Does Affect Voluntary Significant to non-Profit Servant Motivation in Yogyakarta?

The implications of prosocial behaviour on public service motivation are found. The link between prosocial behaviour and public service motivation from a sense of wanting to help others. In practice, civil servants are often encouraged to help the community. The meeting point between public service motivation and prosocial behaviour is with the choice to become a volunteer. Civil servants who have a robust public service motivation will be involved in voluntary activities. This study aims to examine the effect of volunteerism on the motivation of public services on civil servants in Yogyakarta special government. The method used in this research is quantitative research methods. Questionnaires are distributed at special local government offices in Yogyakarta that provide basic services. The number of respondents who answered the survey was 321 people. Data processing using SEM PLS and data analysis using quantitative descriptive. The results of this study are prosocial behaviour and the value of altruism through voluntarism activity significantly influence the motivation of public services. But directly, prosocial and altruism do not affect public service motivation. Keyword: Public Service Motivation, Voluntarism, Prosocial Behaviour, Altruism ABSTRAK Perilaku prososial berimplikasi terhadap motivasi pelayanan publik. Hubungan antara perilaku prososial dan motivasi pelayanan publik timbul dari rasa ingin membantu orang lain. Dalam praktiknya, pegawai negeri sering didorong untuk membantu masyarakat. Titik temu antara motivasi pelayanan publik dan perilaku prososial adalah dengan pilihan untuk menjadi sukarelawan. Pegawai negeri yang memiliki motivasi pelayanan publik yang kuat akan terlibat dalam kegiatan sukarela. Penelitian ini bertujuan untuk menguji pengaruh kesukarelaan terhadap motivasi pelayanan publik pada pegawai negeri sipil di Daerah Istimewa Yogyakarta. Metode yang digunakan dalam penelitian ini adalah metode kuantitatif. Kuisioner disebar di kantor-kantor pemerintah Daerah Istimewa Yogyakarta yang menyediakan layanan dasar. Jumlah responden yang mengisi survei adalah sebanyak 321 orang. Pengolahan data menggunakan SEM PLS dengan teknik analisis data deskriptif kuantitatif. Hasil penelitian menunjukkan bahwa perilaku prososial dan nilai altruisme melalui aktivitas voluntarisme berpengaruh signifikan terhadap motivasi pelayanan publik. Tetapi, prososial dan altruisme tidak secara langsung memengaruhi motivasi pelayanan publik. Kata Kunci: Motivasi Layanan Publik, Voluntarisme, Perilaku Prososial, Altruisme Journal of Government and Civil Society, Vol. 4, No. 1, April 2020 38 Dian Suluh Kusuma Dewi, Achmad Nurmandi, and Dyah Mutiarin INTRODUCTION The motivation of public services, hereinafter abbreviated to PSM, was first introduced by Rainey (1982) as a way to see more specific motivations for employees in public organizations. Subsequently, in 1990, the conceptual definition and identification of PSM typologies included rational, norm and affective-based motivation (Perry & Wise, 1990). Perry (1996) further developed the scale of measuring typology of motivation into four dimensions: interest in public policymaking, commitment to public affairs and civic duties, compassion, and self-sacrifice. This contribution is the beginning of the development of public service motivation theories with various approaches (Perry & Perry, 1996). The integration of public service motivation in self-concept is developed through 4 models (a) motivation built from rational, normative, and affective processes, (b) motivated by self-concept (c) preferences or values must be endogenous to any motivational theory, and ( d) preferences are learned through social processes (Perry & Perry, 2000a). Public service motivation theory was first popularized by Perry (1990) who saw that there was a tendency for individual motivation on civil servants to have a positive effect on public organizations (Perry & Wise, 1990). The wave of research into public service motivation at the onset of this theory is more focused on extrinsic motivation such as salary, status, workload, pension and others (Kim, Vandenabeele, & Kim, 2017, 2018). However, on several findings, PSM strengthens intrinsic motivation (Potipiroon & Faerman, 2016) and has an impact on increasing organizational consequences. In making policies and systems such as service monitoring, financial and HR improvement systems, public organizations include intrinsic motives in policies. It is possible to encourage positive behaviour, such as being responsible and loyal. The institutionalization of values (norms, culture, religion, morals) as an effort by the government to overcome social problems. For example, infrastructure development (Kim et al., 2017; Prysmakova, 2019). Empirical findings of the usefulness of public service motivation for civil servants to provide better services, engage altruistic behaviour and hold organizational norms and ethics (Perry & Perry, 1996; Perry & Wise, 1990). The value of altruism, commitment to public service and other civic duties become a spirit for civil servants (Costello, Homberg, & Secchi, 2017). The motivation of public services is defined as an individual’s tendency to act for the community or greater common good (Esteve, Urbig, Witteloostuijn, & Boyne, 2016). This tendency has a substantial and consistent effect on public service motivation (Esteve et al., 2016). Empirical evidence found by Esteve, et al. (2016) strengthens evidence of a correlation between individual behaviour with public service motivation and actual behaviour. This finding is in line with (Bozeman & Su, 2015) who also found the empirical


