Syntax Literate: Jurnal Ilmiah Indonesia p–ISSN: 2541-0849 e-ISSN: 2548-1398

Vol. 9, No. 7, Juli 2024

 

CONFLICT, JOB STRESS, SATISFACTION AND ITS EFFECT ON PERFORMANCE

 

Tehubijuluw Zacharias

Universitas Kristen Indonesia, Maluku, Indonesia

Email: [email protected]

Abstract 

This study aims to analyze conflict, work stress, satisfaction and influence on employee performance. This study uses a dextive-quantitative approach with the correlational type of cause-effect. The study was conducted in the Ambon Class I Navigation District. This research was conducted for 2 (two) months. The population used in this study was that all Ambon class I Navigation District employees were 31 people. The sample determination method is full sampling. Data was analyzed using multiple linear regression analysis. The results of the study concluded that (1) conflict had a negative and significant effect on the performance of Ambon Class I Navigation District employees; (2) Work stress has a negative and significant effect on the performance of Ambon Class I Navigation District employees; (3) Satisfaction has a positive and significant effect on the performance of the Ambon Class I Navigation District Employees and (4) Conflict, Work Stress and Satisfaction have a significant effect on the performance of the Ambon Class I Navigation District Employees.

Keywords: conflict, work stress, satisfaction, performance

 

Introduction

Good performance is one of the goals of every organization to achieve organizational goals. In order to obtain good performance, good quality human resources are also needed (Risma, 2012). Performance is the result of work achieved by an individual that is adapted to his role and duties within a certain period, which is linked to a certain value measure or standard from the organization where the individual works with the aim of achieving organizational goals. Meanwhile, what is meant by performance appraisal is a process and tool for measuring and evaluating individual employee behavior and the success of their work results with predetermined standards, both standards determined by the organization and standards of the work itself. Meanwhile, standards for measuring performance require dimensions that are appropriate to the type of work. These dimensions can be in the form of quality and quantity of work by paying attention to working time and collaboration with co-workers during a certain period. So it can be said that employees are considered to have high performance if they are able to meet the criteria specified in the performance dimensions.

The Navigation District is a Technical Implementation Unit in the field of Navigation within the Directorate General of Sea Transportation at the Ministry of Transportation which is located and is responsible to the Director General of Sea Transportation. The Navigation District is administratively managed by the Secretary of the Directorate General of Sea Transportation and operationally managed by the Director of Navigation. The Navigation District is headed by a chief. Based on Minister of Transportation Decree No. 30 of 2006 dated 12 June 2007 concerning Organization and Work Procedures, the Ambon Class I Navigation District has the Main Task of carrying out Planning, Operation, Procurement and Supervision of Shipping Navigation Aids, Shipping Telecommunications, as well as Sea Observation activities, Hydrographic Surveys, Monitoring Channels and Crossings with use installation facilities for shipping safety purposes. To carry out these main tasks and functions, the Ambon Class I Navigation District requires employees with high performance.

Studies on employee performance are currently still being carried out by researchers. Several factors were studied in relation to improving performance. The variable that is the latest study is the work conflict variable as has been studied by (Indriyatni, 2019), (Syuhada & Amelia, 2021), (Tewal & Tewal, 2014), (Rosally & Jogi, 2015), (Giovanni, Kojo, & Lengkong, 2015) and (Wenur, Sepang, & Dotulong, 2018).  Likewise the work stress variable as per research (Giovanni et al., 2015)(Massie, Areros, & Rumawas, 2018), (Ahmad et al., 2019) and (Julvia, 2016).  Apart from that, the job satisfaction variable is also one of the variables that is thought to influence performance as per research (Sanuddin & Widjojo, 2013), (Noor, Rahardjo, & Ruhana, 2016) and (Dewi, Bagia, & Susila, 2018).

Work conflicts that occur in organizations generally occur due to incompatibility between two or more members or groups (in an organization) who have to share limited resources or work activities and/or due to the fact that they have different statuses and goals. , value or perception. Work conflict among employees can have positive results, but if it cannot be managed well it will have negative impacts. Dynamic changes in business have an impact on activities within an organization that are required to keep up with changes. This change indirectly encourages existing human resources in the organization to work better and results in the workload on these employees increasing. Workloads that are not appropriate to employee conditions can lead to negative things, namely work stress.

