Academia Open
Vol 10 No 1 (2025): June (In Progress)
Business and Economics

Competence as a Key Driver of Administrative Performance in Universities
Kompetensi sebagai Pendorong Utama Kinerja Administrasi di Perguruan Tinggi


View Article
Table
  • Alexander Sakalessy*,
  • Adriana Rahangiar,
  • Fenny Pegy Suripatty
Alexander Sakalessy
Pattimura University, Indonesia *
Adriana Rahangiar
Pattimura University, Indonesia
Fenny Pegy Suripatty
Pattimura University, Indonesia

(*) Corresponding Author
Picture in here are illustration from public domain image or provided by the author, as part of their works
DOI: https://doi.org/10.21070/acopen.10.2025.10813
Published April 12, 2025
Keywords
  • Human Resource Management,
  • Employee Competence,
  • Work Climate,
  • Higher Education Administration,
  • Structural Equation Modeling
How to Cite
Sakalessy, A., Rahangiar, A., & Suripatty, F. P. (2025). Competence as a Key Driver of Administrative Performance in Universities. Academia Open, 10(1), 10.21070/acopen.10.2025.10813. https://doi.org/10.21070/acopen.10.2025.10813

Copyright (c) 2025 Alexander Sakalessy, Adriana Rahangiar, Fenny Pegy Suripatty

Creative Commons License

This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License.

Abstract

General Background: Employee performance in higher education institutions is a critical determinant of administrative effectiveness and institutional success. Specific Background: However, the complex interplay between work climate, employee competence, work experience, and performance remains underexplored, particularly among non-academic staff. Knowledge Gap: Existing literature rarely integrates these variables within a single analytical framework, especially in the Indonesian higher education context. Aims: This study aims to examine the causal relationships among work climate, employee competence, work experience, and employee performance among administrative staff at Universitas Pattimura Ambon (UNPATTI) using a mixed-methods approach. Results: Findings indicate that work experience significantly influences both competence (path coefficient = 0.704) and work climate (0.652), but has a negligible direct effect on performance (–0.015). Competence emerges as the strongest predictor of performance (0.819), while work climate exerts only a minor direct effect (0.026). Novelty: The integration of Structural Equation Modeling (SEM) with qualitative insights provides a comprehensive understanding of mediating effects, revealing competence as a pivotal mechanism linking experience and climate to performance. Implications: These results inform strategic human resource management practices in higher education, emphasizing targeted professional development, mentorship, and the cultivation of a supportive work climate to enhance staff performance and institutional sustainability.

Highlights:

  1. Work climate and competence affect performance in higher education administration.
  2. Mixed-methods with SEM show competence mediates experience's impact on performance.
  3. Prioritize HR strategies: mentorship, training, and supportive work environment.

Keyword: Human Resource Management, Employee Competence, Work Climate, Higher Education Administration, Structural Equation Modeling

View Article
Table

Downloads

Download data is not yet available.

Metrics

No metrics found.

References

  1. S. L. Albrecht, A. B. Bakker, J. A. Gruman, W. H. Macey, and A. M. Saks, “Employee engagement, human resource management practices and competitive advantage: An integrated approach,” J. Organ. Eff.: People Perform., vol. 2, no. 1, pp. 7–35, 2015, doi: 10.1108/JOEPP-08-2014-0042.
  2. D. P. Lepak, H. Liao, Y. Chung, and E. E. Harden, “A conceptual review of human resource management systems in strategic human resource management research,” Res. Pers. Hum. Resour. Manag., vol. 25, pp. 217–271, 2006, doi: 10.1016/S0742-7301(06)25006-0.
  3. R. E. Boyatzis, “Competencies in the 21st century,” J. Manag. Dev., vol. 27, no. 1, pp. 5–12, 2008, doi: 10.1108/02621710810840730.
  4. R. Deem, “Globalisation, new managerialism, academic capitalism and entrepreneurialism in universities: Is the local dimension still important?,” Comp. Educ., vol. 37, no. 1, pp. 7–20, 2001, doi: 10.1080/03050060020020408.
  5. B. Afsar and Y. F. Badir, “Workplace spirituality, perceived organizational support, and innovative work behavior: The mediating effects of person-organization fit,” J. Workplace Learn., vol. 29, no. 2, pp. 95–109, 2017, doi: 10.1108/JWL-11-2015-0086.
  6. M. Armstrong and S. Taylor, Armstrong’s Handbook of Human Resource Management Practice, 15th ed. London: Kogan Page, 2020.
  7. J. Purcell, N. Kinnie, S. Hutchinson, B. Rayton, and J. Swart, Understanding the People and Performance Link: Unlocking the Black Box. London: CIPD, 2003.
  8. R. B. Kline, Principles and Practice of Structural Equation Modeling, 4th ed. New York: Guilford Press, 2015.
  9. J. F. Hair, W. C. Black, B. J. Babin, and R. E. Anderson, Multivariate Data Analysis, 8th ed. Upper Saddle River, NJ: Pearson, 2017.
  10. P. M. Bentler, “Comparative fit indexes in structural models,” Psychol. Bull., vol. 107, no. 2, pp. 238–246, 1990, doi: 10.1037/0033-2909.107.2.238.
  11. J. W. Creswell and V. L. Plano Clark, Designing and Conducting Mixed Methods Research, 3rd ed. Thousand Oaks, CA: SAGE, 2018.
  12. D. L. Morgan, Focus Groups as Qualitative Research, 2nd ed. Thousand Oaks, CA: SAGE, 1997.
  13. R. Likert, “A technique for the measurement of attitudes,” Arch. Psychol., vol. 22, no. 140, pp. 1–55, 1932.
  14. J. Pallant, SPSS Survival Manual, 7th ed. New York: Routledge, 2020.
  15. L. T. Hu and P. M. Bentler, “Cutoff criteria for fit indexes in covariance structure analysis: Conventional criteria versus new alternatives,” Struct. Equ. Model., vol. 6, no. 1, pp. 1–55, 1999, doi: 10.1080/10705519909540118.
  16. J. L. Arbuckle, AMOS 25.0 User’s Guide. Chicago, IL: IBM SPSS, 2017.
  17. J. J. Vaske, Survey Research and Analysis: Applications in Parks, Recreation and Human Dimensions. State College, PA: Venture Publishing, 2008.
  18. J. C. Nunnally and I. H. Bernstein, Psychometric Theory, 3rd ed. New York: McGraw-Hill, 1994.
  19. C. Fornell and D. F. Larcker, “Evaluating structural equation models with unobservable variables and measurement error,” J. Market. Res., vol. 18, no. 1, pp. 39–50, 1981, doi: 10.2307/3151312.
  20. L. T. Hu and P. M. Bentler, op. cit. [15].
  21. T. K. Dijkstra and J. Henseler, “Consistent partial least squares path modeling,” MIS Q., vol. 39, no. 2, pp. 297–316, 2015, doi: 10.25300/MISQ/2015/39.2.02.
  22. J. Henseler, C. M. Ringle, and M. Sarstedt, “A new criterion for assessing discriminant validity in variance-based structural equation modeling,” J. Acad. Mark. Sci., vol. 43, no. 1, pp. 115–135, 2014.
  23. R. B. Kline, op. cit. [8].
  24. P. M. Bentler and D. G. Bonett, “Significance tests and goodness of fit in the analysis of covariance structures,” Psychol. Bull., vol. 88, no. 3, pp. 588–606, 1980.
  25. J. F. Hair, W. C. Black, B. J. Babin, and R. E. Anderson, op. cit. [9].
  26. C. Fornell and D. F. Larcker, op. cit. [19].
  27. J. C. Nunnally, op. cit. [18].
  28. R. P. Bagozzi and Y. Yi, “On the evaluation of structural equation models,” J. Acad. Market. Sci., vol. 16, no. 1, pp. 74–94, 1988.
  29. J. P. Stevens, Applied Multivariate Statistics for the Social Sciences, 5th ed. New York: Routledge, 2009.
  30. B. M. Byrne, Structural Equation Modeling with AMOS: Basic Concepts, Applications, and Programming, 2nd ed. New York: Routledge, 2010.
  31. J. Van Maanen and E. H. Schein, “Toward a theory of organizational socialization,” Res. Organ. Behav., vol. 1, pp. 209–264, 1979.
  32. C. Ostroff, A. J. Kinicki, and M. M. Tamkins, “Organizational culture and climate,” in Handbook of Psychology, vol. 12, Borman, Ilgen, & Klimoski, Eds. Hoboken, NJ: Wiley, 2003, pp. 565–593.
  33. B. Afsar and Y. F. Badir, op. cit. [5].
  34. A. B. Bakker and E. Demerouti, “The job demands–resources model: State of the art,” J. Manag. Psychol., vol. 22, no. 3, pp. 309–328, 2007, doi: 10.1108/02683940710733115.
  35. D. A. Kolb, Experiential Learning: Experience as the Source of Learning and Development. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice Hall, 1984.
  36. M. Eraut, op. cit. [36].
  37. L. M. Spencer and S. M. Spencer, Competence at Work: Models for Superior Performance. New York: Wiley, 1993.
  38. M. Armstrong and S. Taylor, op. cit. [6].
  39. E. Cameron and M. Green, Making Sense of Change Management, 5th ed. London: Kogan Page, 2019.
  40. R. M. Baron and D. A. Kenny, “The moderator–mediator variable distinction in social psychological research,” J. Pers. Soc. Psychol., vol. 51, no. 6, pp. 1173–1182, 1986.
  41. T. W. H. Ng and D. C. Feldman, “The relationships of age with job attitudes: A meta-analysis,” Pers. Psychol., vol. 63, no. 3, pp. 677–718, 2010, doi: 10.1111/j.1744-6570.2010.01184.x.
  42. J. Hayes, Introduction to Mediation, Moderation, and Conditional Process Analysis: A Regression-Based Approach. New York: Guilford Press, 2013.
  43. B. Schneider, M. G. Ehrhart, and W. H. Macey, “Organizational climate and culture,” Annu. Rev. Psychol., vol. 64, no. 1, pp. 361–388, 2013, doi: 10.1146/annurev-psych-113011-143809.
  44. J. R. Schermerhorn, R. N. Osborn, and J. G. Hunt, Organizational Behavior, 11th ed. Hoboken, NJ: Wiley, 2010.