Journal of Accounting Management and Economics Vol. 20, No. 1, 2018, pp. 18-29 Published by Faculty of Economics and Business, Universitas Jenderal Soedirman Published online on July, 9 2018 in http://jos.unsoed.ac.id/index.php/jame Print ISSN: 1410-9336 OnlineISSN: 2620-8482  Correspondence to : Jenderal Soedirman University, Indonesia. E-mail: putri020293@yahoo.com Received: May 16, 2018 Revised: May 29, 2018 Accepted: June 6, 2018 INTRODUCTION Human resource is one of the most important resources to build a company. Companies that have good human resource will manage other resources owned by the company well to produce profitable production (Armstrong, 2006). Good HR in a company can affect the level of success of the organization. The level of organizational success can be seen through the achievement of organizational goals supported by optimal employee performance. High performance requires motivation and organizational support in it. Furthermore, Armstrong (2012) argued that employees in an organization have an obligation to stakeholders to perform well. Good performance depends on the quality, dedication, enthusiasm, expertise, and skills of employees at all levels. Guest (1997) argued that in HR management, performance improvement can be achieved through people within the organization. Employees’ performance quality in doing their work is the key to success in achieving company goals. Performance that has quality, dedication, enthusiasm, expertise, and skill will give good contribution to the company. Storey, et al. (2009) observed that HR policies have an effect on HR practices that affect employee attitude and behavior. As a result, employees will do their job well. This assumption means that good HR practices will improve performance. Organizations achieve high performance through the work systems they adapt. Therefore, optimal organizational performance can be achieved by improving the performance of its employees. This can be done through the development and implementation of a high performance culture (Armstrong, 2012). This research used the expectation theory as its basic theory. Robbins (2003), who took the basis of Vroom's theory, argued that the drive for action is closely related to the expectation that individual actions will be followed by certain outcomes, and the appeal of those results motivates the individual to act. This theory explains that employees can be motivated to make more strenuous efforts if they believe the effort will provide a good performance appraisal. Good appraisal will encourage an organization to provide rewards such as bonuses, salary increases, or promotions. The rewards will affect the employees’ personal goals. The Influence of POS on Employee Performance with Job Satisfaction as a Mediator KARTIKA PUTRI, HARYADI, ADE IRMA ANGGRAENI Faculty of Economics and Business, Universitas Jenderal Soedirman, Indonesia Abstract This study conducted a research on variable of POS, and employee performance as well as job satisfaction as a mediation variable. This research is quantitative research. The subjects of this study are researchers at LIPI Center for Oceanographic Research. Primary data in this study was obtained directly from the respondents through questionnaires. Sample determination method used in this research is simple random sampling method with saturated sampling technique using Slovin method. Response rate in this study is 92.5%, so the questionnaires distributed were as much as 87 questionnaires. The analysis technique used is Partial Least Square model estimation and the mediation test used Sobel test. The results of this study indicate that POS has a significant positive effect on job satisfaction and employee performance, job satisfaction has a significant positive effect on employee performance, and job satisfaction mediates the influence of influence of POS on performance. Keywords POS; Employee Performance; Job Satisfaction Journal of Accounting Management and Economics , Vol. 20, No. 2, 2018, pp.18-29 23 There are three aspects to the theory of expectations, the first is the relationship between effort and performance that can be understood that the individual has a hope for the possibility of getting rewards so that they will give a certain amount of effort that will boost performance. Second, the relationship between performance and reward that is the extent to which employees will believe that performing at some level will drive the desired outcomes. Third, the relationship between reward and personal goal that is the extent to which the rewards of an organization meet individual personal goals or needs as well as the potential attractiveness benefits for individuals. The theory of expectations explains why so many employees are unmotivated in their work and simply do the least of their duties. The key to the theory of expectations is the understanding of individual goals and the attachment between effort and performance, between performance and reward, and between reward and satisfaction of each goal. Performance is an important spotlight in public and private organizations. One of the public organizations whose performance is important for the development of science in Indonesia is the Indonesian Institute of Sciences or often called LIPI. LIPI as a government institution focuses on the development of knowledge and research has a big role in contributing to Indonesia. One of the work units at LIPI is the Center for Oceanographic Research. The Center for Oceanographic Research is under the Deputy of Earth Sciences of LIPI (IPK LIPI). In accordance with