Introduction

Education in Indonesia is entering a new awareness in the direction of national development resulting in various strategies in the field of education (Pintea, 2010). Responding to industry 4.0, education in Indonesia must focus on developing human resources, so that their capacity must be develop (Koopmans, 2011). In the condition of renewing the pedagogical paradigm, the emergence of network technology distribution has an impact on the enrichment of aspects of human resource preparation to become modern educators interpreted through the concept of teacher professional competence (Park, 2017).

This awareness has led to a new paradigm, namely that the government does not only develop the role of teachers, but also carries out sustainable empowerment. To fulfil the incarnation of education towards education 4.0, teachers must be able to modify and develop their competencies (Schein, 2010). Success will be achieved when all elements must also improve. Education is one of the most strategic main doors in overcoming the challenges of Industry 4.0; therefore it requires comprehensive human resource governance. The presence of the Industrial era 4.0 shows a complex system marked by the massive development of various digital manufacturing technologies, network communication technology, computer technology, automation technology, changes in human behaviour and various other technological implementations. This massive development can only be carried out by human resources, who have the competence and knowledge relevant to the performance standards applied by the industry (Campbell, 2015; Rich, 2010). Where the resources in question should be prepared for educational institutions whose leaders must also have the capacity in line with the demands of the 4.0 industrial eras.

Education has a big role in the downstream to produce quality human resources according to the demands of the industrial era 4.0. Education is required to be able to do its part in preparing prospective actors who are competitive and able to adapt to this industry 4.0 context. As the main mover of educational institutions, school principals in educational institutions have an important role in realizing these educational products in terms of inputs, processes and outcomes so that they are contextual to the needs of industry 4.0. The principal's efforts, among others, to modify and develop competencies are a highlight that cannot be underestimated again (Schein, 2010; Torrente, 2012). For this reason, the role of school principals in the Indonesian context as school leaders who carry out institutional governance is very important.

The strategic role of the principal rests on managing all components of education so that by itself it must be able to become a productive person. The principal must be a person who can be empowered through personal processes and professional development (Saklofske, 2012). Principals must be able to show optimal and quality performance results because this performance is a determining factor for the sustainability of an institution that is ready to realize educational milestones that are contextual to the industrial era 4.0 (Bailey, 2015).

Improving the performance of school principals will positively affect the performance of the institution. In the performance measurement carried out by the government at this time the principal has not been able to fully describe the meaning of the performance itself. Performance is basically interpreted as the achievement of every job desc from A to Z and not just the achievement of the to-do list that has been done (Kim, 2013; Motowidlo, 1996). Therefore, the novelty of this study illustrates that performance measurement which only looks at the principal's achievement will provide difficulties because it must include physical evidence of the outcome of each achievement according to the given target, as planned and expected by the regulator. This research is more trying to reveal the capacity of school principals so that when the capacity of the principal is seen, it can be improved and continuously encouraged. Meanwhile, in an effort to achieve achievement, each school principal's job description requires a capacity. While the process must also be part of the measurement.

In interpreting this frame of mind, this research will reveal the components that underlie the capacity of school principals so that in the end they will be able to transform. The ability to transform is an effort to answer the needs of industry 4.0. The principal is not just making managerial innovation, but the principal must be able to produce a performance that is able to change the paradigm of community thinking which is also called the capacity to transform all resources. Furthermore, in this research it is called transformational capacity performance. This research is more trying to reveal the capacity of school principals so that when the capacity of the principal is seen, it can be improved and continuously encouraged. Meanwhile, in an effort to achieve achievement, each school principal's job description requires a capacity. While the process must also be part of the measurement. Research on Transformational Capacity Performance of school principals in Indonesia is a basic concept in realizing the capacity of education management in schools in Indonesia that is able to adapt to the industrial era 4.0.

Literature Review

Transformational Capacity Performance

The understanding of performance in the field of organizational behaviour has changed over the last 40 years. Various attempts were made to develop a model that sees performance as a multidimensional construct in which an attribute, an outcome or a factor cannot be labelled as performance. Performance is defined as an overall behaviour and activities that are important in a population to meet organizational goals (Pintea, 2010).

Performance includes a variety of work behaviours where some behaviour contribute to duties and responsibilities, while other behaviours still affect organizational goals but are not included in these duties and responsibilities. For school principals, performance includes a variety of work behaviours where some behaviour contribute to their duties and responsibilities as school principals, while other behaviours still affect institutional goals but are not included in duties and responsibilities (Koopmans, 2011). The concept of transformational capacity performance measurement is an integration of the concept of performance measurement with the transformational concept as a concept that is very appropriate in responding to progress and developments in the industrial era 4.0.

The term transformational first appeared as part of transformational leadership. Transformational leadership was first introduced by (Jamex Macgregor, 1978), as a new paradigm that describes leaders and followers in a mutually beneficial relationship to achieve more than expected performance.

