CHANGE OF ADAPTABILITY TO INCREASE EMPLOYEE PERFORMANCE IN STATE-OWNED ENTERPRISES IN AGRICULTURE

Purpose. The main purpose of this research is to summarise the descriptive analysis of change impact and evaluate the impact of change adaptability on employee performance in state-owned enterprises (SOE) in Indonesian agriculture. Methodology / approach. This study integrates theoretical perspectives on change management, adaptability, organisational learning, and employee performance. The model was tested at Indonesian agricultural state-owned enterprise which consists of 14 companies around Indonesia. The sample comprised 373 employees in middle management. Descriptive analysis and probability sampling were used with a disproportionate stratified random sampling technique, Likert questionnaire scale, and indexing with three box methods and Structural Equation Model in Analysis of the Moment Structure program used for the research model. Results. The findings suggest that learning from past change has a positive and significant effect on employee performance, but the adaptability of change and memories of change have a non-significant effect on employee performance. The models fit the Goodness of Fit Criteria (GFI = 0.934; AGFI = 0.911; CMIN/DF = 1.918; RMSEA = 0.050; TLI = 0.982; CFI = 0.985; NFI = 0.969; p-Bollen-Stine Bootstrap = 0.058), and also based on the descriptive analysis, changes in technology is the most significant changes that affect on company. Originality / scientific novelty. Several studies in the literature include the relationship between change readiness, and adaptability on employee performance, nevertheless, this study further builds and examines the construct of adaptability of change, memories of change, learning from the last change, identifying employee performance scales that should be paid more attention to and the significance among them. Practical value


INTRODUCTION
An organisation that is heading toward change requires the support of management and all employees (Holt & Vardaman, 2013).In most organisations, the era of the Industrial Revolution 4.0 is an absolute and unavoidable phenomenon, so organisations must have a strategy that can transform and innovate to deal with it (Novitasari, 2021).The effectiveness of changes implemented by the company is strongly influenced by the readiness of leaders and the readiness of all employees involved in the implementation of company activities (Gunawan et al., 2010).Changes employees, and the ability to recognise the change itself, because this company change is comprehensive, and related to the company's structure, technology implementation, operational systems, company regulations, and so on.Achieving the company's change goals requires employees to enhance performance to implement changes that occur on an ongoing basis in the company.
The main purpose of this research is to summarise the descriptive analysis of change impact and evaluate the impact of change adaptability on employee performance in SOE Agriculture Company in Indonesia.

LITERATURE REVIEW 2.1. Organisational change.
For an organisation or a company, change is not an easy thing to implement because basically, every organisation has various aspects that must be considered carefully before making changes so that efforts to do it are effective and not in vain (Robbins & Judge, 2013).An individual's lack of readiness to change will affect the success of the organisation to change.Individual readiness to change in the process of organisational change is very important and needed, both from the perspective of employees in consolidating changes that occur and in terms of the success of future changes (Mangundjaya, 2015).Management within the company should understand that success in improving quality and productivity must involve employees because employees are not only the main force in realising change, but also increasingly actively participate in planning for change (Robbins & Judge, 2013).One important factor influencing the successful implementation of change in a system is initial readiness, which is defined as the extent to which individual and collective involvement is motivated and technically capable of making changes (Holt & Vardaman, 2013).Lamprinakis (2015) states that in the face of new changes, it is necessary to have the early involvement of employees and their active participation.Employee involvement in change can be expressed when the employee acts as an agent of change, carries out the right process, and there is work participation related to employee readiness to change (Eby et al., 2000).Waisy & Wei (2020) say that 70 % (seventy percent) of organisations that make changes fail, although Hughes (2011) argues that a large percentage of failures are the result of errors in taking scalability role ambiguity, context, perception, time, and measurability.If reviewed further, Maheshwari & Vohra (2015) also revealed that one of the most frequently cited reasons for failure to implement change is that organisations are unable to deal with problems related to the effects of change on aspects of human resources.According to the research of Soumyaja et al. (2015), the inability of individuals to adjust behaviour, skills and the absence of commitment of workers to the implementation of change are factors that fail to change in the organisation.This is in line with the opinion of Mangundjaya (2015) which explains that one of the sources of failure of a change program is humans / employees, where employees do not know how to change until they commit to change.Robbins & Coulter (2012) state that individuals who resist change can be caused by several reasons such as uncertainty, doing work out of the ordinary, fear of losing something they have, and individual beliefs that change is not in line with organisational goals and interests.
In competition and system change, organisations must constantly manage organisational structures and strategies, because organisations will experience continuous changes, so organisational change is a vital aspect of organisational development (Piderit, 2000).Therefore, companies must have an integrated roadmap to build readiness for future business development.In addition, Martin et al. (2012) states that change is something routine and continuous in organisations, so adaptability is required to respond to it.

