JRSSEM 2022, Vol. 01, No. 12, 2076 – 2091
E-ISSN: 2807 - 6311, P-ISSN: 2807 - 6494
DOI : 10.36418/jrssem.v1i12.221 https://jrssem.publikasiindonesia.id/index.php/jrssem/index
EFFECT OF COMPENSATION, WORKLOAD, LEADERSHIP
ON EMPLOYEE PERFORMANCE AND IMPLICATIONS ON
ORGANIZATIONAL PERFORMANCE
Agustina Anisa
1*
Yuliantini Tine
2
1,2
Mercu Buana University, Jakarta, Indonesia
e-mail: anissa.agusstina@gmail.com
1
, tine.yuliantini@mercubuana.ac.id
2
Submitted: 27 June 2022, Revised: 05 July 2022, Accepted: 15 July 2022
Abstract. Discussing the practice of human resource management, one of the things that makes
the determining factor for the company's success is performance. The same is true for the services
business sector of PT Pelita Indonesia Djaya, to become a company that has a good reputation
when providing services, performance is also considered important. This study aims to analyze the
effect of Compensation, Workload, Leadership on Employee Performance and Implications on
Organizational Performance Case study PT Pelita Indonesia Djaya. This research methodology uses
a quantitative approach method using Smart PLS 3.3.9 to analyze several theoretical concepts to
88 respondents of company employees. Based on the results of the analysis in this study, the results
obtained are that: 1) There is a positive and significant effect of compensation on employee
performance; 2) There is a significant and significant effect of Workload on Employee Performance;
3) There is a positive and significant influence of leadership on employee performance; 4) There is
a positive and significant effect of Compensation on Organizational Performance; 5) There is a
significant and influential workload on Organizational Performance; 6) There is a positive and
significant influence of Leadership on Organizational Performance; 7) There is a positive and
significant effect of Employee Performance on Organizational Performance; 8) There is a positive
and significant effect of Compensation on Organizational Performance through Employee
Performance; 9) There is a significant and significant influence on Organizational Performance
Workload through Employee Performance; 10) There is a positive and significant influence of
Leadership on Organizational Performance through Employee Performance.
Keyword: compensation; workload; leadership; employee performance; organizational
performance.
Agustina Anisa, Yuliantini Tine
| 2077
DOI : 10.36418/jrssem.v1i12.221 https://jrssem.publikasiindonesia.id/index.php/jrssem/index
INTRODUCTION
Human resource management is an
important component in the company's
strategic planning process. The
competition of this century makes every
country realize that human resources are
things that need to be maintained for the
sustainability of a nation and state.
Practically, human resource management
consists of recruitment and selection,
training and development, compensation
and performance appraisal
(Siyambalapitiya et al., 2018); (Fayazi et al.,
2019).
In a situation of increasingly high
competition, companies need to carefully
evaluate and improve their performance so
that the company can survive and develop
(Linde et al., 2020). The same is true for the
services business sector of PT Pelita
Indonesia Djaya, to become a company
that has a good reputation when providing
services, performance is also considered
important by PT Pelita Indonesia Djaya.
The scope of PT Pelita Indonesia Djaya
is in the field of supplying passenger food
and onboard services. The goal of PT Pelita
Indonesia Djaya is to become a leading
technology-based service company in
Indonesia. When Indonesia implemented
the sea toll program, the fleet of PT
Pelayaran Nasional Indonesia in 2015 was
31 ships, in 2016 it became 80 ships, in 2017
it became 83 ships, and became 86 ships in
2018 (Hameed & Hamad, 2022). This also
has a positive impact on PT Pelita Indonesia
Djaya where organizational performance is
increasing and developing. However, this is
in contrast to the conditions for the last
three years where the organizational
performance of PT Pelita Indonesia Djaya
has decreased.
The organizational performance target
is 100% but in the realization of the KPI in
2018 it does not reach the target weight
set, which is 97.72%. Then the realization of
the KPI in 2019 did not reach the set target
weight, which was 96.17%. In the realization
of the KPI in 2020, it did not reach the
specified weight, which was 84.96%.
Talking about organizational
performance, there are important things to
consider because the achievement of
organizational performance comes from
employee performance activities within the
organization. At PT Pelita Indonesia Djaya,
the performance of employees is difficult to
project because the performance evaluated
is only up to the divisional unit (Poulsen &
Ipsen, 2017); (Agwu, 2012). However, it can
be said that the division's performance is a
reflection of the employee's performance,
because the division's performance targets
are the result of cooperation between
employees in the business unit.