Work stress is an adaptive response, limited by individual differences and psychological processes, namely the consequences of any activity (environment), situation or external event that imposes excessive psychological or physical demands on a person in the place where the individual is located. Positive stress is called eustress, while stress that is excessive and detrimental is called distress. Stress that is left alone without serious handling from the organization in the short term can make employees become depressed, unmotivated and frustrated, causing employees to work not optimally so that their performance will be disrupted.

The impact of job satisfaction will later be linked to several outputs produced, one of which is performance (work achievement) where performance is the result of work achieved by a person/group of people in the organization in accordance with their respective responsibilities in order to achieve a goal.

 

Research Method

This research uses a descriptive-quantitative approach with a correlational cause-and-effect type, meaning that the relationship between the independent variable and the dependent variable is a cause-and-effect relationship. The research was carried out in the Ambon Class I Navigation District. This research was conducted for 2 (two) months, namely March to April 2024.

The population used in this research was all 31 employees of the Ambon Class I Navigation District. The sample is part of the number and characteristics of the population. The sample is part of the number and characteristics of the population. The sampling method is full sampling. The data analysis technique in this research uses descriptive analysis and multiple linear regression analysis with the following equation:

 

Y = b0 + b1X1 + b2X2 + b3X3 + e

Information:

Y = Employee Performance

X1 = Conflict

X2 = Work Stress

X3 = Job Satisfaction

bo, b1,b2,b3 = Regression coefficients

e = Interference error (error term)

The influence of the independent variable on the dependent variable is tested with a confidence interval of 95% or alpha = 0.05. This can be determined by carrying out simultaneous tests and partial tests.

 

Result and Discussion

Result

The influence of the independent variables, namely emotional intelligence, intellectual intelligence and social intelligence on the dependent variable, namely employee performance (Y), is known through multiple linear regression calculations. Based on the results of data processing using the SPSS 21.00 program, the following table was obtained:

 

Table 1. Results of Multiple Linear Regression Analysis

Variable

Koef.

Regression

t.count

Probability

r2

partial

Conflict (X1)

-0,581

3,725

0,006

0,345

Job Stress (X2)

-0,057

3,304

0,002

0,226

Satisfaction (X3)

0,834

3,848

0,001

0,555

constanta            :  2,985

F. Ratio

:   38,117

R square :  0,809

Prob.

:   0,007

Multiple R         :  0,899

n

:   31

 

Based on Table 1, the multiple regression equation is as follows:

Y= a + b1 X1+ b2 X2 + b3 X3 + e

Y= 2.985 - 0.581 X1 - 0.057 X2 + 0.834 X3 + e

The equation above means that:

1)    The b0 value of 2.985 indicates that employee performance is 2.985 units assuming it is not influenced by conflict, stress and job satisfaction.

2)    The b1 value of -0.581 is negative, which indicates that if conflict increases by 1 (one) unit, employee performance will decrease by 0.581 units, assuming other variables are constant.

3)    The b2 value of -0.057 is negative, which indicates that if stress increases by 1 (one) unit, employee performance will decrease by 0.057 units, assuming other variables are constant.

4)    The b3 value of 0.834 is positive, indicating that if job satisfaction increases by 1 (one) unit, employee performance will increase by 0.834 units, assuming other variables are constant.

Next, testing is carried out to find out whether the proposed hypothesis is accepted or rejected, as explained below:

 

First, Second and Third Hypothesis Testing

The first hypothesis states that conflict (X1), stress (X2) and job satisfaction (X3) partially influence the dependent variable, namely employee performance (Y). The test was carried out by confirming the calculated t value with the t table value at degrees of freedom (df=27).

1)    The calculated t value for the conflict variable is 3.725 > the t table value (df=27) is 1.684, so it can be concluded that Ho is rejected, Ha is accepted, which means that conflict has a partial effect on employee performance.

