TRAINING, MANAGERIAL SKILLS, AND PRINCIPAL PERFORMANCE AT SENIOR HIGH SHOOL IN NORTH

The principal needs training to have managerial skills to optimize his performance. Otherwise, several studies have shown the opposite. This study aims to examine the effect of exercise and managerial skills on principal performance. This study is field research with a simple path analysis design. Data were obtained through questionnaires, observation, and documentation study. This study shows that there is an effect of training and principal managerial skills on principal performance. This indicates that the more intense the principal attends training and has a deep understanding of training material, the higher the principal organizational skills are. The higher the principal managerial skills are, the higher the quality of the principal performance is, which in turn increases the rate of the school.


INTRODUCTION
adequate performance. Khalid et al. (2019) found a significant impact of training on organizational performance to ensure the best course of action for the business. Recent studies have shown that exercise has a positive and significant effect on performance (Abdullah, 2020) and principal competence (Basuki et al., 2020). This study tries to make up for previous studies' deficiencies that examined the relationship between training, managerial skills, and principal performance in partial.
This study is essential and exciting considering the various literature shows that principals need the training to have the right managerial skills to manage schools effectively. Soetopo and Soemanto (1988) describe that additional education and exercises that enrich their leadership position can affect one's leadership in terms of competence and performance. Valle, Martı´n, Romero, and Dolan (2000) explain that practical training is beneficial for organizations. Exercise plays a vital role in building and maintaining capabilities, both at the individual and organizational level and thus supporting the corporate change process. The same thing is stated by Jones and Wright (1992) that training helps increase the retention capacity of talented workers to reduce unwanted job rotation by workers. Even Bartel (1994) ensures that activity encourages increased employee performance and organizational productivity.
Paradox, ambiguity, economic uncertainty, and political turmoil have become norms and challenges for principals in this Millennial Era. In the current Regional Autonomy Era, the authority to appoint principals is in the hands of regional officials. When the regional head elections are over, the next turn is the appointment of school principals, who are sometimes not based on relevant criteria. The proximity factor is often a consideration in determining some principles. This condition raises debate, whether the intensity of principal influences the principal performance in attending training. Clark, Martorell, and Rockoff (2009) found little evidence of an association between school performance and principal selectivity. There was also a slight relationship between principal previous work performance and work experience. However, the school performance led by those who were previously deputy principals was higher than principals who had no prior experience as representatives. This study is intended to reveal whether there is an effect of training and principal managerial skills on principal performance at state senior high schools in the North Luwu Regency.

RESEARCH METHODS
This study uses a quantitative research design with a simple path analysis that uses inferential and descriptive statistical tools with a causal relationship path diagram. The population was 19 school principals at State Senior High Schools in North Luwu Regency in the 2018/2019 academic year. The research sample was taken using probability sampling and multistage cluster sampling, namely sampling, which was carried out through two stages of selection (Cochran, 1977). The first stake, divided based on geography (area), is divided into four regions: South, North, East, and West. The second stake, division based on random sampling, took six schools as a sample from each school area. For the southern region the researchers takes 2 schools (SMA Negeri 6 Luwu Utara and SMA Negeri 11 Luwu Utara) as a sample, in the northern region 1 school (SMA Negeri 18 Luwu Utara), in the eastern region 2 schools (SMA Negeri 8 Luwu Utara and SMA Negeri 1 North Luwu) and 1 school in the west area (SMA Negeri 14 Luwu Utara).
The data collection technique used in this study was a questionnaire technique. However, to support the completeness of research data analysis, the researcher also made observations and documentation studies. The data analysis technique used was simple path analysis to separately test the effect of variable X1 (training) on variable Y (principal performance), and then the effect of variable X2 (principal managerial skills) on variable Y (principal performance). This research also examined the effect of variable X1 (training) on X2 (principal managerial skills) and to test the effect of X1 (training) and X2 (principal managerial skills) variables together on the Y variable (principal performance). For data analysis, this research used SPSS software for Windows ver. 22. The path analysis technique was used in testing the amount of contribution shown by the path coefficient on each path diagram. In data processing, IBM AMOS ver. 21 programm was used.

