:: IJEBD::
(International Journal of Entrepreneurship and Business Developmen.
Volume 07 Number 06 November 2024
ISSN: 2597-4785 (ONLINE)
ISSN: 2597-4750 (PRINTED)
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution- ShareAlike 4.
0 International License.
The Influence of Work Environment and Work Facilities on Employee Performance with Work Motivation as An Intervening Variable Anna.
Agus Sukoco Faculty of Economics and Business.
Narotama University.
Surabaya Corresponding Author*: annaamsya8182@gmail.
ABSTRACT
Purpose: To analyze the effect of work environment, work facilities on employee performance with work motivation as an intervening variable.
Design/methodology/approach: This research approach uses quantitative research.
Saturated Sampling method, the population in this study is the technical team of the Health Sector of the Surabaya City Investment and OneStop Integrated Service Office with a total of 40 people, the measurement scale in this study uses a Likert scale.
The data analysis used in this study used static methods with SEM PLS modeling.
Findings: These findings reveal that work facilities have had no significant influence on employee performance, while the work environment has a significant influence on performance.
However, work facilities have a significant influence on employee performance through work motivation as an intervening variable.
Originality/value: This research contributes to understanding the factors that influence employee performance.
The results of this study confirm that although work facilities do not have a direct impact on performance.
Furthermore, work motivation plays an important role in improving employee performance as a significant intervening variable between work environment and work facilities on performance.
Paper type: Research paper Keyword: Work Environment.
Work Facilities.
Work Motivation.
Employee Performance.
Received: July 13th
Revised: October 18th
Published: November 30th
INTRODUCTION
Achieving the goals of government organizations that are effective and effective requires employees who are professional, responsible, honest, fair and work effectively.
Employees with high performance effectiveness can support the achievement of organizational goals.
According to Hasibuan .
explains that Aueffectiveness is a measurement in the sense of achieving goals or objectives that have been previously determinedAy.
According to Pasolong .
the achievement of organizational goals cannot be separated from the resources owned by the organization which are driven or run by employees who play an active role as actors in efforts to achieve these organizational goals.
Based on the vision of the Dinas Penanaman Modal dan Pelayanan Terpadu Satu Pintu (DPMPTSP) that has been formulated, there are three main points contained in the vision, namely related to increasing investment, excellent licensing services and the use of information technology.
This indicates that increased investment is strongly supported by excellent licensing services that will be provided to industries in applying for investment licenses in the Surabaya City area.
The excellent licensing service is related to the speed of the service process, easy requirements and also clear procedures given to the community.
In addition, to facilitate the service process, information technology is also used such as SSW (Surabaya Single Windo.
and in the future SPIPISE The Influence of Work Environment and Work Facilities on Employee Performance with Work Motivation as An Intervening Variable Anna.
Agus Sukoco Page iC1124 :: IJEBD::
(International Journal of Entrepreneurship and Business Developmen.
Volume 07 Number 06 November 2024
ISSN: 2597-4785 (ONLINE)
ISSN: 2597-4750 (PRINTED)
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution- ShareAlike 4.
0 International License.
(Electronic Investment Information and Licensing Service Syste.
will be used to support the increase in the number of investments in Surabaya City (DPMPTSP, 2.
Based on the results of initial observations, it can be seen that the performance of the Health Sector Technical Team at the One-Stop Investment and Integrated Services Office is not optimal.
This can be seen from the inaccurate time for issuing licenses as stipulated.
This can be seen by not matching the time of issuance of the licensing script with that promised in accordance with the procedure.
This shows that licensing sector employees have not been optimal in utilizing the work time that has been determined.
For example, in the health sector, the health sector is the sector with the most delays in the licensing completion process.
This is an indication of the lack of performance of the Health Sector Licensing Technical Team, namely not achieving the quantity of work seen with the number of completed files not in accordance with incoming files and the average duration of completion is 9 days.