Employee performance.
In practice, comprehensive organisational management can improve employee performance in changing conditions (Iqbal & Asrar-ul-Haq, 2018).Good employee performance, supported by organisational leadership, motivation, and comfort at work (Paais & Pattiruhu, 2020).In addition, organisational culture formed by leaders in innovation, result orientation, teamwork, and maintaining stability also plays an important role in improving employee performance (Maryati et al., 2019).Robbins & Coulter (2012) explain the management function and organisational performance.Once goals and plans are set (planning), structural tasks and arrangements are put in place (organising), and people are hired, trained, and motivated (leading), there should be some evaluation of whether everything is going according to plan.To ensure that goals are achieved and work is done properly, the organisation's management must monitor and evaluate performance.The measured performance should be compared with the goals set.Monitoring employee performance means allocating organisational strategies, policies, and practices related to building superior performance by measuring and monitoring the results (Rizki et al., 2019).

Change management model.
In the development of the change management model, it is divided into two focuses, namely focus process, and people focus.Some change management models that focus on processes are the Kotter  2.4.Adaptability.Burns (1978) said that adaptability is the key for leaders in managing the organisation, so employees will also follow policies for adaptiveness.The homogeneity of an organisation may be able to face adaptation in the short term, but it can hinder diversity within the firm, reducing its adaptability in the long run (Graetz & Smith, 2010;Stark, 2001).Furthermore, Stark (2001) provided the concept of heterarchy, where heterarchy is a complex adaptive system as it can adapt to different organisational principles rather than hierarchical systems.Data compiled by Kraatz & Zajac (2001) show that companies with high levels of historically valuable resources are less likely to make adaptive strategic changes.Thus, procedures, norms, rules, as well as organisational forms can limit options for learning for change in the medium to long term (March, 1991).At the Davos 2000 World Economic Forum Annual Meeting, Gill (2002) argued that adaptability is demonstrated by environmental sensitivity, tolerance for conflicting views, willingness to experiment, tolerance of failure and learn from it, and ability to respond quickly to change, as well as demonstrate organisational agility, so alignment and adaptability are necessary.Pulakos et al. (2000) in their research defined several dimensions of adaptability, namely handling emergencies, handling work stress, solving problems creatively, dealing with uncertain situations, learning, interpersonal adaptability, cultural adaptability, and physically oriented adaptability.They further concluded that the predictors tested produced different results for each type of work, indicating that each type of work will require adaptability, depending on the conditions of the work.In a later study, Pulakos et al. (2006), individual adaptability is one of the predictors of adaptability in teams, so teams consisting of adaptive individuals tend to be more adaptable.Whenever individual team members solve problems creatively while working alone, they are likely to contribute ideas about potential solutions to the problems faced by the team.When team members learn new technologies and procedures to facilitate their independent work, the team will most likely display a greater level of learning about new tasks, technologies, and procedures as well.In line with Pulakos, Martin et al. (2012) also concluded that adaptability is measured by an individual's capacity to constructively regulate the functioning of psychological behaviour in response to new circumstances, conditions, and situations, change, and uncertainty.The success of organisational change increasingly depends on employees taking personal responsibility for change through effective adaptation to changing conditions and proactive anticipation of new challenges (Ghitulescu, 2013).Continuous change readiness is a critical success factor for organіsations (By, 2005).It is clear from this article that change is an element that is always present and affects all organisations.There is a clear consensus that the pace of change has never been greater than in today's ever-evolving business environment.Therefore, successful change management is a skill that organisations urgently need.The complex Adaptive Systems approach argues that adaptive organisations can adapt to turbulent conditions where change is imminent and frequent, with steps such as creating common goals; fostering inquiry, learning, experimenting, and divergent thinking; enhancing external and internal interconnection through communication and technology; embedding rapid feedback for self-reference and self-control; fostering diversity, specialisation, differentiation, and integration; create shared values and principles of action; and make some important structural and behavioural boundaries explicit.Bowles (2010), who initiated the Adaptive Change Model approach, elaborated on the importance of organising all elements simultaneously to bring about change effectively.According to Martin et al. (2012), adaptability must also be supported by continuous regulation of cognition, behaviour, and ongoing influence in response to varied or uncertain conditions and circumstances.In many cases, constructive modulation of cognitive, behavioural, and affective resources plays a greater role in adaptability.Venturacauilan (2022) in his research on online learning after the COVID-19 pandemic shows that adaptability struggles to adjust online learning methods can improve academic ISSN 2414-584X performance.COVID-19 makes management have to think and behave adaptively in running the wheels of the organisation, including paradigm shifts in leaders and employees, such as adopting technology, innovation to maintain financial conditions, and maintaining market share (Mercedes & Burrell, 2021)  Identification of barriers to adaptive capacity in policy implementation is very important, and Ford & King (2015) outline several obstacles, namely: lack of political will and leadership, legal obstacles, absence of financial resources for adaptation, limited coordination between actors, failures in collective decision making, conflicting objectives among interest groups, lack of clarity over who is responsible for action, and uncertainty over information for adaptive decision making.Klein & Pierce (2001) define that adaptive teams are needed to carry out work because adaptive teams will have more experience in solving problems until they become a routine that can be quickly and effectively completed.Some ways are figuring out how to do solutions with communication, figuring out when to complete out of the box, how to outline tasks in a different and better way, visualising ongoing plans, estimating how long it will take to make changes, profit, and loss analysis, finding inconsistencies and unintended consequences of making changes, estimating how many resources are needed to resolve, assess when commitments to a planned result in forfeited costs, estimate coordination costs and make conclusions / synthesis of these matters.In Lant & Mezias (1990) research that examined the application of organisational learning there was organisational change, concluded that organisations that are adaptive to change can improve their performance compared to stagnant organisations.Huy (2002) in his research analyses emotional balancing on organisational sustainability in anticipating radical changes, learning is needed on success and failure.In line with this, Cook & Yanow (2011) also emphasised that organisational learning factors can reduce problems in dealing with changes in organisations.
Organisational learning to deal with change is all the methods, mechanisms, and processes used in organisations to implement learning in change.Organisational learning is the process of finding and correcting corrections achieved through shared, subjective insights, mental patterns, and knowledge based on experience, past knowledge, and past events (Hashemi & Ram, 2017).Kanter & Courneya (2018) who examined the importance of continued learning in a healthcare environment that changes very quickly, stated the importance of continuous learning based on historical care in patients to be applied to other patients, handling emergencies, producing effective performance, and accelerating speed in service and problem-solving.

