The empowerments’ effect on teachers’ responsibility, self-efficacy, and organizational commitment

Article history: Received: October 14, 2020 Received in revised format: November 11 2020 Accepted: November 14, 2020 Available online: November 14, 2020 This study explores the empowerments’ effect on organizational commitment mediating by self-efficacy and responsibility. A questionnaire collected research data. The research participants include 375 teachers in Indonesia selected by accidental sampling. Data analysis uses path analysis supported by descriptive statistics and correlational. The results prove that empowerment positively and significantly affects organizational commitment, directly and indirectly, mediating by self-efficacy and responsibility. A fit research model regarding the empowerments’ effect on organizational commitment mediating by selfefficacy and responsibility was found as a novelty. This model can be discussed among researchers and practitioners in developing organizational commitment models in the future and various organizations’ context. © 2021 by the authors; licensee Growing Science, Canada


Introduction
Organizational commitment is an essential issue in organizational behavior, which is very crucial for organizations. Organizational commitment is believed to contribute to organizational life, especially organizational members, as a driving force for various organizational activities. Several studies in multiple countries, sectors, and organizations indicate that organizational commitment determines individual life in the workplace. For example, the research carries out by Hou et al. (2011) and Parimita, Purwana, and Suhud, 2020) show that organizational commitment affects creativity. The studies by Garrido-Moreno, Lockett, and Garcı´a-Morales (2014) and Gopinath (2019) revealed that organizational commitment has a significant effect on knowledge management. The recent investigation by Tang, Shao, and Chen (2019) also proved that organizational commitment is related to innovative behavior. Liu and Bellibas (2018), Lambert et al. (2019), and Loan (2020) also claimed that organizational commitment influences job satisfaction. Moreover, organizational commitment is also driving increasing job involvement (Nazem & Mozaiini, 2014;Patil, Ramanjaneyalu, & Ambekar, 2016), organizational citizenship behavior (López-Cabarcos et al., 2019;Grego-Planer, 2019), productivity (Gvpn et al., 2018), and job performance (Lin & Shiqian, 2018;Metin & Asli, 2018;Suharto, Suyanto, & Hendri, 2019). A high organizational commitment can also reduce burnout (Enginyurt et al., 2016;Khera, 2017) and turnover (Luz, de Paula, & de Oliveira, 2018). These various studies show the vitality of organizational commitment to individual life as the organizations' main asset. Organizational commitment is the attitudinal experience of commitment occurs apart from, or as a consequence of, day-to-day work activity (Beardwell & Thompson, 2014). Organizational commitment also refers to the degree to which an employee identifies with the organization and wants to continue actively participating in it, willing to put forth effort on its behalf (Newstrom, 2015;Noe et al., 2015). According to Tang, Shao, and Chen (2019), organizational commitment reflects an organizational member's strong acceptance of organizational goals and values, and their willingness to devote themselves to the organization and maintain their position. Meyer and Allen (1991) identify three organizational commitment indicators: affective commitment, normative commitment, and continuance commitment. Affective commitment involves the employees' emotional attachment to, identification with, and involvement in the organization; continuance commitment related to commitment based on the costs that the employee associates with leaving the organization; and normative commitment refer to employees' feelings of obligation to stay with the organization because they should; it is the right thing to do.

Empowerment and Organizational Commitment
Every member of the organization needs to empower to make a more significant contribution to the organization. Empowerment is sharing power and authority with subordinates to increase their confidence and effectiveness (Ivancevich, Konopaske, & Matteson, 2014). Empowerment authorizes employees to cope with situations and enables them to take control of problems as they arise (Newstorm, 2015) and giving subordinates substantial authority to make decisions (Rue, Ibrahim, & Byars, 2016). Empowerment also reflects a psychological experience representing self-determination, meaning, competence, and the impact of the organizations' role (McShane & Von Glinow, 2015). In a psychological context, empowerment is employees' belief in the degree to which they affect their work environment, competence, the meaningfulness of their job, and perceived autonomy (Robbins & Judge, 2015). Conger and Kanungo, as quoted Ivancevich, Konopaske, and Matteson (2014), also describe empowerment as a process of enhancing self-efficacy among organizational members by identifying conditions that foster powerlessness and through their removal by both formal organizational practices and informal techniques of providing efficacy information. Dubois and Miley (2011) identify four indicators of empowerment: building a relationship, build communication, involved in problem-solving, and reflects the attitudes and values of the profession. The indicators, if in good condition, can increase organizational commitment. For example, the teachers involved in problem-solving tends to have an emotional attachment to, identification with, and involvement in the school organization. Several kinds of researches conducted by Kariuki and Kiambati (2017), Jomah (2017), Zaraket, Garios, and Malek (2018), Aggarwal, Dhaliwal, and Nobi (2018) show that empowerment influences organizational commitment. Based on the statements and studies above, the first hypothesis in this study is: H1: Empowerment has a direct effect on organizational commitment.