Regulation of Head of LIPI Number 1 Year 2014 dated May 9, 2014, LIPI Center for Oceanographic Research which is under the Deputy of Earth Sciences of LIPI has the duty to conduct research in oceanography and functions to develop technical policies, plans, and research programs in the field of oceanography such as research, monitoring, evaluation, and reporting on research and administrative matters implementation. In addition, the researchers working there are required to produce scientific papers each year as outlined in the work plans that were made. Each grade has a number of different point credits to rise above the level. If within five years there is no promotion or performance rise, it can be called bad, then the employee may be expelled or the promotion will be terminated. Researchers are required to improve their credibility through increasing competence, creativity, integrity, and communication through existing means of scientific activity. From the description above, LIPI employees have direct responsibility to the president and the society. Researchers have an obligation to conduct research processes that meet the scientific standards of research results that advance science as the foundation of human welfare, and to the scientific society that give recognition in the scientific field of the researcher. Thus, good performance is a very decisive thing for the sustainable development of science produced by LIPI. Given the demands of work that require to perform well, then organizational support become important in influencing performance with the mediation of job satisfaction thereby affecting the performance directly. The phenomenon that can be a gap in this study is the existence of some performance indicators of researchers who need to be improved because the performance of researchers in this institution is important for the sustainability of knowledge development in Indonesia. Based on the performance report of LIPI Center for Oceanographic Research in 2015 and 2016, there are several performance indicators that require improvement. The first indicator is the number of publications published in the national journal in 2015 only reached 68% while in 2016 only reached 65.7%. The second indicator is the number of industries that carry out research cooperation in 2015 and 2016 that is 0%. The third indicator is the number of policy recommendations generated in 2015 and 2016 at 0%. The fourth indicator is the number of technologies, concepts, models, and product types with value added in 2015 that is 0%. The fifth indicator is the number of technologies, concepts, models, product types produced in 2015 that is 0%. Employee performance as the main thing that determines the success of a company has a lot of understanding. Armstrong (2012) stated that performance refers to results or achievements as well as good executions of work in achieving results. Bernadin, et al. (1995) and Kane (1996) describe performance as a result of work and history of one's achievement. Journal of Accounting Management and Economics , Vol. 20, No. 2, 2018, pp.18-29 24 When performance is interpreted as a result, then of course the performance has components that make up the performance itself. Performance components are in-job skills, off-the-job skills (extra behavior in the organization), skills in written and unwritten communication, demonstration of business, maintenance of personal discipline, facilities for performance, supervision or leadership, and management or administration (Campbell, et al., 1993). In addition, other opinions say that there are three main things that affect the individual in work, among others the first is the ability of the individual to do the job, the second is the level of effort devoted, and the third is the organizational support (Mathis and Jackson, 2009). Meanwhile, organizational support (POS) is the support of companies to improve performance by facilitating employees in the development and awarding of employees. Rhoades and Eisenberger (2002) argued organizational support or perceived organizational support (POS) is a form of employee trust about organizational commitment to them. Eisenberger, et al. (1986) stated that employees demonstrate a consistent pattern of understanding that organization will appreciate employees' contributions and treat them well or badly in various situations. Eisenberger, et al. (1986) stated that POS will be rewarded by employees if it meets socioemotional needs, awards for increased work effort, and help to help employees work effectively. Meta-analysis by Rhoades and Eisenberger (2002) shows three major antecedents of POS that are organizational reward and job condition, support from supervisors, and procedural justice. One of the performance-enhancing predictors is job satisfaction. Job satisfaction perceived by employees positively will make employees love their work and will devote performance to the job. Spector (1997) described job satisfaction with a simple that is how much how much a person likes a job. Some people who love it will make it the main one but some others hate it and do the job because of the necessity. Davis (1995) stated employee are part of an organization, they have a set of desires, needs, desires, and past experiences that are one and forms work expectations. Thus, job satisfaction can be seen from the appropriateness between a person's expectations and the rewards provided by the job. Robin and Jugde (2013) argued the higher the job satisfaction of an employee, the more positive he will perceive his work and vice versa. With the