Syntax Literate: Jurnal Ilmiah Indonesia p–ISSN: 2541-0849 e-ISSN: 2548-1398
Vol. 7, No. 12, Desember
2022
The Effect of Discipline and Work Environment on Employee Productivity at PT. CSG Makassar
Haeranah, Muslim, Haerudin, Abdul Khalik
Nobel Indonesian Institute of Technology and Business Makassar, Indonesia
Esa Unggul University, Jakarta, Indonesia
LP3I Makassar Polytechnic, Indonesia
Nobel Indonesian Institute of Technology and Business Makassar, Indonesia
Email: [email protected], [email protected], [email protected], [email protected]
The purpose of this study was to determine and analyze partially and simultaneously the influence of discipline on employee productivity at PT. Cemerlang Surya Gemilang, The research method uses quantitative research and hypothesis testing uses multiple linear regression methods. The population is 30 employees and the sample obtained uses the saturated sample method with a total sample of 30 people. The results showed that partially discipline has a positive and insignificant effect on employee work productivity and the work environment has a positive and significant effect on employee work productivity at PT. Cemerlang Surya Gemilang. Simultaneously it was found that discipline and the work environment jointly influence the work productivity of employees at PT. Cemerlang Surya Gemilang. Discipline and a good and conducive work environment have a positive effect on increasing employee work productivity and management maintains these conditions by supporting supporting facilities, attention andreward employee.
Keywords : Discipline, Work Environment, Work Productivity.
In the current era of globalization, human resource issues become a backup for companies in maintaining employee productivity (Chitsaz-Isfahani & Boustani, 2014). Being a company demand in relation to maintaining and managing quality human resources is urgent due to the changing environment (Schuler, 1992).
Human resources are an important asset that has the ability to develop to be a determinant of the success of the company in the long term, in addition to being the main driver of the company's organization, so that it must be managed optimally and given extra attention and fulfill their rights (Yong et al., 2020). For this reason, companies must have competent human resources who have the knowledge, skills and attitude of being loyal to the company in achieving company goals (Ulrich & Dulebohn, 2015).
The demands of the globalization era, companies must anticipate and adapt to the changes that occur (Lianto et al., 2018). Along with increasing business development which triggers the presence of competition between companies, then to be able to follow these conditions the company runs its business with the best possible thoughts and actions and has new strategies in an effort to improve the development and performance of its employees and optimize all aspects that are related to company activities and improve employee performance (Lumpkin et al., 2013).
In the company's operational management, it is difficult to manage its employees (Adikaram et al., 2021). This problem includes how to maximize discipline and present a conducive work environment, so as to be able to influence employee productivity (Pawirosumarto et al., 2017). High and optimal discipline is one of the factors that can directly or indirectly affect employee performance (Yuliandi, 2019).
Discipline directly affects the ability of employees, while employees who are not disciplined will become an obstacle to achieving company targets that have been set. Employees who comply with regulations and high discipline are able to create a conducive atmosphere and have an impact on company activities. Therefore, employees comply with the rules that have been set is the hope of the company (Mendropa, 2018).
Discipline is the attitude, behavior and actions that are in accordance with the rules of the organization, both written and unwritten. Discipline is the most important operative function of human resource management because the better the employee discipline, the higher the work performance that can be achieved (Utin & Yosepha, 2019). Without good discipline, it is difficult for organizations to achieve optimal results. Discipline is the main factor needed as a warning tool for employees who do not want to change their attitude and behavior, so that an employee is said to have good discipline if the employee has a sense of responsibility for the tasks assigned to him (Goedurov, 2020).
Based on several interviews of employees in the field regarding the productivity of Human Resources where there are still gaps that occur, it is related to work discipline that there are still employees who are lazy at work and more relaxing than working, there are still employees who prioritize the interests personal from the interests of the office in carrying out their duties, if there is a mistake in work, employees lack the initiative to correct it, there is still a lack of employees in coming up with new ideas in completing tasks, then regarding the quietness of the work of employees from the phenomenon in the field there are still employees who often come to the office not on time, do not comply with the rules of the company's office entry hours and there are still employees who do not comply with the standard rules of operational procedures applied by the company.