A transformational leader is described as a leader's ability to process in which leaders take action to try to raise awareness for their followers about what is right and important. This process is carried out by providing motivation to meet expectations and encouraging them to look deep within themselves for the good of the institution (Park, 2017). A transformational leader is described as having adaptive leadership or flexible leadership characteristics, where this leadership is very suitable in situations that are changing rapidly (Schein, 2010).

Dimension of Transformational Capacity Performance

The synergy of the two concepts to become transformational capacity performance makes several dimensions that form this concept important, namely.

Task Performance

Task performance is often referred to as core technical. The performance task includes a variety of specific behaviours that have been carried out in which these behaviours are included in the main duties and responsibilities of the job itself. Task performance is defined as activities that are officially recognized as part of and contribute to the core tasks of the work itself (Campbell, 2015). Job performance tasks have various types of activities, related to abilities and determined by in-role behaviour.

The definition of the Task Performance dimension is the principal's ability to fulfil a to-do list or job description in his daily life as a school principal. This dimension has 3 (three) indicators, namely Completing Job Task and Engagement. This indicator is manifested through the attitude of a person who can fulfil their duties and responsibilities well so that it shows a high level of engagement (Rich, 2010; Torrente, 2012). Work Quantity & Quality. This indicator is manifested through a person's attitude in achieving work targets so that they can complete as many tasks as possible but still with the best quality (Saklofske, 2012; Bailey, 2015). 21st Century Job Skills. This indicator is manifested through a person's attitude in having all the skills needed to complete a task (Wachter, 2016; Chi, 2012).

Contextual Performance

Contextual performance includes other behaviours such as cooperation with colleagues or dedication that is more related to will and personality. Contextual performance includes various activities that serve and maintain core tasks so that they can be more effective and efficient. Briefly describe three main differences between task performance and contextual performance. First, in the job performance task have various types of activities, while in contextual performance there are no variations in activities. Second, task performance is related to ability, while contextual performance is related to personality and motivation. Third, task performance is more determined by in-role behaviour while contextual performance is more determined by extra-roles (Campbell, 2015; Muindi, 2015).

Contextual performance is identified with 5 (five) categories, namely volunteerism in carrying out unofficial tasks as part of work, the ability to maintain enthusiasm for completing these tasks independently, willingness to help and cooperate with others, feel comfortable with organizational rules and procedures and support and defending organizational goals (Motowidlo, 1996). The definition of the contextual performance dimension (Koopmans, 2011; Bin Yusoff, 2014), is the principal's ability to produce performance that maintains core tasks and supports the achievement of school goals. This dimension has 4 (four) indicators, namely Extra Task Preference. This indicator is manifested through one's attitude in choosing and being able to complete challenging tasks (Campbell, 2015; Bin Yusoff, 2014). Online Breakthrough Initiative. This indicator is manifested through a person's attitude in taking the initiative when there is a problem that must be resolved (Campbell, 2015; Wang, 2011) Persistence. This indicator is manifested through a person's attitude in taking the initiative when there is a problem to be resolved (Motowidlo, 1994; Koopmans, 2013). Interpersonal Relations. This indicator is manifested through a person's attitude in establishing good relationships with those around him so that it can be seen through students, parents, teachers and management who are satisfied with their work (Campbell, 2015; Bin Yusoff, 2014).

Organizational Performance

Organizational performance is defined as behaviour related to individual policies that are not included in the official duties and responsibilities of the principal but play a role in increasing organizational effectiveness. This means that fundamentally organizational performance is voluntary behaviour that is not included in the job description which includes behaviour related to the desire to help colleagues, behaviour that contributes to the work environment or behaviour related to thoroughness. Organizational performance becomes a means for school principals to contribute to the institution (Campbell, 2015).

The definition of Organizational performance is the principal's ability to produce performance that maintains core tasks and supports the achievement of school goals. This dimension has 2 (two) indicators, namely Educational Disruptive Leadership. This indicator is manifested through one's attitude in having the courage to break through the old ways, especially those that hinder school progress (Juhdi, 2012; Luthans, 2004). Collaborative (Team Building). This indicator is manifested through a person's attitude in the ability to cooperate with others cooperatively (Weng, 2015; Yabushita, 2015).

Adaptive Performance yang Mampu Menghasilkan Innovation Performance

Performance behaviour. Adaptive performance refers to the ability to adapt to change. Adaptive performance consists of 8 (eight) factors, namely Ability to handle urgent matters (Handling Emergencies), Ability to handle work stress (Handling Work Stress), Ability to handle problems creatively (Solving Problems Creatively), Ability to face uncertain situations (Dealing). With Uncertain Situations), Learning Ability (Learning), Interpersonal Adaptability, Cultural Adaptability, Physically Oriented Adaptability (Koopmans, 2013). Adaptive performance is defined as the principal's ability to produce adaptive performance in the face of disruption. This dimension has 3 (three) indicators, namely Generating New in Technology. This indicator is manifested through one's attitude in trying to increase knowledge by continuing to learn to utilize technology (Koopmans, 2013; Roussel, 2012). Adjusting Goals and Plans to Uncertainty Situation. This indicator is manifested through a person's attitude in fixing uncertain conditions due to changes that occur suddenly (Koopmans, 2013; Roussel, 2012), Resilience. This indicator is manifested through one's attitude in defensive behaviour and quickly gets up from failure (Luthans, 2008; Dufty, 2011).

