This study aims to
analyze the positive and significant effect of Training, Compensation and Work
Discipline on Employee Performance. The research methodology used is
quantitative method and uses multiple linear regression analysis with
processing using Statistical Product and Service Solutions (SPSS) version 26
with data collection method through questionnaires to 70 employees of PT. Pegadaian.
The results of this study indicate that there is an influence between Training
(X1) and Employee Performance (Y) of 0.515 and has an effect of 51.5%. For the
influence variable between Compensation (X2) and Employee Performance (Y) of
0.180 and has an effect of 18%. The influence variable between Work Discipline
(X3) and Employee Performance (Y) is 0.153 and has an effect of 15.3%. The
results showed that Training, Compensation and Work Discipline had a positive
and significant effect on Employee Performance at PT. Pegadaian.
Keywords: training,
Compensation, Work Discipline, Employees Performance
INTRODUCTION
The most
valuable company asset in this modern era is HR. If you have adequate quality
employee resources, the company's goals will be achieved effectively and
efficiently. In general, the goal of every company is that the company can
maximize profits. In the absence of qualified human resources, the company's
goals will not be achieved optimally. Companies with superior human resources
will provide superior performance and will contribute all their potential to
the company's success.
According
to (Eri Susan, 2019) HR management includes the development, use and
preservation of human resources, whether working alone or employed by a company
or institution. By seeing how important HR is for achieving company goals,
companies must pay attention to and manage employee responsibilities
effectively to ensure the company continues to progress and develop in all
circumstances. An administration is needed that is able to manage workers in a
structured, planned and effective manner in order to realize effective human resource
management. The business world must give maximum attention to workers,
especially to all matters related to honing talent, employee skills and
employee welfare, in order to foster employee commitment and loyalty in
maintaining and improving employee performance. To help employees perform
better, institutions offer career development programs that include training,
remuneration and work discipline.
According
to (Nurvita & Budiarti, 2019), employee performance is defined as how
successfully employees fulfill their assigned tasks along with a high level of
quality and quantity. In running a company, an employee's performance is very
important in order to achieve the company's goals. In improving employee
performance so they work better, it can be seen in terms of the training given
to employees in a company.
According
to (Wiwin, 2021), training is a process where the process is structured to
change the behavior of workers towards knowledge and also the skills of an
employee or employees in carrying out certain tasks in order to achieve company
goals. Employee training can further motivate workers to work harder, because
the information obtained through employee training will help employees better
understand the obligations and tasks given to them. It can be concluded that
training affects employee performance; A study conducted by (Rini Astuti1,
2018) shows that training has a good and substantial effect on employee
performance at PT. Kemasindo Fast Nusantara Medan.
Along
with training, employee performance can increase by providing compensation.
According to (Nasir & Siregar, 2017), compensation is the wages employees
receive for their contributions or services. In conclusion, providing
compensation to employees is one of the roles of HR management which is related
to all kinds of individual or individual prices. In addition, remuneration or
compensation is an effort to encourage individuals within the company to be
more disciplined and proactive in their professional development. Thus,
remuneration influences employee performance. This was confirmed by a study
conducted by (Siagian, 2015), which determined that compensation satisfaction
had a good and substantial effect on PT. Amanda International Motor Daihatsu
Surabaya. Therefore, it is very important to reward workers who have given
their time and expertise within the institution or company so that employees
feel happy that their efforts are recognized.
According
to (Surazio et al., 2020), work discipline is the attitude of complying with
the norms established and implemented by a company or institution in accordance
with relevant laws. Like training and remuneration, they have an influence on
improving employee performance in an institution. A study conducted by
(issalillah, 2019) proves that work discipline has a good and substantial
influence on employee performance at PT. Luxury Indah Jaya - Binjai. According
to (issalillah, 2019),
Problems
that develop in business regarding employee performance include problems where
workers are not on time in completing tasks mandated by the institution,
causing other tasks to be delayed.
PT.
Pegadaian is a wholly owned subsidiary of a State-Owned Enterprise (BUMN). The
goal or vision of Pegadaian is "To Become The Most Valuable Financial
Company in Indonesia and the Community's First Choice Financial Inclusion
Agent" to carry out this vision effectively and efficiently, PT. Pegadaians
need to pay attention to employee performance.
