Servant Leadership, Cultural Dimension, and Adversity Quotient: A Causal Model on Organizational Resilience of the Local Government Units’ Employees in Davao Region

Purpose: The study aimed to determine the best-fit model for organizational resilience of local government unit employees regarding servant leadership, cultural dimension, and employees' adversity quotient. The descriptive-causal method and non-experimental quantitative research design were applied. Organizations considerably give these effects of the worrying manifestations attention to guarantee social support in times of need. Resilient leaders should have access to trusted peers and social groups, time, reflection, collaboration, and conversational development chances that request to reduce social seclusion and more chances for partnerships. In this context, the researcher was prompted to conduct the study to determine whether servant leadership, cultural dimension, adversity quotient, and the employees' resilience, especially in local government units, should be strengthened in response to adverse circumstances. Therefore, this would fill the gap, as supported by the literature regarding the local setting. Methodology: Three hundred ninety-three employees from six cities in Davao Region were surveyed using standardized adapted instruments. The survey questionnaire used was validated and approved by experts. The respondents were selected through a stratified sampling technique. Data were analyzed using the Mean, Pearson r, Regression Analysis, and Structural Equation Modeling. Findings: Results revealed that all variables gained a very high level. The result of the study also revealed an overall significant relationship and influence between the exogenous and endogenous variables. Furthermore, the best-fit model for organizational resilience was generated and demonstrated a direct effect in Model 5, and the goodness of fit measures' requirements were met. It is detected that there is a correlation between the exogenous and Endogenous variables. The important relationship between the exogenous and endogenous variables, which predicts the study's findings, is a pronouncement that being resilient and adverse to a chaotic situation could be effective and useful to withstand an employee's life Recommendations: The suggestion between the Exogenous and Endogenous in creating organizational resilience in municipal governments should be essentially measured. This is recommended to the Human Resource Management that embraces and exercises the practice of being efficient in their work and responsibilities to impart individual adversity consciousness and cultivate the employees from training and development.


Findings:
Results revealed that all variables gained a very high level.The result of the study also revealed an overall significant relationship and influence between the exogenous and endogenous variables.Furthermore, the best-fit model for organizational resilience was generated and demonstrated a direct effect in Model 5, and the goodness of fit measures' requirements were met.It is detected that there is a correlation between the exogenous and Endogenous variables.The important relationship between the exogenous and endogenous variables, which predicts the study's findings, is a pronouncement that being resilient and adverse to a chaotic situation could be effective and useful to withstand an employee's life

INTRODUCTION
The employee is affected by adversity, frustration, misfortune, risks, and threats, challenging them before the essential and effective leader comes in.Organizations and individuals face psychological well-being and psychosocial issues (Nicomedes & Avila, 2020).The economic difficulties, adverse events, and poor behaviour have been unfavourably depicted where the workforce, individuals, and their families are directly affected.Constructing resilience would provide workforce motivation, commitment, and engagement while maintaining performance even when facing uncertainty and constantly challenging changes inside and outside the organization (Besuner, 2017).
Positive attitudes are the degree to which the person maintains personal mental control in the face of events and behaviors.It also occurs within positive cultural environments (Bernard, 2018).This will provoke a different response that will affect future success and happiness whether the individual thinks it 'worthwhile' being resilient.The resilient person has limitations according to the cultural environment that can produce benefits of value to the individual (Turgeon, 2019).An imperative part of personal resilience is self-efficacy and self-esteem, which will provide attributes of time and reinforcement.The cultural contingent, with a positive culture reinforcing the self-efficacy, and the self-esteem was to overcome from the negative culture of the individual mind.Being resilient should be practiced and possessed by the individual while utilizing positive coping, adaptation, and persistence (Näswall et al., 2019).Resilience researchers agree that individual resilience is always facing the variations of situations that can answer the risk and never succumbing to challenges, stress, and adversity.Resilient can survive and bounce back from the challenges associated with the odds of time (Bernard, 2018).
The literature depicted the connection between the leader's job stress and the capability to preserve flexibility to shun and quickly recover whatever damages life's adversity (Teo et al., 2017).Being resilient means the strong courage to survive, recover, and thrive for the best describes the stage of a person when facing adversity (Nicomedes et al., 2020).Literature suggested characterizing resilience, including servant leadership, cultural dimension, and adversity quotient, to take place in the described positive responses from the employees in the local government units (Näswall et al., 2019).
Organizations considerably give these effects of the worrying manifestations attention to guarantee social support in times of need.Resilient leaders should have access to trusted peers and social groups, time, reflection, collaboration, and conversational development chances that request to reduce social seclusion and more chances for partnerships (Barasa et al., 2018).In this context, the researcher was prompted to conduct the study to determine whether servant leadership, cultural dimension, adversity quotient, and the employees' resilience, especially in local government units, should be strengthened in response to adverse circumstances.Therefore, this would fill the gap, as supported by the literature regarding the local setting.

Problem Statement
The result of the study points out references for local government unit employees in region xi to enhance all variables mentioned above as an instrument to analyse the pulse from responses of the employees and to protect from any occurred that them at risk and to withstand the odd amid time.Servant leadership, cultural dimension, adversity quotient, and organizational resiliency should determine from employees will re-act the things that occurred in their environment.
Likewise, the readings determine the weaknesses and strengths, which must be measured and supported by the different authors.Organizational resiliency is composed of vision, determination, interaction, relationships, problem-solving, organization, and self-confidence, as cited by Mowbray (2012).Servant leadership is composed of empowerment, standing back, accountability, forgiveness, courage, authenticity, humility, and stewardship, as cited by Dierendonck (2010).The Cultural dimension comprises individualism, power distance, and uncertainty avoidance (Hanges et al., 2014).The Adversity quotient is also composed of control, ownership, reach, and endurance (CORE), as cited by Stoltz (2012).These all were gathered from the varied information and references from different books, journals, the internet, and others, which are helpful for this survey.

Objectives of the Study
This study aimed to determine whether servant leadership, cultural dimension, and adversity quotient predict the organizational resilience of local government unit employees in Region XI.Precisely, this study sought to attain the following objectives: 1) To ascertain the level of servant leadership among the local government unit employees in terms of empowerment, standing back, accountability, forgiveness, courage, authenticity, humility, and stewardship.
2) To describe the level of cultural dimension among local government unit employees in terms of individualism, power distance, and uncertainty avoidance.
3) To determine the level of adversity quotient among local government unit employees in terms of control, ownership, reach, and endurance.

4)
To determine the level of organizational resilience among local government unit employees in terms of vision, determination, interaction, relationships, problem-solving, organization, and self-confidence.

5)
To determine the vital relationship between servant leadership and organizational resilience, cultural dimensions and organizational resilience, and adversity quotient and organizational resilience.
6) To determine the singular and combined influence of independent variables on the organizational resilience of the local government unit employees.

7)
To identify what model best fits the organizational resilience of the local government unit employees.
The null hypotheses were tested at 0.05 significance: 1) There is no substantial relationship between the independent variables, servant leadership, cultural dimension, and adversity quotient, and the dependent variable, organizational resilience.
2) No variable best predicts the organizational resilience of local government unit employees in Region XI.
3) There is no best-fit model for the organizational resilience of local government unit employees in Region XI.
The literature suggested the introductory model and the interviews with servant leadership characteristics, which we discuss below.It can also be identified as empowerment, standing back, accountability, forgiveness, courage, authenticity, humility, and stewarding, as cited by Van Dierendonck and Heeren (2011).
Empowerment is to focus on reassuring personal development for developing a pro-active, selfconfident attitude that can deliver wisdom of personal power this empowering leadership behaviour among features like monitoring and coaching, decision-making, and information sharing for groundbreaking performance.Servant leaders believe in both the extrinsic and intrinsic value of each individual; this is the ability of a person to learn to be appreciated (Blanning, 2016).
Accountability is accountability for performance with a mechanism by which obligation is given to the teams (Hanges et al., 2014).Standing back is about prioritizing the notice of others first and giving them essential backing and recognition for the task accomplished.This aspect is connected to servant leadership with such indicators as authenticity, empowerment, humility, and stewardship (Hanges et al., 2014).
Humility is the talent for proper perspective which emphasizes the courage to accept someone even if he commits mistakes (Peterson et al., 2012).To have an appropriate consideration of one's strong and weak realities servant leadership will always acknowledge the limitations and enthusiastically seek to emphasize limitations.
Authenticity is correlated to articulating the 'true self' and stating oneself, which is dependable with inner opinions and feelings (Liu, 2016).With definite representation privately and publicly, and obligations which the Organizational and individual standpoints emphasize owning personal experiences, views, emotions, needs, wants, preferences, or beliefs.One's expressions are consistent with the inner thoughts and feelings of the person (Peterson et al., 2012).
Courage is taking risks and trying new approaches to old problems (Blanning, 2016).The significant distinctive that differentiates the servant leader from other leaders within the organizational context.These conventional challenges of employed behaviors are indispensable for origination and inspiration.This is connected to pro-active behaviour and suggests producing new ways.It means we should strongly rely on values and convictions to oversee our actions (Louis & Murphy, 2018;Smylie, Murphy, & Karen, 2020).
Forgiveness or Personal acceptance is the capability to know and appreciate people, even those having different backgrounds and experiences (Peterson et al., 2012), the capacity and apparent to not to hold back the indictment and not to keep bitterness into other dilemmas and experiences (McCullough et al., 2007).Nevertheless, personal acceptance is an affection and understanding to accept experience and cognitively of the mental standpoint of other people.Henceforth, personal acceptance can forgive even when there are facts of wrongdoing and arguments of others.This ability to be a servant leader is important to innovate and to create an environment of faith where people feel acknowledged and not rejected when they commit mistakes (Van Dierendonck, et al., 2011).Therefore, this could develop a high-quality intrapersonal and interpersonal relationship for a healthy consideration of other's behaviour.And not unforgiving or ready to get even; behaviour creates and brings out the best people.
Stewardship is willing to accept more extensive responsibilities in the establishment to serve and lead people, not for self-interest.A leader will be a caretaker and role model (Smylie, et al., 2020).For example, leaders should always think about the common interest, which is connected to the social stimulation for responsibility and loyalty for the entire group for work.This concept is represented by a sense of obligation for the common good, in which the self is included, but it bounces beyond one's self-interest (Peterson et al., 2012).The indicator is willing to take responsibility for society and go all-out for service to meet the common good.
Power distance is the person accepting the situation of the society in the institutions and organizations that are somehow distributed unequally.Uncertainty avoidance can be defined as when people feel threatened by the uncertainty and ambiguity of the situation.This needs rules and a reserved life structure because people of high uncertainty avoidance are less open to change and innovation than those of low uncertainty avoidance cultures.They can adopt innovations (Basilio et al., 2017).The high uncertainty avoidance cultures have a passive attitude to health by focusing on purity in food and drink and using more medication, while low uncertainty avoidance cultures have a more active attitude to health by focusing on fitness and sports (De Mooij & Hofstede, 2002;De Mooij, 2010).
As Stoltz (2012) perceived, the worker's capacity to perform may vary or change over time.As defined by the expert mentioned above, the adversity quotient determines how an individual deal with life problems and issues and overwhelm them.Adversity is also viewed as a fruitful version of risk assessment in life.It is, therefore, a mix of individual characteristics and environmental factors.It makes a person more receptive to a positive outlook (Markman, 2000).
The adversity quotient has four sub-areas: control, ownership, reach, and endurance, as identified as CORE.These are interrelated but can identify different areas of adversity quotient.Controlling is one's ability to switch to a much better solution.At the same time, ownership is the willingness of the individual to submit himself or herself to adversity and try to own it and be responsible for it.Reach is the ability to go beyond what is expected of him.It means what an individual does beyond expectations.In contrast, endurance is the ability of an individual to keep going despite the odds of life (Stoltz, 2012).
Resilience can be seen as having two-dimensional constructs: adversity and positive adjustment outcomes of the adversity exposure (Latendresse & Luthar, 2005).Resilience can be examined across different scholarly articles and studies.There is a small agreement on how researchers define adversity, but it can still be viewed as a good way of accepting the challenges.Resiliency is "positive adaptation to manifest social, behavioral competence in meeting particular works or tasks in a given life stage (Latendresse & Luthar, 2005).
In the early times of resiliency research, researchers looked at it as the 'hardy,' 'invulnerable,' and 'invincible' (Latendresse & Luthar, 2005).It can also be identified as 'ordinary magic' because most persons or individuals exposed to adversity can still manage to overcome these trials, as Ungar, Ghazinour, & Richter, (2013) mentioned.Some researchers in resiliency concluded that a person has an inborn capacity to become resilient, a kind of self-righting that operates mot when the person is in the resiliency-building status in his or her life (Bernard, 2018).The internal and external environmental factors influence the employees, and resiliency is developed from gaining personal strength and support from other people (Brendtro & Longhurst, 2005).
Further, Walsh et al. ( 2010) distribute an overview of resilience and measured definition in local government employees.The authors noted that resilience among employees depicts a usual range of competence across several domains of functioning.Furthermore, it was noted that self-report resilience questionnaires measured that adaptability has been developed.They utilized multiple indicators from different variables to determine the resilience of a person who shows competence in one domain.This study was also anchored to the Resilience Theory of Mowbray (2012), which emphasizes enhancing personal characteristics, dealing with others, and doing activities to improve the resilient characteristics of a person.This espouses the seven elements model: vision, determination, interaction, relationships, problem-solving, organization, and self-confidence.In these studies, people exposed to the outcome were measured as resilient simply in the absence of one disorder.This type of informative investigation is a single outcome that needs to be improved when considering overall resilience following maltreatment (Mowbray, 2012).

LITERATURE REVIEW Theoretical Framework
This study was anchored on the proposition of Empowerment.Employees are essential for the environment today to enhance management methods, which can be applied across organizations to respond to requirements in modern global business today (Simmons & Marquis, 2017).This systematic had a rigorous study, especially in employee empowerment, even though this is still in its infancy.All of these measures have been developed in North America and established universally, which are applicable and valid in other cultural settings of Menon (1999).
This essential of cultural dimension values in organizational life is well established and stated firmly in the literature; the constructs between cultural dimension values and the management of different people's cultures are still under-researched (Jackson, 2002).Human resource management (HRM) contributes considerably to developing an organizational competitive advantage for the global economy.In this study, this term refers to individualism, power distance, and uncertainty avoidance.
The employees, while exposed to some risk factors, can easily assume and tolerate life changes and do not cultivate mental disorders.They are described as resilient.They can respond positively to adversities they encounter.Furthermore, the Adversity Quotient Theory of Stoltz (2012) tells about the person's response to challenging issues in life.It looks into the daily responses of the person as pertains to the annoyances of the environment and the people around them.This is a recognized science.Its four dimensions are as follows: control, ownership, reach, and endurance.Control is a degree to which somebody observes what can be effective in whatever occurs next.Ownership is the probability that someone can take to improve the situation, regardless of their proper errands.Reach is the level to which a person will go beyond his expectations to deal with life.Endurance measures when an individual can last or withstand a problem at hand (Stoltz, 2012).
In addition, this study was also anchored to the Resilience Theory of Mowbray (2012), which emphasizes enhancing personal characteristics, dealing with others, and doing activities to improve the resilient characteristics of a person.This espouses the seven elements model: vision, determination, interaction, relationships, problem-solving, organization, and self-confidence.For relationships to endure and flourish there is a need to furnace associations.Part of this is associates, friends, lovers, and others surrounding an individual.Organized persons can efficiently deal with the problems around them.Such characteristics allow them to recall issues and eventually help them solve them.Some unexpected trials do not readily disrupt them.

Conceptual Framework
The conceptual framework is shown in Figure 1.The independent variables are the servant leadership, cultural dimension, and adversity quotient, which follow indicators: The first variable would be servant leadership and represents as follows: Empowerment aims to possess a pro-active ability, self-confident behaviour among employees with a sense of personal power.Accountability has a mechanism and responsibility outcomes given to the individuals and the teams.Standing back is given tasks and responsibilities without ceasing until their success has been accomplished.Humility in leadership emphasizes the courage to admit whatever outcome of the given task because a leader assumes that a mistake is possible (Morris et al., 2005).Authenticity accurately represents-privately and publiclyinternal states, intentions, and commitments (Peterson et al., 2012).
Courage is essential for modernization and creativity within the challenging conventional models between work and the worker's behaviors.Forgiveness is the ability not to make mistakes and not to carry grudges for the circumstances (McCullough et al., 2007).Therefore, personal acceptance is about understanding: having a cognitive capability to adopt the psychological perspective of others, like experiences, feelings of warmth, and compassion.Stewardship is willing to take responsibility even in larger institutions that serve people, not for self-interest and leader will be a caretaker and role model.For example, leaders should always think about the common interest, which is connected to the social stimulation for responsibility and loyalty for the entire group for work.This concept is represented by a sense of obligation for the common good, in which the self is included, but it bounces beyond one's self-interest (Peterson et al., 2012).This indicates a willingness to take responsibility for the organization and go all-out for service to meet the common good.
The cultural dimension is represented as follows by Hanges et al. (2014).There are three large independent cultural dimensions by which cultures may be classified: Individualism suggests a loosely knit social context in which people are supposed to take care of their immediate families; collectivism represents a fitted social background in which people can differentiate between in-groups and outgroups.Power distance is the extent to which the person accepts the situation of society in the cultures and organizations that are somehow distributed unequally.Uncertainty avoidance is also defined as the situation's extent of uncertainty and ambiguity.There is a need for rules and formality to structure life because people of high uncertainty avoidance are less open to change and innovation than those of low uncertainty avoidance cultures.They can adopt innovations (Basilio et al., 2017).People with high uncertainty avoidance cultures have a passive attitude to health by concentrating on purity in food and drink and using more medication, while low uncertainty avoidance cultures have a more active attitude to health by focusing on fitness and sports (De Mooij & Hofstede, 2002;De Mooij, 2010).(Stoltz, 2012).Interaction refers to employees who can encourage other people to work with them harmoniously and encourage them to do things they are not used to.Relationship of employees who show a good camaraderie in working with other persons will succeed and be happy in their respective endeavour despite the problems and issues surrounding them in pursuing their goals in life.Problem-solving-employees whose issues can easily find solutions; they address their problems and face them with a scientific stance without being so much defied.Organization-employees whose apply solutions in an orderly manner and control each step until the problem is solved.Self-confident employees who have a strong will to face all the concerns in life and can stand on their principles (Moss, 2011).
The global importance of the study is to provide gainful data on the utility of this research in the local government unit setting, considering the characteristics of the respondents who are public employees.Thus, they belong to the workplace and are exposed to hardships, adversities, fears, and grounds and sometimes a frontline of all problems through their duties.Further, the study provides ideas for future researchers and employees to look into the fundamental issues that pertain to servant leadership, cultural dimension, adversity quotient, and resiliency of the employees when they are inside or outside the organization's premises.
In terms of the social importance of the study, this will give the study's end users a clear idea of the benefits of having a high level of servant leadership, cultural dimension, adversity quotient, and high organizational resiliency.Whatever the threats of catastrophe may come to their lives, they were already prepared to face the problems and know how to provide solutions and overcome them.
Local Government Administrators This study will shed light on local government administrators and the kind of subordinates they have, particularly in terms of their resilience and adversity quotient.
Employees, this study will give insight into their strengths and weaknesses.Thus, they can seek guidance from their elders and leaders.Department Heads, this study may provide information about their subordinates, especially their struggles.Thus, they could help their employees overcome the challenges to become resilient and competent in adverse situations.
Finally, the result of this measurement may be useful for the local government unit in Region XI and for future researchers to answer their doubtful mind on managing and having inner solid and outer resilience and adversity quotient.
Servant Leadership (SL).This relates to the leadership capacity to manage and build relationships with co-workers and subordinates.This variable protects the individual from stressful occurrences and challenging situations while seeking to develop resilient leaders.This study refers to empowerment, standing back, accountability, forgiveness, courage, authenticity, humility, and stewardship.Cultural Dimension (CD).It is a cultural value and how they relate the empirical experiences to management practices.To build a leader's capacity, resilience is how to affect and collaborate to ensure a social link to care in times of need, shared practice, and access to trusted peers and colleagues.The conversational development opportunities demand less social seclusion and open more employee opportunities (Barasa et al., 2018).
In this study, this term refers to individualism, power distance, and uncertainty avoidance.Adversity Quotient (AQ).The ability to withstand adversity, wins over problems, and strengthens in response to adverse circumstances.In this study, this term refers to control, ownership, reach, and endurance.Organizational Resilience (OR).This relates to one's ability to not let bad energies into one's mind and body.Therefore, to enhance all variables above as instruments to analyse the pulse from employees' responses and to protect from any resilience should be employed to make employees withstand the odds over time.In this study, this refers to the ability of the employees to be more sensitive in terms of vision, determination, interaction, relationships, problem-solving, organization, and self-confidence.

METHODOLOGY
This section presents the methodologies implemented in conducting the research, including respondent materials, instruments, design, and procedure.
This survey made use of quantitative research design using descriptive-causal techniques.It is nonexperimental research; the study's independent variable was not manipulated, and there was no random assignment to groups (Johnson & Christensen, 2008).Further, non-experimental quantitative design is research that lacks the manipulation of an independent variable, random assignment of tactics wants to conditions or orders of conditions (O'Dwyer & Bernauer, 2013).The data of this study determined the servant leadership, cultural dimensions, adversity quotient, and resiliency of the government employees of local government units in Region XI.
The use of descriptive-causal research design provided answers to the statement of the problems as asked for in sub-problems 3 and 4. Descriptive research was used to describe the population characteristics and the studied phenomenon.It does not answer questions about how/when/why the characteristics occurred.Descriptive research examines a phenomenon, group of people, idea, or theory with a particular focus on the facts and conditions of the subject.
The location of the survey is Region XI.It is characterized by the same kind of social environment adopted by the respondents, and the respondents have the same exposure to the same social issues consistently.This means these respondents are employees working within the Davao Region all their lives; thus, their exposure to social, political, economic, and religious experiences are relatively similar.
Three hundred ninety-three respondents in this study belonged to the different cities under Region XI for 2022-2023.These cities keep real identities confidential to safeguard the city's integrity and identity.This study used Stratified sampling in selecting the respondents (Stoltz, 2012).This means that all employees' available time to conduct the study is considered and included in the questionnaire description of stratified sampling with literature support.
The inclusion criteria are as follows: they should be bonafide government employees, whether permanent or temporary, in the workplace.Respondents should be residents of the Davao Region.Any employees who are not a resident of the Davao region is excluded from the study.Voluntary participation in research requires the investigators to inform participants she/he/they may discontinue or withdraw and leave participation even if the research study is ongoing; they may not be penalized or lose benefits.The participant can leave anytime, even if the research study is ongoing.When withdrawing from the study, the participant should let the researcher or the research team knows that he/she/they wish to withdraw.A participant may provide the research team with reasons for leaving the study, but it is not compulsory.
There are four significant instruments used for this survey.Part 1 of the questionnaire focuses on servant leadership of the employees with the following indicators: empowerment with seven questions; standing back with three questions; accountability with three questions; forgiveness with three questions; courage with two questions; authenticity with four questions; humility with five questions, steward with three questions; this is adapted from and authored by Nuijten et al., (2011).Part 2 of the questionnaire focused on the cultural dimensions of the employees with the following indicators: individualism-collectivism with six questions, power distance with six questions, and uncertainty avoidance with five questions.This questionnaire was downloaded from the internet and authored by Whitaker et al. (2014).Part 3 of the questionnaire focused on the adversity quotient of the employees with the following indicators: Control with six questions, Ownership with five questions, Reach with four questions and Endurance with five questions.This questionnaire was downloaded from the internet and authored by Stoltz (2012).Part 4 of the questionnaire focused on the organizational resilience of the employees with the following indicators: vision, determination, interaction, relationships, problem-solving, organization, and self-confidence.Each indicator in this questionnaire comprises five questions, adapted from and authored by Mowbray (2012) with modifications.
The experts validated the questionnaires before their deployment.The experts validated the questionnaires for content validity and construct validity.Using the modified, standardized survey questionnaires, the researcher gathered the data to evaluate the differences in the employees' insight into how they respond to catastrophes and adversity in their individual, peers, and workplace environments.Employees in the Davao Region will respond to the instruments about their experiences, observations, and perceptions on servant leadership, cultural dimension, adversity quotient, and organizational resilience.
The following statistical tools were used to analyze the computation of data and in testing the hypothesis was presented of the study at a 0.05 level of significance: Mean was used to determine the level of servant leadership, cultural dimension, adversity quotient, and organizational resilience of government employees in different cities in the Davao Region.Pearson r was utilized to determine the correlation between servant leadership, cultural dimension, adversity quotient, and organizational resilience of government employees.Regression Analysis was also employed to determine the significant influence of servant leadership, cultural dimension, and adversity quotient on organizational resilience.Structural Equation Modelling (SEM) uses different types of models to analyse and explain the correlations between observed variables, with the same primary objective of providing a quantitative test of a theoretical framework predicted by the researcher (Schumacker & Lomax, 2010).Specifically, various conceptual models can be tested in SEM to theorize how sets of variables specify structures and how these frameworks are interrelated.The research method's suitability relates to the "best fit" design for answering scientific questions (Maxwell, 2005).

Range of Means Descriptive Level
The observed variables are always manifested/observed.

4.20-5.00 Very High
The observed variables are often manifested/observed.

3.40-4.19 High
The observed variables are sometimes manifested/observed.

2.60-3.39 Moderate
The observed variables are seldom manifested/observed.

1.80-2.59 Low
The observed variables are almost never manifested/observed.

1.00-1.79 Very Low
This study's findings agree with the Organizational Resilience Theory by Mowbray (2012), who emphasized that people respond to life difficulties, particularly the hard ones.Collaboration among leaders, co-workers, and community agencies may be the only effective means to address the complex problems of many employees.This indicates further that model 5 obtained a very high value of 0.548, which is the best predictor.
After the researcher met clarity about the methodology, the research instrument, and the process of data analysis, the researcher secured a letter of endorsement from the office of a professional school at the University of Mindanao Davao City and sought permission, which indicated the UMERC certificate approval of Form 2.6 before proceeding to the different Offices of the cities under Davao Region and to the Local government unit Authority to conduct the study to the employees in localities.Upon approval by the authority, a letter of request to conduct the study was sent to the Elected Local Executive or the Authority for their approval to distribute the questionnaire to the respondents.
The researcher will send a letter asking permission with an attachment endorsement letter from the office of the local government authority from the different cities to distribute the survey questionnaire to the employees-respondents.The questionnaire was distributed to various cities from January 2 to March 27, 2023.Each government employee's respondent is given ample time to read and ask clarificatory questions pertaining to the research instrument's questions.The respondents answered the questions while the researcher was close to entertaining further questions, if any.Demographical methods measured the servant leadership, cultural dimensions, adversity quotient, and organizational resiliency of government employees with their level, age, and gender.
After the questions were answered, the researcher retrieved the questionnaire.There are numerous cities visited every day during the period of the distribution of the questionnaire.The researcher retrieved the survey questionnaire after the respondents answered all the questions.The researcher tallied all the data gathered from the respondents with the guidance of the statistician.Then, the results were analysed and interpreted based on the statement of the problem of the study.

FINDINGS
Presented in this section are results of the discussion on the findings of the study.The results are discussed in sequence as follows: level of servant leadership of local government employee; level of cultural dimension; level of employee adversity quotient of local government employee; level of organizational resilience; and the implication of between servant leadership and organizational resilience; cultural dimension and organizational resilience; employee adversity quotient and organizational resilience of local government employees.
The standard deviation in the four descriptive tables, Table 2, Table 3, Table 4 and Table 5 ranged from 0.30 to 0.99 which are less than 1.0 as the distinctive standard deviation for a 5-point Likert Scale.This means the ratings in accomplished questionnaires were closed to the mean, which impliedly indicating the consistency and responsibly responses of the respondents.

Servant Leadership of Local Government Employees
The overall mean of 4.86 for the level of servant leadership assessment was described as very high, indicating that the level of servant leadership assessment was always manifested.The very high level could be attributed to the very high rating of the majority of the indicators, as shown in Table 2 for the indicators of servant leadership assessment.The very high level resulted from standing back with a high rating of 4.92.Similarly, another indicator, accountability, had a very high rating of 4.83, which resulted from the general rating of very high for all the specific items under accountability, as presented in the appendix.
Further, another indicator, forgiveness, obtained a very high rating of 4.87, and the indicator of courage obtained a very high rating of 4.81; another indicator, authenticity, obtained a very high rating of 4.87.The rest of the indicators obtained humility and stewardship mean ratings ranging from 4.86 to 4.87, described as very high.This means that the employee's servant leadership level is always manifested.The variables considered in the study are the cultural dimension of the government employees, which is described as very high.Indicators with very high response levels include individualism, power distance, and uncertainty avoidance.The deed also indicates that the employees with higher cultural dimensions were held accountable to face the situations regardless of their causes.Furthermore, those cultural dimensions are most often felt victimized and helpless.So, individual employees should develop and possess indicators (Stoltz, 2012).
As presented by Hanges et al. (2014).There are three largely independent cultural dimensions by which societies may be classified: Individualism suggests a loosely knit social framework in which people are supposed to take care inclusively of themselves and their immediate families; collectivism represents a tight social framework in which people can differentiate between in-groups and outgroups.

Adversity Quotient of Employees
Depicted in Table 4 are the responses of the respondents on their descriptive level of employee's adversity quotient is very high.The computed overall mean was 4.85, meaning the level of employee adversity was always exhibited.
The overall mean was 4.85, or described as very high.The result of the mean scores obtained 4.86 or very high for ownership, 4.86 or very high for endurance, 4.85 or very high for control, and 4.83 or very high for reach.It can be gathered from the table that the uppermost mean score was obtained from ownership and endurance in the adversity quotient, while the mean score obtained was 4.85 and 4.83 in terms of control and reach.This means that the employee's adversity quotient was very high.
Further, this means that the AQ of the employees is always exhibited.
The variable considered in the study is the adversity competence of employees, which is described as very high.Indicators with high response levels include control, ownership, reach, and endurance of the respondent.The deed also indicates that the employees with higher AQs were held accountable for dealing with the situations regardless of their causes.The adversity quotient is the ability to face life situations, problems, and obstacles.According to Stoltz a person with an adversity quotient can effectively face obstacles and take advantage of opportunities, especially employees in local government (Stoltz, 2012).As perceived by Stoltz (2012), the worker's capacity to perform may vary or change over time.As defined by the expert mentioned above, the adversity quotient determines how an individual deal with life problems and issues and overwhelm them.Adversity is also viewed as a fruitful version of risk assessment in life.It is, therefore, a mix of individual characteristics and environmental factors.It makes a person more receptive to a positive outlook (Markman, 2000).The adversity quotient has four sub-areas: control, ownership, reach, and endurance, as identified as CORE.

Organizational Resilience
Shown in Table 5 are the responses of the respondents on their descriptive level of organizational resilience, which is very high.The computed overall mean was 4.85, meaning the organizational resilience level was always exhibited.
The overall mean was 4.85, or described as very high.The mean scores were 4.87 or very high for vision, 4.87 or very high for relationships, 4.86 or very high for interaction, 4.85 or very high for problem-solving, 4.85 or very high for organization, 4.85 or very high for selfconfidence, and 4.84 or very high for determination.This means that the organizational resilience was very high.Further, this means that the employees in organizational resilience are continuously exhibited.
The variable considered in the study is the organizational resilience of the employees, which is described as very high.Indicators with very high response levels include the respondent's vision, determination, interaction, relationships, problem-solving, organization, and self-confidence.Organizational resilience and the management practice, especially under crisis and disaster situations where the respondent connected, the local government uses the organizational resilience theory to help organizations overcome adversity.Resilience capacity can be developed and managed (Linnenluecke, 2017).Resilience can be examined across different scholarly articles and studies.There is a small agreement on how researchers define adversity, but it can still be viewed as a good way of accepting the challenges.Resiliency is "positive adaptation to manifest social, behavioral competence in meeting particular works or tasks in a given life stage (Latendresse, 2005).It can also be identified as 'ordinary magic' because most persons or individuals exposed to adversity can still manage to overcome these trials, as Masten (2008) mentioned.Some researchers in resiliency concluded that every person has an innate capacity to become resilient to build good status in his or her life.

Significance of the Relationship between exogenous and endogenous variables
Table 6 demonstrates the relationship between servant leadership and organizational resilience.Findings on the computation for the r-value of the overall result under servant leadership are related to the organizational resilience of the employees.Since the computed r values are greater than the pvalue of 0.05.The overall p-value is 0.803.This implies that it is related to all indicators in the area of organizational resilience.This implies that the higher the servant leadership of the employees, the better their organizational resilience.This finding agrees with the proposition of Mowbray (2012) that despite the great risk factors, the more challenges they encounter in their work, being employees, can they easily deal with their problems so as not to pose future mental problems.They are referred to as servant leaders; therefore, they can get out of complex problems they face in their workplace.
The table illustrates the relationship between cultural dimension and organizational resilience.The overall VP value is 0.705.This implies that the higher the employees' responses, the better the organizational resilience.Findings in the area indicate that the more challenges they encounter in their work, being employees, can they easily deal with their problems so as not to pose future mental problems.

STE-stewardship
The relationship between adversity quotient and organizational resilience shows that all these values were higher than the p-value of 0.05.This implies that the employee adversity quotient is related to organizational resilience.Findings in the adversity quotient with the overall vp value is 0.847.These findings imply that the higher adversity quotient is related to the higher relationship between organizational resilience.Therefore, they can get out of the complex problems they face in their workplace.

Significance of the Influence of Exogenous Variable to Endogenous Variable
Depicted in Table 7 are the findings of the regression analysis of the influence of servant leadership assessment, cultural dimension assessment, and employees' adversity quotient on organizational resilience assessment of the local government unit employees.As described and gleaned from the table exogenous variable the overall t value is 3.107, is higher than 0.05.Servant Leadership assessment, on the other hand, obtained a t value of 8.478.In contrast, the variable Cultural Dimension Assessment obtained a t value of 0.974, and the variable Employees Adversity Quotient obtained a t value of 12.303.All of which are higher than the p-value of 0.05.
This implies that all the exogenous variables knowingly influence the employees in local government units in Region XI.This further implies that despite all the odds met by the employees, they still stand firm and can withstand all the odds or problems that may come their way..000 These findings of the study agree with the Organizational Resilience Theory by Mowbray (2012), who emphasized that people respond to life difficulties, particularly the hard ones.Understanding the risk and protective factors is a first step that employee members can take to promote more studies related to the variables provided in this study.Bringing together all the people in their environment and who know and care about themselves.Collaboration among leaders, co-workers, and community agencies may be the only effective means to address the complex problems of many employees.This indicates further that employees' adversity quotient obtained a very high value of 12.303, which is the best predictor.

Goodness of Fit Measures of the Five Generated Models
As depicted in Table 8, the goodness of fit measures of the generated models is the results of the analysis of the data gathered.The table presents the best-fit model for organizational resilience regarding servant leadership, cultural dimension, and employees' adversity quotient of the local government units' employees.Based on the generated models, model 5 was noted to be the best-fit model, described and gathered from the table shown, and the p-value of model 5 is 0.548, which is higher than the value of 0.05.The CMIN / DF (0<value<2) Chi-Square/Degrees of Freedom, on the other hand, obtained the value of 0.953 is the lowest among those models, which means that the best model fit value for the GFI (>0.95) Goodness of Fit Index obtained the value of 0.982 is greater than of the other model, the CFI (>0.95) Comparative Fit Index obtained a value of 1.000, the NFI (>0.95) Normed Fit Index obtained a value of 0.990, the TLI (>0.95) Tucker-Lewis Index obtained a value of 1.001, the RMSEA (<0.05) Root Mean Square of Error Approximation obtained a value of 0.000 with the result also P-close (>0.05) garnered a value of 0.995.
All of which are higher than the p-value of 0.05.This implies that Model 5 is significantly goodness of Fit Measures than the other Models.This is described to the employees in the local government unit in Region XI.
Models 1 to 4 were found not to be the best fit, described and gathered from the table are shown, and the p-value of models 1 to 4 is 0.000, which means that it is lower than the value of 0.05.

