Journal of Business and Management Inaba E-ISSN 2829-5331.
P-ISSN 2829-6559
VOLUME 03 NO.
June 2024
THE IMPACT OF PHYSICAL AND NON-PHYSICAL WORK
ENVIRONMENT ON EMPLOYEE PRODUCTIVITY
Recky1.
Nazaruddin2.
Widyawati3 Management.
Universitas Indonesia Membangun.
Bandung.
Indonesia Universitas Islam Indragiri.
Indragiri Hilir.
Riau.
Indonesia recky@inaba.
id, 2nazarudin3270@gmail.
com, 3widy4zh@gmail.
ABSTRACT
The objective of this study is to evaluate the influence of the physical and non-physical work environment on employee productivity within the Social and Community Welfare Section of Indragiri Hilir Regency.
The research method employed was quantitative.
The population under investigation was all civil servants and contract employees in the Social and Community Welfare Section, a total of 32 individuals, with a census sampling technique.
Data collection was conducted using questionnaires, while data analysis was performed with the use of SPSS software.
The results demonstrated that the physical and non-physical work environment exerts a positive influence on employee productivity.
Keywords: physical work environment.
non-physical work environment.
INTRODUCTION
non-physical Amid increasing work pressure.
Previous studies by the productivity of employees in the Smith .
and Johnson .
have Social Welfare Community Section of Indragiri Hilir Regency has environment can enhance employee significantly declined.
Internal data reveals that over the past year, highlights that lighting, noise, and productivity levels have dropped by room temperature play a crucial role in 15%, impacting the achievement of creating a comfortable and productive social service targets.
This decline work environment (Smith, 2.
raises questions about the factors Johnson further influencing employee productivity in physical factors such as managerial this sector.
This study aims to explore the productivity, particularly focusing on Smith's found that non- employees, and organizational culture also significantly impact productivity (Johnson, 2.
Journal of Business and Management Inaba E-ISSN 2829-5331.
P-ISSN 2829-6559
VOLUME 03 NO.
June 2024 Why Initial communication can reduce employee indicates that 70% of employees feel engagement in work.
conditions do not support productivity.
Additionally, non-physical Unlike research offers a holistic approach that such as relationships among employees not only examines the separate impacts and managerial support are frequently of physical and non-physical work Research by Green and environments but also explores the Black combined effects on productivity.
unsupportive work environment can lead to stress and fatigue, reducing approach, this study will investigate employee productivity.
how physical and non-physical work Further, similar studies by Brown environments interact to influence .
have shown that a decent work employee productivity.
This approach environment significantly increases job aims to provide new insights and satisfaction and productivity in the public sector.
Williams and Thompson improving work conditions in the .
also emphasize that non- public sector.
physical factors such as work-life LITERATUR REVIEW balance and an inclusive organizational Employee Productivity culture are vital in boosting employee .
Employee productivity measures Chandra's highlights the importance of a healthy According to Cascio .
, productivity is gauged by comparing the output .
ork result.
to finding that companies investing in the input .
esources use.
High improvements to the physical work productivity is crucial for organizations environment see up to a 20% increase to achieve their set goals.
Additionally, in productivity.
Additionally.
Ahmed employee productivity is influenced by and Ramli .
show that strong Journal of Business and Management Inaba E-ISSN 2829-5331.
P-ISSN 2829-6559
VOLUME 03 NO.
June 2024 various internal and external factors by Lan et al.
shows that that management needs to understand.
optimal room temperature correlates Physical Work Environment includes all the physical aspects in the workplace that can affect employee temperatures, whether too high or too low, can disrupt focus and reduce work efficiency.
comfort and performance.
Some key performance of employees.
Extreme The physical work environment environment are:
Research by Al Horr et al.
demonstrates that a well-designed physical work environment can boost Lighting: Adequate lighting can enhance concentration and reduce eye strain.
Al Horr et al.
found that well-designed lighting employee productivity by up to 15%.
This underscores the importance of creating a physical workspace that supports employee comfort.
can improve visual comfort and Their Non-Physical Work Environment research indicates that well-planned The non-physical lighting can reduce work errors and environment includes aspects that are improve work quality.
Noise: Excessive noise can cause Sundstrom et al.
psychological and emotional state of employees, such as:
Managerial Support:
Effective .
discovered that workplace managerial support can enhance Kim and Koo .
Employees in high- found a positive correlation between managerial support and work-life experience increased stress and balance and employee productivity.
decreased productivity.
Managers who provide emotional Temperature:
Comfortable and operational support can improve temperature can enhance employee employee loyalty and performance.
comfort and productivity.
Research Journal of Business and Management Inaba E-ISSN 2829-5331.
P-ISSN 2829-6559
VOLUME 03 NO.
June 2024 Employee Effective Communication:
Lan et al.
found that companies investing in improving the enhance collaboration and reduce workplace conflicts.
Men .
productivity gains of up to 20%.
Additionally, research by Men .
communication, especially from top indicates that non-physical factors such management, plays a crucial role in as work-life balance and an inclusive boosting employee engagement and organizational culture are crucial for work effectiveness.
Transparent and enhancing employee productivity.
The hypothesis of this research collaborative and productive work posits that there is a significant impact of the work environment, both physical Organizational Culture:
non-physical.
The organizational culture can increase environment encompasses factors such as office layout, lighting, noise levels.
Groysberg .
emphasize that a strong and amenities available in the workplace.
positive organizational culture can Meanwhile, the non-physical work be a powerful tool for driving environment includes aspects like Organizations with inclusive and supportive cultures tend to have managerial support.
This hypothesis suggests that improvements in one or both aspects of the work environment will positively influence employee The Impact of Work Environment on Productivity the physical and non-physical work Previous studies have established that both physical and non-physical In other words, enhancing environment is expected to lead to increased employee productivity.
influence employee productivity.
For Journal of Business and Management Inaba E-ISSN 2829-5331.
P-ISSN 2829-6559
VOLUME 03 NO.
June 2024
RESEARCH METHOD
physical work environmentAy (X.
on This research was conducted at the Social Welfare Community worker productivity in the Indragiri Hilir Regency's Social Welfare and Section of the Indragiri Hilir Regional Community Section.
Employee Secretariat, located at Jalan Akasia productivity (Y) is the dependent No.
1 Tembilahan.
The population variable in this study, whereas the refers to the general area of study, independent factors are the Auphysical consisting of objects or subjects with work environmentAy (X.
and Aunon- specific quantities and characteristics physical work environmentAy (X.
defined by the researcher for analysis Data said to be normally distributed and conclusion.
A sample is a subset of if they are not significantly different the population whose characteristics from, or standardised to, the standard are intended for study.
Arikunto states When a statistical test using the that it is preferable to include every Kolmogorov-Smirnov test used, the research subject if there are less than variable said to be normally distributed 100, approaching the investigation as a if the significance value is greater than population study.
Given that the or equal to 0.
Conversely, if the number of subjects in this study is less significance value is less than 0.
05, the than 100, the research is conducted on variable or data said to be not normally the entire population, which includes employees in the Social Welfare and Table 1: Normality Test Results Community Section of Indragiri Hilir, totaling 32 individuals.
To gather the necessary data and information, the author used data collection techniques including questionnaires.
Normal Parametersa,b Most Extreme Differences Mean Std.
Deviation Absolute Positive Negative Test Statistic Asymp.
Sig.
-taile.
RESULT AND DISCUSSION This study aims to evaluate the Standardized Residual It can be concluded that for the research variables obtained statistical environmentAy (X.
and the Aunon- results Asymp.
Sig .
-taile.
Auphysical Journal of Business and Management Inaba E-ISSN 2829-5331.
P-ISSN 2829-6559
VOLUME 03 NO.
June 2024 05 then all variables are declared normally distributed.
questions that have been validated.
Validity Testing is an assessment of Reliability testing is conducted on measurement tool in measuring what it questions remain consistent.
is intended to measure.
In simpler The reliability coefficient is used to terms, validity testing aims to evaluate assess the consistency of answers to the whether a set of measurement tools statements provided by respondents.
effectively measures what they are variable is considered reliable if the supposed to measure.
responses to questions are consistently The results of the validity test for the same.
all research variables can be seen in Table 3: Reliability test results Table 1 below:
Table 2: Research Validity Test Results Variable Physical (X.
Non physical (X.
Productivity (Y) Item Pearson Descri Valid Valid Valid Valid Valid Valid Valid Valid Valid Valid Valid Valid Valid Valid Valid Valid Valid Valid Based on the data analysis for each Variable Physical (X.
Non (X.
Productivity (Y) Reliable Reliable Reliable Consequently, coefficient for all research variables, indicated by a "Cronbach's Alpha" value greater than 0.
600, surpasses the r-table value of 0.
338, indicating that all instruments are deemed reliable and meet the necessary criteria.
variable, all instruments are considered To ascertain the effecti of both valid because the Pearson correlation physicali and Aunon-physical workAy coefficient values exceed the critical value of 0.
Journal of Business and Management Inaba E-ISSN 2829-5331.
P-ISSN 2829-6559
VOLUME 03 NO.
June 2024 productivity, multiple linear regression environment (X.
and physical analysis is employed.
work environment (X.
Regression analysis is also used to The physical work environment evaluate the validity of the hypotheses variable (X.
has a regression put out in this research.
In this study, coefficient of 0.
270, meaning ithat independent variables .
he physical and a 1% increase ini the physical non-physical work environmen.
are worki environmenti (X.
will used as indicators to predict the translate into a 0.
270 increase in condition of the dependent variable work productivity (Y), assuming .
ork productivit.
using multiple all other independent variables linear regression analysis.
stay constant.
The physical work This analysis method involves two environment and productivity are or more independent variables related positively correlated, as indicated to the dependent variable (Y) and by this positive coefficient.
independent variables (X1 and X.
The non-physical environment variable (X.
has a Table 4: Multiple Linear Regression Unstandardized Coefficients Model Sig.
Std.
Error (Constan.
1 X1
regression coefficient of 0.
which indicates that a 1% increase non-physical environment (X.
will result in a From the regression analysis, the productivity (Y), assuming all regression equation is obtained as other independent variables stay The positive coefficient Y= 31.
270X1 0.
suggests a positive correlation The explanation of this regression between job productivity and the equation is as follows:
non-physical work environment.
The constant 31.
383 shows that the The purpose of this test is to assess work productivity (Y) of the whether the regression model can be employees will be 31.
383 if the used to predict the dependent variable values of the non-physical work and whether each independent variable has a substantial impact on the Journal of Business and Management Inaba E-ISSN 2829-5331.
P-ISSN 2829-6559
VOLUME 03 NO.
June 2024 dependent variable (Y).
Significance One approach to conducting suggests that the association found can the F test involves comparing the be applied to the entire population.
computed F value with the critical F The analysis results show that the effect of variable X1 on Y .
hysical If the computed F value exceeds the critical F value from the table, we productivit.
has a t-value of 3.
511 and support the alternative hypothesis, a significance level of 0.
001, which is less than alpha = 0.
This means that dependent variable (Ghozali, 2.
value from a table.
variable (X.
has a significant partial effect on employee productivity (Y).
Additionally, the effect of variable .
oni-physicali a significance level of 0.
000, which is also less than alpha = 0.
This indicates that the non-physical work environment variable (X.
also has a significant partial effect on employee Thus, both physical and nonphysical work environment variables can be used as predictors for employee Table 5: F Test Results Model Regression 1 Residual Total ANOVAa Sum of Sig.
Squares 961 2 75.
With a significance level of 0.
which is less than 0.
05, and a calculated F value of 75.
413, exceeding the critical F value of 3.
33, the hypothesis can be accepted.
This indicates a significant simultaneous effect of both productivity (Y).
has a t-value of 4.
441 and Kesra Community Affairs section of Indragiri Hilir Regency.
The F-statistic test is mainly employed to assess whether all the independent variables in the model collectively impact the dependent non-physical environment variables on employee The correlation coefficient, often .
, quantifies the strength of the linear association between two variables.
Its value lies within the range of -1 to 1.
coefficient of 1 signifies a perfect positive linear relationship, while -1 indicates a perfect negative linear Journal of Business and Management Inaba E-ISSN 2829-5331.
P-ISSN 2829-6559
VOLUME 03 NO.
June 2024 A value of 0 implies no CONCLUSION In the modern work environment.
The coefficient of determination, workspace is crucial in boosting commonly represented by (RA), is used employee productivity.
The work to measure the extent to which the environment is divided into two main variation in one variable can be aspects: physical and non-physical explained by another variable.
Its value ranges from 0 to 1, with higher values interconnected and significantly impact indicating a greater proportion of variability that is explained.
Table Correlation Determination Coefficient obtained is 0.
853, signifying a highly robust association between the physical and non-physical work environment and employee productivity.
The determination (RA) is 0.
728, indicating that approximately 72.
8% of the variability in the dependent variable independent variables.
The remaining 2% are influenced by other factors not considered in this research model.
Employees working in spaces with sufficient natural light report A study by Lan et al.
found that the optimal room temperature ranges between 22-25AC.
This study lighting can boost productivity by up to The correlation coefficient .
Research by An et al.
Std.
Adjusted Error of Model Square R Square Estimate ,586 Both increase by 10% when the room temperature is within a comfortable Extreme temperatures can cause discomfort and reduce performance.
Research by Seddigh et al.
indicates that workplace noise can Reducing noise through soundproofing materials and good Journal of Business and Management Inaba E-ISSN 2829-5331.
P-ISSN 2829-6559
VOLUME 03 NO.
June 2024 spatial design can enhance productivity by up to 8%.
A study by De Been and Beijer .
demonstrated that an ergonomic Effective management support can increase productivity by up to 18%.
and well-organized workspace layout Overall, both the physical and nonphysical Employees working in well-arranged crucial roles in determining employee environments showed a 12% increase Organizations aiming to in productivity.
enhance productivity should focus on Research by Zoghbi-Manrique-de- improving the physical conditions of Lara and Ting-Ding .
suggests supportive organizational culture and organizational culture can enhance employees' sense of belonging and aspects, organizations can foster a A good organizational culture can increase productivity by up ultimately leading to 20%.
Employees who feel valued better overall performance.
and supported by their organization From this discussion, it is clear that tend to be more enthusiastic about their attention to both tangible .
and intangible .
on-physica.
aspects A study by Han et al.
found that harmonious working relationships and effective communication among well-being.
employees are crucial for creating a Implementing holistic and sustainable comfortable and collaborative work Good relationships with achieve their productivity goals more colleagues can boost productivity by Research by Cheng et al.
indicates that management support in the form of constructive feedback.
REFERENCES