According to Hasibuan (2017), human resources is the science and art that aims to regulate relationships and the role of the workforce so that they can function effectively and efficiently in achieving the goals of the company, employees, and society. This view aligns with Badriyah (2019), who explains that human resource management is a branch of management science specifically focused on managing the role of the workforce in carrying out organizational activities.

The concept of sustainable development, historically defined as efforts to meet present needs without compromising the ability of future generations to meet their own needs, has continued to evolve with deeper meaning. Contemporary analysis emphasizes that this concept is not merely about achieving a static balance, but rather a dynamic and continuous process of transformation in resource management, technological development, and institutional change to support intergenerational justice (Santoso, 2022). This

process demands fundamental changes in perspective, where resource exploitation must be directed toward wise and long-term-oriented management (Santoso, 2022).

Work motivation is defined as a series of psychological processes that arouse, direct, and sustain goal-oriented voluntary actions in the work context. This process involves three key elements: intensity (how much effort is exerted), direction (where the effort is directed), and persistence (how long the effort can be sustained), which collectively determine an employee’s contribution to organizational goals (A. Nugroho, 2023). In today’s work landscape, understanding these driving forces is crucial, as motivation is no longer seen merely as a response to basic needs, but rather as a complex interaction between individual values and the dynamic organizational context.

Organizational commitment is one of the main predictors of work behavior and serves as the foundation for a productive employment relationship between employees and the company. Colquitt et al. (2021) define organizational commitment as the employee’s perceived desire to remain a member of an organization. This desire often determines whether an employee will continue as a member or choose to leave for another job.

Conceptually, employee performance is not only viewed as an outcome (results) but also as behaviors or actions relevant to organizational goals. Aguinis (2019) defines performance as the behaviors or actions carried out by employees, not the consequences or results of those actions. This definition emphasizes that performance concerns what employees do at work, which can be directly observed and evaluated for development.

Job satisfaction is defined as a pleasant emotional state resulting from an individual’s evaluation of their job or work experience. According to Noe et al. (2023a), job satisfaction is essentially about how much someone likes their job. It is an important attitude rooted in employees’ emotions and rational thoughts regarding various aspects of their work.

The Effect of Work Motivation on Job Satisfaction

Work motivation plays an important role in determining employee job satisfaction. A work environment that encourages motivation can create a conducive atmosphere for employees to feel more satisfied and engaged. Work motivation can arise from various factors, including fair compensation, organizational support, and recognition of achievements. In the study of Shodiqin et al. (2024), work motivation was found to have a significant effect on employee job satisfaction at PT Agro Mina Lestari Wotgalar, Banjarnegara, showing that motivated employees tend to feel more satisfied with their jobs. H1: Work Motivation has a significant effect on Job Satisfaction.

Work motivation is one of the key elements in improving employee performance across various types of organizations. Motivation provides both intrinsic and extrinsic encouragement that enables employees to work better, achieve targets, and contribute optimally.

H2: Work Motivation has a significant effect on Employee Performance.

Based on previous research findings, it can be concluded that organizational commitment significantly affects job satisfaction, as reinforced by the third hypothesis: Organizational Commitment has a significant effect on Job Satisfaction. Organizations that seek to improve employee commitment through a positive work culture, support for work–life balance, and the creation of job satisfaction can foster a productive and sustainable work environment. H3: Organizational Commitment has a significant effect on Job Satisfaction.

Research findings also suggest that organizational commitment significantly affects employee performance, as confirmed by the fourth hypothesis: Organizational Commitment has a significant effect on Employee Performance. In the context of ADINKES, organizational commitment is a critical element in enhancing employee performance through approaches that include inspirational leadership, a supportive work culture, and balancing organizational and employee needs. By building strong commitment, organizations can create a productive, innovative, and sustainable work environment.

H4: Organizational Commitment has a significant effect on Employee Performance.

Based on previous research findings, it can be concluded that job satisfaction significantly affects employee performance, as stated in the fifth hypothesis: Job Satisfaction has a significant effect on Employee Performance. In the context of ADINKES, job satisfaction is a key factor in improving employee performance in the health sector. By creating a supportive work environment, recognizing contributions, and ensuring work–life balance, organizations can enhance job satisfaction, which in turn supports better performance and improved public service.

H5: Job Satisfaction has a significant effect on Employee Performance.

This study employs a quantitative approach. Quantitative research methods can be defined as methods that emphasize the analysis of numerical data processed using statistical techniques. This approach was chosen because the study aims to test hypotheses and measure the influence between predetermined variables, thereby producing measurable, objective, and reliable conclusions (Sugiyono, 2020).

Measurement Model (Outer Model) Testing

In Structural Equation Modeling–Partial Least Squares (SEM-PLS), measurement model testing is conducted to assess the extent to which the indicators developed in the questionnaire instrument can validly and reliably represent the latent constructs. This testing is an essential stage before proceeding to the examination of relationships between variables, ensuring that the quality of the instrument meets appropriate standards.

The measurement model in this study includes four constructs: Work Motivation (X1), Organizational Commitment (X2), Job Satisfaction (Z), and Employee Performance (Y). Each construct consists of a number of indicators developed based on theories discussed in the literature review and conceptual framework. The evaluation of the measurement model was carried out through several stages as follows:

To assess convergent validity, each indicator forming a construct is evaluated. Referring to the standard set by Chin (2015), an indicator is considered highly valid if it has a factor loading value greater than 0.70. However, indicators with values ranging from 0.50 to 0.60 are still acceptable, as they are considered sufficiently adequate. Therefore, indicators with values below 0.50 must be excluded or removed from the research model.

Figure 4.1. Loading Factor Values from SmartPLS 4.0 Algorithm

Source: SmartPLS 4.0 Output Processing, 2025

Based on the results shown in the figure above, the findings indicate that each indicator of the research variables exceeded the recommended threshold value. This provides evidence that all indicators in this study are proven to be reliable. Therefore, it can be concluded that all questions in the questionnaire met the requirements to proceed to the next stage of analysis.

After confirming that the indicators met expectations, the next step was to analyze the extent to which each indicator could explain the construct being studied, while considering potential measurement errors. This test is stricter than commonly used consistency checks. Generally, for satisfactory results, the value should reach at least 0.50. The calculation results obtained using SmartPLS 4.0 software are presented in Table 4.2:

Table 4.2. AVE Test Results

Source: SmartPLS 4.0 Output Processing, 2025

Referring to Table 4.2, the results show that the Average Variance Extracted (AVE) values for all constructs exceeded the minimum threshold of 0.50. This achievement indicates that all indicators met the necessary criteria, confirming that the research model is sufficiently reliable to proceed to the next stage of analysis.

The next step was to evaluate discriminant validity. This was done by comparing the AVE values of each variable with the correlations between that variable and others. A measurement model can be considered to have good discriminant validity if the AVE value of each variable is higher than the correlations with other variables. All AVE values used in this test were obtained from the SmartPLS 4.0 analysis.

The results show that all indicators met the criteria. The indicators of Work Motivation (X1.1–X1.10) loaded onto their construct within the range of 0.794– 0.886; Organizational Commitment (X2.1–X2.11) within 0.851–0.927; Employee Performance (Y.1–Y.19) within 0.814–0.932; and Job Satisfaction (Z.1–Z.12) within 0.842–0.940. All cross-loadings on other constructs were consistently lower than the loadings on their intended construct, confirming that each construct successfully distinguished its indicators from those of other constructs. Thus, discriminant validity was achieved, and the measurement model was deemed appropriate to proceed to structural analysis.

In line with the cross-loading findings, the Fornell–Larcker criterion in the SmartPLS 4.0 output further reinforced this conclusion. The square root of the AVE values were as follows: Work Motivation = 0.840; Organizational Commitment = 0.898; Employee Performance = 0.878; Job Satisfaction = 0.878— all exceeding the highest correlations with related constructs (e.g., Performance– Satisfaction = 0.813; Commitment–Performance = 0.792; Motivation–Performance = 0.728; Motivation–Commitment = 0.535; Motivation–Satisfaction = 0.580; Commitment–Satisfaction = 0.609). Therefore, for each construct, √AVE was greater than the inter-construct correlations, confirming discriminant validity and the robustness of the measurement model.

Additionally, discriminant validity was evaluated using the Heterotrait- Monotrait Ratio (HTMT). Following Hair et al. (2017), the acceptable threshold is HTMT < 0.90. The results of this study show that all HTMT values were below this threshold, thereby meeting the requirements of discriminant validity.

Table 4.5. HTMT Results

Source: SmartPLS 4.0 Output Processing, 2025 Reliability Test Results

As the final step in evaluating the outer model, reliability testing was conducted to ensure no measurement issues were present. This test was carried out using two main indicators: Composite Reliability and Cronbach’s Alpha.

