Suganda, Erik Irawan
Unknown Affiliation

Published : 1 Documents Claim Missing Document
Claim Missing Document
Check
Articles

Found 1 Documents
Search

Analysis of The Influence of Work Motivation on Employee Performance at PT Pertamina EP CEPU (PEPC) Regional 4 Herman, Herman; Suganda, Erik Irawan; Oktavia, Nanda Diena
Jurnal Manajemen (Edisi Elektronik) Vol. 16 No. 3 (2025): Jurnal Manajemen (Edisi Elektronik)
Publisher : UPT Jurnal & Publikasi Ilmiah SPs Universitas Ibn Khaldun Bogor

Show Abstract | Download Original | Original Source | Check in Google Scholar | DOI: 10.32832/jm-uika.v16i2.18034

Abstract

This research aims to analyze the influence of work motivation on employee performance at PT Pertamina Ep Cepu (PEPC) Regional 4 Function Supply Chain Management. The type of research used is quantitative research with descriptive analysis methods. Data collection techniques were obtained from observation and questionnaires. The samples used in this research were 40 samples using the sampling method, namely census. The analytical method used is descriptive analysis, simple linear regression, with the testing conditions namely hypothesis testing where there are several testing stages, namely the partial test (t) and the coefficient of determination test (R2). The results of the hypothesis test state that the influence of work motivation on employee performance shows significant results and has a positive sign. Based on a value of 4.216 greater than 2.026 or a value > 4.216 > 2.026 thenĀ  H_0 is rejected and Ha is accepted. The Functional Relationship between the influence of work motivation on employee performance is Y = 14.368 + 0.567, with a regression coefficient of r = 0.565 and a coefficient of determination R Square = 0.319. So these results show that work motivation as a variable (X) has a positive and significant effect on employee performance, namely the variable (Y). The large value of the coefficient of determination shows that the independent variable, namely work motivation (X), can explain the dependent variable, namely employee performance (Y), by 31.9%, while the remaining 69.1% is explained by other variables not included in this research model.