From 2018 to 2020, the division's
performance has a fluctuating status. In
2018, the Commercial and Maintenance
and IT divisions whose achievements did
not reach the target weight score. Then in
the realization of 2019 the Human
Resources division did not reach the target
weight score set (Agwu, 2012). In the
realization of 2020, it did not reach the
weight score set for the Maintenance and
IT and Human Resources divisions (Rai et
al., 2021).
In addition to the above information,
the authors conducted a pre-survey to
determine the perceptions of employees
regarding the factors that affect the
2078 | Effect of Compensation, Workload, Leadership on Employee Performance and
Implications on Organizational Performance
performance.
From the results of the pre-survey, it is
known that the percentage of each variable
is as follows, on compensation it has a
result of 35% stating it is in line with
expectations and 65% stating it is not as
expected. The workload has a result of 34%
stating that they do not have a workload
and 65% who state that they have a
workload when faced with urgent work. In
leadership, 27% stated that leadership was
optimal and 72% stated that it was not
optimal. In work discipline, 80% stated that
they had complied with work discipline
regulations and 20% were not disciplined.
In the work environment, 66% stated that
the company provides comfort in working
and 34% stated that it was not comfortable.
On motivation, 92% have high motivation
to work in the company and 7% have no
motivation to work.
Based on this phenomenon, it can be
concluded that the most influencing factors
on performance are compensation,
workload, and leadership. This is also
reflected in the results of employee
engagement in 2021 regarding
compensation, workload, and leadership
where the results have decreased from the
previous year (McKenzie & Sansone, 2019).
Where compensation which is included in
the perception of working welfare has an
average result of 8.28 exceeding the target
number but decreasing compared to 2020
(Nursaid et al., 2020). In the average
workload of 7.54, it decreased compared to
2020. In leadership, which is included in the
survey indicators, including the perception
of relationships with superiors, the
perception of relationships with
subordinates, superiors appreciate that it
has decreased in 2021.
Based on the data and phenomena
contained in the background of the
problem, the authors are interested in
conducting a study entitled "The Effect of
Compensation, Workload, Leadership on
Employee Performance and Implications on
Organizational Performance at PT Pelita
Indonesia Djaya".
METHODS
This research method uses a survey
method with a quantitative approach. This
research is included in the form of causal or
causal relationship research which is to test
whether one variable causes another
variable to change or not. The population
in this study were employees of PT Pelita
Indonesia Djaya with a total of 114
employees. The sampling technique used is
simple random sampling, where each
element in the population has the same
meaning and opportunity to be selected as
the subject (Lo et al., 2020).
The author measures the sample size to
be studied using the Slovin formula, where
this formula is able to measure the sample
size to be studied. The sample size to be
studied is as follows:
Description:
n = Number of samples
N = Total population
e = error margin of 5%
From the above formula the following
figures are obtained:
Agustina Anisa, Yuliantini Tine
| 2079
So, the sample in this study was 88
employees of PT Pelita Indonesia Djaya.
Results of Data Analysis
Respondent
Description is the author's way of
describing the characteristics of the
research sample in detail. The
characteristics of the respondents in this
study were analysis based on gender, age,
education, and length of service of each
employee.
Table 1. Characteristics of Respondents
Characte
ristics
Gender
Numb
er of
Respo
ndents
Percent
age (%)
Gender
Male
52
59.10%
Female
36
40.90%
Total
88
100%
Age
18-25
years
22
25%
26-30
years
36
40.90%
31-40
years
24
27.28 %
> 40
years
6
6.82%
Total
88
100%
educatio
n
/equivale
nt
7
7.96%
Diploma
6
6.81%
S1
67
76.14%
Masters
degree
8
9.09%
Total
88
100%
Work
duration
1-3 years
23
26.14%
4-6 years
58
65.91%
> 7 years
7
7.95%
Total
88
100%
Source: Data Processing by the Author (2022)
Test Results Measurement Model (Outer
Model)
Convergent Validity Testing in this study
used a loading factor value above 0.7.
Convergent validity test in principle states
that the instrument used as a measure of a
construct should be highly
correlated (Durdyev et al., 2018).
2080 | Effect of Compensation, Workload, Leadership on Employee Performance and
Implications on Organizational Performance
DOI : 10.36418/jrssem.v1i12.221 https://jrssem.publikasiindonesia.id/index.php/jrssem/index
Table 2. Value of Loading Factor
Variables
Indicato
r
Loadi
ng
Factor
Descript
ion
Compensatio
n (X1)
X1.1.
