70
The Effect of Reward, Punishment, Internal
Communication, and Work Enviroment on Employee Performance PT. Aira Mitra Media
Anisa Ajeng Aulia, Iga Aju Nitya Damayanti
Departement of Management, Narotama University, Indonesia auliandaajeng@gmail.com
Abstract
The Covid-19 pandemic has been in Indonesia for two years, and it still being carried out obediently by government policies. All micro and macro business sectors in Indonesia face many obstacles in its activities, such as mobility, production activities, and many more. A lot of of business sectors lay off due to this pandemic’s impact (Termination of Employment) on a large scale and restrictions on mobility in the corporate environment such as 30% working from the office and 70% working from home. PT. Aira Mitra Media East Jakarta is a company engaged in the service sector which is engaged in professional event organizers & digital events on a national and international scale. The purpose of this study is to measure employee performance with Reward, Punishment, Internal Communication, and Work environment systems during the Covid-19 pandemic.
This study used a quantitative approach. The population used is 50 employees of PT. Aira Mitra Media. The sampling technique used was total sampling. Distribution of questionnaire data using Google Forms. The data analysis technique in this research are: R square test, F-test and T-test with 0.05 for the significant level. The results of this study indicated a positive correlation between Reward, Punishment, Internal Communication, and Work Environment on Employee Performance. while the partial hypothesis testing (T -test) shows that Reward, Work Environment has a significant effect on Employee Performance, but Punishment, Internal Communication has no significant effect on Employee Performance
Keywords :
Internal Communication, Reward, Punishment, Work Environment and Employee Performance
1. Introduction
The Covid-19 pandemic has been in Indonesia for two years, and it still being carried out obediently by government policies. All micro and macro business sectors in Indonesia face many obstacles in its activities, such as mobility, production activities, and many more. A lot of of business sectors lay off due to this pandemic’s impact (Termination of Employment) on a large scale and restrictions on mobility in the corporate environment such as 30% working from the office and 70% working from home. Reporting to the results from Indonesian Statistics Agency, the open unemployment rate based on gender and area of residence (percent) for the August 2020 period reached 7.07%, and 6.49% in August 2021 with 2.8 million people become unemployment during this pandemic. There are many uncertainties during pandemic which is need an adjustments, and by that, the employees in the company can respond quickly, responsively, effectively, and efficiently in completing their work responsibilities. To run optimally, it is necessary to use new tools or ways to create cooperation between leaders and employees to work together to achieve company goals.
PT. Aira Mitra Media East Jakarta is a company engaged in the service sector which is engaged in professional event organizers & digital events on a national and international scale. With the explanation of the background above, the researcher is interested in researching the system of reward, punishment, internal communication, and work environment and its effect on employee performance of PT. Aira Mitra Media in the Covid-19 pandemic situation.This phenomenon cause some customers switch to using competitor’s products, although there are still many customers who remain loyal of using products from PT. Aira Mitra Media. Based on the above background, researchers are interested in conducting research with the title "The Effect Of Reward, Punishment, Internal Communication, And Work Enviroment On Employee Performance PT. Aira Mitra Media".
71
1.1. Research FrameworkFigure 1. Research Framework Hypothesis
The following diagram is a description of the literature review and explained the following hypotheses:
H1: Reward has a significant positive effect on employee performance of PT. Aira Mitra Media H2: Punishment has a significant positive effect on employee performance at PT. Aira Mitra Media H3: Internal communication has a significant positive effect on employee performance at PT. Aira Mitra Media
H4: Work environment has a significant positive effect on employee performance of PT. Aira Mitra Media
H5: Reward, punishment, Internal communication, and Work Environment have a simultaneous effect on employee performance of PT. Aira Mitra Media
1.2. Literature Review
The Reward is also known as a form of business appreciation for competency and professionality of employees. The demands of the position in a business of organizing, planning, using, and maintaining the work force to perform tasks efficiently and effectively. According to Handoko (2012) The Reward is an award from the company given to employees as a form of reciprocity or remuneration for their work performance. Factors that affect the reward are labor supply and demand, the company's ability and willingness, the organization in employees, cost of living, employee performance productivity, employee position, education and work experience, national economic conditions, and applicable labor laws. The Indicators of rewards according to Mahmudi (2013) :
1. Salary and Bonus 2. Welfare
3. Career Development
Punishment is a threat that aims to improve the performance of violators, maintain applicable regulations and provide lessons to customers. Punishment is intended so that employees who make mistakes or violate the rules, feel deterred and will not repeat their mistakes in the future. According to Mangkunegara (2013), in certain conflict conditions, the use of punishment can be more effective for employees to change their behavior, taking into account things such as time, intensity, clarification, and impersonality. There are several indicators of punishment according to Fahmi (2016):
1. Light Punishment 2. Moderate Punishment 3. Severe Punishment
Internal communication performs 4 main functions in a company or organization including control, motivation, emotional statements, and information. The workgroup is the main source of social interaction within the company. The internal communication function bridges the flow of company decision making. The direction of corporate communication (internal communication) flows vertically and laterally. Communication Mode Indicators in vertical and lateral communication according to Stephen Robbins (2015)are:
Reward (X1)
Punishment (X2)
Internal Communication (X3)
Employee Performance
(Y) H1
H2
H3
H4
Work Enviroment (X4)
H5
72
1. Oral Communication 2. Written Communication 3. Nonverbal Communication
Work environment has a positive influence if it creates a conducive environment. On the other hand, it will be negative if the working environment is not conducive, then the short-term impact will have an impact on the performance of employees in carrying out work activities and have a long-term impact on the company.