phenomenon that occurs in the organization and associated with the existing theory so that researchers were focused to discuss it and took the research topic “The Influence of POS on Employee Performance with Job Satisfaction as a Mediator”. LITERATURE REVIEW Theory of Expectations Vroom in Smith and Hitt (2005) described the theory of expectations as having a basis that influences the power of individual motivation to do their work effectively: 1) expectancy: how likely it is that employees perform certain behaviors, they will get the expected work (high performance), 2) instrumentality: how much the relationship between job performance with higher work (income, salary or other things given by companies such as health insurance, transportation, etc.), and 3) valence: how important employees assess the income the company gave them. Each of these points leads to a different type of intervention in improving performance. The first of these points can be improved by designing training interventions to increase employees' confidence in their abilities. The second can be improved by redesigning jobs such as creating reward systems related to employee performance. The third can be achieved by changing rewards or substituting awards with more meaningful things for employees. In addition, the theory of expectations suggests that there is an interaction between these components. For example, an increase in the individual's confidence that he or she is capable of achieving high performance with greater effort will have no effect if the individual does not feel the value or appreciation offered by the company for high performance or if the resulting performance has no intrinsic value to a person. Robbin (2003) described Vroom's theory that the strength of the tendency to act in particular depends on the power of expectation that the action will be followed Journal of Accounting Management and Economics , Vol. 20, No. 2, 2018, pp.18-29 25 by a certain output and depends on the appeal of that output to the individual. This theory says that employees are motivated to make more strenuous efforts if they believe that the effort will result in a good performance appraisal. Good appraisal will encourage organizational rewards such as bonuses, pay increases, or promotions. The rewards will affect the employee's personal goals. The theory of expectations helps explain why so many employees are not motivated at their jobs and simply do the minimum in performing their obligations. The key to the theory of expectations is the understanding of individual goals and the relationship between effort and performance, between performance and reward, and between reward and satisfaction of each goal. Employee Performance Gibson (1997) identified performance as a result of work related to organizational goals such as quality, quantity, and work efficiency. Performance is the result or level of success of a person as a whole in a certain period of time in carrying out the task then compared with the standard work results, targets that have been determined in advance and have been agreed together (Rivai, 2004). Rivai also stated that performance not only stands alone but also relates to job satisfaction and compensation, and is also influenced by factor of skills, abilities, and individual traits. In other words, performance is determined by one's ability and desire and environment. Therefore, in order to have a good performance, a person must have a high desire to do and understand his or her work, and can be improved if there is a suitability between work and ability. According Mangkunegara (2001), performance is the result of work seen from the quality and quantity achieved by employees in carrying out their duties in the responsibility given to them. The high or low performance of a worker is related to the reward system applied by an agency/organization where they work. Giving an award from the company to employees inappropriately can affect a person's performance improvement. Samsudin (2005) mentioned that the performance is the level of achievement of an assignment of an employee, unit, or division by using an existing capability also by paying attention to the limits that have been set to achieve the goals of an organization/company. Performance is a benchmark of how much a company should reward its employees. Mathis and Jackson (2009) revealed that performance is simply what employees do or do not do. Performance is the result of work that is a comparison between real work with a predetermined work standard (Dessler, 2013). According Prawirosentono (2012), performance is if a person or group of people in the organization can achieve the results of work in accordance with the authority and responsibility in order to attempt to achieve the objectives of the relevant organization lawfully and in accordance with the moral and ethical. Kasmir (2016) defined briefly, performance can be interpreted as work results and attitudes of employees that have been achieved in a certain period that is usually 1 year to complete all the tasks and responsibilities given. Performance measurement can be seen through the ability of an employee in completing all tasks and responsibilities provided. That is, in performance contains elements of achievement standards that must be met, so for those who reach the standards that have been set means to perform well or otherwise for those who are not achieved are categorized as underperforming or not good. Job Satisfaction Job satisfaction based on Davis (1995) is the overall feeling of employees about their likes or dislikes