Introduction

The family planning program counseling activities in the millennial era have faced a very complex challenge so that revitalization and innovation in delivering the programs are necessarily required. Thus, it is important to have field workers/counselors who are reliable and professional and have a high level job satisfaction to assist acceptors and prospective family planning acceptors. Job satisfaction is an important factor for the development of work character. PKB or Penyuluh Keluarga Berencana (Family Planning Officer) which has a high level job satisfaction will have a high determination in improving public services and enforcing a clean bureaucracy. This high level job satisfaction can have a significant impact on improving the system and culture of service for the community. A high job satisfaction is also able to provide an example for other family planning field workers so that it can be a good reference for the development of the work character of human resources.

From the results of the Focus Group Discussion (FGD) with Family Planning Field Workers conducted by the Center for Education and Training at the Garut KKB Education and Training Center, several problems were found. Among others are related to job satisfaction where some PKB wished to move functional positions and agencies, the low involvement of PKB in work management operationalization, low self-efficacy in carrying out main tasks and functions, and (FGD PKB Pusdiklat, 2020). Besides, the other problems related to PKB's skills in mastering technology, information, and communication (ICT) also appear to be less than optimal. This has triggered the PKB's lack of confidence in carrying out its main duties and functions.

Job satisfaction is one of the factors that must be considered in an effort to increase employee productivity. Job satisfaction is closely related to the attitude of employees towards their own work, work situations, cooperation between leaders and employees. A person with a high level of job satisfaction shows a positive attitude towards the job; on the other hand, someone who is dissatisfied with his job shows a negative attitude towards the job.

According to Colquitt, Lepine & Wesson (2017) job satisfaction is a pleasurable emotional state resulting from the appraisal of one’s job or job experiences. It represents how you feel about your job and what you think about your job. Employees with high job satisfaction experience positive feelings when they think about their duties or take part in task activities.

In a study conducted by Lai & Chen (2012), it was found that employees with high self-efficacy have superior abilities and performance, due to increased job satisfaction obtained from their work. Law & Guo's research (2016) found that self-efficacy has a significant positive relationship with job satisfaction and research by Canrinus, Helms-Lorenz, Beijaard, Buitink & Hofman (2012) who found that classroom teacher self-efficacy has a significant relationship with job satisfaction

According to Abdallah, Obeidat, Aqqad, Al Janini & Dahiyat (2017) who found that job satisfaction is a positive and significant mediator in the relationship between job involvements. Lambert, Qureshi, Frank, Klahm & Smith (2017) state that job involvement and job satisfaction are associated with lower levels of the three burnout dimensions (emotional exhaustion, depersonalization, and reduced sense of accomplishment).

The description above explains the effect of self-efficacy, job involvement, and job satisfaction. While self-efficacy also has an influence on job involvement, seeing the relationship between these two things, it can be questioned what kind of model can be formed in the 3 variables, to explain the effect on job satisfaction.

Literature Review

Job Satisfaction

Kinicki & Williams (2010), job satisfaction is the extent to which you feel positive or negative about various aspects of your work. Their overall satisfaction depends on how they feel about several components such as work, pay, promotions, coworkers and supervision. The view of Greenberg (2010) regarding job satisfaction is job satisfaction-known as feelings of satisfaction, reflecting attitudes toward their jobs. Job satisfaction plays an important role in organizations; it makes sense to identify the factors that contribute to job satisfaction. These included things such as chances for promotion, opportunities for personal growth, recognition, responsibility, and achievement. Gibson, et al., (2012) explained that job satisfaction is an attitude that individuals have about their jobs. It results from their perception of their jobs, based on factors of the work environment workgroup affiliation, working conditions, and fringe benefit.

Based on the analysis of the concepts mentioned before, it can be synthesized that what is meant by job satisfaction is a psychological aspect that reflects an individual’s positive or negative feeling towards one’s job, having indicators: (1) pleasant work, (2) leader support; (3) cooperative colleagues, (4) promotional opportunities; and (5) adequate income

Self-Efficacy

According to Bandura (Stajkovic & Luthans, 1998), self-efficacy is defined as a personal judgment of how well one can execute courses of action required to deal with prospective situations. Self-assessment of their ability to carry out their duties and job responsibilities can be called self-efficacy. Kinicki & Williams (2011), self-efficacy is belief in one's personal ability to do a task and it's about their personal belief that they have what it takes to succeed. Self-efficacy is a person's confidence to be able to do a job successfully.

As for aspects of self-efficacy or factors that can affect self-efficacy, there are also aspects or dimensions contained in self-efficacy, namely: magnitude (level) strength, and generality. These dimensions were developed by Bandura to measure perceptions of self-efficacy as part of a micro analytic procedure to assess magnitude, generality, and strength in all activities and contexts. Based on the description above, it can be synthesized that self-efficacy is a person's belief in his ability to carry out and regulate the actions needed to achieve the desired goal, with indicators: (1) confidence in completing varied work, (2) confidence in one's abilities facing pressure, (3) strong motivation in doing tasks, and (4) diligently completing the work.

Job Involvement

Kinicki & Fugate (2012) defined job involvement is a component of an employee engagement, represent the extent to which an individual is personally involved with his or her work role. Schermerhorn (2013) stated that job involvement is the extent to which an individual feels dedicated to a job. Having stated by Schermerhorn (2013), someone with high job involvement psychologically identifies with her or his job, and, for example, would be expected to work beyond expectation to complete a special project.

As what has been stated by Brown dan Leigh (1996) in Singh & Gupta (2014), job involvement is related to both the personal characteristics such as age, education, sex, tenure, need strength, level of control and values, and job characteristics such as task autonomy, task significance, task identity, skill variety, and feedback and supervisory behaviors, etc.

Based on the aforementioned description, it can be synthesized that job involvement is the level of participation of employees identified through their work, actively participating in work and trying to show good performance as something which deserves to be achieved at work, with indicators: (1) involvement; (2) proactive; (3) dedicated; and (4) consistent.

Methods

Participants and Procedures

This research was conducted by employing a quantitative approach by survey method. This very method fits to assess either major or minor population by selecting sample taken from the population to define incidence, distribution, and inter-relation between sociological and psychological variables (Klinger, 2004).

The impacts among the variables were assessed by employing the path analysis technique. This path analysis technique in the research was constructive to examine cause relation between variables or direct impacts of a set of independent variables to dependent variables. There were three variables, namely self-efficacy variable (X1), job involvement (X2) as an exogenous variable along with its endogenous variable, job satisfaction (Y)

The population of the research was Family Planning field workers in West Java Province as many as 1.214 agents. In determining the size of the sample in research, it was conducted through calculations that can be implemented using the Slovin formula; the samples taken were set at 301 Family Planning field workers as research respondents representing all districts and cities in West Java Province. Sampling in the field was randomized based on existing Family Planning extension agent names in West Java Province and a total of 301 selected extension agent names were taken. The sampling instrument trial was taken from the field workers who were not taken as the research sample. Data processing was employed by SPSS version 22.0

Measures

Respondents were presented with a Likert scale questionnaire. They were asked to rate their level of approval or disagreement with statements about self-efficacy (X1), job involvement (X2), and job satisfaction (Y). Job satisfaction is a psychological aspect that reflects an individual's positive or negative feeling towards one’s job, the indicators are as follows: (1) pleasant work, (2) leader support; (3) cooperative colleagues, (4) promotional opportunities; and (5) adequate income. It is measured by employing 5 (five) alternative answer items using a Likert scale model in the form of positive and negative statements, namely: (1) Always; (2) Often; (3) Sometimes; (4) Rarely; and (5) Never.

Self-efficacy is a person's belief in his ability to carry out and organize the actions needed to achieve the desired goal, with indicators: (1) confidence in completing a variety of work, (2) confidence in one's ability to face pressure, (3) strong motivation in doing assignments, and (4) diligently completing the work. Self-efficacy is measured by using 5 (five) alternative answer items that use the Likert scale model in the form of statements that are positive and negative. Positive and negative statements, namely: (1) Always; (2) Often; (3) Sometimes; (4) Rarely; and (5) Never.

Job involvement is the level of employee participation identified through their work, actively participating in work and trying to show good performance as something that deserves to be achieved at work, with indicators: (1) involvement; (2) proactive; (3) dedicated; and (4) consistent. Job involvement is measured with 5 (five) items of alternative answers using the Likert scale model in the form of statements that are positive and negative. Positive and negative statements, namely: (1) Always; (2) Often; (3) Sometimes; (4) Rarely; and (5) Never show in Figure 1.

Results and Discussion

Regression analysis was conducted to estimate the relationship between variables, while correlation analysis was conducted to measure the strength of the relationship between variables. The first stage of hypotheses testing, which is implemented using a set of measurement data consisting of pairs of exogenous and endogenous variables, reveals the effect of exogenous variables on endogenous variables. This relationship is presented in the regression equation model. The first requirement in path analysis is that the research sample must derive from a normally distributed population. The estimated normality error test can be analyzed using the Lilliefors test, as shown in Table 1.

Table 1 The Results of Normality Testing
No	Error Estimation	Lcount	Ltable	Normality Testing Result
1	Y on X1	0,043	0,051	Normal Distribution
2	Y on  X2	0,032	0,051	Normal Distribution
3	X2 on  X1	0,049	0,051	Normal Distribution

The results of the calculation of the gallant estimation normality test based on Table 1 can be explained as follows:

Normality Testing of Self-efficacy Score Data on Job satisfaction

The result of normality testing for gallant estimation of Job satisfaction upon Self-efficacy is L count=0,043 <L table=0.051 at α=0.05. The test results indicate that the data is normally distributed and the requirements of the analysis can be met, it can be concluded that self-efficacy on Job satisfaction derives from a normally distributed population.

Normality Testing of Job involvement Score Data on Job satisfaction

The results of the calculation for the normality test of the estimation of job satisfaction for job involvement can be. L count=0,032 <L table=0.051 at α=0.05. The test results indicate that the data is normally distributed and the requirements of the analysis can be met, it can be concluded that the self-efficacy of job involvement comes from a normally distributed population

Normality Testing of Self-efficacy Score Data on Job involvement

The result of normality testing for gallant estimation of job involvement upon self-efficacy is L count 0,049 <L table=0,051 at α=0.05. The test results indicate that the data is normally distributed and the requirements of the analysis can be met, it can be concluded that Self-efficacy on Job involvement derives from a normally distributed population.

The second requirement is that the regression equation model must be tested for its significance and linearity using the F-test in the ANOVA table before concluding hypotheses testing. The criteria for testing significance and linearity are as follows: (1) Significant regression: F count ≥ F table on the regression line; and (2) linear regression: F count<F table. Correlational analysis was conducted to review the significance of the relationship between exogenous and endogenous variables. The results of the correlation test of significance for simple regression and linear regression are presented in Table 2.

Table 2 Simple Regression Significance Test Results and Regression Linearity Tests
Reg	Equality	Significance Test		Linearity Test		Conclusion
		F count	F table	Fcount	F table
			α=0.05		α=0.05
Y on X1	Y=31,083+0,817 X1	521,042	3,872ns	1,237	1,405**	Very significant/ Linear regression
Y on X2	Y=28,319+0,787 X2	522,862	3,872 ns	1,226	1,392**	Very significant/ Linear regression
X2 on X1	x^2=23,502+0,905 X1	861,641	3,872 ns	1,142	1,405**	Very significant/ Linear regression

The results of the significance and linearity tests from Table 2 show the following:

The significant impact of self-efficacy on job satisfaction is F count 521.042, while F table at error level α=0.05 is 3.872. With the value of F count> F table, it can be concluded that the regression equation for self-efficacy on job satisfaction is significant. Furthermore, from the regression linearity test, it is known that F count is 1.237 and F table at an error level of α=0.05 is 1.405. With the value of F count <F table, it can be concluded that the regression equation for self-efficacy on job satisfaction is linear.

The significant impact of job involvement on job satisfaction is F count 522.862, while F table at the error level α=0.05 was 3.872. With the value of F count>F table, it can be concluded that the regression equation for Job involvement on job satisfaction is significant. Furthermore, from the regression linearity test, it is known that F count is 1.226 and F table at an error level of α=0.05 is 1.392. With the value of F count<F table, it can be concluded that the regression equation for job involvement on job satisfaction is linear.

The significant impact of self-efficacy on Job involvement is F count 861.641, while F table at the error level α=0.05 was 3.872. With the value of F count>F table, it can be concluded that the regression equation for self-efficacy on job involvement is significant. Furthermore, from the regression linearity test, it is known that F count is 1.142 and F table at an error level of α=0.05 is 1.405. With the value of F count<F table, it can be concluded that the regression equation for self-efficacy on job involvement is linear.

The correlation coefficient shows the closeness of the relationship between variables. This correlation coefficient is then used as a basis for calculating or analyzing the direct impact of exogenous variables on endogenous variables on the path structure in the model. The correlation coefficients of the regression equation are presented in Table 3.

Table 3 Coefficient Correlations
Regressions	tvalue	ttabel	Coefficient Correlation
X1 towards Y	22,826	1,649	0,797
X2 towards Y	23,513	1,649	0,806
X1 towards X2	29,354	1,649	0,862

The results of the path analysis, where the first sub-structural model confirms that self-efficacy, job involvement have an impact on the job satisfaction of field workers family planning in West Java Province are presented in Table 4.

Table 4 Path Coefficient of Structure 1
Model		Unstandardized Coefficients		Standardized Coefficients	t	Sig.
		B	Std. Error	Beta
1	(Constant)	20.500	5.151		3.980	0.000
	X1	0.410	0.065	0.400	6.293	0.000
	X2	0.450	0.062	0.461	7.259	0.000

The second sub-structural model analysis confirms that self-efficacy has an impact on job involvement, which is presented in Table 5.

Table 5 Path Coefficient of Structure 2
Model		Unstandardized Coefficients		Standardized Coefficients	t	Sig.
		B	Std. Error	Beta
1	(Constant)	23.502	4.606		5.102	0.000
	X1	0.905	0.031	0.862	29.354	0.000

Structurally, the overall path diagram for each sub-structure can be seen in the figure below, it is obtained e2 of 25.8% which states the level of influence of other variables on job satisfaction besides job involvement. The figure below also explains that there is e1 of 31.0% which states the level of influence of other variables on job satisfaction variables, apart from self-efficacy and job involvement.

The Impact of Self-efficacy on Job satisfaction

Table 3 shows the correlation coefficient of Self-efficacy on Job satisfaction is 0.797. Table 4 shows the path coefficient of self-efficacy on job satisfaction (py1) is 0.400, and t count=6.293>t table=1.649 (α=0.05). Thus, H0 is rejected and H1 is accepted. The path coefficient (py1) significantly indicates that Self-efficacy has a direct impact on Job satisfaction.

According to Canrinus, Helms-Lorenz, Beijaard, Buitink & Hofman (2012) who found that classroom teacher self-efficacy has a significant relationship with job satisfaction with fellow teachers. In research conducted by Lai & Chen (2012), it was found that employees with high self-efficacy have superior abilities and performance, due to increased job satisfaction obtained from their jobs. Law & Guo's research (2016) found that self-efficacy has a significant positive relationship with job satisfaction.

The Impact of Job involvement on Job satisfaction

Table 3 shows the correlation coefficient of job involvement on job satisfaction is 0.806. Table 4 shows the path coefficient of job involvement towards job satisfaction (py2) is 0.461, and t value=7.259>t table=1.649 (α=0.05). Thus, Ho is rejected and H1 is accepted. Path coefficient (py2) significantly indicates that job involvement has a direct effect on job satisfaction.

In the research of Zopiatis, Constanti & Theocharous (2014) it is concluded that there is a positive relationship between job involvement and intrinsic job satisfaction, there is no significant relationship, yet there is a positive relationship between job involvement and extrinsic job satisfaction. Whereas Lambert, Qureshi, Hogan, Klahm, Smith & Frank (2015) showed that job stress, job involvement, job satisfaction, affective commitment, and continuance commitment have an impact on fatigue or the desire to quit work among Indian officers. Moreover, Deepak (2016) stated that job involvement have a positive relationship and an explanatory power for job satisfaction. Family planning field workers should have high job involvement since it has a positive direct impact on job satisfaction. Family Planning field workers that are actively involved in their work drive job satisfaction. Based on the description aforementioned, it is suspected that high job involvement has a direct impact on the Family Planning field workers’ job satisfaction.

The Impact of Self-Efficacy on Job Involvement

Table 3 shows the correlation coefficient of self-efficacy on job involvement is 0.862. Table 4 shows the path coefficient of self-efficacy on job involvement (p21) is 0.862, and t count =29,354>ttable=1.649 (α=0.05). Thus, H0 is rejected and H1 is accepted. The path coefficient (py3) significantly indicates that self-efficacy has a direct impact on job involvement.

Hui-Ling Yang, Yu-Hsiu Kao & Yi-Ching Huang (2006) in their research found that Self-efficacy and job involvement are significantly positively correlated at clinical nursing teachers at 19 public and private institutes of technology and junior colleges in Taiwan. Oyewumi Adebomi, Ibitoye, Hannah Olufunke Sanni & Oluyemisi (2012) stated there was a positive significant relationship between self-efficacy and job satisfaction of special education teachers Adliah & Juwita (2018). The positive, direct, significant effect of job involvement on job satisfaction of Production Department PT. Dok dan Perkapalan Surabaya (Persero). Based on the calculations, empirical verification, and analysis aforementioned, it is found that Self-efficacy has a direct impact on Job involvement.

Conclusion

The findings of this study concluded that there is a relationship between the two variables, namely self-efficacy, job involvement, and job satisfaction of KB BKKBN Extension in West Java Province, with job involvement giving the most significant contribution. The impact related to the level of job satisfaction. Family planning instructors have a high level of by job satisfaction showing pleasant work, leader support; cooperative colleagues, promotional opportunities; and adequate income. Job involvement has an important role in increasing job satisfaction, with indicators of being involved in activities, proactive, dedicated, consistent. The higher the job involvement of the family field workers, the higher the job satisfaction. Job involvement in various activities such as participating in education and training activities, planning outreach, creating learning media, extension media, conducting family planning counseling, evaluating and monitoring family planning field workers makes the job satisfaction within the workers even higher. Besides, self-efficacy also affects directly the increase of job satisfaction, especially indicators of confidence in one's ability to face pressure, the higher the self-efficacy of family planning instructors, the higher the job satisfaction.

Furthermore, the findings of other researches show that self-efficacy affects Job involvement. The higher self-efficacy of family planning field workers in various activities will increase family planning extension agents in the field. To further optimize the potential of family planning field workers in West Java Province, it is necessary to conduct structured and directed soft skills and hard skills training, starting from the need for sovereignty analysis, curriculum development, variations in learning resources and learning media as well as the use of the latest technology, information, communication as well as the role of leadership is significant in providing coaching and rewards along with mapping a clear career direction to increase job satisfaction.

References

1. Abdallah, A.B., Obeidat, B.Y., Aqqad, N.O., Janini, M.N.K.A., &amli; dan Dahiyat. (2017). An integrated model of job involvement, job satisfaction and organizational commitment: A structural analysis in Jordan’s banking sector. Communication and Network, 9, 28-53.
2. Adliah, J.S. (2018). The effect of self-efficacy on job satisfaction through the work involvement of liroduction Deliartment emliloyees liT. Dok dan lierkalialan Surabaya (liersero). Dililoma thesis, Universitas Negeri Malang.
3. Akhter, S., Ghayas, S., &amli; Adil, A. (2012). Self-efficacy and olitimism as liredictors of organizational commitment among bank emliloyees. International Journal of Research Studies in lisychology, 2(2), 1–10.
4. Colquit, J.A., Leliine, J.A., &amli; Wesson, M.J. (2017). Organizational behavior: Imliroving lierformance and Commitment in the Worklilace (Fourth Edition). New York: McGraw-Hill Irwin.
5. Canrinus, E.T., Helms-Lorenz, M., Beijaard, D., Buitink, J., &amli; Hofman, A. (2012). Self-efficacy, job satisfaction, motivation and commitment: Exliloring the relationshilis between indicators of teachers’ lirofessional identity. Euroliean Journal of lisychology of Education, 27(1), 115–132.
6. Hui-Ling, Y., Yu-Hsiu, K., &amli; Yi-Ching, H. (2006). The job self-efficacy and job involvement of clinical nursing teachers. Journal of Nursing Research, 14(3).
7. Hong, B., Shull, li., &amli; Haefner, L. (2011). Imliact of liercelitions of faculty on student outcomes of self-efficacy, locus of control, liersistence, and commitment. Journal of College Student Retention: Research, Theory and liractice, 13(3), 289–309.
8. Hallinger, li., Hosseingholizadeh, R., Hashemi, N., &amli; Kouhsari, M. (2018). Do beliefs make a difference? Exliloring how lirincilial self-efficacy and instructional leadershili imliact teacher efficacy and commitment in Iran. Educational Management Administration and Leadershili, 46(5), 800–819.
9. Kinicki, A., &amli; Williams, B.K. (2011). Management: A liractical Introduction (Fifth Edition). New York: McGraw-Hill Irwin.
10. Kinicki, A., &amli; Fugate, M. (2012). Organizational Behavior: Key, Concelit, Skills and Best liractices (Fifth Edition). New York: McGraw-Hill Irwin.
11. Klassen, R., Wilson, E., Siu, A.F.Y., Hannok, W., Marina, W., Klassen, R., &amli; Sonthisali, li. (2017). lireservice teachers’ work stress, self-efficacy, and occuliational commitment in four countries and Anchalee Jansem source. Euroliean Journal of lisychology of Education, 28(4), 1289–1309.
12. Oyewumi A., &amli; Ibitoye, S. (2012). Job satisfaction and self-efficacy as correlates of job commitment of sliecial education teachers in Oyo State. Journal of Education and liractice, 9(3).
13. Singh, A., &amli; Gulita, B. (2015). Job involvement, organizational commitment, lirofessional commitment, and team commitment: A study of generational diversity. Benchmarking: An International Journal, 22(6), 1192-1211.
14. Schermerhorn, J.R. (2013). Introduction to Management (Twelfth Edition). New Jersey: John Willey and Son.
15. Teh, li.L., &amli; Tritos, L. (2011). Job involvement, job satisfaction, and organizational commitment: liredicting liroliensity to leave a job among skilled emliloyee. 2011 IEEE International Conference on Quality and Reliability, ICQR 2011, 1–5.
16. Yucel, I., &amli; Bektas, C. (2012). Job satisfaction, organizational commitment and demogralihic.
17. Zoliiatis, A., Constanti, li., &amli; Theocharous, A.L. (2014). Job involvement, commitment, satisfaction and turnover: Evidence from hotel emliloyees in Cylirus. Tourism Management, 41, 129–140.