JOURNAL SYNTAX IDEA

p�ISSN: 2723-4339 e-ISSN: 2548-1398

Vol. 6, No. 3, March 2024

 

 

Influence Style Leadership, Motivation, and Discipline Work to Performance Employee

 

Oxy Prabowo1*, Agus Rohmat Hidayat2, Septien Dwi Savandha3

1*,2 UNICIMI Universitas Cendikia Indonesia, Yogyakarta Indonesia,

3Universitas Swadaya Gunung Djati, Cirebon, Indonesia

E-mail: 1*[email protected], 2[email protected], 3[email protected]

 

Abstract

This research aims to determine the effect of leadership style, motivation, and work discipline on the performance of employees. The method study uses descriptive analysis with a correlation approach. T-test results It is obtained that the calculated t-value of the motivation variable (X2) has a mark p-value as big as 0,000 <0.05. It means significant, while the t count is 7.287 > from the t table 1.987, meaning it is substantial. The means of 7,287 (X2) motivation are in a way that is partially influential to Performance Employee (Y). The size that influences motivation in performance employees is as big as 37.6%. 3) Discipline influences employee performance. The t-test results showed that the t value was calculated variable motivation (X3) own mark p-value as big as 0,000<0.05 means significant, while the t count is 4.794 > from the t table 1,987 It means substantial. The means 4,794 (X3) discipline is in a way that is partially influential to Performance Employee (Y). The influence of discipline on the performance of employees is as significant as 20.7%. 4) The influence between Style Leadership (X 1), Motivation (X2), and discipline (X3) on Performance Employees (Y) is 0.739; this shows that these four variables influence the strong one at limit interpretation intermediate R-value 0.60 � 0.799.

 

Keywords: leadership; motivation and discipline; performance employee.�

 

INTRODUCTION

Seeing changes in the increasingly complex and competitive organizational environment requires organizations to behave more responsively to endure (Senge, 2017). Every organization sued for Ready Face development technology needs consumers and competes intensely with other organizations (Wirtz, 2020). Organizations that want to survive must face these changes with their strategies. One of these strategies is to improve employee performance (Shanafelt & Noseworthy, 2017). By maintaining high employee performance, the organization is likely to survive and thrive (Taneva et al., 2016).

Likewise, with hospitals, according to Lipset (2017), a house hospital is an organization that operates in the field of providing medical services to the public to raise the degree of health of the public. House Sick Also must follow development knowledge and technology because of the nature of the services provided by hospitals to meet customers' needs (Mosadeghrad, 2014).

Currently, the success of a hospital is primarily determined by its employees' knowledge, skills, creativity, and motivation (Mikael et al., 2022). The need for skilled workers in various fields in a hospital has become a global global demand that must be completed (Bong et al., 2020). The presence of technology and other resources are only tools or supporting materials because, in the end, HR is the most decisive (Ko & Rossen, 2017). A hospital that strives to provide maximum service to the community is the Sumber Kasih Hospital in Cirebon City (Saputra et al., 2024). Sumber Kasih City Hospital Cirebon's proactive move is going to change business, which is competitive, And endeavor to apply characteristics separately, which is Good Clinical Governance. House Sick Sumber Kasih Cirebon City as BLU (Public Service Agency) continues to make efforts to improve services and ease of access for people in need. To provide the best service, Sumber Kasih Hospital Cirebon City certainly must own employees who perform maximum to support vision and mission, Influence Style Leadership, Motivation, And Discipline Work to Performance Employee objectives, and all activity programs that can improve the image of Sumber Hospital Love City Cirebon.

Employee performance is essential in driving progress in an organization, so employee performance is vital to improve. Organizational goals will only be achieved with good work from its employees. Rivaldo (2023) defines "Performance (work achievement) as a work result achieved by a person in carrying out tasks which are charged to her based on skill, experience, and sincerity as well as time." Defining that" Employee performance (work achievement) is the result of work in terms of quality and quantity achieved by an employee in carrying out his duties following his responsibilities answer Which given to him."

Employees who achieve high performance need more answers, are obedient to rules, are honest at work, cooperate, and take initiative (Prihantoro, 2015). If employees work optimally with full awareness, organizational goals will be more easily achieved (Arif, 2021).

However, the performance of employees is no longer in the circumstances, and at Sumber Kasih Hospital, Cirebon City, it is constant. We still see weak performance, as shown by a lack of responsibility towards work, a lack of initiative in dealing with problems at work, less involvement in the collaboration process between units, less compliance with the rules, discipline, etc.