Idealized Influence

This dimension shows that as a leader should be admired, respected and trusted. Leaders consistently do everything based on ethics, principles and values. Idealized influence can be seen through 2 (two) aspects, namely attribute and behaviour (Park, 2017). The definition of idealized influence is the principal's ability to produce performance that prioritizes values and ethics. This dimension has 2 (two) indicators, namely Value Based. This indicator is manifested through one's attitude in considering the moral and ethical consequences of decision making (Waldman, 1987; Covey, 2007).Respect. This indicator is manifested through one's attitude in behaviour emphasizing the importance of respecting others (Hayati, 2014; Indrianti, 2017).

Inspirational Motivation

This dimension describes where leaders behave in a way that motivates those around them by providing meaning and challenges to their followers so as to make them innovative, enthusiastic, enthusiastic and optimistic.

The definition of Inspirational motivation is the principal's ability to produce inspirational performance. This dimension has 2 (two) indicators, namely IT Bases Solving Problem. This indicator is manifested through one's attitude in the behaviour of quickly overcoming problems with technology (Hayati, 2014). Visionary in Technology. This indicator is manifested through a person's attitude in expressing a strong technology-based vision and strategy for the future of the institution (Hayati, 2014; Avolio, 2004).

Intellectual Stimulation

This dimension describes a leader who is able to encourage his followers to be more creative and innovative and provide new ideas in dealing with problems.

The definition of intellectual stimulation is the principal's ability to produce innovative performances. This dimension has 2 (two) indicators, namely Critical Thinking and Problem Solving Skill. This indicator is manifested through a person's attitude in the behaviour of criticizing any assumptions or assumptions that arise (Hayati, 2014; Gutiérrez, 2012). Creativity and Innovation. This indicator is manifested through a person's attitude in the behaviour of having new ways of completing tasks/jobs (Park, 2017; Muenjohn, 2007).

Individualized Consideration

This dimension illustrates that leaders pay attention to the needs of each individual to achieve and grow so that they can develop their potential and have new opportunities to continue learning (Park, 2017; Chi, 2012; Wang, 2011). The definition of individualized consideration is the principal's ability to produce innovative performance. This dimension has 2 (two) indicators, namely Monitoring and Controlling Resources. This indicator is manifested through a person's attitude in the behaviour of placing the team according to their capacity and potential (Gutiérrez, 2012), (Ghafoor, 2011), Developing Other. This indicator is manifested through a person's attitude in the behaviour of taking time to teach and train my team with competence 4.0 (Waldman, 1987; Normann, 1993).

Based on the description above, what is meant by Transformational Capacity Performance in this study is the potential of school leaders in Indonesia as a description of capacity in influencing (the key word for leadership is influencing) in every aspect of school governance in changing the paradigm of the school community. (Transformational) with a culture of independent learning (education policy of the Advanced Indonesia Cabinet). (Table 1)

Table 1 Recapitulation of Construct Theoretical
Dimensions (Exogenous Variable)	Indicators (Exogenous Variable)
Task Performance	Completing Job Task and Engagement
	Work Quantity & Quality
	Job Skill 21st Century
Contextual Performance	Ekstra Task Preference
	Online Breakthrough Initiative
	Persistence
	Interpersonal Relations
Organizational Performance	Educational Disruptive Leadership
	Collaborative (Team Building)
Adaptive Performance	Generating New in Technology
	Adjusting Goals and Plans to Uncertainty Situation
	Resilience
Idealized Influence Performance	Value Based
	Respect
Inspirational Performance	IT Bases Solving Problem
	Visionary in Technology
Intellectual Performance	Critical Thinking and Problem Solving Skill
	Crativity and Innovation
Individualized Consideration Performance	Monitoring and Controlling Resources
	Developing Other

Research Method

This research method with Neuroresearch is a mixed method research method in the social sciences that combines qualitative research methods (exploratory) and quantitative research methods (explanatory and confirmatory) (Sasmoko, 2016; Sasmoko, 2015). The population of this research is all school principals in Indonesia. The sampling technique was Multistage Random Sampling.

Exploratory research is a theoretical study of the Transformational Capacity Performance of school principals throughout Indonesia (TCP) until it finds a construct that contains conceptual definitions that are contextual to Indonesian schools, dimensions, and indicators. Furthermore, these dimensions and indicators function as exogenous variables, while the dependent variable functions as endogenous variables. Endogenous variable is the dependent variable itself. While exogenous variables are dimensions and/or indicators that are born from endogenous variables. So the exogenous variable was born from the study of the dependent variable (endogenous variable) theory, namely the Transformational Capacity Performance of school principals throughout Indonesia (TCP). Endogenous variable is a variable whose diversity is explained by the exogenous variable.

Explanatory research is research that deepens the results of exploratory research, namely through a quantitative approach to find the tendency for the conditions of Transformational Capacity Performance for principals throughout Indonesia (TCP) empirically. The planned relationship between the variables of this study can be seen in Figure 1 below. (Table 2)

Table 2 Information of Exogenous Variable, Endogenous Variable and Moderating Variable
Endogenous Variable
TCP	:	Transformational Capacity Performance for school principals throughout Indonesia
	:
Exogenous Variable
TPR	:	Dimensions Task Performance
CPR	:	Contextual Performance
OPR	:	Organizational Performance
APR	:	Adaptive Performance
IPR	:	Idealized Influence Performance
NPR	:	Inspirational Performance
LPR	:	Intellectual Performance
PPR	:	Individualized Consideration Performance
CJT	:	Completing Job Task
WQQ	:	Work Quantity and Quality
JSK	:	Job Skill
EXT	:	Exstra Task
INT	:	Initiative
PER	:	Persistence
INR	:	Interpersonal Relations
EFC	:	Effective Communication
TBG	:	Team Building
GNW	:	Generating New
AGP	:	Adjusting Goals and Plans to Situation
RES	:	Resilience
VBD	:	Value Based
RPT	:	Respect
SPL	:	Solving Problem
VIS	:	Visionary
OBJ	:	Objective
INN	:	Innovation Capacity
MCR	:	Monitoring and Controlling Resources
DOT	:	Developing Other
	:
Moderating Variable (Nominal Scale)
TERRITORY	:	Indonesia Territory (West, Central, and East Indonesia)
PROVINCE	:	12 Provinces (Bali, East Kalimantan, South Sulawesi, Banten, Jakarta, West Java, Maluku, Papua, West Papua, Central Java, North Maluku, dan North Sulawesi)
DISTRICT	:	School Level (Kindergarten, Elementary, Junior High School, High School, Vocational High School, Madrasah Ibtidaiyah (MI), Madrasah Tsanawiyah (MTs), and Madrasah Aliyah (MA)
SCHSTAT	:	Gender (Male and Female)
SCHLEV	:	Age (<25 years, 25-35 years, 36-45 years, and >46 years)
GENDER	:	EducationAL Background (High School, Bachelor, Master, and Doctor)
AGE	:	Age (<25 years, 25-35 years, 36-45 years, and >46 years)
EDUBACK	:	Educational Backgroud (High School, Bachelor, Master, and Doctor)
TEACHPER	:	Teaching Period (<5 years, 6-15 years, 16-25 years, >26 years)
LEADPER	:	School Leader Period (<2 years, 3-5 years, >6 years)
EMPLOY	:	Employment Status (Permanent PNS Teachers, dan Permanent Foundation Teachers)
CERTIFICAT	:	Certification (Certified, and Not Yet Certified)
LEVEL	:	Level (III, IV, No Level)
TRAINBEF	:	Before becoming a school principal, he attended the training for prospective school principals (Has attended the training, dan Not following the training)
TRAINSTR	:	Has attended school principal strengthening training (Has attended the training, and Not following the training)

The stages of data analysis include: (a) Description of endogenous data and each exogenous variable, (b) Test requirements analysis, which includes normality and linearity tests, and (c) testing hypotheses.

Data Description. Endogenous data descriptions and each exogenous variable consist of the mean, median, mode, standard deviation, and histogram. Description of the moderator variable data, namely the demographic background of school principals in Indonesia, calculated using the mode and pie charts.

Test Requirements Analysis. There are 2 (two) test requirements for analysis, namely: First, the endogenous data normality test and each exogenous variable with the Proportion Estimation Test through the Blom Formula with Q-Q Plot. The reason, because the study sample> 200 respondents. Second, the linearity test of the line relationship between each exogenous variable and the endogenous variable is carried out using a linearity approach to the deviation (deviation from linearity), namely F.

Results

Reliability

Based on the calculation of the First Stage, namely Orthogonal Iteration, 20 items were generated as valid TCP instruments and a Reliability Index of 0.961 was produced as a description of the consistency of measuring the TCL variable of Indonesian principals. The result of the Reliability Index through the Orthogonal Iteration is 0.961.

Data Description

Based on the results of data collection on variables and dimensions of Transformational Capacity Performance for Principals in Indonesia (TCP) against 964 school principals covering 3 regions of Indonesia, 12 provinces and 36 districts/cities, data descriptions were obtained including mean, median, mode, standard deviation, theoretical scores and empirical scores as shown in Table 3 below.

Table 3 Description of Variable Data and Dimensions of Transformational Capacity Performance for Principals in Indonesia (TCP)
No.	Variable/Dimension	Mean	Median	Mode	Standard Deviation	Theoretic score		Empiric score
						Min	Max	Min	Max
1.	Transformational Capacity Performance (TCP)	124.6857	130	140	17.2315	33	140	20	140
2.	Task Performance (TPR)	18.0031	19	21	3.1772	4	21	3	21
3.	Contextual Performance (CPR)	24.6214	26	28	3.8015	6	28	4	28
4.	Organizational Performance (OPR)	12.8122	14	14	1.8486	3	14	2	14
5.	Adaptive Performance (APR)	18.7054	20	21	2.7382	4	21	3	21
6.	Idealized Influence Performance (IPR)	13.0560	14	14	1.6447	2	14	2	14
7.	Inspirational Performance (NPR)	12.5581	13	14	1.8443	2	14	2	14
8.	Intellectual Performance (LPR)	12.3517	13	14	2.0613	2	14	2	14
9.	Individualized Consideration Performance (PPR)	12.5778	13	14	1.9252	3	14	2	14

Normality Test

The picture above shows the results of the Figure 2 data distribution normality test for the Transformational Capacity Performance Variable for School Principals in Indonesia (TCP) as exogenous variables. The normality test is carried out by using Proportion Estimation through the Blom formula with the Q-Q Plot approach. The Q-Q Plot approach was taken because the number of research samples was above 200 school principals. Based on the calculation of the Normal Q-Q Plot, the distribution of the Transformational Capacity Performance Variable data for Principals in Indonesia (TCP) is proven to be normally distributed. The data distribution tends to lead to the normal line, and also the data distribution has no outliers. Likewise, when viewed from its Detrended Normal Q-Q Plot, it proves that the data distribution does not describe a sine or cosine curve. So it can be concluded that the Transformational Capacity Performance Variable data for Principals in Indonesia (TCP) is normally distributed.

Linearity Test

The summary results of the linearity test calculated by the deviation from linearity of each exogenous variable on the Transformational Capacity Performance of Principals in Indonesia (TCP) as the endogenous variable. As a whole, can be seen in the following Table 4.

Table 4 Summary of Linearity Test Results
Linearity Test Intermediate Relationship	Deviation from Linearity Test			Raw Data Test
	F	Sig	Status	F	Sig	Status
TPR à TCP	13.970	0.000	Non-Linear	3645.369	0.000	Linear
CPR à TCP	17.724	0.000	Non-Linear	6539.245	0.000	Linear
OPR à TCP	5.372	0.000	Non-Linear	3351.708	0.000	Linear
APR à TCP	5.831	0.000	Non-Linear	7015.120	0.000	Linear
IPR à TCP	13.225	0.000	Non-Linear	2124.521	0.000	Linear
NPR à TCP	9.021	0.000	Non-Linear	5196.476	0.000	Linear
LPR à TCP	6.486	0.000	Non-Linear	4537.023	0.000	Linear
PPR à TCP	3.817	0.000	Non-Linear	3978.991	0.000	Linear

Based on the table above, the relationship of each exogenous variable with the Transformational Capacity Performance Variable of Principals in Indonesia (TCP) as endogenous variables is all non-linear. Because it is non-linear, then analysis of the estimated curve is carried out on 11 lines (raw data test), and the resulting FLinear test is all very significant at α <0.01. So the line relationship between each exogenous variable with the Transformational Capacity Performance Variable of Principals in Indonesia (TCP) as endogenous variables is all in linear tolerance.

Hypothesis Testing

Hypothesis 1 Test: Principals throughout Indonesia Tend Significantly to High Performers with Transformation Capacity

In proving, in this case the researcher determined 3 (three) categories as in Table 26. Data analysis was carried out with a confidence interval at a significance level of 0.05 and a lower and upper bound was generated. In detail, the results can be seen in Table 5 below.

Table 5 Summary of Results of Hypothesis 1 Which Reads "Principals In Indonesia are Significantly Tend to Have High Performance With Transformation Capacity"
Trend	K	R	I	Empiric score		µ		Conclusion
				Max	Min	Lower Bound	Upper Bound
TCP	1.Very Low 2.Low 3.Height	107	37	140	33	123.597	125.775	Principals throughout Indonesia tend to have high performance with a significant transformation capacity at α <0.05
TPR		17	7	21	4	17.802	18.204	Principals throughout Indonesia tend to have high task performance significantly at α <0.05
CPR		22	8	28	6	24.381	24.862	Principals throughout Indonesia tend to have high contextual performance significantly at α <0.05
OPR		11	4	14	3	12.695	12.929	Principals in Indonesia tend to have high organizational performance significantly at α <0.05
APR		17	6	21	4	18.532	18.879	Principals throughout Indonesia tend to have a significantly high adaptive performance at α <0.05
IPR		12	5	14	2	12.952	13.160	Principals across Indonesia tend to have high idealized influence performance significantly at α <0.05
NPR		12	5	14	2	12.442	12.675	Principals throughout Indonesia tend to have high inspirational performance significantly at α <0.05
LPR		12	5	14	2	12.221	12.482	Principals throughout Indonesia tend to have high intellectual performance which is significant at α <0.05
PPR		11	4	14	3	12.456	12.699	Principals across Indonesia tend to have significantly high individualized consideration performance at α <0.05

Based on the results of the analysis above, the hypothesis which reads "Principals throughout Indonesia tend to be significantly high performers with transformational capacity performance" is proven in this study.