Previous research related to this research conducted by Rini Astuti, Iverizkinawati (2019) research title; "the influence of leadership and work environment on the productivity of human resources employees at PT. Sarana Agro Nusantara Medan”. The results of this study indicate that there is a positive influence of the leadership variable on the productivity of employee Human Resources as indicated by tcount 6,716 > t table 1.68 with a significant value of 0.000 <0.05, there is a positive influence of work environment variables on the employee Human Resources productivity variable which is indicated tcount 2.071 < ttable 1.68 with a significant value of 0.045 <0.05, and for leadership and the work environment have a significant influence on employee job satisfaction with a value of Fcount (88,919) > Ftable (3.20) with a significance level of 0.000. Furthermore, the R Square value is 0.800 or 80%, which means the influence of leadership and work environment on the productivity of human resources employees.
Whereas in Muhammad Ali Iqbal (2021) with the title " The Effect of Work Motivation And Work Environment on Employee Performance Mediated By Job Satisfaction (at PT ICI Paints Indonesia)". The results showed that the working environment conditions were in good criteria, teacher discipline conditions were in good criteria, teacher motivation conditions were in good criteria, human resource productivity conditions were in good criteria, and teacher performance conditions were in good criteria. Then it was proven that there was a significant effect of the work environment on teacher satisfaction, there was a significant effect of discipline on teacher satisfaction, there was a significant effect of work motivation on teacher satisfaction. Simultaneously there is a significant effect of the work environment, discipline and teacher motivation on the productivity of the teacher's Human Resources, with a magnitude of influence of 69.80 percent, while the influence of other variables outside the model (ε1) is 30.20%. And there is a significant effect of satisfaction on teacher performance, with an effect size of 79.30 percent, while the influence of other variables outside the model (ε2) is 20.70 percent.
Based on the above frame of mind, the proposed hypothesis is as follows:
1.
Discipline variable
(X1) has a positive and significant effect on employee work productivity at PT.
Cemerlang Surya Gemilang.
2.
Work Environment
Variable (X2) has a positive and significant effect on employee work
productivity at PT. Brilliant Sun Shine.
3.
Discipline (X1) and
Work Environment (X3) have a positive and significant effect on employee work
productivity at PT. Brilliant Sun Shine.
The type of research used in this study is a quantitative research method. The type of research used is survey research. The survey method is used to obtain data from certain natural (not artificial) places, but researchers carry out treatments in data collection, for example by distributing questionnaires, tests, structured interviews and so on (Sugiyono, 2017). The location of the research was carried out at the distributor company, namely PT. Cemerlang Surya Gemilang domiciled in Makassar and a research period of two months which was carried out from February to March 2022.
To collect research data, researchers used methods including using direct observation of research locations, especially workers at PT. Cemerlang Surya Gemilang related to discipline, work environment and employee work productivity. The questionnaire method or questionnaire is a list containing a series of questions regarding a problem or area to be studied. To obtain data, questionnaires were distributed to respondents (people who answered the questions asked for research purposes), especially in survey research. In this case the writer makes written questions then answered by the respondent/sampling. In this questionnaire technique, the writer uses a scalelikert by applying five categories of answers, namely Strongly Disagree (STS), Disagree (TS), Simply Agree (CS), Agree (S), Strongly Agree (SS). This documentary method is used to obtain data on active employees at PT. Brilliant Sun Shine.
The population in this study are all employees at PT. Cemerlang Surya Gemilang as many as 35 people. This sampling is based on a saturated sample (population), which means that the entire population is 35 people as the sample.
Before the research instrument is used to collect data, the instrument that has been compiled is tested first. This instrument trial was given to respondents who were not included in the sample of this study.
The analytical method used in this study is a quantitative descriptive analysis method, namely the analysis used to describe discipline and work environment as well as employee productivity. In this analysis, tabular form and average values are used to clarify the description of variables.
Hypothesis testing was carried out by means of correlation and regression analysis which was carried out with the help of a computer through the SPSS version 22.0 program. The hypothesis was tested with the following steps: Coefficient of Determination (R2), Simultaneous Significance Test (Statistical Test F), Partial/Individual Parameter Significance Test (Statistical Test t),
Results and Discussion
1.
