Abstract
The results of this research show. (1) It can be seen that the adjusted R square value is 0.767 or 76.7%. This shows that incentives (Z) and work discipline (X) can explain job satisfaction (Y) by 76.7%, the remaining 23.3% (100% - 76.7%) is explained by other variables outside the research model This. (2) The results of the t test (Partial) show that the value obtained is tcount (4,251) > ttable (2.048), likewise with a significance value of 0.00 < 0.05, it can be concluded that the first hypothesis is accepted, meaning that the work discipline variable(X) has a positive and significant effectagainst incentives (Z).(3) The results of the t test (Partial) show that the value of tcount (4.221) > ttable (2.048), and the significance value is 0.00 < 0.05, so it can be concluded that the second hypothesis is accepted, meaning that work discipline(X) has a significant effecton job satisfaction (Y). (4) The results of the t test (Partial) show that tcount(7.162) > ttable (2.048), and the significance value is 0.00<0.05, so it can be concluded that the third hypothesis is accepted, meaning that incentive (Z)significant effecton job satisfaction (Y) (5) The results of path analysis show that the direct influence of variable X on variable Y2 is 0.395. Meanwhile, the indirect influence through variable Z is 0.620 x 0.670 = 0.415. From the calculation results, it can be seen that the indirect influence through variable Z is greater than the direct influence on variable Y.
Cite
CITATION STYLE
Jopinus Saragih. (2024). The Influence of Work Discipline on Employee Job Satisfaction with Incentives as an Intervening Variable. International Journal of Management Research and Economics, 2(2), 38–54. https://doi.org/10.54066/ijmre-itb.v2i2.1740
Register to see more suggestions
Mendeley helps you to discover research relevant for your work.