EMPLOYEE ENGAGEMENT AND ORGANIZATION SUPPORT STRATEGIES: THE MEDIATING ROLE OF PERCEIVED ORGANIZATION SUPPORT FOR HOLISTIC EMPLOYEE SUBJECTIVE WELL-BEING

Keeping employees engaged is strategically important. This paper analyzes the drivers of employee engagement from the point of view of organizational support for employee well-being. The article contains an analysis of data of 509 respondents from a faithbased higher education in Indonesia, conducted through PLS structural equation modeling analysis. The result indicates that the organization support in terms of organization internal communication, performance-based reward and recognition, and perceived organization support on holistic employee subjective well-being has a direct positive influence on employee engagement. The perceived organization support on holistic employee subjective well-being played a mediating role between employee engagement and teamwork dynamic, supervisor support, and work environment. The findings imply theory and practice especially in enhancing employee engagement experience through organizational support. For future research, we suggest including more various organizations and industries to better understand the variable interdependencies in various contexts.

Employee engagement topic has attracted enormous interest among academic researchers and business practitioners over this decade or two. Many have claimed that employee engagement predicts employee outcomes, organizational success, and financial (Baumruk, 2004;Harter et al., 2002). However, based on Kincentric (Panaccio & Adair, 2019) recent survey on over 5 million employee responses from 86 countries with more than 4,100 organizations, employee engagement is facing a relatively flattening mode across the globe with the rate of 65%-66%.
Studies that focus on organization support toward employee well-being have emerged (Eisenberger et al., 1986;Pannacio and Vanderberghe, 2009;Cropanzano and Mitchell, 2005;Bennett et al., 2017). Despite the recently increasing attention, empirical studies on organizational support toward employee subjective well-being at work are still lacking (Joo and Lee, 2017).
Given the high importance of keeping employees engaged, the flattening rate of employee engagement, and the gap in a research study on organization support toward employee subjective wellbeing, this paper is an attempt to analyze the relationship between employee engagement and the organization support strategies in term of organization internal communication, performance-based reward and recognition and perceived organization support for holistic employee subjective well-being. The purpose of this research is to examine the relationship of organization internal communication, performance-based reward, and recognition, and perceived organizational support for holistic employee subjective well-being on employee engagement.
This research contributes to the development of perceived organizational support theory with a deepening perspective in holistic employee subjective well-being. This research highlights the importance of having a holistic employee subjective wellbeing approach in enhancing employee engagement. This research calls every manager to embrace a holistic development of employee subjective wellbeing approach to stimulate the positive employee experience in their organization.

LITERATURE REVIEW
Existing literature on the concept of employee engagement can be drawn (Kahn, 1990). Employee engagement forms the multi-faced construct perspective (Sun and Bunchapattanasakda, 2019). Hewitt (2015), stated that the definition of employee engagement is closely matched to that category. Hewitt (2015), defined employee engagement as the level of rational thought, emotions, behaviors, intentions invested by employees in the organization that articulate in the saying, feeling, and doing positive things for their organization. They comprised in succinct "Say", "Stay", "Strive" model. The model suggested that an engaged employee will speak (say) positively about the organization to co-workers, potential employees, and customers; have a sense strong belonging (stay) and desire to be part of the organization (strive) (Baumruk and Gorman, 2006;Oehler and Adair, 2019).
One theory that many scholars use to explain employee engagement is the social exchange theory (SET) (Sun, 2019). Social exchange theory by Blau (1964), suggested that employees will evaluate the degree of support and the number of resources they receive from the organization and choose to recompense the organization back through cognitive, emotional, and physical energy, intensity, and effort toward the job. Employees can increase or decrease their level of engagement depending on their perception evaluation of what is fair in the exchange.
In the light of social exchange by Foa and Foa (1980), suggested that there are six fundamental types of resources in exchange from most abstract and particularistic such as love, status, information, to most concrete and Universalist such as money, goods, and services. Each resource can be exchanged for another. The employer and employee can reciprocally exchange the relevant category of resources (Cropanzano and Mitchell, 2005).
Based on SET in resource exchange, we delineated the employer or organizational support for employee well-being manifested in these three resources expression such as internal communication (information), reward and recognition (money, goods, status), and opportunities for holistic subjective well-being development (services).