Some factors that influence employee performance are work facilities, work environment and work The work environment is all the tools and materials faced by the environment around which a person works, work methods and work arrangements both individually or in groups (Sedarmayanti, 2.
One of the important roles that must be emphasized by the company in order to achieve its goals is to create a good work environment both physically and non-physically.
Research conducted by (Yantika et al.
, 2.
, shows that the work environment influences employee Meanwhile, research (Sabilalo et al.
, 2.
proves that the work environment has a negative and insignificant effect on employee performance.
Research conducted by (Jufrizen, 2.
shows that the effect of work facilities on employee performance is positive and significant.
This is in line with research conducted by (Monde et al.
, 2.
showing that work facilities affect employee performance.
Meanwhile, research (Irawan, 2.
proves that office facilities have no effect on employee performance.
Research conducted by (Winarsih & Hidayat, 2.
states that the results of analysis and comparison of several relevant theories found that motivation has a positive and significant effect on employee performance.
This is in line with research conducted by (Hanafi & Yohana, 2.
showing that work motivation affects employee performance.
Meanwhile, research (Hidayat, 2.
proves that motivation has no effect on employee Based on the description of empirical research above, there are several results of research gaps on factors that affect employee performance, so the authors want to review and analyze research with the title AuThe influence of work environment and work facilities on employee performance with work motivation as an intervening variableAy.
Literature Review Work Environment The work environment is something that must be considered in organizational companies to improve employee performance.
According to Sedarmayanti .
the work environment is all the tools and materials faced by the surrounding environment where a person works, work methods and work arrangements both individually or in groups.
Work Facilities Moenir .
states that facilities are all types of equipment, work equipment and services that function as tools to assist employees in carrying out work, and are also social in the context of the interests of people who are in contact with the work organization or everything that is used, used, occupied, and enjoyed by users.
Work Motivation Work motivation is one of the factors that determine employees in a company.
Even if the company or organization has complete facilities, this does not guarantee that employees will work optimally if there is little or no motivation.
According to Edison .
motivation is related to what energizes, what directs or channels behavior to be maintained or sustained.
Employee Performance Employee performance is the result of the achievement of a job in fulfilling its purpose.
According to (Mangkunegara, 2.
performance is the result of work in quantity and quality achieved by an employee in carrying out his duties in accordance with the responsibilities given.
Conceptual Framework The Influence of Work Environment and Work Facilities on Employee Performance with Work Motivation as An Intervening Variable Anna.
Agus Sukoco Page iC1125 :: IJEBD::
ISSN: 2597-4785 (ONLINE)
ISSN: 2597-4750 (PRINTED)
(International Journal of Entrepreneurship and Business Developmen.
Volume 07 Number 06 November 2024 This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution- ShareAlike 4.
0 International License.
Work environment .
Employee Performance .
Work motivation .
H6 H7 Work facilities .
Figure 1.
Research Conceptual Framework Hypothesis H1: Work environment has a significant infuence on employee performance H2: Work facilities have a significant infuence on employee performance H3: Work environment has a significant infuence on work motivation H4: Work facilities have a significant infuence on work motivation.
H5: Work motivation has a significant infuence on employee performance H6: Work environment has a significant infuence on employee performance with work motivation as an intervening variable.
H7: Work facilities have a significant infuence on employee performance with work motivation as an intervening variable.
II.
METHODS
This research approach uses a quantitative method approach, the population in this study is the technical team of the Surabaya City Health Sector with a total of 40 people.
The analysis technique used is using structural equation modeling (SEM), the calculation process and presentation of analysis reports using Smart Partial Least Squares (PLS) research analysis with the SEM PLS version 4 application.
RESULTS AND DISCUSSION
Results Characteristics of Respondents based on Gender The distribution of respondents based on gender can be seen in the table 3.
1 below Table 1 Characteristics of Respondents Based on Gender Gender Frequency Percentage (%) Male Female Total Source: Processed primary data .