Many factors influence performance, including leadership style, motivation, and discipline. As a driving force, the leader is the Wrong One holder key to the organization's achievement. Success organization in reaching the goal No free from ability leader in managing resources owned by the organization. These resources include employees who work in the organization. Deep leadership Organizations also play an essential role in improving employee performance. Mangkunegara (2017) explains, "Leadership is one factor that influences the performance of somebody in the organization."

In leading an organization, a leader uses methods or style leadership. "Style leadership is norm behavior which uses somebody in a moment to influence another person as he Looks."

Apart from leadership style and motivation, the discipline also determines the performance of employees. Factor discipline plays a significant role in employee work implementation. Employees with high levels of discipline will continue to work well even without being supervised by the leadership. Employee: A disciplined person will only steal work time to do things concerning work and obey existing regulations with high awareness without flavor coercion. Finally, employees who have discipline Work. Those who are high will perform well because working time is utilized as well as possible. It is To carry out suitable job targets Which has been set.

Siagian (2016) stated, "Work discipline is carrying out all the terms and conditions of work are good." The critical role of discipline is stated by Hasibuan (2018), who thinks that: �Discipline Also No It is less important than other principles, meaning that every employee is always disciplined influence results performance Work. Because of that, in every organization, the discipline of its employees is emphasized. Through high discipline, productivity employee work can be improved.� In essence, with discipline, you can do it make a positive contribution to improving performance as has been planned previously.

So it can be understood that leadership style, motivation, and discipline can influence employee performance in an organization, leaders apply their style appropriately To lead, direct, And guide employees, motivate employees For Work in a way maximum And application Discipline with full responsibility is very necessary to create performance Which tall.

From exposure, the writer is interested in doing a study about the four variables above (Variable X1 Leadership Style), (Variable X2 Motivation), (Variable X3 Discipline), and (Variable Y Performance Employee) and pouring in A thesis. The title is "Influence Style Leadership, Motivation And Discipline Work towards Performance Employee House Source Pain Love City Cirebon.�

 

RESEARCH METHOD

This research uses descriptive methods and correlational methods. According to Latifah (2020), descriptive methods aim to describe the nature of something occurring when the research is conducted and inspect the causes of something symptom-specific. According to Nasution (2018), "The descriptive method is a method that aims to answer questions which concern something while the research process is in progress. Temporarily, what is meant by correlational descriptive research, according to Fox Inside Rahi (2017), is a "Method which is designed to determine the level of connection between different variables in a population. Researchers can find out how much the independent variables contribute to the dependent variable and the magnitude of the direction of the connection that happens.

Data collection techniques in this research include 1) study documentation and 2) filling out the questionnaire/questionnaire. Meanwhile, data analysis can be completed using the analysis of data descriptively, analysis correlation, and analysis regression.

 

RESULTS AND DISCUSSION

A.  Results Study

1.    Analysis Data Descriptive

a.    Leadership Style Overview at Sumber Kasih Hospital City Cirebon

To find out an overview of Leadership Style at the Hospital Source Love City Cirebon done the steps as following:

1)   Count score ideal, with how to multiply the amount of all items valid for variable X 1 (20 grains) with the highest value, namely five, so 20 x 5 = 100

2)   Calculates intervals by subtracting the ideal score from the number of items, then multiply 33%, then 100 � 20 = 80 x 33% = 26.4

3)   Determine the top, middle, and bottom scores in high, medium, and low categories based on estimation logic as a reference, with the opportunity amount lowest answer score of 20.

4)   Count the number of respondents' answers that fall into the category tall, currently, or low to each variable, Then percentage the steps as follows:

a)      Presentation data score evaluation results calculation from the questionnaire with N = 90, based on score Lowest until score highest that is :

 

Table 1. Score Data Results calculation from questionnaire Variable X 1

Style Leadership

 

 

 

Frequency

 

Percent

 

Valid Percent

Cumulative Percent

Valid

42.00

1

1.1

1.1

1.1

 

44.00

1

1.1

1.1

2.2

 

46.00

1

1.1

1.1

3.3

 

47.00

7

7.8

7.8

11.1

 

49.00

3

3.3

3.3

14.4

 

50.00

1

1.1

1.1

15.6

 

51.00

2

2.2

2.2

17.8

 

52.00

3

3.3

3.3

21.1

 