for their own work. Employees become part of an organization, they can be believed to have a set of desires, needs, passions, and past experiences that become one and form the work expectations. Thus, job satisfaction can be seen from the appropriateness between a person's expectations and the rewards provided by the job. From the explanation, it can be interpreted that job satisfaction refers to an employee's attitude towards his or her work. Spector (1997) described job satisfaction simply is how much a person likes a job. Some people love it to make it the main one, some people hate it and do the job because it has to. Job satisfaction is related to how management concerns with the physical and mental well-being of its workers. Journal of Accounting Management and Economics , Vol. 20, No. 2, 2018, pp.18-29 26 Anoraga (1998) also explained that job satisfaction is an employees’ assessment of how far their job satisfies their needs. Job satisfaction is related to attitudes of employees on their work, work situation, and cooperation between leaders and fellow employees. Job satisfaction is a general attitude result of some special attitudes on aspects of work, self adjustment, and individual social relationships outside of work. Job satisfaction actually includes security feeling and has aspects such as socioeconomic aspect (salary and social security), social psychology aspect (opportunity for progress and opportunity for reward), and so on. Robin and Jugde (2013) argued similarly with Spector which stated that job satisfaction is reflected in positive feelings about a job resulting from the evaluation of its characteristics. The higher the job satisfaction of employees, the more positive they will look at they work and vice versa. Aspects that affect a person's job satisfaction may vary depending on the background. If employees come from a poverty background, pay is a key aspect that affects job satisfaction, but if employees come from a good economic background, then pay is not a determinant of job satisfaction. Job satisfaction is not always related to job condition. Employee personality is also decisive, if employees have good core evaluations, they will feel job satisfaction because they feel challenged and fulfilled by their work. Employees who have a poor core self- evaluation will give up when facing difficulties in the job so they will tend to be in a tedious and repetitive work. Organizational Support According to Hutchinson (1997), perceived organizational support (POS) is the organization's commitment to its employees as individuals. Organizational commitment to employees can be given in various forms, ranging from extrinsic (material) such as wages, bonuses, benefits, and others to extrinsic commitments (non- material) such as praise, attention, acceptance, information, intimacy, self- development, and more. Rhoades and Eisenberger (2002) argued that perceptions of organizational support are employees' perceptions of the extent to which the organization assesses the contribution that employees provide to companies, lends support to employees while performing tasks, and cares about the well-being of employees. When organization provides high support to employees, employees will integrate themselves with the company, so they will assume with their membership in the organization then they will feel they have a responsibility to the company to contribute and perform optimally. Employee's perception of organizational support is an assertion of employees that it is the policy and procedure of the organization. For employees, organization is an important source for their socio-emotional needs such as respect, caring, and tangible benefits such as salaries and medical benefits. Feelings appreciated by an organization help meet employee needs for approval, esteem, and affiliation. According to Robbins (2008), organizational support is a level up to where employees believe organization appreciates their contribution and cares about their well-being. When management is not supportive in the eyes of employees, employees can see all tasks that are given as something unpleasant and show work that has not been effective for the organization. HYPOTHESIS DEVELOPMENT AND RESEARCH MODEL The Influence of POS on Job Satisfaction Robbins and Coulter (2012) explained that if employees get support from the organization then they will have job satisfaction and lower turnover rates. Babin and Boles (1996) stated in their research that POS has a positive effect on job satisfaction. Rhoades and Eisenberger (2002) explained in their research that POS has a positive effect on job satisfaction. Allen, Shore, and Griffeth (2003) stated in their research that POS positively affects as a mediation between HR support and job satisfaction. H1: POS has a positive effect on job satisfaction. The Influence of Job Satisfaction on Employee Performance Armstrong (2012) explained that if the organization meets the factors that lead to job satisfaction, then employees will Journal of Accounting Management and Economics , Vol. 20, No. 2, 2018, pp.18-29 27 produce high performance. This happens due to the emergence of motivation that is formed after employee job satisfaction is achieved. Job satisfaction encourages employees to perform well. Wanous (1974) found that job satisfaction and employee performance affect each other positively. Petty, Mcgee, and Cavender (1984) explained in their research that job satisfaction has a significant positive effect on employee performance. Hussin (2011) in his thesis research showed that job satisfaction affects the employee performance positively. H2: Job satisfaction has a positive effect on employee performance. The Influence of POS on Employee Performance Armstrong (2006) stateed that if an organization supports its employees, employees will be able to develop themselves and with increased capabilities, then employees will be able to perform better. Rhoades and Eisenberger (2002) stated that POS has a positive effect on employee performance. Shanock and Eisenbeger (2006) stated in their research that POS has a positive effect on employee performance. Karatepe (2011) conducted a study explaining that POS has a positive effect on employee performance. H3: POS has a positive effect on employee performance. Job Satisfaction Mediates the Influence of POS on Performance Miao (2010) explained in his research that job satisfaction is a full mediator in the relationship between POS and performance. Kartepe (2011) explained in his research that job satisfaction fully mediates the relationship between POS and performance. H4: Job satisfaction mediates the relationship between POS and employee performance. Figure 1. Research Model RESEARCH METHOD This research is quantitative research, because the data used to analyze the influence between variables are expressed by numbers. The objects of this research are the variable of employee performance, job satisfaction, and organizational support. While the location of the research is LIPI Center of Oceanographic Research which is a government-owned institution located in Ancol, North Jakarta. The subjects of this study are researchers at LIPI Center for Oceanographic Research. Primary data in this study was obtained directly from the respondents through questionnaires about POS, job satisfaction, and employee performance. Primary data in this study was obtained from the answers of the respondents that are the researchers of Center of Oceanographic Research in North Jakarta. Data collection in this research was conducted by survey method that was using a questionnaire containing the items of the constructor or variable measurement used in the research model. The questionnaire model used was a closed questionnaire. Sample determination method used in this research is simple random sampling method with saturated sampling technique using Slovin method. Population in this research is 101 researchers of LIPI Center of Oceanographic Research in North Jakarta. With a 5% error rate, then the number of subjects in this study is 81 people. Response rate in this study is 92.5% and the criteria could fit in the superior category. Furthermore, the Journal of Accounting Management and Economics , Vol. 20, No. 2, 2018, pp.18-29 28 questionnaires distributed were as much as 87 questionnaires. ANALYSIS TECHNIQUE Variable measurement tool used in this research is interval data measurement. This research was conducted to test the model of multiple relationship between variables, involving many variables and information obtained that are simultaneous, so that quantitatively, the analysis technique used is Partial Least Square model estimation. And the mediation test used Sobel test. RESULTS Testing of Structural Model (Inner Model) The structural model in the PLS was evaluated by using R^2 for the dependent variable and the path coefficient value for the independent variables which are then the significance was assessed based on the t-statistic value of each path. The structural model of this research can be seen in the following figure: Figure 2. Display of PLS Bootstrapping Structural Model Results, 2018 To assess the significance of the prediction model in structural model testing, it can be seen from the t-statistic value between the independent variables to the dependent variable in the path coefficient table in the Smart PLS output below: Table 1. Path Coefficient (Mean, STDEV, t-value) Original Sample Sample Mean Standard Deviation t-statistics POS-> SATISFACTION 0.5495 0.5668 0.0622 8.8259 SATISFACTION-> PERFORMANCE 0.5682 0.5688 0.0626 9.0716 POS-> PERFORMANCE 0.3275 0.3333 0.0717 4.5672 Journal of Accounting Management and Economics , Vol. 20, No. 2, 2018, pp.18-29 29 Sobel Test Sobel Test for POS → Job Satisfaction → Performance The result of Sobel test statistic (Z Statistic) test is 6.3263 bigger than Z table at critical value of 0.05 (1.96), so it can be concluded that job satisfaction mediates the effect of POS on performance. Table 2. Path Coefficient (Mean, STDEV, t-value) Job Satisfaction Performance POS Direct Effect 0.5495 0.3275 Indirect Effect - 0.3122 Total Effect Correlation Value 0.5495 0.5490 0.6398 0.6388 Job Satisfaction Direct Effect - 0.5682 Indirect Effect - - Total Effect Correlation Value - - 0,5682 0.7475 Direct, Indirect, and Total Effect In table 2, it can be seen POS has a direct influence of 54.95% on job satisfaction and 32.75% on performance, then POS has an indirect effect on performance of 31.22% after passing the mediation variable. Correlation value of POS to job satisfaction is 54.90% which means influental and correlation value of POS to performance is 63.88% which means strong. While job satisfaction as mediation variable has a direct relationship to performance of 56.82% and correlation value to performance of 74.75% which means strong. Hypothesis Testing First Hypothesis Testing The first hypothesis testing is intended to see the effect of POS on job satisfaction. Based on test result, POS obtains original value sample estimate equal to 0.5495 with t-statistic value 8.8259 > 1.66388 (t-table) which means that POS variable has positive significant effect to job satisfaction with 5% significance level. From the result obtained, it can be concluded that the third hypothesis is accepted. Second Hypothesis Testing The second hypothesis testing is intended to see the effect of job satisfaction on performance. Based on test result, job satisfaction obtains original value sample estimate equal to 0.5682 with t-statistic value of 9.0716 > 1.66388 (t-table) which means that job satisfaction variable has significant positive effect to performance with 5% significance level. From the result obtained, it can be concluded that the fourth hypothesis is accepted. Third Hypothesis Testing The third hypothesis testing is intended to see the effect of POS on performance. Based on test result, POS obtains the original sample estimate value of 0.3275 with the value of t-statistics of 4.5672 > 1.66388 (t-table) which means that POS variable has a significant positive effect on performance with a significance level of 5%. From the result obtained, it can be concluded that the fifth hypothesis is accepted. Fourth Hypothesis Testing The fourth hypothesis testing is intended to see job satisfaction as a mediator between the effect of POS on performance. The result of Sobel test gives Sobel test statistic (Z Statistic) value of 6.3263 which is bigger than Z table at critical value 0.05 (1.96), so it can be concluded that job satisfaction mediates the influence of POS to performance. This result shows that the seventh hypothesis is accepted. DISCUSSION The Influence of POS on Job Satisfaction The result of the third hypothesis test shows the positive and significant influence between POS on job satisfaction. In the perception index, the indicator with highest value of the POS variable is in the " organization assessing value", it can be Journal of Accounting Management and Economics , Vol. 20, No. 2, 2018, pp.18-29 30 interpreted that POS has an effect on job satisfaction as the organization considers the value of the researchers of LIPI Center for Oceanographic Research. Values here can be interpreted as a way researchers see a thing or problems that occur in the work. Researchers will feel satisfied if the organization hears the value of the researchers as input to implement a policy or solve a problem. This is in line with the research of Babin and Boles (1996) who stated in their research that POS positively affect job satisfaction. The greater role of the organization will have a significant effect on employee performance and satisfaction. Another study of Rhoades and Eisenberger (2002) also explains that POS has an effect on job satisfaction. Organizational support will cause employees to get job satisfaction and a positive mood. Allen, Shore, and Griffeth (2003) also stated in their research that POS influences as a mediation between HR support and job satisfaction. The study explains the greater support and offer either related to work or outside the work of the organization, then it will cause satisfaction on the employees. The Influence of Job Satisfaction on Employee Performance Based on the results of the fourth hypothesis testing can be drawn the conclusion that the variable of job satisfaction has a significant positive effect on employee performance. From the value of the perception index, job satisfaction earns the highest indicator value on “good communication with organization”. Researchers of LIPI Center for Oceanographic Research can produce good performance supported by good communication with the organization. This causes a sense of satisfaction in the organization because it has supported the researchers with the communication so that the performance of the researchers will be good because the loss of wrong perception between two parties. This research result is in line with previous research which also explains that job satisfaction affects employee performance. Wanous (1974) found that job satisfaction and employee performance affect each other. The study explains that extrinsic job satisfaction will result in performance and performance will result in intrinsic satisfaction. Petty, Mcgee, and Cavender (1984) also explained in their research that job satisfaction affects employee performance. The research describes that the role of the organization is to meet employee job satisfaction in order to create performance improvement. In addition, Hussin (2011) in his thesis research showed that job satisfaction affects employee performance. Hussin explained that the components of job satisfaction such as promotion, work itself, supervision, and co-workers have a positive relationship with employee performance. The Influence of POS on Employee Performance Based on the results of the fifth hypothesis testing can be drawn the conclusion that the POS variable has a significant positive effect on employee performance. In the perception index, POS scores highest on the indicator “organizations considers values”. Researchers working at LIPI Center for Oceanographic Research more easily improve their performance when organization considers their value. This will increase morale because of the sense of being respected and acknowledged by the organization, so that researchers can work without ignoring the values they believe in their work. The result of this study is consistent with the research of Rhoades and Eisenberger (2002) which suggests that positive organizational support can lead to additional roles of employees to take risks, provide inputs to build and explore capabilities, and talents for the benefit of the organization. Organizational support will also make employees help other employees to achieve good performance. Research of Shanock and Eisenbeger (2006) also states that POS has a positive effect on employee performance. The study explains that the impact of organizational support will create good in-role performance and extra-role performance in improving performance. In addition, Karatepe (2011) conducted a study explaining that POS positively affects employee performance. Karatepe explained in his research that organization provides support through the hospitality of managers who provide support and assistance on employee issues, then the employees will show the performance with high quality. Journal of Accounting Management and Economics , Vol. 20, No. 2, 2018, pp.18-29 31 Job Satisfaction Mediates the Influence of POS on Performance Based on the results of Sobel test calculation to see job satisfaction as a mediator between the effect of POS on performance, it can be concluded that job satisfaction mediates the relationship between POS and performance. Thus, by increasing job satisfaction will improve employee performance. Based on the perception index, job satisfaction can be improved by improving “good communication with organization” between researchers of LIPI Center of Oceanographic Research and LIPI organization. With good communication, both parties will be able to avoid misunderstandings in work. The result of this study is in line with the research of Miao (2010) who explained in his research that job satisfaction is a full mediator in the relationship between POS and performance. Managers can improve POS through programs that provide value to employees' contributions such as rewards that link performance with rewards that will increase job satisfaction. To increase job satisfaction, managers must also suppress the possibility of conflict between work and family responsibilities of employees. If job satisfaction increases, then performance will also increase. Kartepe (2011) also explained in his research that job satisfaction fully mediates the relationship between POS and performance. If organizational support has been perceived adequately by employees in various forms of appreciation and opportunity, then job satisfaction will increase because of the satisfaction felt by employees. Thus, high job satisfaction will result in optimal performance. CONCLUSION POS Has a Significant Positive Effect on Job Satisfaction This study shows that POS affects job satisfaction. Researchers from LIPI Center of Oceanographic Research get satisfied when the organization supports them, this is due to the feeling of being recognized and appreciated. So this raises the feeling of satisfaction because they feel the organization gives something that is the rights of researchers. The greater the support and the good offer associated with the work or not from the organization, then it will cause employee satisfaction. Support both in material and immaterial form will result in satisfaction for individuals working in the organization. Job Satisfaction Has a Significant Positive Effect on Employee Performance Research that has been done shows job satisfaction affects employee performance. This can be concluded because when the researchers of LIPI Center of Oceanographic Research get job satisfaction, it is a sign that their needs and objectives both externally and internally met, so that the impetus to perform well will emerge. Job satisfaction will give rise to the spirit to maintain the satisfaction or increase the satisfaction by providing optimal performance. POS Has a Significant Positive Effect on Employee Performance This study concludes that POS affects employee performance. This is because the support from the organization for researchers of LIPI Center of Oceanographic Research do work well. When researchers feel the organization has facilitated them to work well, then their performance will increase. Organizational support can lead to additional roles of employees to take risks, provide inputs to build and explore capabilities, and talents for the benefit of the organization. This can happen because the organizational support will bridge and help researchers to produce good performance. Job Satisfaction Mediates the Influence of POS on Performance This study concludes that job satisfaction mediates the influence of POS on performance. The influence of POS on performance will increase when through job satisfaction as a mediator. The relationship of POS to performance will be high when job satisfaction occurs in employees. The support given from the organization to the employee will facilitate the employees to grow and become a sign of organizational awareness of employees, so that job satisfaction will occur, and the higher job satisfaction perceived by employees, then the performance also increases in order to Journal of Accounting Management and Economics , Vol. 20, No. 2, 2018, pp.18-29 32 maintain satisfaction or increase job satisfaction itself. IMPLICATION Theoretical This study adds to the literacy on the influence of organizational support on employee performance and is expected to expand the knowledge especially in the field of human resource management. Practical This study provides practical implications for organizations, especially organizations that conduct research on natural knowledge in the application of organizational support for performance. Thus, the organization can provide facilities and support to its employees to be able to increase its ability to take risks because the greater the risk the success will also get bigger. While the highest value of outer loading for the POS variable is “organization considering value”. Organizations in making policies and decisions should make employee value judgment a major one because from the results, it is seen that employees appreciate organizational support that considers their values. POS serves as an organizational support that will facilitate employees to work to produce maximum performance. Employees will also appreciate the organizational support that considers their values in work. Both elements in the formation of this good performance, synergize each other so as to create satisfaction in the individual so that will produce the results expected by the organization. LIMITATION The evaluation of the results of this study takes into account the limitations that may affect the results of this study, among others: 1) This research only focuses on public organization, and the result may different with the private organization. 2) This research needs others variabels, especially independent variabel to seek another source of impact for employee performance. SUGGESTION Evaluation of the results of this study is still lacking and not perfect, so for the next studies, need to consider several things as follows: 1) Future research can use motivation as the intrinsic element that may have the possibility to increase the performance. 2) Future research can use spesific motivation theory as the another independent variable such as, career motivation. REFERENCES Regulation of Head of LIPI Number 1 Year 2014 dated May 9, 2014 Allen, D. G., L. M. Shore, and R. W. Griffeth. (2003). The role of perceived organizational support and supportive human resource practices in turnover process. Journal of Management, 29: 99- 118. Anoraga, P. (1998). Psikologi Kerja. Jakarta: Rineka Cipta. Armstrong, M. (2006). Performance management key strategies and practical guideline. London: Kogan Page. Armstrong, M. (2012). Armstrong’s handbook of human resource management practice. London: Kogan Page Babin, B. J. and Boles, J. S. (1996). The effects of perceived co-worker involvement and supervisor support on service provider role stress, performance and job satisfaction. Journal of Retailing, 72(1): 57-75. Bernadin, H. K, J. S. Kane, S. Ross, J. D. Spina, and D. L. Johnson. (1995). Performance appraisal design, development and implementation. Cambridge: Blackwell. Campbell, J. P., R. A. McCloy, S. H. Oppler, and C. E. Sager. (1993). A theory of performance. San Francisco: Jossey- Bass. Davis, K. and Newstrom. (1995). Perilaku dalam organisasi. Jakarta: Erlangga. Dessler, G. (2013). Human resource management. London: Pearson. Eisenberger, R., R. Huntington, S. Hutchison, and D. Sowa. (1986). Perceived organizational support. Journal of Applied Psychology, 71: 500–507 Gibson, J. L. (2012). Organization: behaviour, structure, process. USA: McGraw-Hill. Guest, D. (1997). Human resource management and performance: a review and research agenda. International Journal of Human Resource Management, 8: 263-276. Hussin, A. B. (2011). The relationship between job satisfaction and job performance Journal of Accounting Management and Economics , Vol. 20, No. 2, 2018, pp.18-29 33 among employees in Tradewinds group of companies. Malaysia: Centre for Graduate Studies Open University Malaysia. Hutchison, S. (1997). Perceived organizational support: further evidence of construct validity. Educational and Psychological Measurement, 57(6): 1025-1034. Kane, J. S. (1996). The conceptualization and representation of total performance effectiveness. Human Resource Management Review, 6(2): 123-145. Kasmir. (2016). Manajemen sumber daya manusia (teori dan praktik). Jakarta: Rajawali Pers. Mangkunegara, A. A. and Prabu, A. (2001). Manajemen sumber daya manusia perusahaan. Bandung: Remaja Rosdakarya. Mathis, R. L. and Jackson, J. H. (2004). Manajemen sumber daya manusia. Jakarta: Salemba Empat. Petty, M., W. McGee, and W. Cavender. (1984). A meta-analysis of the relationships between individual job satisfaction and individual performance. The Academy of Management Review, 9: 712-721. Prawirosentono, S. (2012). Manajemen sumberdaya manusia kebijakan kinerja karyawan. Yogyakarta: BPFE- Yogyakarta. Rhoades, L. and Eisenberger, R. (2002). Perceived organizational support: a review of the literature. Journal of Applied Psychology, 87(4): 698-714. Rivai, Veithzal. (2004). Manajemen sumber daya manusia untuk perusahaan dari teori ke praktik. Jakarta: PT Raja Grafindo Persada. Robbins, S. P. (2001). Organizational behavior. New Jersey: Prentice-Hall. Robbins, S. P. and Coulter, M. (2012). Management. USA: Pearson. Robbins, S. P. and Judge, T. A. (2013). Organizational behavior fifteenth edition. New Jersey: Pearson Education. Samsudin, S. (2005). Manajemen sumber daya manusia. Bandung: Pustaka Setia. Shanock, L. R. and Eisenberger, R. (2006). When supervisors feel supported: relationships with subordinates' perceived supervisor support, perceived organizational support, and performance. Journal of Applied Psychology, 91(3): 689-695. Smith, K. G. and Hitt, M. A. (2005). Great minds in management. United Kingdom: Oxford University Press. Spector, P. E. (1994). Job Satisfaction Survey. Florida: Department of Psychology University of South Florida. Spector, P. E. (1997). Job Satisfaction..USA: Sage Publication. Storey, J., P. M. Wright, and D. Ulrich. (2009). The routledge companion to strategic human resource management. Abingdon: Routledge. Wanous, P. J. (1974). A causal-correlational analysis of the job satisfaction and performance relationship. Journal of Applied Psychology, 59(2): 139-144.