Self-efficacy and Organizational Commitment
Everyone has self-efficacy at a different level. Self-efficacy is a multidimensional construct that varies according to the domain of demands, so it must evaluate at a level that is specific to the outcome domain (Zimmerman, Bandura, & Martinez-Pons, 1992). Self-efficacy reflects an ability possessed to do something in a special situation (Lussier, 2008) and the belief that someone has the skills needed to demonstrate the behavior needed for the success of a task (Colquitt, Lepine & Wesson, 2015). In the teachers' context, efficacy is perceptions of their teaching ability and the belief that teaching can impact student learning (Zimmerman et al., 2016). Teachers' efficacy predicted a teachers' capacity for successfully engaging in a future task such as effectively using a new teaching strategy (Southerland et al., 2011). The studies by Guo et al. (2012) also found a positive relationship between teaching efficacy and student's literacy skills. Bandura (1994) mentions three dimensions of self-efficacy: generality, related to broadly to the field of duty or behavior. Magnitude, related to task difficulty. Strength, associated with the level of strength or stability of a person against his beliefs. These dimensions, if at a high level, can be someone feels better about their organizational commitment. For example, the teachers with high strength of beliefs tend to have an emotional attachment to, identification with, and involvement in the school organization. The studies by Zeb and Nawaz (2016), LiLin and Shiqian (2018), and Ahmad (2019) also concluded that self-efficacy influences organizational commitment. Based on argues and studies above, the second hypothesis in this study is: H2: Self-efficacy has a direct effect on organizational commitment.

Responsibility and Organizational Commitment
The existence of responsibility very important, both individual and organizational context. Responsibility refers to an abstraction that originates from the purposive relation between actors but ultimately transcends those same actors becoming institutionalized into rules, regulations, and discourses (Sena, 2014). Responsibility is also an institutionalized relation of position between actors (Savini, 2019). They are the people who have positions that are involved in responsibility. In special cases, responsibility has been intended as an object of efficient design (Mostert, 2015) so that the tasks carried out by the actors can complete adequately. In the human resources context, responsibility is the obligation to perform certain tasks and duties assigned by the supervisor (Leonard & Hilgert, 2007) or an employees' duty to perform the assigned task (Slocum, Jackson, & Hellriegel, 2008). Giddens (1999) shows better profiles of the structuring of responsibility values, pointing out that "what brings into play the notion of responsibility is that someone takes a decision having discernible consequences". Hence, the attribution of responsibilities, therefore, requires a process through which possible 'consequences' of collective action are abstracted and discerned, in a manner that can be more or less dialogical and participative but always relational (McNamee & Gergen, 1999). Therefore, the building of responsibility depends on networks of relations and the sharing of information and reciprocal monitoring within particular action contexts (Ostrom, 2010). Responsibility consists of three indicators: imputability, accountability, and liability. Imputability refers to the causal connection between a person and an action. In its weakest sense, this shows that action can attribute to a person. Accountability is bases on contract relationships, formal or informal. Liability goes beyond accountability, into the idea of concern for others, a sense of liability for certain projects, or people (Schweiker, 1995). Suppose the indicators at a high level can increasing teachers' organizational commitment. For example, the teachers in high imputability, accountability, and liability tend to have an emotional attachment to, identification with, and involvement in the school organization. In various kinds of literature, research on individual responsibility in organizations is minimal. Most of which are studies on organizational responsibility, especially those related to corporate social responsibility (CSR). For example, the studies by Kim et al. (2018), Ahmed and Tahir (2019), Zaman and Nadeem (2019), and Boudlaie, Nik, and Kenarroodi (2020) show that CRS influences organizational commitment. Thus, the research about individual responsibility related to organizational commitment is urgently, so can be hypothesized: H3: Responsibility has a direct effect on organizational commitment.