According to Aspiyah & Martono (2016), the work environment can build binding working relationships between other individuals in the work environment. The following are indicators of the work environment :
1. Physical work environment 2. Non-physical work environment 3. Company building
4. Work equipment 5. Work facilities
6. Work transportation facilities 7. Co-worker relations
8. Industrial relations
Employee Performance explanation according to Anwar Prabu Mangkunegara (2014) describes performance as a work performance with a good quality or quantity achieved by an employee in a certain period that proved their responsibilities given by the leadership. The indicators that affect employee performance according to Wibowo (2009) are:
1. Job performance (accuracy, throughness, skill) 2. Quantity of work (contribution, loyalty)
3. Leadership (suggestion, direction, and improvement) 4. Discipline (attendance, punishment, punctuality)
2. Methodology
This study used a quantitative approach. The total population of all employees is 50 employees of PT.
Aira Mitra Media. Data collection using a questionnaire through Google Form. The data was processed using the Statical Package for Social Science (SPSS) 19.0 application. The data analysis technique was multiple linear regression. This research used Partial Significant Test (T-Test) and Simultaneous Significant Test (F-Test).
The researcher used partial test (t test) and simultaneous test (F test) to test the hypothesis in this study.
The formulation of the hypothesis for the partial test (t statistical test) in this study is as follows:
1. Ho = independent variable (X) partially has no significant effect on the dependent variable (Y).
2. Ha = the independent variable (X) partially has a significant effect on the dependent variable (Y).
The formulation of the hypothesis for the simultaneous test (F statistic test) in this study is as follows:
1. Ho = independent variable (X) simultaneously has no significant effect on the dependent variable (Y).
2. Ha = independent variable (X) simultaneously has a significant effect on the dependent variable (Y).
The basis for decision making with a significance level of 0.05 is as follows:
1. If the value of sig. > 0.05 then the decision Ho is accepted and Ha is rejected, means that the independent variable (X) simultaneously has no significant effect on the variable (Y).
2. If the value of sig. < 0.05 then the decision Ho is rejected and Ha is accepted, means that the independent variable (X) simultaneously has a significant effect on the dependent variable (Y).
3. Result and Discussion
3.1. ResultBased on the result of respondents’s answers in the questionnaires, the respondent's data can be described by gender, the majority are male, 29 people or 58%. While the rest are women with a total of 21 people or 42%.
Total data of 50 respondents with 100% percentage.
The results of the answers were based on age, the majority of respondents aged less than 30 years (<30 years) amounted to 38 respondents with 76% percentage. 11 respondents aged 31-40 years with 22%
percentatage. 1 person aged 41-50 years 2% percentage. The majority of respondents in this study were less than 30 years old (<30 years) with 50 respondents in total, 100% percentage.
The majority results of the answers based on the latest education is Bachelor 1, with 29 respondents in 58%, Bachelor 2 are 12 respondents with 24% percentage, and the last education is senior high scholl with 9 respondents in 18% percentage. the total number of respondents is 50 people in 100% percentage. So it can be
73
concluded that the majority of respondents (employees) of PT. AIRA Mitra Media last education are bachelor 1 and bachelor 2.
3.2 Multiple Linear Regression Equation
The study of hypothesis was validated using multiple linear regression. The distribution of questionnaires provided the raw data for this research. The following table is an overview of how data was processed in this study using the SPSS 19.0 application:
Table 1. Multiple Linear Regression Equation
Model Unstandardized Coefficients Standardized Coefficients
B Std. Error Beta
(constant) 8,386 4,913
Reward ,010 ,102 ,011
Punishment -,270 ,199 -,185
Internal Communication ,529 ,205 ,430
Work Enviroment ,485 ,160 ,435
Source: SPSS 19.0 Output Data
The regression equation model that can be written from these results in the form of a standard form regression equation is as follows:
Y = 8,636 + 0,010X1 + (-0,270)X2 + 0,529X3 + 0,485X4
From the multiple linear regression equation above, the following values are obtained:
1. Constant : The constant Y value is 8.636 gives the results of data, if the variables of reward, punishment, internal communication, and work environment are equal to zero (0) then the value of Employee Performance is 8.636.
2. Reward coefficient value (X1) : The reward coefficient value (X1) shows a positive value: 0.110, which means that every change in X1 will affect the increase of employee performance by 0.110 assuming other variables remain the same.
3. Punishment coefficient value (X2) : The value of the punishment coefficient (X2) shows the result: - 0.270, so the relationship between punishment and employee performance showed a negative relationship, which means that every change in X2 will affect the decrease of employee performance by -0.270 assuming other variables remain the same.
4. Internal Communication coefficient value (X3) : The value of the coefficient of internal communication (X3) shows a positive value of 0.529, which means that every change in X3 will affect the increase of employee performance by 0.529 assuming other variables remain the same.
5. Work Enviroment coefficient value (X4) : The work environment coefficient (X4) shows a positive value of 0.485, which means that every change in X4 will affect the increase of employee performance by 0.485 with the assumption that other variables remain the same.
3.1.1 Determination Test
Ghozali (2013) states that the coefficient of determination (R2) aims to measure how far the model is able to explain the variant of the dependent or dependent variable. A small R2 value indicates that the ability of the independent variable in explaining the dependent variable variance is very limited.
Table 2. Determination Test Model Summaryb
Model R R Square
Adjusted R Square
Std. Error of the Estimate
1 ,681a ,463 ,416 3,630
Source: SPSS 19.0 output data
The value of coefficient of determination (R Square) resulted by SPSS 19.0 is useful for calculating the effect of the independent variables (X1, X2, X3, X4) on the dependent variable (Y) with value: 0.463. While the remaining value: 0.416 is influenced by other variables that are not included in this study. The correlation
74
coefficient (R2) in this study showed value: 0.681. So it stated a positive correlation between the independent variables (X1, X2, X3, X4) on the dependent variable (Y).
3.1.2 T-test (Partial)
The T test shows how far the influence of one explanatory or independent variable individually in explaining the variation of variables and is used to determine whether or not there is an influence of each individual variable on the dependent variable tested at a significance level of 0.05 (Ghozali, 2009)
Table 3. Partial Test
Model Unstandardized Coefficients Standardized
Coefficients t Sig
B Std. Error Beta
(constant) 8,636 4,913 1,758 ,086
Reward ,010 ,102 ,011 2,865 ,005
Punishment -,270 ,199 -,185 -1,354 ,182
Internal Communication ,529 ,205 ,430 2,582 ,013
Work Enviroment ,485 ,160 ,435 3,028 ,004
a. Dependent Variable :Employee Perfomance Source: SPSS output data
The partial significant test (T test) first determines the value of the t table in this study, it is determined Df = N-2 so that in this study found Df = 50 – 2 = 48 with a significant 0.05 so that it can be determined t table of 0.2787.
1. In the reward variable (X1) t count shows the number 2.865. Where t count > t table or 2.865 > 0.2787.
Significantly 0.005 is below 0.05. This shows that reward (X1) has a significant effect on employee performance
2. In the punishment variable (X2) t count shows the number -1.354. Where t count > t table or -1.354 <
0.2787. Significantly 0.182 is above 0.005. This shows that punishment (X2) has no significant effect on employee performance
3. In the internal communication variable (X3) t count shows the number 2.582. Where t count > t table or 2.585 < 0.2787. Significantly 0.013 is above 0.05. This shows that internal communication (X3) has no significant effect on employee performance
4. In the work environment variable (X4) t count shows the number 2.875. Where t count > t table or 2.875 > 0.2787. Significantly 0.005 is below 0.05. This shows that the work environment (X4) has a significant effect on employee performance
3.1.3 F-Test (Simultaneous)
According to Ghozali (2012) F-test basically shows whether all independent variables included in the model have a simultaneous effect on the dependent variable. So that this hypothesis uses the F-test with decision if the probability value is less than 0.05, then the HO is rejected in other words Ha is accepted, which means that all the independent variables simultaneously and significantly affect the dependent variable. Due to the comparison between the value of Fcount with Ftable. If the value of Fcount > Ftable, then HO is rejected and Ha is accepted.
Table 4. F-Test (Simultaneous) Anovab
Model Sum of
Squares df Mean
Square F Sig.
Regression 511,781 4 127,945 9,709 ,000a
Residual 593,039 45 13,179
Total 1104,82 49
Source: SPSS output data
The Simultaneous Significant Test (F test) determined the f table with a significance level of 0.05. In this study, value of F table is 2.57. The F test in this study has F count: 9.709 where f count is more than f table (9.709 > 2.57) with a significance: 0.000. so it can be concluded that the variables reward (X1), punishment
75
(X2), internal communication (X3), work environment (X4) have a simultaneous effect on the employee performance variable (Y).
4. Conclusion
1. The reward variable has a positive and significant effect on employee performance with a value of t count > t table or 2.865 > 0.2787. With significance level: 0.005. Reward variable has a simultaneous effect with f value: 9.709 where f count is more than f table (9.709 > 2.57) with a significance of 0.000.
2. The punishment variable has a negative and insignificant effect on employee performance with t count
> t table or -1.354 < 0.2787. Significantly 0.182 is above 0.005. However, the Punishment variable has a simultaneous effect with the calculated f value of 9.709 where f arithmetic is greater than f table (9.709 > 2.57) with a significance of 0.000.
3. The Internal Communication variable has no significant effect on employee performance with t count >
t table or 2.585 < 0.2787. Significantly 0.013 is above 0.005. However, the Internal Communication variable has a simultaneous influence with the calculated f value of 9.709 where f arithmetic is greater than f table (9.709 > 2.57) with a significance of 0.000.
4. The Work Environment variable has a positive and significant effect on employee performance, the count shows the number 2.875. Where t count > t table or 2.875 > 0.2787. Significantly 0.005 is below 0.05. The Work Environment variable has a simultaneous effect with a calculated f value of 9.709 where f arithmetic is greater than f table (9.709 > 2.57) with a significance of 0.000.
References
Anwar Prabu Mangkunegara, A. . (2016). Manajemen sumber daya manusia perusahaan (Cet. 5., Cet.
13).
Aspiyah, M., & Martono, S. (2016). Pengaruh Disiplin Kerja, Lingkungan Kerja dan Pelatihan pada Produktivitas Kerja. Management Analysis, 5(4). https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.15294/maj.v5i4.12712
Fahmi, I. (2016). Pengantar Manajemen Keuangan. Alfabeta.
Ghozali. (2012). Aplikasi Analisis Multivariate dengan Program IBM SPSS 23 (Edisi 8) (Edisi 8). Badan Penerbit Universitas Diponegoro.
Ghozali, I. (2011). Aplikasi Analisis Multivariate Dengan Program SPSS (6th ed.). Universitas Diponegoro.
Ghozali, I. (2013). Aplikasi Analisis Multivarate Dengan Program IBM SPSS 19 (Edisi 5). Badan Penerbit Universitas Diponegoro.
Handoko, T. H. (2012). Manajemen Personalia Dan Sumber Daya Manusia Edisi 2 (2nd ed.). BPFE- Yogyakarta. http://ucs.sulsellib.net//index.php?p=show_detail&id=36860%0A
Mahmudi. (2013). Manajemen kinerja sektor publik. Unit penerbit dan percetakan sekolah tinggi ilmu manajemen YKPN.
Mangkunegara, A. (2016). Manajemen Sumber Daya Manusia Perusahaan. Remaja Rosdakarya.
Prof. Dr. Wibowo, S.E., M. P. (2009). Manajemen kinerja (5th ed.). Rajawali Pers.
Stephen Robbins, T. (2015). Perilaku Organisasi.