INTRODUCTION
The motivation of public services, hereinafter abbreviated to PSM, was first introduced by Rainey (1982) as a way to see more specific motivations for employees in public organizations. Subsequently, in 1990, the conceptual definition and identification of PSM typologies included rational, norm and affective-based motivation (Perry & Wise, 1990). Perry (1996) further developed the scale of measuring typology of motivation into four dimensions: interest in public policymaking, commitment to public affairs and civic duties, compassion, and self-sacrifice. This contribution is the beginning of the development of public service motivation theories with various approaches (Perry & Perry, 1996).
The integration of public service motivation in self-concept is developed through 4 models (a) motivation built from rational, normative, and affective processes, (b) motivated by self-concept (c) preferences or values must be endogenous to any motivational theory, and ( d) preferences are learned through social processes (Perry & Perry, 2000a). Public service motivation theory was first popularized by Perry (1990) who saw that there was a tendency for individual motivation on civil servants to have a positive effect on public organizations (Perry & Wise, 1990).
The wave of research into public service motivation at the onset of this theory is more focused on extrinsic motivation such as salary, status, workload, pension and others (Kim, Vandenabeele, & Kim, 2017, 2018. However, on several findings, PSM strengthens intrinsic motivation (Potipiroon & Faerman, 2016) and has an impact on increasing organizational consequences. In making policies and systems such as service monitoring, financial and HR improvement systems, public organizations include intrinsic motives in policies. It is possible to encourage positive behaviour, such as being responsible and loyal. The institutionalization of values (norms, culture, religion, morals) as an effort by the government to overcome social problems. For example, infrastructure development (Kim et al., 2017;Prysmakova, 2019). Empirical findings of the usefulness of public service motivation for civil servants to provide better services, engage altruistic behaviour and hold organizational norms and ethics (Perry & Perry, 1996;Perry & Wise, 1990). The value of altruism, commitment to public service and other civic duties become a spirit for civil servants (Costello, Homberg, & Secchi, 2017).
The motivation of public services is defined as an individual's tendency to act for the community or greater common good (Esteve, Urbig, Witteloostuijn, & Boyne, 2016). This tendency has a substantial and consistent effect on public service motivation (Esteve et al., 2016). Empirical evidence found by Esteve, et al. (2016) strengthens evidence of a correlation between individual behaviour with public service motivation and actual behaviour. This finding is in line with (Bozeman & Su, 2015) who also found the empirical evidence.
Some researchers have used public service motivation as a code of altruism which means an individual's willingness to engage in self-sacrifice for the good of others without receiving rewards or reciprocity benefits . The results of the study consistently equate motivation for public service with altruism. In the UK, for example, the development of the concept of needs related to incentives was addressed here by doctors, nurses, teachers, social employees and public servants (Le Julian, 2010). Public service professionals are committed to social welfare.
The development of research on public service motivation also looks at the factors that influence employee motivation in providing services. In developed countries like the United States, socio-culture influences civil servants at work (Norris, 2003;VanderWeele, 2017). Public service motivation is also determined by various individual attributes such as demographic characteristics (Perry & Wise, 1990).
In Korea, for example, the construct of public service motivation of each individual is influenced by various factors such as economic, social, educational, ideological, and other social demographic motivations (Choi & DiNitto, 2012). The researchers also said the motivation of public service with family socialization, religion, professionalism, volunteerism at work (Brewer, Selden, Facer, Brewer, & Selden, 2000;Bright, 2005). In addition, researchers also looked at institutional factors such as organizational policy direction, organizational culture, leadership (Kjeldsen, 2015;Oynihan & Pandey, 2007).