CFI-Comparative Fit Index
These findings of the study agree with the Organizational Resilience Theory by Mowbray (2012), who emphasized that people respond to life difficulties, particularly the hard ones.Understanding the risk and protective factors is a first step that employee members can take to promote more studies related to the variables provided in this study.Bringing together all the people in their environment and who know and care about themselves.Collaboration among leaders, co-workers, and community agencies may be the only effective means to address the complex problems of many employees.This indicates further that model 5 obtained a very high value of 0.548, which is the best predictor.
This diagram of best fit will provide gainful information on the utility of this research in the local government unit setting, considering the characteristics of the respondents who are public employees.Thus, they belong to the workplace and have been exposed to hardships, adversities, fears, and grounds and sometimes a frontline of all problems through their duties.Further, the study provides ideas for future researchers and employees to look into the fundamental issues that pertain to servant leadership, cultural dimension, adversity quotient, and resiliency of the employees when they are inside or outside the organization's premises.Finally, the result of this measurement may be useful for the local government unit in Region XI and in the future researcher to answer their doubtful mind on how to manage and to have strong inner and outer resilience and adversity quotient.
The measures of direct effect were obtained from the variables.Specifically, the results of the servant leadership, cultural dimension, and adversity quotient indicators show that all are significantly related to organizational resilience.This suggests that the indicators or items extracted that fall under a specific paradigm are significantly associated with a specific factor.The total effect of variables is significantly effective to the employees of the local government unit, particularly in servant leadership, obtained 0,299; for the cultural dimension, obtained 0.233, and the adversity quotient obtained a total effect of 0.546, which is not less than the value of 0.05.The importance of cultural values in organizational life is well established in the literature; cultural values are in managing people in different cultures (Jackson, 2002).Human resource management (HRM) practices contribute to the growth and competitive advantage of the organization in the global economy today.
This study was also anchored to the Resilience Theory of Mowbray (2012), which emphasizes enhancing personal characteristics, dealing with others, and doing activities to improve the resilient characteristics of a person.This espouses the seven elements model: vision, determination, interaction, relationships, problem-solving, organization, and self-confidence.For the relationship to endure and flourish there is a need to furnace associations.

CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATION
The considerations of the findings of the study, conclusions, and recommendations are drawn in this section.The level of servant leadership is very high, and the level of cultural dimension is also obtained.The level of the employee adversity quotient is a very high, and even the dependent variable, organizational resilience, obtained very high.Therefore, the respondents were favorable to measure their competence and competitiveness in responding to the chaotic situation, especially in their respective localities, specifically cities in the Davao region.The practical questions were made and shown that they were answered following their dilemma experienced; measuring and analyzing the situation is the basis for how to help them when it comes to the drastic situations in their environment.
The above model and the influence of each dimension factor have been resolute; the overall results would be recommended to the current administration of different Cities in the Davao Region, which may look to incorporate all variables, especially organizational resilience.The working environment and the hiring process to select employees who know how to handle difficulties in various work areas on developing administrative performance.Since all the responses were very high, the indication of the employees would be to maintain and to improve the level of performance in producing good results.
The important relationship between the exogenous and endogenous variables, which predicts the study's findings, is a pronouncement that being resilient and adverse to a chaotic situation could be effective and useful to withstand an employee's life.
Since all the responses were very high, the indication of the employees would be to maintain and to improve the level of very satisfactory results.The important level of maintaining the servant leadership, cultural dimension, adversity quotient, and organizational resilience of the city employees is related to their performance at work.Counselling is also suggested for those fighting and suffering from depression due to hard work, especially the pressure of the workplace.This will assist employees with their mental health to face life-threatening changes.
This situation would contribute more to the individual perspective so that they may develop the specific skills, knowledge, and creativity to improve work methods in responding to the problems in their life.Thus, servant leadership, cultural dimension, adversity quotient, and organizational resilience of the employees should be developed as their skills in facing life development.
These findings corroborate the proposition of the (Mowbray, 2012) which states that despite having many problems and risk factors, life goes on and stays intact without developing mental problems.This is recommended to the Human Resource Management that embraces and exercises the practice of being efficient in their work and responsibilities to impart individual adversity consciousness and cultivate the employees from training and development.They should not be isolated and suffer when a crisis arises, and there are shortcomings and issues at work.With high-performance pressure, other life adversities, and work-related adversities, they must learn how to progress through attending seminars, personal development programs, and self-improvement activities.These abilities and skills acquired from their experiences contribute significantly to their work.It is imperative that the employees are provided with the resources needed for them in order to perform their tasks.
Furthermore, the Servant leadership, cultural dimension, adversity quotient, and organizational resilience are complex aspects, and the respondents may show their resilience to responding the best they can to bounce back the impediment to attain the highest work performance.Thus, it would be great to combine the research method by using this study to get more in-depth and meaningful comprehensive results and findings.The proponents encourage future researchers to explore servant leadership, cultural dimensions, adversity quotient, and organizational resilience in different government agencies, both local and national, especially in the Davao Region, to provide the lack of research and to fill and bridge the gaps of the existing related studies.Lastly, the proponent suggests that future researchers make a greater sample size for more exact and accurate results.
The proponent suggests that Colleges and universities may also use this research as a reference to increase the level of servant leadership, cultural dimension, adversity quotient, and organizational resilience of the employees in respective localities maintaining their performance.Moreover, to regulate the previous or past studies in which variables are used in this study?This study found no significant relationship between servant leadership, cultural dimension, adversity quotient, and organizational resilience.

Figure 1 :
Figure 1: Conceptual Framework of the Study However, the dependent variable represents resiliency: Vision -employees who know what they want to do and are determined to achieve their dreams.Determination-refers to how employees see things positively and can pursue what they intend to do(Stoltz, 2012).Interaction refers to employees who can encourage other people to work with them harmoniously and encourage them to do things they are not used to.Relationship of employees who show a good camaraderie in working with other persons will succeed and be happy in their respective endeavour despite the problems and issues surrounding them in pursuing their goals in life.Problem-solving-employees whose issues can easily find solutions; they address their problems and face them with a scientific stance without being so much defied.Organization-employees whose apply solutions in an orderly manner and control each step until the problem is solved.Self-confident employees who have a strong will to face all the concerns in life and can stand on their principles(Moss, 2011).

Figure 2 :
Figure 2: Structural Model of Organizational Resilience is Best Fit