Faktor keberkesanan bekerja dari rumah semasa pandemik Covid-19 atas Pegawai Tadbir & Diplomatik (PTD) di Jabatan Perkhidmatan Awam
List of Authors
  • Mohd Noor Azam Mohd Mustafa , Zurinah Tahir

Keyword
  • Keberkesanan, bekerja dari rumah, pandemik covid-19, jabatan perkhidmatan awam, pembangunan

Abstract
  • Pandemik COVID-19 meninggalkan impak yang sangat besar kepada manusia, bukan sahaja kepada cara hidup, struktur sosioekonomi, bahkan merubah landskap pengurusan sumber manusia sektor awam serta swasta. Pelbagai langkah telah diambil oleh kerajaan Malaysia termasuklah melaksanakan Perintah Kawalan Pergerakan (PKP) yang mengawal dan menghadkan pergerakan rakyat seperti usulan daripada World Health Organisation (WHO) termasuklah arahan penutupan operasi pejabat kerajaan dan sektor kurang berkepentingan. Seterusnya dasar Bekerja Dari Rumah (BDR) diperkenalkan kepada sektor awam dan swasta. Objektif kajian ini adalah untuk mengenalpasti faktor-faktor keberkesanan BDR semasa pandemik COVID-19 ke atas Pegawai Tadbir Dan Diplomatik (PTD) di Jabatan Perkhidmatan Awam (JPA). Faktor-faktor tertsebut akan dinilai berdasarkan model Teori TAM yang diubahsuai. Pengumpulan data secara kaedah kuantitatif ke atas 187 responden yang terdiri daripada PTD Gred 41-44 di JPA. Hasil kajian menunjukkan bahawa faktor-faktor keberkesanan BDR semasa pandemik ini adalah signifikan dengan semua konstruknya iaitu Sikap Individu, Kelengkapan Teknologi, Pengurusan Masa dan Persekitaran. Namun hanya konstruk Sikap Individu didapati mempunyai hubungkait perbezaan signifikan dengan demografi jantina responden. Ringkasnya, kajian ini menyediakan maklumat tentang aspek yang disifatkan penting oleh majoriti responden dalam mengkaji keberkesanan sesuatu program (BDR). Maka adalah wajar keempat-empat faktor ini dijadikan asas dalam merangka dasar pelaksanan berkaitan BDR pada masa akan datang bagi memastikan kejayaan dan kelestarian program tersebut.