0.870
Valid
X1.2.
0.874
Valid
X1.3.
0.835
Valid
X1.4.
0.865
Valid
Workload
(X3)
X2.1.
0.778
Valid
X2.2.
0.807
Valid
X2.3.
0.747
Valid
X2.4.
0.758
Valid
X2.5.
0.809
Valid
X2.6.
0.833
Valid
X2.7.
0.796
Valid
X2.8.
0.761
Valid
Leadership
(X3)
X3.1.
0.764
Valid
X3.2.
0.748
Valid
X3.3.
0.819
Valid
X3.4.
0.774
Valid
X3.5.
0.728
Valid
X3.6.
0.805
Valid
X3.7.
0.751
Valid
X3.8.
0.771
Valid
X3.9.
0.805
Valid
X3.10.
0.788
Valid
X3.11.
0.784
Valid
X3.12.
0.796
Valid
Employee
Performance
(Y)
Y.1.
0.783
Valid
Y.2.
Y.3
Valid
.
0.823
Valid
Y.4.
0.834
Valid
Y.5.
0.821
Valid
Y.6.
0.813
Valid
Y.7.
Y.8
Valid
.
0.821
Valid
Organization
al
Performance
Z.1.
0.840
Valid
Z.2.
Z.3
Valid
.
0.836
Valid
Agustina Anisa, Yuliantini Tine
| 2081
Variables
Indicato
r
Loadi
ng
Factor
Descript
ion
(Z)
Z.4.
0.851
Valid
Z.5.
0.850
Valid
Source: Results of data processing using SmartPLS, 2022
It can be concluded that all indicators
are valid or have met convergent validity.
Discriminant Validity Testing
Discriminant Validity
Testing is carried out to check the cross
loading value of each indicator
provided that the value of the variable
indicator is greater than the other variables.
If there is a variable value that does not
meet the requirements, then the indicator
is not continued for the analysis process.
Table 3. Results of the Descriminant Validity Test
Indikator
Kompensasi
(X1)
Beban
Kerja
(X2)
Kepemimpinan
(X3)
Kinerja
Karyawan
(Y)
Kinerja
Organisasi
(Z)
Keterangan
X1.1.
0.870
0.313
0.574
0.523
0.763
Valid
X1.2.
0.874
0.403
0.463
0.502
0.754
Valid
X1.3.
0.835
0.305
0.430
0.467
0.683
Valid
X1.4.
0.865
0.346
0.396
0.438
0.643
Valid
X2.1.
0.190
0.778
0.359
0.360
0.397
Valid
X2.2.
0.297
0.807
0.613
0.482
0.496
Valid
X2.3.
0.282
0.747
0.204
0.242
0.302
Valid
X2.4.
0.218
0.758
0.374
0.323
0.344
Valid
X2.5.
0.496
0.809
0.492
0.477
0.549
Valid
X2.6.
0.346
0.833
0.373
0.344
0.427
Valid
X2.7.
0.194
0.796
0.272
0.330
0.323
Valid
X2.8.
0.450
0.761
0.452
0.512
0.586
Valid
X3.1.
0.379
0.410
0.764
0.463
0.584
Valid
X3.2.
0.429
0.263
0.748
0.339
0.522
Valid
X3.3.
0.417
0.364
0.819
0.400
0.565
Valid
X3.4.
0.431
0.347
0.774
0.477
0.552
Valid
X3.5.
0.451
0.362
0.728
0.560
0.580
Valid
X3.6.
0.608
0.387
0.805
0.727
0.730
Valid
X3.7.
0.436
0.331
0.751
0.542
0.600
Valid
X3.8.
0.373
0.473
0.771
0.487
0.590
Valid
X3.9.
0.485
0.371
0.805
0.564
0.637
Valid
X3.10.
0.421
0.477
0.788
0.512
0.584
Valid
X3.11.
0.325
0.429
0.784
0.436
0.605
Valid
X3.12.
0.301
0.505
0.796
0.467
0.559
Valid
2082 | Effect of Compensation, Workload, Leadership on Employee Performance and
Implications on Organizational Performance
Y.1.
0.428
0.512
0.534
0.783
0.571
Valid
Y.2.
0.482
0.453
0.647
0.838
0.662
Valid
Y.3.
0.412
0.382
0.476
0.823
0.562
Valid
Y.4.
0.453
0.326
0.544
0.834
0.599
Valid
Y.5.