Hypothesis testing of the effect of training on pricipal performance
The analysis of hypothesis testing was carried out to find out the effect of training (X1) on principal performance (Y) by using data processing through the SPSS (Statistical Product and Service Solution) Ver. 22 for windows. Based on the result analysis shown in Table 1, principal performance (Y) and training (X1) produces a constant "α" of 55,328 and a regression coefficient of "Βx1" of 0.188 so that the regression equation is: Y = α + Βx1 or Y = 55.328 + 0.188. Testing the meaning between training (X1) and principal performance (Y) through regression equation Y = 55,328 + 0.188 shows an increase in each one score in training (X1) causes an increase of 0.188 in principal performance score (Y) at a constant of 55,328+ 0.188.  Table 2. Simple regression analysis on training (X1) and principal performance (Y) shows the correlation coefficient Ry of 0.506. The results of testing the significance of the coefficients Available online at https://ejournal.unuja.ac.id/index.php/al-tanzim/index using the t test showed that tcount = 4.197 is significant at the significant level of 0.306. As for ttable at a significant level of 0.05 with n = 6 then df = n-2 is 6-2 = 4. The value of ttable = 2.132. Thus, it is known that tcount 4,197 ≥ ttable 2,132 with α = 0.05 so that Ho is rejected and Ha is accepted. It shows that there is an effect of training (X1) on principal performance (Y). The effect of training (X1) on principal performance (Y) is supported by a coefficient of R 2 (R Square) of 0.256 which indicates that there is a significant effect of training (X1) on principal performance (Y) with a determination coefficient of 25. 6%. It means that 25. 6% of training (X1) affects principal performance (Y) which is explained by the variation in aspects through the equation Y = 55.328 + 0.188. The results of this study are relevant to the effects of research by Khan (2011), who found that training affected organizational performance. Suppose we refer to the findings of several researchers who show that principal leadership is a critical element of the effectiveness of school organizations. In this case, this further emphasizes the importance of the professional development efforts of principals. Waters and Marzano (2006) found that principal leadership had a significant effect on student achievement. While Emmanouil et al., (2014) suggest that leadership policy is an essential factor for teacher effectiveness. Likewise, the findings of Lai et al., (2014) shows that the leadership style of principal influences the efficiency and effectiveness of schools. Bartel (1994) suggests that training needs to be done to improve employee performance and organizational productivity. Training is a very strategic form of human resource development, held in addition to professional development, problem-solving, remedial action, and increasing motivation, mobility, and safety of organizational members (Wahjosoemidjo, 2001). In addition, training is an effort to make it easier for employees to understand and master competencies related to their work (Noe et al., 2011). Meyer and Allen (1991) emphasized that to develop knowledge, skills and do a job well, an effective training program is needed.

Hypothesis testing of the effect of training on principal managerial skills
The analysis of hypothesis testing were carried out to find out the effect of training (X 1 ) on principal managerial skills (X 2 ) using data processing through the SPSS (Statistical Product and Service Solution) Ver. 22 for windows.
Analysis of the effect of training (X1) on principal managerial skills (X2) produces a constant "α" of 38,071 and a regression coefficient of "Βx1" of 0.583 so that the regression equation is: Y = α + Βx1 or Y = 38.071 + 0.583 as shown in Table 3. Testing the meaning between training(X1) and principal managerial skills (X2) through the regression equation Y = 38.071 + 0.583 shows an increase in every single score in training (X1) causes an increase of 0.583 in the score of principal managerial skills (X2) at a constant of 38,071 + 0.583.  Table 4. The results of multiple regression analysis of training (X 1 ) and principal managerial skills (X 2 ) show the Ry correlation coefficient of 0.982. The results of testing the meaning of coefficients using the t test show that t count = 8.275 is significant at the 0.000 level. As for ttable at a significance level of 0.05 with n = 6 then df = n-2 is 6-2 = 4. The value of ttable = 2.132. It shows that tcount 8.725 ≥ ttable 2.132 with α = 0.05 so that Ho is rejected and Ha is accepted. It means that there is an effect of training (X1) on principal managerial skills (X2). The effect of training (X1) on principal managerial skills (X2) is supported by a coefficient of R 2 (R Square) of 0.964 which indicates that there is a significant influence between training (X1) on principal managerial skills (X2) with a coefficient of determination of 96.4 %. It means that 96.4% of training (X1) affects principal managerial skills (X2) which is explained by the variation in aspects through the equation Y = 38.071 + 0.583. This study indicates that the more intense the principal is in attending training and a deep understanding of training material, the higher the principal's managerial skills. Experts agree that training is an effort to develop the competence of human resources to improve individual or organizational performance. Bass and Vaughan (1966) emphasize that through training, employees' technical skills and socio-emotional attitudes range from simpler ones to complex development and philosophy change as an organizational improvement process. The same thing is stated by Lynton and Pareek (1967) that training means providing organized opportunities for participants to gain the necessary understanding and skills. Likewise, Goldstein and Ford (2002) argue that training is an effort to provide employees with skills, rules, concepts, or attitudes to improve performance. King (1964) also agrees that training gives individuals conditions to acquire knowledge, skills, or abilities. Training also plays a vital role in organizational effectiveness and has implications for productivity, health and safety in the workplace, and personal development (Goldstain and Ford, 2002).