Reference
  • 1. Baruch, Y. (2000). Teleworking: benefits and pitfalls as perceived by professionals and managers. New Technology, Work and Employment, 15(1), 34-49. http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/1468-005X.00063
    2. Bhumika. (2020). Challenges for work-life balance during COVID-19 induced nationwide lockdown:exploring gender difference in emotional exhaustion in the Indian setting. Gender in Management, 35(7-8), 705-718. http://dx.doi.org/10.1108/GM-06-2020-0163
    3. Chan, X. W., Kalliath, T., Brough, P., O’Driscoll, M., Siu, O.-L., & Timms, C. (2017). Self-efficacy and work engagement: test of a chain model. International Journal of Manpower, 38(6), 819-834. http://dx.doi.org/10.1108/IJM-11-2015-0189
    4. Chatzoglou, P., Chatzoudes, D., & Symeonidis, S. 2015. Factors affecting the intention to use e-government services. Proceedings of the Federated Conference on Computer Science and Information Systems, 1489–1498.
    5. Crosbie, T., & Moore, J. (2004). Work–life balance and working from home. Social Policy and Society, 3(3), 223-233. https://doi.org/10.1017/S1474746404001733
    6. Davis, F. D. (1993). User acceptance of information technology: System characteristics, user perceptions and behavioral impacts. International Journal of Man-Machine Studies, 38(3), 475-487. https://doi.org/10.1006/imms.1993.1022
    7. Dockery, A. M., & Bawa, S. (2014). Australian is working from home: Good work or bad work? Evidence from Australian employees. Journal of Labour Economics, 17(2), 163- 190.
    8. Fishbein, M., & Ajzen, I. (1975). Belief, attitude, intention, and behavior: An introduction to theory and research, reading. Addison-Wesley.
    9. Gajendran, R. S., & Harrison, D. A. (2015). The good, the bad, and the unknown about telecommuting: meta-analysis of psychological mediators and individual consequences. Journal of Applied Psychology, 92(6), 1524-1541. http://dx.doi.org/10.1037/0021-9010.92.6.1524
    10. Gregory, A., & Milner, S. (2009). Work–life balance: A matter of choice?. Gender, Work & Organization, 16(1), 1-13.
    11. Ismail, M. S., & Halim, F. W. (2022). Prestasi adaptif perkhidmatan awam: kajian literatur mengenai intervensi pengurusan dalam pembangunan kepimpinan dan rangka kerja. Jurnal Psikologi Malaysia, 35(3), 73-85.
    12. Krejcie, R. V., & Morgan, D. W. (1970). Determining sample size for research activities. Educational and Psychological Measurement, 30(3), 607–610.
    13. Lee, Y., Kozar, K. A., & Larsen, K. R. (2003). The technology acceptance model: Past, present, and future. Communications of The Association for Information Systems, 12(1), 50. https://doi.org/10.17705/1CAIS.01250
    14. Mohd Majid Konting. (2000). Kaedah penyelidikan pendidikan. Dewan Bahasa dan Pustaka.
    15. Mohd. Sharani Ahmad & Zainal Madon. (2003). Tip pandai belajar panduan teknik-teknik berkesan semasa belajar dan mengajar. PTS Publications & Distributor Sdn. Bhd.
    16. Morris, M. G., & Venkatesh, V. (2000). Age differences in technology adoption decisions: Implications for a changing work force. Personnel Psychology, 53(2), 375-403. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1744-6570.2000.tb00206.9
    17. Prayoonphan, F., & Xu, X. (2019). Factors influencing the intention to use the common ticketing system (spider card) in Thailand. Behavioral Sciences, 9(5), 46. https://doi.org/10.3390/bs9050046
    18. Rana, N. P., Dwivedi, Y. K., & Williams, M. D. (2015). A meta-analysis of existing research on citizen adoption of e-government. Information Systems Frontiers, 17(3), 547–563
    19. Rose, Janelle., & Fogarty, G. (2006). Determinants of perceived usefulness and perceived ease of use in The Technology Acceptance Model: Senior consumers adoption of self-serving banking technologies. Academy of WorldBusiness, Marketing & Management Development Conference Proceedings, 2(10), 122-129.
    20. Shepherd-Banigan, M., Bell, J. F., Basu, A., Booth-LaForce, C., & Harris, J. R. (2016). Workplace stress and working from home influence depressive symptoms among employed women with young children. International Journal of Behavioral Medicine, 23, 102-111. https://doi.org/10.1007/s12529-015-9482-9
    21. Surendran, P. (2012). Technology acceptance model: A survey of literature. International Journal of Business and Social Research, 2(4), 175-178.
    22. Schuster, C., Fuenzalida, J., Meyer-Sahling, J., Mikkelsen, K. S., & Titelman, N. (2020). Encuesta Nacional de Funcionarios en Chile: Evidencia para un servicio público más motivado, satisfecho, comprometido y ético. Centro de Sistemas Públicos, Dirección Nacional del Servicio Civil, University of Nottingham.
    23. Song, Y., & Gao, J. (2020). Does telework stress employees out? A study on working at home and subjective well-being for wage/salary workers. Journal of Happiness Studies, 21(7), 2649-2668. https://link.springer.com/article/10.1007/s10902-019-00196-6
    24. Taiwo, A. A., & Downe, A. G. (2013). The theory of user acceptance and use of technology (UTAUT): A meta-analytic review of empirical findings. Journal of Theoretical & Applied Information Technology, 49(1).
    25. Venkatesh, V., & Davis, F. D. (1996). A model of the antecedents of perceived ease of use: Development and test. Decision Sciences, 27(3), 451-481. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1540-5915.1996.tb00860.x
    26. Venkatesh, V., Morris, M. G., Davis, G. B., & Davis, F. D. (2003). User acceptance of information technology: Toward a unified view. MIS Quarterly, 27(3), 425-478.