The
Influence of Work Environment, Work Discipline, and Work Incentives on The
Performance of Employees at The Directorate of Directors of DKI Jakarta
Fildzah Dini Zahirah1,
Herry Krisnandi2, Kumba Digdowiseiso3*
Faculty
of Economics and Business, National University, Indonesia1,2,3
Email: [email protected]1,
[email protected]2, [email protected]3*
INTRODUCTION
In the era of globalization, human resource
management (HRM) remains the focus of attention and the fulcrum of an
organization's or company's ability to survive. Every function of the company
benefits from having adequate human resources. This shows that the human
resources of the company or organization hold the key to achieving its goals. A
person is a behavior that directs the habits and actions of a group or company.
As is generally known, an organization or company consists of various people
gathered in various circumstances, including each person's education,
occupation, experience, gender, and age. Human resource standards should always
be raised. To create superior human resources, companies must play a role.
Human resource development should take precedence to complete current training
tasks and face future obstacles. Either the organization itself or a third
party can provide development work.
The existence of adequate human resources (HR)
certainly supports the performance of an organization. HR effectiveness is
highly correlated with employee performance results. As a work product created
by employees according to their role in the organization, performance is a real
behavior demonstrated by everyone Rivai (2004). HR is an important component of
any company or government body. HR plays an important role in determining the
progress and development of an organization because it is not only a method of
production but also as a driver and determinant of the continuity of all
organizational operations.
Organizations that offer educational services and
develop high-caliber human resources (HR) are higher education. It also
contains several other elements that contribute to the success of a university
that can produce quality graduates in addition to the teaching and learning
process. The university's human resources consist of students, faculty, staff,
and employees. Lecturers are human resources who devote their lives to the
Tridharma of Higher Education and work together with personnel to practice it
in institutions, offices, and departments. The effectiveness of teaching staff
also determines how well the learning environment and academic climate are
created.
.Compared to other resources, human resources (HR)
play the most significant function in business. Since they are the determining
elements in how a company is organized and how its goals are achieved, human
resources are seen as very important. Developing talent can help an
organization achieve its goals.
Human resource development, whose tasks include
planning, implementing, recruiting, and training them, is known as human
resource management. If an employee is never involved in the debriefing or
development process and relies solely on what they already have, it will be a
challenge for them to acquire achievements and abilities over time. Therefore,
HR development has a significant impact on the effectiveness and efficiency of
the company.
.The term "human resources" (HR) is used
to refer to employees of a business or organization as well as departments
tasked with overseeing resources related to those employees. When the
importance of relationships in the workplace began to receive attention and
concepts such as motivation, organizational behavior, and selection evaluation
began to take shape in the 1960s, the word "human resources" was
first used.
Because it can be used as a benchmark for the
success of an organization in achieving its goals and objectives, employee
performance is a very important activity. Organizations or agencies need to
know the various weaknesses and strengths of employees as a basis for
strengthening weaknesses and increasing strengths to increase employee
productivity and development and ensure employee performance is optimized in
every situation to achieve agency goals ultimately
Based on the data above, it can be stated that
employee performance data does not meet the target 100%. So this makes a
benchmark point based on assessments made to employees, assessments seen from
teamwork obtained values of 78.44% in 2020 and 84.00% in 2021, integrity
assessments obtained values of 88.43% in 2020 and 79.91% in 2021, disciplinary
assessments obtained values of 74.88% in 2020 and 80.15 in 2021, The commitment assessment obtained scores of
80.76% and 83.22% in 2021, while the service assessment obtained values of
87.33% and 87.14% in 2021. Based on the results of the data above, it can be
concluded that there are fluctuations in employee performance appraisal, so it
is necessary to study what factors can improve employee performance.
One of the main determinants that affect employee
performance is the work environment. An optimal work environment is
characterized by the presence of positive energy that has the potential to
improve employee performance to the maximum. Fostering positive and cohesive
interpersonal relationships among employees serves as a mechanism to improve
employee productivity and performance.
Work discipline was identified as the second
influential component that impacts employee performance. Individual awareness
of compliance with all relevant organizational regulations and societal
conventions. Work discipline refers to an individual's mindset that reflects a
sense of responsibility in complying with the rules set in an organization. The
results of his efforts will be influenced by his level of discipline. Timely
and responsible completion of activities is essential to achieve optimal productivity.