Frequency
Distribution of Respondent Profiles
As for the frequency on the respondent's profile, the results obtained can be seen in the table below:
Table 1
Total Profile Frequency
|
Statistics |
|||||
|
|
Age |
Gender |
Last education |
Working time |
|
|
N |
Valid |
30 |
30 |
30 |
30 |
|
Missing |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
|
Source: primary data for 2022
Table 1 shows that of the total 30 respondents, there is no valuemissing, as for the frequency of the respondent's gender, it can be seen in the following table:
Table 2
Gender Profile Frequency
|
Gender |
|||||
|
|
Frequency |
Percent |
Valid Percent |
Cumulative Percent |
|
|
Valid |
Man |
9 |
30,0 |
30,0 |
30,0 |
|
Woman |
21 |
70,0 |
70,0 |
100,0 |
|
|
Total |
30 |
100,0 |
100,0 |
|
|
Source: primary data for 2022
From the processing results obtained on the frequency of the sex profile, it shows that the male sex is 9 people or 30%, while the respondents with female sex are 21 people or 70.0%. Furthermore, the results of the frequency test of respondents in the last education can be seen in the table below:
Table 3
Last Educational Profile Frequency
|
Last education |
|||||
|
|
Frequency |
Percent |
Valid Percent |
Cumulative Percent |
|
|
Valid |
Diploma I |
4 |
13,3 |
13,3 |
13,3 |
|
S1 |
6 |
20,0 |
20,0 |
33,3 |
|
|
SMA |
20 |
66,7 |
66,7 |
100,0 |
|
|
Total |
30 |
100,0 |
100,0 |
||
Source: primary data for 2022
Based on the results of the last education frequency, it shows that at the senior high school education level the number of respondents was 20 people or 66.7%, for the last education level Diploma I-III there were 4 people or 13.3% and for the last education level S1 there were 6 people or 20.0%. Furthermore, the frequency profile at the age of the respondent can be seen in the table below:
Table 4
Age Profile Frequency
|
Age |
|||||
|
|
Frequency |
Percent |
Valid Percent |
Cumulative Percent |
|
|
Valid |
< 30 years |
18 |
60,0 |
60,0 |
60,0 |
|
30 sd. 40 Years |
9 |
30,0 |
30,0 |
90,0 |
|
|
> 40 years |
3 |
10,0 |
10,0 |
100,0 |
|
|
Total |
30 |
100,0 |
100,0 |
||
Srumber : data primer 2022
From the results of the profile test based on the age of the respondents, the values obtained are for those aged under 30 years as many as 18 people or 60.0%, for respondents aged between 30 years and 40 years as many as 9 people or 10.0% and for those aged above 40 years as many as 9 people or 30.0%. The processing results on the respondent's profile based on years of service can be seen in the table below:
Table 5
Tenure Profile Frequency
|
Working time |
|||||
|
|
Frequency |
Percent |
Valid Percent |
Cumulative Percent |
|
|
Valid |
< 2 years |
15 |
50,0 |
50,0 |
50,0 |
|
> 5 Years |
12 |
40,0 |
40,0 |
90,0 |
|
|
2-5 Years |
3 |
10,0 |
10,0 |
100,0 |
|
|
Total |
30 |
100,0 |
100,0 |
|
|
Source: primary data for 2022
For the results of the frequency test of the respondent's profile based on years of service, it shows that for work under 2 years there are 15 people or 50.0%, for work from 2 years to 5 years there are 3 people or 10.0% and for work over 5 years there are 12 people or 40.0%.
2.
Frequency
Distribution of Respondents' Answers
The results of the frequency distribution of respondents' answers in this study are to provide an overview or explanation of the research that has been carried out in the field. To obtain the desired data, the researcher uses a research instrument, namely a questionnaire or questionnaire using the Google form.
The questionnaire that was distributed consisted of 27 questions using alternative linear scale answers. The details for questions on the discipline variable were 7 questions, for work environment variables were 10 questions, while for the productivity variable were 10 questions. From the questionnaire, it was recapitulated using tabulations to determine the magnitude of the frequency of respondents' answers from each variable.
The research questionnaire was distributed to 30 respondents, namely employees of PT. Cemerlang Surya Gemilang Makassar who is still actively carrying out their duties. The return rate of the questionnaire that has been distributed to the respondents has a value of 100% or in other words all the questionnaires that have been distributed back to the researcher. The high level of this research is because researchers disseminate it directly and wait for the results of the respondents' answers to finish.
1.
Validity test
a.
Discipline Variable
Table 6
Discipline Variable Validity Test
|
Item |
Pearson Correlation |
Significant (2-tailed) |
r – critical |
Criteria |
|
X1.1 |
.752** |
0.05 |
> 0.30 |
Valid |
|
X1.2 |
.706** |
0.05 |
> 0.30 |
Valid |
|
X1.3 |
.838** |
0.05 |
> 0.30 |
Valid |
|
X1.4 |
.664** |
0.05 |
> 0.30 |
Valid |
|
X1.5 |
.721** |
0.05 |
> 0.30 |
Valid |
|
X1.6 |
.527** |
0.05 |
> 0.30 |
Valid |
|
X1.7 |
.503** |
0.05 |
> 0.30 |
Valid |
Source: processed data for 2022
From the results of processing in the table above on the disciplinary variable, it can be explained that out of a total of 7 questions on the variable it shows that the Pearson correlation value generated for each item is greater than the r-critical value of 0.30, so it can be concluded that all items declared valid.
b.
Work Environment
Variables
Table 7
Discipline Variable Validity Test
|
Item |
Pearson Correlation |
Significant (2-tailed) |
r - critical |
Criteria |
|
X2.1 |
.585** |
0.05 |
> 0.30 |
Valid |
|
X2.2 |
.742** |
0.05 |
> 0.30 |
Valid |
|
X2.3 |
.784** |
0.05 |
> 0.30 |
Valid |
|
X2.4 |
. .538** |
0.05 |
> 0.30 |
Valid |
|
X2.5 |
.451** |
0.05 |
> 0.30 |
Valid |
|
X2.6 |
.362* |
0.05 |
> 0.30 |
Valid |
|
X2.7 |
.564** |
0.05 |
> 0.30 |
Valid |
|
X2.8 |
.654** |
0.05 |
> 0.30 |
Valid |
|
X2.9 |
.665** |
0.05 |
> 0.30 |
Valid |
|
X2.10 |
.718** |
0.05 |
> 0.30 |
Valid |
Source ; 2022 processing data
From the processing results obtained in the table above, it shows that from all items in the work environment variable, there are 10 questions of the resulting valuepearson correlation > 0.30 so that it can be stated that all items in the service quality variable can be declared valid.
c.
Work Productivity
Variables
Table 8
Test the Validity of Work Productivity Variables
|
Item |
Pearson Correlation |
Significant (2-tailed) |
r - critical |
Criteria |
|
Y.1 |
.833** |
0.05 |
> 0.30 |
Valid |
|
Y.2 |
.715** |
0.05 |
> 0.30 |
Valid |
|
Y.3 |
.783** |
0.05 |
> 0.30 |
Valid |
|
Y.4 |
.818** |
0.05 |
> 0.30 |
Valid |
|
Y.5 |
.833** |
0.05 |
> 0.30 |
Valid |
|
Y.6 |
.834** |
0.05 |
> 0.30 |
Valid |
|
Y.7 |
.755** |
0.05 |
> 0.30 |
Valid |
|
Y.8 |
.834** |
0.05 |
> 0.30 |
Valid |
|
Y.9 |
.834** |
0.05 |
> 0.30 |
Valid |
|
Y.10 |
.715** |
0.05 |
> 0.30 |
Valid |
Source: processed data for 2022
Based on table 8, it can be explained that for items Y1 to item Y10, the processing results obtained show that the resulting valuepearson correlation > 0.30 so it can be concluded that the work productivity variables are all valid items. From these results, the data obtained from all respondents is feasible to proceed to the next test, namely the reliability test.
2. Reliability Test
Table 9
Case Processing Summary
|
Case Processing Summary |
|||
|
|
N |
% |
|
|
Cases |
Valid |
30 |
100,0 |
|
Excludeda |
0 |
0,0 |
|
|
Total |
30 |
100,0 |
|
|
a. Listwise deletion based on all variables in the procedure. |
|||
Source: primary data for 2022
based on datacase processing summary obtained in the table above, it can be seen that from a total of 30 respondents it shows that all of them are valid with a percentage of 100% and none of them are valid.excluded so that the total obtained is N = 30 with a percentage of 100%.
a.
Discipline Variable
Table 10
Discipline Variable Reability Test
|
Item-Total Statistics |
||||
|
|
Scale Mean if Item Deleted |
Scale Variance if Item Deleted |
Corrected Item-Total Correlation |
Cronbach's Alpha if Item Deleted |
|
X1.1 |
27,43 |
5,495 |
,660 |
,741 |
|
X1.2 |
27,50 |
5,362 |
,576 |
,750 |
|
X1.3 |
27,53 |
4,947 |
,754 |
,714 |
|
X1.4 |
27,67 |
5,609 |
,536 |
,759 |
|
X1.5 |
27,67 |
4,989 |
,559 |
,754 |
|
X1.6 |
27,53 |
5,706 |
,308 |
,808 |
|
X1.7 |
27,47 |
5,982 |
,327 |
,795 |
Source: primary data for 2022
Based on the results of the reliability test above, the Cronbachs alpha value is obtained with N of items 7. So from these results it can be concluded that overall the disciplinary variable items as a whole are stated to be reliable or reliable in accordance with the decision-making guidelines Cronbach's alpha> 0.60.
b.
Work Environment
Variables
Table 11
Work Environment Variable Reliability Test
|
Item-Total Statistics |
||||
|
Item |
Scale Mean if Item Deleted |
Scale Variance if Item Deleted |
Corrected Item-Total Correlation |
Cronbach's Alpha if Item Deleted |
|
X2.1 |
39,60 |
11,559 |
,469 |
,785 |
|
X2.2 |
39,87 |
10,189 |
,629 |
,764 |
|
X2.3 |
39,83 |
10,351 |
,699 |
,756 |
|
X2.4 |
39,97 |
11,413 |
,382 |
,797 |
|
X2.5 |
39,93 |
11,926 |
,292 |
,806 |
|
X2.6 |
39,80 |
12,372 |
,193 |
,817 |
|
X2.7 |
39,43 |
11,978 |
,468 |
,787 |
|
X2.8 |
39,67 |
11,057 |
,539 |
,777 |
|
X2.9 |
39,43 |
11,357 |
,572 |
,775 |
|
X2.10 |
39,67 |
11,264 |
,641 |
,769 |
Source: primary data for 2022
In the table above the results of the reliability testing on the work environment variable with the values obtained are from a total of 10 question items all of which can be statedreliableor reliable because the value of Cronbach's alpha> 0.60 is in accordance with the decision making guidelines.
c. Productivity Work
Table 12
Work Productivity Variable Reliability Test
|
Item-Total Statistics |
||||
|
Scale Mean if Item Deleted |
Scale Variance if Item Deleted |
Corrected Item-Total Correlation |
Cronbach's Alpha if Item Deleted |
|
|
Y1 |
40,77 |
14,323 |
,790 |
,921 |
|
Y2 |
40,70 |
14,907 |
,652 |
,927 |
|
Y3 |
40,77 |
14,530 |
,730 |
,924 |
|
Y4 |
40,67 |
14,575 |
,775 |
,922 |
|
Y5 |
40,77 |
14,323 |
,790 |
,921 |
|
Y6 |
40,87 |
14,257 |
,790 |
,921 |
|
Y7 |
41,07 |
13,857 |
,674 |
,928 |
|
Y8 |
40,87 |
14,257 |
,790 |
,921 |
|
Y9 |
40,87 |
14,257 |
,790 |
,921 |
|
Y10 |
40,97 |
13,964 |
,621 |
,932 |
Source: primary data for 2022
Based on the statistical reliability table on the work productivity variable above, it shows that the value resulting from the total number of questions on the performance variable is 10 items, all of which are declared reliable or reliable, in accordance with the decision guidelines that the valuecronbach’s Alpha> 0.60.
1.
Normality test
Table 13
Normality test
|
One-Sample Kolmogorov-Smirnov Test |
||
|
|
Unstandardized Residual |
|
|
N |
30 |
|
|
Normal Parametersa,b |
Mean |
,0000000 |
|
Std. Deviation |
2,47857736 |
|
|
Most Extreme Differences |
Absolute |
,123 |
|
Positive |
,123 |
|
|
Negative |
-,080 |
|
|
Kolmogorov-Smirnov Z |
,672 |
|
|
Asymp. Sig. (2-tailed) |
,757 |
|
|
a. Test distribution is Normal. |
||
|
b. Calculated from data. |
||
Source: primary data for 2022
Based on the output table on the normality test above, it can be concluded that the valueAsymp. sig. is 0.757> 0.05, according to the normality test decision making basiskosmogorov smirnov, then it is concluded that the data is normally distributed, thus the assumption requirements of the regression model can be fulfilled.
2.
Linearity Test
Table 14
Linearity Test
|
ANOVA Table |
|||||||
|
Sum of Squares |
df |
Mean Square |
F |
Say. |
|||
|
Productivity (Y) * Discipline (X1) |
Between Groups |
(Combined) |
125,292 |
9 |
13,921 |
,726 |
,681 |
|
Linearity |
6,790 |
1 |
6,790 |
,354 |
,559 |
||
|
Deviation from Linearity |
118,501 |
8 |
14,813 |
,772 |
,631 |
||
|
Within Groups |
383,675 |
20 |
19,184 |
||||
|
Total |
508,967 |
29 |
|||||
Source: primary data for 2022
Based on the decision-making method where the value generated in the ANOVA table is sig. 0.631 > 0.05 and the comparison of calculated f values is 0.772 <2.93, it can be concluded that there is a linear relationship between the independent variable and the dependent variable.
3.
Multicollinearity Test
Table 15
Multicollinearity Test
|
Coefficientsa |
||||||||
|
Model |
Unstandardized Coefficients |
Standardized Coefficients |
t |
Say. |
Collinearity Statistics |
|||
|
B |
Std. Error |
Beta |
Tolerance |
VIF |
||||
|
1 |
(Constant) |
-2,528 |
8,314 |
-,304 |
,763 |
|||
|
Catsipilnan (X1) |
,249 |
,179 |
,159 |
1,392 |
,175 |
,997 |
1,003 |
|
|
Work Environment (X2) |
,904 |
,129 |
,799 |
7,008 |
,000 |
,997 |
1,003 |
|
|
a. Dependent Variable: Produktivitas (Y) |
||||||||
Source: primary data for 2022
Based on the output in the coefficient table above, it can be concluded that the Tolerance value on the motivational variable on work productivity is 0.997 > 0.10 and the VIF value is 1.003 <10.00 so according to the decision guidelines there is no multicollinearity of the disciplinary variable on work productivity then the work environment variable has the results of the same value are the tolerance value of 0.997 > 0.10 and the VIF value of 1.003 < 10.00, so there is no multicollinearity of work environment variables on work productivity.
4.
Heteroscedasticity
Test
Figure 2
Heterosceda.sticity Test
Source: primary data for 2022
From the picture above, according to the decision making on the heteroscedasticity test, the data points spread above and below or around zero (0), then the dots do not collect only above or below, then the distribution of the points in the data has no pattern the wave widens then narrows and widens again, and finally the spread of data points does not form a pattern.
Table 16
Variables Entered/Removed
|
Variables Entered/Removeda |
|||
|
Model |
Variables Entered |
Variables Removed |
Method |
|
1 |
Work Environment (X2), Discipline (X1)b |
|
Enter |
|
a. Dependent Variable: Produktivitas (Y) |
|||
|
b. All requested variables entered. |
|||
Source: primary data for 2022
Based on the results of the regression analysis in the table above, in the entered/removed variables, it is explained that in the multiple linear regression analysis, the independent variables consist of independent variables, namely discipline (X1) and work environment (X2). And the dependent variable is employee productivity using the above analysismethod entered or in the sense that no variables are discarded, so that in the columnvariables removed no figures or wasted.
Determination of the regression equation in the research analysis carried out, can be seen in the results of the processing in the coefficient table below:
Table 17
Multiple Linear Regression Output
|
Coefficientsa |
||||||
|
Model |
Unstandardized Coefficients |
Standardized Coefficients |
t |
Say. |
||
|
B |
Std. Error |
Beta |
||||
|
1 |
(Constant) |
-2,528 |
8,314 |
|
-,304 |
,763 |
|
Catsipilnan (X1) |
,249 |
,179 |
,159 |
1,392 |
,175 |
|
|
Work Environment (X2) |
,904 |
,129 |
,799 |
7,008 |
,000 |
|
|
a. Dependent Variable: Produktivitas (Y) |
||||||
Source: primary data for 2022
The coefficient table above from the processing results obtained provides data regarding the regression equation and whether there is an influence of the independent variables namely discipline and work environment on the dependent variable, namely the productivity of employees of PT. Makassar's brilliant sun. The formula used in this regression analysis is as follows:
Y = -2.528 + 0.249 X1 + 0.904 X2
From these results it can be seen that the relationship between employee performance and supervision and service quality is that there is a positive relationship by looking at the output results above if X increases (discipline and work environment) then Y (employee productivity) will also increase. If without being influenced between the values of X then the average Y is-2.528 if it is assumed other variables remain.
The resulting coefficient value on the disciplinary variable is equal to0.249 and it is positive, this shows that the discipline variable has a linear relationship with employee productivity, which means that if the variable X1 increases if the other variables are constant then the value of Y will change by0.249, for each X1 unit, the beta variable, namely Y, will increase by 0.249 assuming the other independent variables in the regression model are still the same. This also applies to the work environment variable, the value of X2 increases by one point, so it can be concluded that the value of Y also increases by0.904 if it is assumed that the other regression model variables are fixed.
T Test (Partial Test)
In testing the hypothesis, the first step that needs to be done is the partial (separate) t test, namely the analysis carried out to determine the partial effect of each variable, namely the independent variable (independent) on the dependent variable (dependent). As for making the basis of reference in making decisions the results of the t test in the regression analysis of this study are in two ways which are used as in decision making, namely: a) by looking at the significance value (Sig). b) by comparing the calculated t values and t table values
Based on the two criteria above, the value decision (Sig.) is as follows:
1.
If the result is a
significance value (Sig.) <probability of 0.05, then there is an influence
of the (free) Independent Variable (X) on the dependent dependent variable (Y),
meaning that the hypothesis can be accepted (Ha)
2.
If the result is a
significance value (Sig.) > probability 0.05, then there is no effect of the
independent variable (X) on the dependent variable (Y) or the hypothesis is
rejected (H0).
Furthermore, if based on how to compare the value of t table with t count is as follows:
1.
If t count > t
table, it can be concluded that there is an influence of the independent
variable (X) on the dependent variable (Y), then Ha (the hypothesis can be
accepted).
2. If t count <t table, then there is no effect of the
independent variable (X) on the dependent variable (Y) or in other words H0
(the hypothesis is rejected).
Discussion
After analyzing the independent variables (discipline and work environment) and their effect on the dependent variable (Employee Productivity), then each independent variable and its effect on the dependent variable will be explained below:
1.
The Effect of
Discipline Variables on Work Productivity of PT. Brilliant Surya Gemilang
Makassar
From the results of the partial t test on the discipline variable, the partial t test results on the independent variable discipline (X1) with a significant resulting value obtained is 0.175 <probability of 0.05, then according to the decision guidelines, the discipline variable is rejected (Ho), while for the decision guidelines that secondly by looking at the resulting t-count value, then from the table it is obtained with a t-count value of 1,392 > 1,703. then from the results of multiple regression analysis it can be interpreted where the beta (b) value produced is positive so it can be concluded that the influence of discipline has a positive but not significant effect on the work productivity of employees of PT. Cemerlang Surya Gemilang Makassar so it can be stated that the first hypothesis is rejected. As for the existing meaning that H1 is rejected, if the disciplinary variable increases by 1 then it has a positive but not significant impact on the increase in work productivity at PT. Brilliant Surya Gemilang Makassar.
2.
The Influence
of Work Environment Variables on Work Productivity of PT. Brilliant Surya
Gemilang Makassar
On the test results on the second hypothesis (H2) in the partial t test on the work environment variable (X2) on work productivity (Y) where the results obtained are sig. 0.000 <probability 0.05, then the second way is to find out whether the hypothesis is accepted or rejected by looking at the comparison of the calculated t value with t table and the results obtained are 7.008 > 1.703, so based on the basic guidelines for decision making that the work environment variable (X2) can be stated received, namely the work environment has a positive and significant effect on the work productivity of employees of PT. Brilliant Surya Gemilang Makassar. Furthermore, in the regression analysis where the beta (b) value produced is positive. It can be interpreted that if the work environment variable increases, then by itself it will have a real or significant effect on the increase in employee performance variables.
3.
The Effect of
Discipline and Work Environment Variables on Employee Productivity at PT.
Brilliant Surya Gemilang Makassar
In the discussion of the simultaneous or joint effects of the independent variables and their influence on the dependent variable, based on the results of empirical testing, it was found that the two variables namely; discipline and work environment variables have a positive and significant effect on the work productivity of employees of PT. Brilliant Surya Gemilang Makassar. So with these results it can be stated that the hypothesis is accepted.
This can be interpreted if the discipline and work environment variables simultaneously increase by 1, it will have a linear impact on improving employee performance by 1. In addition, the contribution of the two independent variables to the dependent variable is 65% which can be interpreted. that the contribution is quite strong influence on work productivity and the remaining 35% is the influence of other factors or variables outside of the independent variables examined in this study.
From the results of the analysis tests that have been carried out and the discussion above, it has been explained that the conclusions that can be drawn from this study are as follows: 1) Varietal discipline has a positive but not significant effect on employee work productivity at PT. Cemerlang Surya Gemilang Makassar, this shows that, if discipline has increased it will affect the increase in employee productivity but not significantly. 2) The work environment variable has a positive and significant effect on the work productivity of employees at PT. Cemerlang Surya Gemilang Makassar, this shows that if the work environment increases, it will affect the increase in employee productivity significantly. 3) Discipline and work environment variables simultaneously (together) have a positive and significant effect on employee work productivity at PT. Cemerlang Surya Gemilang Makassar, this shows that if discipline and the work environment increase, it will affect the increase in employee productivity significantly.
Adikaram, A. S., Naotunna, N., & Priyankara, H. P. R.
(2021). Battling COVID-19 with human resource management bundling. Employee
Relations: The International Journal, 43(6), 1269–1289.
https://doi.org/10.1108/ER-08-2020-0390
Astuti, R., & Iverizkinawati, I. (2019). Pengaruh
Kepemimpinan dan Lingkungan Kerja terhadap Kepuasan Kerja Karyawan pada PT.
Sarana Agro Nusantara Medan. Jurnal Ilman: Jurnal Ilmu Manajemen, 6(1).
Chitsaz-Isfahani, A., & Boustani, H. R. (2014). Effects
of talent management on employees retention: The mediate effect of
organizational trust. International Journal of Academic Research in
Economics and Management Sciences, 3(5), 114.
Goedurov, R. (2020). Public Sector Organizations: Work
Environment, Employee Behavior and Discipline. International Journal Papier
Public Review, 1(2), 6–11.
Iqbal, M. A., Saluy, A. B., & Hamdani, A. Y. (2021). The
Effect of Work Motivation And Work Environment on Employee Performance Mediated
By Job Satisfaction (at PT ICI Paints Indonesia). Dinasti International
Journal of Education Management And Social Science, 2(5), 842–871.
https://doi.org/10.31933/dijemss.v2i5.942
Lianto, B., Dachyar, M., & Soemardi, T. P. (2018).
Continuous innovation: a literature review and future perspective. International
Journal on Advanced Science Engineering Information Technology, 8(3),
771–779.
Lumpkin, G. T., Moss, T. W., Gras, D. M., Kato, S., &
Amezcua, A. S. (2013). Entrepreneurial processes in social contexts: how are
they different, if at all? Small Business Economics, 40, 761–783.
https://doi.org/10.1007/s11187-011-9399-3
Mendropa, K. A. (2018). Effect of Work Motivation and
Discipline on Employee Performance of PT. Pos Indonesia Lubuk Pakam. Journal
of Management Science (JMAS), 1(4, Oktober), 93–97.
https://doi.org/10.35335/jmas.v1i4,%20Oktober.17
Pawirosumarto, S., Sarjana, P. K., & Gunawan, R. (2017).
The effect of work environment, leadership style, and organizational culture
towards job satisfaction and its implication towards employee performance in
Parador Hotels and Resorts, Indonesia. International Journal of Law and
Management. https://doi.org/10.1108/IJLMA-10-2016-0085
Schuler, R. S. (1992). Strategic human resources management:
Linking the people with the strategic needs of the business. Organizational
Dynamics, 21(1), 18–32. https://doi.org/10.1016/0090-2616(92)90083-Y
Sugiyono. (2017). Metode Penelitian Bisnis: Pendekatan
Kuantitatif, Kualitatif, Kombinasi, dan R&D. Alfabeta.
Ulrich, D., & Dulebohn, J. H. (2015). Are we there yet? What’s
next for HR? Human Resource Management Review, 25(2), 188–204.
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.hrmr.2015.01.004
Utin, N. H., & Yosepha, S. Y. (2019). The model of
employee performance. International Review of Management and Marketing, 9(3),
69. https://doi.org/10.32479/irmm.8025
Yong, J. Y., Yusliza, M., Ramayah, T., Chiappetta Jabbour, C.
J., Sehnem, S., & Mani, V. (2020). Pathways towards sustainability in
manufacturing organizations: Empirical evidence on the role of green human
resource management. Business Strategy and the Environment, 29(1),
212–228. https://doi.org/10.1002/bse.2359
Yuliandi, R. T. (2019). Work discipline, competence,
empowerment, job satisfaction, and employee performance. International
Journal of Recent Technology and Engineering, 8(3), 7209–7215.
|
Copyright holder: Haeranah, Muslim, Haerudin, Abdul Khalik (2022) |
|
First publication right: Syntax Literate: Jurnal
Ilmiah Indonesia |
|
This article is licensed under: |