JRSSEM 2022, Vol. 02 No.

3, 301 – 310
E-ISSN: 2807 - 6311, P-ISSN: 2807 - 6494

THE INFLUENCE OF LEADERSHIP STYLE &

ENVIRONMENT ON EMPLOYEE PERFORMANCE WITH
WORK MOTIVATION AS A MEDIATION VARIABLE PT.
UNILAB PERDANA

Famdan1
Arif Hartono2
1,2,
Indonesian Islamic University
*
e-mail: [email protected], [email protected]
*Correspondence: [email protected]

Submitted: 21 September 2022 Revised: 17 October 2022 Accepted: 24 October 2022

Abstract: The title of this research is the analysis of the influence of leadership style (LS) and
work environment (WE) on employee performance (EP) with work motivation (WM) as a
mediating variable at PT. Prime Unilab. This study aims to determine the mediating effect of
work motivation in the relationship between leadership style and work environment on
employee performance. This research was conducted quantitatively and used a questionnaire
as a data collection method. The population is 300 employees. The research sample used was
172 employees. Therefore, sampling is simple and multiple linear regression analysis and path
analysis. The results of this study indicate that leadership style and work environment have a
positive and significant influence on employee performance, leadership style and work
environment have a positive and significant influence on work motivation. Work motivation
can mediate the relationship between leadership style and work environment on employee
performance.

Keywords: Leadership Style, Work Environment, Employee Performance, Work Motivation.

DOI: 10.36418/jrssem.v2i03.270 https://jrssem.publikasiindonesia.id/index.php/jrssem/index

Famdan1, Arif Hartono2 | 302

INTRODUCTION

Human resource management is a leadership style, work environment,

challenge for human resources who are employee performance, and work
truly competent and competitive, resources motivation as evidenced by several
that are competitive and highly dedicated, previous research journals that had
and valuable assets that are very close to different research results. Therefore, this is
employees is one of the focuses of the the reason why researchers conducted this
company/organization that is willing to study with the title "The Influence of
face. Among the resources of other Leadership Style & Work Environment on
enterprises, both tangible and intangible. Employee Performance with Work
Human resources are the most important Motivation as an Intervening Variable" to
and decisive factor in management. The continue the previous research which is still
person who plans and at the same time in doubt about the relationship between
carries out the process of achieving these the variables. This research will be
goals. Without people, there is no planning conducted at PT Unilab Perdana with the
and work process in management. Even in selection of this company will facilitate
an automated world, an organization research by collaborating with employees
cannot develop without human resources and managers to facilitate the data
(Syafaruddin, 2015). collection process. The purpose of this
Organizations and companies study is to get answers to whether there is
always need strong leadership and a relationship between leadership style and
management to improve their effectiveness work environment to employee
of the two companies. If he has excellent performance through work motivation as a
human resources, the effectiveness of the mediation variable at PT Unilab Perdana.
company is achieved. The increase in
LITERATURE REVIEW
human resources is rather absolute. Human
Leadership style
resources can be said to be a deciding
According to (Bass & Avolio, 1990)
factor for the organization and the success
Leadership style is a leader who performs
of the enterprise. Business organizations
management tasks with all his abilities and
and organizations have been created. This
attitudes, leadership style is a set of traits
is determined by the performance created
and behaviors of managers and ways of
by the employee. Employee performance
communicating and interacting with others
can be measured by reviewing the results
to influence others. This style may vary
of work, regardless of whether it meets the
depending on motivation.
operational standards set by the company
(Putra et al., 2016) .
Work Environment
This research was conducted because work environment according to
researchers saw that there were several (Marie-Pierre & Caroline, 2017), the work
unanswered problems on the topics of environment consists of the system of
303 | The Influence of Leadership Style & Environment on Employee Performance With Work
Motivation as a Mediation Variable PT. Unilab Perdana

work, the design of jobs, working motivation.

conditions, and the ways in which people
are treated at work by their managers and Work Motivation
co-workers. The working environment According to Herzberg in (Stephen
consists of a working system and design. & Timothy, 2008), Work motivation is the
Employment, working conditions, and the desire contained in an individual that
way superiors treat employees at work. stimulates him to perform actions.
According to this theory, there are 2 factors
Employee Perfomance that affect work conditions, namely
According to (Robbins & Judge, motivation factors and hygiene factors. This
2009), Employee performance is the result theory sees that there are 2 factors that
of an employee's achievements in working encourage employees to be motivated,
according to certain criteria that apply to a namely intrinsic factors, namely motivation
certain job, employee performance is a appears in individuals, and extrinsic factors
function of the interaction of abilities and of motivation appear outside of individuals.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