2)    The calculated t value for the stress variable is 3.304 > t table value (df=27) is 1.684, so it can be concluded that Ho is rejected, Ha is accepted, which means that stress has a partial effect on employee performance.

3)    The calculated t value for the job satisfaction variable is 3.848 > t table value (df=27) is 1.684, so it can be concluded that Ho is rejected, Ha is accepted, which means that job satisfaction has a partial effect on employee performance.

 

Fourth Hypothesis Testing

The fourth hypothesis states that conflict (X1), stress (X2) and job satisfaction (X3) influence the dependent variable, namely employee performance (Y) simultaneously. Testing is carried out by confirming the calculated F value with the table F value in df (3)(27). The table above shows the calculated F value of 38.117 > F table in df (3)(27) of 2.45; so it is concluded that Ho is rejected and Ha is accepted, which means that conflict (X1), stress (X2) and job satisfaction (X3) influence the dependent variable, namely employee performance (Y) simultaneously. The influence of these three variables is 0.809 or 80.9% of the performance variable is influenced by conflict (X1), stress (X2) and job satisfaction (X3) and the remaining 19.1% (100%-80.9%) is influenced by other variables not included in the research model.

 

Fifth Hypothesis Testing

Table 1  shows the results of multiple linear regression analysis, where it can be seen that the largest regression coefficient value is the job satisfaction variable, as well as the calculated t value and partial r2 value, which shows that the largest influence comes from the job satisfaction variable with an influence size of 55.0 %, because it has the largest correlation coefficient value between the other two variables. The regression coefficient shows the magnitude of the influence of each independent variable (X1, X2, X3) on the dependent variable (Y) if the magnitude of the other independent variables in the model remains constant.

 

Discussion

The Effect of Conflict on Employee Performance

The conflict variable (X1) has a negative sign, this means that if conflict increases it will result in employee performance decreasing. Furthermore, the regression coefficient is -0.581, meaning that every one unit increase in the conflict variable will result in a decrease of 0.581 units in employee performance, if the other variables are constant.

The partial coefficient of determination explains the effect of each change in the independent variable (X) on changes in the dependent variable (Y). The results of data processing show that the partial coefficient (r) for the conflict variable is 0.345. This means that: the conflict variable can explain any variation in changes in employee performance of 0.345 with the assumption that other variables are constant, meaning that it shows that conflict has a moderate correlation with employee performance of 34.5% with the assumption that other variables do not change.

Testing the regression coefficients of the variables, whether the conflict variable (X1) is significant or not significant, tested the significance of the t value. This test was carried out using a two-way test, using a real level of 5%. The test results obtained tcount for the conflict variable of 3.725; Meanwhile, the size of the ttable at the 5% confidence level is ± 1.684. The values mentioned above can be explained that partially (individually), the conflict variable has a significant effect on employee performance because the calculated t value > t table value. The calculated t value of the independent variable is in the Ho rejection area, this means that the regression coefficient of the conflict variable is not equal to 0, in other words the coefficient of this variable is significant.

The results of this research are in line with previous research conducted by  (Christine et al., 2010)  which concluded that the more pressure and demands in work-family life, the lower a person's performance in their work environment. This happens because the pressure and demands that come from a person's dual role (as a worker and husband/wife) cause a person to not be optimal in completing their work. However, basically the level of conflict has a positive or negative effect on performance. When organizational conflict is low, unit performance is also low. Increased conflict increases performance and so on. At the optimal level of conflict, the resulting performance is maximum. After reaching the optimal level of conflict, if conflict is added again, what happens is that performance actually decreases.

Indriyatni (2019) explains that to be able to find out how conflict affects organizational performance or how conflict can act as a force to improve organizational performance, it can be seen through the types of conflict themselves. Functional conflict will reduce the opportunity that one group's thinking will dominate the decisions/policies taken. Meanwhile, dysfunctional conflict will disrupt/hinder overall activities, in other words, this conflict will disrupt the overall performance of the organization.