In California, public service motivation is used in the employee recruitment process and organizational culture. The motivation of public services used in recruitment aims to understand aspects of the organization, values and mission of prospective employees (Paarlberg, Perry, & Hondeghem, 2008). The employee's values and mission become meaningful and useful for the organization's work design.
Research on public service motivation in rural Australia is more focused on the motivation of politicians to run for elections, especially individual motivation dedicated to society (Balian & Gasparyan, 2017). Growing research shows that politicians are motivated by close relations with society, lineage, personal mission. This finding is in accordance with (Balian & Gasparyan, 2017) where politicians see public service as a personal mission.
In Indonesia, several antecedents of motivation are public dietary services to civil servants in West Sumatra. Syamsir (2014) found socio-demographic factors, social institutions, and organizational factors to be antecedents. In addition, factors that have strong correlations include differences in sex (sex), marital status, income, political ideology, family outreach, religious outreach, application of religious teachings, position in employment, and years of service on public service motivation (Syamsir, 2014). However, Syamsir (2014) found no correlation of voluntary activities on public service motivation.
This article aims to look at the antecedent factors of public service motivation, but is more focused on influence scorealtruism and prosocial attitudes in voluntary activities. And the direct influence of both on PSM. It also saw how the influence of voluntary activities in Community Participation in civil servants in basic service offices in the Yogyakarta Special Region Government (Belle, 2013;Chambre & Einolf, 2011;Eddy & et, 2016;Ertas, 2016;Lee & Wilkins, 2011;Meyer-Sahling, Mikkelsen, & Schuster, 2019). Although Bellé (2013) clearly states that volunteerism appears to be quite common among hospital staff that are the object of research. Survey data show that around 58 percent of administrative staff and 81 percent of clinical and medical staff participate in several types of voluntary projects in hospitals such as blood donations, collection of donations, and so on. Houston (2005) found that government employees tend to be more willing to volunteer for charity and donate blood than private employees (Houston, 2005). Then PSM was more prominent in public services than private organizations. A study conducted by Piatak (2016) shows the same thing: people with higher levels of community participation tend to want to work in public and voluntary services. But for career ambitions working in government, the results are mixed (Piatak, 2016).
The prosocial aspect of voluntary behavior is related to the PSM altruism dimension (Eddy et al., 2016). People who tend to volunteer show a stronger motive for public services by extension holding government jobs. Therefore, it is not surprising that government workers report higher levels of volunteer behavior than their private sector counterparts.
The relationship between prosocial behavior and public service motivation from a desire to help others (Houston, 2005). The meeting point between public service motivation and prosocial behavior is with the choice to become a volunteer. Civil servants who have a strong public service motivation will be involved in voluntary activities (Coursey, Brudney, & Littlepage, 2011). Employees work in the spirit of altruism (Gao, 2015). Civil servants work hard, are dedicated, and are independent with moral foundation (Gao, 2015). Altruism and the penchant for helping others are strongly related to public service motivation (Perry & Perry, 1997;Potipiroon & Faerman, 2016) and in some ways increase the consequences of organizations.
Motivation of public services owned by public servants is quite high because there are several interrelated driving factors (Kjeldsen, 2015). Public servants have a high altruistic value so they choose to work in public organizations (Christensen, Wright, Christensen,

Understanding Motivation of Public Services
In various literatures, public service motivation is often associated with social backgrounds such as education, family, ideology, and so on. The role of parental socialization (parental socialization) and political affiliation in forming PSM (Perry, 1997;Perry et al., 2008). In the family, values are instilled, which then influences the existence of community participation. Political affiliation also influences ideology so that a person's motivation for public service can vary between individuals. The level of education and the presence/absence of a person attending professional training or participation in community service greatly influence PSM (Jones & Hill, 2003;Palma & et, 2017;Perry & Perry, 1997).
According to Jones & Hill (2003), participation in community service can grow into a commitment if the environment is integrated into a person. The influence of demographic background on PSM is only slightly touched upon in the literature. For example, the age difference, some writers reveal that this influences (Perry, 1997). There is also a lack of significant impact (Charthy & Et, 2019). Gender differences also have no significant effect (Dehart-davis, Marlowe, Pandey, Dehart-davis, & Pandey, 2017; Perry & Perry, 1997). Then economic income is mentioned by Perry (1997) as one indicator that gives effect to PSM, but the reasons are not explained further.
Public Service Motivationalso influences the length of time a person works or vice versa, is influenced by the environment of the organization or workplace (Belle, 2013;Moynihan & Pandey, 2007;Palma & et, 2017). The length of service is an essential factor because it can reflect the cumulative effect, both positive and negative, of doing certain jobs or being in certain work environments from time to time. Bellé (2013), for example, found that PSM can be influenced by how long a person is in an organization because PSM values are obtained through the organization's process. The role of the organization itself towards PSM is crucial (Moynihan & Pandey, 2007;Sung-Min & Min-Young, 2016;Wright, 2001).
In addition, consistent with social exchange theory, individuals who enjoy good faith and organizational concern will feel obliged to reciprocate with behaviours and attitudes that benefit the organization (Sung-Min & Min-Young, 2016). This can make a person work longer in an institution or public service organization. The next factor is religion or belief.
Various literature on PSM also discusses how it influences one's attitude, especially in work attitudes (Belle, 2013;Charthy & Et, 2019;Grant & Berg, 2012;Houston, 2005;Palma & et, 2017). Bellé (2013) found a positive relationship between PSM and work attitudes of a group of nurses in Italy, especially in the aspects of persistence, productivity, and alertness. These findings generally support the hypothesis that PSM is more prominent in public services than in private organizations.
Commitment to the interests of the community, providing services to others, and selfsacrifice are the basis of public service motivation. Although it has been developed in the context of public administration, public service motivation is an individual concept, not a sectoral specific concept (Brewer, Selden, & Ii, 1996). In addition, the motivation of public services is more closely attached to the individual character of public employees than to the private sector. Usually, individuals who are interested in service will choose public organizations (Perry & Perry, 2000b).
The reason is the level of clarity and specificity of objectives in organization and also with the expectation of clear reward. This is consistent with a rational approach to public service motivation that is based on behavioral assumptions in maximizing the utility that occurs at the goals and expectations of rewards for good performance (Shamir, 1991). However, public organizations are more likely to have vague goals that difficult to measure because of managerial constraints and the use of cash rewards (Allison 1983;Brehm and Gates 1997;Perry 2000;Perry and Porter 1982;Wilson 1989). Thus, public service motivation becomes the basis for understanding motivation of each individual (Perry, 2000).
Public service motivation tends to be typical of public service employees (non-profit). During this time, many people think that money (salary) is a motivation for someone to work; money is considered as a tool and medicine (Lea & Webley, 2006) because people want a lot of money as a tool of psychological and biological satisfaction (Acevedo, 2018). Therefore, money is widely used to attract, motivate, improve, and maintain employee performance (Chiu, Luk, and Tang, 2001;Milkovich and Newman, 2008). The approach that can be taken to test the existence of public service motivation is to operate it as an assessment of intrinsic employee benefits above extrinsic terms (Crewson 1997;Houston 2000). The voluntary and sincere feelings of employees cause them to be more able to value intrinsic rewards than extrinsic rewards. The classification of awards (extrinsic and intrinsic rewards) in Gibson, et, al (2000) is described as follows: 1. Extrinsic reward is an external award in the form of rewards given for work, such as salary, incentives, career, position and so forth. This type of award is called extrinsic because awards are given by other people or management who are then able to control the results of the work. Extrinsic reward cannot be offered in public services because of its financial nature. Extrinsic reward is widely used in private organizations, therefore, this is not a concern in this study. However, unlike public organizations, this type of award is considered unethical if it is used for the benefit of the community (Martinelli, 2014).
2. Intrinsic reward is an award that comes from the work itself, including achievement and personal growth. Psychological rewards are received by employees when a job is done and done well. Substantially, the majority of employees manage their intrinsic reward by using intelligence and experience as well as managing activities in accordance with organizational goals. Leaders or management only need to direct employees according to their competencies and give the confidence to take some decisions so that the work can be done well and full of responsibility.
Besides rewards, public service motivation also encourages employees to be more easily directed according to their goals and consistent with expected results. Brewer (2003) found that public employees have higher attitudes related to social trust, equality, tolerance and humanitarianism. Meanwhile, Rainey (1997) found that public employees have an altruistic attitude than private-sector employees, which are more supportive of democratic values (Blair and Garand, 1995), and have a higher sense of duty as citizens (Conway, 2000). Based on these findings, Brewer (2003) concluded that public employees have strong motivation, prioritizing the interests of the public, community and social services. One form of citizenship is to be involved in the political process.

METHODOLOGY
This research survey method with primary data obtained directly from the source through a questionnaire. This study design using a quantitative method to examine the influence of the independent variable on the dependent variable. The study population was ASN in the Yogyakarta provincial government with non-probability sampling technique that is an employee who has been appointed as the ASN at least one year.
Data Analysis Techniques and Testing Hypotheses The model in this study were tested using SEM-based variants, PLS (Partial Least Square) with the help of software SmartPLS 3.0. SEM-PLS can work effectively with a small sample size with complex models and can be used to construct reflective and formative (Ketchen, 2013), PLS do testing in the measurement model (outer model) and structural models (inner model).
Measurement Model Test on the measurement model consists of validity and reliability. Validity test consists of convergent validity and discriminant validity. Concurrent validity is used to assess the extent of the correlation between the two sizes of the same concept. Measurement reflective convergent construct validity on the loading factor is calculated by value and Average Variance Extracted (AVE) is the standardized factor squared divided by the number of measurement items. Rule of thumb of loading factor above 0.7 and AVE value should be higher than 0.5 (Beckett, Eriksson, Johansson, & Wikström, 2017), While in the formative construct validity testing using a weight value and Variance Inflation Factors (VIFs).
Discriminant validity is an assessment of how different a construct with other constructs, which is measured by comparing the value AVE of the constructs with the squared correlation values between the two constructs tested. Rule of thumb discriminant validity AVE square root of a value higher than the correlation between the build and the low cost of the cross-loadings (Beckett et al., 2017), Reliability test is used to determine the consistency of the results of measurements if the measurements were taken twice or more of the same symptoms with the same measuring instrument. Reliability testing is done by measuring the composite value that meets the criteria of reliability above 0.7 though 0.6 is acceptable (Beckett et al., 2017), The greater the value of Cronbach's alpha then highreliability level measuring instruments used. Structural Model Inner model is a structural model to predict the causal relationships between latent variables. Test models use a parameter value of R-Square (²). The higher the value of R ², the better research model. The level of significance in hypothesis testing indicated by the path coefficient (inner model). Rule of thumb score coefficients shown by t-statistic values must be above 1.64 for a one-tailed hypothesis on hypothesis testing using alpha 5% (Beckett et al., 2017). Testing this hypothesis is accepted if it shows pvalue <0.05.

RESULT AND DISCUSSION
A total of 36 office provision of essential services in counties, cities and local governments of Yogyakarta. Of the 36 offices, there were 321 questionnaires collected.

Discriminant Validity Test Results
Results of testing the validity discriminant detailed in Table 2 show that all constructs in this research model meet the requirements. In each construct tested, the value of the square root of AVE is higher than the correlation between the constructs. This indicates that the discriminant validity is met.

The Results of t-statistic Significance Tests
The results of the t-statistic significance test in Table 2 above shows that in H1. I.e., prosocial influence on Voluntarism is not significant because of the t-statistic values of less than 1.96. Likewise with H3 impact of Voluntarism on public service motivation. Dian Suluh Kusuma Dewi, Achmad Nurmandi, and Dyah Mutiarin

Reliability test (Composite Reliability)
Composite reliability aims to test the reliability of latent variables or constructs. Size reliability showed good value if it is> 0.7 (Chin, 1998). Results composite reliability values in Table 4 shows that all indicators were reliable.

Fit Models
Analysis of structural models used to determine the influence and significance of the relationship between prosocial behaviour, altruism value, Voluntarism and public service motivation.
Based on the statistical t-test results in Figure 1 can be seen that the prosocial behaviour and the value of the variable altruism significant effect on Voluntarism. This is evidenced by the value of the t statistic> 1.96. Effect of prosocial behaviour toward voluntarism 4,472 and influence altruism value in 7484 voluntarism.
In the t-test statistic, prosocial behaviour and altruism value on public service motivation showed significant results are 0.869 and 0771. However, public service motivation is significantly influenced by Voluntarism with 7.030 t-test statistic.

IMPLICATIONS OF THEORY
Being a civil servant is often described as a calling, a duty and a job as a 'not work' task (Freeman & Houston, 2010;Houston, 2005;Perry, 1996). Although the attitudes of each individual are different, civil servants are required to commit to government rules, maintain ethics at work that can affect society (Houston, 2005). Attitudes and values that exist in public servants are prosocial behaviour that has relevance in the motivation of public service (Houston, 2005). Public servants are often asked to consider the interests of the community and forget personal interests (Esteve et al., 2016).
Starting from there, PSM is associated with voluntary activities such as blood donations, collecting donations, volunteering in religious or community-based activities. Prosocial behaviour is the starting point for forming voluntary attitudes in various activities and shaping PSM buildings (Esteve et al., 2016). Voluntarism is driven out of a desire to help others (Perry & Perry, 1996;Perry & Wise, 1990;Rainey &Steinbauer, 1999), Voluntarism becomes a meeting point between prosocial behaviour in public service motivation. The tendency of employees to provide public services substantially and consistently influences employee motivation (Esteve et al., 2016). These findings reinforce empirical evidence about the construct of public service motivation (Bozeman & Su, 2015). Gao (2015) describes the dedication of civil servants, hard workers, independent and morally based.
In this study, the value of altruism becomes the foundation related to public service motivation (Perry & Perry, 1997b;Potipiroon&Faerman, 2016); However, linking selfish variables through volunteerism.
Voluntarism is the variable that has the greatest influence on public service motivation. Charity and humanitarian activities carried out by civil servants show that helping people can encourage someone to love one another (Freeman & Houston, 2010;Houston, Cartwright, & Cartwright, 2017). In addition, charity is also a form of affection among people. Building affection carried out on voluntary activities influences public service motivation, especially on indicators of affection (Delfgaauw & Dur, 2008;Rashid, 2012;Tang & Liu, 2012), The more often an employee performs charitable activities, builds compassion in motivation public services will be more reliable.
The growing spirit of giving to civil servants continues to develop and encourage PSM with prosocial behaviour (Houston, 2005). The desire to be able to serve the people in the PSM concept is getting closer to the value of altruism. This is in line with the concept of PSM according to Rainey and Steinbauer (1999) which states that altruistic attitude is a motivation to serve the community, nation and state.
Humanity, like empathy, wanting to make others happy, helpful and loving, also shows a great influence on the motivation of public service. Civil servants are happier if they can help people, even though there is no reward for their support. Of course, these findings encourage the motivation of public services to build themselves (Houston, 2005;Perry & Perry, 1996). PSM is a strongly entrenched trait for civil servants, so people with high PSM are intrinsically motivated to act and provide greater benefits and goodness (Esteve et al., 2016).

CONCLUSION
The empirical findings of the effect of Voluntarism on the motivation of public service in Yogyakarta on this study can be summarized, Prosocial behaviour and altruism value contained in the individual civil servants be the cornerstone of volunteerism and then motivating public services. Prosocial behaviour and altruism value are reflected in the craze to help others and orientations help improve the welfare of others in the worksvoluntarism to character staff in the Yogyakarta region. Voluntarism into the role for charitable activity and humanitarian activities are often carried out by civil servants in government environment Yogyakarta particular region. Humanity and want to make others into the construct of public service motivation.