This research uses quantitative obtained was 172 with a response rate of
methods (Sugiyono & Kuantitatif, 2009). 100%. This study used a Likert scale of 1-6.
This study takes the object on the The data analysis technique used in this
employees of PT. Unilab Prime. Data study was SPSS.
collection using questionnaires distributed
.
through google forms. The total data

RESULTS AND DISCUSSION

Research Respondent Profile
Has a result of research on the taken randomly, the number of
influence of leadership style and work questionnaire returns was 180
environment on employee performance questionnaires. This discussion includes
with work motivation as a mediation respondent characteristics, descriptions of
variable in PT. Unilab Prime. This research research variables, regression testing and
questionnaire was distributed by 300 PT path analysis. The technique in processing
employees. Unilab Perdana, which was the data used is SPSS software.
Famdan1, Arif Hartono2 | 304

Gender of Respondents
Jenis_Kelamin
Cumulative
Frequency Percent Valid Percent Percent
Valid Man 62 36.0 36.0 36.0
Woman 110 64.0 64.0 100.0
Total 172 100.0 100.0

Based on the table above, the 110 people (64%) were more than the male
gender of respondents in the table found sex of 62 people (36%). For more details,
that respondents with a female gender of you can see the following pie chart chart.

Age of Respondents
Age
Cumulative
Frequency Percent Valid Percent Percent
Valid < 25 Years 107 62.2 62.2 62.2
25-35 Years 58 33.7 33.7 95.9
36-45 Years 7 4.1 4.1 100.0
Total 172 100.0 100.0

Based on the age table of the rest have 25-35 years of age as many as
respondents, it is known that most 58 people (33.7%) and 36-45 years old as
respondents have an age of < 25 years, many as 7 people (4.1%). For more details
which is 107 respondents (62.2%). While can be seen in the following chart.

Marital Status
Status_Perkawinan
Cumulative
Frequency Percent Valid Percent Percent
Valid Unmarried 151 87.8 87.8 87.8
Marry 21 12.2 12.2 100.0
Total 172 100.0 100.0

Based on the table of the marital are married as many as 21 people (12.2%).
status of respondents, it is known that most For more details can be seen in the
of the respondents are Unmarried, namely following chart.
151 respondents (87.8%). While the rest
305 | The Influence of Leadership Style & Environment on Employee Performance With Work
Motivation as a Mediation Variable PT. Unilab Perdana

Respondents' Last Education

Education
Cumulative
Frequency Percent Valid Percent Percent
Valid Diploma 5 2.9 2.9 2.9
Magister (S2) 5 2.9 2.9 5.8
Undergradu
140 81.4 81.4 87.2
ate (S1)
High
School/Voca 22 12.8 12.8 100.0
tional School
Total 172 100.0 100.0

Based on the last education table of people (2.9%), the last S2 education as
respondents, it is known that most many as 5 people (2.9%), and the last high
respondents had the last S1 education, school / equivalent education as many as
which was 140 respondents (81.4%). While 22 people (12.8%). More details can be
the rest have D3 education as many as 5 seen in the following chart.

Pengalaman Work Respondents

Pengalaman_Kerja
Cumulative
Frequency Percent Valid Percent Percent
Valid 5-Year < 99 57.6 57.6 57.6
11-15 Years 1 .6 .6 58.1
15-20 Years 2 1.2 1.2 59.3
5-10 Years 70 40.7 40.7 100.0
Total 172 100.0 100.0

Based on the table of work (0.6%), 15-20 years of work experience with
experience of respondents, it is known that as many as 2 people (1.2%), and 5-10 years
most respondents have work experience of work experience as many as 70 people
for < 5 years, namely 99 respondents (40.7%). More details can be seen in the
(57.6%). While the rest have 11-15 years of following chart.
work experience with as much as 1 person

Respondent Division
Divided
Cumulative
Frequency Percent Valid Percent Percent
Valid General Administration
37 21.5 21.5 21.5
& Finance
Famdan1, Arif Hartono2 | 306

Environmental
11 6.4 6.4 27.9
Laboratory
Quality 21 12.2 12.2 40.1
Operational 21 12.2 12.2 52.3
Business Development
60 34.9 34.9 87.2
(Business Development)
Business Transactions 22 12.8 12.8 100.0
Total 172 100.0 100.0