HYPOTHESES DEVELOPMENT
Communication demonstrates a central role in ensuring employee engagement (Wiley et al., 2010;Kahn 1992;MacLeod andClarke, 2009). MacLeod andClarke (2009), reported that every employee needs clear communication from leaders of the organization, they found that poor communication such as unwillingness to listen to the voice of the employee will serve as an obstruction to engagement. DECEMBER 2020

Sucipto Asan, Andry Panjaitan, Selvi Ester Suwu, Ferry Vincenttius Ferdinand
This is in line with the studies by Bindl and Parker (2010), Larkin andLarkin (1994), andWelch (2011). Surveys and regression analysis study by Karanges et al. (2015), confirmed that the organizational internal communication supports workplace relationships based on meaning and worth, and has a significant part to play in developing and maintaining optimal employee engagement. A more recent study by Davardoost and Javadi (2019), identified that the frequency and mode dimensions of internal communications in an organization have the most and least impacts on employee engagement. Thus we propose the following hypotheses: H1. Organizational Internal Communication has a positive influence on Employee Engagement Cropanzano and Mitchell (2005), argued that the resources exchange can be collapsed into two forms: economic and socioemotional outcomes. Reward and recognition are the quantifiable financial elements such as salary, variable pay and benefit (economics outcomes), and also intangible nonfinancial elements such as praise and recognition and other intrinsic motivation provided by the work itself provided by the organization (socioemotional outcomes) (Armstrong and Murlis, 2004).
According to Lyons and Ben-Ora (2002), performance-related rewards permit the highest performer to be awarded accordingly and successful performance-based rewards are those, perfectly begin, implemented, and aligned with total reward strategy. When organizations structure the "reward systems" entirely based on performance goals, it happens to the human instinct to work hard to achieve their own and organizational objectives (Pfau and Kay, 2002). A recent study by Frinlicia and Nilasari (2019), confirmed that rewards and recognition has a positive and significant effect on employee engagement.
Another recent study of a total of 1,293 private-sector workplaces across the United Kingdom with 21,981 employees in the survey and of 2,680 face-to-face structured interviews with managers. This study confirmed that of the three contingent pay dimensions-performance-related pay, profitrelated pay, and employee share-ownership, only performance-related pay had direct positive relationships with Positive employee engagement in terms of job satisfaction, employee commitment, and trust in management (Ogbonnaya and Nielsen, 2017). Thus we propose the following hypothesis: H2. Performance-Based Reward & Recognition has a positive influence on Employee Engagement Perceived organization support (POS) is defined as "the employee beliefs concerning the extent to which the organization values their contribution and care about their well-being" (Eisenberger, et. al, 1986). In the perspective of Social Exchange Theory, individuals are more likely to feel obligated to help their organization succeed if they believe that their organization cares about their well-being (Rhoades and Eisenberger, 2002). A recent study by Dai and Qin (2016), on POS, found that POS and employee engagement have a significantly positive correlation, furthermore, the study found that POS applies a positive influence on employee engagement. Another recent study by Frinlicia and Nilasari (2019), confirmed that POS has a positive and significant effect on employee engagement.
Subjective well-being (SWB) can be viewed in two broad domains that are emotional well-being and positive functioning. Emotional well-being is a dimension of subjective well-being that consists of perceptions of happiness and satisfaction with life and the balance of positive to negative effects (Russell, 2008). Positive functioning consists of the multidimensional constructs of psychological wellbeing and social well-being include personal growth, purpose in life, positive relations with others, selfacceptance, environmental mastery, autonomy (Ryff, 1989), and social well-being (Keyes, 1998).