Empowerment and Responsibility
Empowerment also affects responsibility. In practice, the indicators of empowerment, such as building a relationship, build communication, involved in problem-solving, and reflects the attitudes and values of the profession (Dubois & Miley, 2011) need by teachers to help resolve their responsibilities, so if in good condition and conducive for teachers can increase their responsibilities manifested in imputability, accountability, and liability (Schweiker, 1995). Several studies carried out by Farahmand (2011) and Likah et al. (2017) also show that empowerment affects responsibility. Based on the argues and studies above, the fourth hypothesis in this study is: H4: Empowerment has a direct effect on responsibility.

Self-efficacy and Responsibility
Self-efficacy is crucial for individuals as members of organizations so that its existence, besides influencing organizational commitment, also affects responsibility in the context of school organization. Three dimensions of self-efficacy: generality, magnitude, and strength (Bandura, 1994), if at a high level, can stimulate teacher to realize their responsibilities manifested in imputability, accountability, and liability (Schweiker, 1995). Scholars also approved the research result that self-efficacy influences responsibility (e.g., Kurt, Güngör, & Ekici, 2014;Habibie, 2018). Referred to the argues and studies above, so the fifth hypothesis in this study is: H5: Self-efficacy has a direct effect on responsibility.

Empowerment and Self-efficacy
Self-efficacy, besides influences organizational commitment, is also affected by empowerment. When the indicators of empowerment, such as building a relationship, build communication, involved in problem-solving, and reflects the attitudes and values of the profession (Dubois & Miley, 2011) in good condition, can enhance self-efficacy manifested in generality, magnitude, and strength (Bandura, 1994). The research result conducted by Moattari et al. (2012), Muhtar (2013), Nafari and Vatankhah (2016), and Köhler et al. (2018) also indicates that empowerment influences self-efficacy. Based on the argues and studies above, the sixth hypothesis in this study is: H6: Empowerment has a direct effect on self-efficacy.

Empowerment and Organizational Commitment Mediating by Responsibility
From the various results of the research above, responsibility, besides influences organizational commitment, also mediates the empowerment effect on organizational commitment. In practice, when the indicators of empowerment, for example, building a relationship, build communication, involved in problem-solving (Dubois & Miley, 2011) in good conditions for a long time, can stimulate teachers' responsibilities, particularly, imputability, accountability, and liability (Schweiker, 1995). It then positively impacts teachers' organizational commitment reflected in affective commitment, normative commitment, and continuance commitment (Meyer & Allen, 1991). The studies by Farahmand (2011) andLikah et al. (2017) also shows that empowerment affects responsibility, while the investigation by Kim, Song & Lee (2016), Asif et al. (2017), and Im, Chung, and Yang, (2017) proved that responsibility influences organizational commitment. Based on argues and studies above, the seventh hypothesis in this study is: H7: Empowerment has an indirect effect on organizational commitment mediating by responsibility.

Self-efficacy and Organizational Commitment Mediating by Responsibility
Responsibility also mediates self-efficacy effect on organizational commitment. When dimensions of self-efficacy: generality, magnitude, and strength (Bandura, 1994) at a high level can drive teachers' responsibilities manifested in imputability, accountability, and liability (Schweiker, 1995). It then significant impact on teachers' organizational commitment reflected in affective commitment, normative commitment, and continuance commitment (Meyer & Allen, 1991). The studies by Kurt, Güngör, and Ekici (2014) and Habibie (2018) also indicated that self-efficacy affects responsibility, while the investigation by Im, Chung, and Yang (2017), Kim et al. (2018), Zaman and Nadeem (2019), and Boudlaie, Nik, and Kenarroodi (2020) revealed that responsibility influences organizational commitment. Based on argues and studies above, the eighth hypothesis in this study is: H8: Self-efficacy has an indirect effect on organizational commitment mediating by responsibility.

Empowerment and Organizational Commitment Mediating by Self-efficacy
According to the studies above, self-efficacy mediates empowerment effect on organizational commitment. In practice, when the indicators of empowerment, for example, build communication and involved in problem-solving (Dubois & Miley, 2011) in the right conditions for a long time, can increase self-efficacy reflected in generality, magnitude, and strength (Bandura, 1994). It then implicates to teachers' organizational commitment manifested in affective commitment, normative commitment, and continuance commitment (Meyer & Allen, 1991). The investigation by Nafari and Vatankhah (2016) and Köhler et al. (2018) shows that empowerment influences self-efficacy, while the studies from LiLin and Shiqian (2018) and Ahmad (2019) revealed that self-efficacy affects organizational commitment. Based on argues and studies above, the ninth hypothesis in this study is: H9: Empowerment has an indirect effect on organizational commitment mediating by self-efficacy.

Empowerment and Responsibility Mediating by Self-efficacy
Self-efficacy also mediates the empowerment effect on responsibility. The indicators of empowerment: building a relationship, build communication, involved in problem-solving, and reflects the attitudes and values of the profession (Dubois & Miley, 2011) if sufficient conditions and well maintained for a long time can enhance self-efficacy reflected in generality, magnitude, and strength (Bandura, 1994). It then implicates to teachers' responsibilities manifested in imputability, accountability, and liability (Schweiker, 1995). The scholars' studies by Nafari and Vatankhah (2016) and Köhler et al. (2018) shows that empowerment influences self-efficacy, while the studies conducted by Kurt, Güngör, & Ekici (2014) and Habibie (2018) claimed that self-efficacy affects responsibility. Based on argues and studies above, the tenth hypothesis in this study is: H10: Empowerment has an indirect effect on responsibility mediating by self-efficacy.

Research Methods
This research uses a quantitative approach to the survey method through a Likert scale questionnaire with five alternative answers: strongly disagree, disagree, neutral, agree, and strongly agree. The questionnaire was made by researchers themselves based on the theoretical dimensions/indicators of the experts. The indicators of empowerment: building a relationship, build communication, involved in problem-solving, and reflects the attitudes and values of the profession (Dubois & Miley, 2011); dimensions of self-efficacy: generality, magnitude, and strength (Bandura, 1994); indicators of responsibility: imputability, accountability, and liability (Schweiker, 1995); and indicators of organizational commitment: affective commitment, normative commitment, and continuance commitment (Meyer & Allen, 1991). The empowerment questionnaire consists of 10 items with an alpha coefficient = .791, self-efficacy consists of 9 items with an alpha coefficient = .873, responsibility consists of 6 items with alpha coefficients = .887, and organizational commitment consists of 9 items with an alpha coefficient = .942. This research participant is 375 teachers in Indonesia spread across four provinces (Jakarta, Banten, West Java, Riau) determined by accidental sampling based on participant willingness to fill in the questionnaire when the research was conducted (Widodo, 2019). Description of the participants shown in Fig. 1. The majority of participants are female (64%), aged 26 -35 years (42.13%), bachelor education (74.93%), and length of teaching ≤ five years (33.33%).

Gender
Age Experience Education  Fig 1. Personal Characteristics of the Research Participants Data analysis using the path analysis and the path coefficient significance uses a t-test and Z-test supported by descriptive statistics and correlational. Descriptive and correlational analyzes were performed by SPSS version 26, while the path analysis by Lisrel 8.80.

Result
The result of descriptive statistical analysis and correlations of the four research variables are presented in Table 1. The mean values of the four variables from the lowest to the highest in succession are responsibility (25.73), self-efficacy (36.94), organizational commitment (38.35), and empowerment (43.35). Meanwhile, the standard deviation values of the four variables from the lowest to the highest in succession are responsibility (2.837), empowerment (3.416), self-efficacy (3.926), and organizational commitment (4.728). The correlation analysis results in all variables had significant relationships with the other variables at level p < .01. This condition indicates that all the variables had a mutual relationship with each other. The results of hypothesis testing with path analysis of the effects of empowerment on self-efficacy, responsibility, and organizational commitment are summarized in Table 2 and visualized in Fig. 1 and Fig. 2. The hypothesis testing results show that all hypotheses were supported (t-value/Z-value > t-table/Z-table at α = .01). Therefore the result of this study: empowerment had a significant direct effect on self-efficacy, responsibility, and organizational commitment. Responsibility and self-efficacy had a significant direct effect on organizational commitment. Self-efficacy had a significant direct effect on responsibility. This study result also showed that empowerment had a significant indirect effect on organizational commitment mediating by self-efficacy. Self-efficacy had a significant indirect effect on organizational commitment mediating by responsibility. Empowerment had a significant indirect effect on organizational commitment mediating by responsibility. Empowerment had a significant indirect effect on responsibility mediating by self-efficacy. .20** 3.50 Supported H2: Self-efficacy (Y1) on organizational commitment (Y3) .21** 3.46 Supported H3: Responsibility (Y2) on organizational commitment (Y3) .14** 2.38 Supported H4: Empowerment (X) on responsibility (Y2) .25** 5.25 Supported H5: Self-efficacy (Y1) on responsibility (Y2) .45** 9.50 Supported H6: Empowerment (X) on self-efficacy (Y1) .54** 12.33 Supported H7: Empowerment (X) on organizational commitment (Y3) mediating by responsibility (Y2) .04** 6.23 Supported H 8 : Self-efficacy (Y 1 ) on organizational commitment (Y 3 ) mediating by responsibility (Y 2 ) .06** 6.65 Supported H9: Empowerment (X) on organizational commitment (Y3) mediating by self-efficacy (Y1) .11** 7.01 Supported H10: Empowerment (X) on responsibility (Y2) mediating by self-efficacy (Y1) .24** 9.33 Supported ** p < .01 In Fig. 2 and Fig. 3, the test results of the model with the goodness of fit statistics show the significant with Chi-Square = 0.000, df = 0, p-value = 1.00000 > .05 and RMSEA = .000 < .08, so that the model tested is fit. This result indicates that empirical data support the theoretical model being tested. Fig. 3. T Values

Discussion
This study revealed that empowerment influences self-efficacy, responsibility, and organizational commitment. The fittest result of the structural model also indicates significance (fit). This finding shows vitality empowerment for teachers' selfefficacy, responsibility, and organizational commitment. Therefore, school principals need to improve empowerment optimally through various strategics, methods, or approaches. For example, the school principals can produce a feasible strategic policy to improve empowerment to drive teachers' self-efficacy, responsibility, and organizational commitment. This finding in line with and consistent with other research result to develop this research hypothesis. However, in reality, empowerment has a multiplier effect on the school organizations' multiplier effect, including teachers' self-efficacy, responsibility, and organizational commitment. The indicators or empowerment, such as building a relationship, build communication, involved in problem-solving, and reflects the attitudes and values of the profession (Dubois & Miley, 2011) if in the right condition and stable for a long time, can enhance teachers' self-efficacy, responsibility, and organizational commitment. For example, the teachers' self-efficacy, as reflected in generality, magnitude, and strength (Bandura, 1994), enhances. The studies conducted by Nafari and Vatankhah (2016), and Köhler et al. (2018) show that empowerment positively impacts self-efficacy. Conducive empowerment can also encourage the growth of teachers' responsibility manifested in imputability, accountability, and liability (Schweiker, 1995). The scholars, including Kurt, Güngör, and Ekici (2014) and Habibie (2018), also concluded that empowerment influences responsibility. Besides, better empowerment can also encourage teachers' organizational commitment to grow more optimally, reflecting on affective commitment, normative commitment, and continuance commitment (Meyer & Allen, 1991). The results of the research of Zaraket, Garios, and Malek (2018), Aggarwal, Dhaliwal, and Nobi (2018) also proved that empowerment was positively correlating with organizational commitment. This study also found that self-efficacy and responsibility play a significant role as a mediator of empowerment on the teachers' organizational commitment. This finding reveals empirical facts that self-efficacy and responsibility need to consider enhancing teachers' organizational commitment through empowerment. Therefore, a kind of effort to enhance teachers' organizational commitment will do better if it improves empowerment with support increasing self-efficacy and responsibility. In this case, self-efficacy should be a priority because it has a dominant indirect effect on organizational commitment than responsibility. It implies that the school principals need to improve teachers' self-efficacy priority through various strategic policies, such as or workshops regarding improving personal self-efficacy. Finally, this study confirms the results of several such studies and finds a new empirical model of empowerment on teachers' organizational commitment mediating by self-efficacy and responsibility based on the data from teachers in Indonesia. This model can discuss among researchers and practitioners in developing organizational commitment models in the future and various organizations' context.

Conclusion
This study found that empowerment influences self-efficacy, responsibility, and organizational commitment. It also proves that empowerment significantly affects teachers' organizational commitment, either directly or indirectly, mediating by selfefficacy and responsibility. This evidence introduces a new research model about the effect of empowerment on teachers' organizational commitment, mediating by self-efficacy and responsibility, with the teachers' research in Indonesia. The model can be discussed or adopted as a concept of organizational commitment model by researchers and practitioners in the future and various organizations' context. For the researcher, the model can develop by adding other indicators and variables or an analytical approach, such as structural equation modeling (SEM). For practitioners, particularly educational organizations, the model can enhance the teachers' organizational commitment based on empowerment, self-efficacy, and responsibility.