Claim Missing Document
Check
Articles

Found 1 Documents
Search

PENGARUH GAYA KEPEMIMPINAN, BEBAN KERJA, DAN DISIPLIN KERJA TERHADAP KINERJA SDM PADA SMK NEGERI 6 DENPASAR Ni Luh Putu Putri Wijayanti; Ni Luh Kardini; Ni Made Yusmini
Nusantara Hasana Journal Vol. 6 No. 3 (2026): Nusantara Hasana Journal, August 2026
Publisher : Yayasan Nusantara Hasana Berdikari

Show Abstract | Download Original | Original Source | Check in Google Scholar | DOI: 10.59003/nhj.v6i3.2335

Abstract

This study aims to analyze the effect of leadership style, workload, and work discipline on the performance of human resources at SMK Negeri 6 Denpasar. This study employs a quantitative approach with a causal-associative research design. The study population consists of human resources working at SMK Negeri 6 Denpasar, with a sample size of 42 respondents. Data collection was conducted via a questionnaire using a Likert scale. Data analysis employed multiple linear regression analysis using SPSS software, which included tests of validity, reliability, classical assumptions, t-tests, F-tests, and the coefficient of determination. The results of the study indicate that leadership style has a positive and significant effect on human resource performance, with a regression coefficient of 0.376, a t-value of 2.169, and a significance level of 0.036. Workload has a positive and significant effect on human resource performance, with a regression coefficient of 0.436, a t-value of 2.109, and a significance level of 0.042. Work discipline also has a positive and significant effect on human resource performance, with a regression coefficient of 0.490, a t-value of 2.686, and a significance level of 0.011. Collectively, leadership style, workload, and work discipline have a significant effect on human resource performance, with an F-value of 31.392 and a significance level of 0.000. The coefficient of determination (R²) of 0.713 indicates that 71.3% of the variation in human resource performance can be explained by these three variables, while 28.7% is explained by other factors outside the research model.