Table 1. Recapitulation Data Percentage of PT Pegadaian employee
performance
|
No. |
Performance
Indicators Employee |
Target |
Achievements |
||
|
2018 |
2019 |
2020 |
|||
|
1. |
Completion
Accuracy Task |
100% |
80% |
82% |
85% |
|
2. |
Suitability
of Working Hours |
100% |
83% |
79% |
82% |
|
3. |
Attendance
Rate |
100% |
87% |
82% |
79% |
|
4. |
Collaboration
Between Employees |
100% |
82% |
80% |
85% |
|
5. |
Job
satisfaction. |
100% |
86% |
84% |
88% |
Source: PT. Pegadaian
Based on
Table 1, worker performance at PT. In 2018 - 2020, Pegadaian is still facing
increases and decreases, this proves that the employee or worker has not
achieved maximum results when carrying out the tasks or work given to the
employee or worker, as the result measurement is still below the target.
From the
results of the table above, it shows that the results of increases and
decreases in the performance of PT employees. Pegadaian, possibly due to the
training, compensation and work discipline that exists in the company. The
author is very interested in researching "The Effect of Training,
Compensation and Work Discipline on Employee Performance at PT. Pegadaian.� Taking
these matters into consideration, the objectives of this research are as
follows:
1) To analyze the effect of training on employee
performance at PT. Pegadaian.
2) To analyze the effect of compensation on
employee performance at PT. Pegadaian.
3) To analyze the influence of work discipline on
employee performance at PT. Pegadaian.
RESEARCH METHOD
This
research uses quantitative methods. In research regarding employee performance
which is influenced by training, compensation and work discipline at PT.
Pegadaian, there are two main data sources, namely secondary data and primary
data. Secondary data in the form of profiles and performance data of PT
employees. Pegadaians that have been arranged in documents or reports.
Meanwhile, primary data consists of information collected directly through
questionnaires sent to 70 employees of PT. Pegadaian.
Data collection
methods used in this observation include observation, documentation studies,
interviews, and questionnaires. Observation is an accurate and specific data
collection method for gathering information about activities that are the
object of study. Observations can be participatory, where the researcher
participates in the activity being observed, or non-participatory, where the
observation is carried out secretly.
In data
analysis, descriptive analysis methods are used to illustrate the data as a whole
without using generalizations or statistics to assess the data through
description. Apart from that, inferential analysis methods are also used,
especially multiple linear regression analysis to determine the impact of the
independent variables (training, compensation and work discipline) on the
dependent variable (employee performance).
A.
Test Research Instruments
1. Validity test
Table 2.
Validity
Test Results
|
Variable |
Statement |
r Count |
r Table |
Information |
|
|
Training
(X1) |
Statement
1 |
0.660 |
0.2352 |
Valid |
|
|
Statement
2 |
0.740 |
0.2352 |
Valid |
||
|
Statement
3 |
0.616 |
0.2352 |
Valid |
||
|
Statement
4 |
0.501 |
0.2352 |
Valid |
||
|
Statement
5 |
0.727 |
0.2352 |
Valid |
||
|
Variable |
Statement |
r Count |
r Table |
Information |
|
|
Training
(X2) |
Statement
1 |
0.732 |
0.2352 |
Valid |
|
|
Statement
2 |
0.849 |
0.2352 |
Valid |
||
|
Statement
3 |
0.827 |
0.2352 |
Valid |
||
|
Statement
4 |
0.658 |
0.2352 |
Valid |
||
|
Statement
5 |
0.668 |
0.2352 |
Valid |
||
|
Variable |
Statement |
r Count |
r Table |
Information |
|
|
Work
Discipline |
Statement
1 |
0.563 |
0.2352 |
Valid |
|
|
(X3) |
Statement
2 |
0.747 |
0.2352 |
Valid |
|
|
Statement
3 |
0.594 |
0.2352 |
Valid |
|
|
|
Statement
4 |
0.646 |
0.2352 |
Valid |
|
|
|
Statement
5 |
0.637 |
0.2352 |
Valid |
|
|
|
Variable |
Statement |
r Count |
r Table |
Information |
|
|
Employee Performance (Y) |
Statement
1 |
0.536 |
0.2352 |
Valid |
|
|
Statement
2 |
0.548 |
0.2352 |
Valid |
|
|
|
Statement
3 |
0.833 |
0.2352 |
Valid |
|
|
|
Statement
4 |
0.504 |
0.2352 |
Valid |
|
|
|
Statement
5 |
0.833 |
0.2352 |
Valid |
|
|
Source: Data processed using SPSS Version 26.0
Based on the validity test table above, the
calculations used were SPSS 26 Version 26. Testing the data on 70 respondents
stated that all statement items 1 - 19 statements intended for the variables
Training, Compensation, Work Discipline and Employee Performance were concluded
to be valid.
