The moderating role of intrinsic religiosity in the relationship of stressors and job performance: Evidence from Indonesia


Creative Commons License
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License

Job performance is the ability to complete work according to predetermined standards. Stressful conditions at work can make job performance worse. An individual’s intrinsic religiosity can weaken these stressful conditions. This study aims to empirically prove the influence of challenge and hindrance stressors on job performance and examine whether intrinsic religiosity can moderate this influence. This paper uses the method of administering online questionnaire surveys by distributing Google Form links to the eligible respondents without conducting the interview. It employs a non-probability sampling design with a purposive sampling method, in this case, judgment sampling. The criteria for selecting respondents are individuals who have the status of full-time employees and work in state-owned and private-owned organizations in the cities of Indonesia. This study proved all hypotheses. Higher challenge stressors result in higher job performance. At the same time, higher hindrance stressors result in lower job performance. Further, intrinsic religiosity weakens the positive influence of challenge stressors on job performance. Individuals who are always attached to God will use work as a means to please God. The characteristics of these individuals are having a positive mental attitude so that they are always ready and calm in facing various work situations and view work as a calling. Also, this study proves that the negative influence of hindrance stressors on job performance is weaker in people with intrinsic religiosity. Ambiguous job descriptions, conflicts, or excessive work are no longer burdensome.

This study is funded by the Faculty of Economics and Business, Pelita Harapan University, award number 023/P-ORP-FEB/I/2024.

view full abstract hide full abstract
    • Figure 1. Conceptual model
    • Table 1. Respondents’ demographic data
    • Table 2. P-value and VIF value of the formative construct
    • Table 3. Convergent validity results
    • Table 4. Discriminant validity results using the cross-loading
    • Table 5. Discriminant validity results using the Fornell-Larcker approach
    • Table 6. Discriminant validity results using the HTMT ratio approach
    • Table 7. Reliability test
    • Table 8. Path coefficient and p-value of hypotheses testing
    • Conceptualization
      Lina Lina
    • Data curation
      Lina Lina
    • Formal Analysis
      Lina Lina
    • Investigation
      Lina Lina
    • Methodology
      Lina Lina
    • Project administration
      Lina Lina
    • Resources
      Lina Lina
    • Supervision
      Lina Lina
    • Validation
      Lina Lina
    • Visualization
      Lina Lina
    • Writing – original draft
      Lina Lina
    • Writing – review & editing
      Lina Lina