The characteristics of respondents based on gender above, it can be seen that the number of male respondents .
is 50% and female respondents are 50%.
The Influence of Work Environment and Work Facilities on Employee Performance with Work Motivation as An Intervening Variable Anna.
Agus Sukoco Page iC1126 :: IJEBD::
ISSN: 2597-4785 (ONLINE)
ISSN: 2597-4750 (PRINTED)
(International Journal of Entrepreneurship and Business Developmen.
Volume 07 Number 06 November 2024 This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution- ShareAlike 4.
0 International License.
Characteristics of Respondents based on Age The distribution of respondents by age can be seen in the table 3.
2 below.
Table 2 Characteristics of Respondents Based on Age
Age
Frequency Percentage (%) 20 - 30
31 - 40
41 - 50
>51
Total Source: Processed primary data .
Based on the characteristics of respondents according to age, it can be seen that the majority of respondents are 31-40 years old, amounting to 70%.
Characteristics of Respondents Based on Education The distribution of respondents based on their latest education can be seen in the table 3.
3 below.
Table 3.
Characteristics of Respondents Based on Education Education Frequency Percentage (%) SMA D i D IV Total Source: Processed primary data .
Based on the characteristics of the respondents' latest education, it can be seen that the majority of respondents have the latest education S1 .
Analysis Technic The Structural Equation Modeling (SEM) method is a combination of mathematical engineering methods and path analysis.
Model Scheme in this research, hypothesis testing uses the Partial Least Square (PLS) analysis technique with the smartPLS 4.
0 program.
Outer Model Testing Convergent Validity The Influence of Work Environment and Work Facilities on Employee Performance with Work Motivation as An Intervening Variable Anna.
Agus Sukoco Page iC1127 :: IJEBD::
ISSN: 2597-4785 (ONLINE)
ISSN: 2597-4750 (PRINTED)
(International Journal of Entrepreneurship and Business Developmen.
Volume 07 Number 06 November 2024 This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution- ShareAlike 4.
0 International License.
To test convergent validity, the outer loading or loading factor value is used.
An indicator is declared to meet convergent validity in the good category if the outer loading value is > 0,7.
The following are the loading factor values for each indicator on the research variables:
Table 4 Loading Factor Variable Indicator Loading Factor Rule of Thumb Conclusion Valid X1.
Valid X2.
Valid X2.
Valid X2.
Valid X2.
Valid X2.
Valid X2.
Valid
Z11
Valid
Z12
Valid
Z13
Valid
Z14
Valid
Z15
Valid
Y11
Valid
Y14
Valid
Y15
Valid
Y16
Valid Work environment (X.
Work facilities (X.
Work motivation .
X1.
Employee Performance (Y) Data Source: 2024 PLS Data Processing Results Based on table 3.
5 work environment variables are measured by 5 .
valid measurement items with outer loading between 0.
934, work facility variables are measured by 3 .
valid measurement items with outer loading between 0.
930, employee performance variables are measured by 4 .
valid measurement items with outer loading between 0.
961, work motivation variables are measured by 5 .
valid measurement items with outer loading between 0.
Average Variance Extracted (AVE) The Influence of Work Environment and Work Facilities on Employee Performance with Work Motivation as An Intervening Variable Anna.
Agus Sukoco Page iC1128 :: IJEBD::
ISSN: 2597-4785 (ONLINE)
ISSN: 2597-4750 (PRINTED)
(International Journal of Entrepreneurship and Business Developmen.
Volume 07 Number 06 November 2024 This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution- ShareAlike 4.
0 International License.
Apart from observing the cross-loading value, discriminant validity can also be determined through other methods, namely by looking at the average variant extracted (AVE) value for each indicator, the required value must be > 0.
5 for a good model.
Table 5 Average Variant Extracted (AVE) Variable AVE Work facilities Employee Performance Work environment Work motivation Data Source: 2023 PLS Data Processing Results Based on table 3.
6 the test results that the Average Variance Extracted (AVE) value of all statement items is> 0.
5, it can be concluded that all statement items are declared convergent valid.
Discriminant Validity In this section, the results of the discriminant validity test will be described.
The discriminant validity test uses cross loading values.
An indicator is declared to meet discriminant validity if the cross loading value of the indicator on the variable is the largest compared to other variables.
The following is the cross loading value of each indicator :
Table 6 Cross Loading Indicator Work facilities Employee Performance Work environment Work motivation X11
X14
X15
X16
X17
X21
X22
X23
Y11
Y14
The Influence of Work Environment and Work Facilities on Employee Performance with Work Motivation as An Intervening Variable Anna.
Agus Sukoco Page iC1129 :: IJEBD::
ISSN: 2597-4785 (ONLINE)
ISSN: 2597-4750 (PRINTED)
(International Journal of Entrepreneurship and Business Developmen.
Volume 07 Number 06 November 2024 This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution- ShareAlike 4.
0 International License.
Y15
Y16
Z11
Z12
Z13
Z14
Z15
Data Source: 2023 PLS Data Processing Results Based on table table 3.
7 it shows that the loading value of each indicator item on the construct is greater than the cross-loading value.
Thus, it can be concluded that all constructs or latent variables have good discriminant validity, where in the block the construct indicators are better than the other block indicators.
Composite Reliability and CronbachAos Alpha Besides construct validity testing, construct reliability testing was also carried out as measured by composite reliability and Cronbach's alpha of the indicator block that measures the construct.
The following are the results of composite reliability and Cronbach's alpha testing from Smart PLS:
Table 7 Composite Reliability and CronbachAos Alpha Variable Composite Reliability Rule of Thumb CronbachAos Alpha Rule of Thumb Conclution Work facilities Reliable Employee Performance Reliable Work environment Reliable Work motivation Reliable Data Source: 2024 PLS Data Processing Results A variable is declared reliable if it has a composite reliability value above 0.
7 and Cronbach's alpha above From the SmartPLS output results above, all variables have composite reliability values above 0.
and Cronbach's alpha above 0.
So it can be concluded that validity has good reliability.
Inner Model Testing This research will explain the results of the path coefficient test.
R-square, f-square, goodness of fit test.
Qsquare and hypothesis test.
Determination Coefficient (R.
Test Results The determination coefficient (R-Squar.
is used to measure how much endogenous variables are influenced by other variables.
Based on data processing that has been carried out using the SmartPLS program, the R-Square values are obtained as follows:
The Influence of Work Environment and Work Facilities on Employee Performance with Work Motivation as An Intervening Variable Anna.
Agus Sukoco Page iC1130 :: IJEBD::
ISSN: 2597-4785 (ONLINE)
ISSN: 2597-4750 (PRINTED)
(International Journal of Entrepreneurship and Business Developmen.
Volume 07 Number 06 November 2024 This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution- ShareAlike 4.
0 International License.
Table 8.
R-Square Value Variable R-Square Employee Performance 0,625 Work Motivation 0,810 Data Source: 2024 PLS Data Processing Results Based on table 3.
9 it can be concluded that employee performance is 0.
625, meaning that the ability of variables X1 and X2 through Z to explain Y is 62.
5% .
That work motivation is 0.
810, meaning that the ability of variables X1 and X2 to explain Z is 81% .
Effect Size .
Results The change in the R-square value can be used to determine whether the influence of exogenous latent variables on endogenous latent variables has a substantive impact.
Therefore, it is necessary to measure the effect size .
A), with the recommended values for exogenous latent variables being 0.
, 0.
, and 35 .
(Cohen, 1.
Table 9.
f-Square Value Variable f-Square Work facilities Ie Employee Performance Work facilities Ie Work Motivation Work Environment Ie Employee Performance Work Environment Ie Work Motivation Work Motivation Ie Employee Performance Data Source: 2024 PLS Data Processing Results Predictive Relevance Test (Q.
The Q-Square value has the same meaning as coefficient determination (R-Squar.
in regression analysis, where the higher the Q-Square, the betteror more fit the model can be to the data.
The results of calculating the Q-Square value are as follows:
Q-Square = 1 Ae [.
Ae R.
Ae R.
] = 1 Ae [.
Ae 0,.
Ae 0,.
] = 1 Ae .
= 1 Ae 0,07125 = 0,92875 Q2 value greater than 0 .
indicates that the model is said to be good enough, while a Q2 value of less than 0 .
indicates that the model lacks predictive relevance.
In this research model, the construct or endogenous latent variable has a Q2 value greater than 0 .
so that the predictions made by the model are considered relevant.
Model Goodness of Fit (GoF) The goodness of fit assessment is known from the Q-Square value.
The Goodness of Fit (GoF) test is used to validate the combined performance of the measurement model and the structural model.
The GoF value ranges from 0 to 1, with the interpretation of the values as follows: 0.
mall GoF), 0.
oderate GoF), and 0.
arge GoF).
The results of calculating the GoF value are as follows:
The Influence of Work Environment and Work Facilities on Employee Performance with Work Motivation as An Intervening Variable Anna.
Agus Sukoco Page iC1131 :: IJEBD::
ISSN: 2597-4785 (ONLINE)
ISSN: 2597-4750 (PRINTED)
(International Journal of Entrepreneurship and Business Developmen.
Volume 07 Number 06 November 2024 This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution- ShareAlike 4.
0 International License.
Table 10.
Compare AVE and R-Square Value Variable AVE R-Square Work Environment Work Facilities Work Motivation Employee Performance Average Data Source : 2024 PLS Data Processing Results GoF = Ooi yaycOya ycu Iyci2 = Oo0.
739 yeo 0.
= 0.
Based on table 3.
11 the calculation results obtained a GoF value of 0.
7281, indicating that the combined performance between the outer model and the inner model in this study can be classified into the large GoF category and meets the Goodness of Fit test.
Hypothesis Testing Hypothesis testing was carried out using the bootstrapping resampling method developed by Geisser and Stone.
The image below shows the results that this model meets the validity and reliability tests on each path Model SEM-PLS Based on the data processing that has been carried out, the results can be used to answer the hypothesis in this research.
Hypothesis testing in this research was carried out by looking at the T-Statistics values and P-Values The research hypothesis can be declared accepted if the P-Values value is < 0.
The following are the results of hypothesis testing obtained in this research through the inner model:
The Influence of Work Environment and Work Facilities on Employee Performance with Work Motivation as An Intervening Variable Anna.
Agus Sukoco Page iC1132 :: IJEBD::
ISSN: 2597-4785 (ONLINE)
ISSN: 2597-4750 (PRINTED)
(International Journal of Entrepreneurship and Business Developmen.
Volume 07 Number 06 November 2024 This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution- ShareAlike 4.
0 International License.
Table.
11 Hypothesis Testing Hypothess Influence Coefficient T-statistics P-Values Result Work Environment Ie Employee Performance Rejected Work facilities Ie Employee Performance Rejected Work Environment Ie Work Motivation Accepted Work facilities Ie Work Motivation Accepted Work Motivation Ie Employee Performance Accepted Work Environment Ie Employee Performance with Work Motivation as Intervening Variable 0,433 2,662 0,008 Accepted Work facilities Ie Employee Performance with Work Motivation as Intervening Variable 0,342 2,115 0,034 Accepted Data Source : 2024 PLS Data Processing Results Based on the data presented in the table.
11 above, it can be seen that of the seven hypotheses proposed in thisresearch, they are as follows:
Work Environment Variable on Employee Performance is 0.
P-Value is 0.
ot significan.
Work Facility Variable on Employee Performance is -0.
P-Value is 0.
ot significan.
Work Environment variable on work motivation of 0.
P-Value of 0.
Work Facility Variable on Work Motivation of 0.
P-Value of 0.
Work Motivation variable on Employee Performance is 0.
P-Value is 0.
Work Environment variable on Employee Performance through Work Motivation is 0.
P-Value 008 .
This means that work motivation variables Auplay a roleAy in mediating the effect of Work Environment on Employee Performance.
The Work Facility variable on Employee Performance through Work Motivation is 0.
, with a P-Value of 0.
This means that the work motivation variable Auplays a roleAy in mediating the effect of Work Facilities on Employee Performance.
Discussion In this section, will discuss the research hypothesis which is explained as follows:
The Influence of Work Environment on Employee Performance From the analysis of the variable above, the p-value of the work environment is 0,201 > 0,05.
This explains that the work environment has a positive and not significant influence on employee performance.
This means that although there are indications that improvements in the work environment may have a positive impact on employee performance, the effect is not strong or consistent enough to achieve improved employee The work environment is one of the important factors in creating employee performance.
Because the work environment has a direct influence on employees in completing work which will ultimately improve organizational performance (Sedarmayanti, 2.
This is also reinforced by the results of research (Asfar & Anggraeni, 2.
and (Yantika et al.
, 2.
The Influence of Work Facility on Employee Performance Based on the results of the second hypothesis test, the p-value of the facilities is 0.
210 > 0.
This means that while poor quality work facilities appear to be associated with reduced employee performance, this relationship is not strong or consistent enough to be considered statistically significant.
In other words, improvements to work facilities may not substantially improve employee performance in the context of this study, or there are other factors that are more dominant in influencing performance.
This contradicts the results of research (Monde et al.
, 2.
that work facilities have a significant effect on employee performance.
Because with the existence of work facilities in a company that can be enjoyed by employees in the form of The Influence of Work Environment and Work Facilities on Employee Performance with Work Motivation as An Intervening Variable Anna.
Agus Sukoco Page iC1133 :: IJEBD::
(International Journal of Entrepreneurship and Business Developmen.
Volume 07 Number 06 November 2024
ISSN: 2597-4785 (ONLINE)
ISSN: 2597-4750 (PRINTED)
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution- ShareAlike 4.
0 International License.
tools, equipment, objects, and rooms for work, it will cause job satisfaction for employees, of course this has a good impact on the company.
The influence of Work Environment on Work Motivation Referring to the results of the third hypothesis test, the p-values obtained for the work environment (X.
= 000 < 0.
The results of the analysis show that the work environment has a significant influence on work This shows that the work environment is a force that encourages the spirit that is inside and outside him, this is supported by the answers of respondents who mostly stated that the conditions of the work environment consisting of the physical work environment are well maintained, so that employees are motivated to work in completing work because physiological needs, security needs, needs to be liked, selfesteem needs, self-development needs are met.
The results of this study support the opinion of Siagian .
which states that factors that cause work motivation include good working conditions, especially in terms of the physical work environment.
The influence of Work Facility on Work Motivation Based on the results of the fourth hypothesis test, the p-value of the workload variable (X.
= 0.
000 < 0.
Based on the results of data processing, it is known that there is an influence of work facilities on work This finding means that: the positive value indicates that if the value of work facilities increases, then work motivation also increases.
the significant value means that work facilities are significant enough to affect work motivation.
To increase work motivation, it would be better for leaders to directly improve these work facilities, especially adding work facilities or repairing work facilities that have been damaged or are not functioning properly (Anggrainy et al.
, 2.
Based on the results of previous research conducted by (Munawirsyah, 2.
and (Damanik, 2.
which states that there is a positive and significant influence between work facilities on work motivation.
The influence of Work Motivation on Employee Performance Based on the results of the fifth hypothesis test, statistically the p-value of the work motivation variable (Z) = 0.
006 < 0.
This means that the work motivation (Z) has a significant effect on employee performance (Y).
The results of this study support research conducted (Jufrizen, 2.
which states that work motivation shows an increase, employee performance will increase.
Work motivation is important in increasing work Because people who have high work motivation will try with all their might so that their work can succeed as well as possible.
If their personal needs are met, then they will be able to work harder and more passionately.
In relation to efforts to improve employee performance, it requires a number of high work Therefore, work motivation has a very close relationship to employee performance.
Providing individual work motivation to employees will run faster so that employees can work optimally in the The influence of Work Environment on Employee Performance with Work Motivation as Intervening Variable Based on the results of the sixth hypothesis test that the p-value of 0.
008 < 0.
05 indicates that the work environment have a significant influence on employee performance through work motivation.
A comfortable and conducive work environment can influence employees to be more motivated to improve the quality and quantity of their performance to be more effective and efficient, so that the work environment and work motivation can have an effect on improving employee performance.
With the fulfillment of various employee needs, both physiological needs, security needs, needs to be liked, self-esteem needs, self-development needs and supported by a good work environment, it will certainly greatly affect the improvement of employee A pleasant work environment is a key driver for employees to produce peak performance.
Likewise, when employees do work, as employees cannot be separated from the various circumstances around where employees work, namely the work environment.
As long as employees do work, employees will interact with various conditions that exist in the work environment.
The influence of Work Facility on Employee Performance with Work Motivation as Intervening Variable Based on the results of the sixth hypothesis test that the p-value of 0.
034 < 0.
05 indicates that the work facilities have a significant influence on employee performance through work motivation.
Based on the results of the study, the effect of work facilities on employee performance mediated by work motivation is This means that work motivation acts as an intervening variable .
, especially in this At this stage, adequate work facilities will make employees increase their work motivation so that their performance will increase.
Good work facilities owned by the company will increase employee motivation at work in order to achieve better employee performance results (Sukaesih et al, 2.
Based on previous research conducted (Sukaesih et al.
, 2.
stated that there is a positive and significant influence between work facilities on performance through work motivation.
The Influence of Work Environment and Work Facilities on Employee Performance with Work Motivation as An Intervening Variable Anna.
Agus Sukoco Page iC1134 :: IJEBD::
(International Journal of Entrepreneurship and Business Developmen.
Volume 07 Number 06 November 2024
ISSN: 2597-4785 (ONLINE)
ISSN: 2597-4750 (PRINTED)
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution- ShareAlike 4.
0 International License.
IV.
CONCLUSION
In accordance with the research results described in the previous chapter, several conclusions can be drawn.
The work environment has a positive and not significant influence on employee performance, which means that while the work environment may have a positive impact on employee performance, this influence is not strong or consistent enough to achieve improved employee performance.
Work facilities have a negative and not significant influence on employee performance, which means that although poor quality work facilities seem to be associated with a decrease in employee performance, this relationship is not strong or consistent enough to be considered statistically significant.
In other words, improvements to work facilities may not substantially improve employee performance in the context of this study, or there are other factors that are more dominant in influencing performance.
Work environment has a positive and significant influence on work motivation, which means that the better the work environment, the better the work motivation of employees.
Work facilities have a positive and significant influence on work motivation, which means that the better the work facilities, the better the work motivation.
Work motivation has a positive and significant influence on employee performance, which means that the higher the work motivation, the better the employee performance.
The work environment has a positive and significant influence on employee performance with work motivation as an intervening variable, which means that a good work environment can motivate employees to work better so as to improve employee performance.
Work facilities have a positive and significant influence on employee performance with work motivation as an intervening variable, which means that good work facilities can motivate employees to work better so as to improve employee performance.
Suggestions Based on the conclusions and limitations of the research, the researchers suggest:
The data processing results also show that the work facilities does not have an impact on employee However, it would be beneficial to further evaluate and improve the work facilities so that a better work facilities can enhance employee performance.
REFERENCES