0.479
0.395
0.531
0.821
0.609
Valid
Y.6.
0.488
0.430
0.473
0.813
0.589
Valid
Y.7.
0.460
0.372
0.485
0.803
0.590
Valid
Y.8.
0.467
0.362
0.505
0.821
0.583
Valid
Z.1.
0.765
0.465
0.576
0.609
0.840
Valid
Z.2.
0.686
0.425
0.662
0.638
0.849
Valid
Z.3.
0.715
0.431
0.602
0.569
0.836
Valid
Z.4.
0.624
0.465
0.709
0.644
0.851
Valid
Z.5.
0.704
0.541
0.674
0.620
0.850
Valid
Source: The results of data processing using SmartPLS, 2022
Test discriminant validity show that all
indicators used in valid have a cross loading
of the construct that is greater than the
cross loading of other constructs.
Furthermore, for discriminant validity is
done by looking at the Average variance
extracted (AVE) value. Evaluation of
discriminant validity can be seen from the
value of Average Variance Extracted (AVE) >
0.50 (Sari et al., 2019).
Table 4. AVE Value
Variable
Average Variance
Extracted (AVE)
Compensation
0.742
Workload
0.619
Leadership
0.606
Employee
Performance
0.668
Organizational
Performance
0.714
Source: The results of data processing using SmartPLS, 2022
AVE Value for all research variables and
research dimensions has a value above 0.5
so The AVE value for discriminant validity
testing has met the requirements for
further testing. Therefore. The Discriminant
Validity test has been met as
well as the Convergent Validity test so that
it can be concluded that the research
model is valid.
The construct reliability test
Agustina Anisa, Yuliantini Tine
| 2083
Declared reliable if the Composite
Reliability value > 0.7 and Cronbach Alpha
> 0.60 (Fayazi et al., 2019).
Table 5. Value of Cronbach's Coefficient Alpha
Variable
Cronbach
's Alpha
Composi
te
Realibilit
y
Descriptio
n
Compensation
0.884
0.920
Reliable
Workload
0.912
0.928
Reliable
Leadership
0.941
0.948
Reliable
Employee
Performance
0.929
0.941
Reliable
Organizational
Performance
0.900
0.926
Reliable
Source: The results of data processing using SmartPLS, 2022.
Based on table 5 obtained the value of
Cronbach's Coefficient Alpha is more than
0.70 and the Composite Reability value is
more than 0.60. It can be concluded that
all variables in this study were declared
reliable.
Structural Model Testing (Inner Model)
Structural Model Testing (Inner Model)
is a step in the analysis in evaluating the
path coefficient value, evaluating the R
2
.
Evaluating the Value of the Path
Coefficient
The path coefficient is a way of
evaluating to see the strength of the
relationship between constructs/variables.
Table 6. Path Coefficient Test Results
Original
Sample
(O)
Sample
Mean
(M)
Standard
Deviation
(STDEV)
T Statistic
(O/STDEV)
P
Values
Compensation→Employee
Performance
0.270
0.276
0.100
2.706
0.007
Organizational→Performance
Compensation
0.510
0.515
0.060
8.439
0.000
Compensation→Employee
Performance
0.182
0.183
0.084
2.161
0.031
Organizational→Performance
Compensation
0.092
0.091
0.039
2.351
0.019
Compensation→Employee
Performance
0.403
0.404
0.101
4.006
0.000
Organizational→Performance
0.313
0.311
0.066
4.745
0.000
2084 | Effect of Compensation, Workload, Leadership on Employee Performance and
Implications on Organizational Performance
Original
Sample
(O)
Sample
Mean
(M)
Standard
Deviation
(STDEV)
T Statistic
(O/STDEV)
P
Values
Compensation
Organizational→Performance
Compensation
0.196
0.191
0.051
3.860
0.000
Source: Results of data processing using SmartPLS, 2022
It can be concluded that the largest
path coefficient value is indicated by the
direct influence of Compensation on
Organizational Performance with a T-
statistic value of 8,439. Then followed by
the variable Leadership on Organizational
Performance of 4,745 then Leadership on
Employee Performance of 4,006. For other
variables have a not big enough influence
on Employee Performance and
Organizational Performance.