The purpose of these tests is to verify the reliability and consistency of the research instrument. Based on established standards, a construct is considered reliable if both Composite Reliability and Cronbach’s Alpha values reach or exceed 0.70.

Based on SmartPLS 4.0 output (2025), internal reliability was evaluated using Cronbach’s Alpha and Composite Reliability (CR), with a minimum threshold of 0.70. All constructs proved to be reliable: Work Motivation (α = 0.954; CR = 0.957), Organizational Commitment (α = 0.976; CR = 0.978), Employee Performance (α = 0.983; CR = 0.984), and Job Satisfaction (α = 0.973; CR = 0.974). All values exceeded 0.90, indicating excellent internal consistency; thus, the questionnaire instrument was deemed reliable and suitable for subsequent stages of analysis.

After meeting all the outer model evaluation criteria, the analysis proceeded to the next stage, namely testing the structural model (inner model). This phase tests the validity of the model developed based on the established concepts and theories. The main focus is to analyze in depth how exogenous variables influence endogenous variables, in line with the hypotheses formulated in the research framework. This evaluation involved several systematic steps, outlined as follows:

Multicollinearity testing in the structural model was conducted to detect high correlations among independent constructs that may affect the accuracy and stability of coefficient estimations. Referring to Hair et al. (2019), a model is considered free from multicollinearity if the Variance Inflation Factor (VIF) values are below 5.0.

The SmartPLS output indicated that all paths met this criterion: Work Motivation → Employee Performance (VIF = 1.637), Work Motivation → Job Satisfaction (1.401), Organizational Commitment → Employee Performance (1.726), Organizational Commitment → Job Satisfaction (1.401), and Job Satisfaction → Employee Performance (1.858). All VIF values < 5.0, indicating no signs of multicollinearity; therefore, coefficient estimates in the model were considered stable, and interpretations of relationships among constructs were reliable.

One of the key steps in this test was evaluating the coefficient of determination (R-Square or R²). This essentially measures the Goodness of Fit, showing how well the research model explains the variance in dependent variables. In other words, the R² value assesses the predictive power of the overall structural model under analysis.

Table 4.8. R-Square Test Results

Source: SmartPLS 4.0 Output Processing, 2025

For the Employee Performance variable, the calculation results showed an R² value of 0.849. This indicates that variations in Employee Performance can be explained by the predictor variables in this model by 84.9%. This figure shows that most of the factors influencing employee performance fluctuations were successfully represented by the research model. Based on interpretation standards, this value is categorized as very high, demonstrating strong explanatory power of the model. The remaining 15.1% is assumed to originate from other variables not included in the conceptual framework of this study.

For the Job Satisfaction variable, the analysis yielded an R² value of 0.462. This means that the predictor variables in this model collectively explained 46.2% of the variation in Job Satisfaction. In other words, the ability of the independent variables to explain fluctuations in Job Satisfaction was at that level.

Based on general criteria, this value categorizes the research model as having moderate explanatory power. Meanwhile, the remaining 53.8% suggests the presence of other factors outside the scope of the tested model in this study.

To determine the magnitude of the partial effect of each predictor variable on the endogenous variables individually, the f-Square (f²) value was tested. The interpretation of these values refers to the criteria established by Ghozali (2014), which serves as the guideline in this analysis. According to this standard, a predictor variable is considered to have a strong effect if its f² value is equal to or greater than 0.35. An effect is categorized as medium when the f² value ranges between 0.15 and 0.35, while an effect is considered weak if the f² value falls between 0.02 and below 0.15.

Based on the calculation results of f² values to assess the impact of each exogenous variable on the endogenous variables in this research model, the findings are as follows:

f² = 0.313. This value falls within the range of 0.15 to 0.35, indicating that the effect of Work Motivation on Employee Performance can be interpreted as medium.

f² = 0.169. This value is within the range of 0.15 to 0.35, suggesting that the effect of Work Motivation on Job Satisfaction is also medium.

f² = 0.584. Since this value is well above 0.35, the effect of Organizational Commitment on Employee Performance is classified as strong.

f² = 0.232. This value lies between 0.15 and 0.35, meaning the effect of Organizational Commitment on Job Satisfaction is considered medium.

f² = 0.609. As this value exceeds 0.35, the effect of Job Satisfaction on Employee Performance is categorized as strong.