Hypothesis testing of the effect of managerial skills on principal performance
Data analysis of the effect of managerial skills (X2) on principal performance (Y) as seen in Table 5 produces a constant "α" of 44,617 and a regression coefficient of Βx2 of 0.305 so that the regression equation is: Y = α + Βx2 or Y = 44,617 + 0.305. Testing the meaning of the effect of managerial skills (X2) on principal performance (Y) through regression equation Y = 44,617 + 0.305, shows an increase in every single score of managerial skills (X2) of 0.305 on principal performance score (Y) at a constant of 0.583 on the score of managerial skills (X2) at a constant of 38.071 + 0.583. The test for the significance level of α = 5%, which means that it rejects the correct hypothesis. The analysis of the effect of managerial skills (X2) on principal performance (Y) shows the Ry correlation coefficient of 0.485. The results of testing the significance of the coefficients using the t test showed that tcount = 2.902 is at 0.329 significant level. As for t table at significance level of 0.05 with n = 6 then df = n-2 is 6-2 = 4. The value of ttable = 2.132. It shows that tcount 2.902 ≥ ttable 2.132 with α = 0.05 so that Ho is rejected and Ha is accepted. It means that there is an effect of managerial skills (X2) on principal performance (Y). The effect of managerial skills (X2) on the principal's performance (Y) is supported by a coefficient of R 2 (R Square) of 0.235 which indicates that there is a significant influence of managerial skills (X2) on principal performance (Y) supported by a coefficient of determination of 23.5%. It means that 23.5% of managerial skills (X 2 ) have an effect on principal performance (Y) which is explained by the variation in aspects through equation Y = 38.071 + 0.583. The results of this study are in line with the views of Lusier and Achua (2010) in who identify three factors that affect performance, namely: ability, motivation, and resources. Gupta (2012) emphasizes that competency aspects are factors that organizations or companies must consider to achieve adequate performance. By adding motivational factors, organization, tradition, organizational characteristics, performance definition, technology, and type of task analysis, Landy and Conte (2010) suggest the same thing that competency factors can influence performance. Mukherjee's research (2013) found a significant relationship between principal managerial skills and school performance and the main driver of the success of the principal performance and school performance.
As a school leader, who has a vital role in leading and managing the school, the principal needs managerial skills. Katz (1974) defines managerial skills as a manager's ability to transform information and knowledge into action, including conceptual skills, human or interpersonal skills, and technical skills. Conceptual skills are the ability to understand the organization as a whole that is interrelated with the surrounding environment with relevant priorities and important issues. As top management in schools, principals need these conceptual skills because their duties require strong analytical skills and creative talents (Skripak, 2016). As managers, principal with good conceptual skills tends to be creative and willing to consider various methods to achieve goals (Madura, 2007). Interpersonal skills are the ability of managers to motivate workers, resolve work conflicts, and communicate and work with people. Meanwhile, technical skills are the manager's competency to use specific methods and techniques in performing managerial work (Mokroš, 2007).

Hypothesis testing of the effect of training and managerial skills on principal performance
Hypothesis testing analysis was carried out to find out the effect of training (X1) and managerial skills (X2) on principal performance (Y) as shown in Table 7 result at a constant "α" of 63,062 and a regression coefficient of Βx1 of 0.307 and a regression coefficient of Βx2 equal to 0.203 so that the regression equation is: Y = α + Βx1 + Βx2 or Y = 63.062 + 0.307 + 0.203. Testing the meaning between training (X1) and managerial skills (X2) on principal performance (Y) can be seen through the regression equation Y = 63.062 + 0.307 + 0.203 shows an increase in every single score in training (X1) of 0.307 and managerial skills ( X2) of 0.203 causes an increase in the principal performance score (Y) at a constant of 63.062 + 0.307 + 0.203. The results of the analysis in Table 8 show the coefficient of the determinant value of the effect of training (X1) and managerial skills (X2) on principal performance (Y). It shows the Ry correlation coefficient of 0.510. The results of testing the significance of the coefficients using the t test show that tcount = 2.976 is significant at 0.287 level. As for ttable at a significance level of 0.05 with n = 6 then df = n-2 is 6-2 = 4. The value of ttable = 2.132. It shows that tcount 2.976 ≥ ttable 2.132 with α = 0.05 so that Ho is rejected and Ha is accepted. It means that there is an effect of training (X1) and managerial skills (X2) on principal performance (Y). It is supported by the R 2 (R Square) of 0.260 which indicates that there is a significant effect of training (X1) and managerial skills (X2) on principal performance (Y) supported by a determination coefficient of 26%. It means that 26% of managerial skills (X2) have an effect on principal performance (Y) which is explained by the variation in aspects through the equation Y = 63.062 + 0.307 + 0.203. The results of this study indicate that the more intense the principal in attending the training and having a deep understanding of training material, the higher the principal managerial skills are. The higher of managerial skills is, the higher the quality of principal performance is. which in turn increases the quality of school.