Coefficient of Determination Test/ R-
Square (R2)
The value of R-Square (R2
0
to 1, with
higher levels indicating more predictive
accuracy. The criteria for limiting the value
of R2
weak
are in three classifications, namely
the value of R2
=
0.75, 0.50, and 0.25, which
can be considered substantial, moderate
(Fayazi et al., 2019). The results of PLS
Bootstrapping R-Square and R-Square
Adjusted values are as follows:
Table 7. R-Square value (R2)
Variable
R Square
R
Square
Adjuste
d
Employee
Performance (Y)
0.501
0.483
Organizational
Performance (Z)
0.854
0.847
Source: Processing results data using
SmartPLS. 2022.
Valuation value of R-square, namely
Employee Performance variable of 0.501
and Organizational Performance of 0.854
where the R2 value
indicates
that the level of
determination of exogenous variables
(Compensation, Workload, and Leadership)
to endogenous (Employee Performance) is
moderate. And the level of determination
of exogenous variables (Compensation,
Workload, and Leadership) to endogenous
(Organizational Performance) is high.
Goodness of Fit Index (GoF)
Agustina Anisa, Yuliantini Tine
| 2085
Goodness of Fit Index (GoF) is to
validate the combined performance of the
measurement model (outer model) and
structural model (inner model) which can
be obtained through the following
calculations:
=
= 0.669
GoF values have three categories. ie
small GoF = 0.1. Moderate GoF = 0.25 and
large GoF = 0.36 (Haryono. 2017). The
results of the calculation of the Goodness
of Fit Index (GoF) show a value of 0.669. It
can be concluded that the overall
performance of the measurement model
(outer model) and structural model (inner
model) is good because the Goodness of
Fit Index (GoF) value is > 0.36.
Testing Predictive Relevance (Q
2
)
Predictive relevance (Q
2
) is a way of
validating the model. The results of the
calculation of Q2 are as follows:
Calculation of predictive relevance
(Q
2
) obtained a value of 0.797. In this
research model, the dependent latent
variable has a predictive relevance value
(Q
2
) > 0. So that the independent latent
variable as the explanatory variable is able
to predict the dependent variable, namely
employee performance. In other words, it
proves that this model is considered to
have good predictive relevance.
RESULTS AND DISCUSSION
Hypothesis test results for the
independent variable Compensation (X1).
Workload (X2). Leadership (X3) on
Employee Performance (Y) and the
influence of the independent variable
Compensation (X1). Workload (X2).
Leadership (X3) on employee performance
(Y) with a mediating effect on employee
performance (Y) can be seen in table 5.
Hypothesis 1 – Compensation has a
positive and significant effect on employee
performance. The path coefficient is 0.270
and Tcount (2.706) > Ttable (1.663) with a
P-value of 0.007. Thus H1 is accepted (P
value < 0.05) and H0 is rejected.
Compensation (X1) has a positive and
significant effect on Employee Performance
(Y).
2086 | Effect of Compensation, Workload, Leadership on Employee Performance and
Implications on Organizational Performance
Table 8. Path Coefficient, t-Statistics, and P-Values Values
Hipotesis
Variabel
Original
Sample
(O)
Sample
Mean
(M)
Standard
Deviation
(STDEV)
T Statistic
(O/STDEV)
T Tabel
P
Values
Keterangan
Partial Effect of Independent Variables on Dependent Variables
H1
Compensation→Em
ployee Performance
0.270
0.276
0.100
2.706
1.663
0.007
Diterima
H2
Compensation→Em
ployee Performance
0.182
0.183
0.084
2.161
1.663
0.031
Diterima
H3
Compensation→Em
ployee Performance
0.403
0.404
0.101
4.006
1.663
0.000
Diterima
H4
Organizational→Per
formance
Compensation
0.510
0.515
0.060
8.439
1.663
0.000
Diterima
H5
Workload→Organiz
ational Performance
0.092
0.091
0.039
2.351
1.663
0.019
Diterima
H6
Leadership→Organi
zational
Performance
0.242
0.311
0.066
4.745
1.663
0.000
Diterima
H7
Employee
Performance→Orga
nizational
Performance
0.913
0.991
0.051
3.860
1.663
0.000
Diterima
Indirect Effect of Independent Variables on Dependent Variables
H8
Organizational→
Performance
Compensation
through Employee
Performance
0.053
0.053
0.024
2.196
1.663
0.029
Diterima
H9
Workload→Organiz
ational Performance
through Employee
Performance
0.036
0.034
0.018
1.975
1.663
0.049
Diterima
H10
Leadership→Organi
zational
Performance
through Employee
Performance
0.079
0.078
0.030
2.677
1.663
0.008
Diterima
Source: The results of data processing using SmartPLS, 2022
Hypothesis 2 – Workload has an effect
and is significant on employee
performance. The path coefficient is 0.182
and Tcount (2.161) > Ttable (1.663) with a
P-value of 0.031. Thus H1 is accepted (P
value < 0.05) and H0 is rejected. Workload
Agustina Anisa, Yuliantini Tine
| 2087
(X2) has a significant and significant effect
on Employee Performance (Y).
Hypothesis 3 – Leadership has a
positive and significant effect on employee
performance. The path coefficient is 0.403
and Tcount (4.006) > Ttable (1.663) with a
P-value of 0.000. Thus H1 is accepted (P
value < 0.05) and H0 is rejected. Leadership
(X3) has a positive and significant effect on
Employee Performance (Y).
Hypothesis 4 – Compensation has a
positive and significant effect on
Organizational Performance. The path
coefficient is 0.510 and Tcount (8.439) >
Ttable (1.663) with a P-value of 0.000. Thus
H1 is accepted (P value < 0.05) and H0 is
rejected. Compensation (X1) has a positive
and significant effect on Organizational
Performance (Z).
Hypothesis 5 – Workload has an effect
and is significant on Organizational
Performance. The path coefficient is 0.092
and Tcount (2.351) > Ttable (1.663) with a
P-value of 0.019. Thus H1 is accepted (P
value < 0.05) and H0 is rejected. Workload
(X2) has a significant and significant effect
on Organizational Performance (Z).
Hypothesis 6–Leadership has a positive
and significant effect on Organizational
Performance. The path coefficient is 0.242
and Tcount (4.745) > Ttable (1.663) with a
P-value of 0.000. Thus H1 is accepted (P
value < 0.05) and H0 is rejected. Leadership
(X3) has a positive and significant effect on
Organizational Performance (Z).
Hypothesis 7 – Employee Performance
has a positive and significant effect on
Organizational Performance. The path
coefficient is 0.913 and T Count (3,860) > T
Table (1,663) with a PV value of 0.000. Thus
H1 is accepted (PValue < 0.05) and H0 is
rejected. Employee Performance (Y) has a
positive and significant effect on
Organizational Performance (Z).
Hypothesis 8 – Compensation has a
positive effect on Organizational
Performance through Employee
Performance. The P-value of the indirect
effect of compensation on organizational
performance mediated by employee
performance is 0.053 with a TStatistic of
2.196. Thus H8 is accepted because the P
value < 0.05 and TStatistic > 1.663.
Hypothesis 9 – Workload affects
Organizational Performance through
Employee Performance. The P-value of the
indirect effect of Workload on
Organizational Performance mediated by
Employee Performance is 0.036 with a
TStatistic of 1.975. Thus H9 is accepted
because the P value < 0.05 and TStatistic >
1.663.
Hypothesis 10–Leadership has a
positive effect on Organizational
Performance through Employee
Performance. The P-value of the indirect
influence of Leadership on Organizational
Performance mediated by Employee
Performance is 0.079 with a TStatistic of
2.677. Thus H10 is accepted because the P
value < 0.05 and TStatistic > 1.663.
CONCLUSIONS
Based on the analysis of the research
results that have been described
previously, the following conclusions can
be drawn: 1) Compensation has a positive
and significant effect on employee
performance at PT Pelita Indonesia Djaya.
This shows that the compensation given by
the company to employees is very
2088 | Effect of Compensation, Workload, Leadership on Employee Performance and
Implications on Organizational Performance
influential on employee performance. The
highest dimension that reflects
compensation is Financial Compensation
with direct financial indicators, while the
highest dimension that reflects employee
performance is Contextual Performance
with interpersonal indicators. Thus,
employees will give their best performance
to the company through Contextual
Performance where employees have the
ability to work interpersonally such as
starting new tasks when old tasks are
completed and seeking the latest
knowledge. 2) Workload has a significant
and significant effect on employee
performance at PT Pelita Indonesia Djaya.
This shows that the condition of the
company, especially in terms of the
workload given by the company to
employees, greatly influences employee
performance. The highest dimension that
reflects Workload is the Mental Load
dimension with alertness indicators, while
the highest dimension that reflects
Employee Performance is Task Performance
with work quality indicators. Employees
need socialization in setting work points
according to the ability and capacity of
employees to avoid being alert to work
mistakes. Thus, employees will give their
best performance in quality work to solve a
problem. 3) Leadership has a positive and
significant effect on employee performance
at PT Pelita Indonesia Djaya. This shows
that the condition of the company,
especially in terms of leadership applied to
employees, greatly influences employee
performance. The highest dimension that
reflects the leadership dimension is
participatory leadership with indicators of
deliberation decision making, while the
highest dimension reflects the dimensions
of Employee Performance, namely
Contextual Performance with interpersonal
indicators. Employees need participation
from a leader, especially when making
decisions through joint deliberation. Thus,
employees will give their best performance
to the company through Contextual
Performance where employees have the
ability to work interpersonally. 4)
Compensation has a positive and
significant effect on the Organizational
Performance of PT Pelita Indonesia Djaya.
This shows that the compensation given by
the company to employees is very
influential on organizational performance.
The highest dimension that reflects the
dimensions of Compensation is Financial
Compensation with indicators of indirect
compensation, while the highest dimension
that reflects the dimensions of
Organizational Performance is Financial
Performance with indicators of economic
value added and income growth. This is to
achieve the company's performance goals,
especially in terms of economic value
added and income growth, so employees
need to increase employee welfare in terms
of compensation indirect, such as
protection which includes insurance,
severance pay, children's schooling and
pensions. Thus, organizational
performance will be achieved through
Financial Performance, namely economic
value added and revenue growth. 5)
Workload has an effect and is significant on
the Organizational Performance of PT Pelita
Indonesia Djaya. This shows that the
condition of the company, especially in
terms of the workload given by the
company to employees, greatly influences
Agustina Anisa, Yuliantini Tine
| 2089
organizational performance. The highest
dimension that reflects the dimensions of
Workload is Time Load with indicators of
doing two or more jobs at the same time,
while the highest dimension that reflects
the dimensions of Organizational
Performance is Non- Financial Performance
with indicators of organizational
commitment. Employees need socialization
in determining that the workload can be
divided equally by all employees, especially
when doing two or more jobs at the same
time. Thus organizational performance will
be achieved through organizational
commitment. 6) Leadership has a positive
and significant effect on the Organizational
Performance of PT Pelita Indonesia Djaya.
This shows that the condition of the
company, especially in terms of leadership
applied to employees, greatly influences
organizational performance. The highest
dimension that reflects the dimension of
Leadership is participatory leadership with
indicators of deliberation decision making,
while the highest dimension that reflects
the dimensions of Organizational
Performance is Non- Financial Performance
with indicators of employee satisfaction.
Employees need participation from a
leader, especially when making decisions
through joint deliberation. Thus this will
increase employee satisfaction while
working in the company and the
achievement of organizational
performance goals. 7) Employee
performance has a positive and significant
impact on the Organizational Performance
of PT Pelita Indonesia Djaya. This shows
that the condition of the employee's
performance is very influential on
organizational performance. The highest
dimension that reflects the dimensions of
Employee Performance is Task Performance
with indicators of planning and managing
work, while the highest dimension that
reflects the dimensions of Performance The
organization is Non- Financial Performance
with employee satisfaction indicators. In
improving organizational performance,
especially on employee satisfaction, it is
necessary to disseminate information to
employees in planning and managing
work. 8) Compensation has a positive and
significant effect on Organizational
Performance through the Employee
Performance of PT Pelita Indonesia Djaya.
Through employee performance, the
achievement of organizational
performance related to financial
performance and non-financial
performance can be achieved and is
reflected in individuals or employees of a
company. Hypothesis testing direct and
indirect effect it can be seen that the value
of the effect of Compensation on
Organizational Performance directly
directly has a positive value but lower than
the way through the intermediary of the
Employee Performance variable. This
means that the more companies pay
attention to and consider compensation
that is proportional to the effort of
employee performance when completing
organizational tasks in accordance with the
capabilities of the employee, the
organizational performance in terms of
economic value added and revenue
growth, profit margins, efficiency of
internal business processes, employee
satisfaction, and organizational
commitment can be increased. 9) Workload
has an effect and significant on
2090 | Effect of Compensation, Workload, Leadership on Employee Performance and
Implications on Organizational Performance
Organizational Performance through
Employee Performance of PT Pelita
Indonesia Djaya. Hypothesis testing direct
and indirect effect it can be seen that the
value of the influence of Workload on
Organizational Performance directly
directly has a lower value than the way
through the intermediary of the Employee
Performance variable. Therefore,
companies need to pay attention to the
workload mechanism of each employee's
performance when they are doing physical
activities such as employees, high
concentration at work, feeling indecisive
when doing assigned tasks, always being
alert when working to avoid mistakes,
accuracy in providing services, working
quickly to solve problems. complete work,
do two or more jobs at the same time. 10)
Leadership has an effect and significant on
Organizational Performance through
Employee Performance of PT Pelita
Indonesia Djaya. Hypothesis testing direct
and indirect effect it can be seen that the
value of the influence of Leadership on
Organizational Performance directly
directly of lower value than by means of
intermediary Employee Performance
variables. This needs to be taken into
consideration by companies to support
organizational performance improvement,
namely the need to involve leadership in
acting in leading to direct, guide, organize,
and facilitate group or organizational
activities and relationships.
