Proceedings of the International Conference on Industrial Engineering and Operations Management

Sao Paulo, Brazil, April 5 - 8, 2021

The Influence of Human Relations and Communication on

Employee Performance Through Work Ethics in Gowa
Regency
Herlinah, Buyung Ramadhoni, Mansur Azis
Sekolah Tinggi Ilmu Ekonomi AMKOP Makassar, Indonesia
herlina@gmail.com, Buyung@gmail.com, mansur_asiz@stieamkop.ac.id

Miandhani Denniz Yuniar

Universitas Selamat Sri, Kendal, Indonesia
mdenniz@gmail.com

Yusriadi Yusriadi
Sekolah Tinggi Ilmu Administrasi Puangrimaggalatung, Makassar, Indonesia
yusriadi.yusriadi@uqconnect.edu.au

Minarti Usman
Baubau Islamic School of Religion (STAI)
minarti393@gmail.com

Dwi Lindarto Hadinugroho

Departemen Arsitektur, Fakultas Teknik, Universitas Sumatera Utara
dwi.lindarto@usu.ac.id

ABSTRACT
The purpose of this study was to determine and analyze whether human relations and communication have a
positive and significant effect on employee performance through work ethic in Gowa Regency (review at the
Pallangga, Bajeng, and Bontonompo sub-district offices). This type of research is explanatory research. Sampling
was used in the census method with a sample of 91 respondents. Distributing questionnaires to respondents was as
collecting data. Furthermore, the whole data is processed using SPSS 16.0 software. The results showed, (1).
Human relations have a positive and significant effect on work ethic in Gowa Regency: (2). Communication has a
positive and significant impact on work ethic in Gowa Regency; (3). Human relations have a positive and
significant impact on performance in Gowa Regency: (4). Work Communication has a positive and significant
impact on performance in Gowa Regency; (5). Work ethic has a positive and significant impact on performance in
Gowa Regency; (6). Human relations have a positive and insignificant influence on performance through work
ethic in Gowa Regency; (7). Communication has a positive and significant impact on performance through work
ethic in Gowa Regency
Keywords:
Human Relations, Communication, Work Ethic, Performance

1. Introduction
Employee performance and agency performance are closely related. "According to Sinambela et al. in Riniwati
(2011) states that employee performance is defined as an employee's ability to perform certain skills."
Organizational goals cannot be separated from the organization's resources driven or run by employees who play an
active role as actors in achieving the organization's purposes. "Employee performance will be built by
communication. As Hovland stated in Effendy (2011), communication is the process of changing others' behavior.
"The most important thing that can influence the formation of good performance is a good relationship between
employees (Human Relations)." Communication within an institution mainly occurs in two contexts, namely
communication inside and communication that occurs outside.

© IEOM Society International

 Proceedings of the International Conference on Industrial Engineering and Operations Management
Sao Paulo, Brazil, April 5 - 8, 2021

This communication is formed because there is a structure in the organization. "Edwin B Flippo in Mangkunegara
(2011) defines communication as an activity that can cause other people to interpret an idea, especially what is
meant by the speaker or writer". The goal is to improve the performance of human resources in the institution.
"Usually, the process of exchanging information between organizational structures is carried out with internal
communication, both vertically, horizontally, and diagonally. There are often difficulties that cause communication
to occur, or in other words, miscommunication occurs" (Setyoningrum, 2017). Furthermore, Setyoningrum "said
that communication difficulties occur due to misunderstandings. Psychological traits such as selfishness, lack of
openness between employees, feelings of pressure, and so on, causing communication to be ineffective. In the end,
the goals of an institution are difficult to achieve".
In the author's initial research in the sub-district office, some employees looked less harmonious due to
miscommunication that occurred between one employee and another; the method of delivering information was
unclear. The relationship between employees (human relations) is not good. This happens because of the lack of
employees who respect each other, the lack of greetings, etc. The work ethic of employees decreases, and the
implication for performance is not optimal anymore.
Based on these problems, the authors are interested in researching the title "The Influence of Human Relations and
Communication on Employee Performance Through Work Ethics in Gowa Regency (Study at the District Office of
Pallangga, Bajeng and Bontonompo)."