Conflict is disagreement and different points of view on something. Conflict in organizations has both positive and negative impacts on the organization. Positively, conflict can improve work rhythm, make work complete quickly and increase employee discipline. Meanwhile, negatively, conflict in organizations can cause work stress, decreased job satisfaction, decreased organizational commitment and increased intention to quit  (Giovanni et al., 2015).

 

The Effect of Stress on Employee Performance

The stress variable (X2) turns out to have a negative sign, this means that if employees experience stressful conditions, it will potentially reduce employee performance. Furthermore, the regression coefficient is -0.057, meaning that every increase of one unit in the stress variable will result in a decrease of 0.057 units in employee performance, if the other variables are constant.

The partial coefficient of determination explains the effect of each change in the independent variable (X) on changes in the dependent variable (Y). The results of data processing show that the partial coefficient (r) for the stress variable is 0.226. This means that: the stress variable can explain every variation in employee performance changes of 0.226 with the assumption that the other variables are constant, meaning that it shows that stress has a sufficient correlation with employee performance of 22.6% with the assumption that the other variables do not change.

Testing the regression coefficients of the variables, whether the stress variable (X2) is significant or not significant, tested the significance of the t value. This test was carried out using a two-way test, using a real level of 5%. The test results obtained tcount for the stress variable of 3.304; Meanwhile, the size of the ttable at the 5% confidence level is ± 1.684. The values mentioned above can be explained that partially (individually), the stress variable has a significant effect on employee performance because the calculated t value > t table value. The calculated t value of the independent variable is in the Ho rejection area, this means that the regression coefficient of the intellectual intelligence variable is not equal to 0, in other words the coefficient of this variable is significant.

The results of this research are in line with previous research conducted by (Wartono, 2017) that the relationship between stress and employee performance can be described with an inverted U-shaped curve. At low stress levels, employee performance is low. In this condition, employees do not have challenges and boredom arises due to understimulation. As stress increases to an optimal point, good performance will result. This condition is called the optimal stress level. At optimal levels of stress this will create innovative ideas, enthusiasm and constructive output. At very high stress levels, employee performance is also low. In this condition, performance decreases. Excessive levels of stress will cause employees to become depressed, because they are no longer able to cope with tasks that are too heavy.

Everyone experiences stress, both outside the organization and within any organization. In other words, everyone cannot avoid stress, therefore employees and leaders are obliged to manage it well. When an employee or manager is able to manage stress well, the consequences are functional (positive), whereas if you ignore the stress that arises, the consequences are negative for the individual and the organization. So, stress not only has a negative impact, but also has a positive impact on a person. Stress is not just nervous tension, stress can have positive consequences, stress is not something to be avoided, and the absence of stress at all is death (Nur, 2013).

Steven and Prasetio (2020) summarizes several research results that employing employees with high self-esteem and prioritizing reducing excessive burden can improve employee performance. According to Rajeshwaran and Aktharsha (2017) the results found that family-related stress, subordinate-related stress, burnout-related stress and personality-based stress were found to be significant predictors of organizational commitment and continuance commitment plays an important role in job performance. Other research conducted by (Khuong and Yen, 2016) found that work factors have a significant positive influence on work stress and work stress has a negative influence on employee job performance. Meanwhile, Nyangahu and Bula's (2015) findings show that there is a relationship between work stress which significantly positively influences an individual's performance.

Massie, Areros, and Rumawas (2018) explained that if work stress increases it will reduce employee performance potential and if on the contrary work stress decreases it will increase employee performance potential. From an organizational perspective, management may not be concerned if employees experience mild stress. The reason is because a certain level of stress will have positive consequences, because this will urge them to do their job better.

 

The Effect of Job Satisfaction on Employee Performance

The job satisfaction variable (X3) turns out to have a positive sign, this means that if work increases, performance will also increase. Furthermore, the regression coefficient is 0.834, meaning that every one unit increase in the job satisfaction variable will result in an increase of 0.834 units in performance, if the other variables are constant.

The partial coefficient of determination explains the effect of each change in the independent variable (X) on changes in the dependent variable (Y). The results of data processing show that the partial coefficient (r) for the job satisfaction variable is 0.555. This means that: the job satisfaction variable can explain every variation in employee performance changes of 0.555 with the assumption that the other variables are constant, meaning that it shows that job satisfaction has a fairly large correlation with performance of 55.5% with the assumption that the other variables do not change.

Testing the regression coefficients of the variables, then the job satisfaction variable (X3) is significant or not significant, testing the significance of the t value. This test was carried out using a two-way test, using a real level of 5%. The test results obtained tcount for the job satisfaction variable of 3.848; Meanwhile, the size of the ttable at the 5% confidence level is ± 1.684. The values mentioned above can be explained that partially (individually), the job satisfaction variable has a significant effect on employee performance because the calculated t value > t table value. The calculated t value of the independent variable is in the Ho rejection area, this means that the regression coefficient of the job satisfaction variable is not equal to 0, in other words the coefficient of this variable is significant.

The results of this research are in line with previous research conducted by (Arda, 2017) that job satisfaction reflects employee feelings towards their work which can be seen in the employee's positive attitude towards their work which can improve the employee's performance, while employees who do not get job satisfaction will develop an aggressive attitude, or vice versa, will show an attitude of withdrawing from contact with the social environment

Steven and Prasetio (2020) summarizes several research results regarding the relationship between job satisfaction and employee performance. Research conducted by Dekoulou and Trivellas (2015) found that learning-oriented operations are an important predictor of employee job satisfaction which influences employee performance. According to Farooqui and Nagendra (2014), there is a relationship between people's organizations and job satisfaction and employee performance. According to Melian Gonzalez and Bulchand Gidumal (2014), satisfaction with senior leadership, compensation and work balance each have an impact on employee performance. Furthermore, research conducted by Pang and Lu (2018) shows that there is a relationship between motivation and job satisfaction on performance in the context of container shipping.

Employees with high job satisfaction certainly have high work enthusiasm, so that their work performance will be maximum. On the other hand, employees with low job satisfaction cause their work performance to be poor. They become unenthusiastic about work, and this will have a huge impact on the organization. Employee performance has a big impact on the maximum performance of the organization. That is what causes employee job satisfaction to be considered very important, especially to support organizational performance in competition in this era of globalization (Changgriawan, 2017).

 

 

Conclusion

Based on the results and discussion that have been presented, it is concluded that: (1) conflict has a negative and significant effect on the performance of Ambon Class I Navigation District employees, (2) work stress has a negative and significant effect on the performance of Ambon Class I Navigation District employees, (3) satisfaction has a positive and significant effect on the performance of Ambon Class I Navigation District employees, and (4) conflict, work stress and satisfaction have a significant effect on the performance of Class I Ambon Navigation District employees

 

 

BIBLIOGRAPHY

 

Ahmad, Y., Tewal, B., & Taroreh, R. N. (2019). Pengaruh stres kerja, beban kerja, dan lingkungan kerja terhadap kinerja karyawan pada Pt. Fif Group Manado. Jurnal EMBA: Jurnal Riset Ekonomi, Manajemen, Bisnis Dan Akuntansi, 7(3).

Anugrah, P. G., & Priyambodo, B. A. (2021). Peran Work-Life Balance terhadap Kinerja Karyawan yang Menerapkan Work From Home ( WFH ) di Masa Pandemi COVID-19 : Studi Literatur. Fakultas Pendidikan Psikologi Universitas Negeri Malang, 19(April), 340–349.

Arda, M. (2017). Pengaruh Kepuasan Kerja Dan Disiplin Kerja Terhadap Kinerja Karyawan Pada Bank Rakyat Indonesia Cabang Putri Hijau Medan. Jurnal Ilmiah Manajemen Dan Bisnis, 18(1), 45–60. https://doi.org/10.30596/jimb.v18i1.1097

Cahyandani, P. T. (2021). Pengaruh Kepemimpinan Transformasional dan Employee Engagement terhadap Kinerja Karyawan PT Taspen (Persero) Kantor Cabang Utama Surabaya. Jurnal Ilmu Manajemen, 9(1), 19. https://doi.org/10.26740/jim.v9n1.p19-27

Changgriawan, G. S. (2017). Pengaruh Kepuasan Kerja dan Motivasi Kerja Terhadap Kinerja Karyawan One Way Production. Jurnal Agora, 5(3), 1–7.

Christine, W. S., Megawati, O., & Indah, M. (2010). Pengaruh Konflik Pekerjaan dan Konflik Keluarga Terhadap Kinerja dengan Konflik Pekerjaan Keluarga Sebagai Intervening Variabel  (Studi pada Dual Career Couple  di Jabodetabek). Jurnal Manajemen Dan Kewirausahaan, 12(2), pp.121-132. Retrieved from http://puslit2.petra.ac.id/ejournal/index.php

Dekoulou, P., & Trivellas, P. (2015). Measuring the impact of learning organization on job satisfaction and individual performance in Greek advertising sector. Procedia-Social and Behavioral Sciences, 175, 367-375.

Dewi, C. N. C., Bagia, I. W., & Susila, G. P. (2018). Pengaruh Stres Kerja Dan Kepuasan Kerja Terhadap Kinerja Karyawan. Bisma: Jurnal Manajemen, 4(2), 154–161.

Engko, C. (2020). Pengaruh Kepuasan Kerja Terhadap Kinerja Individual dengan Self Efficacy sebagai Variabel Intervening. Jurnal Bisnis Dan Akuntansi, 10(1), 1–12. https://doi.org/10.37641/jimkes.v8i3.400

Farooqui, M. S., & Nagendra, A. (2014). The impact of person organization fit on job satisfaction and performance of the employees. Procedia economics and Finance, 11, 122-129.

Giovanni, M., Kojo, C., & Lengkong, V. P. . (2015). Pengaruh Konflik Peran, Konflik Kerja dan Stres Kerja Terhadap Kinerja Karyawan Pada PT. Air Manado. Jurnal EMBA, 3(3 September 2015), 90–98.

Gunasti, A., & Pratama, A. D. (2021). Pengaruh Mental Workloud , Komunikasi , Quality Of Work Life , Job Satisfaction Terhadap Kinerja Manajer Konstruksi. JDM - Jurnal Dinamika Manajemen, 2(1), 23–34.

Hasni, P., Noviantoro, D., & Septianti, D. (2020). Pengaruh Kepemimpinan Terhadap Kinerja Karyawan Pada PT. Win Acces Telecommunicatin Palembang Dengan Kepuasan Kerja Sebagai Variabel Intervening. Jurnal Aplikasi Manajemen & Bisnis, 1(1), 27–35.

Indriyatni, L. (2019). Pengaruh Konflik Terhadap Kinerja. Fokus Ekonomi, 5(1), 36–42. https://doi.org/10.17509/manajerial.v4i1.16505

Julvia, C. (2016). Pengaruh Stres Kerja Dan Konflik Kerja Terhadap Kinerja Karyawan. Jurnal Ilmiah Manajemen Bisnis, 16(1), 59–72.

Khuong, M. N., & Yen, V. H. (2016). Investigate the effects of job stress on employee job performance--a case study at Dong Xuyen industrial zone, Vietnam. International Journal of Trade, Economics and Finance, 7(2), 31.

Lewiuci, P., G., & Mustamu, R., G. (2017). Pengaruh Employee Engagement Terhadap Kinerja Karyawan Pada Perusahaan Keluarga Produsen Senapan Angin. Agora, 4(2), 101–107.

Mallafi, F. R., & Silvianita, A. (2021). Pengaruh Flexible Working Arrangement Dan Work Life Balance Terhadap Kinerja Karyawan ( Studi Pada Karyawan Department Internal Audit PT . Telkom Indonesia , Tbk Bandung ). E-Proceeding of Management ISSN : 2355-9357, 8(6), 8596–8602.

Massie, R. N., Areros, W. ., & Rumawas, W. (2018). Pengaruh Stres Kerja Terhadap Kinerja Karyawan. Jurnal Administrasi Bisnis (JAB), 6(6), 41–49. https://doi.org/10.35313/jrbi.v3i2.935

Melián-González, S., & Bulchand-Gidumal, J. (2016). A model that connects information technology and hotel performance. Tourism management, 53, 30-37.

Noor, N. N., Rahardjo, K., & Ruhana, I. (2016). Pengaruh Stres Kerja Dan Kepuasan Kerja Terhadap Kinerja Karyawan. Jurnal Administrasi Bisnis (JAB), 31(1), 9–15.

Nur, S. (2013). Konflik, Stress Kerja dan Kepuasan Pengaruhnya terhadap Kinerja Pegawai pada Universitas Khaiirun Ternate. Jurnal EMBA: Jurnal Riset Ekonomi, Manajemen, Bisnis Dan Akuntansi, 1(3), 739–749. https://doi.org/10.1109/siu.2009.5136498

Nyangahu, K. P., & Bula, H. O. (2015). Relationship between Work Stress and Performance of Employees: A Case Study of Transit Hotel in Nairobi City Country. Archieves of Business Research, 3(6), 22-37.

Pang, K., & Lu, C. S. (2018). Organizational motivation, employee job satisfaction and organizational performance: An empirical study of container shipping companies in Taiwan. Maritime Business Review, 3(1), 36-52.

Rajeshwaran, N. R., & Aktharsha, U. S. (2017). Relationship between total quality management, knowledge management and organizational performance in IT organization. International Journal of Business and Management Invention, 6(8), 44-54.

Risma, D. (2012). Pengaruh Kecerdasan Emosional Terhadap Kinerja Karyawan. Fokus Ekonomi, 01(1), 86–97. Retrieved from http://stiepena.ac.id/wp-content/uploads/2012/11/pena-fokus-vol-4-no-2-40-45.pdf

Rosally, C., & Jogi, Y. (2015). Pengaruh Konflik Peran, Ketidakjelasan Peran dan Komitmen Organisasi terhadap Kinerja Auditor. Business Accounting Review, 3(2), 31–40.

Sanuddin, F. D. P., & Widjojo, A. R. (2013). Pengaruh Kepuasan Kerja dan Motivasi Kerja Terhadap Kinerja Karyawan PT. Semen Tonasa. Modus, 25(2), 217–231.

Steven, H. J., & Prasetio, A. P. (2020). Pengaruh Stres Kerja Dan Kepuasan Kerja Terhadap Kinerja Karyawan. Jurnal Penelitian Ipteks, 5(1), 78–88. https://doi.org/10.24912/jmk.v3i4.13433

Syuhada, I., & Amelia, W. R. (2021). Pengaruh Konflik Kerja Dan Semangat Kerja Terhadap Kinerja Karyawan Divisi Avsec Angkasa Pura. Jurnal Ilmiah Manajemen Dan Bisnis (JIMBI), 2(2), 136–145. https://doi.org/10.31289/jimbi.v2i1.455

Tewal, F., & Tewal, B. (2014). Pengaruh Konflik Peran Terhadap Kinerja Wanita Karir Pada Universitas Sam Ratulangi Manado. Jurnal Riset Ekonomi, Manajemen, Bisnis Dan Akuntansi, 2(1), 450–456.

Wartono, T. (2017). Pengaruh Stres Kerja Terhadap Kinerja Karyawan. Jurnal Ilmiah Prodi Manajemen Universitas Pamulang, 4(2), 41–55. https://doi.org/10.37888/bjrm.v1i2.90

Wenur, G., Sepang, J., & Dotulong, L. (2018). Pengaruh Konflik Kerja dan Stress Kerja terhadap Kinerja Karyawan pada PT.Bank Negara Indonesia (Persero) Tbk Cabang Manado. Jurnal EMBA: Jurnal Riset Ekonomi, Manajemen, Bisnis Dan Akuntansi, 6(1), 51–60.

 

 

Copyright holder:

Tehubijuluw Zacharias (2024)

 

First publication right:

Syntax Literate: Jurnal Ilmiah Indonesia

 

This article is licensed under: