Antecedents of Perceived Organizational Support to Improve Organizational Commitment in the Public Sector Institutions

Objective – This study aims to examine the effect of organizational reward, procedural justice, and supervisor support as an antecedent variables of perceived organizational support in increasing organizational commitment as the ultimate dependent variable at the local government units in Serang City Government, Banten Province, Indonesia.  Design/methodology – This research is an empirical study using purposive sampling technique. Data was collected through surveys and the respondents are civil servants from local government unit of Serang City Government. Data analysis was performed with the Structural Equation Model (SEM) with the SmartPLS (Partial Least Square) program. Results – The results of this study provide empirical evidence that organizational reward, procedural justice, supervisor support perceived organizational support, and organizational commitment have a significant positive relationship. This results is consistent with similar studies in private sector.


Introduction
Poor relations between agencies/organizations and employees can lead to decreased growth of agencies/organizations. The reason is the social relationship encourage employees to behave well by providing beneficial results for the organization, because they feel obliged to support the organization (Blau, 1964). In fact Cropanzano and Mitchell (2005) and Lavelle et al. (2007) also stated that social exchange relationships can motivate employees to be positive in providing benefits to agencies/organizations, because employees tend to judge that the welfare of agencies/organizations will have an impact on their welfare as well. So that they feel obliged to support the company. The existence of perceived organizational support will create an obligation for employees to feel concerned about the welfare of the organization and also the organization is helped in achieving its goals. Employees are able to meet the level of commitment and seek to help the organization (Wayne et al., 1997).
Successful achievement of organizational goals must involve human resources with a good organization as planned. Good organization needs to pay attention to work design and organizational commitment for the achievement of organizational goals effectively and efficiently. Organizational Commitment is important in today's business environment because business organizations increasingly depend on human expertise (Kleinman et al., 2001). Therefore, employees' emotional attachment to their organization (commitment) has been considered a determinant of dedication and loyalty as well as a drive that increases their involvement in organizational activities, their willingness to pursue organizational goals, and their desire to remain with the organization (Meyer and Allen, 1991). According to Van Scooter (2000) Organizational Commitment is an important thing in organizations, because many studies have stated that organizational commitment has a significant impact on work behavior. So that employees give the best JAROE VOL. 3(2) for the organization where they work, because with high commitment employees will be more fully oriented towards their work Perception of organizational support has an important influence on various aspects of organizational behavior. This perception relates to a condition where employees feel that their organization wants to provide fair compensation for business or performance, help employees meet needs, provide attractive and motivating work and provide conducive working conditions (Eisenberger and Huntington, 1986). Employees are also seen as having encouragement that can increase their involvement in organizational activities, their willingness to achieve organizational goals and their desire to remain in the organization (Meyer and Allen, 1991). So the theory of perceived organizational support Shore and Shore (1995) can help explain employee commitment to their organization. Rhoades and Eisenberger (2002) defines Perceived Organizational Support as a measure that an agency/organization or organization can value the contributions of employees and care about their welfare. So employees will provide reciprocity in the form of responsibility for their work to organization (organizational commitment), because of the support that has been given to them (Perceived Organizational Support).
According to Meyer and Allen (1997) there are three main categories of work experiences namely, organizational rewards, procedural justice, supervisor support that are found to have a stronger relationship with organizational commitment if there is support from the organization (perceived organizational support). Because, according to a scientific approach, looking at humans is seen as an economic man means that to motivate employees is only based on economic benefits such as additional wages or bonuses to improve the work efficiency of these employees (Taylor, 2001). According to Djastuti (2011) an organization is usually always interfered with the participation of supervisors to oversee the activities of employees in its implementation. Even if employees are required to work with good quality but are bound by strict rules/procedures, but have not received adequate compensation. This will disrupt organizational commitment and employee performance in the organization. This will disrupt organizational commitment and employee performance in the organization. Meanwhile, Mowday et al. (1979), stated that Organizational commitment is the relative strength of individuals in certain organizations. Therefore, perceived organizational support can be a mediation towards organizational commitment (Herda and Lavelle, 2011).
Based on previous research from Herda and Lavelle (2011) the impact of organizational fairness and organizational commitment. So, researchers are interested in reexamining but by adding variables that have an influence on perceived organizational support and organizational commitment such as work experiences which have three main categories, namely, organizational rewards, procedural justice, supervisor support (Rhoades et al., 2001). So that the purpose of this study is to determine the factors that affect organizational commitment which have an impact on employee performance in public sector organizations.

