Influence of the Work Environment and Work Discipline on Employees Performance
Mohammad Rifki, Elok Damayanti Narotama University, Surabaya, Indonesia [email protected], [email protected]
Abstract
Freight forwarding companies in Indonesia are growing in recent years. This is partly due to the lifestyle of the population in the current digital era. Because it has a fairly tight competition between shipping companies, it spurs entrepreneurs to continue to develop their business in order to be able to win the competition. Various challenges arise in the competition of freight forwarding companies. Therefore, a strategy is needed in order to achieve a competitive position. The results showed that the work environment, job satisfaction, and compensation simultaneously had a significant effect on employee performance. Partially only the work environment is not significant on employee performance, job satisfaction and compensation have a significant effect on employee performance.
Keywords:
Employee Performance, Work Environment, Work Discipline.
1. Introduction
In the current era of globalization, the rapid competition requires companies to develop to find new ideas in order to achieve company goals. The Companies must have advantages and competitiveness, so that they can survive among other companies a phenomenon that occurred at PT Logam Jaya B. The absence of employees will certainly hamper the productivity of PT Logam Jaya B. In addition, the atmosphere is not comfortable due to the number of rooms and the density of goods to be shipped. Therefore, it is necessary to conduct research on the performance of employees of PT Logam Jaya B. Employee contributions are very important, one of which is to work more effectively, efficiently and productively. According to Mangkunegara & Prabu (2006) performance is the result of work in quality and quantity achieved by an employee in carrying out in accordance with the responsibilities given to him.
2. Literature and Hyphotesis
2.1. Work DisciplineDiscipline comes from English discipline which comes from the word disciple which means student, follower, adherent. Discipline can mean rules that must be followed, areas of knowledge studied, and teachings.
Disciplinary means people who enforce the rules. From this description, it can be interpreted that work discipline is generally accepted norms, ethics and habits as well as procedures for behaving in an atmosphere and in relation to the company.
Disciplinary action is an action taken against (anyone, indiscriminately) violators of the rules. Sutrisno in (Sahlan, 2015) suggests discipline is a form of obedience to the rules, both written and unwritten that have been set. Work discipline is basically always expected to characterize every human resource in the organization, because with organizational discipline it will run well and can achieve goals well too.
2.2. Factors Affecting Work Discipline
According to Moekijat (2002) discipline can arise due to two things, namely:
1. Self-imposed discipline,
Discipline that comes from a person is essentially a spontaneous response to a capable leader and is a kind of encouragement in himself or is called motivation.
2. Command disciplines
Ordered discipline. That is, discipline that comes from a recognized power and uses "scary" ways to get implementation through the rules or culture that exists within the organization.
2.3. Work Environment
According to Annisa et al. (2015) The work environment is where employees do their daily work. A conducive work environment will provide a sense of security and allow employees to work optimally. In addition, the work environment can also affect employee emotions, for example if the employee likes the work environment
in which he works, the employee will feel at home in his work place to carry out activities, so that work time is used effectively and optimistically the employee's work performance is also high. The work environment includes working relationships that are formed between fellow employees and working relationships between subordinates and superiors as well as the physical environment where employees work in (Sudaryo et al., 2018).
According to Sedarmayanti (2009) the definition of the work environment is the overall tools and materials encountered, the environment in which a person works, work methods and work arrangements (both as individuals and as groups).
2.4. Types of Work Environment
According to Sedarmayanti (2009) sbroadly speaking, the work environment is divided into two, namely:
1. Physical Work Environment 2. Non-physical work environment
The physical work environment according to Sedarmayanti (2009) is everything that is around the workplace and which can affect employees either directly or indirectly. The factors that affect the physical work environment are
3. Temperature
Temperature is a variable in which there is a large individual difference. thus, in order to maximize productivity, it is essential that employees work in an environment where the temperature is set in such a way that it falls within the acceptable working range for each individual.
4. Noise
Evidence from a study of sound shows that constant or predictable noises generally do not cause a decrease in work performance. On the other hand, the effects of unpredictable noises have a negative influence and disrupt employee concentration.
5. Explanation
Working in a dark, dimly lit room will cause eye strain. The right light intensity can help employees in facilitating their work activities. The exact level of light intensity also depends on the age of the employee. Attainment of job performance at higher levels of illumination is greater for older employees than for younger employees.
6. Air Quality
It is a fact that cannot be ignored that breathing polluted air will have a detrimental effect on personal health. Polluted air can harm the personal health of employees. Polluted air in the work environment can cause headaches, sore eyes, fatigue, irritability and depression.
2.5. Employee Performance
According to Ainsworth (2002) that performance means an end result. Performance comes from the word job performance or actual performance which means work performance or actual achievement achieved by someone. Understanding employee performance is the results obtained by an organization both profit oriented and non-profit oriented which are produced over a period of time (Fattah & Hussein, 2017). According to Bernardin et al (1993) Performance is a record of the results obtained from certain functions over a certain period of time.
Performance is the endpoint of specific people, resources, and environments brought together with the intent to produce certain things. This opinion emphasizes that the performance of an employee is the result or output of a job assigned to an organization/institution. The term performance can also be used to indicate the output of the company/organization, tools, management functions (production, marketing, finance) or the output of an employee.
2.6. Factors Affecting Performance
2.7. Research Conceptual Framework
Figure 1. Research Conceptual Framework H1 = Work environment partially significant effect on employee performance
H2 = Work discipline partially significant effect on employee performance
H3 = Work environment and work discipline have a significant effect simultaneously on employee performance.
3. Methodology
In this approach a quantitative approach, the variables will be observed and based on calculations to be able to show the relationship between variables. The unit of analysis in this study is the employees of PT Logam Jaya B. The data collection technique is using a questionnaire. Questionnaire technique is a data collection technique which is done by giving a set of questions or written statements to the respondent to answer. The scale technique in this study is using the Likert scale.
The populations in this study were all employees of PT. Logam Jaya B, totaling 30 employees. The sample used in this study is to take the entire population of 30 employees as a sample, so it is called a population study.
Instrument testing was conducted at PT. Logam Jaya B. Validity test uses correlation product moment, while reliability test uses Spearman Brown which is processed using SPSS 18.0 for Windows.
Furthermore, the classical assumption test includes multicollinearity test and heteroscedasticity test.
While the hypothesis test in this study uses multiple regression analysis and the coefficient of determination as well as hypothesis test t and f.
4. Result and Discussion
1. Validity test
Validity test is a measure that shows the levels of validity and validity of an instrument. An instrument is said to be valid if it can be used to measure what it is supposed to measure. Research results are valid if there are similarities between the data collected and the data that actually happened to the object under study
partially simultaneously
Work environent
(X1)
Work discipline (X2)
Employee performance
(Y)
Table 1. Validity test
Item r Hitung r Table Information
X1.1 0.787 0.361 Valid
X1.2 0.892 0. 361 Valid
X1.3 0.873 0. 361 Valid
X1.4 0.864 0. 361 Valid
X1.5 0.797 0. 361 Valid
X2.1 0.901 0. 361 Valid
X2.2 0.815 0. 361 Valid
X2.3 0.856 0. 361 Valid
X2.4 0.926 0. 361 Valid
Y1.1 0.931 0. 361 Valid
Y1.2 0.885 0. 361 Valid
Y1.3 0.968 0. 361 Valid
Source: Primary Data Processed
From Table 1 above, it can be seen that the value of sig. r question items are smaller than 0.05 (α = 0.05) and r count > r table which means that each variable item is valid, so it can be concluded that these items can be used to measure research variables.
2. Reliability test
The reliability testing technique is to use the Spearman Brown reliability coefficient value. The decision- making criteria is if the Guttman Split-Half Coefficient value is more than 0.80.
The results of the variable reliability test are presented in table 2:
Tabel 2. Reliability test
No. Variable Reliability Coefficient Information
1 Work Environment (X1) 0.810 Reliabel
2 Work Discipline (X2) 0.923 Reliabel
3 Employee Performance (Y) 0.882 Reliabel
From Table 2 it is known that the value of the Guttman Split-Half Coefficient for all variables is greater than 0.80. From what has been determined previously, all variables used for research are reliable.
3. Normality Test
This test is conducted to determine whether the residual value is normally spread or not. The test procedure was carried out using the Kolmogorov-Smirnov test, with the following conditions:
The hypothesis used is H0: normal spread residuals and H1: not normally distributed residuals. If the value is sig. (p-value)> 0.05 then H0 is accepted, which means that normality is met. The results of the normality test in this study can be seen in
Tabel 3. Normality Test One-Sample Kolmogorov-Smirnov Test e table:
Unstandardized Residual
N 30
Normal Parametersa,b Mean .0000000
Std. Deviation .75522806 Most Extreme Differences Absolute .211
Positive .211
Negative -.096
Kolmogorov-Smirnov Z 1.153
Asymp. Sig. (2-tailed) .140
a. Test distribution is Normal.
b. Calculated from data.
From the calculation results obtained sig. value of 0.140 (can be seen in Table 1) or greater than 0.05. Then the provisions of H0 are accepted, namely that the assumption of normality is met.
Figure 2. P-P Plot
Based on the P-P Plot test, it was found that the data points had spread following the diagonal line, so it was said that the residuals had spread in a normal distribution.
4. Multicollinearity Test
The multicollinearity test is conducted to determine that there is no very strong relationship or no perfect linear relationship or it can also be said that the among independent variables are not related. The way to test is to compare the tolerance value that is obtained from multiple regression calculations. If the tolerance value is> 0.10, so that multicollinearity does not occur.
Table 4. Multicollinearity Test Coefficientsa Model
Unstandardized Coefficients
Standardized Coefficients
t Sig.
Collinearity Statistics
B Std. Error Beta Tolerance VIF
1 (Constant) .373 1.308 .285 .778
work environment (X1)
.304 .140 .455 2.177 .038 .191 5.237
work discipline (X2) .356 .166 .448 2.145 .041 .191 5.237
a. Dependent Variable: EmployeePerformance (Y)
Table 5. Multicollinearity Test Variabel bebas Collinearity Statistics
Tolerance VIF
X1 0.191 5.237
X2 0.191 5.237
Based on Table 5, the following are the test results of each independent variable:
1) Tolerance for Work Environment is 0.191 2) Tolerance for Work Discipline is 0.191
The test results show that the overall tolerance value is > 0.10 so it can be concluded that there is no multicollinearity between the independent variables. Multicollinearity test can also be done by comparing the VIF (Variance Inflation Factor) value with the number 10. If the VIF value is < 10, then there is no multicollinearity.
The following are the test results of each independent variable:
1) 5.1 VIF for Work Environment is 5.237 2) 5.2 VIF for Work Discipline is 5.237
From the test results, it can be concluded that there is no multicollinearity between the independent variables. Thus the assumption test of the absence of multicollinearity can be fulfilled.
5. Heteroscedasticity test
The heteroscedasticity test aims to test whether in the regression model there is an inequality of variance and residual from one observation to another. The Glejser test is used by regressing between the independent variables and their residual observational value. If the significance probability is above the 5% confidence level or the significance is more than 0.05 then the regression model does not contain heteroscedasticity.
Heteroscedasticity test in this study is detected by using the Glejser test that is strengthened with a scatterplot obtained as follows:
6. Glesjer test
Table 6 Heteroscedasticity test
Variable Sig. criteria
work environment (X1) 0.922 P > 0.05 work discipline (X2) 0.990 P > 0.05
The results of the heteroscedasticity test show that the significance value of each variable is greater than 0.05.
Figure 3. Heteroskedasticities test
From the test results, it was found that the scatterplot display diagram spreads and does not form a certain pattern, so there is no heteroscedasticity. So it can be concluded that the residuals have homogeneous variance (constant) or in other words there are no symptoms of heteroscedasticity.
1) Regression Equations
This regression analysis is used to calculate the amount of influence among the independent variables, namely leadership (X1) and work motivation (X2) to the dependent variable, namely employee performance (Y).
The regression equation is used to find out the form of the relationship between the independent variable and the dependent variable. By using the help of SPSS for Windowsver 18.00, the regression model is obtained as in the table:
Table 7. Regression Results Equations Coefficientsa
Model
Unstandardized Coefficients
Standardized Coefficients
t Sig.
B Std. Error Beta
1 (Constant) .373 1.308 .285 .778
work environment (X1) work discipline (X2)
.304 .140 .455 2.177 .038
.356 .166 .448 2.145 .041
a. Dependent Variable: Employee Performance (Y)
Based on Table 4.8.1 the regression equation is obtained as follows:
Y = 0.373 + 0.303 X1 + 0.356 X2
From the above equation can be interpreted as follows:
a. The constant of 0.373 means that if the work environment and work discipline are constant, the employee's performance is 0.373.
b. b1 = 0.303, meaning that Employee Performance will increase by 0.303 units for each additional unit of X1 (Work Environment). So, if the work environment has increased by 1 unit, then Employee Performance will increase by 0.303 units assuming the other variables are considered constant.
c. b2 = 0.356, Employee Performance will increase by 0.356 units for every additional unit of X2 (Work Discipline), So if work discipline increases by 1 unit, then Employee Performance will increase by 0.356 units assuming the other variables are held constant.
2) Koefisien Determinasi (R2)
To determine the contribution of the independent variables (Work Environment (X1) and Work Discipline (X2)) to the dependent variable of Employee Performance (Y), the value of R2 is used. The value of R2 is as in
Table 8. Correlation and Determination Coefficients Model Summary
Model
R R Square
Adjusted R Square
Std. Error of the Estimate
dimension 1 .880a .775 .758 .783
The coefficient of determination is used to calculate the magnitude of the influence or contribution of the independent variable to the dependent variable. The result of adjusted R (coefficient of determination) is 0.772.
This means that 75.8% of Employee Performance Variables will be influenced by the independent variables, namely the Work Environment (X1) and Work Discipline (X2). While the remaining 24.2% of Employee Performance variables will be influenced by other variables that are not discussed in this study.
In addition to the coefficient of determination, there is also a correlation coefficient that shows the magnitude of the relationship between the independent variables, namely the Work Environment and Work Discipline with Employee Performance Variables, the R value (correlation coefficient) is 0.880, this correlation value indicates that the relationship between the independent variables, namely the Work Environment (X1) and Work Discipline (X2) with Employee Performance (Y) is included in the strong category because it is in the range of 0.6 – 0.8.
7. Simultaneous Test
T test is used to determine whether each independent variable partially has a significant effect on the dependent variable. It can also be said if t count > t table or t count < t table then the result is significant and means H0 is rejected and H1 is accepted. Meanwhile, if t count < t table or t count > t table then the result is not significant and means H0 is accepted and H1 is rejected. The results of the t-test can be seen in Table 9
Table 9 T testing
Dependent Variable Independent Variable t count t Table Information
Employee Performance (Y) X1 2.117 2.051 Significant
X2 2.145 2.051 Significant
Based on Table 9 the following results are obtained:
1) First Hypothesis Testing
The work environment has a significant partial effect on employee performance.
The t test between X1 (Work Environment) and Y (Employee Performance) shows t count = 2.117.
While the t table is 2.051. Because t count > t table, which is 2.117 > 2.051 or sig t value (0.038) <α = 0.05, the effect of X1 (Work Environment) on Employee Performance is significant. This means that H0 is rejected and Ha is accepted so that it can be concluded that employee performance can be significantly influenced by the work environment or by improving the work environment, employee performance will increase significantly.
2) Second Hypothesis Testing
Work discipline partially significant effect on employee performance.
The t-test between X2 (Work Discipline) and Y (Employee Performance) shows t count = 2.145. While the t table is 2.051. Because t count > t table which is 2.145 > 2.051 or sig t value (0.041) <α = 0.05, the effect of X2 (Work Discipline) on Employee Performance is significant. This means that H0 is rejected and Ha is accepted so that it can be concluded that employee performance can be significantly affected by work discipline or by increasing work discipline, employee performance will increase
Based on Table 10 the calculated F value is 46,461. While the F table is equal to 3.34. Because F count >
F table, which is 46,461 > 3.34 or sig F value (0.000) <α = 0.05, the regression analysis model is significant. This means that this means that H0 is rejected and H1 is accepted so that it can be concluded that the work environment and work discipline have a significant effect on employee performance simultaneously.
5. Discussion
1. Based on the results obtained that the work environment (X1) Work discipline (X2) has a significant influence simultaneously on employee performance (Y). So that the Work Environment (X1) Work Discipline (X2) can be opened by increasing it will increase employee performance.
2. Based on the partial t-test results, it was found that the work environment (X1) had a partially significant effect on employee performance.
3. Based on the results of the partial t test, it was found that work discipline (X2) gave a partially significant effect on employee performance.
4. Based on the results of the t test, it is found that the work environment variable has the largest t value and beta coefficient. So that the work environment variable has the strongest influence compared to other variables, the work environment variable has a dominant influence on employee performance.
6. Conclusion
1. It is expected that the company can create a conducive work environment, because the work environment variable has a dominant influence in influencing employee performance, including by creating a comfortable workplace for employees so that employee performance will increase.
2. Given that the independent variables in this study are very important in influencing employee performance, it is hoped that the results of this study can be used as a reference for further researchers to develop this research by considering other variables which are other variables outside the variables that have been included in this study.
Referencess
Ainsworth, S. M. (2002). Managing Performance, Managing People. Pearson Education Australia.
Annisa, Siti, Kadir, Hainim, & Mardiana. (2015). Analisis Willingness To Pay (WTP) Sampah Rumah Tangga (Studi Kasus Perumnas Kelurahan Simpang Baru Panam Pekanbaru). Univeritas Riau.
Bernardin, H. J., A., J. E., & Russell. (1993). Human Resource Management. McGraw Hill Inc.
Fattah, & Hussein. (2017). Kepuasan Kerja & Kinerja Pegawai. Elmatera.
Mangkunegara, & Prabu, A. (2006). Manjemen Sumber Daya Manusia Perusahaan. Remaja Rosdakarya.
Moekijat. (2002). Dasar-dasar Motivasi. Pionis Jaya.
Sahlan, N. I. et al. (2015). “Fakultas Ekonomi dan Bisnis, Jurusan Manajemen Universitas Sam Ratulangi Manado.” 3(1), 52–62.
Sedarmayanti. (2009). Sumber Daya Manusia dan Produktivitas Kerja. Mandar Maju.
Sudaryo, Y., Aribowo, A., & Sofiati, N. (2018). “Manajemen Sumber Daya Manusia".