Change adaptability and employee performance.
Organisations need to adapt to global changing conditions to improve employee performance (Pulakos et al., 2000).In his research, dimensions for adaptive performance were developed, namely handling emergencies or crises, handling work stress, solving problems creatively, managing uncertain and unpredictable work situations, studying work tasks, technology, and procedures, realising interpersonal adaptability, realising cultural adaptability, and physically oriented adaptability.
Research conducted by Idil (2015) proves that there is a positive relationship between employee change management and employee performance.This is because, changes in mental tools provided to employees help them to perform well by maintaining employee relationships with leaders, encouraging work performance efficiently and effectively, helping employees to solve personal problems, encouraging teamwork, and improving morale in the workplace to perform betterit is an increase in performance.
One of the management strategies called Total Quality Management, can be used as a parameter to increase organisational competitiveness in facing change, with several dimensions, namely human resource management, top management  2019) found an anomaly with the previous research, namely readiness to change does not have a significant effect directly on employee performance, but with knowledge-sharing mediators, readiness to change can have a significant effect on employee performance.This shows that knowledge sharing is needed in changes that occur in the organisation, considering that not all employees understand how to deal with changes that change the way of working.Effiyanti et al. (2021) showed that empowering knowledge-sharing quality does not have a significant effect directly on organisational performance or through change readiness mediators, but this study proves that readiness to change has a significant effect on organisational performance, and can be a mediator that significantly influences the relationship between transformational leadership and organisational performance.Novitasari (2021) shows a significant relationship directly between readiness to change and employee performance; and according to Novitasari (2021), the variable readiness to change becomes a significant mediator in the relationship between transformational leadership and employee performance.These studies are supported by Rizka et al. (2022) who stated that readiness has a significant positive effect on employee performance directly, as well as being a significant mediator in the relationship between transformational leadership on employee performance, as well as on the relationship between employee empowerment on employee performance.The research of Sparr et al. ( 2022) also showed a significant positive influence between paradoxical leadership on proactive adaptive performance, with mediators of readiness to change.
Siswanto & Haryati (2020) who examined the relationship between organisational culture change, motivation, readiness to change, and employee performance showed that readiness to change is a significant positive predictor of employee performance, and readiness to change can be an intervening variable in the relationship between motivation to employee performance, as well as the relationship between changes in organisational culture to employee performance.This shows that employee motivation will be higher and can improve performance when it is ready to accept the changes that have occurred in the organisation.
Research conducted by Kimhi et al. (2019) on the manufacturing industry in Nigeria on technological changes, leadership changes and management strategies in facing change shows the results that technological changes, leadership changes, and management strategies in facing organisational changes have a significant positive effect on organisational performance.Technology affects employee performance because it can simplify the work to be done, making work more efficient.Organisations implementing new technologies must provide appropriate training to their employees to be able to adapt as well as improve their performance.Every organisation must build a strong organisational management strategy to improve relationships based on their values, norms, behaviours, and perceptions.Changes in leadership mindset, leadership style and behaviour support the change process designed as a result of orientation that can motivate employees to want to participate and contribute to the organisation.2022) also prove that there is a significant positive relationship between readiness to change and employee performance, which shows that a person's willingness to adapt can positively affect their capacity to succeed in work.This is supported by the statement of Fachriansyah et al. (2021) which also found a significant positive influence between organisational changes on employee performance.Research conducted by Merdiaty et al. (2022) shows that readiness to change has a significant positive effect on work performance directly, and also has a moderate significant effect on work performance through mindfulness mediators.
In the face of change, it requires employee training and development, so that employees are ready to face change.Research has a significant positive effect on readiness to change, as well as readiness to change ability to be a mediator in the relationship between training and development on employee performance.Ratnawati et al. (2018) proved that although readiness to change does not directly affect employee performance, with mediator adaptability, the significance of the relationship between transformational leadership on employee performance was obtained, and also the relationship between readiness to change on employee performance.This research shows how important adaptability is in understanding change, to improve performance.
Research conducted by Mohammad (2019) on the management of banks in Nigeria, shows positive significance in the relationship between strategic change to organisational learning, strategic change to firm performance, organisational learning to firm performance, and based on this study, organisational learning able to be a full and significant positive mediator on the relationship between strategic change and firm performance.
Based on these references, the hypothesis proposed: H1: Adaptability of change will positively and significantly influence employee performance; H2: Memories of change will positively and significantly influence employee performance; H3: Learn from the past change will positively and significantly influence employee performance.

METHODOLOGY
According to Ferdinand (2014), population is a combination of all elements that make up an event, thing, or individual that has similar characteristics and is the center of attention of a researcher because it is seen as a universe of research.The method used for this research is disproportionate stratified random sampling (Sekaran & Bougie, 2016).The population in this study is employees with BOD-2 level from 14 companies, where the BOD-2 position is a supervisor position, with the position of Head of Sub Division, Head of Sub Division, Assistant Head, and other equivalents.The reason for determining the position of BOD-2 as a population is because the position of BOD-2 is a middle-level management function that has a significant role in connecting the vision and mission between the Board of Management (Directors and SEVP), BOD-1 (Head of Division, Head of Department, Manager) with the position of first-level management BOD-3 (Staff, Assistants) technically and operationally so that variable indicators are suitable to be examined at the BOD-2 level.In terms of quantity, BOD-2 positions totaling 1329 meet to be the research population.The sample is a certain part or number taken from a population and examined in detail so that the sample is part of the population that has certain characteristics and represents the entire population.From the population, the sample consisted of 373 respondents from these 14 companies.The survey conducted in December 2022 -February 2023.
This article intends to collect the most affected changes in companies, divided into nine options: changes in technology (implementation of information systems, application), changes in work atmosphere, changes in operational system, changes in company regulations, changes in income scheme (salary, remuneration), external changes (environmental, social, economic, government policies), organisational structural changes, changes in performance targets, changes in the company's financial condition.These options are given to the respondents, and choosing the options in the order of the changes that have the most impact on their performance.The researchers indexed the answers and then sorted by five-box methods (Ferdinand, 2014) 2010), the best sample size used for SEM is 100 to 200 samples, but further, according to him the sample size in SEM can reach 500 samples, with the consequence that a larger sample size will make the model more sensitive, especially on Chi-Square Model testing.Determination of models in the use of samples and sample sizes is very important to obtain samples that are representative of the population so that the results of the study can be declared good.
Based on the literature review, Figure 1 below shows that there are connections between the adaptability of change, memories of change, learn from the past change, employee performance, and proposed hypothesis.This study used a questionnaire technique designed using a closed statement format that requires respondents' answers to determine the degree of understanding of the respondents (Sekaran & Bougie, 2016).The statements in this questionnaire are made using a scale of 1-7 to obtain data that is interval and assigned a score.This study uses the bipolar adjective scale as a refinement of the semantic scale with the hope that respondents and the responses produced are interval-scaled data (Ferdinand, 2014).The most positive response (maximum) is given the greatest value, while the most  1.

