Research Article: 2021 Vol: 24 Issue: 1S
Nabilah Aliyyah, Universitas Wijaya
Indra Prasetyo, Universitas Wijaya Putra
Rusdiyanto, Universitas Airlangga, UPN Veteran Jawa Timur
Esa Wahyu Endarti, Universitas Wijaya Putra
Fitra Mardiana, Universitas Wijaya Putra
Ruddy Winarko, Universitas Wijaya Putra
Chamariyah, Universitas Wijaya Putra
Sri Mulyani, Universitas Wijaya Putra
Firsty Oktaria Grahani, Universitas Wijaya Putra
Arif Syafi'ur Rochman, Universitas Gresik
Nawang Kalbuana, Politeknik Penerbangan Indonesia Curug
Widi Hidayat, Universitas Airlangga
Heru Tjaraka, Universitas Airlangga
Citation: Citation Information: Aliyyah, N., Prasetyo, I., Rusdiyanto, Endarti, E.W., Mardiana, F., Winarko, R., … & Tjaraka, H. (2021). What affects employee performance through work motivation? Journal of Management Information and Decision Sciences, 24(1), 114.
Competency, Workload, Employee Performance, Work Motivation
Objective: This study aims to estimate and predict the influence of competence and workload on employee performance through the work motivation of employees of stateowned public bodies. Design/methodology/approach: This type of research uses explanatory research with a quantitative approach. The population in this study was 55 employees at stateowned public bodies, in this study using sampling 55 employees. The analysis method in this study uses path analysis. The selection of this model aims to determine the direct or indirect influence of competency variables and workloads on employee performance variables through work motivation variables. Findings: These results prove that Competence affects employee performance in stateowned public bodies. Workload negatively affects Employee Performance in companies of stateowned public bodies. While the motivation of Work affects employee performance. Competency positively affects employee workload motivation negatively affects employee's work motivation. Competence through Work Motivation positively affects Employee Performance. Workload through Work Motivation negatively affects Employee Performance in stateowned public bodies. Originality/value: Previous research measured the Effect of Competence and Workload on Employee Performance Through Employee Work Motivation on manufacturing companies listed on the Indonesia stock exchange, while this research focused on stateowned public bodies.
The importance of human resource management policies and practices in improving organizational performance as a strategic function is to analyze the role of Human Resource Management; one of the approaches that can be used is the value chain approach put forward by Human Resource Management functions along with the company's infrastructure, technology development, and purchasing functions are supporting activities in the company's value chain. Porter (2015) each company consists of a series of design activities, manufacture, market, deliver, and support its products.
Performance of the workforce is the outcome of a person's work in the fulfillment of his tasks on the basis of skill, experience and time (Chhabra Roy, 2020; Elangovan & Rajendran, 2020; Sangeetha, 2020; Khaled, 2020; Russen, 2020; Jannah et al., 2020) Performance assessment is a systematic assessment of the work carried out by staff intended to carry out development. The performance of an employee will be good if the employee has sufficient competence and appropriate in their field as determining the appropriate Human Resources both in character, place, and time as the term “Who's Man Behind The Gun” (Chachulski & Windshügel, 2020; de Brito Silva, 2020; Iriyani, 2020; Mousaei, 2020; Siramshetty, 2020).
Competence is something that every employee should have. This is absolute because in carrying out the orders of superiors, of course, an employee must be competent and competitive to complete it so as to ensure the accuracy and speed of completion of the work to optimize its capacity and capability that can be expressed as a concept of competence identical to the performance that is as "demonstrated ability (including knowledge, skill, or attitudes) to perform a specific task successfully to meet the standard" (Bykova, 2020; Chmil, 2020; Choi, 2020; Richter, 2020; Sagone, 2020).
Employee competence has an influence on employee performance that is also related to workload factors as a concept to the application of each individual to complete the task by the duties and authorities of his/her position (Anwar et al., 2020; Bayer et al., 2020; Elangovan & Rajendran, 2020; Leung et al., 2020; Usman et al., 2020). If the individual's limitations prevent work from reaching the expected level, therefore the expected competence and the performance capacity are divided.
Motivation for Work is the desire to make a high level of organizational effort as the willingness to meet the individual's needs(Abrorov et al., 2020; Bartosh et al., 2020; Bartosh et al., 2020; Frolova et al., 2020; Idoko et al., 2020; Puchkova et al., 2020). Motivation is the motive of the word, which is an encouragement of the employee's needs to be met for the employee to adjust to his context. So motivation is a condition that moves employees to be able to achieve the goals of their motives. High employee work motivation will have a positive impact on the company and will affect the creation of organizational commitments (Buj & Revuelta, 2020; Coudret & Dietrich, 2020; Mylona & Mihail, 2020; Nazir & Islam, 2020; Sergeeva et al., 2020).
Employee Performance
Employee performance is the result of work in quality and quantity achieved by an employee in carrying out his duties in accordance with the responsibilities given to him (Chhabra Roy, 2020; Elangovan & Rajendran, 2020; K & Ranjit, 2020; Khaled et al., 2020; Russen et al., 2020; Sangeetha, 2020). Employee performance is the achievement or effectiveness at the employee or employment level (Bhatnagar, 2020; Bin, 2020; Čech, 2020; Meričková, 2020; Wolff, 2020). Performance of the workforce is the outcome of a person's work in the fulfillment of his tasks on the basis of skill, experience and time (Desoky & Mousa, 2020; Hermawan, 2020; Idris, 2020; Jerónimo, 2020; Kusumaningrum, 2020). Based on the description above, in general, the understanding of performance is the result of the process of achieving targets that the organization has set in accordance with its capabilities.
Overall, the performance is divided into performance and corporate performance. Individual performance is based on both quality and quantity, while the performance of the Organization combines individual performance and group performance (Lee, 2020; Baird, 2020; Upadhyay, 2020; van de Brake, 2020; Ye et al., 2020).
Work Motivation
Work motivation is a set of attitudes and values that influence an individual to achieve a specific thing according to the individual's goals (Gillet et al., 2020; Idoko et al., 2020; Mylona & Mihail, 2020; Nazir & Islam, 2020; Ronen & Donia, 2020). Motivation of work as a force in the person that impact the intensity, direction and perseverance of one's voluntary behavior to do the job (Gagné et al., 2020; Gahlawat & Kundu, 2020; Albiez, 2020; Idris, 2020; Oh & Kim, 2020; Zhang et al., 2020).
Work motivation is encouragement in a person to do or do an activity or task as best as possible in order to achieve achievements (Hensel & Kacprzak, 2020; Langevoort, 2020; Musil & Hedija, 2020; Schneider, 2020; Walumbwa et al., 2020). From the understanding of the motivation of the above experts' work, Work motivation means a condition that encourages or moves a person to do a job or activity done to achieve his goals.
Competence
Competence is an ability that a person has, which is a combination of personal, scientific, technological, social, and spiritual abilities. The required capabilities of consistently demonstrated employees provide an adequate level of performance in a job function (Bykova, 2020; Chmil, 2020; Gorbenko, 2020; Kapalygina, 2020; Martynova, 2020; Yusupova, 2020).
Competence is an ability to carry out or perform a job or task based on skills and knowledge and supported by the attitude of work required by the work. Competence also demonstrates the characteristics of knowledge and skills that each individual possesses that enables a person to perform their duties and responsibilities effectively and raises the standards of professional quality in the work (Krezhevskikh, 2020; Choi, 2020; Miller, 2020; Richter, 2020; Sagone, 2020; Sarigiani et al., 2020).
Competence is a capacity based on knowledge and skills supported by and applied to work and work in a work place that refers to established work requirements (Ayapbergenova et al., 2020; Drews et al., 2020; Koptseva, 2020; Lin et al., 2020; Sebba, 2020; Stojić & Košuta, 2020). Understanding competence is a person's ability or capacity to do various jobs where two factors, intellectual ability and physical ability, determine this ability (Báez et al., 2020; Bal, 2020; Bernate et al., 2020; Erton, 2020; Guzmán & Castaño, 2020; Mora & López, 2020).
It can be concluded from this understanding that competency is a characteristic inherent in a person that causes a person to be able to predict his surroundings in a job or situation.
Work Load
T The workload is a concept which arises because of the low capacity in information processing. In the face of a task, people should complete the job at a certain level. If the limitations of the individual hamper work at the anticipated levels, the expected capacity level and the capacity level are divided. This gap causes failures in performance (Bosurgi, 2020; Mayya, 2020; Taylor, 2020; Wu et al., 2020; Zydziunaite, 2020).
A workload is the volume of work or a record of the results of work that can indicate the volume generated by a number of employees in a particular section. The amount of work a group or person must complete in a given time or workload can be viewed on an objective and subjective point of view (Khalil, 2020; Li & Boyle, 2020; Matz & Lowe, 2020; Schäfer, 2020; Schütze & Johansson, 2020; Hu et al., 2020). Objectively is the entire time spent or the amount of activity performed. While the workload is subjectively a measure that a person wears against statements about feelings of overwork, a measure of job pressure and job satisfaction. Workload as a source of dissatisfaction caused by overwork (House & Giordano, 2020; Puksa & Janzen, 2020; Volz & Dorneich, 2020; Agner, 2020; Bergman, 2020; Das et al., 2020).
Workloads can be defined as a difference between a worker's capacity or ability and the demands of the job at hand. Given that human work is mental and physical, each has a different level of charge (Cioara et al., 2020; Krumbiegel, 2020; Lawler, 2020; Nagel, 2020; Nonnenmacher & Kim, 2020; Ramalho, 2020).
Conceptual Framework
The research analysis model related to the above research can be described in the conceptual framework as follows (Figure 1):
Hypothesis
Based on the hypothesis model which is the development of the concept model, the hypothesis formulation in this research can be described as follows:
H1 : Competency have a positive and significant effect on employee performance
H2 : Workload have a negative and significant effect on employee performance
H3 : Motivation have a positive and significant effect on employee performance
H4 : Competency on Motivation has a positive and significant impact
H5 : Workload on Motivation has a negative and significant impact
H6 : Competency positively affects Employee Performance through Motivation
H7 : Workload negatively affects Employee Performance through Motivation
Types and Approaches of Research
This type of research uses explanatory research with a quantitative approach. Quantitative method is a research method based on a specific population or sample, data collection using research instruments, data analysis is quantitative or statistical, with the aim to test hypotheses (Juanamasta et al., 2019; Luwihono et al., 2021; Prabowo et al., 2020; Prasetyo et al., 2021; Rusdiyanto, Agustia et al., 2020; Rusdiyanto & Hidayat et al., 2020; Shabbir et al., 2021; Susanto et al., 2021).
Variable Operating Definitions
The operational definition of a variable is an attribute or trait or value of a person, object or activity has a certain variation set by the researcher to be studied and then drawn conclusions.
Exogenous Variable
Exogenous variable is a variable whose value is not influenced or determined by other variables in the model. Each exogenous variable is an independent variable. The exogenous variables in this study were Competency (X_{1}) and Workload (X_{2}).
Variable Intervening
An intervening variable is a type of variable that has an indirect relationship between an independent variable and a dependent variable. These variables have a position between independent and dependent variables. This makes dependent variables indirectly affected by independent variables. The intervening variable in this study is Work Motivation (Z).
Endogenous Variables
Endogenous variable is a variable whose value is influenced or determined by another variable in the model. The endogenous variable in this study was Employee Performance (Y).
Research Variable Indicators
Some indicators contained in the concept of competence (Mar’atin, 2020) as follows: Knowledge, Understanding, Skill, Value, Attitude, Interest. While the workload indicators in this study will be measured by the following indicators (Sugiharjo & Aldata, 2018): Task demands factor, Effort, Performance. Some indicators of average work according to (Octaviani, 2019) are: Responsibility in doing the work, Achievements achieved, Selfdevelopment, Selfreliance in acting
According to Menurut (Robbins & Judge, 2012) indicators for measuring employee performance individually include: Quality, Quantity, Timeliness, Effectiveness, Independence
Population, Sample and Sampling Techniques
The study consisted of 55 employees at stateowned public bodies. In this study using saturated sampling where the determination of samples used are all members of the population of 55 employees.
Path Analysis
The analysis method used is path analysis. The purpose of this model is to determine how a number of free/exogenous variables directly or indirectly influence endogenous variables (Darma & Supriyanto, 2017). A patch coefficient is a standardized regression coefficient, which is a regression coefficient calculated from a database that has been set in a standard number (Zscore) (Wang, 2020; Wei, 2020; Taranu et al., 2020).
When doing path analysis, first do draw a path diagram. Path diagrams are a tool for graphically describing the structure with causality relationships between intervening, independent, and dependent variable. The model path chart is centred with the dependent variables; variables studied in this research Competency (X_{1}) and Workload (X_{2}) as independent variables, Motivation as intervening variables, with Employee Performance as variable dependents. In the figure 2 below, the following path analysis model is shown:
Description :
X_{1} : Competence
X_{2} : Workload
Y_{1} : Motivation
Y_{2} : Employee Performance
ρ(rho) : Coeff. of each variable
ρY_{1}X_{1} : Coeff. of Competency to Motivation pathways
ρY_{1}X_{2} : Coeff. of Workload path to Motivation
ρY_{2}X_{1} : Coeff. of Competency path to Employee Performance
ρY_{2}X_{2} : Coeff. of Workload path to Employee Performance
ρ Y_{2}Y_{1} : Motivational path Coefficient on Employee Performance
ε(epsilon) : Other factors that affect dependent variables
In this study, the structural forms include:
First Sub Structural Path Equation
Second Sub Structural Path Equation
Path analysis can be carried out in this study by estimating the true worth and measured from the deity of fitness. The deity of fit could be measured statistically by the coefficient of determination (R^{2}). Then a hypothesis test with a statistical value of t.
Test the Goodness of Fit Models
In estimating the actual value, the fitness test of this model serves to assess the exactness of the sample regression function. Statistically, the goodness of fit of a model can be measured by the value of the determination coefficient (R^{2}) (Alkan & Özçelik, 2020; Ejarque & Campos, 2020; SadłowskaSałęga & Radoń, 2020). The test coefficient is intended to determine how far the model can go when variations in dependent variables are described. The coefficient of determination is at 0 and 1. Classification of correlation coefficients i.e., 0 (no correlation), 00.49 (weak correlation), 0.50 (moderate correlation), 0.510.99 (strong correlation), 1.00 (perfect correlation) (Liu, 2020; Melišová, 2020; RomeroEsquinas, 2020). A small R^{2} value means that independent variables are very limited in their ability to describe dependent variables. A nearly one value means that variable provide almost all of the information necessary for predicting dependent variables.
Individual Parameter Significance Test (T statistical test)
The t statistical test basically shows how far an individual independent variable affects in describing dependent variables. The T statistical test have a significance score of α=5%. The criteria for testing hypotheses using t statistical tests is that if the signifkansi value t (pvalue)<0.05 then an alternative hypothesis is accepted, stating that an independent variable individually and its significance affects dependent variables.
Indirect Influence Test
To find out the influence of variables mediators used Sobel Test. Using the development of procedures performed by Sobel (1982) Mediation hypothesis testing can be conducted. The Sobel test is performed using intermediate variables to test the indirect influence strength of independent variables (X) to dependent variables (Y_{2}) through intervening variables (Y_{1}). Indirect influence is obtained by multiplying the coefficient of path of each relationship. Calculate the t values of coefficients to test the signification of indirect influence a (ρ Y_{1}.x) and b(ρ Y_{2},Y_{1}) with the following formula :
Description:
a=ρy_{1}.x (Coefficient of influence X →Y_{1})
b=ρy_{2}.y_{1} (Coefficient of influence Y_{1}→ Y_{2})
S_{ab}=standard error
The value for tcount is compared with table t and if the value for t is larger that the value for t of the table, then mediation can be concluded. Standard values of error coefficients a and b are expressed with Sa and Sb, default magnitude of indirect errors Sab calculated with the following formula:
a=Coefficient of influence X → Y_{1}
b=Coefficient of influence Y_{1}→ Y_{2}
ab=Multiplication result correlation coefficient X → Y_{1} with correlation coefficient Y_{1}→ Y_{2}
S_{a}=Standard error coefficient a
S_{b}=Standard error coefficient b
S_{ab}=Standard indirect error (indirect effect)
Results of Research
Regression Analysis is intended to determine if there is a significant influence of Competency (X_{1}) and Workload (X_{2}) on Motivation (Z) and Competency (X_{1}) and Workload (X_{2}) and Motivation (Z) on Performance (Y).As shown in Table 1
Table 1 Regression Equation 


Independent Variable  Dependent Variable  Koef.  T statistics  Prob. 
Constant  Motivation  1,394  3,368  0,001 
Competence  Motivation  0,775  8,795  0,000 
Workload  Motivation  0,220  4,533  0,000 
Constant  Performance  0,848  1,887  0,065 
Competence  Performance  0,525  3,604  0,001 
Workload  Performance  0,148  2,465  0,017 
Motivation  Performance  0,366  2,523  0,015 
Structural Model
Z=1,394+0,775 X_{1} 0,220 X_{2}
Y=0,848+0,525 X_{1} 0,148 X_{2}+0,366 Z
The results in the table above can be known that the tstatistical value resulting from the influence of Constants on Motivation (Z) is 1,394 with 0.001 value of significance. The significance value is smaller than significant alpha 5% or 0.05. So it can be concluded that constants have meaning in models.
The results in the table above can be known that the statistical t value resulting from the influence of Competency (X_{1}) on Motivation (Z) is 0.775 with 0.001 value of significance. The significance value is smaller than significant alpha 5% or 0.05. So it is concluded that Competence affects motivation.
The results in the table above can be known that the statistical t value resulting from the influence of Workload (X_{2}) on Motivation (Z) is 0.220 with 0.001 value of significance. The significance value is smaller than the significant alpha 5% or 0.05. So it is concluded that workload negatively affects motivation.
The results in the table above can be known that the statistical t value resulting from the influence of Constants on Performance (Y) is 0.848 with 0.065 value of significance. The value of such significance is greater than the significant alpha 5% or 0.05. So it can be concluded that constants have no meaning in the model.
The results in the table above can be known that the statistical t value resulting from the influence of Competency (X_{1}) on Performance (Y) is 0.525 with 0.001 value of significance. The significance value is smaller than the significant alpha 5% or 0.05. So it can be concluded that Recruitment affects employee performance.
The results in the table above can be known that the statistical t value resulting from the impact of Workload (X_{2}) on Performance (Y) is 0.148 with 0.017 value of significance. The significance value is smaller than the significant alpha 5% or 0.05. So it can be concluded that Workload negatively affects Performance.
The results in the table above can be known that the statistical t value resulting from the influence of Motivation (Z) on Performance (Y) is 0.366 with 0.015 value of significance. The significance value is smaller than the significant alpha 5% or 0.05. Therefore, motivation can be concluded to affect performance.
Path Analysis Results
Path analysis is intended to determine the direct influence of Competencies on Motivation, Workload on Motivation, Competencies On Performance, Workloads On Performance, and Motivation To Performance. As well as the indirect influence of Competencies and Workloads on Performance through intervening variables which in this case is Motivation.
Coefficient of Determination
The Determination Coefficient is used to determine the magnitude of the diversity of independent variables in describing the diversity of dependent variables, or to know in other words the magnitude of the contribution of independent variables to dependent variables or also called goodness of fit model assessments. Fit Model Goodness in Path analysis is done usingStructural Model
Z=1,394+0,775 X_{1} 0,220 X_{2}
Y=0,848+0,525 X_{1} 0,148 X_{2}+0,366 Z
The results in the table above can be known that the tstatistical value resulting from the influence of Constants on Motivation (Z) is 1,394 with 0.001 value of significance. The significance value is smaller than significant alpha 5% or 0.05. So it can be concluded that constants have meaning in models.
The results in the table above can be known that the statistical t value resulting from the influence of Competency (X_{1}) on Motivation (Z) is 0.775 with 0.001 value of significance. The significance value is smaller than significant alpha 5% or 0.05. So it is concluded that Competence affects motivation.
The results in the table above can be known that the statistical t value resulting from the influence of Workload (X_{2}) on Motivation (Z) is 0.220 with 0.001 value of significance. The significance value is smaller than the significant alpha 5% or 0.05. So it is concluded that workload negatively affects motivation.
The results in the table above can be known that the statistical t value resulting from the influence of Constants on Performance (Y) is 0.848 with 0.065 value of significance. The value of such significance is greater than the significant alpha 5% or 0.05. So it can be concluded that constants have no meaning in the model.
The results in the table above can be known that the statistical t value resulting from the influence of Competency (X_{1}) on Performance (Y) is 0.525 with 0.001 value of significance. The significance value is smaller than the significant alpha 5% or 0.05. So it can be concluded that Recruitment affects employee performance.
The results in the table above can be known that the statistical t value resulting from the impact of Workload (X_{2}) on Performance (Y) is 0.148 with 0.017 value of significance. The significance value is smaller than the significant alpha 5% or 0.05. So it can be concluded that Workload negatively affects Performance.
The results in the table above can be known that the statistical t value resulting from the influence of Motivation (Z) on Performance (Y) is 0.366 with 0.015 value of significance. The significance value is smaller than the significant alpha 5% or 0.05. Therefore, motivation can be concluded to affect performance.
Path Analysis Results
Path analysis is intended to determine the direct influence of Competencies on Motivation, Workload on Motivation, Competencies On Performance, Workloads On Performance, and Motivation To Performance. As well as the indirect influence of Competencies and Workloads on Performance through intervening variables which in this case is Motivation.
Coefficient of Determination
The Determination Coefficient is used to determine the magnitude of the diversity of independent variables in describing the diversity of dependent variables, or to know in other words the magnitude of the contribution of independent variables to dependent variables or also called goodness of fit model assessments. Fit Model Goodness in Path analysis is done using Total Determination Coefficient (R^{2}_{m} ). Results of fit model goodness summarized in the table 2 below:
Table 2 Fit Model Goodness 


Model  R^{2} 
Z=b1 X_{1}+b2 X_{2}+e1  0.764 
Y=b3 X_{1}+b4 X_{2}+b5 Z+ e2  0.772 
The Rsquare on the Perceived Value model is worth 0.764 or 76.4%. This may indicate variable motivation diversity is able to be explained by competency and workload variables by 76.4%, or in other words the contribution of the influence of competency variables and workloads to motivation by 76.4%, while the remaining 23.6% is a variable contribution that was not discussed in this study.
Rsquare model Performance is worth 0.772 or 77.2%. This may indicate varying performance variables is able to be explained by competency, workload, and motivation variables by 77.2%, or in other words the contribution of the influence of Competency, Workload, and Motivation to Performance variables by 77.2%, While the other 22.8 percent are other variables not covered by the study.
Coefficient of Total Determination( ) is 0.9303 or 94.62%. This can show that the ability of all independent variables in this study to describe dependent variables in high categories. The remaining 5.38% was a variable contribution not discussed in the study.
Testing the Significance of Competency, Workload, and Motivation on Performance
Testing the significance of Competency, Workload, and Motivation on Performance is intended to partially determine the influence. Partial testing is used to test hypotheses about whether or not a partial independent variable affects dependent variables. The test criteria indicate if the value<significant probability value (5% or 0.05) This means the dependent variable partially have an independent variable impact. The summary in the table 3 below provides for a partial significance test:
Table 3 T Test Results Influence Competency, Workload, And Motivation On Performance 


Independent Variable  Dependent Variable  Koef.  T statistics  Prob. 
Competence  Performance  0,426  3,604  0,001 
Workload  Performance  0,218  2,465  0,017 
Motivation  Performance  0,347  2,523  0,015 
The resulting empirical models are as follows:
Performance=0,426 Competence0,218 Workload+0,347 Motivation
Hypothetical test results can be explained:
H1: The influence of Competency on Performance results in the Tstatistics scores of 3,604 with the probability of 0.001. Results of test showed that the probability of <significant alpha (5% or 0.05). This means that the competence in performance has a significant influence. The coefficient value is 0.426 (positive), meaning that the higher the Competency, the more likely to improve performance. Thus hypothesis 1 is fulfilled.
H2:The effect of Workload on Performance results in T statistics scores of 2.465 with the probability of 0.017. Results of the test showed that the probability of <significant alpha (5% or 0.05). This means that workloads have a substantial impact on performance. Coefficient value of 0.218 (negative), that means the more workload, the less performance the more workload. Thus hypothesis 2 is fulfilled.
H3: The influence of Motivation on Performance results in a T statistics score of 2.523 with the probability of 0.015. Results of the test showed that the probability of <significant alpha (5% or 0.05). This means that the motivation of performance has a significant influence. Coefficient value of 0.347 (positive), meaning that the higher the work motivation, the more likely to improve Employee Performance. Thus hypothesis 3 is fulfilled.
Testing the significance of the Influence of Competencies and Workloads on Motivation
Testing the significance of Competency and Workload Influence on Motivation is intended to determine partial influence. Partial testing is used to test hypotheses about whether or not a partial independent variable affects dependent variables. The test criteria indicate if the value<significant probability value (5% or 0.05), means the dependent variable partially has an independent variable impact. The summary in the table 4 elow provides for a partial significance test:
Table 4 T Test Results Influence Competencies And Workloads On Motivation 


Independent Variable  Dependent Variable  Koef.  T statistics  Prob. 
Competence  Motivation  0,664  8,795  0,000 
Workload  Motivation  0,342  4,533  0,000 
Empirical models produced are as follows
Motivation=0,664 Competence 0,342 Workload
Hypothetical test results can be explained
H4: The influence of Competency on Motivation results in a T statistics scores of 8,795 with the probability of 0.000. Result of the test showed that the probability of <significant alpha (5% or 0.05). This means that competence on motivation has a significant impact. Coefficient value of 0.664 (positive), meaning the higher the competency, the more likely to increase motivation. Thus hypothesis 4 is fulfilled.
H5: The effect of Workload on Motivation results in a T statistics scores of 4.533 with the probability of 0.000. Result of the test showed that the probability of <significant alpha (5% or 0.05). This means that Workload on motivation has a significant impact. Coefficient value of 0.342 (negative), meaning that the higher the Workload, the less likely to decrease motivation. Thus hypothesis 5 is fulfilled.
Indirect Significance Testing
Observe Table 5:
Table 5 Indirect Influence 


Effect  Coefficients  Std.Error  T Statistics  Prob. 
X_{1}à Z à Y  0,230  0,101  2,281  0,013 
X_{2}à Z à Y  0,1119  0,052  2,264  0,014 
From the results of indirect effect calculation through sobel test can be explained as follows:
H6: Influence of Competency (X_{1}) on Performance (Y) through Motivation (Z) produces T statistics scores of 2,281 with the probability of 0.013. The test results showed that the probability of<alpha (5%). That means that Competency (X_{1}) has a significant indirect influence on Performance (Y) through Motivation (Z). The coefficient value is 0.230 (positive), meaning that the higher the Motivation (Z) caused by the increase in Competence (X_{1}) it tends to improve Performance (Y). Thus hypothesis 6 in this study was fulfilled.
H7: The effect of Workload (X_{2}) on Performance (Y) through Motivation (Z) results in a T statistics scores of 2.264 with the probability of 0.014. Result of the test showed that the probability of<alpha (5%). That means that Workload (X_{2}) has a significant indirect influence on Performance (Y) through Motivation (Z). Coefficient value of 0.119 (negative), meaning the decrease in Motivation (Z) caused by increased Workload (X_{2}) tends to decrease Performance (Y). Thus hypothesis 7 in this study was fulfilled.
Effect of Competency on Performance
Competency is a characteristic inherent in a person that causes a person to be able to predict his surroundings in a job or situation. Competence can be measured from a variety of indicators, namely knowledge, understanding, values, attitudes, and interests. While Performance is the result of work both in quality and quantity on the basis of the work standard established. Several indicators in performance can be measured: quality, quantity, timeliness, effectiveness, and independence.
Employees who have high competence that is good in terms of knowledge, understanding, value, attitude, and interest will produce a good performance. This is because employees can predict their surroundings either in a job or in different situations and can read the opportunities that exist to get a good job. Therefore, the better the competence of employees will be, the better the performance of employees.
Based on the first hypothesis test results, it was concluded that there is a positive and significant influence of Competence on performance. The higher the competence of employees of stateowned public bodies will result in better performance.
How Workloads Affect Performance
Work loads represent a difference between workers' ability or skills and the work requirements that must be met. Indicators for measuring workload are factors of demand for tasks, efforts or personnel, and performance. Workload is one of the factors that affect performance. As employees have little time to do many jobs, the number of tasks and duties they give to their employees results are smaller than maximum. If this happens often it will have an impact on the performance of employees who are decreasing.
The results of the second hypothesis test, the conclusion was that the performance workload had an important and negative influence. The higher the workload of employees of stateowned public bodies will result in decreased performance.
The Influence of Motivation on Performance
Motivation is a condition that encourages or moves a person to do a job or activity that is done so that the person can achieve his or her goals. Indicators for measuring motivation are responsibilities in doing work, achievements achieved, selfdevelopment, and selfreliance in acting. Employees who are highly motivated in their work will produce a good performance. Motivation will positively impact yourself to build a sense of responsibility for his work, a great desire to develop himself, the desire to get high achievements and have a spirit of selfreliance. A strong sense of responsibility and desire to develop oneself and desired achievements will greatly influence one's work. The improved work shows that the performance of the karayawan is high. Employees will always try to learn to solve problems and develop their potential to create high motivation and provide good performance results in their work. Therefore, the higher the motivation, the higher the performance of employees.
Based on the third hypothesis test results, it was concluded that there is a positive and significant influence of motivation on performance. The higher the motivation of employees of stateowned public bodies companies can produce better performance.
The Effect of Competence on Motivation
The competence of employees of stateowned public bodies is good so that employees will have the knowledge, understanding, skills, values, attitudes, and good interests as well. Because the level of knowledge and understanding and good skills will provide good motivation in carrying out their duties and obligations responsibly, an employee who has good knowledge and skills will try to develop his own potential to get the desired achievement. This shows that the greater the competence, the greater the motivation.
Based on the fourth hypothesis test results, it was concluded that there is a positive and significant influence of Competence on Motivation. The higher the competence of employees will result in higher motivation.
The Effect of Workload on Motivation
Work loads represent a difference between workers' ability or skills and the work requirements that must be met. Indicators for measuring workload are factors of demand for tasks, efforts or personnel, and performance. If the workload of employees of stateowned public bodies is increasing, it will affect the work's performance due to the increasing workload without considering the capacity or capabilities of employees. Decreased job performance will decrease work quality accompanied by greater job demands resulting in decreased employee work motivation. The growing workload makes employees less accountable for work, such as work that cannot be completed by the deadline and lack of selfdevelopment to improve performance. This indicates that the greater the workload, the lower the motivation of employees.
Based on the results of the fifth hypothesis test, the conclusion was that the motivation workload was affected negatively and significantly. The higher the workload, the lower the Motivation.
The Influence of Competence on Performance through Motivation
The higher the competence of an employee, the higher the motivation. High motivation will affect high performance. An employee who has high competence in terms of knowledge, understanding, skills, and interest in work will increase motivation in terms of selfdevelopment and independence in acting. Competence in values and attitudes will make an employee more responsible in his or her work. Selfdevelopment and responsibility in work make an employee have good quality in completing his work. The burden of work given is carried out in accordance with the burden given with a predetermined time. This means that employees' performance is getting better. This shows that the higher the competence, the better the performance will be through high motivation.
Based on the results of the sixth hypothesis test, it concluded that the effect of competence on performance by motivation was significant indirect. Which can be interpreted as getting higher motivation caused by the increase in competence, it tends to improve the performance of stateowned public agency companies.
The Influence of Workload on Performance through Motivation
The increasing workload due to the increasing demand for tasks with all the pressure to do all the tasks charged with the work's capacity that exceeds the ability will cause the motivation of work to decrease. This is because an employee will be exhausted, causing a lack of focus in carrying out the work. The time limit is given causes less maximum results in his work, resulting in a decreased quality of work. The declining quality of work due to the responsibility of completing the work is low. This indicates that the greater the workload will have an impact on the decrease in employee performance due to decreased motivation.
Based on the results of the seventh hypothesis test, The conclusion was that there was indirectly negative and significant impact on performance by motivation. Which can be interpreted as the lower the motivation caused by the increase in workload, it tends to decrease employees' performance of the Company's publicowned stateowned bodies.
Competence has a positive and significant effect on Employee Performance in stateowned public bodies. The higher the work competency, the higher the performance of employees in stateowned public bodies. Workload negatively and significantly affects Employee Performance in stateowned public bodies. The greater the employees' workload, the lower the employee's work performance in the Company's stateowned public bodies. The motivation of Work has a positive and significant effect on the Performance of Employees in companies of stateowned public bodies.
Competence has a positive and significant effect on Work Motivation in stateowned public bodies. The higher the work motivation, the higher the performance of employees in the Company's stateowned public bodies. Workload negatively and significantly affects Work Motivation in stateowned public bodies. The greater the workload of employees, the lower the employees' work motivation in companies of stateowned public bodies. Working competency Motivation has a positive and significant impact on the performance of employees in public authorities. Workload through Work Motivation negatively and significantly affects Employee Performance in stateowned public bodies.
Ayapbergenova, G.S., Nurgaliyeva, S.A., Bissembayeva, N.A., Kabakova, M.P., & Koyshibayev, M.N. (2020). Developing project skills in future primary school teachers within the universitybased initial teacher education. Science for Education Today, 10(6), 7–26.
Bykova, S.S., Kuvaldina, E.A., Maslova, S.V., & Krinisyna, A.E. (2020). Formation of IСT competences of youth in the system of nonformal education [Formation of IT competence of youth in the system of nonformal education]. Science and Education Perspectives, 48(6), 67–77.
Coudret, C., & Dietrich, N. (2020). Fun with flags and chemistry. Journal of Chemical Education, 97(12), 4377–4384.
Drews, R., Tani, G., Cardozo, P., & Chiviacowsky, S. (2020). Positive feedback praising good performance does not alter the learning of an intrinsically motivating task in 10yearold children. European Journal of Human Movement, 45, 1–9.
Erton, I. (2020). Linguistic and cognitive aspects of translation and interpretation skills. Journal of Language and Linguistic Studies, 16(4), 1910–1920.
Frolova, E.V., Rogach, O.V., & Ryabova, T.M. (2020). Benefits and risks of switching to distance learning in a pandemic [Benefits and risks of switching to distance learning in a pandemic]. Science and Education Perspective, 48(6), 78–88.
Guzmán, J.L.R., & