EXPLORING RESILIENCE AS A MEDIATOR BETWEEN CHARISMATIC LEADERSHIP AND AFFECTIVE COMMITMENT TO CHANGE

Objective: The purpose of this study is to measure the effects of charismatic leadership on change initiatives (affective commitment to change), mediated by resilience. Method: Data was collected using the Affective Commitment Inventory. Charismatic leadership scales (Conger & Kanungo, and Resilience inventory) using Structural Equation Modelling. This study surveyed 355 employees in the banking and insurance industry. Results Finding and Discussion: The results showed that charismatic leadership positively affected affective commitment to change directly and by resilience as a partial mediator. It is also demonstrated that the results added to the body of knowledge and theory concerning the function and adaptability of charismatic leaders in change initiatives and change management procedures. Research Implications: The results contribute to the organization in terms of developing the change agent with a style of charismatic leadership to develop an affective commitment to change. Originality/Value: The research offers about manage organizational change, especially to manage the strategic position of leaders as How to be a change agent. To create an affective commitment, change leaders must adopt the characteristics of charismatic leaders, including unconventional behavior, innovative and unique activities, and sensitivity to their followers.


INTRODUCTION
Every business, government agency, and private sector including banks and insurance companies must adapt to thrive and compete in the fast-paced world of today.However, previous studies and business practices have demonstrated that numerous planned organizational transformations have failed, with people's commitment to change being one of the main issues.Because it makes them feel unclear and uneasy about the future when they must deal with its adjustments, people frequently detest and fear organizational structure alterations.As a result, they are not amenable to change and affect how well organizational restructuring works.Therefore, all companies require a good program and change agents capable of motivating employees to take on board the changes they are planning.In the meantime, some people's traits such as effectiveness and resilience may be driving forces for organizational change according to previous studies in Luthans, 2015;Hodges, 2017).In addition, a recent study by Michaelis et al., 2009, andHouse in Pierce andNewstrom 2011, has shown the key drivers for organizational transformation and commitment to change are leaders, especially charismatic ones.
There is some previous research about leadership and affective commitment such as a study by Michaelis, Segmaier, and Sonntag (2009), which has shown that affective commitments to change are highly correlated with charismatic leadership.Additionally, research was done on the connection between transformational leadership and commitment to change (Rowold & Abrel-Vogel, 2014;Mangundjaya, 2018), and affective commitment to change (Herold et al., 2008;Mangundjaya, 2015).In this sense, charismatic and transformational leaders have a lot in common, which is have put their followers' growth and well-being first.However, there hasn't been much research done on how charismatic leadership affects affective commitment to reform.Do they affect the development of affective commitment directly or do they need a mediator, which dimensions of charismatic leadership play a significant role in affective commitment to change?
To fill gaps, about the role of leaders in people's willingness to make changes, this study is being carried out.Research is needed because leaders play a major role in the organization, especially during organizational changes.In this regard, House in Pierce and Newstrom (2011) illustrated that some dimensions of charismatic leadership are intended to influence the values, beliefs, or attitudes of the follower while simultaneously fostering a positive outlook for the future.Charismatic leaders also inspire their followers to go above and beyond to promote organizational advances and put in a lot of labor.Charismatic leadership by Conger and Kanungo (1998), has five dimensions of leadership behavior, namely: a) strategic vision, b) sensitivity to the environment, c) sensitivity to members' needs, d) personal risk, and e) unconventional behavior, which are assumed to have an impact on affective commitment to change, as these qualities of behavior typically encourage and motivate others to grow.These qualities are regarded to make charismatic leadership approaches more acceptable to their followers throughout organizational transformation, as followers are more driven to complete their jobs and feel better about their work (Dorfman et al., 1997;1998).
Nevertheless, prior studies have indicated a negative association between charismatic leadership and crises (Williams et al, 2009;Bligh et al., 2005).Meanwhile, resilience includes having the capacity to deal with difficulties and emergencies.Based on those conclusions and reasons, the goal of this study is to investigate the role of resilience as a mediator in charismatic leadership and an affective commitment to change.Thus, the purpose of the study is to examine resilience's function as a mediator between affective commitment to change and charismatic leadership, as well as the effects of charismatic leadership on affective commitment to change.

THEORITICAL FRAMEWORK
2.1 AFFECTIVE COMMITMENT TO CHANGE Herscovitch and Meyer (2002) developed the idea of commitment to change, which they describe as a state of mind that binds an individual to the actions necessary to successfully implement a change program.One of the dimensions of commitment to change is affective commitment, which is described as the willingness to support change because people believe it will benefit the organization.This dimension represents discretionary behavior, which is best predicted as useful behavior during organizational transformation.It has the greatest impact on an individual's positive attitude and behavior (Herscovitch and Meyer, 2002).

CHARISMATIC LEADERSHIP
Max Weber (1978) was a pioneer in charismatic leadership theory, who believed that people follow their leaders because of a sense of value and meaning.Weber (1978) developed three theories of legitimacy: traditional, charismatic, and legal-rational.Tradition emphasizes past actions, which give meaning to the present situation.Prestige is personal and emphasizes the rights and power of a particular individual.Legal justification focuses on the best ways to achieve certain goals while behaving consistently with interests.
Charismatic leadership is defined as the ability to behave and act in a way that makes a person feel that they and their mission are extraordinary, organizational innovators who understand the need for change and can communicate the need for that change according to a vision of a better world.future (Conger and Kanungo, 1994).Highly charismatic leadership traits include vision and expression, environmental awareness, unconventional conduct, taking personal risks, and being sensitive to member needs (Conger & Kanungo, 1994).Additionally, according to Conger and Kanungo (1994, 1997, 1998), charismatic leadership occurs in five different ways: through strategic vision and communication; environmental sensitivity; personal risks; members' desire for sensitivity; and abnormal conduct.

RESILIENCE
According to Siebert (2005), resilience is the capacity of an individual to overcome discouragement in the face of adversity.Resilient people may also make decisions under pressure and turn setbacks into opportunities for success (Reivich and Shatte, 2002).This means that those who are resilient can adjust to organizational change more effectively (Frank Dong et al., 2013;Luthans et al., 2015;Maddi and Khoshaba, 2005).Additionally, Dong et al. (2013) created a resilience measurement consisting of four components: goal orientation, b) social and familial support, c) emotional support, and d) flexibility.

THE RELATIONSHIP BETWEEN CHARISMATIC LEADERSHIP, RESILIENCE, AND AFFECTIVE COMMITMENT TO CHANGE
Charismatic leadership focuses on changing the values, beliefs, and attitudes of followers to stimulate an ideal vision of the future (Conger and Kanungo, 1994), which includes images of the organization when the transition is made.With these characteristics, charismatic leaders who have high trust in their followers, as well as those who have high trust in their leaders, are more likely to follow the leader's goals.and believe they can contribute to achieving the organization's and leader's goals.(House in Pierce and Newstrom, 2011).
Adhering to organizational reform is a component of this kind of obedience.According to Kahtani's (2013) article, an engaging leader has an impact on followers' dedication to organizational change.Furthermore, Rowden (2000) discovered a strong and favorable correlation between organizational commitment and charismatic leadership.Mangundjaya (2013) also discovered a strong and favorable correlation between affective commitment and organizational commitment to change.Affective commitment to change is favorably and strongly connected with charismatic leadership.
Further, according to research by Michaelis, Segmaier, and Sonntag (2009), charismatic leadership and affective commitment to change were highly and favorably correlated.According to House in Pierce & Newstrom (2011), charismatic leaders work to improve the attitudes, values, and beliefs of those they lead to build a better future.Research demonstrates that charismatic leadership serves as an analyst of subordinates' positive work attitudes and improves organizational arrangements.Results indicate that charismatic leadership has a positive impact on organizational performance; 78% of results demonstrate that charismatic leadership helps resolve crises by clearly defining quality goals and suggesting new, better ideas (Ansar et al., 2016).
In the meantime, developing and idealizing a vision of the future is one of the traits of charismatic leadership, as well as influencing followers' attitudes, values, and beliefs (House in Pierce and Newstrom 2011).Yukl (2013) asserts that the effects of these changes will make it possible for employees to take part in and contribute to organizational change.Individuals who feel empowered grow resilient in the face of organizational change.Based on this, we suggest the following hypothesis:

Hypothesis 2: Charismatic leadership as the predictor of resilience
Organizational transformation is characterized by uncertainty, instability, and ambiguity.Resilience is therefore one of the most crucial traits for handling change.People who possess resilience are better able to adjust to and handle all kinds of change, as well as sustain greater performance levels, enhance well-being, and deal with fluctuating emotions.
According to Hodges (2017), resilience also helps people adjust to a variety of changes without feeling overwhelmed.This kind of resilience makes it possible for people to manage organizational change more skillfully and adaptably (Maddi and Khoshaba, 2005;Dong et al., 2013).According to Langvardt. (2007), commitment to change is positively impacted by resilience.
Concurrently, genuine dedication to alteration is regarded as an expression of such dedication.Consequently, the capacity to foresee an affective commitment to change might be used to characterize resilience.Mangundjaya (2021)

METHOD
This study uses quantitative research methods.A questionnaire was used to collect data.
The Likert scale has 5 options: strongly disagree, disagree, neutral, agree, and completely agree.
The questionnaire has been closed.The questionnaire was distributed to 500 users and 355 forms were accurately filled out and returned.

SAMPLING AND RESPONDENTS
After controlling for data in the questionnaire, the respondents worked at two banking and insurance companies in Jakarta, Indonesia.They fulfilled the requirements for permanent employees, had been with the company for at least two years, and had seen organizational changes during their time there.Four companies made the transition while 500 surveys were According to respondent profiles, 61.69% of the sample is male, 62.54% have a bachelor's degree, 46.48% are aged 44 to 56, 42.53% have worked for more than 20 years, and 41.41% work in a staff job.

DATA COLLECTION TOOLS
The research method used in this study is quantitative.To get the data, a questionnaire was employed.There are five items on the Likert scale: strongly disagree, disagree, agree, and Affective commitment to change was evaluated using the six-item of Herscovitch and Meyer (2002) commitment to change inventory.The scale was translated into Bahasa Indonesia and modified into six scales ranging from 1 (one) to 6. (six).Change Commitment Inventory was utilized in various research by Mangundjaya (2015Mangundjaya ( , 2015Mangundjaya ( , 2018,),), with a Cronbach Alfa score of 0.778, and a good confirmatory factor analysis was produced.The second scale is charismatic leadership by Conger and Kongo (The C-K scale) was translated and adapted into Bahasa Indonesia, with six scales (1-6), consisting of five dimensions, and 30 items, with a Cronbach Alfa score of 0.979.The third scale to measure resilience used the modified CD-RISC (Dong et al., 2013) to assess resilience.It contains four dimensions, and 32 items, with a Cronbach's Alfa score of 0.977.The scale is also broken into six numbered scales from 1 to 6, which are translated into Bahasa Indonesia.

METHOD OF ANALYSIS
Demographic data were analyzed using descriptive analysis and the model was tested using Structural Equation Modelling (SEM) analysis to conduct the path analysis between variables.

DESCRIPTIVE ANALYSIS
It was discovered that the responders had high scores across the board, with values greater than 4 (four)on a scale of 1 (one) to 6 (six).This shows that respondents' overall higherthan-average scores for affective commitment to change, charismatic leadership, and resilience.

Table 1
Mean, SD, for the three variables Additionally, descriptive analysis showed that both men and women scored relatively high on affective commitment to change and that the older a person was, the higher their affective commitment to change.Meanwhile, in terms of resilience, it was found that the higher an employee's position, the higher their level of resilience.

INTER-CORRELATION ANALYSIS
Correlation analysis is used to determine the correlation between variables.Table 1 presents descriptive statistics, standard deviations, and correlations among study variables.Based on the results, it was found that all variables were correlated, with the largest correlation found between resilience and affective commitment to change.

RESULTS OF SEM
The following table shows the results of SEM The followings figure shows the results of this study analyzed by SEM.

Figure 1
The results of this study analyzed by SEM The findings reveal that affective commitment to change is considerably influenced by charismatic leadership (t-value 2.26 > 1.96), implying that charismatic leadership is a predictor of affective commitment to change.Thus, the first hypothesis is accepted.In this regard, when a leader is exposed to charisma and excellence, employees will show a stronger affective commitment to change.Further, the results revealed that charismatic leadership has a significant impact on resilience (t-value 2.14 > 1.96), indicating that charismatic leadership predicts resilience.It also demonstrates how charismatic leaders inspire their followers to develop greater resilience.This discovery led to the acceptance of hypothesis 2 (two).
The findings reveal that affective commitment to change is considerably favorably impacted by resilience (t-value 6.93 > 1.96), implying that persons with high resilience scores would also have a strong affective commitment to change.These findings provided support for hypothesis 3 (three).The findings also suggest that affective commitment to change and charismatic leadership may be mediated by resilience.Resilience, however, served as a partial mediator and Hypothesis 4 (four) was accepted since charismatic leadership had a direct and significant unmediated good influence on emotional engagement (0.11) and higher scores on resilience (0.07).
Researchers have examined the aspects of charismatic leadership to identify weaknesses.Which element affects affective commitment to change the most?They discovered that the charismatic leadership component gave the highest score (0.97) to informal leadership conduct, with sensitivity to member requirements expected in score (0.94).This information leads to the conclusion that people become emotionally committed to changing the leader because of their dysfunctional behavior.When compared to other resilience traits, goal orientation (0.77) and flexibility to change earned the highest ratings in the resilience dimensions.

DISCUSSION
Testing a model of how charismatic leadership affects affective commitment to change through resilience-more precisely, how charismatic leadership and resilience elements relate to emotional engagement about change-was the aim of this study.The findings demonstrate the significant positive impact that charismatic leadership has on affective commitment to change.According to Conger and Kanungo (1998), it implies that developing a realistic 12 commitment to change requires ad hoc behavior (such as a personal approach) and sensitivity to members' needs.Individuals will gladly obey those whom they perceive to be paying attention to them.The findings of Michaelis, Segmaier, and Sonntag (2009), who discovered a strong and positive relationship between charismatic leadership and affective commitment to change, are supported by these studies.The results further support Langvardt's (2007) finding that resilience and commitment to change are positively related to each other.
The second finding shows that resilience is significantly enhanced by charismatic leadership.To accomplish their goals and objectives, charismatic leaders persuade their supporters to be adaptable to changes in their surroundings.This result corroborates that of Conger, Kanungo, and Menon (2000), who discovered that followers of charismatic leaders experienced high levels of pleasure and trust with them, strengthening their sense of group identity and empowerment and promoting resilience.
The results also show that the element of unorthodox behavior of charismatic leaders received the highest score compared to other aspects, followed by sensitivity to members' requests.It can be concluded that a charismatic leader who pays attention to his subordinates/members by engaging in unique behaviors, such as daring to question the status quo and empowering his subordinates to perform beyond normal expectations, will transform his subordinates by sacrificing the individual for the collective.care and participating in the leader's vision and mission, such as honesty, fairness, and know-how.They also structured their vision so that it makes sense.Charismatic leaders frequently include powerful elements in their messages to increase their emotional appeal.Framing, metaphor, comparison, and biography are examples of strategies used to elicit emotional responses from followers.Using engaging content can also improve how followers perceive themselves by boosting their self-esteem.
Regarding resilience, the results showed that goal orientation and flexibility to change had the highest scores among other dimensions.To be resilient, people must be goal-oriented, know where they want to go and what kind of goals they want to achieve, and have the flexibility to modify and adapt to changing environments because this is the fundamentals of resilience.The third and fourth findings revealed that resilience predicts affective commitment and plays a partial mediating role in the association between charismatic leadership and affective commitment to change.The results also showed that the goal orientation component received the highest score for the resilience dimension.This situation explains why people with a strong goal orientation are more resilient.
This empirical investigation has the following limitations: First, social desirability bias was found in this study, which used questionnaires to collect all the data.This strategy has the potential to become standard (Podsakoff et al. 2003).It is recommended that future study be 6 CONCLUSION Gilley and Gilley (2009) and Gilley et al. (2008) both assert that leaders have a major influence on whether organizational reform is successful or unsuccessful.According to Levy (2010), charismatic leaders are regarded as extraordinary change agents within organizations.
In this sense, charismatic leadership influences the behavior of followers by emphasizing their beliefs and identities.Therefore, self-awareness theory can easily explain why transformational leadership has a favorable relationship with its followers' internalization of corporate principles.Leadership that emphasizes collective identity has a favorable impact on followers' attachment to a unit (Dvir et al., 2002).
Furthermore, charismatic leadership is positively related to organizational effectiveness.
Employees identify leaders who are charismatic, conflict-free, and high-functioning, helping to improve organizational effectiveness.Charismatic leaders create effective teams.The results indicate that charismatic leaders perceive their strengths and abilities more effectively, which leads to higher organizational performance and production.Charismatic leaders encourage employees to commit to the organization's goals and success.Previous research indicates that charismatic CEOs and employee motivation have a favorable relationship, leading to greater organizational success.
In this sense, charismatic leaders inspire and encourage their followers to commit to organizational goals.Previous research has also shown that charismatic leadership evaluates subordinates' positive work attitudes and strengthens organizational performance more effectively and successfully.Additionally, charismatic leaders more effectively identify their Mangundjaya (2021)  discovered that charismatic leadership increased affective commitment to change.This study will examine the elements that go into creating a charismatic leadership Exploring Resilience as a Mediator Between Charismatic Leadership and Affective Commitment to Change ___________________________________________________________________________ Rev. Gest.Soc.Ambient.| Miami | v.18.n.1 | p.1-16 | e06802 | 2024.6 style considering the findings.Four characteristics of charismatic leadership are: a) clear and strategic vision; b) sensitivity to members' needs and the environment; c) taking personal risks; and d) unusual behavior.Considering this, the following theory is presented: Hypothesis 1: Charismatic leadership as a predictor of affective Commitment to change.
examined resilience and affective commitment to change, building on earlier studies, and discovered that resilience predicted affective commitment to change.Regarding this, the following concept is presented: Hypothesis 3: Resilience as the predictor of affective Commitment to change.Exploring Resilience as a Mediator Between Charismatic Leadership and Affective Commitment to Change ___________________________________________________________________________ Rev. Gest.Soc.Ambient.| Miami | v.18.n.1 | p.1-16 | e06802 | 2024.7 Hypothesis 4: Resilience works as a mediator between charismatic leadership.
completed by researchers.Every survey comprised three components and commenced with an introduction detailing our research objectives and guaranteeing the privacy of study participants.Large and well-known commercial and public banking and insurance corporations are among the covered entities in Indonesia and have experienced organizational changes in organizational structure, human resource policy, and strategic management.355 employees in total replied: comprising 90 from private Bank A, 85 from public Bank B, 88 from private insurance company Insurance A, and 92 from Insurance B. The following are traits of the responders.A) Full-time employees; B) Having served the company for a minimum of two years; C) Having completed high school; and D) An organizational transition.HR personnel compiles a list of potential responders based on these standards, from which a convenience sample is taken.
___________________________________________________________________________ Rev. Gest.Soc.Ambient.| Miami | v.18.n.1 | p.1-16 | e06802 | 2024.8 highly agree.The survey is no longer available.200 users each received a questionnaire; 170 of the forms were correctly completed and returned.Three different kinds of questions were used in this study: 1) Charismatic leadership; 2) affective commitment to change; and 3) resilience.
a Mediator Between Charismatic Leadership and Affective Commitment to Change ___________________________________________________________________________ Rev. Gest.Soc.Ambient.| Miami | v.18.n.1 | p.1-16 | e06802 | carried out at various times or with different data collection devices.Second, the results may differ due to the differing organizational cultures of the two banks and insurance businesses from which the sample was taken.Future studies could be conducted in different types of organizations, with different organizational modifications, and in various places inside Indonesia.Third, this study focuses solely on charismatic leadership; other leadership styles, such as transformative leadership, servant leadership, and transformational leadership, may have different outcomes.Future research should consider a range of characteristics and leadership styles.

Table 2
Mean, SD, Correlation, and reliability between variables