Are Physical and Non-Physical Working Environment Effect Employees Productivity with Motivation as an Intervening Factor?

Aisyah, Siti; Deswindi, Leli; Indrajaya, Danang

doi:10.2991/aebmr.k.200812.042

Cited by 7 publications

(2 citation statements)

References 1 publication

(1 reference statement)

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Employee comfort at work is primarily determined by the support of an excellent non-physical work environment Ena et al (2022). The non-physical work environment involves harmonizing employee relationships with coworkers and leaders (Aisyah et al, 2020). Working conditions, organizational support, coworker relations, and work pressure are indicators of the non-physical work environment (Abdou et al, 2022).…”

Section: Non-physical Work Environmentmentioning

confidence: 99%

The role of affective commitment: Do servant leadership and non-physical work environment promote employee performance?

Ginting,

Sopiah,

Suharsono

2024

J. Fokus Manaj. Bisnis.

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Maintaining the performance of a quality employee is the biggest challenge of the 4-star hotel industry in Malang City. The pandemic has caused hotels to experience a crisis due to a massive decline in occupancy. The economic crisis has made hotel management pay less attention to employee welfare during a hotel's recovery period. Employee welfare is a trigger for the expected performance instability. This study adopts an explanatory method with a quantitative approach. The study includes 242 participants employed in three 4-star hotels in Malang City. A sample of 151 respondents is chosen through stratified random sampling. Path analysis is used for data analysis. The results indicate that affective commitment, non-physical work environments, and servant leadership substantially impact employee performance. The association between employee performance and servant leadership may be partly influenced by affective commitment. However, affective commitment does not mediate the relationship between worker performance and the non-physical work environment.

show abstract

Section: Non-physical Work Environmentmentioning

confidence: 99%

The role of affective commitment: Do servant leadership and non-physical work environment promote employee performance?

Ginting,

Sopiah,

Suharsono

2024

J. Fokus Manaj. Bisnis.

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…On the one hand, it needs to improve physical working environment, such as circulating indoor air, safe production equipment, and reduced production noise, which makes their employees feel valued and appreciated. On the other hand, it needs to create non-physical working environment, such as working relationship and organization structure, which can positively affect employees' productivity and performance (Aisyah et al, 2020).…”

Section: Conclusion and Recommendationmentioning

confidence: 99%

The effect of human resource practices on employee retention in food manufacturing industry in the Philippines: The moderating role of the work environment

Jiang,

2023

IJRSM

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

This study investigates the effect of human resource practices on employee retention in food manufacturers in the Philippines and whether the work environment moderates this relationship. The human resource practices examined are training and development, employee participation in decision-making, compensation, job security, and performance appraisal. The theoretical framework for this research is based on the Social Exchange Theory. The study uses a quantitative research design and collects data through online and offline survey from employees working in food manufacturing companies. A sample of 206 employees was used for data analysis through JAMOVI software. The findings reveal that employee participation in decision-making, compensation, job security, and performance appraisal positively influences employee retention, but training and development don't influence employee retention. Additionally, the work environment moderates the relationship between human resource management practices except training and development, and employee retention.These findings suggest that organizations need to create a conducive work environment to maximize the benefits of human resource management practices and retain employees in the food manufacturing industry in the Philippines.

show abstract

University Administrative Employees’ Perceptions of Their Offices’ Physical Environment Comfort

Ngcobo

Mhlanga

2022

BEL

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Administrative office employees spend much time confined in their workspaces as they work hard to provide the critical support required for the overall performance of their organizations. As a result, their comfort should be given priority by their organizations, be it private or public. This article investigated the administrative employees’ perceptions of their offices’ physical environment comfort in a public university. Different aspects of their physical environment, such as furniture, noise, office temperature, lighting and space, were examined as variables influencing their performance. The systematization of literary sources for solving the problem of arranging a comfortable physical environment in private organizations proved a significant dependence of the productivity of employees on the physical environment in which they perform their duties. However, there is the scarcity of research conducted in a public organization, especially in the higher education sector. The methodological tool of the research was the method of quantitative analysis, in which a questionnaire was used to collect data from 81 administrative staff of a public university with several campuses in South Africa. The findings indicated that many respondents generally perceived a comfortable physical environment necessary to increase performance. These were, however, not always matched by their perceptions of what transpired at their offices. For instance, 63% of respondents viewed comfortable furniture as critical for the performance of their duties. Nevertheless, only 55% of respondents agreed that their university furniture was comfortable, with 24% disagreeing and 21% taking a neutral stance. The split in perceptions makes it imperative for the university to attend to areas of weakness and inequality in providing physical environment resources. A future study could examine whose offices are more comfortable than others in university contexts. In addition, a promising direction of future research should be the reconciliation of employees’ perception of the comfort of the physical environment in offices with the results of observations. This will enrich the obtained results.

show abstract

Are Physical and Non-Physical Working Environment Effect Employees Productivity with Motivation as an Intervening Factor?

Cited by 7 publications

References 1 publication

The role of affective commitment: Do servant leadership and non-physical work environment promote employee performance?

The role of affective commitment: Do servant leadership and non-physical work environment promote employee performance?

The effect of human resource practices on employee retention in food manufacturing industry in the Philippines: The moderating role of the work environment

University Administrative Employees’ Perceptions of Their Offices’ Physical Environment Comfort

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About