The evaluation of Goodness of Fit for the structural model (inner model) was also conducted using predictive relevance, represented by the symbol Q². This test essentially aims to determine whether the research model has the capability to predict the observed data of its endogenous variables. The evaluation criterion is straightforward: a model is considered to have adequate predictive relevance if the Q² value is greater than 0.

The Q-Square results are as follows:

A crucial step in structural model analysis is ensuring that each estimated path coefficient is statistically significant and reliable. To obtain significance levels, the bootstrapping procedure was employed, which essentially generates thousands of sub-samples to test the stability of the path coefficients.

The determination of hypothesis significance was based on two key values from the bootstrapping report: the path coefficient and, more importantly, the t- statistic value. Decision-making was carried out by comparing the t-statistic (commonly referred to as t-value) obtained from the analysis with the critical t- table value.

At a significance level of α = 0.05 (5%), the critical t-value is 1.96. Therefore, a hypothesis is declared statistically significant if its t-statistic exceeds 1.96.

The final test results indicate that work motivation has a positive and significant effect on employee performance. The path coefficient value of 0.279 reflects a positive relationship, with significance supported by a T- statistic of 3.531 (greater than 1.96) and a P-value of 0.000. In other words, an increase in work motivation among ADINKES employees directly leads to a significant improvement in employee performance.

Work motivation was found to have a positive and significant effect on job satisfaction. This is shown by a positive path coefficient of 0.357. The effect is statistically significant, as the T-statistic (3.497) exceeds 1.96 and is supported by a P-value of 0.000. This result implies that the higher the work motivation of employees, the higher their level of job satisfaction.

The analysis reveals that organizational commitment has a positive and significant effect on job satisfaction. A positive path coefficient of 0.418 indicates the direction of this relationship. The significance is confirmed by a T-statistic of 4.354, which exceeds 1.96, and a P-value of 0.000. Thus, it can be concluded that increased organizational commitment significantly improves employee job satisfaction.

The test results show that job satisfaction has a positive and significant effect on employee performance. This is evidenced by a positive path coefficient (Original Sample) of 0.414. The T-statistic value of 3.911 is far greater than the critical t-value of 1.96, while the P-value of 0.000 is smaller than 0.05. This indicates that the higher the job satisfaction experienced by employees at ADINKES, the higher their performance will be.

The results also confirm that Job Satisfaction significantly mediates the effect of Work Motivation on Employee Performance. Statistical evidence shows a T-statistic of 2.296 (greater than 1.96) and a P-value of 0.022 (less than 0.05). This means that the positive effect of Work Motivation on Employee Performance is partially mediated by Job Satisfaction. In other words, higher motivation enhances satisfaction, which in turn drives performance improvement. The indirect effect coefficient is 0.148.

The analysis shows that Job Satisfaction significantly mediates the effect of Organizational Commitment on Employee Performance. This is evidenced by a T-statistic of 2.541 (greater than 1.96) and a P-value of 0.011 (less than 0.05). This implies that Organizational Commitment not only directly affects Employee Performance but also indirectly influences it by first increasing Job Satisfaction, which subsequently enhances performance. The indirect effect coefficient is 0.173.

This study shows that work motivation has a positive and significant effect on employee performance, underscoring the importance of managing motivation as part of human resource development. Theoretically, motivation is an internal and external driver that shapes enthusiasm and achievement-oriented behavior in achieving organizational goals; high motivation enhances responsibility, enthusiasm, and employee productivity (Al-Ghifari, Jamaludin Al Azhar, & Wahjono, 2025; Firdaus, Trisnawati, & Sumartik, 2025). From a managerial perspective, strengthening motivation can be fostered through recognition, continuous training, and clear communication of objectives, which in turn improve productivity and commitment to the organization (Robbins & Judge, 2021).

The consistency of these findings is supported by cross-context empirical evidence: motivational leadership styles have been shown to increase work responsibility and quality outcomes (Naskhud & Anggraini, 2025); motivation significantly affects productivity and work efficiency (Wahyuni & Masruroh, 2025); and has even been reported to account for more than 50% of the variance in employee performance (Waruwu & Ariyanti, 2025). In the insurance sector, satisfaction and motivation together improve work effectiveness and productivity (Liani & Azis, 2025). Thus, both theoretical foundations and empirical findings imply that enhancing motivation is a strategic lever to drive performance, which in practice can be realized through recognition of achievements, access to career development, and alignment of work goals.