The third determining factor that affects employee
performance is the existence of work incentives. Incentives are rewards given
to employees as a means of motivating them to perform their jobs in accordance
with, or exceeded, established performance criteria. Incentives refer to prizes
or awards given by an organization to individuals or work groups who
demonstrate outstanding achievements beyond the standard standard of
remuneration.
Previous studies have identified many elements that
exert considerable influence on employee performance. These aspects include the
work environment, work discipline, and work incentives. Previous research
findings have consistently demonstrated the significant influence of these
three factors on employee performance.
In research conducted by Wijayanti (2015) on the
influence of work discipline and providing incentives on employee performance,
it shows that these two variables have a beneficial influence on employee
performance. Performance There is empirical evidence showing that the
application of work discipline and incentives exerts a major influence on
employee performance. Research This research is supported by research conducted
by Ningtyas et al. (2013), which showed that incentives have the most
significant impact on employee performance, with the work environment ranking
second in terms of influence. In his research, Shalahuddin (2017) showed that
there is a simultaneous positive and significant influence of discipline and
work environment on employee performance. According to the findings of Paruru
et al (2016), the influence of the work environment on employee performance is
positive and significant.
This research is a development of previous
research, where there are differences from this research and other studies. The
first is that the independent variable of work discipline is an additional
variable that was not discussed in the previous study. The two research sites
conducted in this study are the DKI Jakarta Highways Office. Dînas Bîna Marga DKI Jakarta is one of the
Regional Apparatus Work Units (SKPD) in the DKI Jakarta Provincial Government
Organîsasî which has the task of serving the community in providing Bîna Marga
infrastructure.
Based on the background description above and
supported by theories related to research variables that will be discussed in
this study, the author makes the title "The Influence of the Work
Environment, Work Discipline, and Incentives Work on the Performance of DKI
Jakarta Highways Agency Employees"
METHODS
This research uses a quantitative approach with the
object of research in the form of employee performance at the DKI Jakarta
Provincial Highways Office, which is influenced by independent variables,
namely Work Environment, Work Discipline, and Work Incentives. The research
data was obtained from primary data sources through the distribution of
questionnaires to 100 employees of the DKI Jakarta Provincial Highways Office.
The type of data used is quantitative data, with analysis techniques that
include descriptive analysis and inferential analysis. The study population
included all employees of the Department of Highways, while the samples were
taken by saturated sampling techniques. Data collection techniques and tools
using questionnaires with Likert scales. Data analysis involves testing the
validity and reliability of instruments, classical assumption tests such as
normality tests, multicollinearity tests, heteroscedasticity tests, and
autocorrelation tests. Furthermore, multiple linear regression analysis was
used to examine the effect of the independent variable on employee performance,
with statistical test F, test coefficient of determination (R2), and partial
test t.
The validity test was
carried out using the help of the SPSS version 23 computer program, with
research criteria stating that a variable is considered valid if the r-count
value is greater than the r-table value. Table 4.5 shows validity test results
for several variables, including Work Environment (X1), Work Discipline (X2),
Work Incentives (X3), and Employee Performance (Y). All of these variables show
r-calculated values that are greater than r-tables, with a breakdown of values
for each indicator. Work Environment has indicators X1.1 to X1.4, Work
Discipline has indicators X2.1 to X2.5, Work Incentives have indicators X3.1 to
X3.4, and Employee Performance has indicators Y1 to Y5. These results indicate
that all data can be considered valid. Thus, all variables meet the criteria of
validity, allowing the study to proceed to the next stage of testing. The data
used in this analysis comes from primary data that has been processed in 2023.
Reliability Test
In this reliability test, all valid items are
entered while invalid items are not included in the reliability test.
Previously, in the validity test, all valid items were included in the
reliability test.
Table 1.
Reliability Test
|
Variable |
Cronbach's Alpha |
Testing |
Information |
|
X1 |
0.852 |
0.6 |
Reliable |
|
X2 |
0.839 |
0.6 |
Reliable |
|
X3 |
0.800 |
0.6 |
Reliable |
|
Y |
0.874 |
0.6 |
Reliable |
Source: Primary Data Processed 2023
Based on the table it can be seen that all
Cronbach's Alpha values from the data above have values above 0.6. This means
that all data is declared reliable.
