In the business industry, entrepreneurs generally view that business is always focused on how to get the maximum profit and reduce costs as much as possible. But over time, a paradigm shift began to develop, where the management of human resources as the main asset for business continuity really needs more attention. In fact, more and more companies are making innovations in managing human resources, starting from the recruitment process, employee development, to efforts to retain potential employees. All of this is done in order to get qualified and highly competent workforce, have loyalty, and can provide maximum contribution to the company. Human resources who have adequate knowledge and skills, behave well, are willing to work hard, and have other positive characters will have a major impact on the success and progress of the company. On the other hand, if employees do not have these things, then management will always be busy with internal problems that arise and sink and tend to interfere with company operations [1-3].

The problem of human resources that is currently often complained of by company management is that there are still many employees who have not met the expectations or standards set by the company, such as competence, work ethic related to work motivation, as well as soft skills problems which ultimately have an impact on their performance. One of them is stated by Yuspratiwi that discipline can be interpreted as the attitude of a person or group who intends to follow the rules that have been set. Likewise, the problem of work ethic formulated by Sinamo, "work ethic is a set of positive behaviors rooted in fundamental beliefs accompanied by a total commitment to an integral work paradigm". The work ethic is the foundation of true and authentic success. Furthermore, it is said that success in various areas of life is determined by human behavior, especially work behavior. Some people refer to this work behavior as motivation, habits, and work culture [4,5].

In another point of view, it can be related that a situation that exists is the result of a process or other circumstances. Circumstances created and in accordance with these expectations largely have an impact on the attitudes and behaviors that emerge from employees. If the expectations and desires can be met, it will create a condition where employees feel satisfaction at work. Research on job satisfaction is a concern in the industrial world, because high job satisfaction will encourage increased performance or individual and group achievements, which in turn will increase the effectiveness of the company as a whole. The study of job satisfaction is currently a serious concern for company managers, because it is closely related to the workforce, productivity and survival of the company concerned. Low job satisfaction causes various negative impacts such as absenteeism, sluggish work, unfulfilled work targets, strikes, employee turnover (turnover), intentional damage and other disciplinary behavior. Conversely, high job satisfaction will greatly affect positive and dynamic working conditions that are able to provide real benefits, not only for the company but also for the employees themselves. No less important in empowering human resources in the company in order to increase employee commitment to create high job satisfaction is to involve employees in policy making and decision making. One of them is implemented into a model known as the core job characteristics that are used as the basis for redesigning a job [3-8].

The role of human resources in the organization greatly determines the direction of the company's life. With low employee performance, of course, it will harm the company, causing the company's goals that have been set cannot be achieved or can be achieved but do not meet expectations. The company's demands on the performance of its employees have become a major focus in the last few decades. This can be seen through the productivity of employees and the company in general. Facts show that not all employees perform well as expected. In some of the information or data obtained, human resources play a role in determining a performance both on a small and large scale. For example, according to the Global Competitiveness Index Report 2015 – 2016 it is stated that Indonesia is in position 34 of all countries in the world and is ranked 4th among Asean countries after Singapore (rank 2), Thailand (rank 31), and Malaysia (ranked 20). In this global competition, of course, human resources, in this case the workforce, contribute to it. Other data states that Indonesian workers are ranked 4th in terms of productivity in the economic sector, after Singapore, Malaysia, and Thailand [5,7,9].

One aspect that is the source of various employee work problems is the effectiveness or not of a job design. Job design as a form of development of job analysis will greatly affect the success of achieving company goals. With an effective job design, one will be able to harmonize one job with another, between one individual and another, as well as the relationship between superiors and subordinates as well as between employees. Thus, operational activities within the company become more focused on their goals [3,10].

In addition to the problem of job design, according to several studies that have been conducted, the quality of work life of employees (Quality of Work Life) also shows a positive relationship to employee job satisfaction. QWL was first put forward at the international labor relations conference in 1972 at Arden House, Columbia University, New York. According to Raja and Kumar, the quality of work life is one of the trends that is taken into account as a determinant of the sustainability and viability of business organizations. Another expert said that the quality of work life is a process carried out by organizations to respond to the needs of employees by developing mechanisms that allow them to fully share in making decisions that design their lives at work. By making adjustments to the needs of the work for the competence of the perpetrators of work, as well as the need for employees to be accommodated in their competence, it will make them feel satisfied in doing their work, so that efforts emerge to work better. However, the quality of work life is not job satisfaction, but affects job satisfaction [11]. 

This research is causal research that aims to determine the structure of the variable model of job quality, job design and job satisfaction. The sample in this study was a private university in Surabaya. The sampling technique in this study used purposive sampling method. In this study, job design as an exogenous variable with 10 indicators, quality of work life as an intervening variable with 13 indicators, job satisfaction as an exogenous variable with 8 indicators. The data analysis technique in this study used the structural question modeling method - partial least square. SEM – PLS consists of 2 stages, namely the analysis of the outer model and the analysis of the inner model. The analysis of the outer model consists of 3 stages of convergent validity, discriminant validity and reliability validity. The criteria for testing convergent validity are the loading factor value > 0.4 with an AVE value > 0.5. The criteria for discriminant validity testing are that all loading factor indicator values measure the latent variable, rather than measuring other variables. The criteria for testing reliability validity are Composite reliability values > 0.7 or Croncbach alpha values > 0.7. The inner model analysis in this study is used to answer the hypothesis, the hypothesis is accepted if the p-value <0.05.

This research was conducted on employees at private universities in Surabaya. The survey was conducted using a google form (online questionnaire). The research data were taken from employees of private universities in Surabaya, the sample taken was 130 employees of private universities in Surabaya. The distribution of 130 respondents who filled out the questionnaire is as shown in Table 4.1. The number of lecturers who became respondents was 80.77% and the remaining non-lecturers were 19.23%. Based on gender, male respondents were 43.85% and female respondents were 56.15%. The age distribution of respondents is divided into 4 groups, namely the age of 20 to <30 years as many as 25.38%, the age from 30 to <40 years as much as 43.08%, the age from 40 to <50 years 14.62% and 50 and above as much as 19.92%.

After the data is tabulated perfectly, this research starts from the analysis of validity and reliability. In this study the direction of the indicator to the construct is reflective, the measurement model is carried out by confirmatory factor analysis or often called Confirmatory Factor Analysis (CFA) which is used to test the dimensionality of a construct, namely to test the validity and reliability of the indicators forming the latent construct. There are three criteria for measuring the model / to assess the outer model in SEM-PLS with the help of the WarpPLS 6.0 sofa, namely Convergent Validity, Discriminant Validity and Composite Reliability. The initial measurement of the outer model by conducting convergent validity which is illustrated by the loading factor value of each indicator on the construct variable is expected to be more than 0.4 and the AVE value is more than 0.5, where the construct variables in this study are job design, quality of work life and job satisfaction. The results of the analysis of the outer model are attached in the table as follows:

Outer Model Analysis

The analysis of the outer model in this study is used to see the validity and reliability of the indicators on the latent variables. The results of the outer model in this study indicate that all indicators that measure latent variables are good (valid and reliable), this is shown in the table 1.

Table 1: Outer Model

Table 2: Inner Model

Table 1 informs that all job design indicators have a loading factor value > 0.4 with an AVE value > 0.5 and the highest indicator loading factor value measures the job design variable than other latent variables and the Croncbach Alpha and Composite Rability values are greater than 0.7, this shows that all job design indicators are valid and reliable, which means that all job design indicators are able to measure latent variables properly. Table 1 provides a series of indicators for the quality of work life and job satisfaction variables. The outer results conclude that all indicators of job design, quality of work life and job satisfaction are valid and reliable, which means that all indicators of each latent variable are able to measure the latent variable properly and correctly (valid and reliable).

Inner Model Analysis

The analysis of the inner model in this study aims to answer the research hypothesis. The outer model analysis in this study uses the t test, where the hypothesis is accepted if the p value is less than 0.05. The results of the analysis of the inner model are presented in the table 2. 

Table 2 informs that all hypotheses are accepted, this is indicated by the p value < 0.001 which means the p value is very small and less than 0.05. The results of table 2 can be concluded that hypothesis 1, hypothesis 2 and hypothesis 3 are accepted.

Job Design Variables on Quality of Work Life

The results of testing the first hypothesis show that the relationship between worker design variables (JD) and quality of work life (QWL) shows a path coefficient value of 0.7 95 with p value < 0.001, the p value is less than alpha = 0.05. These results mean that job design has a positive and significant relationship to the quality of work life which means that it is in accordance with the first hypothesis where the better the job design, the higher the quality of work life. This means that hypothesis 1 is accepted.

The results of hypothesis testing are supported by the views of the following two studies which state that there is a significant correlation between job design and the quality of work life of employees. As with Reddy and Reddy which revealed an indication that job design has an impact on the quality of work life which is influenced by work environment security, occupational health, appropriate working hours and decent income. Meanwhile, quality of work life is also a program that represents a systems approach to job design and job enrichment that will make work more interesting and challenging. It is also a good total value where material and non-material benefits are favored by employees as members of the organization with a view to improving working conditions and productivity [1,5,12].

Job Design Variables on Job Satisfaction

Second hypothesis show that the relationship between worker design variables (JD) and job satisfaction (JS) shows a path coefficient value of 0.325 with a p-value <0.001 , the P -value is less than alpha = 0.05 . These results mean that job design has a positive and significant relationship to job satisfaction, which means that it is in accordance with the second hypothesis where the better the job design, the higher the job satisfaction. work is increasing. This means that hypothesis 2 is accepted.

The results of hypothesis testing are supported by Hulin and Blood, where job satisfaction and job dissatisfaction of employees towards certain jobs depend largely on the attitudes of employees. They also revealed that the relationship between job satisfaction and job characteristics would be higher in employees who have high development needs. Hackman and Oldham have developed a job characteristics approach to job enrichment and found that job enrichment increases motivation and job satisfaction. Job characteristics are known as core dimensions that produce three psychological statements of employees. The three statements are producing a work result such as high internal work motivation, growth satisfaction, job satisfaction and work effectiveness [3,12].

Variables of Quality of Work Life on Job Satisfaction

Third hypothesis indicate that the relationship between the quality of work life (QWL) and job satisfaction (JS) shows a path coefficient value of 0.504 with a p-value <0.001 , the P -value is less than alpha = 0.05 . This result means that the quality of work life has a positive and significant relationship to job satisfaction, which means that it is in accordance with the third hypothesis where the better the quality of work life, the higher job satisfaction. This means that hypothesis 3 is accepted.

Quality of work life also makes work productivity better and competitive advantage, reduces absenteeism and employee turnover, and increases job satisfaction. Another researcher, Davoodi in Asgari and Dadashi, hypothesized that employee involvement in decision-making related to working conditions and the work itself will increase job satisfaction. He found that employee involvement would increase job satisfaction and decrease accidents. Gayathiri and Ramakrishnan also show that the quality of work life affects employee job satisfaction related to a stress-free work environment, better motivation and satisfaction, decreased absenteeism, lower employee turnover [11-14].

The samples taken and used in this study were 130. The number of lecturers who became respondents was 80.77% and the remaining non-lecturers were 19.23%. Based on gender, male respondents were 43.85% and female respondents were 56.15%. The age distribution of respondents is divided into 4 groups, namely the age of 20 to <30 years as many as 25.38%, the age from 30 to <40 years as much as 43.08%, the age from 40 to <50 years 14.62% and 50 and above as much as 19.92%. 10 indicators that are able to measure job design, 13 indicators that are able to measure the quality of work life and 8 indicators that are able to measure job satisfaction. 2 indicators that are not able to measure job satisfaction are removed in the model so that the validity and reliability criteria are met. All hypotheses in the study were met, namely, job design variables affect the quality of work life, job design variables affect job satisfaction and quality work life variables on job satisfaction. large so that the results of the study are able to explain the diversity of existing phenomena and can be used as general models. the main points of the research work are written in this section. Ensure that abstract and conclusion should not be the same. Graphs and tables should not be used in conclusion.

1. Abid, Moeed A. et al. "Effect of job design on employee satisfaction (a study of fertilizer companies listed in Lahore Stock Exchange)." European Journal of Business and Management, vol. 5, no. 19, 2013.

2. Mangkunegara, A. A. Anwar Prabu. Perilaku dan budaya organisasi. PT Refika Aditama, 2002, Bandung.

3. Ahmed, I. et al. "Effects of motivational factors on employees job satisfaction: A case study of University of the Punjab, Pakistan." International Journal of Business and Management, 2010, pp. 70–80. http://www.ijmbs.com/32/1/rai.pdf. Accessed 11 May 2011.

4. Albdour, Ali A. and Imad I. Altarawneh. "Employee engagement and organizational commitment: Evidence from Jordan." International Journal of Business, vol. 19, no. 2, 2014, pp. 192–212.

5. Bailey, Catherine et al. "The meaning, antecedents and outcomes of employee engagement: A narrative synthesis." International Journal of Management Reviews, vol. 19, no. 1, 2017, pp. 31–53.

6. Gardner, Donald G., Linn Van Dyne and Jon L. Pierce. "The effects of pay level on organization-based self-esteem and performance: A field study." Journal of Occupational and Organizational Psychology, vol. 77, 2004, pp. 307–322.

7. Fu, Weiqi and Satish P. Deshpande. "The impact of caring climate, job satisfaction, and organizational commitment on job performance of employees in a China’s insurance company." Journal of Business Ethics, vol. 124, no. 2, 2014, pp. 339–349.

8. Ghazanfar, F. et al. "A study of relationship between satisfaction with compensation and work motivation." International Journal of Business and Social Science, vol. 2, no. 1, 2011, pp. 126–128. http://ijbssnet.com/journals/. Accessed 1 May 2015.

9. Greenberg, Jerald. Managing behavior in organizations. Prentice Hall, 2005, USA.

10. Husain, R. and Shahid Bashir. "Effect of motivational factors on employee's job satisfaction: A case of District Public School Okara." International Journal of Business and Management Studies, vol. 3, 2013, pp. 8–9. http://www.ijmbs.com/32/1/rai.pdf. Accessed 11 May 2015.

11. Kemboi, Ambrose, Geoffrey Biwott and Nehemiah Chenuos et al. "Skill variety, feedback and employee performance: A case of Moi Teaching and Referral Hospital Eldoret." European Journal of Business and Management, vol. 5, no. 19, 2013, pp. 151–155.

12. Sedarmayanti. Building and developing leadership and improving performance to achieve success. PT Refika Aditama, 2011, Bandung.

13. Husain, Walidun. Participative leadership. MQS Publishing, 2011, Bandung.

14. Wibowo. Performance management, 2007.