THE EFFECT OF STRATEGIC LEADERSHIP AND ROLE CONFLICT TO EMPLOYEE’S COMMITMENTS WITH WORK STRESS AS MEDIATION

Correspondention Author: Priest Winka Sajida, Master of Management Faculty of Economics and Business Universitas Brawijaya DOI: http://dx.doi.org/ 10.21776/ub.jam.2018. 016.03.08 Dynamic competition in the banking sector requires early anticipation in Human Resources (HR) as an effort to maintain the existence of the company. Employee commitment is something that is important in an organization, the loss of employee commitment means the loss of valuable investments that employees have built with the organization (Becker, 1960). One of the motivators that influence the employee commitment is leadership. Leaders in this rapidly changing period and intense competition must be strategic leaders (Hitt, et al., 2010). Another factor affecting the employee commitment is the role conflict, either the conflict that occurs due to non-conformity between the roles demanded by the organization with the expected role of the employee or the conflict between the role in the work environment with the role in the family environment (Riley, 2007 and Kim, et al., 2015). Several research gaps were found from previous studies. First, the inconsistency of the results of research on the influence of leadership on employee commitment. Research result Fasola, et al. (2013), found that the influence of transformational leadership on employee commitment was not significant, but transactional leadership had more impact on employee commitment.Porter (2015),also found that transformational leadership has no significant relationship with continuous commitment, which indicates that there is little use or value in predicting the relationship. The findings are supported by Cooper (2012), which insists that continuous commitAbstract: The purpose of this research is to analyze the impact of strategic leadership and role conflict on employee commitment with job stress as mediation. The study used 60 samples of employees from BPR Nusamba Ngunut Tulungagung as respondents. Research data were obtained through questionnaires and analyzed through SmartPLS. The results show significance for the impact of strategic leadership to job stress, role conflict to job stress, role conflict to employee commitment, job stress to employee commitment, and insignificant results on the influence of strategic leadership to employee commitment. Job stress mediates the influence of strategic leadership and role conflict to employee commitment.

Dynamic competition in the banking sector requires early anticipation in Human Resources (HR) as an effort to maintain the existence of the company. Employee commitment is something that is important in an organization, the loss of employee commitment means the loss of valuable investments that employees have built with the organization (Becker, 1960). One of the motivators that influence the employee commitment is leadership. Leaders in this rapidly changing period and intense competition must be strategic leaders (Hitt, et al., 2010). An-other factor affecting the employee commitment is the role conflict, either the conflict that occurs due to non-conformity between the roles demanded by the organization with the expected role of the employee or the conflict between the role in the work environment with the role in the family environment (Riley, 2007 andKim, et al., 2015).
Several research gaps were found from previous studies. First, the inconsistency of the results of research on the influence of leadership on employee commitment. Research result Fasola, et al. (2013), found that the influence of transformational leadership on employee commitment was not significant, but transactional leadership had more impact on employee commitment. Porter (2015),also found that transformational leadership has no significant relationship with continuous commitment, which indicates that there is little use or value in predicting the relationship. The findings are supported by Cooper (2012), which insists that continuous commit-ment is not desired by leaders because they expect more than obedience from their employees. Caykoylu, et al. (2011),confirmed that employees with high levels of role conflict tend to have low employee commitment levels. However, this relationship is not significant in the research conducted byHarijanto (2013),which indicates that members of the organization have reached the safe zone so that they do not experience role conflict and they are still committed to their organization. In research conducted byKim, et al. (2015),found insignificant results from data collected in 1998. Chênevert, et al. (2013),who examined the relationship between passive leadership, role conflict, and affective commitment, found no significant influence between role conflicts on affective commitment.
This research builds job stress constructs as mediators on the relationship between strategic leadership, role conflict, and employee commitment. Employees who feel that the organization cares about them, experience lower levels of stress on their work and employees respond in the form of work commitments. Dramatic changes in the workplace have had an impact on female employees, older employees, and highly educated employees as migration increases (Kompier, 2003). Since leaders are officially responsible for monitoring employee performance on behalf of the organization and engaging in strategic decisions that affect employee performance, strategic leadership is expected to increase employee commitment to the organization. However, these relationships do not occur directly but are mediated by employee job stress levels.

LITERATURE REVIEW Strategic leadership
The issue of strategic leadership claimed by John Adair in the 1980s, which defines the "strategic leader" as "the person who successfully meets the organizational expectations of his leadership management"(Adair, 2010). Tutar, et al. (2011), states that strategic leadership can build strategies by analyzing the interior and exterior environments of an organization, applying the right strategy at the right time, evaluating, and acting with appropriate behavior for the current environment.