Table 1 Dimensions and scales
Adaptability for Change (ACC) ACC1 I was able to cope with stress on the job after a change ACC2 I am open to interacting about new things after the change ACC3 I am not resistant (not resisting) to unexpected changes Memories of Change (MCC) MCC1 I was able to remember the changes that occurred in the company MCC2 The memory of the change left an impression on me MCC3 I remember the change because it had a big effect on me Learn from The Past Change (LCC) LCC1 I was able to learn from the changes in the company in the past LCC2 Learning from past changes will make it easier for me to cope with the changes that occur LCC3 I believe that the company will survive the next changes because I have learned from the changes that have occurred Employee Performance (EP) Dimension

RESULTS
From the survey, 373 respondents consisted of 338 men and 35 women.Based on the number of respondents, it can be seen that the characteristics of these agricultural companies are that there are more male employees than women, mainly due to the large number of jobs in the plantation (field).The socio-economics characteristic of the sample based on the degree of education and age, shown in Table 2.In Table 2, most degrees of education of respondents are bachelor's degrees (76.14 %) and most are between 36-40 years old (24.40 %).Based on the level of education from the respondents, it can be seen that the BOD-2 position has a bachelor degree education level.Companies usually require a bachelor's degree for this position, because at this degree an employee is taught not only high skills, but also soft skills, such as leadership, communication skills with subordinates, and other things to support becoming a manager.Moreover, these companies are state-owned enterprises.Although there are some respondents who come from high school or associate degree, can be seen that they are over 40 years old.The degree of education and working periods of respondents shown in Table 3.

Degree of education
Working period (years) From Table 3, most working periods of respondents are between 11-15 years (30.83 %), then 21-25 years (20.91 %), and 16-20 years (19.57%).Only a few respondents with work experience of under 11 years were in middle manager positions, because usually it is still in a position below it.However, we can see that there are respondents who have a working period of up to 11-15 years from a high school degree.This explains that these employees are still able to be at the middle manager level, without going through a higher degree of education.None of the respondents came from a doctoral degree.
From the descriptive analysis impact of changes, five-box methods describing the index number with the interval very low: The Table 4 concludes that changes in technology have the most significant changes, and the further changes in operational systems are also shown in the high category.These means that technological changes occur so quickly, and not everyone is successful in overcoming its impact, for example the implementation of precision farming using the Global Positioning System (GPS) method, the use of automatic sensors, the implementation of Enterprise Resource Planning (ERP) which is no longer manual, and integrated applications.The use of a centralised operational system, realtime monitoring, strict implementation of standard operational procedures, will change the way of working.Hereafter changes in company regulations, changes in income scheme (salary, remuneration), organisational structural changes, changes in the company's financial condition, and changes in work atmosphere are shown in the middle category.Some of these things may have an impact on employee performance, but do not directly impact job changes, are felt but do not affect employee performance in the long term.According to the results, external changes and changes in performance targets are shown in the low category.External changes sometimes have an impact, but more towards management in strategic matters, which are not the scope of employees, also a change in performance target does not have much impact, because it only Then, the findings from the Structural Equation Model are shown in Figure 2.