REFERENCES
Agwu, M. O. (2012). Impact of employees
safety culture on organisational
performance in shell bonny terminal
integrated project (BTIP). European
Journal of Business and Social Sciences,
1(5), 70–82.
Durdyev, S., Ismail, S., Ihtiyar, A., Bakar, N. F.
S. A., & Darko, A. (2018). A partial least
squares structural equation modeling
(PLS-SEM) of barriers to sustainable
construction in Malaysia. Journal of
Cleaner Production, 2(4), 564–572.
https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.1016
/j.jclepro.2018.08.304
Fayazi, F., Araban, M., Haghighi Zadeh, M.
H., & Mohamadian, H. (2019).
Development and psychometric
evaluation of a colorectal cancer
screening scale based on preventive
health model: Application of Smart-PLS
software. Payesh (Health Monitor), 8(3),
251–259.
https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.1016
/j.ijhm.2018.02.011
Hameed, V. M., & Hamad, F. J. (2022).
Implementation of novel triangular fins
at a helical coil heat exchanger.
Chemical Engineering and Processing-
Process Intensification, 2(4), 1087–1095.
https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.1016
/j.cep.2021.108745
Linde, L., Sjödin, D., Parida, V., & Gebauer,
H. (2020). Evaluation of digital business
model opportunities: a framework for
avoiding digitalization traps. Research-
Technology Management, 6(4), 43–53.
https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.1080
/08956308.2021.1842664
Lo, F.-Y., Rey-Martí, A., & Botella-Carrubi, D.
(2020). Research methods in business:
Quantitative and qualitative
comparative analysis. In Journal of
Business Research (Vol. 2, pp. 221–224).
Elsevier.
https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.1016
/j.jbusres.2020.05.003
Agustina Anisa, Yuliantini Tine
| 2091
McKenzie, D., & Sansone, D. (2019).
Predicting entrepreneurial success is
hard: Evidence from a business plan
competition in Nigeria. Journal of
Development Economics, 4(2), 102369.
https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.1016
/j.jdeveco.2019.07.002
Nursaid, N., Qomariah, N., Sanosra, A.,
Satoto, E. B., & Utomo, A. W. (2020).
Improvement of Job Satisfaction Based
on Work Motivation, Work
Environment, Competence and
Compensation for Hospital Employees.
Indonesian Journal of Law and
Economics Review, 7(2), 210–225.
https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.2107
0/ijler.2020.V7.461
Poulsen, S., & Ipsen, C. (2017). In times of
change: How distance managers can
ensure employees’ wellbeing and
organizational performance. Safety
Science, 10(2), 37–45.
https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.1016
/j.ssci.2017.05.002
Rai, N. G. M., Silmina, N., Fitrananda, H.,
Hanoum, S., Sinansari, P., & Noor, B. A.
(2021). The Effect of work Conflict and
Job Stress on The Human Resources
Performance (Case Study: Maintenance
& Engineer Division at PT. Paiton
Operation & Maintenance Indonesia).
3rd International Conference on
Business and Management of
Technology (ICONBMT 2021), 305–309.
https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.2991
/aebmr.k.211226.042
Sari, I. P., Febtriko, A., Rahayuningsih, T., &
Putra, A. A. (2019). Integrasi
pendekatan analytic network process
dan structural equation modeling
untuk pengukuran bullying di tempat
kerja berbasis gender menggunakan
sistem pakar. Rabit: Jurnal Teknologi
Dan Sistem Informasi Univrab, 4(2),
109–119.
https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.3634
1/rabit.v4i2.742
Siyambalapitiya, J., Zhang, X., & Liu, X.
(2018). Green human resource
management: A proposed model in the
context of Sri Lanka’s tourism industry.
Journal of Cleaner Production, 2(2), 542–
555.
https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.1016
/j.jclepro.2018.07.305
© 2022 by the authors. Submitted
for possible open access publication
under the terms and conditions of the Creative
Commons Attribution (CC BY SA) license
(https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/4.0/).
