The Influence of Work Motivation and The Work Environment on The Performance of UD. Norton
Surabaya
Yan Ardiansyah, Elok Damayanti, Joko Suyono, Helen Pramudita Departement of Management, Narotama University, Surabaya
Jl. Arief Rachman Hakim No. 51, Surabaya, Indonesia
yanardiansah17@gmail.com, Elok.damayanti@narotama.ac.id, joko.suyono@narotama.ac.id, helen.pramudita@narotama.ac.id
Abstract
Human resources are the most important thing in determining company goals. Therefore, human resources need serious attention so that they can be managed properly. Many companies do to improve performance for customer satisfaction. UD Norton Building Store which is located at Jl. Raya Dukuh kupang Surabaya, which is a building shop that sells building materials. At this time, UD Norton's building shop was well known by the public, especially for those who wanted to build or renovate a house. Motivation to work at UD Norton Surabaya is still not good, this is evidenced because in the sales and marketing processes sometimes they still do not meet the predetermined targets so that this can hinder the delivery process, therefore the company needs to provide the expected reward or bonus, to be able to. increase employee motivation. This study used a sample of 70 people from all employees of UD. NORTON and all populations were taken to be sampled. To answer the research objectives and hypotheses, the analysis used is multiple linear regression analysis. Based on the results of multiple regression analysis, the conclusion of this study is that work motivation has a partially significant effect on employee performance, the work environment has a partially significant effect on employee performance, work motivation and work environment have a significant effect simultaneously on employee performance. Thus, the three hypotheses of this study are proven to be true.
Keywords:
Employee Performance, Work Environment, Work Motivation.
1. Introduction
Human resource is essentially one of the capitals and plays an important role in the success of a company.
Good human resource management is the key to the successful achievement of company goals. To assess the quality of HR can be measured from employee performance. Employee work results are the quality and quantity of work achieved by an employee in carrying out the assigned duties and responsibilities. Work motivation is a driving force that results in an employee willing and willing to mobilize the ability to form the skills and skills of the manpower and his time to carry out various activities that are his responsibility and fulfill his obligations in order to achieve the goals and objectives of the company that have been predetermined according to Siagian (2008) Providing better external and internal work motivation can encourage employees to work more productively. In addition, providing opportunities for each employee to develop. Another factor that also affects employee performance is the work environment. (Nitisemito, 2000) the work environment is everything that is around the workers that can influence him / her in carrying out the tasks that are carried out. The work environment in a company is very important for management to pay attention to. Even though the work environment does not carry out the production process in a company, the work environment has a direct influence on the employees.
who carry out the performance process. UD Norton Building Store which is located at JL. Raya Dukuh kupang Surabaya, which is engaged in the sale of building materials. Motivation to work at UD Norton Surabaya is still not good, this is evidenced because in the sales and marketing processes sometimes they still do not meet the predetermined targets, which hinders the delivery process. In addition, the work environment at UD Norton also plays a bad role, this is evidenced by the unorganized storage of raw materials in the warehouse due to unattainable sales targets resulting in an accumulation of warehouse stock. Cleanliness and tidiness in the warehouse will provide comfort for employees.
2. Research Methods
This type of research is quantitative. the author took a sample of 70 employees of UD Norton Surabaya.
The type of sample used is saturated sample. The data collection technique in this study used questionnaires. The data in this study were processed using the Statistical Package for Social Science (SPSS) program for windows.
Data analysis in this study is to use multiple linear regression analysis. This study uses a partial test (T test) and simultaneous test (F test) to test the hypothesis in this study.
The t test is used to test the significant constants of each independent variable, whether the work motivation (X1) and work environment (X2) variables actually have a partial (separate) effect on the dependent variable, namely Employee Performance (Y). The test criteria with a significant level (a) = 0.05 are determined as follows:
1. t count <t table, then H0 is accepted 2. t count> t table, then H0 is rejected
The F test is a test to determine the effect of the independent variables, namely work motivation (X1) and work environment (X2) simultaneously on the dependent variable, namely Employee Performance (Y). The criteria for testing the hypothesis are: with a level of truth of 95% or a significant level of 5%, then:
1. If F count> F table, then H0 is rejected, it means that each independent variable jointly has a significant effect on the dependent variable.
2. If F count <F table, then H0 is accepted, it means that each independent variable together does not have a significant effect on the dependent variable.
3. Result
The data in this study, the parties who become respondents are all employees of UD Norton as many as 70 employees. implementation of the method in this study through distributing questionnaires to respondents which were distributed directly by the researcher. Based on the results of respondents' answers in distributed questionnaires, the respondent's data can be described as follows:
Table 1. Respondents' Answers to Work Motivation Variables (X1)
No. Indicator Skor (%)
Mean
1 2 3 4 5
1. Work is generally caused by
demands and needs the economy 0 0 11.4 45.7 42.9 4.31 2. Satisfaction with a salary received 0 0 11.4 48.6 40 4.29 3. Leadership develops ability and
career 0 0 11.4 42.9 45.7 4.34
4 Security guarantee and serenity
working from the leadership 0 0 11.4 65.7 22.9 4.11 5 Attention and appreciation
leadership on work performance. 0 0 17.1 91.4 31.4 4.14 6
The leadership ability to create working relationships wich are
fun
0 0 11.4 45.7 42.9 4.31 7 Leaders always pay attention
pension plan 0 0 10.7 51.4 32.9 4.17
8 Communicate inside complete a
task or job. 0 0 25.7 41.4 42.9 4.07
Average Percentage 0 0 14.4 49.1 36.5 4.20
From table above can be seen that most of the respondents are at a score of 4, namely 49.1% or tend to agree with the statement and when seen from the overall average value of 4.20 where the value is close to a score of 4, namely agree
Table 2. Respondents' Answers to Work Environment Variables (X2)
No. Indicator Skor (%)
Mean
1 2 3 4 5
1. Ligthi is convenient for work 0 0 4.3 47.1 48.6 4.44 2. The air temperature is
comfortable for activity. 0 0 10 52.9 37.1 4.27 3. Space is conducive to
working (not noisy) 0 0 4.3 54.3 41.4 4.37
4.
Spatial planing makes it easier to work a means of
safety and occupational
0 0 10 58.6 31.4 4.21
5.
The company provides a means of safety and occupational health
0 0 15.7 50 34.3 4.19
6. Working facilities help at
work. 0 0 4.3 47.1 48.6 4.44
7.
The warmth of the relationship personal between superiors
with subordinates and between colleagues
0 0 5.7 52.9 41.4 4.36
8.
The company tolerates diversity within the tribe,
religion and race.
0 0 21.4 55.7 22.9 4.01
Average percentage 0 0 9.5 52.3 38.2 4.30
From table above can be seen that most of the respondents are at a score of 4, namely 52.3% or tend to agree with the statement and when seen from the overall average value of 4.30 where the value is close to a score of 4, namely agree.
Table 3. Respondents' Answers to Employee Performance Variables (Y)
No. Indicator Skor (%)
Mean
1 2 3 4 5
1. The ability of employes
to job appropriately. 0 0 1.4 27.1 71.4 4.7 2.
Conditions in the company create good
morale
0 0 1.4 37.1 61.4 4.6
3. Ability to complete work
more than given 0 0 1.4 32.9 65.7 4.64
4.
Task that be according come work according to
expertise possessed.
0 0 4.3 45.7 50 4.46
5.
Ability to provide deep solutions a problem
0 0 1.4 44.3 54.3 4.53
6. Get a work team
which support each other 0 0 1.0 38.6 51.4 4.41 7.
Have a good ability to complete work that is charged
0 0 1.4 41.4 57.1 4.56
8. Felt in accordance
current job 0 0 7.1 37.1 55.7 4.49
9. Average percentage 0 0 3.6 38.0 58.4 4.50
From table above can be seen that most of the respondents are at a score of 5, namely 58.4% or tend to strongly agree with the statement and when seen from the overall average value of 4.50 where the value is close to a score of 5, which is strongly agree.
3.1 Validity Test
According to Azwar (1997) to determine validity, namely by correlating the total score obtained on each question item. So, if the value rcount> 0.30 means the statement is valid and if the value rcount ≤ 0.30 means the statement is not valid. The results of the validity test of the research variables are presented in the following table:
Table 4. Validity Test of Work Motivation Variables (X1) Item
Corrected item total correlation
r-table Information
x1.1 0.809 0,30 Valid
x1.2 0.847 0,30 Valid
x1.3 0.682 0,30 Valid
x1.4 0.845 0.30 Valid
x1.5 0.788 0.30 Valid
Based on the table above, it can be explained that all items or questions on the work motivation variable are valid, because the value of the corrected item total correlation (rcount) generated is more than 0.3.
Table 5. Validity Test of Work Environment Variables (X2) Item
Corrected item total correlation
(r-count)
r-table Information
x2.1 0.762 0,30 Valid
x2.2 0.666 0,30 Valid
x2.3 0.762 0,30 Valid
x2.4 0.617 0,30 Valid
x2.5 0.520 0,30 Valid
x2.6 0.672 0,30 Valid
x2.7 0.661 0,30 Valid
x2.8 0.438 0,30 Valid
Based on the table above, it can be explained that all items or questions on work environment variables are valid, because the value of the corrected item total correlation (rcount) generated is more than 0.30.
Table 6. Validity Test of Employee Performance Variables (Y) Item
Corrected item total correlation
(r-count)
r-table Information
y1 0.657 0,30 Valid
y2 0.571 0,30 Valid
y3 0.740 0,30 Valid
y4 0.497 0,30 Valid
y5 0.565 0,30 Valid
y6 0.475 0,30 Valid
y7 0.661 0,30 Valid
y8 0.517 0,30 Valid
Based on the table above, it can be explained that all items or questions on employee performance variables are valid, because the value of the corrected item total correlation (rcount) generated is more than 0.30.
3.2 Reliability Test
The reliability test in this study used Cronbach Alpha (α) with a limit of 0.60. The results of the reliability test on the research variables are:
Table 7. Reliability Test Results
No. Variable Cronbach Alpha Information
1 Work motivation (X1) 0,931 Reliabel
2 Work environment (X2) 0,873 Reliabel
3 Employee performance (Y) 0,843 Reliabel
Reliability test results on the variables of work motivation, work environment and employee performance are reliable, because the resulting Cronbach Alpha value is more than 0.60.
3.3 Multiple Linear Regression
The results of the classical assumption test show that the multiple linear regression equation used is free from multicollinearity, heteroscedasticity and is normally distributed. The regression test results can be seen in the following table:
Table 8. Multiple Linear Regression Equation Variable Regression coefficient
Constant 1.643
Work motivation (X1) 0.403
Work environment (X2) 0.281
Based on the table above, the resulting regression model is:
Y = 1,643 + 0,403 X1 + 0,281 X
The resulting regression equation is a constant (a) of 1.643 indicating the value of employee performance, if work motivation and work environment are constant or zero, then the value of employee performance is 1.643.
In other words, if work motivation and work environment are constant or zero, then the employee's performance is 1.643 (low).
The b1 value of 0.403 in the work motivation variable (X1) is positive. This means that every one-unit increase in the work motivation variable, the employee's performance will increase by 0.403 with the assumption that the work environment variable is constant.
The b2 value of 0.281 in the work environment variable (X2) is positive. This means that every one-unit increase in the work environment variable, the employee's performance will increase by 0.281 assuming that the work motivation variable is constant.
3.4 Simultaneous test (F test)
It is used to determine the relationship between the independent variable and the dependent variable, whether the work motivation and work environment variables simultaneously influence the employee performance variable. The results of the F test are as follows:
Table 8. F Test Results
Fcount Sig R2
45.317 0,000 0,575
From the results of the F test in this study, the Fcount value was 45.317 with a significance value of 0.000. With a significance level of 95% (α = 0.05), the significance level is 0.000 <0.05, on the basis of this comparison, then H0 is rejected or it means that the work motivation and work environment variables have a significant influence simultaneously on employee performance variables.
Table 9. T test results
Independent Variable tcount Sig
Work motivation (X1) 6.752 0.000
Work environment (X2) 3.812 0.000 Based on the table above, the results of the t test in this study can be explained as follows:
1. On the work motivation variable (X1) with a significance level of 95% (α = 0.05). The significance value (P Value) generated is 0.000 <0.05, on the basis of this comparison, then H0 is rejected or it means that partially the work motivation variable has a significant effect on the employee performance variable.
2. In the work environment variable (X2) with a significance level of 95% (α = 0.05). The significance value (P Value) generated is 0.000 <0.05, on the basis of comparison.
4. Conclusion and Suggestion
Based on the results of the multiple linear regression analysis above, it can be concluded that the hypothesis in this study is:
1. Work motivation has a partially significant effect on employee performance. This can be indicated by a significance value (P value) of 0.000 less than 0.05 and a regression coefficient value of 0.403. It can be concluded that the higher the work motivation, the higher the employee's performance.
2. The work environment has a partially significant effect on employee performance. This can be indicated by a significant value (P value) of 0.000 less than 0.05 and a regression coefficient value of 0.281. It can be concluded that the higher the work environment, the higher the employee's performance.
3. Work motivation and work environment have a significant effect simultaneously on employee performance.
This can be shown by the Fcount value of 45.317 with a significance figure of 0.000. It can be concluded that the higher the work motivation and work environment, the higher the employee's performance. The amount of influence of work motivation and work environment on employee performance is 57.5%.
The suggestions for this research are as follows:
1. For future researchers. Should add other independent variables to enrich the factors that can affect employee performance
2. For companies, should make policies and work evaluations related to work motivation, work environment, so that in the future it can improve the performance of employees of UD. NORTON Surabaya.
Referencess
Azwar. (1997). Metode Penelitian Jilid I. Pustaka Belajar.
Nitisemito, A. S. (2000). Manajemen Personalia. Ghalia Indonesia.
Siagian, S. (2008). Manajemen Sumber Daya Manusia. Bumi Aksara.