Organizational Rewards
Organizational Rewards is one of the main categories of work experiences used by Meyer and Allen (1997) which is important in an organization. It can be said that organizational rewards are an award given by organizations to employees for their contribution to the company (Eisenberger et al., 1997). So that with work experiences an employee can judge how good the rewards provided by the organization are for him, because according to Malhotra and Birks (2007) (organizational rewards usually follow the financial and non-financial benefits presented from employees to the organization through good working relationships. In fact Mottaz (1988) explains that employee emotional ties can also provide benefits to the organization.

Procedural Justice
Procedural justice discusses the perceived fairness of the means used in determining the number and distribution of employee resources (Greenberg, 1990). So that with work experiences an employee can see whether the procedural justice that has been applied by the organization is good or not, because procedural justice must be related to perceived organizational support by showing concern for the welfare of employees (Shore and Shore, 1995). This can be seen from the policies or rules that exist in the organization, whether it is good and fair because procedural justice can be said to be part of organizational justice.

Supervisor Support
Work experiences still have one main criterion, namely supervisor support Meyer and Allen (1997) has an important role in the organization. Rhoades and Eisenberger (2002) argue that supervisor support is able to form an impression built by employees, how supervisors value employees who have contributed to the company by paying attention to their welfare. Several studies have shown that employees have views regarding supervisor support for their well-being and the value of employee contributions to the organization, which is called supervisor support (Maertz et al., 2007).

Perceived Organizational Support
Perceived organizational support can be defined as the size of a company or organization that appreciates employee contributions and cares about their welfare (Rhoades and Eisenberger, 2002). Perceived organizational support can describe employees' beliefs that organizations value their contribution and welfare (Dawley et al., 2007). Based on social exchange theory, perceived organizational support has a significant relationship with organizational commitment (Eisenberger et al., 1990;Rhoades et al., 2001).

Organizational Commitment
Organizational commitment is an indicator of an employee's attitude who feels he is in the best condition between the relationship between social exchange and the organization (Cropanzano and Mitchell, 2005).

Hypothesis Development
Employees personally want rewards that can be felt in material benefits such as salary, benefits and promotional opportunities (Newman and Sheikh, 2012). Organizational rewards will increase employee perceptions of perceived organizational support (Rhoades et al., 2001). Meanwhile, Gregersen (1992) states that a favorable award will lead to greater commitment within the company.
According to Eisenberger et al. (1990), giving good rewards for employee contributions affects perceived organizational support, which in turn will increase commitment. Furthermore, opportunities for self-actualization and promotion are provided with organizational support Wayne et al., (1997). Thus, employees will emotionally give a good contribution to the organization, in accordance with the rewards they have received from the organization. In fact Mottaz (1988) explains that employee emotional ties can also provide benefits to the organization.
Meanwhile, Gregersen (1992) argues that good rewards can lead to greater commitment to the carrying capacity and reliability of agencies/organizations. So, we know that a reward in an organization or agency/organization is necessary, because it can encourage employees to care more about the agency/organization. Rhoades et al. (2001) argued that organizational rewards can increase employee perceptions of perceived organizational support. The proposed hypothesis is: H1: Organizational Rewards have a significant positive effect on Perceived Organizational Support.

JAROE VOL. 3(2)
Procedural Justice concerns justice to determine the amount and distribution of resources among employees who are perceived through the means used (Greenberg, 1990). Because, Procedural Justice addresses employee welfare concerns and is related to perceived organizational support (Shore and Shore, 1995). Meanwhile Rhoades et al. (2001) distinguishes between structural and social factors of procedural justice. Structural factors are involved regarding decisions in formal rules and policies that can affect employees, including the decision-making process, providing information before implementing decisions, and receiving accurate information. Fasolo (1995) states that there is a positive relationship between Procedural Justice and Perceived organizational support.
The relationship between social exchanges with the organization itself will have a positive impact, because employees will feel obliged to provide good reciprocity to the organization without having to be forced. Previous research has shown that fair treatment by organizations is crucial for the development of social exchange relationships (Lavelle et al., 2007). Cropanzano and Mitchell (2005) in their research showed that fair treatment of social exchange relations. In particular, to see how organizations treat their employees fairly, which can be seen from the organization's concern for their welfare and supporting them (perceived organizational support). The organizational justice model Tyler and Lind (1992) suggests that fair treatment is something important for employees, because it can show a sense of belonging and symbolizes that employees are an important asset owned by the organization. Consistent with this perspective, Moorman et al., (1998) stated that procedural justice was positively related to perceived organizational support in previous studies in hospitals. Finally, Rhoades and Eisenberger (2002) suggest that organizational justice is a strong predictor of perceived organizational support, formally stated: H2: Procedural Justice have a significant positive effect on Perceived Organizational Support. Rhoades and Eisenberger (2002) argue that supervisor support is considered as the extent to which employees form a general impression that their supervisors value contributions and care about their well-being. Hutchison (1997) explains the good relationship between supervisor support and perceived organizational support. The results of this study are supported by several studies, including Rhoades et al. (2001) and (Rhoades and Eisenberger, 2002).
Several studies have shown that employees develop a general view of the extent to which supervisors care about their welfare and the value of their contribution to the organization, which is called supervisor support (Maertz et al., 2007). According to organizational support theory shows that employee actions are indicators of the goals of an organization, and supervisors are the closest to the relationship between the organization and employees. According to Chen et al. (2002) indeed loyalty to supervisors has a greater impact on employee performance. Good treatment received from supervisors will increase perceived organizational support to the extent that the treatment is associated with organizational policies, procedures. These arguments lead to the following hypothesis: H3 : Supervisor Support have a significant positive effect on Perceived Organizational Support.
Perceived organizational support and organizational commitment are two variables that are used as indicators between the relationships of employee social exchange with the organization. Lavelle et al. (2007) states that when employees feel support from the organization, employees will feel obliged to reciprocate and support in the form of favorable attitudes towards the organization, such as commitment. Perceived Perceived Organizational Support, Organizational Commitment organizational support makes it possible to influence every form of organizational commitment. A study conducted by Rhoades and Eisenberger (2002) shows that perceived organizational support has a strong effect and is positively correlated with affective commitment. This is recognized by Lavelle et al. (2007) in their model there are targets referred to as phase one and phase two of the social exchange relationship. The previous studies supporting this were (Eisenberger et al., 1990;Rhoades and Eisenberger, 2002;Shore and Wayne, 1993). Eisenberger et al. (1990) examined that perceived organizational support can predict organizational commitment, but the opposite (international organizational commitment predicts perceived organizational support) does not occur. Based on the literature, there are hypotheses as follows: H4 : Perceived organizational support have a significant positive effect on Organizational Commitment.

Sample and Data
The population in this study is the Regional Organization of ASN (OPD) in Serang City Government. The sample selection in this study was based on purposive sampling (Gantino et al., 2019). The sample criteria proposed in this study are as follows: Echelon II, III, IV and implementing staff in the Regional Organizations in Serang City Government.

Research Variables and Operational Definitions
Organizational Rewards is a positive award from employee contributions that can provide many benefits and opportunities to contribute to perceived organizational support in a positive way that will ultimately increase commitment. Adapted from research (Eisenberger et al., 1997;Rhoades et al., 2001) with the indicators are work recognition; promotion; salary increases; career development and respect.
Procedural justice discusses the perceived fairness of the means used in determining the number and distribution of employee resources (Greenberg, 1990), with indicators of questions namely: organizational significant events; organizational decisions; justice procedures applied; important organizational meetings; and feedback.
Supervisor Support is the extent to which employees form the general impression that their supervisors appreciate the contribution of those who support and care about their well-being. Adapted from research (Hutchison, 1997;Rhoades et al., 2001), with indicators of questions namely: supervisory care; supervisory considerations; supervisory attitude; freedom of discussion and openness of supervisor.
Perceived organizational support can be defined as the size of a company or organization that appreciates employee contributions and cares about their welfare (Rhoades and Eisenberger, 2002), with indicators of questions namely: assessment of the organization; welfare of the organization; concern from the organization; work performance in the organization; accepting every complaint about the organization and receiving input to the organization. Organizational commitment is an indicator of an employee's attitude who feels he is in the best condition between the relationship between social exchange and the organization (Cropanzano and Mitchell, 2005). Adapted from the research of (Mowday et al., 1979), with indicators of questions namely: social relations to the organization; ties to the organization; ownership of the organization; Good workplaces accept tasks from the organization and support the goals of the organization. All questions were measured questions with a 7 point Likert scale, point 1 (strongly disagree) to 7 (strongly agree).
The data analysis technique used the SmartPLS software. According to (Latan and Ghozali, 2012) the covariance-based to variant-based SEM approach is an alternative approach. PLS is more of a predictive model and is a powerful analysis method (Wold, 1982 in Latan andGhozali, 2012) which is not based on many assumptions.

Results and Discussion
The data validity test in this study used PLS software, the outer model of convergent validity. It can be seen that the square root value or Average Variance Extracted (AVE) of each construct must be greater than 0.5. Likewise, reliability testing, by looking at composite reliability. The data is said to be reliable if the value, the reliability of the composite is more than 0.7 (Latan and Ghozali, 2012 Table 1 explaining the value Organizational Rewards (OR), Procedural Justice (PJ), Supervisor Support (SS), Perceived Organizational Support (POS) and Organizational Commitment (OC). It can be seen that each construct (variable) has a value above 0.5 AVE. This indicates that each construct has good validity value of each indicator or the questionnaire used to determine the relationship of Organizational Rewards, Procedural Justice, Supervisor Support, Perceived Organizational Support and Organizational Commitment (OC) be valid.
From table 1 see that every construct or latent variable has a value of composite reliability above 0.7 which indicates that the internal consistency of the independent variables (Organizational Rewards, Procedural Justice and Supervisor Support), the dependent variable (Perceived Organizational Support, Organizational Performance) had good reliability.
The significance of the parameters is estimated to provide information about the relationship between the research variables. The limit for rejecting and accepting the hypothesis is ± 1.96, where if the t statistical value is greater than t The results of data processing in table 2 show that organizational rewards have a positive effect on perceived organizational support (H1). These findings are the same as the study of Rhoades et al. (2001) who found the effect of OR on POS. So it can be said OR can improve employee perceptions of POS, because employees will emotionally make a good contribution to the organization, according to the rewards that it has received from the organization. A good rewards can lead to a greater commitment to organizational support and reliability. In addition, rewards can also encourage employees to care more about the organization.
Hypothesis 2 is accepted that procedural justice has a positive effect on perceived organizational support. These findings are consistent with the results of research Rhoades et al. (2001) which states procedural justice has a positive effect on perceived organizational support. This finding reinforces the theory revealed by Fasolo (1995) in his research which revealed the good influence of procedural justice on perceived organizational support. If a procedure or policy made by an organization is good and fair then employees will feel that they are treated fairly. Thus, fair treatment is important for employees, because it can show ownership and symbolize that employees are important assets of the organization (Tyler and Lind, 1992).
In table 2 shows that supervisor support has a significant positive effect on perceived organizational support, hypothesis 3 is accepted. These findings are consistent with research by Rhoades et al. (2001) which states that supervisor support has a positive effect on perceived organizational support. Employees will usually give an image or an impression about their supervisors who value their performance and pay attention to their well-being (Rhoades and Eisenberger, 2002). If the employee has given loyalty to the supervisor, it will have an impact on their performance which will benefit the organization.
The last hypothesis, hypothesis 4 is also accepted, showing perceived organizational support has a significant positive effect on organizational commitment. These findings are consistent with research by Rhoades and Eisenberger (2002) who found that there was an influence between perceived organizational support and organizational commitment. This finding reinforces the theory revealed by (Herda and Lavelle, 2011). When employees get good support from the organization, they will feel comfortable at work and will even give their loyalty to the organization such as loyalty. When employees feel support from the organization, employees will feel obliged to reciprocate and support in the form of favorable attitudes towards the organization, such as commitment (Herda and Lavelle, 2011).

Conclusions, Recommendations, and Limitations
The findings of this study demonstrates that organizational reward, procedural justice, supervisor support, perceived organizational support, and organizational commitment have a significant positive relationship, and there are no differences in the results of research between research conducted by private companies and research conducted in the public sector.
Organizational reward can improve employee perceptions of Perceived Organizational Support, because employees will emotionally make a good contribution to the organization, according to the rewards they have received from the organization. Procedural justice can improve perceived organizational support, if a procedure or policy made by the organization is good and fair then employees will feel that they are treated fairly. Thus, a fair treatment is important for employees, because it can show ownership and symbolize that employees are important assets of the organization. Supervisor support can increase perceived organizational support, if the employee has given loyalty to the supervisor it will have an impact on their performance which will benefit the organization. Finally the perceived organizational support can increase organizational commitment, when employees feel support from the organization, then employees will feel JAROE VOL. 3 (2) obliged to reciprocate and support in the form of favorable attitudes towards the organization, such as commitment (Lavelle et al., 2007).
The limitation in this study is that the sample size is relatively small, and this research also only focuses on public organizations so that it does not allow other entities to be part of the research. Further research is expected to take samples from various other business entities outside the public sector such as the service sector and SMEs. To avoid biased responses by making the language of the questionnaire clearer or even modifying the questionnaire used in previous studies, so that it is more easily understood by respondents.