Based on the respondent division Laboratory division was 11 people (6.4%),

table, it is known that most of the the Quality and Operations division was 21
respondents are in the Business people each (12.2%) and the Business
Development division (Business Transactions division was 22 people
Development) which is as many as 60 (12.8%). For more details can be seen in the
respondents (34.9%). While the rest of the following chart.
General Administration &Finance division
was 37 people (21.5%), the Environmental

Respondent's Earnings
Income
Cumulative
Frequency Percent Valid Percent Percent
Valid < IDR 2,500,000 44 25.6 25.6 25.6
IDR 10,000,000 - IDR
27 15.7 15.7 41.3
15,000,000
IDR 15,000,000 - IDR
2 1.2 1.2 42.4
20,000,000
IDR 2,500,000 - IDR
29 16.9 16.9 59.3
5,000,000
IDR 5,000,000 - IDR
70 40.7 40.7 100.0
10,000,000
Total 172 100.0 100.0

Based on the income table of 10,000,000 - Rp. 15,000,000 as many as 27

respondents, it is known that most respondents (15.7%), income of Rp.
respondents have an income of Rp. 15,000,000 - Rp. 20,000,000 as many as 2
5,000,000 - Rp. 10,000,000, which is as respondents (1.2%) and income of Rp.
many as 70 respondents (40.7%). While the 2,500,000 - Rp. 5,000,000 as many as 29
rest have income < Rp. 2,500,000 as many respondents (16.9%). For more details can
as 44 people (25.6%), income of Rp. be seen in the following chart.
307 | The Influence of Leadership Style & Environment on Employee Performance With Work
Motivation as a Mediation Variable PT. Unilab Perdana

Descriptive Analysis
Descriptive Statistics
Maximu Std.
N Minimum m Mean Deviation
Gaya_Kepemimpinan_X
172 20 72 59,96 8,386
1
Lingkungan_kerja_X2 172 22 84 67,75 9,651
Kinerja_karyawan_Y 172 33 90 77,16 10,253
Motivasi_kerja_Z 172 86 276 235,10 31,124
Valid N (listwise) 172

Based on the table it is known that standard deviation of 9.651. The minimum
the number of samples is 172. The value in the work motivation variable (Z) is
minimum value on the leadership style 86 and the maximum is 276 while the
variable (X1) is 20 and the maximum is 72 average obtained is 235.10 with a standard
while the average obtained is 59.96 with a deviation of 31.124. The minimum value
standard deviation of 8.386. The minimum on the employee performance variable (Y)
value on the work environment variable is 33 and the maximum is 90. While the
(X2) is 22 and the maximum is 84. While average obtained is 77.16 with a standard
the average obtained is 67.75 with a deviation of 10.253.

DISCUSSION
Leadership Style Has a Significant Effect on Work Environment Has a Significant Effect
Employee Performance on Employee Performance
Based on the results that have been Based on the results that have been
carried out, it is known that the influence of carried out, it is known that the influence of
leadership style on employee performance the work environment on employee
obtained a calculated t-value of 6.307 which is performance obtained a calculated t value of
greater than the tablet with a level of 6.759 which is greater than the t table with
significance of 0.05 is 1.999 and a p-value a level of significance of 0.05 is 1.999 and a
of 0.000 is obtained which is less than the p-value of 0.000 is obtained which is less
significance level of 0.05. On the basis of than the significance level of 0.05. On the
this comparison, it can be concluded that basis of this comparison, it can be
the leadership style coefficient of 0.528 is concluded that the coefficient of the
significant. The first hypothesis reads "It is working environment of 0.492 is significant.
suspected that there is a significant The second hypothesis reads "It is
influence between leadership styles on the suspected that there is a significant
performance of the work. influence between the work environment
on the performance of the work and
proven.
Famdan1, Arif Hartono2 | 308

Leadership Style Has a Significant Effect on of significance of 0.05 is 1.999 and a p-value
Work Motivation of 0.000 is obtained which is less than the
Based on the results that have been significance level of 0.05. On the basis of
carried out, it is known that the influence of this comparison, it can be concluded that
leadership style on work motivation the coefficient of work motivation of 0.310
obtained a calculated t-value of 5.466 which is is significant. The fifth hypothesis reads "It
greater than the t table with a level of is suspected that there is a significant
significance of 0.05 is 1.999 and a p-value influence between work motivation and the
of 0.000 is obtained which is less than the performance of the work.
significance level of 0.05. On the basis of
this comparison, it can be concluded that Leadership Style Has a Significant Effect on
the coefficient of the Leadership style of Employee Performance Through Work
1.374 is significant. The third hypothesis Motivation Variables
reads "It is suspected that there is a Based on the results that have been
significant influence between leadership carried out, it is known that the influence of
style and proven work motivation. leadership style on employee performance
through the mediation of work motivation
Work Environment Has a Significant Effect variables obtained a calculated value of
on Work Motivation 5,406 where more the magnitude of the
Based on the results that have been table t with a significance level of 0.05
carried out, it is known that the influence of which is 1.999 and a p-value of 0.000 which
the work environment on work motivation is smaller than the significance level of 0.05
obtained a calculated t-value of 7.780 which is is obtained. On the basis of such a
greater than the tablet with a level of comparison, it can be concluded that the
significance of 0.05 is 1.999 and a p-value mediation of significant work motivation
of 0.000 is obtained which is less than the variables. The sixth hypothesis reads "It is
significance level of 0.05. On the basis of suspected that there is a significant
this comparison, it can be concluded that influence between leadership style on the
the coefficient of the working environment performance of the work through the
of 1.699 is significant. The fourth mediation of proven work motivation
hypothesis reads "It is suspected that there variables.
is a significant influence between the work
environment on proven work motivation. Work Environment Has a Significant Effect
on Employee Performance Through Work
Work Motivation Has a Significant Effect on Motivation Variables
Employee Performance Based on the results that have been
Based on the results that have been carried out, it is known that the influence of
carried out, it is known that the influence of the work environment on employee
work motivation on employee performance performance through the mediation of
obtained a calculated t-value of 36.348 work motivation variables obtained a
which is greater than the t table with a level calculated value of 7.601 which is greater
309 | The Influence of Leadership Style & Environment on Employee Performance With Work
Motivation as a Mediation Variable PT. Unilab Perdana

from t the table with a significance level of motivation variables. The seventh
0.05 which is 1.999 and a p-value of 0.000 hypothesis reads "It is suspected that there
is obtained which is less than the is a significant influence between the work
significance level of 0.05. On the basis of environment on the performance of the
such a comparison, it can be concluded work through the mediation of proven
that the mediation of significant work work motivation variables.

CONCLUSIONS

Based on the results of the test and and significant on work motivation, Work
discussion above, several conclusions can motivation has a positive and significant
be drawn from this study that leadership influence on employee performance, then
style has a positive and significant influence Leadership style and employee
on employee performance, the work performance have a positive influence and
environment has a positive influence and significant through work motivation, and
significant on employee performance, The work environment and performance of
Leadership style has a positive influence employees have a positive and significant
and significant on work motivation, the influence through work motivation.
Work environment has a positive influence
Famdan1, Arif Hartono2 | 310

REFERENCES

Bass, B. M., & Avolio, B. J. (1990). (PDAM) Kota Malang. Jurnal

Developing transformational Administrasi Bisnis (JAB), 40(2).
leadership: 1992 and beyond. Robbins, S. P., & Judge, T. (2009).
Journal of European Industrial Organizational behavior.
Training. Pearson South Africa.
Marie-Pierre, L., & Caroline, C. Stephen, P. R., & Timothy, A. J. (2008).
(2017). Reflexivity as Individual Perilaku organisasi
Antecedent to Trust in Complex (Organizational behavior).
Project Setting. Trust in Major Salemba Empat, Jakarta.
and Mega Projects, 279. Sugiyono, M. P. P., & Kuantitatif, P.
Putra, F. A., Musadieg, M. A., & (2009). Kualitatif, dan R&D,
Mayowan, Y. (2016). Pengaruh Bandung: Alfabeta. Cet. Vii.
Gaya Kepemimpinan dan Syafaruddin, S. (2015). Manajemen
Lingkungan Kerja Terhadap lembaga pendidikan Islam.
Kinerja: Studi Pada Karyawan
Perusahaan Daerah Air Minum

© 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/).
Copyright of Journal Research of Social Science, Economics & Management is the property
of Publikasi Indonesia and its content may not be copied or emailed to multiple sites or posted
to a listserv without the copyright holder's express written permission. However, users may
print, download, or email articles for individual use.