2. Reliability Test
Table 3.
Reliability Test Results
|
No. |
Variable |
Reliability |
r Table |
Information |
|
1. |
Training |
0.658 |
0.6 |
Reliable |
|
2. |
Compensation |
0.805 |
0.6 |
Reliable |
|
3. |
Work Discipline |
0.639 |
0.6 |
Reliable |
|
4. |
Employee performance |
0.643 |
0.6 |
Reliable |
Source: Data processed using SPSS Version 26.0
From the table above, it can be said that the
Cronbach Alpha value for the 4 variables above, namely X1 Training, X2
Compensation,
B.
Classical Assumption Test Analysis
1. Normality test
Table 4.
Normality Test Results
|
|
Unstandardized Residuals |
|
|
N |
70 |
|
|
Normal
Parameters, b |
Mean |
.0000000 |
|
Std.
Deviation |
1.02026528 |
|
|
Most Extreme
Differences |
Absolute |
,046 |
|
Positive |
,046 |
|
|
Negative |
-.046 |
|
|
Statistical
Tests |
|
,046 |
|
Asymp.
Sig. (2-tailed) |
|
,200c,d |
|
a. Test
distribution is Normal. |
||
|
b.
Calculated from data. |
||
|
c.
Lilliefors Significance Correction. |
||
|
d. This is a
lower bound of the true significance. |
||
Source: Data processed using SPSS Version 26.0
Based on the results of the Normality Test
above, it can be seen that the significant value based on the table above is
0.200, this indicates the value is greater than 0.05, so it can be concluded
that the normality test in research has a normal distribution with 0.200 >
0.05
2. Multicollinearity Test
Table 5.
Coefficientsa Multicollinearity Test Results
|
Model |
Collinearity Statistics |
||
|
Tolerance |
VIF |
||
|
1 |
(Constant) |
||
|
Training |
,699 |
1,430 |
|
|
Compensation |
,674 |
1,483 |
|
|
Work
Discipline |
,884 |
1,131 |
|
a. Dependent Variable: Employee Performance
Source: Data processed using SPSS Version 26.0
It can be seen from the multicollinearity test
above, that the independent variable, namely Training (X1) has a Variance
Inflation Factor (VIF) value of 1.430 < 10 and a tolerance value of 0.699
> 0.1, Compensation (X2) has a Variance Inflation Factor (VIF) value of
1.438 < 10 and a value of tolerance 0.674 > 0.1 and Work discipline (X3)
has a Variance Inflation Factor (VIF) value of 1,131 < 10 and a tolerance
value of 0.884. From the three variables above, it can be concluded that the
regression model does not have multicollinearity.
3. Auto Correlation Test
Table 6.
Auto Correlation Test Results
|
Model |
R |
R Square |
Adjusted R Square |
Std. Error of the Estimate |
Durbin-Watson |
|
1 |
.790a |
,624 |
,607 |
1.04320 |
1,945 |
|
a. Predictors:
(Constant), Work Discipline, Training, Compensation b. Dependent
Variable: Employee Performance |
|||||
Source: Data processed using SPSS Version 26.0
In table 6 it can be explained that the result of Durbin-Watson is
1.945. Where the K value or number of independent variables is 3 and the N
value or number of respondent data = 70. So the dL value is 1.5245 and the dU
value is 1.7028, then the 4-Du value = 2.475. If it is included in the
criteria, the result is dU < DW < 4- dU (1.7028 < 1.945 < 2.475),
this shows that there is no autocorrelation in the regression model.
Heteroscedasticity
Test
Table 7.
Heteroscedasticity Test Results Coefficientsa
|
Model |
Sig. |
|
|
1 |
(Constant) |
,649 |
|
Training |
,780 |
|
|
Compensation |
,736 |
|
|
Work
Discipline |
,170 |
|
|
a. Dependent
Variable: Abs_RES |
||
Source: Data processed using SPSS Version 26.0
Based on the table of heteroscedasticity test results above, where
testing heteroscedasticity for research is by using the Glejser Test, it can be
said that the sig number of the variable studied is Training (X1) sig of 0.780.
Compensation (X2) sig is 0.736. Work Discipline (X3) sig is 0.170. So the
conclusion is that the results of the heteroscedasticity test in this study
stated that there was no heteroscedasticity because all independent variables
had a significance value of > 0.05.
Analysis Method
Multiple Linear Regression Analysis
Table 8.
Coefficientsa Multiple Linear Regression Test Results
|
Model |
Unstandardized Coefficients |
Standardized Coefficients |
t |
Sig. |
||
|
B |
Std.
Error |
Beta |
||||
|
1 |
(Constant) |
4,047 |
1,821 |
|
2,223 |
,030 |
|
Training |
,515 |
,085 |
,546 |
6,059 |
,000 |
|
|
Compensation |
,180 |
,066 |
,253 |
2,751 |
,008 |
|
|
Work |
.153 |
,069 |
,179 |
2,228 |
,029 |
|
|
a. Dependent Variable: Employee Performance |
||||||
Source: Data processed with SPSS Version 26.0
Based on the table above, it can be seen that
the multiple linear regression coefficients have a regression equation, namely:
Information:
Y = Employee Performance X1 = Training
X2 = Compensation X3 = Work Discipline
�
Based on the coefficients table, the following regression equation is
produced: Y= 0.546 X1 + 0.253 X2 + 0.179 X3
The Training variable (X1) has a regression coefficient value of 0.546,
which means that if the compensation and work discipline variables are assumed,
then when there is an increase of 1 in training, it will affect the increase in
employee performance levels, namely 0.546.
The Compensation Variable (X2) has a regression coefficient value of
0.253, which means that if the training and work discipline variables are
assumed, then when there is an increase of 1 in compensation it will affect the
increase in employee performance levels, namely 0.253.
The Work Discipline variable (X3) has a regression coefficient value of
0.179, which means that if the compensation and work discipline variables are
assumed, then when there is an increase of 1 in work discipline it will affect
the increase in employee performance levels, namely 0.546.
Model Feasibility Test
Analysis
F test
Table 9. F Test Results
|
ANOVAa |
|
||||||
|
Model |
Sum of Squares |
df |
Mean Square |
F |
Sig. |
|
|
|
1 |
Regression |
119,446 |
3 |
39,815 |
36,586 |
,000b |
|
|
Residual |
71,825 |
66 |
1,088 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total |
191,271 |
69 |
|
|
|
|
|
a. Dependent
Variable: Employee Performance b. Predictors:
(Constant), Work Discipline, Training, Compensation |
|||||||
Source: Data processed with SPSS Version 26.0
Based on the ANOVA table above, it shows that the calculated F value is
36.586 with a significant degree of 0.000. The table f value is obtained from
the df degree of freedom (residual) value, namely 2.74 at a 5% confidence level
(a= 0.05). Because the calculated f value is greater than the f table (36.586
> 2.74) at a significant level 0.000 < 0.05. So the conclusion is that
the independent variables, namely training, compensation and work discipline,
together have a significant effect on the dependent variable, namely employees.
Coefficient of Determination Test (𝑹𝟐 Test)
Table 10.
Coefficient Test Results (Determination) Model Summary b
|
Model |
R |
R Square |
Adjusted R Square |
Std. Error of the Estimate |
|
1 |
.790a |
,624 |
,607 |
1.04320 |
|
a. Predictors:
(Constant), Work Discipline, Training, Compensation b. Dependent
Variable: Employee Performance |
||||
Source: Data processed using SPSS Version 26.0
The table above shows that the R Square value is 0.624. Based on this
value, it can be seen that the coefficient of determination (R2) value is
explained as 62.4%. This means that the training, compensation and work
discipline variables have an influence on employee performance variables by
62.4%. Meanwhile, the remaining 37.6% was influenced by other variables not
analyzed in this study.
Hypothesis Test (t Test)
Table 11.
Hypothesis Test Results (t)
|
Coefficientsa |
||||||
|
Model |
Unstandardized
Coefficients |
Standardized Coefficients |
t |
Sig. |
||
|
B |
Std. Error |
Beta |
||||
|
1 |
(Constant) |
4,047 |
1,821 |
|
2,223 |
,030 |
|
Training |
,515 |
,085 |
,546 |
6,059 |
,000 |
|
|
Compensation |
,180 |
,066 |
,253 |
2,751 |
,008 |
|
|
Discipline Work |
.153 |
,069 |
,179 |
2,228 |
,029 |
|
|
a. Dependent
Variable: Employee Performance |
||||||
Source: Data processed with SPSS Version 26.0
Based on the t test results above, it can be concluded as follows:
Testing the hypothesis of the training variable (X1) on employee
performance obtained a calculated t value of 6.059 > t table of 1.668 along
with a significance level of 0.000 < 0.05, this means that training has a
positive and significant influence on the employee performance variable of PT
Pegadaian. Testing the hypothesis of the compensation variable (X2) on employee
performance obtained a calculated t value of 2.751 > t table of 1.668 along
with a significance level of 0.008 < 0.05, so this means that compensation
has a positive and significant influence on the performance variable of PT
Pegadaian employees.
Testing the hypothesis of the work discipline variable (X3) on employee
performance obtained a calculated t value of 2.228 > t table of 1.668 with a
significance level of 0.029 < 0.05, so it can be interpreted that training
has a positive and significant effect on the performance variable of PT
Pegadaian employees.
Discussion
The Effect of Training on Employee Performance
According to (Safriatna et al., 2020) concluded that training will
encourage productivity, progress and also organizational progress, if the
training provided is appropriate to employee needs. Based on the results of
studies that have been carried out, variable X1 training has a positive and
significant influence on PT Pegadaian employee performance. The Training
Variable (X1) has a value of 0.515 which means that training increases by 0.515
or 51.5% assuming the other independent variables have constant values. The t
test shows that the value obtained is > t table (6.059 > 1.668) with a
significant value of 0.000 < 0.05, so the conclusion is that training
provides a positive and significant impact on employee performance. Employee
training can further motivate workers to work harder, because the information
obtained through employee training will help employees better understand the
obligations and tasks given to them. It can be concluded that training affects
employee performance. This is in accordance with research from (Rini Astuti1,
2018) proving that training has a positive and significant influence on
employee performance at PT. Kemasindo Fast Nusantara Medan.
The Effect of Compensation on Employee Performance
According to (Nasir & Siregar, 2017), compensation is the wages
employees receive for their contributions or services. In conclusion, providing
compensation to employees is one of the roles of HR management which is related
to all kinds of individual or individual prices. In addition, remuneration or
compensation is an effort to encourage individuals within the company to be
more disciplined and proactive in their professional development. Based on the
results of studies that have been carried out, the compensation variable has a
positive and significant influence on PT Pegadaian employee performance.
The Compensation Variable (X2) has a value of 0.180 which means that
compensation increases by 0.180 or 18% assuming the other independent variables
have a fixed value. The t test shows the results that the value > t table
(2.751 > 1.668) and the significant value is 0.008 < 0.05, so the
conclusion is that compensation has a positive and significant effect on
employee performance. Thus, remuneration has an influence on employee performance.
This is supported by research studies conducted by (Siagian, 2015), which
determined that compensation has a positive and significant influence on PT.
Amanda International Motor Daihatsu Surabaya. Therefore, it is very important
to reward workers who have given their time and expertise within the
institution or company so that employees feel happy that their efforts are
recognized.
The Influence of Work Discipline on Employee Performance
According to (Surazio et al., 2020), work discipline is the attitude of
complying with the norms established and implemented by a company or
institution in accordance with relevant laws. Based on the results of studies
that have been carried out, the work discipline variable has a positive and
significant impact on PT employee performance. Pegadaian Work Discipline
Variable (X3) with a value of 0.153 which means that training increases by
0.153 or 15.3% assuming other independent variables have constant values. The t
test shows that the value is > t table (2.228 > 1.668) and the
significant value is 0.029 < 0.05. It can be concluded that Work Discipline
has a positive and significant impact on employee performance.
By realizing work discipline, it will ensure that regulations are
maintained and run smoothly within a company, which will result in increased
employee performance. This is supported by research results (issalillah, 2019)
which show that discipline has a positive and significant impact on employee
performance at PT. Luxury Indah Jaya � Binjai.
CONCLUSION
Based on the results, it can be concluded that the research results
are: (1) based on the results of hypothesis testing, which shows that training
has a positive and significant impact on employee performance and the training
variable has a significant level of 0.000. Which means the training system at
PT. Pegadaian is appropriate and influences employee performance. (2) based on
the results of hypothesis testing, which shows that compensation has a positive
and significant effect on employee performance and the compensation variable
has a significant level of 0.008. Which means the compensation system at PT.
Pegadaian is appropriate and influences employee performance, and (3) based on
the results of hypothesis testing, which shows that work discipline has a
positive and significant influence on employee performance and the work
discipline variable has a significant level of 0.029. Which means the work
discipline system at PT. Pegadaian are right and affect employee performance.
Acknowledgment
This article is a part of joint research and publication between
Faculty of Economics and Business, National University, Jakarta and Faculty of
Business, Economics, and Social Development, Universiti Malaysia Terengganu.
REFERENCES
Anggrainy, I. F., Darsono, N., & Putra, T. R. I. (2017). Pengaruh
fasilitas kerja, disiplin kerja dan kompensasi terhadap motivasi kerja
implikasinya pada prestasi kerja pegawai negeri sipil badan kepegawaian
pendidikan dan pelatihan Provinsi Aceh. Jurnal Magister Manajemen, 1(1), 1�10.
Baharuddin, A., Alhabsyi, T., & Utami, H. N. (2013). Pengaruh
Pelatihan, Kompensasi dan Disiplin Kerja Terhadap Prestasi Kerja Karyawan
(Studi Pada Kantor PT. PLN (Persero) Area Pelayanan dan Jaringan Malang).
Jurnal Profit, 6(2), 56�68.
Catio, M., Sarwani, & Ruknan. (2020). Manajemen Sumber Daya Manusia
(A. Rachmatullah (ed.)). Indigo Media.
Dessler. (2015). Manajemen Sumber Daya Manusia. Salemba Empat.
Eri Susan, 2019:1. (2019). MANAJEMEN SUMBER DAYA MANUSIA Eri Susan 1.
Jurnal Manajemen Pendidikan, 2, 952�962.
Ghozali. (2011).������ Aplikasi�������� Analisis��������� Multivariate��� Dengan�������� Program������� SPSS.
Universitas Diponegoro.
Hasibuan. (2012). Manajemen Sumber Daya Manusia. Bumi Aksara.
issalillah, fayola. (2019). Pengaruh Motivasi Kerja Dan Disiplin Kerja
Terhadap Kinerja Karyawan. 2. https://doi.org/10.31227/osf.io/9frzv
Larasati, S. (2018). Manajemen Sumber Daya Manusia (H. Susanto, Ari
(ed.)). Deepublish.
Mangkunegara, P. A. (2009). Manajemen Sumber Daya Manusia Perusahaan. PT.
Remaja Rosdakarya.
MARATUR LUMBAN RAJA, E. (2016). Pengaruh Pelatihan Dan Kompensasi
Terhadap Kinerja Karyawan Pada Pt. Pln (Persero) Area Surabaya Utara. Jurnal
Ilmu Manajemen (JIM), 4(3).
Nana, D., & Elin, H. (2018). Memilih Metode Penelitian Yang Tepat:
Bagi Penelitian Bidang Ilmu Manajemen. Jurnal Ilmu Manajemen, 5(1), 288.
https://jurnal.unigal.ac.id/index.php/ekonologi/article/view/1359
Nasir, M., & Siregar, M. R. (2017). Pengaruh Pelatihan, Kompensasi
Dan Disiplin Kerja Terhadap Prestasi Kerja Karyawan Di Kantor Pln (Persero)
Banda Aceh. Jurnal Ilmiah Mahasiswa Ekonomi Manajemen, 2(1), 104�117.
Nasution, S. (2017). Variabel penelitian. Raudhah, 05(02), 1�9.
http://jurnaltarbiyah.uinsu.ac.id/index.php/raudhah/article/view/182
Notoatmodjo. (2009). Pengembangan Sumber Daya Manusia. Rineka Cipta. Nurvita,
A. R., & Budiarti, A. (2019). Jurnal Ilmu dan Riset Manajemen e-ISSN: 2461-0593.
Jurnal Ilmu Dan Riset Manajemen, 8, 1�18.
Rini Astuti1, I. S. (2018). Pengaruh Pelatihan Dan Kompensasi Terhadap
Kinerja Karyawan Pada PT. Kemasindo Cepat Nusantara Medan. Seminar Nasional
Royal (SENAR), Rini Astut (Rini Astuti1, Indah Sari2), 461�464.
Rivai. (2006). Manajemen Sumber Daya Manusia untuk Perusahaan dari
teori ke praktik. PT. Raja Grafindo Persada.
Rumahlaiselan, A., Wenas, R. S., Manajemen, J., Sam, U., & Manado,
R. (2018). Pengaruh Pelatihan Dan Kompensasi Terhadap Produktivitas Kerja
Karyawan Pada Pt Sumber Alfaria Trijaya, Tbk Cabang Manado. Jurnal EMBA: Jurnal
Riset Ekonomi, Manajemen, Bisnis Dan Akuntansi, 6(4), 3783�3792.
https://doi.org/10.35794/emba.v6i4.21904
Safriatna, S., Hermanto, H., & Wardini, A. K. (2020). Pengaruh
Pelatihan, Kompensasi, Dan Disiplin Terhadap Kinerja Penyuluh Keluarga
Berencana Di Kabupaten Bima. JISIP (Jurnal Ilmu Sosial Dan Pendidikan), 4(3).
https://doi.org/10.36312/jisip.v4i3.1336
Sari, M. S., & Wulandari, A. (2021). Pengaruh Pengungkapan Corporate
Social Responbility (CSR) Terhadap Nilai Perusahaan (Studi Kasus pada Subsektor
Tekstil dan Garmen yang Terdaftar di Bursa Efek Indonesia (BEI) tahun 2017-2019.
2(2), 2019�2022.
Sedarmayanti. (2017). Sumber Daya Manusia dan Produktivitas Kerja. CV.
Mandar Maju.
Setiawan. (2014). Pengaruh Kompensasi dan Lingkungan KerjaTerhadap
Kinerja Karyawan Pada CV. Berkat Anugrah. E-Jurnal Manajemen Universitas
Udayana.
Siagian, S. S. I. (2015). Pengaruh Pelatihan, Kepuasan Kompensasi,
Motivasi Dan Disiplin Kerja Terhadap Kinerja Karyawan. Jurnal Ilmu Dan Riset
Manajemen, 4(prom 2), 1�20.
Simamora, H. (2004). Manajemen Sumber Daya Manusia (Ketiga). Sekolah Tinggi
Ilmu Ekonomi YPKN.
Subroto, S. (2018). Pengaruh Pelatihan Dan Motivasi Terhadap Kinerja
Karyawan. Optimal: Jurnal Ekonomi Dan Kewirausahaan, 12(1), 18�33.
https://doi.org/10.33558/optimal.v12i1.1544
Sujarweni, V. W. (2015). Statistik untuk Bisnis dan Ekonomi.
Yogyakarta: Pustaka Baru Press.
Sugiyono. (2019). Metode Penelitian Bisnis (Pendekatan Kuantitatif,
Kualitatif dan R&D). Alfabeta.
Sunarto, A. (2021). Pengaruh Pelatihan Dan Kompensasi Terhadap Kinerja
Karyawan Cv Murni Rasa Bogor. Jurnal Arastirma, 1(2), 326. https://doi.org/10.32493/arastirma.v1i2.12370
Surajio, Nasruddin, & Oaleni, H. (2020). Penelitian Sumber Daya
Manusia, Pengertian, Teori dan Aplikasi (Menggunakan IBM SPSS 22 FOR WINDOWS).
Deepublish Publisher.
Sutrisno, E. (2016). Manajemen Sumber Daya Manusia. Kencana Prenada
Media Group.
Umar, H. (2008). Metode Penelitian untuk Skripsi dan Tesis Bisnis Edisi
Kedua. PT Raja Grafindo Persada.
Unaradjan, Dolet, D. (2019). Metode Penelitian Kuantitatif (K. Sihotang
(ed.). Grafindo.
Veithza, R. (2011). Manajemen Sumber Daya Manusia untuk Perusahaan:
dari Teori ke Praktik. RajaGrafindo Persada.
Wiwin, H. (2021). Analisis Model-Model Pelatihan (C. B. Tim (ed.)).
Wulandari, A. (2020). Pengaruh Instruktur Pelatihan, Peserta Pelatihan,
Materi Pelatihan, Metode Pelatihan Dan Tujuan Pelatihan Terhadap Kinerja
Karyawan. Value: Jurnal Manajemen Dan Akuntansi, 15(1), 1�14.
Yusup, F. (2018). Uji Validitas dan Reliabilitas Instrumen Penelitian
Kuantitatif. Jurnal Tarbiyah : Jurnal Ilmiah Kependidikan, 7(1), 17�23.
https://doi.org/10.18592/tarbiyah.v7i1.2100
|
Copyright holder: Ayu
Lian Putri, Herry Krisnandi, Kumba Digdowiseiso (2024) |
|
First publication right: |
|
This article is licensed under:
|