Hypothesis 2 Test: Adaptive Performance (APR) is significantly the Most Dominant Aspect of Turtles in Shaping the Transformational Capacity Performance of School Principals in Indonesia (TCP)

In proving the second hypothesis, an analysis of 2 (two) stages was carried out. The first stage, by analyzing the effect of each exogenous variable, namely Task Performance (TPR), Contextual Performance (CPR), Organizational Performance (OPR), Adaptive Performance (APR), Idealized Influence Performance (IPR), Inspirational Performance (NPR), Intellectual Performance (LPR), and Individualized Consideration Performance (PPR) individually on the Transformational Capacity Performance of Principals in Indonesia (TCP) as Endogenous Variables. The results of each calculation are then summarized in the following Table 6.

Table 6 Results of Calculation of The Effect of Individual Exogenous Variables on Endogenous Variables
No.	Individual Exogenous Analysis of Endogenous Variables	Symbol	TPRàTCP	CPRàTCP	OPRàTCP	APRàTCP
1.	The relationship between Xn and Y in the sample	ryn	0.889	0.934	0.881	0.938
2.	Variance determination	r2yn	0.791	0.872	0.777	0.879
3.	The relative contribution of Xn in forming Y	r2yn (%)	79.1	87.2	77.7	87.9
4.	Xn's relationship with Y in the population	t	60.377	80.866	57.894	83.756
5.	Significance value	Sig.	0.000	0.000	0.000	0.000
6.	Effect of Xn on Y in the sample	?	4.824 TPR	4.232 CPR	8.216 OPR	5.901 APR
7.	The effect of Xn on Y in the population	FReg	3645.369	6539.245	3351.708	7015.120
8.	Significance value	Sig	0.000	0.000	0.000	0.000
9.	The greatest pure relationship	r2yn.m	-	-	-	-
10.	A relatively pure contribution of X to Y	r2(%)yn.m	-	-	-	-

The Table above shows that the strongest relationship in the sample is between Adaptive Performance (APR) and Transformational Capacity Performance for Principals in Indonesia (TCP) resulting in ryn of 0.938. This means that the relationship between Adaptive Performance (APR) and Transformational Capacity Performance for Principals throughout Indonesia (TCP) is positive. Variance determination adaptive performance (APR) to the Transformational Capacity Performance of Principals in Indonesia (TCP) in the sample is generated through Adjusted-r-Square of 0.879. So the relative contribution of Adaptive Performance (APR) to the formation of Transformational Capacity Performance for Principals in Indonesia (TCP) in the sample was 87.9%. The condition of the relationship between Adaptive Performance (APR) and Transformational Capacity Performance of Principals in Indonesia (TCP) in the sample generated through the t-test of 83,756 is very significant at α <0.01. So the relationship between Adaptive Performance (APR) and Transformational Capacity Performance of Principals in Indonesia (TCP) in the population is the same condition as in the sample, namely having a positive relationship and Adaptive Performance (APR) dominantly forms 87.9% of the Transformational Capacity Performance of School Principals in Indonesia (TCP).

Graphically, the results can be shown in the following Figure 3.

The second stage of verification, hypothesis testing is carried out using the Binary Segmentation approach, which is also known as the Classification and Regression Trees. In this analysis, the researchers set Prunning Depth at 2, Prunning Parent at 2, and Prunning Child at 1, with a significance level of α <0.05. The result is as shown below Figure 4.

The picture above can be explained that the increase in the Transformational Capacity Performance of school principals throughout Indonesia (TCP) is very much determined by two things, namely the increase in Adaptive Performance (APR) and Innovation Capacity (INN) principals throughout Indonesia. In detail the results are as follows.

First, if the Adaptive Performance (APR) is increased through a one-time improvement program (intervention program), then the Transformational Capacity Performance of school principals throughout Indonesia (TCP) will increase 185,621 times from the current performance conditions of school principals in Indonesia.

Second, the increase in Adaptive Performance (APR) is largely determined by the increase in the Contextual Performance (CPR) and Intellectual Performance (LPR) of school principals throughout Indonesia. If the improvement of Contextual Performance (CPR) and Intellectual Performance (LPR) is carried out together, it will be able to change 63,479 times the current Adaptive Performance condition of school principals across Indonesia (APR).

Third, if the Principal's Innovation Capacity (INN) is increased through a one-time improvement program (intervention program), then the Transformational Capacity Performance of school principals throughout Indonesia (TCP) will increase 177,947 times from the current performance conditions of school principals in Indonesia.

Fourth, the increase in Innovation Capacity (INN) is largely determined by an increase in Problem Solving Capacity (SPL) and Ability to Act Objectively (OBJ). If the increase in Problem Solving Capacity (SPL) and Ability to Act Objectively (OBJ) is carried out jointly, it will be able to change 63,448 times the condition of the Innovation Capacity of school principals throughout Indonesia (INN). In simple terms, the results can be seen in the following image.

Fifth, if Adaptive Performance (APR) and Innovation Capacity (INN) are jointly increased through a one-time improvement program (intervention program), then the Transformational Capacity Performance of school principals across Indonesia (TCP) will increase 363,568 times from the current performance condition of the head. Schools throughout Indonesia. In detail can be seen in Figure 5.

Based on the results of the first and second analysis stages, it can be proven that the first and second calculation findings are consistent, that is, what determines the formation of Transformational Capacity Performance for Principals throughout Indonesia (TCP) is Adaptive Performance (APR). So it can be concluded that the second hypothesis which reads "Adaptive Performance (APR) is the Most Dominant aspect Significantly Determines the Formation of Transformational Capacity Performance of principals throughout Indonesia (TCP) is proven in this study.

Discussion

The results of the study show that it is necessary to take various efforts to support the realization of an increase in Adaptive Performance (APR) and Innovation Capacity (INN) simultaneously in order to build self-capacity in order to improve the performance of Indonesian school principals whose capacity changes the paradigm of community thinking (transformational). Strategies and Efforts to Strengthen the Role of Scientific and Institutional Functions are that the principal has a strategic role in improving the quality of the education unit.

As a leader, the principal must lead and empower a number of educators and education personnel in the school he leads to jointly achieve the vision and mission of the school. Based on the results of this study, at least the principal's competence is added not only to 5 (five) competencies as currently, but into 8 (eight) competencies that must be engaged in the principal, namely: (1) personality competencies, (2) managerial, (3) entrepreneurial competencies (4) supervition and mentoring competencies, (5) social competencies, (6) adaptive competencies, (7) transformational competencies, (8) IT Competencies, and (9) nationalism engagement competencies.

As a school manager, the principal must improve the quality of the school in order to achieve 8 (eight) National Education Standards (SNP), which include (1) Graduation Standards, (2) Content Standards, (3) Process Standards, (4) Assessment Standards, (5) Educators and Education Personnel Standards, (6) Management Standards, (7) Facilities and Infrastructure Standards, (8) Financing Standards.

Based on the results of this study, there are several things that should be managed by the principal as a manager, including: (1) curriculum management, (2) management of educators and education personnel, (3) student management, (4) management of facilities and infrastructure, (5) financial management, (6) admission of new students, (7) management of the school environment, (8) management of business development in the context of realizing the spirit of Adaptive Performance and Innovation Capacity which is named entrepreneurial generation, (9) specifically managing nationalism engagement community within an institution-led.

Referring to the description above, the task of a school principal is quite heavy. Even so, a head who has a clear vision, of course, will do his best to lead and manage the school as well as possible. As a consequence, becoming a school principal is not enough like the current principal recruitment policy which only goes through various stages of selection, from administrative selection, academic selection, to having to pass training and training for prospective school principals. Based on the results of this study, the determination of school principals must also be based on the selection of adaptive abilities of information technology advances for education, as well as their ability to innovate and transform education. Because these two things determine the formation of the performance of school principals in Indonesia.

References

1. Pintea, M.O., & Achim, M.V. (2010). Performance - An evolving concept. University of Craiova Annals Journal - Economic Sciences Series, 2(38), pp. 1–12, 2010.
2. Koopmans, L., Bernaards, C.M., Hildebrandt, V.H., Schaufeli, W.B., de Vet Henrica, C.W., & van der Beek, A.J. (2011). “Conceptual frameworks of individual work performance”. Journal of Occupational and Environmental Medicine, 53(8), 856–866, 2011.
3. Park, C.K. (2017). Transformational leadership and teacher engagement in an international context. in handbook of research on global issues in next-generation teacher education. IGI Global, 22–42.
4. Schein, E.H. (2015). Organizational culture & leadership, (4th Edition). San Francisco: Jossey-Bass, 2010.
5. Campbell, J.P., & Wiernik, B.M. (2015). The Modeling and Assessment of Work Performance. 2, 1.
6. Rich, B.L., Lepine, J.A., & Crawford, E.R. (2010). “Job engagement: Antecents and effects on job performance.” Academy of Management Journal, 53(3), 617–635, 2010.
7. Torrente, P., Salanova, M., Llorens, S., & Schaufeli, W. (2012). “Teams make it work: How team work engagement mediates between social resources and performance in teams”. Psicothema, 24(1), 106–12.
8. Saklofske, D.H., Austin, E.J., Mastoras, S.M., Beaton, L.M., & Osborne, S.E. (2012).“Relationships of personality, affect, emotional intelligence and coping with student stress and academic success: Different patterns of association for stress and success”. Learning and Individual Differences, 22(2), 251–257.
9. Bailey, C., Madden, A., Alfes, K., & Fletcher, L. (2015). The meaning, antecedents and outcomes of employee engagement: A narrative synthesis. International Journal of Management Reviews, 00, 1–23.
10. Kim, Y.H., Kim, D.J., & Wachter, K. (2013). “A study of mobile user engagement (MoEN): Engagement motivations, perceived value, satisfaction, and continued engagement intention”. Decision Support Systems, 56(1), 361–370.
11. Van Scotter, J.R., & Motowidlo, S.J. (1996). “Interpersonal facilitation and job dedication as separate facets of contextual performance”. Journal of Applied Psychologyied Psychology, 81(5), 525–531, 1996.
12. Chi, N.W., & Pan, S.Y. (2012). A multilevel investigation of missing links between transformational leadership and task performance. The mediating roles of perceived person-job fit and person-organization fit. Journal of Business Psychology, 27(1), 43–56.
13. Muindi, F., & Obonyo, P.K. (2015). Quality of work life, personality, job satisfaction, competence, and job performance. A Critical Review of Literature, 11(26), 223–240.
14. Bin Yusoff, R., Ali, A., & Khan, A. (2014). Assessing reliability and validity of job performance scale among university teachers. Journal of Basic and Applied Scientific Research (JBASR), 4(1), 35–41.
15. Wang, G., Oh, I.S., Courtright, S.H., & Colbert, A.E. (2011).Transformational leadership and performance across criteria and levels. A meta-analytic review of 25 years of research. Group & Organization Management, 36, 223–270.
16. Motowidlo, S.J., & Van Scotter, J.R. (1994). Evidence that task performance should be distinguished from contextual performance. Journal of Applied Psychology, 79(4), 475–480.
17. Koopmans, L., Bernaards, C.M., Hildebrandt, V.H., Van Buuren, S., Van der Beek, A.J., & De Vet, H.C.W. (2013). “Development of an individual work performance questionnaire”. International Journal of Product Performance. Management, 62(1), 6–28.
18. Juhdi, N., & Pa’wan, F. (2012), “Examining characteristics of high potential employees from employees’ perspective.” International Conference for Academic Disciplines, 5(7), 175–186.
19. Luthans, F., Luthans, K.W., & Luthans, B.C. (2004). “Positive psychological capital: Beyond human and social capital”. Business Horizons, 47(1), 45–50.
20. Weng, Z., Ramallo-González, A.P., & Coley, D.A. (2015). “A review of the e-learning resources on building physics for architects”. Energy Procedia, 78, 2590–2595.
21. Yabushita, N.W. (2015). “Labour market and economic performance in thailand and the philippines . Supply-Demand Imbalance and the ASEAN Economic Community (AEC), 25–50.
22. Charbonnier, V.A., & Roussel, P. (2012). “Adaptive performance: A new scale to measure individual performance in organizations”. The Canadian Journal of Administrative Sciences (CJAS.), 29(3), 280–293.
23. Luthans, F., Norman, S.M., Avolio, B.J., & Avey, J.B. (2008). “The mediating role of psychological capital in the supportive organizational climate-Employee performance relationship.” Journal of Organizational Behaviour, 29(2), 219–238.
24. Dufty, N. (2011). “Engagement or education?” Aust. J. Emerg. Manag, 26(3), 35–39.
25. Bass, B.M., Waldman, D.A., Avolio, B.J., & Bebb, M. (1987). “transformational leadership and the falling dominoes effect”. Group & Organization Management,12(1), 73.
26. Covey, S. (2007). “The transformational leadership report”. Transformational leadership Journal, 1–19.
27. Hayati, D., Charkhabi, M., & Naami, A. (2014). “The relationship between transformational leadership and work engagement in governmental hospitals nurses: A survey study”. Springerplus, 3, 25.
28. Indrianti, Y., Khan, A., Bin, A.R., Sasmoko, Bin, H., Widhoyoko, S.A., & Lasmy A.S. (2017). “The role of transformational leadership in generating work engagement to the volunteers of humanity organization”. Man India, 97(17).
29. Avolio, B.J., Zhu, W., & Koh, W. (2004). “Transformational leadership and organizational commitment : Mediating role of psychological empowerment and moderating role of structural distance”. Journal of organizational Behaviour, 968, 951–968.
30. García-Morales, V.J., Jiménez-Barrionuevo, M.M., & Gutiérrez, G.L. (2012). “Transformational leadership influence on organizational performance through organizational learning and innovation”. Journal of Business Resources, 65(7), 1040–1050.
31. Muenjohn, N., & Armstrong, A. (2007). “Transformational leadership: The influence of culture on the leadership behaviours of expatriate managers.” International Journal of Business Information Systems, 2(2), 2007.
32. Ghafoor, A., Qureshi, T.M., Khan, M.A., & Hijazi, S.T. (2011). “Transformational leadership, employee engagement and performance: Mediating effect of psychological ownership.” African Journal of Business Management, 5(17), 7391–7403.
33. Normann, R., & Ramírez, R. (1993). “From value chain to value constellation: Designing interactive strategy”. Harvard Business Review (HBR), 71(4), 65–77.
34. Fios, F., Sasmoko, & Gea, A.A. (2016).“Neuro-research method: A synthesis between hermeneutics and positivism.” Advanced Science Letters, 22(9), 2202–2206.
35. Sasmoko, & Ying. (2015). “Construct validity in neuroresearch.” Adv. Sci. Lett., 21(7), 2438–2441.