This study finds that work motivation has a positive and significant effect on employee job satisfaction. Conceptually, this result aligns with Maslow’s hierarchy of needs and Herzberg’s motivation–hygiene theory: when key needs are met, motivated individuals tend to experience higher levels of satisfaction. Empirical evidence supports this pattern—high motivation sparks enthusiasm and positive feelings in carrying out tasks (Amarolloh, Romdoni, & Ajiji, 2025) and strengthens positive perceptions of work that lead to increased satisfaction (Saifuloh & Triyana, 2025). The implication is that strengthening motivation is a key managerial lever to improve a productive and harmonious work climate.

Furthermore, managerial practices determine the extent to which motivation transforms into satisfaction. Positive feedback and opportunities for innovation have been shown to increase satisfaction at the organizational level (Judge & Bono, 2020); the combination of strong motivation with effective compensation systems and work discipline further enhances satisfaction (Hasan & Yuliani, 2025). Motivation, alongside career development, has a simultaneous effect on satisfaction and fosters a positive emotional bond with work (Wiratama & Firdzaus, 2025). Cross-context evidence is also consistent: inclusive and motivating school environments increase teachers’ psychological well-being and satisfaction (Yudiani & Meyrinda, 2025), while in the food and beverage sector, motivation is positively and significantly correlated with job satisfaction (Putri, Eka, & Anggraini, 2025). Therefore, strengthening motivation—through recognition of achievements, growth opportunities, fair rewards, and supportive work norms—is an effective strategy to increase job satisfaction.

This study shows that organizational commitment has a positive and significant effect on employee performance, thereby emphasizing the managerial importance of building and maintaining employees’ sense of belonging and responsibility toward the organization. Theoretically, commitment reflects individuals’ psychological investment that drives motivation and productivity; within Meyer and Allen’s framework, affective, continuance, and normative commitment form the foundation that—when managed through a fair and supportive work environment—enhances loyalty, reduces turnover, and improves performance (Meyer & Allen, 2021). Accordingly, commitment has been identified as a key variable in sustaining competence and performance across sectors (Putra, Kharimatul, & Jannah, 2025) and contributes to forming motivation and positive work attitudes that affect work quality (Qurrota’ayun, 2025).

Consistent empirical evidence reinforces these findings: organizational commitment mediates the relationship between work engagement and employee performance (Sapta, Ningsih, & Novarini, 2025) and strengthens the impact of rewards and sanctions on work outcomes (Wuryaningrat et al., 2025). In the tourism sector, commitment instilled through emotional and spiritual intelligence has been shown to improve performance (Suryawati & Nugraha, 2025), while high commitment reduces resistance and fosters productive employee contributions (Palandi & Wuryaningrat, 2025). Overall, both theoretical and empirical evidence conclude that strengthening commitment is a critical foundation in modern HR management to enhance performance— practically through creating a fair work climate, providing developmental support, consistent reward and discipline mechanisms, and strengthening organizational engagement.

This study shows that organizational commitment has a positive and significant effect on employee job satisfaction, requiring systematic managerial efforts to build and maintain employees’ sense of belonging and responsibility toward the organization. Theoretically, commitment represents employees’ attachment to organizational values, goals, and identity, which directly impacts satisfaction; employees with high commitment tend to feel valued and engaged (Cahyaningsih & Suyoto, 2025), while commitment also mediates the influence of organizational culture on job satisfaction (Ekowati, 2025). Within the three- dimensional framework—affective, continuance, and normative—commitment managed through a fair and supportive work climate enhances loyalty, reduces turnover, and improves both performance and satisfaction (Meyer & Allen, 2021). The implication is that organizations need to foster a culture that supports commitment as a prerequisite for productivity and retention.

The strength of this finding is reinforced by cross-context empirical evidence: healthy work environments and supportive leadership increase commitment and, in turn, strengthen satisfaction (Riono & Sucipto, 2025); internal control systems and effective communication foster commitment and create satisfying working conditions (Yaya, 2025). The positive and significant relationship between organizational commitment and job satisfaction has also been confirmed in a study at PT BISI International Kediri (Nathaniel, 2025). Furthermore, commitment functions as a mediating variable that strengthens the relationship between teamwork and job satisfaction (Islamy, 2025). Overall, theoretical and empirical evidence confirms organizational commitment as an important determinant of stable job satisfaction; practical levers include strengthening supportive leadership, procedural fairness, recognition of achievements, as well as consistent communication and internal control.

This study demonstrates that job satisfaction has a positive and significant effect on employee performance within ADINKES. Theoretically, this relationship aligns with Herzberg’s two-factor theory: motivator factors such as recognition and achievement directly drive performance improvements. Empirical evidence further supports this—satisfaction with salary, interpersonal relationships, and job challenges are key drivers of productivity in SMEs (Praditya, R. A., Prayuda, R. Z., & Purwanto, A., 2025), while commitment and organizational citizenship behavior (OCB) act as important linkages that strengthen the influence of job satisfaction on performance (Rahman, A. N., & Yuniawan, A., 2025).

From a managerial perspective, creating working conditions that support satisfaction—through appropriate rewards, a positive environment, and effective communication—will enhance engagement, reduce absenteeism and turnover, and encourage optimal performance (Judge & Bono, 2020). Cross-context evidence is consistent: job satisfaction contributes to a supportive work culture and stimulates achievement motivation (Liani, N., & Azis, A., 2025); comfortable work environments and harmonious internal communication foster satisfaction that drives maximum performance (Kholidiyah, N. H., Hasanah, W., & Irfansah, C., 2025); job satisfaction significantly contributes to engagement and productivity in the private sector (Ludbiyanto, O. X., 2025); and at PT Telkom, both intrinsic and extrinsic satisfaction have been shown to directly affect work performance (Pramuswari, A., et al., 2025). Overall, job satisfaction is a key determinant of optimal performance in ADINKES and similar organizations.

This study confirms that job satisfaction plays a significant mediating role in the effect of work motivation on employee performance. Conceptually, this aligns with Herzberg’s two-factor theory—intrinsic motivators such as achievement, recognition, and responsibility foster satisfaction that then drives performance—as well as the self-determination framework, which emphasizes that intrinsic motivation, when facilitated through recognition of achievements and opportunities for growth, enhances satisfaction and subsequently performance (Deci & Ryan, 2021). Empirical evidence supports this mechanism: job satisfaction has been shown to mediate the relationship between motivation and performance in the food and beverage industry (Mahira, 2025), and performance improves significantly when satisfaction strengthens the effects of motivation and discipline (Ramdhani & Martowinangun, 2025). The managerial implication is clear: beyond increasing motivation, organizations need to intentionally create working conditions that foster satisfaction so that the impact of motivation on performance is maximized.

The consistency of this finding is evident across studies and sectors. Motivation and workload directly affect performance, but their effects are stronger when satisfaction serves as a mediating variable (Firdausi, 2025); in service companies that demand high emotional involvement, motivation contributes significantly to performance through satisfaction (Wajdi & Astuti, 2025). Furthermore, both intrinsic and extrinsic motivation positively impact performance with satisfaction as an intervening variable (Fitriansyah, 2025), and leadership effectiveness and operational efficiency enhance motivation, which then influences performance through satisfaction (Sangapan, Carlos, & Ali, 2025). Thus, job satisfaction is a crucial pathway that transforms motivation into performance; practically, strengthening recognition of achievements, career development opportunities, fair rewards, task autonomy, and quality feedback are relevant policy levers.

This study shows that job satisfaction significantly mediates the effect of organizational commitment on employee performance. Conceptually, this mechanism aligns with work attitude theory—commitment enhances positive perceptions of the work environment, strengthens satisfaction, and then drives productivity—as well as the three-component framework (affective, continuance, normative) that emphasizes the importance of emotional attachment to the organization (Allen & Meyer, 2021). Empirical evidence further supports this: satisfaction functions as a mediator between commitment and performance because satisfied employees are more loyal and motivated to deliver their best performance (Ekowati & Azizah, 2025). The managerial implication is that strengthening commitment must be accompanied by creating conditions that foster satisfaction—such as fair rewards, growth opportunities, and supportive leadership—so that the impact of commitment on performance is maximized.

The consistency of this mediation function is evident across contexts. In educational institutions, commitment influences performance both directly and indirectly through satisfaction (Prabowo, 2025); organizational support affects performance when satisfaction is positioned as an intervening variable (Anwar & Ratnawati, 2024). Other findings suggest that without job satisfaction, the effect of commitment on performance weakens (Safitrih, 2025), while the relationship between leadership style and performance is strengthened by organizational commitment and satisfaction as mediators (Ekawaty, 2024). Overall, these results confirm that job satisfaction is a crucial pathway that transforms commitment into performance; therefore, organizational strategies that simultaneously strengthen commitment and increase satisfaction will be more effective in driving productivity and sustainable performance.