DOES PERCEIVED IMPACT OF CHANGE AFFECT READINESS FOR CHANGE IN HIGHER EDUCATION GOVERNANCE?

ABSTRACT


INTRODUCTION
Global competition urges the government to comply with changes in governance and the performance of government apparatus and public services by improving the bureaucracy in all government institutions (Astridina et al., 2018).In the world of education, to follow this rhythm, universities, especially state universities in Indonesia, are trying to change towards more autonomous governance.State universities are competing towards the most autonomous management, namely Legal Entity State Universities (Perguruan Tinggi Negeri Badan Hukum abbreviated PTN-BH).Legal entitiy state universities has abundant sovereign in financial management and human resources within it (Diyanto et al., 2021).
As of 2022, there were 21 state universities in Indonesia with legal entity status (Caesaria, 2022).Meanwhile, state universities that have a prominent opportunity to move up to a legal entity level are state universities with public service agencies (Badan Layanan Umum abbreviated BLU).Currently, 47 public service agencies state universities are preparing to become legal entity state universities (eCampuz, 2020;Pindai Kemdikbudristek, 2021).Changing higher education governance status has its challenges because if it is inadequate to meet the achievement requirements in the first couple of years, it might abolish.Whereas for legal entity state universities, those that do not fulfill the performance evaluation in the form of inappropriate performance reports and financial reports within 5 years may be subject to sanctions in the form of changing the status of legal entity to become public service agencies (downgrade of governance status) as regulated in Article 27 Government Regulations Number 4 of 2014 (Sutini, 2019).Therefore, it is crucial to prepare all human resources in higher education to be able to undergo the change process and maintain the status given.It is because the role and quality of HR greatly influence whether success or failure of an organization in realizing its plans and goals (Inandriciya et al., 2021).
Changes in governance are closely related to the readiness of academic staff in administrative tasks.According to Amon et al. (2021), academic staff should have operational and administrative technical skills in implementing their work.In addition, the academic staff is also the front guard who is required to adapt quickly to changes related to administrative services (Anardani et al., 2021).
Before starting a change in the organization, it requires readiness from members (Mangundjaya, 2016).Readiness for change is one of the drivers for achieving the effectiveness of organizational change (Armenakis et al., 1993).Holt et al. (2007) argue that readiness to change is a comprehensive attitude persuaded by content (something that is changed), process (how changes are carried out), context (changes that are taking place), and a person involved in a change (individual characteristics).There will be feelings of unpreparedness, opposite, rejection, and a lack of commitment to change which will be a challenge and even an obstacle to achieving the success of an organizational change program if the readiness is not prepared (Mangundjaya, 2016).Rafferty et al. (2013) define readiness to change as a cognitive state in individuals who have positive attitudes, beliefs, and intentions toward change.Bernerth (2004) believes that readiness to change is a success factor in organizational change.The change readiness expressed by Weiner et al. (2008) refers to the commitment to a change to implement the success of the change.Holt et al. (2007) define change readiness as a comprehensive attitude reflected stimulus in the individual's cognitive and emotional aspects.In his research, it was categorized into several dimensions: appropriateness, management support, change efficacy, & personal valence.
Readiness for change in an individual can be demonstrated through several things, namely individual characteristics (core self-evaluation), contextual (trust in management, communication climate), perceived impact of change, and attitudes at work (job satisfaction) (Vakola, 2014).Perception is how individuals interpret information to gain meaning (Robbins & Judge, 2013).McNabb and Sepic (1995) stated that change is a process of changing actions, reactions, and interactions from individuals to realize the goals of achieving an organization.All changes lead to organizational effectiveness to improve the organization's ability to adapt to environmental changes and the behavior of members (Robbins & Judge, 2013).The perception of an individual becomes a facility and a constraint in implementing readiness for change (Smith, 2005).Individuals in implementing change will make interpretations regarding how the process is, evaluate it, determine its meaning, and develop what they feel (Choi, 2011).
According to Bouckenooghe and Devos (2008), the attitude of readiness for change is divided into three, based on cognitive, emotional, and intentional.An individual's perception becomes both a facility and an obstacle in implementing change readiness (Smith, 2005).
Based on this, the researchers focused on research in the organizational context, especially related to readiness for change and the perceived impact of change on state university academic staff in implementing change.The role of the perceived impact of change on readiness for change is necessary to prove empirically.
Previous research has mentioned the importance of organizations implementing change, informing change processes, and noting predictors of individual readiness to change (Deem et al., 2008;Pincus et al., 2017).Armenakis et al. (1993) believe individual factors are the most influential model for the success of change initiatives in an organization, where the implementation of change will be effective if individuals are dedicated to being ready to change.The change will impact the original situation to the new one, causing feelings of anxiety, uncertainty, and different perspectives (Shah & Shah, 2010).Change requires a way to ensure the success of implementing change by knowing the level of readiness of employees in an organization (Mulà et al., 2017).The researchers thought that further studies need to be conducted to see if the mentioned results also occur in academic field.
This study aims to determine the role of perceived impact of change on readiness for change in academic staff.It aims to test the researchers' hypothesis, which is there is a role for the perceived impact of change on readiness for change in academic staff.Based on this, the researchers focused on research in the organizational context, especially related to readiness for change and the perceived impact of change on state university academic staff in implementing change.The aim of this research is to find out empirically whether there is a role for perceptions of the impact of change on readiness for change.This research can be a reference for universities, especially those who want to change governance so that the implementation of changes can be carried out.

METHOD
The design of this study uses a quantitative method by collecting data in the form of numbers, words, or sentences converted into numerical data, then analyzed to obtain scientific information (Martono, 2019).The research design is cross-sectional, a study with an approach or data collection at once (point time approach) to examine the relationship between risk factors and effects (Siyoto & Sodik, 2015).
The population in this study was 985 academic staff at one state university in South Kalimantan.The recruitment of academic staff as research respondents based on their duties as managers of continuous administrative management with a change plan.The total number of participants was 263 academic staff from 10 faculties (Faculty of Teaching and Education, Faculty of Law, Faculty of Economics and Business, Faculty of Social and Political Sciences, Faculty of Fisheries and Maritime Affairs, Faculty of Agriculture, Faculty of Engineering, Faculty of Forestry, Faculty Mathematics and Natural Sciences and Postgraduate), it can be said that the minimum sample size is adequate.After going through the residual normality test process, there were nine outliers or subjects with extreme values, the total number of participants to analyze was 254.

RESULTS AND DISCUSSION
The description of the research data aims to present general results related to research variable data.The research data were analyzed descriptively based on the scoring results by comparing hypothetical scores with empirical scores on readiness for change and the perceived impact of change.The research data collected was then analyzed using the help of IBM SPSS Statistics 26.The analysis used to measure the role of the perceived impact of change on readiness for change in academic staff was preceded by carrying out an assumption test (residual normality test and linearity test).If the assumption test is declared successful, then the data analysis will be continued with hypothesis testing using simple linear regression analysis techniques.Based on the table, before removing outliers the data shows that the residual readiness to change and the residual perceived impact of change does not meet the assumption of normality with a kurtosis z value (9.71 > 3.29) and require the elimination of outliers by checking the extreme values (outliers) through the box-pot diagram.Tests after eliminating outliers obtained the data distribution to be normal with skewness z score (-2.01 < 3.29) and a kurtosis z score (-0.14 < 3,29) (see Table 4).Based on the test results, each variable has fulfilled the assumption of normality.Based on the results of the linearity test, the significance value was 0.000 (< 0.05), which means there is a linear relationship between readiness for change and the perceived impact of change (F = 261.822,p <0.05), it can be said both variables have met the assumptions of the linearity test.Test the significant role of the perceived impact of change on readiness for change can be seen from the calculated t value.Perceived impact of change positively significant to predicts readiness for change (R 2 = 0.577, F(2, 252) = 343.884,p = 0.001) (ß = 1.979 t = 18.544, p < 0.001) with a t count is obtained > t table (18.544 > 1.650), means the research hypothesis is accepted.
The unstandardized coefficients in the constant column (a value) are 44.463, the unstandardized coefficients in the perceived impact of change column (b value) are 1.979 using a simple linear regression equation Ŷ = a + bX, then Ŷ = 44.463+ 1.979X.If the perceived impact of change increases by one point, the readiness for change will increase by 1.979.The coefficient value is positive means there is a positive role between the perceived impact of change and readiness for change, the higher the perceived impact of change, the higher the readiness for change in academic staff and vice versa.
The coefficient of determination (R 2 ) value is 0.577.It shows the role of the perceived impact of change on readiness for change by 57.7% and 42.3% is affected by other factors not included in this study (e.g.individual characteristics, contextual, and attitudes at work) (Vakola, 2014).The researcher tried to perform a hierarchical regression analysis to discover whether demographic factors (gender, age, and length of work) could influence the research model.In Table 9, the results of the R 2 value strengthen (R 2 = 0.581, F(4, 249) = 86.441,p = < 0.001), but the ß value from the demographic data is not significant.It can be concluded that gender, age, and length of work do not affect readiness for change.
Based on the results, there is a role for the perceived impact of change on readiness for change.This finding is align with previous research conducted by Vakola (2014), someone who is positively oriented to the perceived impact of change will be more ready to face these changes.Other findings to strengthen the results of this study investigated by Armenakis et al. (1993), if they dedicated to implementing change through their perspective are the models that most play a role in the success of change.These findings are also supported by Choi's research (2011) which shows that individuals will make interpretations regarding the systematic process of implementing change.
The operational system in an organization must focus on individual perception abilities in dealing with change to achieve readiness for change (Walinga, 2008).Worrall et al. (2000) explained that an individual's perception has an impact on change which can affect negatively or positively, one of several factors that have the potential to influence readiness for change.A positive attitude toward change is motivated by its perception of change and becomes the most meaningful thing to target a certain goal in the organization (Eby et al., 2000).Vakola (2014) also believes that the perceived impact of change is a context that tends to be strong in dealing with readiness for change effectively.
The individual value of the change plan is influenced by cognitive and emotional (Purwaningrum et al., 2022).In implementing the changes, Judge et al. (1999) stated that one individual will see change as an opportunity while the other might be neutral or respond negatively.However, Eby and colleagues (2000) mention that each individual has their view of the organization, individual perceptions will continue to evolve as time goes by, and the results from the change itself will impact an individual's performance, attitude, and willingness to survive from the organization.Creating perceptions about the impact of change through the impressions and expectations given by the company will guide attitudes and behavior to be ready to accept change (Choi & Ruona, 2013;Tran et al., 2020).
Based on the data analysis, the coefficient value is positive, which means that the higher the perceived impact of change, the higher the readiness for change in academic staff.The existence of a positive role between these variables involves the effectiveness of academic staff in implementing changes, especially in the context of financial management by general state financial management to public service agencies.In line with previous findings by Bowman and Stern (1995), a positive individual interpretation of change can lead to successful change.Walinga (2008) also added that the operational system in an organization focuses on the ability of individual perceptions in dealing with change to achieve readiness for change.Research by Eby et al. (2000) which is also the supporting findings stated that individual perceptions play a significant role in readiness for change.This perception of receiving support from the internal context can help organizations manage uncertainty and anxiety during organizational change (Cullen et al., 2014).
Comparison of readiness for change based on demographic data (gender, age, and length of work) showed no difference.This finding aligned with Wittenstein research (2008) which investigated the role of demographics, individual dispositions towards change, empowerment, and emotional climate with employee readiness for change and found no significant differences between demographic characteristics (age, gender, length of work) and employee readiness for change.O'Neil (2007) also investigated the role of demographic information such as gender, age, years of service, and position.He found no significant difference between demographic information in employees' readiness for change.
This research has limitations such as measuring tools in the form of self-reports because humans sometimes do not tell what is true about themselves, which creates a risk of bias.Second, this research only examines one of the human resources that is most related to changes in higher education governance, namely academic staff.Other human resources (lecturers, leaders, students) can consider being used as material for further research.Third, this study only included gender, age, and length of work as additional demographic data.Other researchers can add other demographic factors to enrich the research results.

CONCLUSION
The results show that the perceived impact of change affected the readiness for change in academic staff.State universities, especially leaders, are expected to ensure the participation of employees, especially academic staff, in undertaking planning and implementing governance changes for these changes to run successfully.In addition, this research can be used as material for consideration for state universities to ensure that the message of change has been conveyed in order that its members are ready to face change.

Table 1 .
Population of Academic Staff

Table 2 .
Description of ParticipantOffline data collection was carried out from June 28 th -July 5 th , 2022 with a total of 254 for further analysis.The data analysis technique used is to test assumptions with several tests such as the residual normality test, linearity test, and hypothesis testing with simple linear regression analysis techniques using the help of IBM SPSS Statistics 26.

Table 3 .
Research Variable Data Categorization

Table 4 .
Residual Skewness Kurtosis Normality Test Results

Table 6 .
Model Summary Readiness for Change