53.00

8

8.9

8.9

30.0

 

54.00

2

2.2

2.2

32.2

 

55.00

4

4.4

4.4

36.7

 

56.00

2

2.2

2.2

38.9

57.00

8

8.9

8.9

47.8

58.00

3

3.3

3.3

51.1

59.00

4

4.4

4.4

55.6

60.00

2

2.2

2.2

57.8

61.00

4

4.4

4.4

62.2

62.00

5

5.6

5.6

67.8

63.00

3

3.3

3.3

71.1

64.00

3

3.3

3.3

74.4

65.00

2

2.2

2.2

76.7

66.00

3

3.3

3.3

80.0

67.00

4

4.4

4.4

84.4

68.00

1

1.1

1.1

85.6

69.00

1

1.1

1.1

86.7

70.00

3

3.3

3.3

90.0

71.00

3

3.3

3.3

93.3

75.00

1

1.1

1.1

94.4

77.00

2

2.2

2.2

96.7

81.00

1

1.1

1.1

97.8

82.00

2

2.2

2.2

100.0

Total

90

100.0

100.0

 

b)   Count frequency And percentage answers from 90 respondents as the author serves in the table following:

 

Table 2

Frequency and Percentage Answer Respondent to Variable X 1

(Style Leadership)

Category

Frequency

Percentage (%)

Tall

6

6.67

Currently

81

90

Low

3

3.33

Amount

90

100

 

1)   Determine the amount score criterion (SK) with the formula: SK = ST x JB x JR

= 5 x 20 x 90

= 9000

2)   Compare the total score of the questionnaire results for variable X 1 with the total variable X 1 criteria score to find the total score of variable X.

3)   Determine the criteria area into three levels: low, medium, and tall. From the percentage calculation above, the parameters can be obtained percentage as follows:

Area low on interval ���������������������� = 1 % - 33 % Area currently at intervals � = 34 % - 67 % Area tall on interval �������������������������������� = 68 % - 100 %

The value of the variable X 1 of 59.23% is located in the medium criteria area in the interval 34% - 67%. Thus, the criterion area Variable X 1 is as big as 59.23%. The Style Leadership on House Sick Source Love City Cirebon has achieved 59.23% of the set criteria, and this included in the medium criteria category, with interval distances 34% - 67% of this percentage shows that Leadership Style on House Sick Source of Love City Cirebon it's enough Good.

2.    Testing Hypothesis

a.    Influence Leadership Style (X 1 ) on Employee Performance (Y)

For now, big Style influences Leadership (X1) in a way individual (Partial) to Performance Employees (Y) can be seen from the t value in the Coefficients table below with the test criteria. The hypothesis is accepted if the significance level is smaller than 0.05. As for the results testing hypothesis, they are as follows:

 

Table 3. Coefficients a

 

 

Unstandardized Coefficients

Standardized Coefficients

 

Model

 

B

Std. Error

Beta

t

Sig.

1

(Constant)

12,894

4,354

 

2,961

,004

 

Style Leadership

,560

.073

,634

7,698

,000

a. Dependent Variables: Performance

 

 

 

 

 

Based on Table 3, the results of the t-test showed that the t value is calculated as a variable Style Leadership (X1) own mark as big as p-value 0,000 <0.05 It means significant. In contrast, t count 7,698 > from t table 1,987. It means significant. (t table 1.987 obtained from degrees of freedom (df) n-3 or 90- 3=87, with the formula in Microsoft Excel using = tinv (0,05,87). Matter the means Style Leadership (X1) in a way Partial own influence on Employee Performance (Y). This means accepting the Hi hypothesis: "There is an influence of Leadership Style on Performance Employee."

Furthermore, To know how to influence Style Leadership to Performance, Employees can see from the results calculation coefficient of determination in the table this:

 

Table 4. Model Summary

 

Model

 

R

R Square

Adjusted ��� R Square

Std. Error of the Estimate

1

.634 a

,402

,396

6.03236

a. Predictors: (Constant), Style Leadership

 

From the table above, it can be seen that the R Square is 0.402; this is significant that the variable Style Leadership influences 40.2% of the Performance of Employees, whereas the remaining 59.8% are influenced by factors other.

b.    Influence Motivation (X2) to Performance Employee (Y)

To determine the magnitude of the influence of Motivation (X2) individually (partial) on Employee Performance (Y) can be seen from the t value in the table Coefficients under This with criteria testing If level significance is more minor from 0.05, so hypothesis accepted. As for results, the testing hypotheses are as follows:

Table 5. Coefficients a

 

 

Unstandardized Coefficients

Standardized Coefficients

 

Model

 

B

Std. Error

Beta

t

Sig.

1

(Constant)

17,434

3,981

 

4,379

,000

 

Motivation �I

,471

,065

,613

7,287

,000

a. Dependent Variables: Performance

 

 

 

 

Based on Table 5 results, the t-test shows that the calculated t-value of the variable Motivation (X2) has a p-value of 0.000 <0.05, meaning it is significant. In contrast, t count 7,287 > from t table 1.987. It means significant. (t table 1,987 obtained from degrees of freedom (df) n-3 or 90-3=87, with the formula in Microsoft Excel using =tinv(0,05,87). This means Motivation (X2) partially affects Employee Performance (Y). It is meaningful to accept hypothesis Hi, which states: "There is influence Motivation to Performance Employee."

Furthermore, To know how to influence Motivation Performance, Employees can see from the results calculation coefficient determination in the table below:

 

Table 6. Model Summary

 

Model

 

R

 

R Square

Adjusted ��� R

Square

Std. Error of

the Estimate

1

.613 a

,376

,369

6.16260

a. Predictors: (Constant), Motivation

 

 

From the table above, it can be seen that the R Square is 0.378; this is significant that the variable Motivation influences 37.6% of the Performance of Employees, whereas the rest, 62.4%, is influenced by other factors.

c.    Influence Discipline (X3) to Performance Employee (Y)

To determine the magnitude of the influence of Discipline (X3) individually (partial) on Employee Performance (Y) can be seen from the t value in the table Coefficients below with testing criteria if the level of significance is smaller from 0.05, so the hypothesis is accepted. As for results, the testing hypotheses are as follows:

 

Table 7. Coefficients a

 

 

Unstandardized Coefficients

Standardized Coefficients

 

Model

 

B

Std. Error

Beta

t

Sig.

1

(Constant)

24,183

4,621

 

5,234

,000

 

DISCIPLINE

,503

.105

,455

4,794

,000

a. Dependent Variables: Performance

 

 

 

 

Based on Table 7, the t-test results show that the t value is calculated as a variable Motivation (X3) has a p-value of 0.000 <0.05, meaning it is significant. In contrast, t count 4,794 > from t table 1.987. It means significant. (t table 1,987 obtained from degrees of freedom (df) n-3 or 90-3=87, with the formula in Microsoft Excel using =tinv (0,05,87). This means Discipline (X3) partially affects Employee Performance (Y). That is meaningful to accept hypothesis Hi, which states: "There is influence Discipline to Performance Employee".

Furthermore, To know how big an influence discipline Performance Employees can see from the results calculation coefficient determination in the table below:

 

Table 8. Model Summary

 

 

Model

 

R

 

R Square

Adjusted ��� R

Square

Std. Error of the Estimate

1

,455 a

,207

,198

6.94870

a. Predictors: (Constant), Discipline

 

 

 

From the table above, it can be seen that the R Square is 0.207; this is significant that 20.7% of Performance Employees are influenced by variable discipline, whereas the rest, 79.3%, are influenced by other factors.

d.    Influence of Leadership Style (X1), Motivation (X2), and Discipline (X3) on Employee performance (Y)

Furthermore, For now, influence together Style Leadership (X1), Motivation (X2), And Discipline (X3) to Performance Employee (Y), tested using the F test. The test results can be seen in the table below:

 

Table 9. ANOVA b

 

Model

Sum Squares

of

 

df

Mean Square

 

F

 

Sig.

1

Regression �� 2926.034

 

3

975,345

34,480

,000 a

 

Residual ������ 2432,689

 

86

28,287

 

 

 

Total ����������� 5358,722

 

89

 

 

 

a. 
Predictors: (Constant), Discipline, Motivation, Style Leadership

b.  Dependent Variables: Performance

 

Based on the results table, the ANOVA or F test obtained an F count of 34,480 with a significance level 0.000. This means that the Leadership Style variable (X 1 ), Motivation (X 2 ), and discipline (X3) together influence the variables Performance Employee (Y). Results test the F own mark p-value 0,000 <0.05, which means it is significant, while the t count is 34.480 > from the t table 2.709, which means it is significant. (t table 2.709 is obtained from df1=k-1 and df2 = nk, k is the number of dependent variables and independent, then df1 =4-1 =3 and df2= 90-3=87, with the formula in Microsoft excel uses =finv(0.05,3.87). This means that leadership style (X1), motivation (X2), and discipline (X3) influence employee performance (Y). The means to accept hypothesis Hi is as follows: "There is influence Style Leadership, Motivation and discipline to Performance Employee."

Next, to find out how much influence Leadership Style has, Motivation and discipline towards employee performance can be seen from the calculation results coefficient of determination in the table below:

 

Table 10. Model Summary

 

Model

 

R

R Square

Adjusted ��� R

Square

Std. Error of

the Estimate

1

,739 a

,546

,530

5.31856

a. Predictors: ��� (Constant), �� Discipline, �������������������������� Motivation, �� Style

Leadership

 

The table above shows that Adjusted R Square is 0.530; this is the case, which means that 53% of the Performance Employees are influenced by the variable Style Leadership, Motivation, And discipline, whereas other factors influence the remaining 47%.

e.       Analysis Correlation

The correlation analysis used is multiple correlation analysis. Analyzing this will be used to determine the influence of leadership style variables (X1), motivation (X2), and discipline (X3) on the performance of employees (Y) in a way that is together.

 

Table 11

Correlations

 

������������������������� Style Leader nan

Motivation si

Discipline n

Performance

Style Leadership

Pearson Correlation

1

,440 **

,576 **

,634 **

 

Sig. (2-tailed)

 

,000

,000

,000

 

N

90

90

90

90

Motivation

Pearson Correlation

,440 **

1

,332 **

,613 **

 

Sig. (2-tailed)

,000

 

,001

,000

 

N

90

90

90

90

Discipline

Pearson Correlation

,576 **

,332 **

1

,455 **

 

Sig. (2-tailed)

,000

,001

 

,000

 

N

90

90

90

90

Performance

Pearson Correlation

,634 **

,613 **

,455 **

1

 

Sig. (2-tailed)

,000

,000

,000

 

 

N

90

90

90

90

**. Correlation is significant at the 0.01 levels (2-tailed).

 

 

From Table 11, it can be known that there is an influence Style Leadership (X1) with Performance Employee (Y) as big as 0.634, And p-value 0.000 < 0.05, then it is significant. The figure is 0.634 if consulted the table Limitations and Interpretation of the r value according to Sugiyono (2005:216) are included in the influence category, which is strong with limitations 0.60 - 0.799.

There is influence Motivation (X2) with Employee Performance (Y) of 0.613 and p-value 0.000 < 0.05 then it is significant. The figure is 0.613 if consulted on table Limitation And Interpretation Mark according to Sugiyono (2005:216), so including one category influences the strong one with limitation 0.60 - 0.799.

There is an influence Discipline (X3) with Employee Performance (Y) of 0.455 and p-value 0.000 < 0.05 then it is significant. The figure is 0.455 if consulted on table Limitation and Interpretation Mark r according to Sugiyono (2005:216), including on influence category which currently has limitations 0.40 �0, 599.

Meanwhile, the results of the multiple correlation can be seen from the model summary output in Table 4.25, which shows an R figure of 0.739. To be able to provide an interpretation regarding the correlation coefficient obtained, the Limitations and Interpretation of the r value, according to Sugiyono (2005:216) and the R number of 0.739, includes on category strong with a limit of 0.60 - 0.799.

B.   Discussion

After processing and analyzing the data obtained from the answers on the questionnaire distributed to respondents regarding Leadership Style (X1), Motivation (X2), Discipline (X3), and Employee Performance (Y) then it is obtained description as follows :

X1Y=0,402

X2Y=0,376

X3Y=0,207

X3

X1 X2X3Y=0,530

Y

X2

X1

Picture 1. Diagram Influence Variable Study

 

Information:

X 1 = Leadership Style Variable X 2 = Variable Motivation

X 3 = Variable Discipline

Y = Performance Variables Employee

Influence Style Leadership to Performance Employee

Partial testing influence of variables Style Leadership to Employee performance The result obtained is that the Leadership Style variable can predict Employee Performance positively. The significance value is 0.000, meaning that the hypothesis is accepted. If seen from test t obtained that mark t count as big as 7,698 whereas mark t table as big as 1,987. Therefore, it is known that t count > t table This means that the hypothesis formulated previously, which states that "There is influence Style Leadership on Employee Performance," is accepted or proven. In other words, Leadership Style can predict increased employee performance. As for the big influence of upbeat style leadership on performance, employees are 40.2%.

The research results described previously show that Leadership style is sufficient to support employee performance. This matter was shown by opinions from 90-person employees, which made respondents say that Style Leadership is one category currently as big as 90% or as many as 81 people, and 6.67% or 6 people had a high opinion. Meanwhile, the opinion was low as 3 people or 3.33%.

The research hypothesis reveals that �There is an influence of Leadership Style on Employee Performance,� which means that improving employee performance can be achieved by increasing the Style of Leadership (Hidayat, 2020).

A leader can use various methods to influence others or subordinates to take specific actions that are always focused on achieving organizational goals (Imam Mutakin et al., 2020). This method reflects the attitude and views a leader as a person whom he leads, and he describes his leadership (Agus Rohmat Hidayat, Nur Alifah, 2023).

Ways that can be done to improve employee performance through style leadership are Giving instructions appropriately, doing continuous supervision, providing opportunities for comments to subordinates, and bestowing authority according to the field of his job (Hidayat & Alifah, 2022).

The research results show the influence of Leadership Style on employees, in line with the opinion of the results of this research powered by opinion Rani (2015) that leadership styles vary from one situation to situation other in push or direct para subordinates according to the level of development and maturity of the people they lead. The situational leadership style will be based on factors such as leader, followers, situation, structure tasks, maps power, and dynamics group.

From this opinion, one can understand that leadership style influences employee performance. In connection with this research, from the results of data analysis supported by the opinion above, it can be concluded that there is an influence of Style Leadership on the Performance of Employees while accepting the hypothesis proposed previously, namely: "There is an influence of Style Leadership towards performance Employee. "

Influence Motivation to Performance Employee

Testing in a way Partial influence variable Motivation to Performance Employee The results show that the motivation variable can positively predict employee performance. A significance value of 0.000 means that the hypothesis is accepted. If seen from the t-test, it is found that the calculated t-value is 7.287 while the t-table value is 1.987. Thus, it is known that t count > t table means that the hypothesis that has been previously formulated states that "There is an influence of Motivation on Employee Performance" is accepted or proven. Alternatively, motivation can predict increased performance among employees. The magnitude of motivation's influence on employee performance amounts to 37.6%.

The research results described previously show that motivation already has enough support to performance Employees. This is shown by the opinions of 90 employees who responded that motivation Employee work is in the medium category at 85.56% or 77 people, and 11.11% or 10 people have a high opinion. Meanwhile, those who think low as many as 3 people or 3.33%.

The research hypothesis reveals that �There is an influence of Work Motivation on Employee Performance," which means that employee performance can be improved through Motivation.

Motivation is the driving force that results in a member of an organization Want to And willing to deploy ability in form skill or skills, energy and time to organize various activities become not quite enough he answered And carry out his obligations in frame achievement objective And various target organization Which has determined previously.

Ways that can be done to improve performance through motivation include recognition for work results, providing exciting work, and giving opportunities to advance.

The research results show that there is an influence on Motivation for Performance Employees, in line with the opinion Van Thang (2022) put forward: "Motivation reflected from the desire somebody to take the task in a way consistent, responsible for his actions and try to overcome all challenge And obstacle in effort reach objective Which want to achieved.�

In my opinion, it can be concluded that the performance of employees can increase, as can motivation.

Influence Discipline to Performance Employee

Testing in a way that partially influences variable discipline to the performance of Employees results in the fact that variable discipline can predict the performance of employees positively. A significance value of 0.000 means that the hypothesis is accepted. If seen from the t-test, it is found that the calculated t-value is 4.794 while the t-table value is 1.987. Thus, it is known that t count > t table means that the hypothesis that has been previously formulated states that "There is influence discipline to performance employee" is accepted or proven. Alternatively, discipline can predict increased performance among employees. The magnitude of discipline's influence on employee performance amounts to 20.7%.

The research results described previously show that Discipline is sufficient to support employee performance. This is demonstrated by the opinion of 90 employees who were respondents that Discipline was in the medium category at 85.56% or as many as 77 people, and 5.55% or 5 people with high opinions. Meanwhile, those with low opinions were 8 people or 8.89%.

Referring to the research hypothesis reveals that �There is influence Discipline to Performance Employee," which means that employee performance can be improved through Discipline.

Discipline is a form of employee self-control and regular implementation, and it shows a level of sincerity in teamwork in an organization. Ways that can be done to improve performance through discipline include being appropriate at times and obeying the regulations in place Work (Hidayat & Hardiyanto, 2022).

Influence Leadership Style Motivation and Discipline towards Performance Employee

Testing, in a way, influences variable style leadership motivation and discipline on employee performance, obtaining variable results. Leadership style and employee work motivation can predict the performance of employees together. A significance value of 0.000 means that the hypothesis is accepted. If seen from the F test, it is found that the calculated t value amounted to 34.480 while the t table value was 2.709. Thus, it is known that t count > t table. This means that the hypothesis formulated previously states that "There is a significant influence on style leadership, motivation, and discipline on employee performance� is accepted or proven. Alternatively, other leadership styles, motivation, and discipline can enhance employee performance. As for big influence, positive Style Leadership, Motivation, and Discipline to Performance Employees are 53%.

Referring to the hypothesis study discloses that "There is the influence of Motivational and Disciplinary Leadership Style on Employee Performance. " This means that the Performance of Employees can improve with Style, Leadership, Motivation, and discipline.

Temporary results show a double correlation between Variable Style Leadership (X1), Motivation (X2), and Discipline (X3) on Employee Performance (Y), which obtained the number R of 0.739. This shows that these four variables have an influence and are strong at the limits interpretation R-value between 0.60 � 0.799.

 

 

CONCLUSION

Based on the results analysis and discussion, which has been stated previously, the following conclusions can be drawn: 1) Style leadership influences House Sick Source Love City Cirebon to Performance employees. The t-test results showed that the calculated t value of the Leadership Style variable (X 1 ) has a p-value of 0.000 <0.05, meaning it is significant, while the t count is 7.698 > from t table 1,987. It means significant. Matter the means 7,698 (X1) in a way Partial influence on Employee Performance (Y). The magnitude of leadership style's influence on employees' Performance is as significant as 40.2%. 2) Motivation influences employee performance. The t-test results showed that the t value was calculated as a variable motivation (X2) own mark p-value as big as 0,000 <0.05, Which means significant. In contrast, t count 7.287 > from t table 1.987, which means it is significant. That's meaningful 7,287 (X2) motivation in a way Partial influential to Performance Employee (Y). The size that influences motivation in performance employees is as big as 37.6%. 3) Discipline influences employee performance. The t-test results showed that the t value was calculated as a variable motivation (X3), which has a p-value of 0.000 <0.05, meaning it is significant, whereas the t count is 4.794 > from the t table 1.987, meaning it is significant. This means 4,794 (X3) disciplines partially influence employee performance (Y). The magnitude of the influence of discipline on the Performance of employees is as significant as 20.7%. 4) There is influence. The significant relationship between Leadership Style (X1), Motivation (X2), and discipline (X3) towards Employee Performance (Y) is 0.739; this shows that the four variables have an influence that is vital within the range of interpretation of the R-value between 0.60 � 0.799.

 

REFERENCES

 

Agus Rohmat Hidayat, Nur Alifah, A. A. R. (2023). Kontribusi Digitalisasi Bisnis Dalam Menyokong Pemulihan Ekonomi dan Mengurangi Tingkat Pengangguran di Indonesia. Jurnal Syntax Idea, 5(9), 1259�1269. https://doi.org/10.46799/syntax-idea.v5i9.2559

 

Arif, F. (2021). The influence of transformational leadership, discipline, and productivity on employee performance. Scientific Journal of Reflection: Economic, Accounting, Management and Business, 4(1), 51�60.

 

Bong, C.-L., Brasher, C., Chikumba, E., McDougall, R., Mellin-Olsen, J., & Enright, A. (2020). The COVID-19 pandemic: effects on low-and middle-income countries. Anesthesia & Analgesia, 131(1), 86�92.

 

Hasibuan, S. M. (2018). Pengaruh Kepemimpinan, Lingkungan Kerja dan Motivasi Kerja terhadap Kinerja. Maneggio: Jurnal Ilmiah Magister Manajemen, 1(1), 71�80.

 

Hidayat, A. R. (2020). Tinjauan Ekonomi Islam Terhadap Jual Beli Online Account Game Mobile Legends: Bang Bang Dalam Tinjauan Fiqih Muamalah. Jurnal Syntax Admiration, 1(1), 13�22.

 

Hidayat, A. R., & Alifah, N. (2022). Analysis of The Basis of The Creative Economy in The Development Strategy of Economic Innovation. Asian Journal of Social and Humanities, 1(3), 95�104.

 

Hidayat, A. R., & Hardiyanto, F. (2022). Lembaga Keuangan dan Kebijakan Publik Dalam Menangani Krisis Ekonomi Global. Syntax Literate; Jurnal Ilmiah Indonesia, 7(10), 17710�17719.

 

Imam Mutakin, Taufik Ridwan, & Hidayat, A. R. (2020). Strategi Pengembangan Usaha Berbasis Komunitas (Studi Kasus Konveksi Jack Tailor Di Desa Ciperna). Jurnal Indonesia Sosial Sains, 1(1), 51�59. https://doi.org/10.36418/jiss.v1i1.10

 

Ko, S., & Rossen, S. (2017). Teaching Online: A Practical Guide (Fourth). Routledge.

 

Latofah, N., & Harjo, D. (2020). Analisis Tax Awareness Dalam Upaya Meningkatkan Kepatuhan Wajib Pajak Di Kantor Pelayanan Pajak Pratama Bekasi Barat. Jurnal Pajak Vokasi (JUPASI), 2(1), 52�62. https://doi.org/10.31334/jupasi.v2i1.1121

 

Lipset, S. (2017). Social organization of medical work. Routledge.

 

Mangkunegara, A. P. (2017). Manajemen Sumber Daya Manusia Perusahaan. Remaja Rosdakarya.

 

Mikael, M., Sofiyan, S., Faris, S., & Rostina, C. F. (2022). The Effect of Communication and Work Environment on Employee Performance With Motivation as Intervening Variable at Royal Prima Medan Hospital. International Journal of Science, Technology & Management, 3(5), 1373�1379.

 

Mosadeghrad, A. M. (2014). Factors influencing healthcare service quality. International Journal of Health Policy and Management, 3(2), 77.

 

Nasution, N. (2018). Strategi Manajemen Penyiaran Radio Swasta Kiss Fm Dalam Menghadapi Persaingan Informasi Digital. Jurnal Interaksi: Jurnal Ilmu Komunikasi, 2(2), 167�178. https://doi.org/10.30596%2Finteraksi.v2i2.2094

 

Prihantoro, C. R. (2015). The perspective of curriculum in Indonesia on environmental education. International Journal of Research Studies in Education, 4(1), 77�83.

 

Rahi, S. (2017). Research design and methods: A systematic review of research paradigms, sampling issues and instruments development. International Journal of Economics & Management Sciences, 6(2), 1�5.

 

Rani, I. H., & Mayasari, M. (2015). Pengaruh penilaian kinerja terhadap kinerja karyawan dengan motivasi sebagai variabel moderasi. Jurnal Akuntansi, Ekonomi Dan Manajemen Bisnis, 3(2), 164�170.

 

Rivaldo, Y., & Nabella, S. D. (2023). Employee performance: Education, training, experience and work discipline. Calitatea, 24(193), 182�188.

 

Saputra, A., Fitri, K., & Novrianti, D. P. (2024). The Relationship Between Nurse Performance and Inpatient Satisfaction in Regional Hospitals, Madani Pekanbaru City. West Science Interdisciplinary Studies, 2(02), 319�329.

 

Senge, P. M. (2017). The leaders new work: Building learning organizations. In Leadership perspectives (pp. 51�67). Routledge.

 

Shanafelt, T. D., & Noseworthy, J. H. (2017). Executive leadership and physician well-being: nine organizational strategies to promote engagement and reduce burnout. Mayo Clinic Proceedings, 92(1), 129�146.

 

Siagian, M. D. (2016). Kemampuan koneksi matematik dalam pembelajaran matematika. MES: Journal of Mathematics Education and Science, 2(1).

 

Taneva, S. K., Arnold, J., & Nicolson, R. (2016). The experience of being an older worker in an organization: A qualitative analysis. Work, Aging and Retirement, 2(4), 396�414.

 

Van Thang, D., & Nghi, N. Q. (2022). The effect of work motivation on employee performance: the case at OTUKSA Japan company. World Journal of Advanced Research and Reviews, 13(1), 404�412.

 

Wirtz, J. (2020). Organizational ambidexterity: cost-effective service excellence, service robots, and artificial intelligence. Organizational Dynamics, 49(3), 1�9.

 

Copyright holder:

Oxy Prabowo*, Agus Rohmat Hidayat, Septien Dwi Savandha (2024)

 

First publication right:

Journal of Social Science

 

This article is licensed under: