions: Dialysis Employee Satisfaction. Therapeutic Apheresis and Dialysis, 19(5), 503–512. https:// doi.org/10.1111/1744-9987.12297 Hair, J. F. (Ed.). (2014). A primer on partial least squares structural equations model- ing (PLS-SEM). Los Angeles: SAGE. Hanaysha, J. (2016). Testing the Effects of Employee Engagement, Work Environ- ment, and Organizational Learning on Organizational Commitment. Procedia - Social and Behavioral Sciences, 229, 289–297. https://doi.org/10.1016/ j.sbspro.2016.07.139 Handayani, S., Anggraeni, A. I., & Rahardja, E. (2017). Analysis of Antecedent and Consequence of Employee Engagement in Small and Medium-Sized Enterprises in Central Java, Indonesia. European Research Studies Journal, XX(3A), 500– 510. Holbeche, L., & Matthews, G. (2012). Engaged: unleashing your organization’s po- tential through employee engagement. San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass. Imam ghozali, & Latan, Hengky. (2015). Partial Least Square Konsep, Teknik dan Ap- likasi menggunakan Program SmartPls 3.0 (2nd ed.). Semarang: Badan Penerbit Universitas Diponegoro. Izvercian, M., Potra, S., & Ivascu, L. (2016). Job Satisfaction Variables: A Grounded Theory Approach. Procedia - Social and Behavioral Sciences, 221, 86–94. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.sbspro.2016.05.093 Jain, D. R., & Kaur, S. (2014). Impact of Work Environment on Job Satisfaction. In- ternational Journal of Scientific and Research Publications, 4(1), 8. Jiony, M. M., Tanakinjal, G. H., Gom, D., & Siganul, R. S. (2015). Understanding the Effect of Organizational Culture and Employee Engagement on Organizational Performance Using Organizational Communication as Mediator: A Conceptual Framework. American Journal of Economics, 5(2), 128–134. Kafui Agbozo, G. (2017). The Effect of Work Environment on Job Satisfaction: Evi- dence from the Banking Sector in Ghana. Journal of Human Resource Manage- ment, 5(1), 12–18. https://doi.org/10.11648/j.jhrm.20170501.12 Kalia, N., & Verma, Y. S. (2017). Organizational Culture and Employee Engagement: An Interrelationship Study in Hospitality Industry of Himachal Pradesh. Interna- tional Journal of Human Resource Management and Research (IJHRMR), 7(3), 13–22. Kaliannan, M., & Adjovu, S. N. (2015). Effective Employee Engagement and Organi- zational Success: A Case Study. Procedia - Social and Behavioral Sciences, 172, 161–168. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.sbspro.2015.01.350 Kim, C. (2011). Factors Influencing Public Employee Engagement and Its Impact on Organizational Performance. The Korean Journal of Policy Studies, 26(3), 69– 90. Kinicki, A., & Fugate, M. (2016). Organizational behavior: a practical, problem- solving approach (First edition). New York, NY: McGraw-Hill Education. Locke, E. A. (Ed.). (2009). Handbook of principles of organizational behavior: indis- pensable knowledge for evidence-based management (Second edition). Chiches- ter: John Wiley. Firdaus, M. A., Hamidah, H., Sutanto, S.. (2019). Journal of Business and Behavioural Entrepreneurship Volume.3 Nomor.1 2019 p (14-26)  Antecedent Direct And Indirect Of Employee Engagement.  https://doi.org/10.21009/JOBBE.003.1.02 25 Luis R. Gomez-Mejia, & Balkin B., D. (2012). Management, People Performance Change (12th ed). Upper Saddle River, N.J: Pearson Prentice Hall. Luthans, F. (2011). Organizational behavior: an evidence-based approach (12th ed). New York: McGraw-Hill Irwin. Marciano, P. L. (2010). Carrots and sticks don’t work: build a culture of employee en- gagements with the principles of RESPECT. Retrieved from http:// www.books24x7.com/marc.asp?bookid=35902 Mohd, I. H., Mohd Shah, M., & Zailan, N. S. Z. (2016, November 30). How Work En- vironment affects the Employee Engagement in a Telecommunication Company. 418–426. https://doi.org/10.15405/epsbs.2016.11.02.37 Munir, R. I. S., & Rahman, R. A. (2016). Determining Dimensions of Job Satisfaction Using Factor Analysis. Procedia Economics and Finance, 37, 488–496. https:// doi.org/10.1016/S2212-5671(16)30156-3 Noe, R. A., Hollenbeck, Gerhart, & Wright. (2011). Fundamentals of human resource management (4th ed). New York: McGraw-Hill Irwin. Odedina, S. A., Asuntade, O. B., Adebayo, A., Awudum, M., & Fapohunda, O. O. (2011). Policy and Agricultural Development in Nigeria: Challenges and Pro- spects. 25th Farm Management Association of Nigeria (FAMAN) Conference. Oludeyi, O. S. (2015). A Review of Literature on Work Environment and Work Com- mitment: Implication for Future Research in Citadels of Learning. University of Education, Ogun State, Nigeria, 2, 32–46. Rasheed, A., Khan, S., & Ramzan, D. M. (2013). Antecedents and Consequences of Employee Engagement: The Case of Pakistan. Journal of Business Studies Quar- terly, 4(4), 183–200. Razak, N. A., Ma’amor, H., & Hassan, N. (2016). Measuring Reliability and Validity Instruments of Work Environment Towards Quality Work Life. Procedia Eco- nomics and Finance, 37, 520–528. https://doi.org/10.1016/S2212-5671(16) 30160-5 Raziq, A., & Maulabakhsh, R. (2015). Impact of Working Environment on Job Satis- faction. Procedia Economics and Finance, 23, 717–725. https://doi.org/10.1016/ S2212-5671(15)00524-9 Robbins, S. P., & Coulter, M. K. (2012). Management (11th ed). Boston: Prentice Hall. Robbins, S. P., & Judge, T. (2013). Organizational behavior (15th ed). Boston: Pear- son. Saner, T., & Eyupoglu, S. Z. (2015). The Job Satisfaction of Bank Employees in North Cyprus. Procedia Economics and Finance, 23, 1457–1460. https:// doi.org/10.1016/S2212-5671(15)00594-8 Schein, E. H. (2010). Organizational culture and leadership (4th ed). San Francisco: Jossey-Bass. Shuck, B., Twyford, D., Reio, T. G., & Shuck, A. (2014). Human Resource Develop- ment Practices and Employee Engagement: Examining the Connection With Employee Turnover Intentions. Human Resource Development Quarterly, 25(2), 239–270. https://doi.org/10.1002/hrdq.21190 Siswadi, E. (2012). Reengineering BUMD, mengoptimalkan Kualitas Pelayanan yang Unggul (Vol. 1). Bandung: Mutiara Press. Soane, E., Truss, C., Alfes, K., Shantz, A., Rees, C., & Gatenby, M. (2012). Develop- ment and application of a new measure of employee engagement: the ISA En- gagement Scale. Human Resource Development International, 15(5), 529–547. https://doi.org/10.1080/13678868.2012.726542 Firdaus, M. A., Hamidah, H., Sutanto, S.. (2019). Journal of Business and Behavioural Entrepreneurship Volume.3 Nomor.1 2019 p (14-26)  Antecedent Direct And Indirect Of Employee Engagement.  https://doi.org/10.21009/JOBBE.003.1.02 26 Suharti, L., & Suliyanto, D. (2012). The effects of organizational culture and leader- ship style toward employee engagement and their impacts toward employee loy- alty. World Review of Business Research, 2(5), 128–139. Sukmana, W., & Firmansyah, I. (2014). Analisis Problematika Kinerja Bumd Non- Keuangan Di Jawa Barat: Aplikasi Metode Analytic Network Process. Sustaina- ble Competitive Advantage (SCA), 4(1). Tariq, M. H. (2015). Effect of CSR on Employee Engagement. Indian Journal of Sci- ence and Technology, 8(S4), 301. https://doi.org/10.17485/ijst/2015/v8iS4/64700 Thomas, K. W. (2009). Intrinsic motivation at work: what really drives employee en- gagement (2nd ed). San Francisco: Berrett-Koehler Publishers. Tio, E. (2014). The impact of working environment towards employee job satisfaction: a case study In PT. X. IBuss Management, 2(1). Truss, K., Soane, E., Delbridge, R., Alfes, K., Shantz, A., & Petrov, G. (2011). Em- ployee engagement, organisational performance and individual well-being: ex- ploring the evidence, developing the theory. The International Journal of Human Resource Management, 22(1), 232–233. https:// doi.org/10.1080/09585192.2011.552282 Wagner, J. A., & Hollenbeck, J. R. (2010). Organizational behavior: securing compet- itive advantage. New York: Routledge. Zábrodská, K., Mudrák, J., Květoň, P., Blatný, M., Machovcová, K., & Šolcová, I. (2014). Work Environment and Well-being of Academic Faculty in Czech Uni- versities: A Pilot Study. Studia Paedagogica, 19(4), 121–144. https:// doi.org/10.5817/SP2014-4-6 Zavyalova, E., & Kucherov, D. (2010). Relationship between organizational culture and job satisfaction in Russian business enterprises. Human Resource Develop- ment International, 13(2), 225–235. https:// doi.org/10.1080/13678861003703740 Firdaus, M. A., Hamidah, H., Sutanto, S.. (2019). Journal of Business and Behavioural Entrepreneurship Volume.3 Nomor.1 2019 p (14-26)  Antecedent Direct And Indirect Of Employee Engagement.  https://doi.org/10.21009/JOBBE.003.1.02