2. Literature Review
2.1. Human Relations and Work ethic
"Human relations is a human relationship that is included in interpersonal communication (interpersonal
communication) because it generally takes place between two people in a dialogical manner; it is said that human
relations are (Efendy, 2009)". "The interaction of employees and leaders in an organizational environment is an
inseparable thing which will lead to feelings of joy and enthusiasm for work—the environmental situation of the
organization in carrying out its duties and functions. Employees are inseparable from interaction with each other
for the sake of smooth and work harmony (Miryanti et al., 2011). According to Tasmara (2002). "Work ethic is the
totality of his personality and his way of expressing, seeing, believing and giving meaning to something, which
encourages him to act and achieve optimal charity so that the pattern of relationships between humans and
themselves and between humans and other creatures. Can be well established".
This is in line with the research of Rukmana and Yuniawan (2010), Widodo and Susanti (2019), Prabowo (2009),
and Saputro and Fathoni (2017). They found that there is an effect of human relations on work ethic.
H1: Human relations have a positive and significant effect on work ethic
2.2. Communication and Work Ethic
Communication for employees is essential as well as for an institution. Because with good communication, an
organization can run smoothly and successfully or vice versa if there is no communication in the organization can
be messy. According to Harjana (Rokhani, 2015), communication means notification of conversations,
conversations, exchange of ideas or relationships, while Edwin B Flippo in Mangkunegara (2011) defines
communication as an activity that can cause other people to interpret a statement, mainly what is meant by the
speaker or writer. This is in line with the research of Edi (2019) and Azhar and Esfandari (2018). who found that
there is an effect of communication on work ethic? Based on this study, the researchers built a hypothesis, namely:
H2: Communication has a positive and significant effect on work ethic
2.3. Human Relations and Performance
Human relations in the organization is the main thing because it is a medium of liaison between employers and
employees with a leader. This means that a better relationship between employees or leaders will have an impact on
performance. Rivai and Basri (2011) say that the meaning of performance is the results that have been achieved
from what has been done, done by someone in carrying out work or assignments.
This is in line with the research of Edi (2019) and Azhar and Esfandari (2018). who found that there was an
influence of Human relations on work ethic? Based on this study, the researchers built a hypothesis, namely
H3: Human relations have a positive and significant effect on performance
2.4. Communication and Performance
Communication is essential in organizations as communication is a binding element between parts of the system.
Communication allows the structure/organization to develop by providing the media for employees to coordinate
their activities to achieve organizational goals and objectives. If communication between employees is not carried
out properly, the organization or company will impact the implementation of operational activities to stop, and
there is no significant growth.
This is in line with the research of Syahrir, Mattalatta, and Maddatuang (2019) as well as Srimiatun and Prihatinta
(2017), who found that there was an effect of communication on performance, based on relationship, the
researchers built a hypothesis, namely:
H4: Communication has a positive and significant effect on performance

© IEOM Society International

 Proceedings of the International Conference on Industrial Engineering and Operations Management
Sao Paulo, Brazil, April 5 - 8, 2021

2.5. Work Ethic and Performance

One of the mandatory prerequisites of a work ethic is to work optimally, and it is maintained primarily for the
adjustment of employees to location and relationships among employees. With these conditions, it is hoped that it
can provide a perception to adapt to the human being to provide an excellent assessment of hard work. By
implementing each activity and personality, an employee can achieve results by expectations on employee
performance (performance). Good. This means that the work ethic can boost and improve the performance of each
employee.
This is by the results of research by Tampubolon (2007), Karauwan and Mintardjo (2015), Saputra (2018), and
Priansa (2015), who found that there is an effect of work ethic on performance, so the researchers built the
following hypothesis:
H5: Work Ethic has a positive and significant effect on performance.
H6: Human relations have a positive and significant effect on performance through work ethic.
H7: Communication has a positive and significant effect on performance through work ethic.

3. Methods
In this study, the author's approach is quantitative, with a sample of 116 respondents. The sampling technique used
is the sampling technique using a census sampling technique.
3.1. Variable Measurement
This research is using a Likert scale with a rating range of 1 to 5. For data collection, using questionnaires and
closed. Questions/statements. closed not only makes it easier for respondents to give answers quickly but also
makes it easier for researchers to analyse data that has been collected from questionnaires that have been
disseminated.
Table 1. The scale used in assessing each statement
No Response Shoes
1. Strongly Agree (SS) 5
2. Agree (S) 4
3. Neutral (RR) 3
4. Disagree (TS) 2
5. Significantly Disagree (STS) 1
In this study, human relation is intended to be an activity in the interaction between individuals in the work
atmosphere. Effendy in Isnaturohmah (2018) stated four indicators in assessing human relations: relationships with
superiors, relationships with colleagues; relationships with consumers; and relationships with the community. For
indicators of communication, according to Hutapea and Nuriana (2008), in
Antarctica 2015 there are 3 (three) indicators in assessing communication, namely: knowledge (knowledge);
attitude (attitude); and skills.
According to Sinamo (2002) in Edward D.F (2014) that "work ethic is an attitude. Work or paradigm thinking is
believed by a person or a group about the correct work. of people through with patterns or behaviors with a
distinctive". Salamun et al. (1995) in Octarina (2013) says
"that to judge the work ethic characterized by hard work; discipline; diligent (be diligent); honesty; and
responsibility;" while indicators of performance namely (Government Regulation No. 30 of 2019 on performance
assessment of State Civil Apparatus); quality, quantity, time and cost.

4. Results and Discussion

4.1. Path Analysis
Table 1. Path Equation Coefficient Test Result 1
Coefficients
Standardized
Unstandardized Coefficients Coefficients
That's it,
Model B Std. Error Beta t that's
1 (Constant) 11.422 2.283 5.002 .000
Human Relation (X1) .183 .082 .184 2.229 .028
Communication (X2) .766 .144 .439 5.320 .000
a. Dependent Variable: Work Ethic (Y1)
Source: SPSS Data Processing Results version 16.0, 2019.
Calculation of data processing from table one in equation path 1 (one), namely:
Y1 = p1X1 + p2X2 + e1

© IEOM Society International

 Proceedings of the International Conference on Industrial Engineering and Operations Management
Sao Paulo, Brazil, April 5 - 8, 2021

Information:
X1: Coefficient of human relation correlation
X2: Communication correlation coefficient
Y1 = 0,184 X1 +0,439 X2
The correlation coefficient value of human relation is0.184, which is based on each increase of 1 point of human
relation variable, the work ethic will increase by 0.184 points. The value of the correlation coefficient in
communication variables is 0.439, which means that any increase in communication variables worth one of the
energies will increase work ethic by 0.439.
Table 1 also shows a variable that dominates the communication variable because the standardized coefficient
value is the largest (0.439). To calculate how much influence the variable human relation and communication work
to work ethics then conducted coefficient of determination test (square) using computer program SPSS, namely:
Table 2. R square 1 Test Results
Model Summary
Std. An error of the
Model R R Square Adjusted R Square Estimate
1 .463a .214 .201 2.837
a. Predictors: (Constant), Communication (X2), Human Relation (X1)
Source: Processed primary data, 2019.
In table2, there is a coefficient of R-square value of 0.214; this value is also interpreted as much as 21.4 percent
work ethic influenced by human relation and communication. As well as 79.6
percent were affected by other variables not included in this study.
4.2. Hypothesis Test Results
As for the equation of line 1 (one), the interpretation of hypothesis testing is:
1. H1: Human Relation has a positive and significant effect on work ethic in employees in Gowa Regency.
A hypothesis test is conducted through t-calculated value based on the results of processed data through
SPSS then compared t- table value and significance value, assuming:
H1 is received when the t-count value > t-table and its significance value are <0.050.
H0 is rejected if the t-count < t-table value and its significance value are > 0.050.
From analyst results in table 1, it obtained t-count for human relation variable worth 0,184 with a significant
value of 0.028, then obtained t-table value from df = 116 (df = n - k = 119- 3) of 1,981. Thus, the t-count
value is greater than the t-table value (2,229 > 1,981) as well as the sig value. < 0.050 (0.028), so it can be
said that human relation variables significantly affect work ethic. Furthermore, the coefficient value
indicates a positive value (0.184); thus, it is concluded that Hypothesis one (H1) in this study is acceptable.
The results of this study are in line with those conducted by Rukmana and Yuniawan (2010), Prabowo
(2009), and Wididodo and Susanti (2019), who stated that "there is an influence between
human relations and work ethic."
2. H2: Communication has a positive and significant effect on employees' work ethic in the Gowa Regency.
The hypothesis test is analyzed through the magnitude of the count value obtained then compares with the t-
table value. As well as looking at the value of its significance with the assumption:
H1 is received when the t-count value > t-table and its significance value are <0.050.
H0 is rejected if the t-count < t-table value and its significance value are > 0.050.
As for the results of the analysis in table 1 above, show the value of t-calculate the variable communication of
0.439 with a significant level of 0.000, then obtained the value of t-table
from df = 116 (df = n - k = 119- 3) of 1,981. Thus, the t-count value is greater than the tablet-value (5,320 > 1,981)
and the sig value. < 0.050 (0.000), so it can be said that communication variables significantly affect work ethic.
Furthermore, the coefficient value indicates a positive value (0,439), so it is concluded that Hypothesis one (H2) in
this study is acceptable.
This study's results are in line with those conducted by Edi (2019) and Azhar and Esfandari. (2018) which states
that "there is an influence of Communication with work ethic."

© IEOM Society International

 Proceedings of the International Conference on Industrial Engineering and Operations Management
Sao Paulo, Brazil, April 5 - 8, 2021

Table 3. Coefficient of Equations Equation 2 Test Results

Coefficients
Standardized
Unstandardized Coefficients Coefficients That's it,
Model B Std. Error Beta T that's
1 (Constant) 3.636 1.904 1.910 .059
Human Relation (X1) .181 .063 .234 2.861 .005
Communication (X2) .381 .121 .280 3.136 .002
Work Ethic (Y1) .199 .070 .255 2.830 .005
a. Dependent Variable: Performance (Y2)
Source: SPSS Data Processing Results version 16.0,2019.
The calculation result from table 3 indicates the equation of line 2 as follows:
Y2 = p3X1+ p4X2 + p5Y1 + e2
Information:
X1: Coefficient of human relation correlation
X2: Communication correlation coefficient
Y1: Coefficient of work ethic correlation
Y1 = 0,234 X1 +0,280 X2 + 0,255
The correlation coefficient of the human relation value of 0.234 means that each increase of 1 point of the
human relation variable will increase the performance point by 0.234. The value of the correlation coefficient in the
communication variable is 0.280. For each increase of 1 point, the communication variable will increase the
effectiveness of performance by 0.280 and the value of the correlation coefficient in the work ethic variable by
0.255, which means that for each increase of 1 point, the work ethic variable will increase performance
effectiveness by 0.255.
It will be tested its coefficient of determination with the help of SPSS software, namely:
Table 4. R square Model 2 Test Results
Model Summary
Std. An error of the
Model R R Square Adjusted R Square Estimate
1 .517a .267 .248 2.146
a. Predictors: (Constant), Work Ethic (Y1), Human Relation (X1), Communication (X2)
Source: Processed primary data, 2019.
Based on Table4, it can be known the magnitude of the coefficient of R square is 0.267. This means that as much as
26.7% of performance is influenced by human relations, communication, and work ethic. At the same time, the
remaining 73.3%is influenced by other variables that are not included in this research.
From table 3 also shows that there is a variable that dominates the communication variable because the value of the
standardized coefficient is the largest (0.280).
For hypothesis testing for equation line 2 are as follows:
3. H3: Human Relation has a positive and significant effect on performance in employees in Gowa Regency.
The hypothesis test is analyzed through the magnitude of the t-count value obtained then compares with the
t-table value, assuming:
H1 is accepted when the value of t-calculates > t-table and its significance value is <0.050.
H0 is rejected if the t-count <t-table value and its significance value are > 0.050.
The results of the analysis in table 3, show the value of t-calculate human relation variable 0,234 with a
significant level of 0.005, then obtained the value of t-table from df = 116 (df = n - k = 119- 3) of 1,981.
Thus, the t-count value is greater than the tablet-value (2,861 > 1,981) and the sig value. < 0.050 (0.005), it
can be said that human relation variables have a significant effect on performance. Furthermore, the
coefficient value indicates a positive value (0,234); thus, it is concluded that hypothesis three (H3) in this
study is acceptable.
The results of this study are in line with those conducted by Rukmana and Yuniawan (2010), whose
research results found that "there is an influence of human relations on performance."
4. H4: Communication has a positive and significant effect on the performance of employees in the Gowa
Regency.
The hypothesis test was analyzed through the magnitude of the t-count value obtained then compared with
the t-table value, as well as looking at the value of its significance assuming:
H1 is accepted when the value of t-calculates > t-table and its significance value is <0.050.
H0 is rejected if the t-count <t-table value and its significance value are > 0.050.

© IEOM Society International

 Proceedings of the International Conference on Industrial Engineering and Operations Management
Sao Paulo, Brazil, April 5 - 8, 2021

The analysis results in table 3 above show the value of t-count communication variables by0.280 with a
significant level of 0.002, then obtained the t-table value from df = 116 (df = n - k = 119-3) of 1,981. Thus,
the t-count value is greater than the t-table value (3,136 > 1,981) and the sig value. < 0.050 (0.002), meaning
that communication variables have a significant effect on performance. Furthermore, the coefficient value
indicates a positive value (0,280); thus, it is concluded that hypothesis four (H4) in this study is acceptable.
The results of this study are in line with those conducted by Syahrir, Mattalatta, and Maddatuang. (2019) the
results of his research found that "there is an influence of communication on the performance."
5. H5: Work ethic has a positive and significant effect on the performance of employees in Gowa Regency.
The hypothesis test was analyzed through the magnitude of the t-count value obtained then compared with
the t-table value, as well as looking at the importance of its significance assuming:
H1 is accepted when the value of t-calculates > t-table and its significance value is <0.050.
H0 is rejected if the t-count <t-table value and its significance value are > 0.050.
The analysis results in table 3 above show the value of t-count variable work ethic of 0.255 with a
significant level of 0.005, then obtained the value of t-table from df = 116 (df = n - k = 119- 3) of 1,981.
Thus, the t-count value is greater than the t-table value (2,830 > 1,981) as well as the sig value. < 0.050
(0.005), meaning that the work ethic variable has a significant impact on performance. Furthermore, the
coefficient value indicates a positive value (0.255); so, it is concluded that hypothesis four (H5) in this study
is acceptable
The results of this study are in line with those conducted by Tampubolon (2007), Rukmana and Yuniawan
(2010), Karauwan and Mintardjo (2015), Priansa (2015), Saputro and Fathoni (2017), and Saputra (2018),
whose research results found that there is an influence of work ethic on performance.
6. Hypothesis 6 (H6) The indirect influence of human relation (X1)on performance (Y2) through work ethic
(Y1)
To know the value of the indirect influence of human relation to performance through work ethic can be
seen from the result of the multiplication of coefficient value. between the power of human relationships. on
work ethic and the influence of work ethic on performance then obtained 0.184 x 0.25 5 = 0.047 For
determination of t-table by using degrees of freedom (df) n-k = 119-3 = 116, then got value t-table = 1,981.
However, the significance was not tested by using the Sobel test. From calculations via the Sobel test, it was
found that the calculated t value of 1,751 is smaller than the tablet-1,981. This means that the work ethic as
an intervening variable has no significant effect. This explains that human relations (X1) indirectly affect
performance (Y2) through work ethic (Y1) is positive and insignificant so that H6 is rejected.
7. Hypothesis 7 (H7). The indirect influence of communication (X2) on performance(Y2) through work ethic
(Y1).
To know the value of the indirect influence of communication on performance through work ethic can be
seen from the result of multiplication of coefficient value between the power of touch on work ethic and the
impact of work ethic on performance then obtained 0.439 x 0.255 = 0.112. The determination of t-table by
using the degree of freedom (df) n-k = 119-3 = 119, then got the value of t-table = 1,981, however
significant or not tested by the test. From calculation to The Sobel test found that the calculated t value of
2,499 is greater than the tablet- 1,981. This means that the work ethic as an intervening variable has a
significant effect. This explains that communication (X1) indirectly affects performance (Y2) through work
ethic (Y1) is positive and effective so that H7 is accepted.

5. Conclusions and Recommendations

Based on the results of data processing and testing, conclusions are obtained to answer the formulation of research
problems, namely as follows:
1. Human relations have a positive and significant influence on the work ethic in Gowa Regency.
2. Communication has a positive and significant positive effect on the work ethic in Gowa Regency.
3. Human relations have a positive and significant impact on performance in Gowa Regency.
4. Work Communication has a positive and significant influence on performance in Gowa Regency.
5. Work ethic has a positive and significant impact on performance in Gowa Regency.
6. Human relations have a positive and insignificant effect on performance through work ethic in Gowa
Regency.
7. Communication has a positive and significant influence on performance through work ethic in Gowa
Regency.

© IEOM Society International

 Proceedings of the International Conference on Industrial Engineering and Operations Management
Sao Paulo, Brazil, April 5 - 8, 2021

References
Alam, S.(2014) Pengaruh Komunikasi, Motivasi, Dan Disiplin Kerja Terhadap Kinerja Pegawai Lembaga
Penjaminan Mutu Pendidikan. Katalogis, 2(1).
Anonim, Peraturan Pemerintah Nomor 30 Tahun 2019 Tentang Penilaian Kinerja Aparatur Sipil Negara.
Antartika, R. A. (2015). Identifikasi Kemampuan Komunikasi Tenaga Marketing dan Dampaknya Terhadap
Kinerja Karyawan (Studi Kasus pada PT X Kiaracondong Bandung) (Doctoral dissertation, Universitas
Widyatama).
Azhar, M. H., & Esfandari, D. A. (2018). Pengaruh Komunikasi Internal Terhadap Etos Kerja (survey Terhadap
PT. Telekomunikasi Indonesia, Tbk Pada Divisi Business Service Area Bandung). eProceedings of
Management, 5(1).
Edi, E. (2019). Pengaruh Komunikasi Organisasi Dan Pengembangan Guru Terhadap Etos Kerja Guru. Edum
Journal, 2(2), 108-119.
Edward, D. F (2014). Pengaruh Etos Kerja dan Penilaian Kinerja Terhadap Motivasi Karyawan PT. Bank Rakyat
Indonesia Tbk Cabang Iskandar Muda Medan.
Effendy, Onong Uchjana. 2009. Human Relations &Public Relations. Bandung : Mandar Maju.
Effendy, Onong Uchjana. 2011. Ilmu Komunikasi, Teori & Praktik. Bandung: PT. Remaja Rosdakarya.
Isnaturohmah, R. (2018). Pengaruh Human Relation Dan Lingkungan Kerja Terhadap Kinerja Karyawan Pada
Usaha Dagang Gemilang Kabupaten Blitar.
Karauwan, R., & Mintardjo, C. (2015). Pengaruh Etos Kerja, Budaya Organisasi, Dan Beban Kerja Terhadap
Kinerja Pegawai Di Dinas Pekerjaan Umum Minahasa Selatan. Jurnal EMBA: Jurnal Riset Ekonomi,
Manajemen, Bisnis dan Akuntansi, 3(3).
Mangkunegara, A. A. Anwar Prabu. 2011. Manajemen Sumber Daya Manusia Perusahaan, PT. Remaja
Rosdakarya, Bandung.
Miryanti, I., Sultan, M. I., & Farid, M. (2011). Penerapan Human Relations Dalam Meningkatkan Motivsi Kerja
Karyawan di Valentino Boutique Hotel Makassar (Doctoral dissertation).
Nasution, Z. 2000. Komunikasi Pembangunan.Pengenalan Teori dan Penerapannya. Jakarta. Rajawali Pers.
Octarina, A. (2013). Pengaruh Etos Kerja Dan Disiplin Kerja Terhadap Kinerja Pegawai Pada Dinas Kebudayaan
Pariwisata Pemuda Dan Olahraga Kabupaten Sarolangun. Manajemen S-1, 1(1).
Prabowo, O. S. (2009). Analisis Pengaruh Human Relation, Kondisi Fisik Lingkungan Kerja, dan Leadership
Terhadap Etos Kerja Karyawan Kantor Pendapatan Daerah Di Pati (Doctoral dissertation, Universitas
Muhammadiyah Surakarta).
Priansa, D. J. (2015). Pengaruh Kepemimpinan Visioner Dan Etos Kerja Terhadap Kinerja Pegawai Bank Syariah
Mandiri. Jurnal Ecodemica: Jurnal Ekonomi, Manajemen, dan Bisnis, 3(1), 342-347.
Rivai, Vethzal & Basri (2011). Performance Appraisal: Sistem Yang Tepat Untuk Menilai Kinerja Karyawan dan
Meningkatkan Daya saing Perusahaan. Jakarta: PT. Raja Grafindo Persada.
Rukmana, W. E., & Yuniawan, A. (2010). Analisis Pengaruh Human Relation (Hubungan Antar Manusia) Dan
Kondisi Fisik Lingkungan Terhadap Etos Kerja Dan Kinerja Karyawan Dedy Jaya Plaza Tegal (Doctoral
Dissertation, UNIVERSITAS DIPONEGORO).
Saputra, A. Y. (2018). Pengaruh Etos Kerja Terhadap Kinerja Pegawai Di Kantor Kecamatan Rancaekek
Kabupaten Bandung (Doctoral dissertation, UIN Sunan Gunung Djati Bandung).
Setyoningrum, R. (2017). Pengaruh Komunikasi Internal terhadap Etos Kerja Pegawai di Pusat Pengembangan
Pendidikan Anak Usia Dini dan Pendidikan Masyarakat (PP-PAUD dan Dikmas) Jawa Tengah
(Doctoral dissertation, Universitas Negeri Semarang).
Syahrir, I. E., Mattalatta, M., & Maddatuang, B. (2019). Pengaruh Komunikasi Internal Dan Kompensasi Terhadap
Kinerja Pegawai Melalui Komitmen Organisasi Pada Badan Pengelola Keuangan Daerah Kabupaten
Bantaeng. YUME: Journal of Management, 2(1).
Tasmara, T. 2002. Etos Kerja Pribadi Muslim. Yogyakarta: Dana Bhakti Prima Yasa.
Tampubolon, B. D. (2007). Analisis faktor gaya kepemimpinan dan faktor etos kerja terhadap kinerja pegawai pada
organisasi yang telah menerapkan SNI 19-9001-2001. Jurnal standardisasi, 9(3), 106-115.
Widodo, B. H., & Susanti, F. (2019). Pengaruh Human Relation (Hubungan Antar Manusia), Lingkungan kerja
Terhadap Etos Kerja karyawan (Studi Kasus Pada PT. Pelindo Teluk Bayur Padang).

© IEOM Society International

 Proceedings of the International Conference on Industrial Engineering and Operations Management
Sao Paulo, Brazil, April 5 - 8, 2021

Biographies
Herlinah is a student at Magister Program of Economic Science of STIE AMKOP, Indonesia. Her areas of interest
and research include social science and economic. She has published some articles in national journals.
Buyung Ramadhoni is a lecturer at Economics Department of STIE AMKOP, Indonesia. His areas of interest and
research include economic, management, management human resource. He has published some books and many
articles in national and international journals.
Mansur Azis is a lecturer at Economics Department of STIE AMKOP, Indonesia. His areas of interest and
research include economic, management, management human resource. He has published some books and many
articles in national and international journals.
Miandhani Denniz Yuniar is lecturer in the Department of Communication at Selamat Sri University, Indonesia.
Her research areas and interests include communication science in marketing, digital media, advertising, and
promotion. As a lecturer, she has published several scientific articles in national journals. She is also active in the
PERHUMAS Semarang organization
Yusriadi Yusriadi is a lecturer at Public Administration Department of Sekolah Tinggi Ilmu Administrasi
Puangrimaggalatung, Indonesia and chancellor on Sekolah Tinggi Ilmu Hukum Pengayoman. His areas of interest
and research include social science, political science, sociology, legal studies, and public administration. He has
published some books and many articles in national and international journals. He is a reviewer and editor in
some local and international journals.

© IEOM Society International