Role Conflict
Role conflict can occur in the workplace, in the family, or between work and family. Riley (2007),defines role conflict as the degree of discrepancy among the various role expectations. In other words, individuals who have certain positions may experience role conflict when they are instructed by two or more roles at the same time, and these different instructions are not compatible (Kim, et al., 2015).

Job Stress
Stress is defined as a deviation from a normal psychological or physiological function caused by the urgency in the immediate environment of an individual (Parker and DeCotiis, 1983).There are many definitions for stress that can be found in the literature, but almost all of these definitions can be placed into one of two categories, that is stress can be defined either as a stimulus or a response (Lambert, et al., 2016).

Employee Commitment
Becker (1960),states that individuals show a commitment to their organization because of some of the valuable investments they have built with the organization. Further studies illustrate commitment as the relative strength of the identification and involvement of individuals within a particular organization (Mowday, et al.,1979). Meyer and Allen (1991), widely recognized and acknowledged that includes effective, continuous, and normative commitment.

HYPOTHESES
The relationship between strategic leadership and job stress is supported by previous studies (Lambert, et al., 2016;Skogstad, et al., 2014;and Chênevert, et al., 2013). Inappropriate behavior of leaders, can become abusive, drain a lot of energy, and become a significant source of stress that contribute to the emergence of negative experiences in employees and their welfare prejudices (Tepper, 2000). Conversely, job stress is reportedly reduced by the various types of leadership that exist. Another factor that affects job stress is the role con-flict. Role conflict has been shown as one of the causes of stress (Kahn, et al., 1964). Job stress caused by role conflict is a serious problem that can be experienced by employees in all types of organizations, including in the banking sector (Belias, et al., 2015).
Low job stress is expected to have a significant effect on high employee commitment. The relationship between job stress and employee commitment is supported by researchGarg and Dhar (2014) and Hung, et al., (2012), state that excessive job stress can affect the physical and emotional health of employees. One of the negative results of job stress is reduced employee commitment to their organization (Jaramillo, et al., 2005).Based on previous research studies, this study builds the conceptual framework shown in Figure 1. The research hypothesis is as follows: H1 : Strategic leadership affects job stress. H2 : Strategic leadership affects employee commitment. H3 : Role conflict affects job stress. H4 : Role conflict affects employee commitment. H5 : Job stress affects employee commitment. H6 : Job stress mediates the influence of strategic leadership on employee commitment H7 : Job stress mediates the influence of role conflict on employee commitment.

METHOD
This research is included in the type of quantitative research with explanatory research design. The sample of research in this research is bank employees from BPR Nusamba Ngunut Tulungagung with a population of 60 people. The data is obtained from all members of the population, so it is also referred to as a census because members of the population are relatively small or easily accessible. The data were collected by a questionnaire containing a list of statement items that included four variables. The variable of strategic leadership is measured by two indicators, namely organizational capability and personal ability (Davies and Davies, 2004). The role conflict variable is measured by the indicator of the developed questionnaire Donald and Donald (2001),is a person-role conflict, inter-gender conflict, inter-role conflict and intra-sender conflict. Job stress variables are measured using instruments developed byLambert, et al. (2016),with a total of five items. The employee commitment variable is measured by three indicators, which are an effective commitment, continuance commitment, and normative commitment (Allen and Meyer, 1996).All items are measured on a five-point Likert scale from "strongly disagree" to "strongly agree". Data analysis is SEM with PLS approach.

RESULTS
The results of the analysis consist of direct effect test and indirect effect test (through mediation). Direct effect test with PLS technique gives two types of output: evaluation of measurement model and evaluation of the structural model.  Table 2 shows the summary of structural model evaluation results. The result of the analysis shows that from the four hypothetical paths tested only the second line which has no significant direct effect, which is the influence of Strategic leadership on Employee commitment. Thus, H2 is rejected. These results indicate an indirect effect. While the other hypothesis paths were shown significant, each influence of Strategic leadership to Job stress ( = -0,046; significant at p <0,05), influence of Role conflict to Job stress ( = 0,771; significant at p <0, 05), Role conflict to Employee commitment ( = -0,566, significant at p <0,05) and Job stress to Employee commitment ( = -0,028; significant at p <0,10). Thus, H1, H3, H4, and H5 are accepted.

DISCUSSION
Strategic leadership proved to influence job stress. The average employee responds well to the leadership models implemented within the organization. One aspect of personal ability is the ability to align individuals with the organization to be the cause of low level job stress employees. This ability is supported by the ability of supervisors to develop strategic competencies within the organization.
Strategic leadership is not proven to affect employee commitment. These results support the assumption that there is an indirect effect of strategic leadership on employee commitment through job stress. The leadership model applied in the organization is identified as a strategic leadership style, measured concerning personal ability and organizational capability. The response rate regarding the ability of the supervisory organization is more dominant than the personal ability, possibly limited to the employee's knowledge of their supervisors. This is due to a recent change of the board of directors so that employees do not understand the personal skills of their supervisors. Nevertheless, the applied strategic leadership model does not show an immediate increase in employee commitment.
Role conflict proved to influence job stress. Role conflict is felt more by female employees and employees who have a family. For female employees and married, clarity of job roles is needed to establish their expectations and goals within the organization. The change of directors has an impact on policy changes and how leaders treat role assignments to their members. Female and female employees are more difficult to accept changes in role assignment than male employees and those who are motivated by the treatment of the role assignment. It is identified as one of the factors that influence the job stress level.
Role conflict proved to have an immediate effect on employee commitment. Reasons for explaining this finding are that role conflict tends to affect employee work attitudes. Role conflict has been regarded as one of the causes of stress that limits the development of individuals, whereas lower levels of role conflict lead to a better quality of work life associated with higher levels of employee commitment.
Job stress proved to have an immediate effect on employee commitment. Employees show a low level of commitment as stress levels increase. Em- Table 4 shows the results of the total effect test. As expected in the test of mediation effect, the influence of independent variable of Strategic leadership on Job Stressor variable is significant (p <0,05), and the influence of Job Stress variable to a dependent variable of significant Employee commitment (p <0,10). Likewise, the influence of independent variables of Role conflict on the variable of Job Stress is significant (p <0,05), and the influence of Job Stress variables variable to the dependent variable of significant Employee commitment (p <0.10). Thus, Job stress fully mediates the influence of Strategic leadership and Role conflict on the Employee commitment so that H6 and H7 are accepted.

Total Effect
Path Coefficient T-Statistic P-Value  ployees who feel pressured by their work put the organization in charge because of their suffering, which ultimately makes them form a weak relationship with the organization. Employees with high job stress experience a lower commitment to the organization.
The effect of job stress mediation is evidenced by the influence of strategic leadership on employee commitment. The successful implementation of strategic leadership to increase employee commitment can be explained by the decreasing level of job stress employee. The effect of job stress mediation is also evidenced in the influence of role conflict on employee commitment. The higher the role conflict experienced by the employee will decrease the employee commitment level because the job stress level is felt. The results of this study add to the contribution of research that investigates the influence of role conflict on employee commitment.

IMPLICATIONS
The influence of strategic leadership on job stress was found to be significantly positive, showing similarities with the results of research by Gill, et al. (2006). Job stress mediates the influence of strategic leadership on employee commitment, consistent with the results of research conducted byDale and Fox (2008). But there is no similarity with some research results that link employee commitment with leadership (Mahdi, et al., 2014;Patiar and Wang, 2016;Gulluce, et al., 2016;Fasola, et al., 2013;Wei, et al., 2016;Acar, 2012;and Wallace, et al., 2013).The effect of role conflict on job stress was found to be insignificant, which is consistent with the research conducted byLing, et al.  Malik, et al. (2015);and Kemp, et al. (2013). The results of this study indicate an indirect influence of role conflict on employee commitment, through job stress. The influence of job stress on employee commitment is significantly positive. This is consistent with the results of research that have been done by Garg andDhar (2014) andHung, et al. (2012).
Job stress employees can occur in bank work environments that require employees to provide excellent face-to-face services, regardless of personal or emotional employees. Organizations including BPR Nusamba Ngunut Tulungagung need to consider efforts to improve employees' work commitments by formulating strategic leadership and overcoming the role conflict that lowers job stress employees. Self-development needs are very important for employees to feel a commitment to the organization (Meyer, et al., 2004).Employees with high self-control ability can easily adapt to negative moods and are more likely to contribute to a harmonious organizational atmosphere, which in turn strengthens relationships between employees and the organization.

CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDA-TIONS Conclusion
This study provides empirical evidence of the influence of strategic leadership and role conflict on employee commitment with job stress as a mediation on BPR Nusamba Ngunut Tulungagung employees. Increased employee commitment is closely related to the low level of job stress employees. Job stress is more dominantly influenced by role conflict than strategic leadership.

Suggestion
The limitations of the study lie in the lack of literature review, so future research is suggested to add other variables or use different measuring items in investigating the determinants of employee commitment. The most dominant factor found to affect job stress is role conflict, which needs to be a focus as well as the implementation of strategic leadership.