The Effect of Leadership, Motivation, and Work Environment on Performance of Employees at Panai Central Camat Office

Rika Rika; Rizki Syahputra; Christine Herawati Limbong

doi:10.35877/454RI.qems957

Authors

Rika Faculty of Economics and Business, University of Labuhanbatu, Indonesia
Rizki Syahputra Faculty of Economics and Business, University of Labuhanbatu, Indonesia
Christine Herawati Limbong Faculty of Economics and Business, University of Labuhanbatu, Indonesia

DOI:

https://doi.org/10.35877/454RI.qems957

Keywords:

Leadership, Motivation, Work Environment, Work Performance.

Abstract

This study was conducted to determine the effect of Leadership (X1), Motivation (X2) and Work Environment on Work Performance (Y) at the Panai Tengah District Office. This research is a type of quantitative research. The population used in this study were all employees at the Panai Tengah District Office. The sample consists of 34 samples of respondents. Data were analyzed using multiple linear regression analysis techniques. The results of the study were obtained where (1) the Leadership Variable (X1) did not have a positive and significant/significant effect on work performance where the number of t count < t table was 1,943 > 2,042. (2) Motivation variable (X2) has no positive and significant/significant effect on work performance where the number of t count < t table is 0.881 < 2.042. (3) The Work Environment Variable (X3) does not have a positive and significant/significant effect on work performance where the number of t count < t table is 0.483 < 2.042. (4) Leadership (X1), Motivation (X2), and Work Environment (X3) variables have a positive and significant/significant effect on work performance (Y) simultaneously where the number of F count > F table is 3.230 > 2.922. The value of the R2 coefficient of 0.169 means that Leadership (X1), Motivation (X2), and Work Environment (X3) affect work performance by 16.9%, while 83.1% is influenced by others. F table is 3,230 > 2,922. The value of the R2 coefficient of 0.169 means that Leadership (X1), Motivation (X2), and Work Environment (X3) affect work performance by 16.9%, while 83.1% is influenced by others. F table is 3,230 > 2,922. The value of the R2 coefficient of 0.169 means that Leadership (X1), Motivation (X2), and Work Environment (X3) affect work performance by 16.9%, while 83.1% is influenced by others.

References

A.A. Anwar Prabu Mangkunegara. (2011). Manajemen sumber daya manusia perusahaan. Remaja Rosdakarya.
Ariyani, R., & Sugiyanto, E. (2020). PENGARUH KOMITMEN AFEKTIF, KOMITMEN BERKELANJUTAN DAN KOMITMEN NORMATIF TERHADAP KINERJA KARYAWAN (Studi Perusahaan BUMN X di Semarang). Jurnal Ilmiah Manajemen Ubhara, 2, 113. https://doi.org/10.31599/jmu.v2i2.772
Dlamini, S., & Chinje, N. B. (2019). The influence of loyalty programs on South African Youth’s repeat purchase behaviour. Journal of Business & Retail Management Research, 13(03), 235–247. https://doi.org/10.24052/jbrmr/v13is03/art-21
Faizah, N. R., Suryoko, S., & Saryadi. (2013). Pengaruh Harga,Kualitas Produk Dan Kualitas Pelayanan Terhadap Kepuasan Pelanggan Restoran O-Mamamia Steak and Ice Cream Cabang Jati Semarang. Jurusan Administrasi Bisnis, 2(2), 1–8.
Ghozali, I. (2016). Aplikasi Analisis Multivariete Dengan Program IBM SPSS 23 (Edisi 8). Cetakan ke VIII (Edisi 8). : Badan Penerbit Universitas Diponegoro.
Ikhlash, M., Rafika, M., & Hasibuan, D. K. (2020). Implementasi Work from Home terhadap Motivasi dan Kinerja Dosen di Indonesia. 8(2), 263–269.
Lorna, E. Y. M., & Martini, S. (2019). MENILAI PENGARUH CITRA MEREK, KERAGAMAN MENU, SUASANA TOKO DAN KUALITAS PRODUK TERHADAP KEPUASAN KONSUMEN DAN NIAT BELI ULANG (STUDI PADA KONSUMEN SOCIETY COFFEE HOUSE PURWOKERTO). Jurnal Ekonomi, Bisnis, Dan Akuntansi, 21.
Panjaitan, Maludin, S. (2017). Pengaruh Lingkungan Kerja Terhadap Produktivitas Kerja. Management Analysis Journal, 3(12), 1–12.
Ribeiro, N., Nguyen, T., Duarte, A. P., Torres de Oliveira, R., & Faustino, C. (2021). How managerial coaching promotes employees’ affective commitment and individual performance. International Journal of Productivity and Performance Management, 70(8), 2163–2181. https://doi.org/10.1108/IJPPM-10-2018-0373
Runtunuwu, H. J., Lapian, J., & Dotulong, L. (2015). Pengaruh Disiplin, Penempatan dan Lingkungan Kerja Terhadap Kinerja Pegawai Pada Badan Pelayanan Perizinan Terpadu Kota Manado. Jurnal EMBA: Jurnal Riset Ekonomi, Manajemen, Bisnis Dan Akuntansi, 3(3).
Siagian, T. S., & Khair, H. (2018). Pengaruh Gaya Kepemimpinan Dan Lingkungan Kerja Terhadap Kinerja Karyawan Dengan Kepuasan Kerja Sebagai Variabel Intervening. Maneggio: Jurnal Ilmiah Magister Manajemen, 1(1), 59–70.
Sinatra, G. M., Heddy, B. C., Lombardi, D., Sinatra, G. M., Heddy, B. C., & Lombardi, D. (2015). The Challenges of Defining and Measuring Student Engagement in Science The Challenges of Defining and Measuring Student Engagement in Science. 1520. https://doi.org/10.1080/00461520.2014.1002924
Sutrisno, S. (2019). Pengaruh Kepemimpinan Dan Disiplin Kerja Terhadap Kinerja Guru SMP Muhammadiyah 44 Pamulang. JENIUS (Jurnal Ilmiah Manajemen Sumber Daya Manusia), 3(1), 58–73.