Classical Assumption Test
Normality Test
The
Normality Test is used to determine whether the residual value of the
regression is normally distributed or not. A regression model with normally
distributed residual values is a good model. The spread of data on diagonal
sources on normal P-P plots of regression graphs or Kolmogorov-Smirnov One
Sample test is a normality test method. 1) P-Plot Graph Method
The residual normality test uses the graph method,
namely by looking at the results of the P-Plot test with the distribution of
data on diagonal sources on the normal graph of the P-P plot of Regression
standardized residual. If the dots spread around the line and follow the
diagonal line, then the value is normal.
Figure
1. P-Plot Normality Test
Based on the figure above, it can be stated that
the points follow a diagonal line. This indicates that the data has been
distributed normally.
Kolmogorov Smirnov test method
This analysis looks at the level of significance in
the Asymp value. Sig (2-tailed).
Table
2. Kolmogorov Smirnov Normality Test
One-Sample Kolmogorov-Smirnov Test
|
|
Unstandardized Residual |
|
|
N |
100 ,0000000 |
|
|
Normal Parametersa,b |
Mean |
|
|
|
Std. Deviation |
1,67567333 |
|
Most Extreme Differences |
Absolute |
,084 |
|
|
Positive |
,074 -,084 ,084 .078c |
|
Negative |
||
|
Test Statistics |
||
|
Asymp. Sig. (2-tailed) |
||
Source: SPSS.23
Based on the results of the normality test using
Kolmogrov Smirnov's One Sample test, it can be seen that the significant value
of Asymp.sig (2-tailed) is 0.078. Because the significance value is more than
0.05 (0.078>0.05), the residual value is normal.
Multicoreniality Test
In regression models, multicollinearity is found to
have perfect or near-perfect correlations between independent variables. The
independent variable should not have a correlation greater than or equal to one
in a good regression model. The value of the tolerance factor and inflation
(VIF) can also be seen by comparing the value of the individual coefficient of
determination with the value of determination simultaneously. If the velue
tolerance value > 0.01 and the VIP value < 10, multicollinearity does not
occur.
Table
3. Multicoreniality Test
Coefficientsa
|
Type |
Collinearity Statistics |
|
|
Tolerance |
VIF |
|
|
1 (Constant) WORKING ENVIRONMENT WORK DISCIPLINE WORK INCENTIVES |
|
|
|
,275 |
3,631 |
|
|
,274 |
3,651 |
|
|
,976 |
1,025 |
|
Source: SPSS.23
The test results are known that the VIF value of
all variables is less than 10 or < 10 and the tolerance value is more than
0.10 or > 0.10, so in this study there is no problem of multicoreniality.
Heteroscedacity Test
In the instructions for heteroscedasticity assay,
the glacier test, i.e. a significant value of > 0.05, is concluded not to
have symptoms of heteroscedasticity. Meanwhile, if the significant value <
0.05 is a conclusion that there are symptoms of heteroscedasticity.
Table
4. Heteroscedacity Test
Coefficientsa
|
Type |
Unstandardized Coefficients |
Standardized Coefficients |
t |
Sig. |
|
|
B |
Std. Error |
Beta |
|||
|
1 (Constant) MILIEU WORK WORK DISCIPLINE WORK INCENTIVES |
1,804 |
,857 |
|
2,104 |
,038 |
|
-,127 |
,066 |
-,357 |
- 1,916 |
,058 |
|
|
,035 |
,054 |
,120 |
,643 |
,522 |
|
|
,047 |
,038 |
,123 |
1,238 |
,219 |
|
Source: SPSS.23
The results of the test are known that the Sig
value of the three variables (work environment, work discipline, and work
incentives) has a Sig value of > 0.05 so that it can be stated that there is
no heteroscedacity problem in this study.
Autocorrelation Test
Autocorrelation is a condition
in which there is a strong correlation in observations between one with another
observation arranged according to time rows. The purpose of the autocorrelation
test is to find out whether in the linear regression model there is a validity
of either positive or negative between the data and the research variables. The
autocorrelation test was performed by the DurbinWatson (DW) method. The results
of the autocorrelation test can be seen in the following table.
Table
5. Autocorrelation Test
Model Summaryb
|
Type |
R |
R Square |
Adjusted R Square |
Std. Error of the Estimate |
Durbin- Watson |
|
1 |
,899a |
,808 |
,802 |
1,702 |
1,766 |
Source: SPSS.23
Based on the table above, it can be seen that the
DW value (DurbinWatson) generated from the regression model is 1.766 While from
the DW table with a significance of 0.05 and the number of data (n) = 100, and
k = 3 (k is the number of independent variables) obtained a dL value of 1.6131
and a dU of 1.7364 (obtained from the DW table with N 100). Because the DW
value of 1.766 > from dU 1.7364, there is no positive autocorrelation.
Multiple Linear Regression Test
The purpose of this analysis is to predict the
value of the dependent variable if the value of the independent variable
increases or decreases and to determine the direction of the relationship
between the independent variable and the dependent variable, whether each
independent variable is positively or negatively related.
Table
6. Multiple Linear Regression Test
Coefficientsa
|
Type |
Unstandardized Coefficients |
Standardized Coefficients |
t |
Sig. |
|
|
B |
Std. Error |
Beta |
|||
|
1 (Constant) MILIEU WORK WORK DISCIPLINE WORK INCENTIVES |
,634 |
1,317 |
|
,482 6,905 |
,631 |
|
,702 |
,102 |
,588 |
,000 |
||
|
,335 |
,084 |
,342 |
4,009 |
,000 |
|
|
,120 |
,059 |
,092 |
2,044 |
,044 |
|
Source: SPSS/23
Based on the table, it is known that the multiple
linear regression equation is known in the Standardized Coefficient column as
follows:
KP = 0.588 LK + 0.342 DK + 0.092 IK
|
Information:
|
|
|
|
KP |
: |
Employee Performance |
|
B0 |
: |
Constant |
|
B1+B2+B3 |
: |
Regression Coefficient |
|
LK |
: |
Work Environment |
|
DK |
: |
Work Discipline |
|
IK |
: |
Work Incentives |
The
interpretation of the results of the equation is as follows:
1. The constant value has a positive value of 613
2. The Work Environment regression coefficient is
0.588 with a positive sign. This shows that the better the work environment in
the organization, the better the performance of employees.
3. The coefficient of Regression of Work Discipline is
0.342 with a positive sign. This shows that the better the work discipline in
the organization, the better the performance of employees.
4. The Employment Incentive regression coefficient is
0.092 with a positive sign. This shows that the more often work incentives are
given to employees in the organization, the better the performance of
employees.
Based on the Standardized Coefficient that the work
environment variable that has the greatest contribution where the work
environment is considered to represent the totality in employee performance.
The work environment in this study is very influential on employee performance
because the work environment can affect the atmosphere at work, then work
discipline becomes the second largest influence after the work environment, and
then work incentives become the third influence in measuring the influence on employee
performance.
Test F
Test F aims to determine whether the Independent
variables affect together or simultaneously with the dependent variable. This
test is used to see the effect of the three independent variables on the
dependent variable. The test scale is 0.05 or 5%. If the significant value of F
is less than 0.05 then it can be said that the independent variables together
affect the dependent variable. This test is seen from the output results of
spss version 23 used in data processing applications in this study, the test results
used are by looking at the output of the ANOVA table that has been tested.
The table is as follows:
Table
7. Test F
ANOVAa
|
Type |
Sum of Squares |
Df |
Mean Square |
F |
Sig. |
|
1 Regression Residuals Total |
1173,460 |
3 |
391,153 |
135,084 |
,000b |
|
277,980 |
96 |
2,896 |
|
||
|
1451,440 |
99 |
|
|
Source: SPSS.23
From the data above, it can be seen that the
F-count value is 135.084 and the Sig value is 0.000 and the significant level
is 5%, then the F-calculate value is > Sig value or 135.084 > 0.000. This
means that the variables of Work Environment, Work Discipline, and Work
Incentives together affect Employee Performance.
Coefficient of Determination Test
The coefficient of determination (R2) is known to
determine how strong the relationship and influence between free varaibels on
bound variables, this study is shown as in the following varaibel.