Several studies have examined the relationship between subjective well-being and successful working life (Sivanathan et al., 2004;Judge andWatanabe, 1993, Russell, 2008). Because subjective well-being is related to the successful work outcome, thus employer needs to strengthen the feelings of subjective well-being among their employees. A recent study by Wieneke et al. (2019), on 46,787 em-ployees in the US, reported that organizational commitment to employee well-being was associated with better employee engagement and satisfaction. Another recent study in Asia (South Korea) by Joo and Lee (2017), found that employees were highly engaged in their work, satisfied with their careers, and felt a greater sense of well-being in their lives when they had higher POS. Thus we proposed the following hypothesis: H3. Perceived organization support for holistic employee subjective well-being has a positive influence on Employee Engagement. Rico et al. (2008), reported that high-performing organizations were associated with effective teamwork dynamics. Teamwork dynamics happened at two different levels in an organization, which is the inter-teamwork level and intra-teamwork levels. Inter-teamwork dynamics are critical in delivering increased customer satisfaction (Ambrosini et al., 2007). Kahn (1990), found that sympathetic and trusting interpersonal relationships, as well as a supportive intra-teamwork, promote employee engagement. Supportive intra-teamwork environments allow members to experiment and to try new things and even fail without fear of the consequences (Kahn, 1990), to be more engaged and productive in a workplace (May et al., 2004;Asan and Huliselan, 2020).
In organizational support theory, as agents of the organization, supervisors are responsible for directing, motivating, and evaluating employees' job performance (Eisenberger et al., 1986). Supervisor support is defined as employees' views concerning the degree to which their supervisors value their contributions and care about their well-being. Research by Wallace and Trinka (2009), showed that engagement occurs naturally when leaders or supervisors are inspiring. Harter et al. (2002), pointed out that direct supervisors influence employee engagement. Schaufeli and Salanova (2008), reported that trust in supervisor support from the supervisor, and creating a blame-free environment are considered as components of psychological safety, a condition which leads to employee engagement (Xu and Cooper-Thomas, 2011).
The work environment is defined by Huysamen (1999), as a physical work environment, human work environment, and organizational environment. The physical work environment is the physical aspect of the working area such as equipment, tools, lighting and air quality, etc. The human work environment is the relationship between the employees with their peers and task. The organizational environment is the procedures and organization system that runs in the workplace. An empirical study by Bennett et al. (2017), reported that employees have well-being when their work environment is both physically supportive (ergonomics, safety, nontoxic) and psychosocially facilitative (positive climate and culture). Many studies reported that the work environment was one of the significant factors that determine the engagement level of an employee (Harter et al., 2002;May et al., 2004;Rich et al., 2010). Recently study by Chaudhry et al. (2017), also supported this idea.
According to Organizational Support Theory, Perceived Organization Support (POS) strongly depends on employees' attributions concerning the organization's intent behind their receipt of favorable or unfavorable treatment. (Wieneke, et. al 2019;Eisenberger et al., 1986;Kurtessis et al., 2015). Levinson (1965), argued that any actions taken by agents of the organization are often viewed by employees as indications of the organization's intent rather than credited solely to the agents' motives.
In this regard, we assumed that supervisor support, teamwork dynamic as well as the working environment are perceived by employees as organizational agents. When the employee experienced any treatment either favorable or unfavorable from their co-worker, supervisor as well as of their working environment, the experience will be viewed as indications of the organization's intent toward their subjective well -being as employees. The strength of this relationship hinges on the degree to which employees identify and associate their supervisor, co-worker, and working environment with the organization as organizational agents (Eisenberger et al., 2001). Thus, we propose the following three hypotheses: H4. Perceived organization support for holistic employee' subjective well-being mediates the relationship between Teamwork Dynamics and Employee Engagement H5. Perceived organization support for holistic employees' subjective well-being mediates the relationship between Supervisor Support and Employee Engagement. H6. Perceived organization support for holistic employees' subjective well-being mediates the relationship between Work Environment and Employee Engagement.

METHOD Population and Sample
This research is a survey research using quantitative research strategies. The empirical data were obtained in a faith-based higher education institution in Indonesia that has campuses in Jakarta and Banten Province. The sample selection uses a purposive sampling technique. The survey was distributed and administered between November 2018 -January 2019, through a web-based tool LimeSurvey version 2.05+. Through this open-source web application survey, an institutional official letter of introduction of the survey was sent to 1,078 administrative staff and faculty members (lecturers). The process of distributing questionnaires to respondents (staff and lecturers) is done through email. We obtained 509 usable questionnaires in total for a response rate of approximately 47%. Respondents that identify themselves as lecturers are 56% while the rest of 44% is the staff of administrative support. The majority of respondents are female consist of 61 % meanwhile there are 39% male respondents. The respondent length of work in that institution varies, there are 27% respondents with less than two years, 31% within the range of 3-5 years, 17% within the range of 6-9 years, and 25% with more than 10 years length of work.

Operational Definition of Variables
All constructs were measure through 26 question items on a five-point Likert scale ranging from 1 (Strongly Disagree) to 5 (Strongly Agree). To study the Employee Engagement we used the 6 (six) items of the Aon Hewitt Employee Engagement Scale (Hewitt, 2015). The scale captures the dimension of cognitive, affective as well as the behavior of the engagement. Larkin and Larkin (1994), stated that the organization's internal communication scale was developed based on the organizational communication model of downward and upward communication. The performance-based reward and recognition scale was developed (Armstrong and Murlis, 2004). Financial reward, non-financial reward, and Model of performancebased reward (Pfau and Kay, 2002). The perceived organization support for employee subjective wellbeing scale was developed (Ryff, 1989 andFabian, 2018). Subjective Well-Being model and POS theory (Rhoades and Eisenberger, 2002). In regards to organization support for employee well-being, Rhoades and Eisenberger (2002), have developed a scale to measure the perception of the employee on the organization for their well-being. However, we found the scale is still lack in specifying items on organization support for the employee subjective well-being that covers the emotional well-being and positive function aspect. We, therefore, develop a simple scale to cover the subjective well-being and name it as Perceived Organization Support on Holistic Employee Subjective Well-Being (PWB). This construct refers to the degree of organizational commitment as perceived by the employee in supporting and taking care of the employee personal holistic life experience both cognitive and affective state of their psychological wellness (Diener et al., 1999;Fabian, 2018, Ryff, 1989Rhoades and Eisenberger, 2002). We proposed that the PWB consists of four dimensions (Ryff, 1989), that is personal growth and development (professional development); purpose in life (spiritual development); self-acceptance, environmental mastery, and autonomy (character and personal values development), positive relations with others (Social Development. The teamwork dynamic scale was developed based on Ambrosini et al. (2007), the model of inter-teamwork, and intrateamwork. The supervisor support scale was developed by Eisenberger et al. (1986), the supervisor's responsibility model. The work Envi-ronment scale was developed based on the work environment model (Huysamen, 1999).

Data Analysis
All the data were analyzed with PLS-SEM using SmartPLS 3.0 software. PLS-SEM is a multivariate technique combining aspects of multiple regression and factor analysis in examining the relationship of the theories simultaneously using a bootstrapping technique and has respectable statistical credibility despite small sample availability (Hair et al., 2011).

RESULTS
The results of data analysis that examining the influence of the organization support strategies toward employee engagement shown in figure 1.
The R2 is a function of the number of predictor constructs-the greater the number of predictor constructs, the higher the R 2 (Hair et al., 2018). As a guideline, the R 2 values of 0.75, 0.50, and 0.25 can be considered substantial, moderate, and weak (Hair et al., 2011). The value R 2 in Table 1. Shows that the endogenous constructs are in the range of moderate level of predictive accuracy.

Figure 1 Line Diagram Structural Model in PLS
Hypothesis testing is completed by assessing the p-value. The p-value significance parameter provides a representation of the probability of the significance of the hypothesis. In the case of a pvalue greater than  = 0.05, the hypothesis is insignificant or rejected, if less than  = 0.05, the hypothesis is significant and accepted (Bougie and Sekaran, 2013).  Table 2 and Table 3 provide an overview of the six hypotheses tested which are described in detail following. Hypothesis H1 predicts the Organizational Internal Communication has a positive influence on Employee Engagement empirically is significant (p value= 0.000 ). Hypothesis H2 predicts the Performance-Based Reward & Recognition has a positive influence on Employee Engagement is empirically significant (p-value = 0.015). Hypothesis H3 predicts the Perceived Organization Support for holistic employee's subjective well-being has a positive influence on Employee Engagement is empirically significant (p-value = 0.000). Table 3. shows the result of the mediation hypotheses testing result. The conclusion on the type of mediation was based on the work by Cepeda-Carrion et al. (2018) and Zhao et al. (2010), where a full mediation is indicated in the case where the direct effect c' is not significant, whereas the indirect effect a × b is significant. The case means only the indirect effect via the mediator exists.
Hypothesis H4 proposes that the Perceived Organization Support for holistic employee subjective well-being mediates the relationship between Teamwork Dynamics and Employee Engagement in indirect effect (TW  PWB  EE; p-value = 0.003) is significant while the indirect effect is insignificant (p-value = 0.249). This concluded that the type of mediation in H4 is full mediation. Meaning that the Perceived Organization Support for ho-listic employee subjective well-being mediates fully the relationship between Teamwork Dynamics and Employee Engagement is accepted.
Hypothesis H5 proposes that the Perceived Organization Support for holistic employee subjective well-being mediates the relationship between Supervisor Support and Employee Engagement indirect effect is significant and accepted in the mediation model (SS  PWB  EE; p-value = 0.003), while the indirect effect is insignificant (pvalue = 0.173). This concluded that the type of mediation in H4 is full mediation. Meaning that the Perceived Organization Support for holistic employee' subjective well-being mediates fully the relationship between Supervisor Support and Employee Engagement is accepted.
Hypothesis H6 proposes that Perceived Organization Support for holistic employees' subjective well-being mediates the relationship between Work Environment and Employee Engagement in indirect effect is significant In mediation model (WE  PWB  EE; p-value = 0.000) ), while the indirect effect is insignificant (p-value = 0.163). This concluded that the type of mediation in H4 is full mediation. Meaning that the Perceived Organization Support for holistic employee' subjective well-being mediates fully the relationship between Work Environment and Employee Engagement is accepted.

DISCUSSION
This study suggested that the organization's support in terms of organization internal communication, performance-based reward and recognition, and perceived organization support on holistic employee subjective well-being has a direct positive influence on employee engagement. It also revealed that the usage of PWB is particularly effective to influence employee engagement and it plays a fully mediating role between teamwork dynamic, supervisor support, and work environment. This paper is expanding the finding by Dai and Qin (2016), who demonstrate that the perceived organizational support has a direct positive influence on employee engagement, and expanding the finding by Joo and Lee (2017), who identified that perceived organizational support and psychological capital served as the significant antecedents of work engagement, career satisfaction, and subjective well-being.
This study confirmed the previous study by Karanges et al. (2015) and Davardoost and Javadi (2019), in which organizational internal communication has a significant positive influence on employee engagement. The frequent downward communication conveys the trust that the organization is progressing because of the continuous support and involvement of the employee meanwhile the upward communication conveys the culture of listening and intention for improvement. Thus these kinds of two-ways communication build trust and meaningful relationships in the organization and enhance employee engagement (Karanges et al., 2015).
This study also confirmed the previous study conducted by Messepi (2016), which convey that reward and recognition play an important role in employee motivation since with a poor reward and recognition employee will get a discounted motivation and will cause the company to a poor performance delivery. Ogbonnaya and Nielsen (2017), argued that people may have a motivation to work harder to obtain an individual reward. While a lack of rewards and recognition can lead to burnout and disengagement (Maslach et al., 2001).
This study also confirmed the recent study by Abun et al. (2020), contended that genuine respect and empathy from the organization in the form of inclusive management that cares for the individual employee can boost the morale and engagement of employees in an organization (Abun, et. al 2020). This study expanded the model of inclusive management into two categories. Firstly in terms of context supportive elements such as support from supervisor, co-worker, a well-designed and conducive work environment. Secondly, in terms of holistic subjective well-being development elements such as skill and knowledge, character and personal values, the purpose of life, faith, and spiritual growth, as well as positive and meaningful friendship in the workplace (Abun et al., 2020). Our study found that inclusive management in term of context supportive elements are fully mediated by the holistic subjective well-being development elements in influencing the employee engagement.
This study also expands the study of Priebe (2018), by adding besides supervisory support, the co-workers' support and work environment design could also representing job resources. And when these job resources were perceived positively by employees, they can predict feelings of safety experienced at work, which in turn predicted work or employee engagement (Priebe, 2018;Othman and Nasurdin 2012).
This study in line with Shuck and Reio (2014), found that when engagement levels were high, the relationship between psychological workplace climate and personal accomplishment and psychological workplace climate and psychological well-being were stronger.
This study is also confirmed by the report of The Global Talent Report in 2019. They found that two of the top three factors that employees and job candidates are looking for in a company are closely related to our study that is the organization committed to the health and the employee's well-being and working with a purpose. This finding highlighted that when a company pays intentional attention to employee well-being, their effort will eventually pay off by attracting more talents that could boost the company to the next level.
To summarize, this study contributes to enriching the study of employee engagement theory by DECEMBER 2020 Sucipto Asan, Andry Panjaitan, Selvi Ester Suwu, Ferry Vincenttius Ferdinand revealing a novel relationship of Perceived Organization Support for Holistic Employee Subjective Well-Being as a mediating role between employee engagement and teamwork dynamic, supervisor support, and work environment.

CONCLUSIONS & RECOMMENDATIONS Conclusions
The paper further indicates that an organization could enhance the employee engagement level by optimizing these three organizational supportive strategies i.e. enhancing the internal communication, maintaining performance-based reward and recognition, and supporting the development of holistic employee subjective well-being. Among these three strategies, the strategy relates to development opportunities for holistic employee subjective wellbeing has the highest positives relationship with employee engagement.
A possible explanation for this is that compare to the organization's internal communication and performance-based reward and recognition, the PWB strategy is touching the most personal part of the employee as a human being and individual (Rupp, 2011). The organization's internal communication strategy deal with the mass that is non-personal -collective individual in transmitting and receiving information. The Performance-based reward and recognition deal with the employee as a person but in a conditional situation. A person can get a personal reward and recognition only when she can achieve a certain expected goal. In the PWB context, the organization deals with individuals in a more genuine, personal, and unconditional situation. Since employee engagement is closely related to the expression of personal state of mind thus the distinctive personal characteristic of the perceived organizational support for holistic employee subjective well-being strategy will resonate stronger in igniting employee engagement compared to the other organizational supportive strategies (Kahn, 1990).
The manager, HR/OD practitioner, and HR consultant need to understand that to optimize the support for holistic employee subjective well-being strategy, the organization needs to orchestrate the teamwork dynamic, supervisor support, and work environment in such a way that circle around the employee holistic subjective well-being experience. By holistic we mean that the development opportunities have to be specifically designed to accommodate the dimension of personal and professional competencies of the employees (skill), spiritual growth and purpose of life (faith), personal values and character (character), and encouragement to build genuine and positive relations with others in the workplace (social).
We also agree with the recommendation for supervisors and managerial staff by Priebe (2018), that supervisors should understand that the work context alone does not predict work engagement, job attitudes, and job performance. Supervisors may understand that their employees' lives are not bifurcated and that work and personal lives have spillover effects on each other. Supervisors should encourage their employees to participate in wellness programs and to invest resources in strengthening their psychological and emotional competencies. Supervisors themselves should participate in interventions designed to help themselves and their employees practice wellness and build psychological capital.
A practical implication of these findings is that managers can implement creative and strategic human resource practices such as offering personalized developmental opportunities that will position their organizations as supportive of employees in regards to the growth of their professional, spiritual, values, and character and social capacity. This finding is in line with Plaskoff (2017), which is organizations to optimize the employee experience as a new approach in human resources management. The goal of this employee experience strategy is not to provide services, but to design an experience that demonstrates care for the employees within the context of their work (Plaskoff, 2017).

Recommendations
The study acknowledges several limitations concerning the methods and findings. Firstly, the usage of self-reports and a single respondent for both dependent and independent variables increases the risk of common method bias (Podsakoff et al., 2003). To scholars, we recommend including more various organizations and industries to better understand their interdependencies and to confirm the instrument validity and reliability in the different various contexts. This research was conducted only in one faith-based-higher education environment in Indonesia, the result might be different should it applied in other industries, countries, or environments such as business, manufacturing industry, or other sectors. To scholars, we recommend future research to include more various industries in different various contexts.
Secondly, another promising avenue for further research is investigating other relevant constructs that contribute to perceived organization support on holistic employee subjective well-being such as employee involvement initiatives, employee benefit, company facilities for employees' physical fitness, company policies that support community-based services, and environmentally friendly initiatives, etc.
Lastly, another promising avenue for further research is investigating how those organization support strategies influence other established construct such as the Work Engagement (Schaufeli and Baker, 2004), Organization Commitment and Citizenship Behavior developed by Allen and Meyer (1997), or the revised organizational citizenship behavior scale (OCBS) developed by Bakhshi et al. (2009).