Figure 2. The result of the full structural model
Source: data processing by authors.
The results of Goodness of Fit are shown in Table 5.From the results of Goodness of Fit above, GFI, CMIN/DF, AGFI, RMSEA, TLI, CFI, and NFI showed cut-off values above the standard, while chi-square and p-values were ignored due to large sample sizes (Hair et al., 2010).According to Hair et al. (2010), in determining the Goodness of Fit criteria of a model, it is necessary to pay attention to one criteria with another, if the majority of criteria show values above the standard, the model can be said to be suitable.Collier (2020) also notes that when the sample size is large, the CMIN/DF criterion is more recommended, so the model was matched in this study.As can be seen from Figure 2, the results of the load factor for each dimension and scale are shown in Table 6.
Table 6 Loading factor From the results of the loading factor above, the highest loading factor is came from LEP2 (0.950) in the dimension of Learning Development at scale "I strive to get training or learning that is relevant to my job", and then from ACC2 (0.944) in the dimension of Adaptability of Change at scale "I am open to interacting about new things after the change".The high loading factor also came from MCC2 (0.932) in the dimension of Memories of Change at scale "The memory of the change left an impression on me" and from WEP3 (0.930) in the dimension Work Performance at scale "I was able to achieve the work productivity expected by the company".The result also proved that the highest loading factor from Employee Performance is came from Perceived Performance (PEP) with the loading factor 0.964 %.Perceived performance determine how the employee feel their performance towards the company, can be controlled by the company, can achieve the targets set by the company, and work with their best performance.Nevertheless, in general, the values are > 0.70 as required (Collier, 2020) except LEP1 (0.639).Even though, the literature shows the significance of loading factor by > 0.50 (Hair et al., 2010) confirmed as significant loading factor, so this case is tolerable, and the dimensions and scales used are significant.
Table 5 shows that the probability of 0.000 is not confirmed by expected cut-off value > 0.05 due to large sample size.The authors tried to examine a p-value of > 0.05, further in the next stage Bollen-Stine Bootstrap testing was used; one of the primary concerns with non-normal data is the inflation of model fit estimates.Therefore, to assess the model fit with the bootstrap samples, we use the Bollen-Stein method.This method allows us to see if the proposed model fits the data when the bootstrap samples are used as the input.A Bollen-Stine test is also advisable to determine how well the model fits the bootstrap samples.If the Bollen-Stine Bootstrap is rejected (found a significant result p < 0.05), the result means the model is not fitting the data.The Bollen-Stine is very sensitive to sample size, and it is advisable to use numerous goodness (and badness) of fit indices to determine model fit.Bollen-Stine accesses only chi-square values, but it is always advisable to use numerous different model fit options in presenting results (Collier, 2020).This method used in this study through bootstrapping performance with several bootstrap samples of 1000 samples, and obtained a p-value of 0.058 (> 0.05) as shown in Figure 3, so that the p-value of the Bollen-Stine Bootstrap results could be accepted.Based on the full structural model results, a summary of hypothesis testing results is presented in Table 7. From the hypothesis testing above, the results of H3 are positive and significant at p < 0.001, but H1 and H2 were concluded as not significant, because the p from H1 is 0.041 (> 0.001) and p from H2 is 0.268 (> 0.001).This is in agreement with previous studies.
This study shows that adaptability to change and memory of change alone are not р = 0.058 ISSN 2414-584X sufficient to increase employee productivity.Learning from past changes allows employees to more easily respond to change, recognise the impact of change, prepare ways to deal with it, adapt to ways of working, and increase employee productivity, especially when considering the impact of technological change, among other influences.Learning from the past changes is important because by learning from changes employees can improve their performance, and there is no resistance to changes that occur continuously.It can be imagined that in current conditions employees cannot use the latest technology and operational systems, they will certainly be lag behind others.Agricultural companies with old-fashioned thinking can no longer avoid the changes taking place.In the next stage, employees are expected to learn from changes that have occurred, by trying to enrich information, trying to improve abilities (competencies), evaluating changes that occur, learning from changes in the past, mitigating potential changes in the future, trying to unravel bottlenecks that occur in the change process, and trying to understand the critical points of change.
In this research, the authors combined a descriptive analysis of the impact of change and a Structural Equation Model to provide comprehensive results to measure the impact of change on employee performance.Descriptive analysis describes what aspects of change have an influence on work.SEM was used to test the influence of dimensions of adaptability of change, memories of change, and learn from the past change on employee performance.From the results can be seen that employees must constantly learn how the world of work develops and changes, following the global world, in order to get the employee performance expected by the company.Employees are required to learn to adapt technology for work, although for people who are no longer young, this is difficult to do.This is different from the younger generation who are used to gadgets and online applications.There is a correlation between the impact of changes caused by changes in technology and operational systems (see Table 4), because current operational systems mostly integrate technology into them.The use of paper in work is reduced due to the impact of using electronic recording and ERP software.There is no longer a recap function, due to the use of automatic formulas in real time when inputting data, resulting in reports that can be presented directly, and displayed on the management dashboard.This also has an impact on changes to company regulations, which have a slight difference with the impact of changes on the operation system.The company establishes rules regarding the use of applications, according to which all company transactions can only be recognised if they have been entered using an application defined by the company.If the application is not used, the work carried out by the employee cannot be recognized as correct.
According to this research, employees must consciously and actively seek training or adopt new methods, learn from other colleagues, which they have never had before.This is to improve learning development so as to improve performance.This is the key to change adaptability in agricultural companies.Because learn from the past change is only significant impact on employee performance than adaptability of change and memories of change, then learning from changes that occurred in the past will be able to increase employee resilience to changes that occur in the company, so that it will improve employee performance.In addition, this will also bring changes to the indicators that influence employee performance in working at this agricultural company.

DISCUSSION
The studied companies are located all over Indonesia, with various work habits of the employees.After the merger, the parent company attempted to unify those differences, resulting in the changes.That is why the impact of this change is examined, and change adaptability along with its dimensions are tested to improve employee performance.
This The results from the descriptive analysis show the category from index-numbered results.The impact of changes that occur on companies illustrates that all changes require readiness to face them.The categories included in this research are categories that usually exist when a company changes in a planned or unplanned situation.The results obtained represent the results of companies operating in the agriculture sector.Changes in technology, for example, may not have a high impact on companies that do have core competence in the field of technology, because they consciously follow technological changes.
The findings from the Structural Equation Model do not show supported results between adaptability of change and employee performance, because it is not only the openness of the employees to interact with something new that allows them to adapt to change.Therefore, they do not feel the change is part of the new way of working, and continue to work in the old way, without wanting to be disturbed by the change; and the employee is not able to cope with the stress on the job after the change and is resistant to change.This also happen on memories of change.The memories of change can't give the ability to conduct the readiness for change, although they know that it will impact their jobs.The research shows the only dimension that significant impact on employee performance is learn from the past change.The employees learn how to deal with the changes based on the past changes because it becomes easier to implement the new methods to face the changes.

CONCLUSIONS
Changes in technology are very influential for companies in agriculture, this can be caused by the beginning of the digitalisation era which requires companies to apply technology in company operations, where they can no longer fully use manual systems.For companies, it is necessary to prepare employees to adapt to the changes that occur in the company.Technology affects employee performance because it can simplify the work to be done, making work more efficient.Organisations implementing new technologies must provide appropriate training to their employees to be able to adapt as well as improve their performance.Every organisation must build a strong organisational management strategy to improve relationships based on their values, norms, behaviours, and perceptions.Changes in leadership mindset, leadership style, and behaviour, support the change process designed as a result of orientation that can motivate employees to want to participate and contribute to the organisation.In addition to collaborative changes in technology, change in the operational system is also an impactful change, the use of mechanisation, sensors, and policies that underlie the company's operations.
Learning from the past change brings employees to adopt new ways of working, ways of dealing with new technology, new regulations, a different work atmosphere than before, and being willing to allocate time to learn how to achieve the targets imposed on the job.In addition, the changes will also have an impact on income, because the company is tightening spending on things that are not priorities.Without learning from changes, employees will actually be demotivated, feel marginalised, hopeless, and unproductive, feel that they are not suitable to work in that position, which will ultimately make employees stressed, and act out of bounds, at one's own will, disobeying superiors, breaking the corporate rules.
The management should give clear guidance to the employees about the impact of change; they must also be able to eliminate conditions where employees feel worried about changes that occur because the company has not shown significant improvement.Some employees who show resistance when changes occur, work becomes more difficult, feel that there are negative aspects to the changes, and that the changes have not affected the company.Those memories of change will make employees able to adapt, in an open way in interacting with new things, able to learn from changes that occur in the company, try to explore information related to the purpose of change, multiply discussions with the topic of changes in the company.It will also help increase employee productivity if they learn to understand change, try to develop insight (on external factors), think positively about change, and not resist change.Expectations for improving employee performance, can be achieved if all parts of the company can organise the change in the spirit and implementation of the company's values.
Adaptability to change is expected to help companies remain resilient and keep pace with the times.So it is necessary to bring the purpose and urgency of change to all levels of employees, through careful planning, increasing employee competence.It is important that each employee will be ready to accept change, innovate, value creation and develop technology to face competition, changes adapted to local conditions, consistent in the implementation of changes.Particular attention should be paid to ensuring that policies adopted from time to time are not subjective, that rewards and penalties are fair and equitable, that education and training of employees are highly valued, that they understand changes in external regulation, that they are marketoriented and have a thorough knowledge of the business from production to processing, and that they have a long-term vision to achieve sustainable agricultural development.Management should pay attention to employees' readiness for change, take systematic and measurable steps to meet the company's expectations, and not allow employees feel that change only makes work more difficult and burdensome.

LIMITATIONS AND FUTURE RESEARCH
The sample size was taken from 14 companies with a wide scope, with empirical findings that are quite varied, where the financial, operational, financial, and human resource conditions of each company are quite diverse.Respondents' perceptions of the definition of "change" lead to multiple interpretations and ambiguities, however, this study still provides a general perspective on "change".So, the authors suggest the use of different sampling techniques to produce conclusions that are more representative of the population in the company.
The other limitation is the period of change occurs over a long period and in several stages.At the time this research was conducted, there was still a process of change itself, so it was necessary to do research with a multi-time series.Then the use of employee performance dimensions needs to be adjusted to the real indicators used in each existing company by the company's sector, to make research more comprehensive.
In future research, using a two-stage questionnaire is a better way, where at the initial stage prospective respondents are given questions related to the level of understanding of each variable, if prospective respondents reach a certain level of understanding, then they will continue to close (scalar) and open questions.The use of other variables that have a theoretical relationship with change, both endogenous and exogenous, enriches the literature.
Conflicts of interest: the authors declare no conflict of interest.
(2019) introduced the concept of Cognitive Flexibility Theory as a support in the development of adaptive readiness and adaptive response to novelty, with an emphasis on readiness to face the complexity of organisational change in the 21st century, with the need for adaptive ability to respond to change, because the nature of change itself is dynamic and requires professionals to always be open in exploring the best solutions.
commitment, process management, customer focus & satisfaction, learning and training, and supplier partnership.Scientists Al-Maamari et al. (2021), Iqbal & Asrarul-Haq (2018) and Laseinde et al. (2020) prove the positive significance of the influence between readiness to change on employee performance Total Quality Management and employee performance.In this case, employee change readiness will contribute to the level of change and make leaders understand the work of their employees.The next study by Iqbal & Asrar-Ul-Haq ( Research conducted by Novitasari et al. (2020), Asbari et al. (2021), Permana et al. (2021), Arshad & Sabeen (2021) and Maksum et al. ( to five impact changes: very high, high, medium, low, and very low.This study also uses the Structural Equation Model (SEM) with the Analysis of the Moment Structure program (AMOS version 24.0), where according to Hair et al. (

Figure 1 .
Figure 1.Research model Source: develop by the authors.

1 :
Work Performance (WEP) WEP1 I can achieve the quantity of work targeted by the company WEP2 I do my work on time WEP3 I was able to achieve the work productivity expected by the company Dimension 2: Perceived Performance (PEP) PEP1 I apply high standards to the work I do PEP2 I work at the best performance level PEP3 The work I do is reliable Dimension 3: Learning Development (LEP) LEP1 I get regular training within the company to keep my competencies up to date LEP2 I strive to get training or learning that is relevant to my job LEP3 I look for every opportunity that allows me to improve my performance (training, group projects, exchanges with colleagues, etc.) Source: developed on the basis of Bouckenooghe et al. (2009), Oreg (2006), Piderit (2000), Ratnawati et al. (2018), Pulakos et al. (2006), Stata (1989), Senge (1990), Hashemi & Ram, 2017), Astuty & Udin (2020), Ratnawati et al. (2018), Rodwell et al. (1998), Sabuhari et al. (2020), Al-Dmour (2020), Donkor et al. (2021), Maryati et al. (2019), Pulakos et al. (2000), Charbonnier-Voirin & Roussel (2012).ISSN 2414-584X requires more effort and activity in the work to achieve the goal.These results proved the research from Shum et al. (2008), Pulakos et al. (2006), Dooley (1997), Mercedes & Burrell (2021) and Kimhi et al. (2019) that technology is the most influential change and managing change throughout an implementation requires long-term investments on "soft-selling", such as training, team building exercises, and cultivating a culture that embraces change.As change alters an individual's current state, resistance to change is likely, especially when it comes to technology.The details of the indexing number are shown in Appendix A.

Figure 3 .
Figure 3.The result of the Bollen-Stine BootstrapSource: data processing by authors.