Table
8. Coefficient of Determination Test
Model Summaryb
|
Type |
R |
R Square |
Adjusted R Square |
Std. Error of the Estimate |
|
1 |
,899a |
,808 |
,802 |
1,702 |
Source : SPSS.23
Based on the table above, the number R 2
(R Square) is 0.808 or (80.8%). This shows that the percentage of the influence
of independent variables (work environment, work discipline, and work
incentives) on the dependent variable of employee performance is 80.8%. While
the remaining 19.2% was influenced or explained by other variables that were
not included in this research model.
The hypothesis test (t-test) is used to determine
the effect of free varaibel, namely Work Environment, Work Discipline, and Work
Incentives on bound varaibel, namely, Employee Performance. This test uses a
significance level of 0.05 with the following test results:
Table
9. Hypothesis Testing
Coefficientsa
|
Type |
Unstandardized Coefficients |
Standardized Coefficients |
t |
Sig. |
|
|
B |
Std. Error |
Beta |
|||
|
1 (Constant) MILIEU WORK WORK DISCIPLINE WORK INCENTIVES |
,634 |
1,317 |
|
,482 |
,631 |
|
,702 |
,102 |
,588 |
6,905 |
,000 |
|
|
,335 |
,084 |
,342 |
4,009 |
,000 |
|
|
,120 |
,059 |
,092 |
2,044 |
,044 |
|
Source : SPSS.23
1. Test the Effect of Work Environment (X1) on
Employee Performance (Y)
Based on the table, it can be explained that the
influence of Work Environment variables on Employee Performance can be seen
from the t-count value of 6.905 and significant 0.000 (0.000 < α = 0.05)
then Ho is accepted and H1 is rejected, so it can be stated that the
Work Environment has a positive and significant effect on the Performance of
Employees of the DKI Jakarta Highways Agency.
2. Test the Effect of Work Discipline (X2) on Employee
Performance (Y)
Based on the table, it can be explained that the
influence of the Work Discipline variable on Employee Performance can be seen
from the t-count value of 4.009 and significant 0.000 (0.000 < α = 0.05)
then Ho is accepted and H2 is rejected, so it can be stated that
Work Discipline has a positive and significant effect on the Performance of
Employees of the DKI Jakarta Highways Office.
3. Test the effect of work incentives (X1) on employee
performance (Y)
Based on the table, it can be explained that the
effect of the Work Incentive variable on Employee Performance can be seen from
the t-count value of 2.004 and significant 0.044 (0.044 < α = 0.05) then Ho
is accepted and H3 is rejected, so it can be stated that Work
Incentives have a positive and significant effect on the Performance of
Employees of the DKI Jakarta Highways Office.
The Influence of the Work
Environment on the Performance of Employees of the DKI Jakarta Highways Agency
Based on the results of partial testing or
hypothesis testing, it is known that the t-count value is 6.905 and significant
0.000 (0.000 < α = 0.05), then Ho is accepted and H1 is rejected,
so it can be stated that the Work Environment has a positive and significant
effect on the performance of employees of the DKI Jakarta Highways Agency.
Based on the presentation of the results of the
hypothesis test above, it can be concluded that the work environment has a
positive and significant effect on employee performance. This means that a good
and comfortable environment will certainly affect the process of good
performance and the absence of something that can make work hampered, so that
by creating a comfortable work environment will provide a positive impact on
employee performance.
Good working environment if the workplace is
comfortable, has ventilation, clean and comfortable work environment,
Relationship with coworkers Mutual support, Leaders are always friendly and
polite, establish good communication with teachers, Fellow teachers always
maintain open communication.
This research is in line with research conducted by
Toto et al. (2019) and Rastana et al. (2021) in their research explaining the
results that the work environment has a positive and significant effect on
employee performance. Therefore, the better the environment in an organization,
the more enthusiastic employees will be at work.
The Effect of Work Discipline on the Performance of
Employees of the DKI Jakarta Highways Agency
Based on the results of partial testing or
hypothesis testing, it is known that the t-count value is 4.009 and significant
0.000 (0.000 < α = 0.05), then Ho is accepted and H2 is rejected,
so it can be stated that Work Discipline has a positive and significant effect
on the performance of employees of the Dki Jakarta Highways Office.
Based on the results of the hypothesis test, it
states that Work Discipline has a positive and significant effect on Employee
Performance. This means that by complying with all existing regulations in the
organization in the company, discipline for employees must be applied. With
good discipline, employee performance will be better and increase.
Work discipline is something that must be instilled
in every employee. Employee awareness is required by complying with applicable
regulations. Regulations are needed to provide guidance and counseling for
employees in creating good discipline in the company. In addition, the company
itself must strive so that the regulations are clear, easy to understand and
apply to all employees.
This research is in line with research conducted by
Nurjaya (2021) and Kepi Kusumayanti, Sri Langgeng Ratnasari (2020) in their
research explaining the results that Work Discipline has a positive and
significant effect on Employee Performance. Therefore, the more obedient the
discipline, the better and improved employee performance will be.
The Effect of Work Incentives on the Performance of
Employees of the DKI Jakarta Highways Agency
Based on the results of the test in parisal or
hypothetical, it is known that the t-count value is 2.004 and significant 0.044
(0.044 < α = 0.05), then Ho is accepted and H3 is rejected, so it
can be stated that Work Incentives have a positive and significant effect on
the performance of employees of the DKI Jakarta Highways Agency.
Based on the results of the hypothesis test, it is
concluded that Work Incentives have a positive and significant effect on
Employee Performance. This means that the more often companies provide
incentives to employees who succeed in achieving targets or providing
achievements to the company, the more active employees will be in working and
incentives are used as motivation in morale.
Incentives are stimulators or encouragements given
deliberately to workers so that in them there is a greater spirit to achieve
for the organization. The main purpose of providing incentives is to improve
the performance of individuals and groups. Providing incentives is very
important to improve employee morale, motivate employees, and increase job
satisfaction. The size of incentives affects employee performance. Every
employee in carrying out his duties or work can feel satisfied or dissatisfied,
regardless of the factors that influence it. When employees are dissatisfied
with what they get in the company where employees work can lead to
disappointment, which ultimately results in decreased performance.
This research is in line with research conducted by
Candana (2021) and Is Dwi Purwoko (2021) explaining the results that work
incentives have a positive and significant effect on employee performance. This
means that the more often incentives are given, the more persistent employees
will be in carrying out their work.
Based on the results of testing that has been done
in the previous chapter, several conclusions can be drawn in this study. First,
the Work Environment has proven to have a positive and significant effect on
the Performance of DKI Jakarta Highways Agency Employees. This fact shows that
the existence of a good and comfortable work environment can increase the
enthusiasm of employees in carrying out their activities. Second, Work
Discipline also has a positive and significant influence on Employee Performance.
This indicates that compliance with regulations and discipline in carrying out
all activities within the organization contribute to improving company
performance. Third, Work Incentives are proven to have a positive and
significant effect on Employee Performance. The implication is that rewarding
employees who achieve achievements can be a motivation for other employees,
encouraging morale and better performance in carrying out their duties and
activities. All of these findings provide an in-depth understanding of the
factors that influence the performance of DKI Jakarta Highways Agency employees
in the context of work environment, discipline, and incentives.
Acknowledgment
This
article is a part of joint research and publication between Faculty of
Economics and Business, Universitas Nasional, Jakarta and Faculty of Business,
Economics, and Social Development, Universiti Malaysia Terengganu.
REFERENCES
Affandi. (2018). Manajemen Sumber Daya Manusia.
Zanafa Publisihing.
Candana, D. M. (2021). Pengaruh Disiplin Kerja,
Lingkungan Kerja dan Insentif Terhadap Kinerja Karyawan PT. Incasi Raya Muaro
Sakai Kecamatan Pancung Soal Kabupaten Pesisir Selatan. Jurnal Ekobistek, 7(1),
1–8. https://doi.org/10.35134/ekobistek.v7i1.4
Casico, W. F. (2017). Managing Human Resources :
Productivity, Quality, of Work Life, Profits. McGraw-Hill.
Daryanto, B. (2017). Manajemen Penilaian Kinerja
Karyawan. Gava Media.
Dede, G. (2018). PENGARUH DISIPLIN KERJA, INSENTIF,
LINGKUNGAN KERJA DAN KEMAMPUAN KERJA TERHADAP KINERJA PEGAWAI (Studi Empiris
pada Organisasi Perangkat Daerah di Kota dan Kabupaten Magelang).
Is Dwi Purwoko, H. (2021). Pengaruh Disiplin Kerja,
Insentif Dan Lingkungan Kerja Terhadap Kinerja Pegawai Pada Direktorat Lalu
Lintas Polda Jawa Tengah. Jurnal Ekonomi Dan Bisnis, 1(1), 6.
Kepi Kusumayanti, Sri Langgeng Ratnasari, L. H.
(2020). PENGARUH MOTIVASI KERJA, DISIPLIN KERJA, LINGKUNGAN KERJA, DAN GAYA
KEPEMIMPINAN TERHADAP KINERJA PEGAWAI NEGERI SIPIL DINAS PERINDUSTRIAN DAN
PERDAGANGAN DAERAH PEMERINTAH KOTA BATAM. Jurnal Bening Prodi Manajemen
Universitas Kepulauan Batam.
Malayu, H. (2017). Manajemen Sumber Daya Manusia.
Bumi Aksara.
Nurhaedah, M. A., Muhammad Hidayat, and D. H. G. (2021). Pengaruh
Kepemimpinan,Motivasi, Insentif, Lingkungan Kerja Dan Kepuasan Kerja Terhadap
Kinerja Karyawan PT. Bosowa Propertindo. Jurnal Magister Manajemen Nobel
Indonesia, 2(Vol 2 No 3 (2021): Jurnal Magister Manajemen Nobel Indonesia),
463–472. https://e-jurnal.stienobelindonesia.ac.id/index.php/JMMNI/index
Nurjaya, N. (2021). Pengaruh Disiplin Kerja,
Lingkungan Kerja Dan Motivasi Kerja Terhadap Kinerja Karyawan Pada Pt. Hazara
Cipta Pesona. AKSELERASI: Jurnal Ilmiah Nasional, 3(1), 60–74.
https://doi.org/10.54783/jin.v3i1.361
Rastana, I. M. S., Mahayasa, I. G. A., &
Premayani, N. W. W. (2021). Pengaruh Lingkungan Kerja Fisik dan Disiplin Kerja
Terhadap Kinerja Pegawai Pada Badan Keuangan Daerah di Kabupaten Tabanan.
Jurnal Manajemen, Kewirausahaan Dan Pariwisata, 1(3), 834–843.
Sedarmayanti. (2014). Sumber Daya Manusia dan
Produktivitas Kerja. Mandar Maj.
Sedarmayanti. (2017). Perencanaandan Pengembangan
Sumber Daya Manusia. PT. Refikaaditama.
Shinta, D. (2020). Pengaruh Komunikasi, Disiplin,
Kerja, Dan Insentif Terhadap Kinerja Karyawan Pada PT Citra Mandiri
Distribusindo. 17. http://repository.upbatam.ac.id/2064/
Sugiyono. (2012). Memahami Penelitian Kualitatif.
Alfabeta.
Sugiyono. (2014). Metode Penelitian Pendidikan
Pendekatan Kuantitatif Kualitatif dan R&D.
Sugiyono. (2018). Metode Penelitian Manajemen.
Alfhabeta.
Sugiyono. (2019). Metode Penelitian Kuantitatif,
Kualitatif dan R&D.
Toto, A. B., Bijang, J., & Kamase, J. (2019).
Pengaruh Kepemimpinan, Lingkungan Kerja,
Disiplin dan Pemberian Insentif
Terhadap Kinerja Guru Madrasah Aliyah (MA) Di Kabupaten Maros. YUME : Journal
of Management, 2(3), 141–150. https://doi.org/10.37531/yume.vxix.207
Wewengkang, D. A. Y., Kojo, C., & Uhing, Y.
(2021). PENGARUH BEBAN KERJA, INSENTIF, DAN LINGKUNGAN KERJA TERHADAP KINERJA PEGAWAI
DI-TENGAH PANDEMI COVID-19 DI UPTD RUMAH SAKIT MANEMBO-NEMBO TIPE-C BITUNG.
Jurnal EMBA, 9(3), 242–251.
Yusuf, H. A. (2018). Pemahaman Sumber Daya Manusia.
PT. Buku seru.
Zainal, V. R. (2015). Manajemen Sumber Daya Manusia
Untuk Perusahaan (Edisi ketu). PT Rajagrafindo Persada
|
Copyright
holder: Fildzah
Dini Zahirah, Herry Krisnandi, Kumba Digdowiseiso (2024) |
|
First
publication rights: International Journal of Social Service and Research (IJSSR) |
|
This article is
licensed under:
|
