The Social Exchange Theory proposed by George C. Homans in 1958 emphasizes social interaction between individuals in building everyday relationships. Homans developed this theory with the idea that social interaction can be explained through simple economic principles. The theory is based on the assumption that people engage in actions to gain rewards and avoid punishments. Homans asserted that economics can describe exchange relationships, sociology can explain social structures, and psychology is the key to these explanations. Social exchanges not only involve material rewards but also spiritual ones, such as praise. Unlike economic transactions, social exchanges do not always yield monetary compensation—tangible and intangible elements are also exchanged.

To achieve organizational goals, employee performance must be a focus in determining steps that drive those objectives. Performance is defined as an individual’s or group’s willingness to carry out tasks and complete them in accordance with responsibilities and expected outcomes (Nursam, 2017). When employees possess the right skills, knowledge, and motivation, they tend to contribute more significantly to an organization’s productivity and innovation (Windari & Rini, 2024). Performance is aligned with the employee’s role within the organization and based on experience, expertise, and dedication to achieving organizational goals. These goals are often embodied in specific, measurable targets. Without such targets, individuals or groups would not be able to determine direction or benchmarks. Performance is strongly related to productivity; conversely, organizational productivity and success are directly linked to employee performance.

Transformational leadership refers to a leadership approach that can bring about change in individuals and social systems. It is the ability to inspire and motivate followers to achieve results beyond original expectations, driven by internal rewards (Pratama et al., 2020). In a leader-member relationship, it is important to anticipate member satisfaction and align it with group goals, maintain high motivation, support maturity in decision-making, and encourage strong determination in achieving objectives (Rumpaidus & Fauzi, 2022). The theory developed by Bass (1985) emphasizes that transformational leaders inspire, motivate, and build positive relationships with their employees. Transformational leaders create a conducive work environment, motivating employees to improve their performance.

Employee impressions of how much the company values their contributions and is concerned about their welfare are referred to as organizational support. According to Farradilah et al. (2024), perceived organizational support (POS) is the degree to which workers feel their company appreciates their efforts and promotes their well-being, including their emotional needs and performance-related incentives. These perceptions are shaped by how employees attribute the organization's intentions—whether they believe they are being treated fairly and beneficially (Prasetyo et al., 2023). The relationship between the organization and employees shapes their attitudes and behaviors within the organization. Organizational support, therefore, involves providing recognition, attention, and improved welfare based on the effort or performance delivered. According to Wellem (2018), several dimensions of organizational support that can influence performance include organization, work tools, working conditions, and employment terms.

Juniati (2018) defines organizational commitment as a type of behavior indicating that an individual does not want to leave the organization. This shows a sense of belonging to the organization. Organizational commitment reflects employee loyalty and is evident in their strong involvement in achieving the organization’s goals (Waluyo & Swasti, 2024). High organizational commitment motivates employees to work harder and engage more deeply in their work. It is considered a work attitude because it reflects how individuals feel (positively or negatively) about their workplace (Anwar, 2019). Organizational commitment includes loyalty, identification, and involvement—defining the orientation between individuals and their organization.

According to Allen & Meyer (1990), organizational commitment is a psychological attachment of employees to the organization. Employees who feel burnout and job stress due to heavy workloads tend to be less cooperative with the company. Allen & Meyer’s model outlines three dimensions of organizational commitment:

The conceptual framework of this study is developed based on Social Exchange Theory, which posits that human interactions—such as transformational leadership and organizational support—can lead to significant improvements in performance, particularly when accompanied by effective commitment. This framework incorporates three variables: transformational leadership, organizational support, and organizational commitment, in relation to employee performance.

Transformational leadership and organizational support are presumed to have direct influences on employee performance, as they contribute to enhancing capabilities, innovation, and overall productivity. Furthermore, organizational commitment is proposed as a mediating variable, since employee performance tends to improve when the organization provides strong support and transformational leadership.

This approach attempts to experimentally validate the mediating function of organizational commitment in the interaction between transformational leadership, organizational support, and employee performance.

Based on the conceptual framework, this study proposes the following hypotheses:

Based on Table 1, the majority of respondents are female (53%), over 40 years old (66.1%), hold a bachelor’s degree (64.3%), and have 5–10 years of work experience (37.4%). These characteristics suggest that the respondents have sufficient backgrounds to provide informed responses.

Construct measurement quality was evaluated through reliability and validity tests. The indicators used are presented in the table below:

The results show that all constructs have Cronbach’s Alpha and Composite Reliability values above 0.7, indicating reliability. Additionally, the AVE values exceed 0.5, indicating good convergent validity.

Table 3. Outer Loadings

According to Table 3's findings, all of the research variables' indicators— transformational leadership, organizational support, organizational commitment, and employee performance—have loading factors greater than 0.5, meaning that all satisfy the criterion for convergent validity.

Table 4. Hypothesis Testing

According to the hypothesis testing results, employee performance is not significantly impacted by transformational leadership (H1). This is demonstrated by a p-value of 0.601 and a path coefficient of 0.070, both of which are higher than the significance level α = 0.05 (5%). H1 is thus disproved.

A path coefficient of 0.440 and a p-value of 0.001, which is below the α criterion, support the idea that organizational support (H2) significantly improves employee performance. H2 is therefore approved.

With a path coefficient of 0.071 and a p-value of 0.041 (< 0.05), organizational commitment has a substantial mediating role in the association between transformational leadership and employee performance (H3). H3 is therefore approved.

Similarly, with a path coefficient of 0.137 and a p-value of 0.033, the mediating role of organizational commitment in the association between organizational support and employee performance (H4) is noteworthy. H4 is therefore approved.

The findings indicate that transformational leadership does not significantly affect employee performance. This suggests that the motivational efforts of leaders do not directly influence employees’ performance, likely due to a lack of inspiration, motivation, or role modeling by the leaders.

Although transformational leadership theoretically can inspire and motivate employees, in practice it may not align with their immediate needs. Maslow's Hierarchy of wants states that before higher-level wants like self-actualization become important, lower-level requirements like safety and physiology must be met.

Civil servants in Level II (ASN Golongan II), who typically occupy executor roles with limited income and responsibility, are more focused on job stability and meeting basic needs than on long-term personal growth or visionary change. Thus, employees may respond better to transactional leadership approaches, such as direct incentives or tangible rewards, rather than abstract inspiration.

The findings of Widjaja et al. (2018) and Baihaqi & Saifudin (2021), who discovered that transformative leadership had no discernible effect on worker performance, are consistent with this outcome.

The findings demonstrate that staff performance at the Surabaya Environmental Agency is significantly improved by organizational support. This suggests that improved employee performance is correlated with increased perceived organizational support.

This is consistent with Social Exchange Theory by George C. Homans (1958), which posits that employees reciprocate positive treatment from the organization (e.g., comfort, ease of work, or recognition) by increasing their work performance.

The Surabaya Environmental Agency demonstrates this through organizational support practices, such as enhancing technical capacity in environmental management. These findings align with Marbun et al. (2022) and Metria et al. (2018), who found that organizational support significantly and positively affects employee performance.

The study reveals that transformational leadership has a significant indirect effect on employee performance through organizational commitment. This means transformational leadership influences performance not directly, but via its ability to foster organizational commitment.

Job satisfaction and reduced burnout—when employees are placed in roles aligned with their expectations—can boost loyalty. Elements like structural support, policy clarity, and consistent programs strengthen employee commitment. Transformational leadership becomes effective when paired with enabling systems such as digital service implementation and ongoing training.

These findings align with Fauzan et al. (2023) and Pratama et al. (2020), who concluded that transformational leadership positively affects employee performance through the mediating role of organizational commitment.

The study also demonstrates how organizational commitment acts as a mediator between organizational support and employee performance. This implies that positive organizational support boosts employees’ sense of belonging and loyalty.

Positive support fosters affective commitment, or an emotional and psychological bond with the organization. Such commitment leads to responsible, high-performing behavior.

At the Surabaya Environmental Agency, organizational support includes leadership concern for employee welfare and provision of adequate work facilities—e.g., regular B3 waste management training and leadership participation in river clean-up efforts during the Eid al-Adha festivities.

Prasetyo et al. (2023) and Metria et al. (2018) provided evidence in support of these findings, showing that organizational commitment plays a substantial mediating role in the relationship between employee performance and perceived organizational support. The relationship between work performance and perceived support is strengthened by organizational commitment.