Editorial Board

A Refereed Monthly International Journal of Management

Enhancing Employees' Agility in the Financial Sector through Job Satisfaction in the Workplace and Empowerment

Mohamed Husni Athamneh

Department of Business & Management,

Universiti Tenaga Nasional (UNITEN),

Kajang, Malaysia.

eng_mohamad.athamneh@yahoo.com

Corresponding author

 

Juraifa Bte Jais

Department of Business & Management,

Universiti Tenaga Nasional (UNITEN),

Kajang, Malaysia.

 

Abstract

Financial sectors, like other businesses with rigid hierarchical structures, struggle to be sufficiently adaptable or agile to meet the demands of competitive conditions. However, there is a paucity of examination on the effectiveness of empowerment to improve the agility of employees in financial sectors, which are currently confronted with expanding duties and complicated challenges. This study investigates the connections among employee empowerment through effective communication, work teams, and the agility of employees. In addition, this study examined the function that work satisfaction plays as a mediating factor among employee agility and empowerment. 460 banking employees were surveyed to collect data. The results indicate that empowerment enhance employees' agility by assisting workers to adapt to an unexpected work environment. In addition, job satisfaction enhances employee communication, the implementation of work teams, and the agility of employees. This is among of the first investigation to examine the connection among these components in this field, and it also has significant and beneficial consequences for financial sectors and banking in particular, as well as for academics, as discussed in this paper.

Keywords: Employees' Agility; Empowerment; Effective Communication; Job Satisfaction; Work Teams; Banks.

 

Introduction

Institutions with a hierarchical structure find it hard to deal with complicated situations that need constant change(Lassala et al., 2021). Such institutions rely primarily on pre-specified instructions, and obedience to policies, which restricts individuals' capacity to innovate and adapt to unexpected, changing circumstances (Vrontis et al., 2022). Accordingly, in difficult environments, studies indicate that institutions like the banking industry experience difficulty in being agile or adaptable to meet the demands resulting from environmental changes (Tseng et al., 2021).

Scholars say that in order for institutions to exhibit adaptation in extremely complex environments, executives must delegate significant decision-making authority to employees with minimal or no opportunity for consultation (Ulrich & Yeung, 2019; Putri & Mangundjaya, 2020; Thani et al., 2022).Empowerment offer employees the specialized information, skillsets, and training required to adapt successfully to their workplace environment, as well as the freedom to make crucial decisions required for successful adaptation during complicated situations(Federici et al., 2021; Rousseau & Aubé, 2020).

The fundamental challenge of businesses is how to motivate their employees to develop innovative solutions and how to establish an environment in which associates may apply their creative views(Lai et al., 2021).This challenge has prompted businesses to strengthen their resiliency and conduct their activities with ease (Caniëls & Hatak, 2022). Originally developed as a special way to manage a changing and dynamic environment, agility is now a vital component of company success(Khodabandeh et al., 2018).

Adopting new strategies, such as employee agility, also allows financial industries to adapt to environmental challenges. Employees become a key strategic source of knowledge and progress, as well as a basis for brilliance, helping sectors to fulfill their duties creativity and gaining the competitive advantages that ensure their survival, advancement, and success(Al-Faouri et al., 2014; Menon & Suresh, 2022).Besides that, numerous sources, like as ( Saleem et al., 2021;AL-Kasasbeh et al., 2016; Muduli, 2017; Sherehiy & Karwowski, 2014; Putri & Mangundjaya, 2020), concur that employees' agility is based on three factors: "resilience, adaptability, and proactivity."

This paper investigates the effects of empowerment on the agility of bank employees. Additionally, we examine the significance of job satisfaction as mediating factor in the relationship between employee agility and empowerment. This paper provides several notable contributions. First, this analysis reveals the importance of empowerment in achieving employee agility, therefore improving our empirical understanding of the variables influencing employee agility in financial industries.Second, this paper analyses the interconnections among empowerment, work satisfaction, and employee agility in the financial industry, a topic for which there is no previous research. Our research also analyses whether or not work satisfaction mediates this connection.Thirdly, this original study concentrate on empowering employee and job satisfaction in banking institutions has practical significance for policymakers and practitioners in all nations striving to foster agility-driven competition.

Literature review

 Employees' agility"overview"

The agility of employees is a technologically advanced management style that emerged in the early 1990s as a suitable alternative for dynamic and overly sensitive environments and has since become a crucial factor for economic success, as it deals with unanticipated environmental changes and converts them into chances for the advantage of banks in order to increase their competitive strength, gain market share, and fulfill the needs(Banihashemi & Sarani, 2012;Lai et al., 2021;Alavi, 2016; Athamneh & Jais, 2021).

Employees within any organization have characteristics that boost agility and are commonly referred to as "employees agility" ( e.g., Sherehiy, 2008; Lai et al., 2021; Alavi et al., 2014; Breu et al., 2002; Harsch & Festing, 2020; Nafei, 2016), prompting us to focus on this essential concept in our research. In this work, we apply the notion of "employee agility" since research indicates that it is a novel management style that has arisen as an acceptable reaction to dynamic and overly sensitive situations (Munteanu et al., 2020; Menon & Suresh, 2022).

Despite the significance of employees' agility, assessments of the degree of comprehension and the elements that influence employees' agility are lacking in the scientific literature. For example, the majority of researchers found that employees' agility possesses three qualities: "resilience, adaptability, and proactivity" in the literature on ability, behavior, and structures(Baran & Woznyj, 2021;Al-Kasasbeh et al., 2016; Roper et al., 2022; Bushuyeva et al., 2019; Joiner, 2019;Cai et al., 2018; Goswami & Kumar, 2018;Muduli & Pandya, 2018;Muduli, 2016; Pereira et al., 2021).

The initial aspect of employee agility is proactivity entails the capacity of individuals within the institution to identify market opportunities and any threats to seize on them, and the capability to constantly provide new ideas and suggestions to expand work, as well as the power to inventively deal with cases they face(Baran & Woznyj, 2021; Cai et al., 2018; Bushuyeva et al., 2019). Adaptability refers to the aptitude of workers to adjust and modify their activities under business environment changes, and respond promptly (Pereira et al., 2021; Al-Kasasbeh et al., 2016). Resilience signifies the capacity of institution members to perform well under pressure and changing settings while maintaining a positive attitude, proposing new ideas, and accepting the viewpoints of others (Harsch & Festing, 2020; Goswami & Kumar, 2018).

Furthermore, businesses require the agility of their employees to survive, prosper, grow, and adapt to changing surroundings. Two benefits are associated with employee agility. First, it provides the most efficient technique to deliver and prevent dynamics and risks in a shorter amount of time. Second, it offers more opportunities most effectively and capitalizes on them at the optimal moment (Muduli & Pandya, 2018; Joiner, 2019; Muduli, 2016).

 Theoretical background: Empowerment

Employees are empowered when they are able to offer their abilities and duties, are motivated to make the right choices, and have the authority and self-assurance to accomplish their tasks without interference from administration(Melhem et al., 2020). Yin(2020), described empowerment as the convergence of employee and administration relationships, incentives, and involvement in decision-making, as well as the reduction of internal management obstacles between administration and employees.

The authorization empowers employees to amass the resources needed to assert control over the business (Sulaiman & Muhamad, 2020;Kele, 2020). According to Obi et al., (2020), empowerment encompasses the transfer of responsibility and authority to various levels in the organization. Hameed et al., (2020), define empowerment in the same way asJocelyne and Kariuki (2020): as improving systems, sharing information, building capacity, and making teams better able to change their efforts and deal with risks(Coun et al., 2022).

Typically, empowerment involves the distribution of power and responsibility from senior management to junior staff, as well as the option to take the role in decision-making(Istiningdyah & Gunawan, 2022). Almotawteh(2020),asserts that empowerment provides employees with the power to make decisions via innovation, accountability, and active engagement in the management of their organizations. Increasing employee authority has been the focus of numerous studies and practices for a long time. It has been accomplished in several ways, which has led to the fashionable empowerment attitude(Sonal et al., 2019).

Due to technological progress, businesses are increasingly concentrating on their employees, rendering empowerment vital. This highlights the importance of empowering employees and fostering their interaction with the company at all levels of administration in a way that boosts them to share their thoughts and generate fresh contributions to enhance their business(Hanaysha, 2016; Sutherland et al., 2007). This paper concentrates on the numerous necessary parts of empowerment, such as effective communication and work teams that make employees more flexible.

Effective communication

Financial sectors ought to emphasize their resources to get a competitive edge over their rivals in situations that are both dynamic and tough and where rivalry is intensifying. Over the last several decades, experts have acknowledged the significance of effective communication to the achievement of an organization's goals and accorded it considerable attention(McLachlan, 2022; Razak et al., 2019). Studies define effective communication as a way of individual communication that includes the transfer of information, full participation, and knowledge exchange among staff at all organizational units. Scholars Yuest and Sumantra (2017), say that employee trust is the best way to measure how well an organization can carry out its plans.

Moreover, Rajhans(2018) argues that information sharing supports employees in grasping the overall organization's plan and that awareness in an ideal technical and cultural context is crucial. Effective communication is viewed in a broader sense as the active engagement and flow of information within all organizational levels to achieve a common goal. The work atmosphere may be improved when employees share their skills, abilities, and expertise. Sharing gives them a chance to learn and gives them the freedom to deal with their problems on their own (Abuzid & Abbas, 2017).

In their notion, Nwabueze and Mileski(2018) underline the necessity of exchanging information and expertise inside an institution in order to enhance its capacity to operate successfully and smoothly. Muhamedi and Ariffin 2017; and Syakur et al., (2020) say that for employees and executives to adapt well to changes, they need to communicate with each other well(Mehralian et al., 2022).After studying and analyzing the publications on the agility of employees and the influence of influential communication on it, we discovered that the connections were positive in the majority of academic publications. For example, Lee et al., (2019) said that how well employees communicate has a big effect on their agility, especially when it comes to being proactive.

Effective communication activities are important organizational behaviors for solving problems and getting ahead of the competition. Lassoued et al.(2020) found a strong link between these behaviors and the agility of employees.In addition, studies have shown that employees' agility, identified as "adaptability, proactivity, and resilience," is positively impacted by effective communication among employees inside an organization (Khan et al., 2019;Pitafi et al., 2019;Cai et al., 2018; Farahani & Salimi, 2015; Deksnys, 2018;Muduli, 2016, 2017;). Based on these results, we can say that the best way to create a culture of agility is for employees to communicate with each other and work together.

H1. Effective communication correlates positively with employees' agility.

 Work teams

Presently, the economy is increasingly dependent on workers, and the environment is undergoing rapid change. Therefore, the firm must leverage the expertise of its workers to achieve agility. In addition, institutions require staff engagement, the expansion of talents, and the ability to respond to client demand. After acquiring this information, they will be talented to react to the changes and meet the organization's missions.

A "work team" refers to a group of individuals inside an institution whose skills complement each other and whose skills and talents are integrated to achieve a common goal. Employees of the company have a sense of shared accountability, which can increase their agility (Abuzid & Abbas, 2017).

In addition, their work environment may be better when individuals share their talents, skills, and knowledge that are related to their jobs(Coun et al., 2022; Hanaysha, 2016).Work teams help the institution grow and become more flexible, which helps it deal with situations in the most effective way possible(Qin et al., 2015).D’Innocenzo et al., (2016) state that cooperative strength is an emergent property that can be measured by four things: freedom, effectiveness, value, and power.Likewise, O’Neill and Salas(2018) found that a work team combines numerous characteristics: (1) group efforts must fully satisfy stakeholders and represent them favorably. (2) Teams need to evolve into more capable units of labor over time. (3) Institutions need to provide their workers with ample chances to develop their abilities.

Research has shown that working in a team improves strategic agility (Hawajrah & Al-Azab, 2019) and that teams predict employees' agility in complicated and risky work contexts (Erkutlu & Chafra, 2012; Muduli, 2016).

The importance of work teams in developing employees' agility has been stressed by several researchers. According to Munteanu et al., (2020); Sofijanova and Zabijakin (2013), employers who encourage teamwork have the biggest impact on raising employee agility.Muduli, (2017); Sherehiy and Karwowski(2014) both say that focusing on work teams means thinking about how people interact at work and that work teams help individuals be more agile.

Moreover, work teams have been studied in prior studies to enhance employee agility (Hawajrah & Al-Azab, 2019; Varshney & Varshney, 2020; Muduli, 2017; Sumukadas & Sawhney, 2004; Munteanu et al., 2020). Working as a team has been shown to have many benefits, such as making people more proactive, flexible, and able to adapt to new situations.

H2. Work teams correlate positively with employees' agility.

Job Satisfaction"JOS"

Job satisfaction is a critical challenge for all businesses, and ignoring it results in long-term disobedience, disruption of the social structure, and a weakened sense of duty (Jafari, 2016; Al-Abdullat & Dababneh, 2018). The way workers feel about their professions and the many aspects of their work is known as job satisfaction. Businesses should prioritize employee satisfaction for many reasons, including the expectation that workers will be treated with care and the fact that job satisfaction"JOS"can influence member of staff conduct in ways that influence organizational aims(Poursadeghiyan et al., 2016; Schlaegel et al., 2022; Yıldız & Şimşek, 2016).

Employees are more satisfied when they have factors like promotion, a high salary, positive feedback, and public acknowledgement (Buitendach & De Witte, 2005; Heimerl et al., 2020). It has been argued by Verplanken and Roy (2016)that JOS is not just tied to monetary compensation or professional advancement but also to the freedom with which workers are provided to make decisions and carry out initiatives of their choosing. Managers have an outsized impact on worker satisfaction because they are the ones who have the most direct impact on employees through coordination, communication, and socializing. In tandem, the business depends more and more on its employees, and the outside world is always changing. For the business to be flexible, it's important that employees feel appreciated(Top et al., 2015; Bello & Change, 2017). 

In this regard, Nabatchian et al.(2014); Azmy(2021) found that job satisfaction correlates positively with employee agility and the willingness of employees to suggest new approaches to improving the company's operations. It takes a lot of contentment to keep up a high level of productivity. Not only that but it was also shown that a happy workforce is a more agile one. Employee satisfaction also leads to a more productive and enthusiastic team, which helps the company grow by giving its workers the knowledge, skills, and confidence to take advantage of growth opportunities (Heimerl et al., 2020; Al-Abdullat & Dababneh, 2018).

One of the characteristics that helps firms in advanced countries thrive is employee satisfaction with their job. George and Zakkariya(2015) found that when employees are happy and loyal, the organization can be more flexible and adapt to its surroundings. Businesses need the flexibility to respond to the many ongoing shifts in their environments if they are to survive and thrive. So, Hameed et al., (2022);Aidan et al., (2018); Momeni & Pourasadi, (2015);and Rahardi et al. (2022) all found that JOS and employee agility are strongly linked.

In this paper, we study the effects of JOS on employees' agility as both an independent variable and a mediator, which forges a link between the organization and its staff in pursuit of common goals and the successful navigation of dynamic changes (Al-Abbadi & Agyekum, 2022; Al-Abdullat & Dababneh, 2018; Suifan, 2019; Davies et al., 2017).

As a result, the arguments for this study were emphasized by Otuya (2019); Zhao et al. (2010); andSidhu et al. (2021), who all pointed out that if a definite relationship exists between three factors, then one of the factors may operate as a mediator between the other two. Similarly, little to no studies has examined the role of JOS as a mediator among employees' agility and empowerment. It may be a new idea that JOS is a bridge among employee agility and empowerment.

H3. Job satisfaction"JOS" correlates positively with employees' agility.

H4. JOSmediates the correlationbetween effective communication and employees' agility.

H5. JOS mediates the correlation between work teams and employees' agility

Methodology

Participants

To accomplish the study's objectives, we utilized a quantitative research design based on prior literature. Our sample is composed of all current commercial banks located in Jordan (13), and the total number of their employees is "21247" (CBJ, 2021). For this study, a total of 460 participants from diverse areas and different levels were collected as a representative sample. After checking the data, it was determined that 448 were acceptable for analysis, resulting in a statistically acceptable percentage of 98.4%. The details of the participants are described in Table 1 below.

Basic information	(n)	%
1:Gender…… Ø  "Female" Ø  "Male"	** 178 270	** 39.7 60.3
2:Marital Status…… Ø  "Married" Ø  "Single" Ø  "Widowed" Ø  "Divorced"	** 246 147 19 36	** 54.9 32.8 4.2 8.0
3:Age………. Ø  "Less than 25 years old" Ø  "25 – 35 years old" Ø  "36 – 45 years old" Ø  "More than 45 yearsold"	** 27 198 181 42	** 6.0 44.2 40.4 9.4
4:Education……… Ø  "Secondary school" Ø  "Diploma" Ø  "Bachelor's degree" Ø  "Master's degree" Ø  "Postgraduate diploma" Ø  "Ph.D"	** 4 19 317 69 22 17	** 0.9 4.2 70.8 15.4 4.9 3.8
5:Experience………. Ø  "Less than one year" Ø  "1 - less than 5 years" Ø  "5 - less than 10 years" Ø  "10 - less than 15 years" Ø  "15 - less than 20 years" Ø  "20 years and more"	** 31 97 142 93 52 33	** 6.9 21.7 31.7 20.8 11.6 7.4

Authors' source

 Measures

Our research questionnaire was divided into four sections. As seen in Table 1, the first section of this analysis consists of details about the participants. Second, empowerment was evaluated, with effective communication (α = 0.908) and work teams (α = 0.931) using 5- and 5-item scales, respectively, developed by Coyle and Morrow(2003); Kruja and Oelfke (2009). The third section assessed the agility of employees (α = 0.950). This variable has three components: (7-item) resilience, (8-item) proactivity, and (6-item) adaptability, which were developed by (Sherehiy et al., 2007). The last section reflected the variable of Job satisfaction (α = 0.947). This measure consists of two components: (6-item) intrinsic satisfaction and (6-item) extrinsic satisfaction, which were designed by (Weiss et al., 1967). To facilitate analysis, all items had a 5-point Likert scale attached to them(Clarke, 2007).

Analysis and results

The AMOS 25 and SPSS 25 software packages were used to analyze the data. Cronbach's α "internal consistency" values for all variables range from 0.908 to 0.950, much over the 0.7 threshold recommended for reliability (Ong & Puteh, 2017; Shiau et al., 2019). The factor loadings are quite high, ranging from 0.59 to 0.94(Igbaria & Tan 1997; Shiau et al., 2019). Regarding CR, "composite reliability" was much higher than the suggested threshold of 0.700, indicating that all metrics are convergent valid (Hair et al., 2010b, 2017). A value of AVE greater than 0.500 is considered excessive(Hair et al., 2010a, 2016; Ong & Puteh, 2017). Taking all of this into account, it is reasonable to conclude that our measurements are accurate. See also: Table 2.

Table 2. The measurements' values

Variable/Items	Item	F. L	α	AVE	CR
Effective Communication	EF 1	0.73
	EF 2	0.73
	EF 3	0.83	0.908	0.627	0.893
	EF 4	0.89
	EF 5	0.77
Work Teams	WO 1	0.89
	WO 2	0.85
	WO 3	0.72	0.931	0.709	0.923
	WO 4	0.93
	WO 5	0.81
Job Satisfaction	JOS1	0.73
	JOS2	0.70
	JOS3	0.59
	JOS4	0.65
	JOS5	0.76
	JOS6	0.94	0.947	0.872	0.894
	JOS7	0.72
	JOS8	0.66
	JOS9	0.79
	JOS10	0.80
	JOS11	0.75
	JOS12	0.91
Employees' Agility	EA1	0.59
	EA2	0.73
	EA3	0.84
	EA4	0.86
	EA5	0.80
	EA6	0.85
	EA7	0.67
	EA8	0.68
	EA9	0.84	0.950	0.792	0.898
	EA10	0.83
	EA11	0.92
	EA12	0.58
	EA13	0.74
	EA14	0.68
	EA15	0.89
	EA16	0.56
	EA17	0.88
	EA18	0.79
	EA19	0.89
	EA20	0.63
	EA21	0.61

 

All measures are trustworthy, as stated in Table 2. After that, we evaluated how well each variable fit into the model. CFI = 0.923, RMSEA = 0.065 < 0.080, the Chi-square value was 2353.35, DF = 997, and the relative Chi-Square = 2.360. The data fit nicely within the framework of the proposed model(Hu & Bentler, 1999;Hair et al., 2016).Furthermore, the prerequisites for a mediation effect have been met on the basis of the strength of the associations between these variables in our model "see Table 3"(Baron & Kenny, 1986; Otuya, 2019).

Table 3. Intercorrelations between scales.

Variables	M	SD	EF	WO	JOS	EA
EF	3.64	0.84	0.795
WO	3.88	0.88	0.757	0.851
JOS	3.55	0.86	0.760	0.530	0.880
EA	3.83	0.72	0.86	0.614	0.74	0.71

Note: EF= Effective communication, EA= Employees' Agility, WO= Work teams, and JOS= Job satisfaction

Table 3 shows that the correlations are within the range of 0.530 and 0.880. Therefore, all correlations should fall between the ranges of 0.20 to 0.90, as proposed by Hair et al. (2016). The findings confirmed the validity of all variables, and all items were approved for the following stage of analysis.

 Hypothesis testing

Many interesting connections between the study's variables are discovered. The first is that the ability to communicate effectively correlates positively with employees' agility. Secondly, work teams are highly and positively correlated with employees' agility. Thirdly, the satisfaction of employees is highly and positively correlated with their agility. Fourth, our research reveals substantial associations between these main factors. Since this is the case, verifying the efficacy of mediation is essential (Sidhu et al., 2021;Baron & Kenny, 1986; Otuya, 2019). Within this part, we'll evaluate these links' impact.

 Direct Impacts

As a first step, we investigated whether employees' agility (EA) relates to their level of EF (effective communication). According to the standardized path coefficients, EF (effective communication) has a positive and statistically significant impact on employees' agility (β=.315, p < .001). This proves the first hypothesis to be correct (H1).

The second is through investigating how work teams (WO) influence employees' agility (EA). There is a positive and statistically significant connectionamong work teams and the agility of employees, as measured by standardized path coefficients (β= .355, p < .001). This proves the second hypothesis to be correct (H2).

The third point was investigating the direct influence of job satisfaction "JOS" on employees' agility (EA). There is a positive and statistically significant connectionamong job satisfaction and "EA" employees' agility, as measured by standardized path coefficients (β= .270, p < .001). This proves the third hypothesis to be correct (H3).

Additional information on the direct path model is provided in Table 4. It summarizes the major relationships between all of the variables (IVs) and employees' agility as a whole (DV).

Table 4. Direct Impacts

Hypothesis.	Path.	Estimate.	S. E.	β.	C.R.	P-value.	Result.
H1.	EF   → EA	0.220	0.064	0.315***	3.816	0.000	Accepted
H2.	WO → EA	0.400	0.053	0.355***	4.192	0.000	Accepted
H3.	JOS → EA	0.684	0.090	0.270***	3.630	0.000	Accepted

Note: ***=p < .001.

All of the direct paths in the structural model, as shown in Table 4, have statistical significance.

Mediation analysis

Our study examined the connections between effective communication "EF", work teams "WO", and employees' agility (EA), with job satisfaction "JOS" serving as a mediator variable. Findings showed a significant relationship between EF and EA among employees (Beta=0.315, P=0.000). In contrast, even after taking into account the mediating impact of JOS, the direct effects of EF on EA were also significant (β=-0.459, P=0.011). The link between effective communication "EF" and JOS was significant (β=0.75, P=0.001). Furthermore, there was a significant relationship among JOS and employees' agility "EA" (Beta=0.98, P=0.000). There was a significant mediation impact of JOS among EF and EA (β=0.731, P0.001). Hypothesis 4 was confirmed by these findings, as seen in Table 5 below.

Furthermore, the results also showed a significant connection among work teams "WO" and employees' agility "EA" among employees (Beta=0.355, P=0.001). In contrast, even after taking into account the mediating impact of JOS, the direct effects of WO on EA were also significant (β=0.354, P=0.001). The correlation between WO and JOS was significant (β=0.030, P=0.611). Furthermore, there was a significant connection among JOS and EA (β=0.98, P=0.000). There was a significant mediation impact of JOS between WO and EA (β=0.321,P= 0.001). Hypothesis 5 was confirmed by these findings. All of the mediated effects from the model's structure are recorded in Table 5.

Table 5: The outcomes of mediation

M = Job Satisfaction (JOS) DV = Employees' Agility (EA)	Independent variables (IVs)
	Effective Communication (EF)	Work Teams (WO)
Result of IV on EA	0.310***	0.355***
Result of IV on JOS	0.750***	0.030 (0.611)
Result of JOS on EA	0.980***	0.980***
Direct impact of IV on EAwith JOS	-0.459***	0.354***
Indirect impact of IV on EA with JOS	0.731***	0.321***
Decision	Mediate	Mediate
Results	Supported (H4)	Supported (H5)

"***=p < .001".

 

Conclusion and Discussion

A conceptual model linking empowerment (EM) and employee agility (EA) was evaluated and presented in this paper, with the impact being mediated by job satisfaction (JOS). Researchers found that effective communication "EF" increased employees' agility (EA). These findings are consistent with those of (Deksnys, 2018;Pitafi et al., 2019; Cai et al., 2018; Farahani & Salimi, 2015; Lassoued et al., 2020; Khan et al., 2019; Muduli, 2016, 2017).

In addition, the study demonstrated that the work team's "WO" in the workplace improves employees' agility (EA). This study agrees with previous findings by (Varshney & Varshney, 2020; Hawajrah & Al-Azab, 2019; Munteanu et al., 2020; Sofijanova & Zabijakin, 2013;). Moreover, previous studies corroborated our results that job satisfaction "JOS" positively improves employees' agility"EA" (Rahardi et al., 2022; Aidan et al., 2018; Goodarzi et al., 2018; Hameed et al., 2022; Mian & Mian, 2017;Nabatchian et al., 2014; Nafei, 2016;).

This study indicated that job satisfaction "JOS" mediated the link among the variables, as suggested by(Sidhu et al., 2021; Otuya, 2019). To the extent that empowerment (EM) has a meaningful and even positive influence on employee agility (EA), it is clear that the JOS mediates this impact.

These findings are useful for advising financial industry leaders on how to best empower their staff and encourage the public to share their views. These findings also help the financial sector develop methods for gaining an edge in the marketplace, enhancing the skills of employees, and adapting to both internal and external changes. Workers who feel appreciated in their professions are more likely to go above and beyond at work, which increases satisfaction, and the rate of financial services furnished by the bank and gives it a competitive edge. 

Additionally, strong lines of communication and collaborative efforts push policymakers to take steps that might improve the design of principles guiding the generation and implementation of agile choices. Banking institutions that do well in the future will be those whose staff members are able to adjust to new circumstances quickly and easily. Also, they play a crucial role in the development, financial success, and competitive advantage of banks.

As a conclusion, the preceding discussions show how highly connected the factors of job satisfaction, empowerment, and employee agility are. Furthermore, job satisfaction is crucial among employee agility and empowerment within banks, and it makes an important contribution to theory by giving a new path for research into this subject.

 Theoretical implications

Our work complements earlier studies that studied the influence of empowerment (Lassoued et al., 2020;Muduli, 2017; Khan et al., 2019;Pitafi et al., 2019; Munteanu et al., 2020); and job satisfaction on employees' agility (Hameed et al., 2022;Aidan et al., 2018; Goodarzi et al., 2018; Azmy, 2021; Rahardi et al., 2022; Mian & Mian, 2017). The expansion of the present corpus of knowledge has several theoretical repercussions.

To begin, we have closed the informational gap about methods for empowering employees. We propose that these activities lead to the agility of employees and their firms, in contrast to earlier research that has tackled these practices independently in different studies.

The second contribution of this study is to provide a conceptual model for the mediating role of JOS in the relationship among two types of empowerments (effective communication and work teams) and employee agility in the financial services industry. Indeed, banks that encourage open lines of communication and collaborative teams tend to have more responsive employees. Furthermore, the current investigation has prioritized the essential research aspects that assist banks in executing and implementing policies that promote adaptability to a dynamic and rapidly changing environment.

Thirdly, our findings have implications for understanding employee agility in efficiency-based economies. In these situations, a company's capacity to react to the rapid changes in the market is sometimes hampered by a lack of adaptability, initiative, and resilience. Academic studies have yet to identify the factors that affect employee agility. Our study is an important first step in this direction. This study thus adds to the corpus of knowledge in the subject matter of management by answering crucial questions for academics and filling in critical gaps in the current literature.

 Practical implications

Numerous substantial practical implications stem from this work. First, job satisfaction is a primary factor in employees' agility, whereas empowerment like effective communication and working in teams have a substantial influence on employees' agility. This illustrates that satisfaction in one's work environment is critical to realizing the full benefits of empowerment strategies for enhancing employees' agility. Banking institutions need to prioritize work teams, promote constructive communication, and encourage staff to share their ideas.

Banks may use these findings to refine their strategies for gaining a competitive edge, fostering employee growth, and adjusting in the workplace. If this goal is met, it will lead to more contented employees, which in turn will increase their agility. Banks may benefit from these ideas since they encourage initiative, socialization, and confidence. To achieve agility, bank management will need to relax their work rules and give their employees more autonomy.

Second, it's crucial for the top levels of management and their supervisors to work on improving their agility if the company wants to thrive and remain competitive (Natapoera & Mangundjaya, 2020;Munteanu et al., 2020; Thani et al., 2022). Managers must rely on their workers while trying to improve their employees' agility (Lassoued et al., 2020; Al-Ganemi & Chalab, 2021;Nouri & Mousavi, 2020; Muduli & Pandya, 2018). In addition, banks may be more agile if they hire younger workers. Besides that, business schools need to emphasize these ideas by teaching and preparing the next generation to make smart decisions, develop their logical thinking skills, and promote collaboration ahead.Finally, it is recommended that relevant strategies and activities be implemented.

 Future research and limitations

 Future research directions

There is a numeral of ways for future research that might improve our results. Foremost, research must determine whether the model results are valid in multiple circumstances, such as different financial sectors in other nations or diverse socioeconomic and cultural environments. Secondly, integrate other components of empowerment to produce a better full view of the function of empowerment in this context. Thirdly, future research must also include the perspectives of management members to increase the accuracy of analyzing our model's key factors.

 Limitations

Our research has certain limitations that must be addressed. First, focusing on only two domains of empowerment, namely, effective communication and work teams, is insufficient for understanding the significance of empowerment in a general context. In order to appreciate the significance of empowerment from a broader perspective, it is vital to integrate well-known other significant components such as employee involvement in decision-making and transfer of authority.Second, we gathered our information from bank employees in Jordan, a country where agile-driven entrepreneurship is flourishing. As a result, the results may only apply to certain types of banks. Not only that, but the research was carried out in the economic and cultural setting of Jordan. The results might have been affected by this.Furthermore, bank administrators may have more positive views on this matter than other bank personnel, or vice versa.

References

Abuzid, H. F. T., & Abbas, M. (2017). Impact of teamwork effectiveness on organizational performance vis-a-vis role of organizational support and team leader’s readiness: A study of Saudi Arabian government departments work teams. Journal of Engineering and Applied Sciences, 12(8), 2229–2237. https://doi.org/10.3923/jeasci.2017.2229.2237

Aidan, Z., Alibabaei, A., & Mohammad, H. S. (2018). Identify the Relationship between Employer Brand Attractiveness, Job Satisfaction, Organizational Commitment and Workforce Agility in Telecom Industries Based on Structural Equation Modeling (SEM) (Case Study: Huawei Technologies Service Iranian). Journal of Ecophysiology and Occupational Health, 18(1&2), 6–11. https://doi.org/10.18311/jeoh/2018/21068

Al-Abbadi, G., & Agyekum, G. (2022). The effects of motivational factors on construction professionals productivity in Jordan. International Journal of Construction Management, 22(5). https://doi.org/10.1080/15623599.2019.1652951

Al-Abdullat, B. M., & Dababneh, A. (2018). The mediating effect of job satisfaction on the relationship between organizational culture and knowledge management in Jordanian banking sector. Benchmarking, 25(2), 517–544. https://doi.org/10.1108/BIJ-06-2016-0081

Al-Faouri, A. H., Al-Nsour, M. M., & Al-Kasasbeh, M. M. (2014). The impact of workforce agility on organizational memory. Knowledge Management Research and Practice, 12(4), 432–442. https://doi.org/10.1057/kmrp.2013.19

Al-Ganemi, S. S. W., & Chalab, I. D. (2021). Reflection of the effect of empowering leadership behaviors on the workforce agility (An analytical study of the opinions of teachers in the private schools of the Diwaniyah governorate center). Turkish Journal of Computer and Mathematics Education, 12(14), 2120–2149.

AL-Kasasbeh, A. M., Halim, M. A. S. A., & Omar, K. (2016). E-HRM, workforce agility and organizational performance: A review paper toward theoretical framework. International Journal of Applied Business and Economic Research, 14(15), 10671–10685.

Alavi, S., Abd. Wahab, D., Muhamad, N., & Arbab Shirani, B. (2014). Organic structure and organisational learning as the main antecedents of workforce agility. International Journal of Production Research, 52(21), 6273–6295. https://doi.org/10.1080/00207543.2014.919420

Almotawteh, M. (2020). Impact of Employee Empowerment on Competitive Advantage: Mediating Role of Ethical Leadership. PalArch’s Journal of Archaeology of Egypt / Egyptology, 17(7), 17.

Azmy, A. (2021). The Effect of Employee Engagement and Job Satisfaction on Workforce Agility Through Talent Management in Public Transportation Companies. Media Ekonomi Dan Manajemen, 36(2), 212. https://doi.org/10.24856/mem.v36i2.2190

Bani-Melhem, S., Quratulain, S., & Al-Hawari, M. A. (2020). Customer incivility and frontline employees’ revenge intentions: interaction effects of employee empowerment and turnover intentions. Journal of Hospitality Marketing and Management, 29(4), 450–470. https://doi.org/10.1080/19368623.2019.1646180

Banihashemi, S., & Sarani, A. (2012). Assessment of organizational agility in cement industry. African Journal of Business Management, 6(27), 8055–8064. https://doi.org/10.5897/ajbm11.2124

Baran, B. E., & Woznyj, H. M. (2021). Managing VUCA: The human dynamics of agility. Organizational Dynamics, 50(2), 100787. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.orgdyn.2020.100787

Baron, R. M., & Kenny, D. A. (1986). The Moderator-Mediator Variable Distinction in Social Psychological Research. Conceptual, Strategic, and Statistical Considerations. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 51(6), 1173–1182. https://doi.org/10.1037/0022-3514.51.6.1173

Bello, Y., & Change, M. B. (2017). Employees’ empowerment, service quality and customers’ satisfaction in hotel industry. The Strategic Journal of Business & Change Management, Vol. 4(Iss. 4), pp 1001-1019.

Breu, K., Hemingway, C. J., Strathern, M., & Bridger, D. (2002). Workforce agility: The new employee strategy for the knowledge economy. Journal of Information Technology, 17(1), 21–31. https://doi.org/10.1080/02683960110132070

Buitendach, J., & De Witte, H. (2005). Job insecurity, extrinsic and intrinsic job satisfaction and affective organisational commitment of maintenance workers in a parastatal. South African Journal of Business Management, 36(2), 27–38. https://doi.org/10.4102/sajbm.v36i2.625

Bushuyeva, N., Bushuiev, D., & Bushuieva, V. (2019). Agile leadership of managing innovation projects. Innovative Technologies and Scientific Solutions for Industries, 4(10), 77–84. https://doi.org/10.30837/2522-9818.2019.10.077

Cai, Z., Huang, Q., Liu, H., & Wang, X. (2018). Improving the agility of employees through enterprise social media: The mediating role of psychological conditions. International Journal of Information Management, 38(1), 52–63. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijinfomgt.2017.09.001

Caniëls, M., & Hatak, I. (2022). Employee resilience: considering both the social side and the economic side of leader-follower exchanges in conjunction with the dark side of followers’ personality. International Journal of Human Resource Management, 33(2), 297–328. https://doi.org/10.1080/09585192.2019.1695648

CBJ. (2021). Central Bank Of Jordan Law. Https://Www.Cbj.Gov.Jo/Pages/Viewpage.Aspx?PageID=337. http://www.cbj.gov.jo/pages.php

Clarke, A. (2007). Grounded theory: Critiques, debates, and situational analysis. Handbook.

Coun, M., Peters, P., Blomme, R., & Schaveling, J. (2022). ‘To empower or not to empower, that’s the question’. Using an empowerment process approach to explain employees’ workplace proactivity. International Journal of Human Resource Management, 33(14), 2829–2855. https://doi.org/10.1080/09585192.2021.1879204

Coyle, J., & Morrow, P. (2003). The role of individual differences in employee adoption of TQM orientation. In Journal of Vocational Behavior (Vol. 62, Issue 2). https://doi.org/10.1016/S0001-8791(02)00041-6

D’Innocenzo, L., Mathieu, J. E., & Kukenberger, M. R. (2016). A Meta-Analysis of Different Forms of Shared Leadership–Team Performance Relations. Journal of Management, 42(7), 1964–1991. https://doi.org/10.1177/0149206314525205

Davies, E. M. M., Van der Heijden, B. I. J. M., & Flynn, M. (2017). Job satisfaction, retirement attitude and intended retirement age: A conditional process analysis across workers’ level of household income. Frontiers in Psychology, 8(MAY), 1–13. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2017.00891

Deksnys, M. (2018). Agility in High Growth Companies.

Erkutlu, H., & Chafra, J. (2012). The impact of team empowerment on proactivity: The moderating roles of leader’s emotional intelligence and proactive personality. Journal of Health Organization and Management, 26(5), 560–577. https://doi.org/10.1108/14777261211256918

Farahani, A. H., & Salimi, F. (2015). The Study of the Relationship between Employees ’ Empowerment and Organizational Agility : A Case Study in Azarab Industrial Company. Journal of Natural and Social Sciences, 4(1), 1067–1076.

Federici, E., Boon, C., & Den Hartog, D. (2021). The moderating role of HR practices on the career adaptability–job crafting relationship: a study among employee–manager dyads. International Journal of Human Resource Management, 32(6), 1339–1367. https://doi.org/10.1080/09585192.2018.1522656

George, E., & Zakkariya, K. A. (2015). Job related stress and job satisfaction: A comparative study among bank employees. Journal of Management Development, 34(3), 316–329. https://doi.org/10.1108/JMD-07-2013-0097

Goodarzi, B., Shaker, K., Ghaniyoun, A., & Heidari, M. (2018). Assessment correlation of the organizational agility of human resources with the performance staff of Tehran Emergency Center. Journal of Education and Health Promotion, 7(January), 1–6.

Goswami, M., & Kumar, G. (2018). An investigation of agile manufacturing enablers in Indian automotive SMEs using structural equation model. Measuring Business Excellence, 22(3), 276–291. https://doi.org/10.1108/MBE-10-2017-0068

Guetterman, T., Fetters, M., & Creswell, J. (2015). Integrating quantitative and qualitative results in health science mixed methods research through joint displays. Annals of Family Medicine, 13(6), 554–561. https://doi.org/10.1370/afm.1865

Hair, J., Babin, B., & Krey, N. (2017). Covariance-Based Structural Equation Modeling in the Journal of Advertising: Review and Recommendations. Journal of Advertising, 46(1), 163–177.

Hair, J., Black, W., Babin, B., & Anderson, R. (2010a). Canonical correlation: A supplement to multivariate data analysis. In A Global Perspective (7th ed). Pearson Prentice Hall Publishing.

Hair, J., Black, W., Babin, B., & Anderson, R. (2010b). Multivariate Data Analysis: A Global Perspective. In Multivariate Data Analysis: A Global Perspective (Vol. 7th).

Hair, J., Gabriel, M., & Patel, V. (2016). AMOS covariance-based structural equation modeling (CB-SEM). Brazilian Journal of Marketing, 13(2), 12. https://doi.org/10.5585/remark.v13i2.2718

Hameed, L., Taher, M., & Hussein, A. (2022). The Impact of Job Satisfaction in Achieving Strategic Agility through the Mediating Role of Knowledge Sharing. Webology, 19(1), 807–831. https://doi.org/10.14704/web/v19i1/web19057

Hameed, Z., Khan, I., Islam, T., Sheikh, Z., & Naeem, R. (2020). Do green HRM practices influence employees’ environmental performance? International Journal of Manpower, 41(7), 19. https://doi.org/10.1108/IJM-08-2019-0407

Hanaysha, J. (2016). Examining the Effects of Employee Empowerment, Teamwork, and Employee Training on Organizational Commitment. Procedia - Social and Behavioral Sciences, 229, 298–306. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.sbspro.2016.07.140

Harsch, K., & Festing, M. (2020). Dynamic talent management capabilities and organizational agility—A qualitative exploration. Human Resource Management, 59(1), 43–61. https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.1002/hrm.21972

Hawajrah, & Al-Azab. (2019). The Mediating Effects of Dynamic Capabilities between Workforce Diversity and Strategic Agility in the United Nations Organizations Working in Jordan. Ijims, 2.

Heimerl, P., Haid, M., Benedikt, L., & Scholl, U. (2020). Factors Influencing Job Satisfaction in Hospitality Industry. SAGE Open, 10(4). https://doi.org/10.1177/2158244020982998

Hu, L., & Bentler, P. (1999). Cutoff criteria for fit indexes in covariance structure analysis: Conventional criteria versus new alternatives. Structural Equation Modeling: A Multidisciplinary Journal, 6(1), 1–55. https://doi.org/10.1080/10705519909540118

Igbaria, M., & Tan, M. (1997). The consequences of information technology acceptance on subsequent individual performance. Information and Management, 32(3), 113–121. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0378-7206(97)00006-2

Istiningdyah, R., & Gunawan, A. (2022). The Effect of Employee Empowerment and Job Satisfaction on Turnover Intention with Organizational Commmitment as Intervening in the Land Office in DKI Jakarta Province. BIRCI-Journal, 5(3), 20293–20304.

Jafari, R. (2016). Examining the Relationship between Organizational Agility and the Staff Job Satisfaction in Central Basement of Social Insurance Fund. Abstract of Economic, Finance and Management Outlook, 5, 1–2.

Jocelyne, S., & Kariuki, M. (2020). Human capital, employee empowerment and organization performance. International Academic Journal of Human …, 3(9), 319–332.

Joiner, B. (2019). Leadership Agility for Organizational Agility. Journal of Creating Value, 5(2), 139–149. https://doi.org/10.1177/2394964319868321

Kele, A. (2020). Employee Empowerment in Luxury Hotels in East Malaysia [The University of Waikato]. https://hdl.handle.net/10289/13690

Khan, Z., Rao-Nicholson, R., Akhtar, P., Tarba, S. Y., Ahammad, M. F., & Vorley, T. (2019). The role of HR practices in developing employee resilience: a case study from the Pakistani telecommunications sector. International Journal of Human Resource Management, 30(8), 1342–1369. https://doi.org/10.1080/09585192.2017.1316759

Khodabandeh, N., Mohammdi, N., Droudi, H., & Mansouri, A. (2018). Iranian journal of educational Sociology Designing a Human Resource Agility Model based on Grounded. 1(7), 163–179.

Kruja, D., & Oelfke, T. (2009). The Levels of Empowerment Impact on the Level of Employee Job Satisfaction. Academic Journal, 4(2), 92–93. https://www.researchgate.net/publication/297702444

Lai, H., Pitafi, A. H., Hasany, N., & Islam, T. (2021). Enhancing Employee Agility Through Information Technology Competency: An Empirical Study of China. SAGE Open, 11(2). https://doi.org/10.1177/21582440211006687

Lassala, C., Orero-Blat, M., & Ribeiro-Navarrete, S. (2021). The financial performance of listed companies in pursuit of the Sustainable Development Goals (SDG). Economic Research-Ekonomska Istrazivanja , 34(1), 427–449. https://doi.org/10.1080/1331677X.2021.1877167

Lassoued, K., Awad, A., & Guirat, R. Ben. (2020). The impact of managerial empowerment on problem solving and decision making skills: The case of Abu Dhabi University. Management Science Letters, 10(4), 769–780. https://doi.org/10.5267/j.msl.2019.10.020

Lee, H. W., Pak, J., Kim, S., & Li, L. Z. (2019). Effects of Human Resource Management Systems on Employee Proactivity and Group Innovation. Journal of Management, 45(2), 819–846. https://doi.org/10.1177/0149206316680029

McLachlan, C. (2022). Developing a framework for responsible downsizing through best fit: the importance of regulatory, procedural, communication and employment responsibilities. International Journal of Human Resource Management, 33(1), 16–44. https://doi.org/10.1080/09585192.2021.1958248

Mehralian, G., Sheikhi, S., Zatzick, C., & Babapour, J. (2022). The dynamic capability view in exploring the relationship between high-performance work systems and innovation performance. International Journal of Human Resource Management, 0(0), 1–30. https://doi.org/10.1080/09585192.2022.2138494

Menon, S., & Suresh, M. (2022). Assessment framework for workforce agility in higher education institutions. Higher Education, Skills and Work-Based Learning, 5. https://doi.org/10.1108/HESWBL-01-2022-0014

Mian, S. S., & Mian, M. S. (2017). Impact of High Performance Work Practices ( HPWPs ) on the Employee Agility. International Conference on Law, Business, Marketing and Education, 283–290.

Momeni, M., & Pourasadi, M. J. (2015). Investigation of the relationship between organizational agility and staff’s job satisfaction of Samen credit institution. Journal of Social Issues and Humanities, 3(1), 36–41.

Muduli, A. (2016). Exploring the facilitators and mediators of workforce agility: an empirical study. Management Research Review, 39(12), 1567–1586. https://doi.org/10.1108/MRR-10-2015-0236

Muduli, A. (2017). Workforce agility: Examining the role of organizational practices and psychological empowerment. Global Business and Organizational Excellence, 36(5), 46–56. https://doi.org/10.1002/joe.21800

Muduli, A., & Pandya, G. (2018). Psychological Empowerment and Workforce Agility. Psychological Studies, 63(3), 276–285. https://doi.org/10.1007/s12646-018-0456-8

Muhamedi, M., & Ariffin, M. (2017). Importance of Communication Channels between Managers and Employees in Management Communication. In The Social Sciences (Vol. 12, Issue 9, pp. 1541–1552).

Munteanu, A. I., Bibu, N., Nastase, M., Cristache, N., & Matis, C. (2020). Analysis of practices to increase the workforce agility and to develop a sustainable and competitive business. Sustainability (Switzerland), 12(9). https://doi.org/10.3390/SU12093545

Nabatchian, G., Moosavi, S. J., ..., & Safania, A. M. (2014). Reviewing the Relationship Between Organizational Agility & Job Satisfaction Staff in the Ministry of Youth Affairs and Sports Iran. International Journal of Modern Communication Technologies & Research, 2(2), 1–4.

Nafei, W. A. (2016). The Role of Organizational Agility in Reinforcing Job Engagement: A Study on Industrial Companies in Egypt. International Business Research, 9(2), 153. https://doi.org/10.5539/ibr.v9n2p153

Natapoera, M., & Mangundjaya, W. (2020). The Effect of Employee Involvement and Work Engagement on Workforce Agility. 1996. https://doi.org/10.4108/eai.30-10-2019.2299408

Nouri, B. A., & Mousavi, M. M. (2020). Effect of cooperative management on organizational agility with the mediating role of employee empowerment in public transportation sector. Cuadernos de Gestion, 20(2), 15–46. https://doi.org/10.5295/CDG.170873BA

Nwabueze, U., & Mileski, J. (2018). Achieving competitive advantage through effective communication in a global environment. Journal of International Studies, 11(1), 50–66. https://doi.org/10.14254/2071-8330.2018/11-1/4

O’Neill, T. A., & Salas, E. (2018). Creating high performance teamwork in organizations. Human Resource Management Review, 28(4), 325–331. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.hrmr.2017.09.001

Obi, C., Leggett, C., & Harris, H. (2020). National culture, employee empowerment and advanced manufacturing technology utilisation: A study of Nigeria and New Zealand. Journal of Management and Organization, 26(4), 460–482. https://doi.org/10.1017/jmo.2017.70

Ong, M. H. A., & Puteh, F. (2017). Quantitative data analysis: Choosing between SPSS, PLS and AMOS in social science research. International Interdisciplinary Journal of Scientific Research, 3(1), 14–25. www.iijsr.org

Otuya, W. (2019). … (1986): A case of employee job satisfaction as a mediator between ethical climate and performance among sugarcane transport SME’s in western Kenya. Journal of Economics and Sustainable Development, 2012, 108–118. https://doi.org/10.7176/JESD

Pereira, V., Budhwar, P., Temouri, Y., Malik, A., & Tarba, S. (2021). Investigating Investments in agility strategies in overcoming the global financial crisis - The case of Indian IT/BPO offshoring firms. Journal of International Management, 27(1), 1–39. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.intman.2020.100738

Pitafi, A. H., Kanwal, S., & Pitafi, A. (2019). Effect of enterprise social media and psychological safety on employee’s agility: Mediating role of communication quality. International Journal of Agile Systems and Management, 12(1), 1–26. https://doi.org/10.1504/IJASM.2019.098708

Poursadeghiyan, M., Abbasi, M., Mehri, A., Hami, M., Raei, M., & Ebrahim, M. H. (2016). Relationship between job stress and anxiety, depression and job satisfaction in nurses in Iran. Social Sciences (Pakistan), 11(9), 2349–2355.

Putri, D., & Mangundjaya, W. (2020). Examining the Effects of Organizational Learning on Workforce Agility through Psychological Empowerment. Open Journal for Psychological Research, 4(2), 85–94. https://doi.org/10.32591/coas.ojpr.0402.02085n

Qin, R., Nembhard, D. A., & Barnes, W. L. (2015). Workforce flexibility in operations management. Surveys in Operations Research and Management Science, 20(1), 19–33. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.sorms.2015.04.001

Rahardi, D., Nurbaiti, B., & Fauzi, A. (2022). the Effect of Job Satisfaction , Learning Agility and Resilience on Performance With Work Stress As an Intervening Variable in Sales Department Employees of Pt Bungasari Flour Mills Indonesia During the Covid-19. Dinasti International Journal of Management Science, 3(4), 715–724.

Rajhans, K. (2018). Effective Communication Management: A Key to Stakeholder Relationship Management in Project-Based OrganizaHoegl, M., Gemuenden, H. G., Hoegl, M., Gemuenden, H. G., Hoegl, M., & Georg, H. (2001). Empirical Evidence Linked references are available on JSTOR . IUP Journal of Soft Skills, 12(4), 47.

Razak, I., Azfarozza, A., Durani, Johar, S., & Ilyana, H. (2019). Effective Communication As a Tool for Achieving Organizational Goals. KnE Social Sciences, 3(14), 380. https://doi.org/10.18502/kss.v3i14.4324

Rousseau, V., & Aubé, C. (2020). Disentangling the relationship between empowering leader behaviors and adaptive performance in work teams. Group Processes and Intergroup Relations, 23(5), 761–777. https://doi.org/10.1177/1368430219854801

Saleem, M. S., Isha, A. S. N., Mohd Yusop, Y., Awan, M. I., & Naji, G. M. A. (2021). Agility and Safety Performance among Nurses: The Mediating Role of Mindful Organizing. Nursing Reports, 11(3), 666–679. https://doi.org/10.3390/nursrep11030063

Schlaegel, C., Engle, R., & Lang, G. (2022). The unique and common effects of emotional intelligence dimensions on job satisfaction and facets of job performance: an exploratory study in three countries. International Journal of Human Resource Management, 33(8), 1562–1605. https://doi.org/10.1080/09585192.2020.1811368

Sherehiy, B. (2008). Relationships between agility strategy, work organization and workforce agility. The University of Louisville, May, 121.

Sherehiy, B., & Karwowski, W. (2014). The relationship between work organization and workforce agility in small manufacturing enterprises. International Journal of Industrial Ergonomics, 44(3), 466–473. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ergon.2014.01.002

Sherehiy, B., Karwowski, W., & Layer, J. K. (2007). A review of enterprise agility: Concepts, frameworks, and attributes. International Journal of Industrial Ergonomics, 37(5), 445–460. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ergon.2007.01.007

Shiau, W., Sarstedt, M., & Hair, J. (2019). Internet research using partial least squares structural equation modeling (PLS-SEM). Internet Research, 29(3), 398–406. https://doi.org/10.1108/IntR-10-2018-0447

Sidhu, A., Bhalla, P., & Zafar, S. (2021). Mediating Effect and Review of its Statistical Measures.Empir. Econ. Lett, 20, 29-40.

Sofijanova, E., & Zabijakin, C. (2013). Employee Involvement and Organizational Performance: Evidence From the Manufacturing Sector in Republic of Macedonia. Trakia Journal of Sciences, 11, 31–36. http://www.uni-sz.bg

Sonal, J., Sangeeta, J., & Vivek, S. (2019). Empowering Leadership Behavior – An Empirical Study with Special Reference to Selected Service Sector in India. Advances in Management, 12(1), 54–58.

Suifan, T. (2019). the Effects of Work Environmental Factors on Job Satisfaction: the Mediating Role of Work Motivation. Business: Theory and Practice, 20(01). https://doi.org/10.3846/btp.2019.42

Sulaiman, N., & Muhamad, R. (2020). CSR and Employee Empowerment: Scale Development and Validation. … Journal of Business and Social …, 2011, 1–13.

Sumukadas, N., & Sawhney, R. (2004). Workforce agility through employee involvement. IIE Transactions (Institute of Industrial Engineers), 36(10), 1011–1021. https://doi.org/10.1080/07408170490500997

Sutherland, R., Bruin, G., & Crous, F. (2007). The relation between conscientiousness, empowerment and performance. SA Journal of Human Resource Management, 5(2), 62. https://doi.org/10.4102/sajhrm.v5i2.120

Syakur, A., Susilo, T. A. B., Wike, W., & Ahmadi, R. (2020). Sustainability of Communication, Organizational Culture, Cooperation, Trust and Leadership Style for Lecturer Commitments in Higher Education. Budapest International Research and Critics Institute (BIRCI-Journal): Humanities and Social Sciences, 3(2), 1325–1335. https://doi.org/10.33258/birci.v3i2.980

Thani, F., Mazari, E., Asadi, S., & Mashayekhikhi, M. (2022). The impact of self-development on the tendency toward organizational innovation in higher education institutions with the mediating role of human resource agility. Journal of Applied Research in Higher Education, 14(2), 852–873. https://doi.org/10.1108/JARHE-05-2020-0151

Top, M., Akdere, M., & Tarcan, M. (2015). Examining transformational leadership, job satisfaction, organizational commitment and organizational trust in Turkish hospitals: public servants versus private sector employees. In International Journal of Human Resource Management (Vol. 26, Issue 9, pp. 1259–1282). Taylor & Francis. https://doi.org/10.1080/09585192.2014.939987

Tseng, M.-L., Bui, T.-D., Lan, S., Lim, M. K., & Mashud, H. (2021). Smart product service system hierarchical model in banking industry under uncertainties. International Journal of Production Economics, 240, 108244. https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijpe.2021.108244

Ulrich, D., & Yeung, A. (2019). Agility: the new response to dynamic change. Strategic HR Review, 18(4), 161–167.

Varshney, D., & Varshney, N. K. (2020). Workforce agility and its links to emotional intelligence and workforce performance: A study of small entrepreneurial firms in India. Global Business and Organizational Excellence, 39(5), 35–45. https://doi.org/10.1002/joe.22012

Verplanken, B., & Roy, D. (2016). Empowering interventions to promote sustainable lifestyles: Testing the habit discontinuity hypothesis in a field experiment. Journal of Environmental Psychology, 45, 127–134. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jenvp.2015.11.008

Vrontis, D., Belas, J., Thrassou, A., Santoro, G., & Christofi, M. (2022). Strategic agility, openness and performance: a mixed method comparative analysis of firms operating in developed and emerging markets. In Review of Managerial Science (Issue 0123456789). Springer Berlin Heidelberg. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11846-022-00562-4

Weiss, D. J., Dawis, R., England, G., & Lofquist, L. (1967). Manual for the Minnesota Satisfaction Questionnaire. Manual for the Minnesota Satisfaction Survey, 125.

Yin, Y. (2020). What determines the adoption of employee empowerment practices by MNE subsidiaries in China?: An institutional perspective. Chinese Management Studies, 14(4), 871–894. https://doi.org/10.1108/CMS-09-2019-0340

Yıldız, I. G., & Şimşek, Ö. F. (2016). Different Pathways from Transformational Leadership to Job Satisfaction: The Competing Mediator Roles of Trust and Self-Efficacy. Nonprofit Management and Leadership, 27(1), 59–77. https://doi.org/10.1002/nml.21229

Yuest, & Sumantra. (2017). Empowerment On The Knowledge And Learning Organization For Community Development. Scientific Research Journal (SCIRJ), 5(9). Scientific Research Journal, 5(9).

Zhao, X., Lynch, J. G., & Chen, Q. (2010). Reconsidering Baron and Kenny: Myths and truths about mediation analysis. Journal of Consumer Research, 37(2), 197–206. https://doi.org/10.1086/651257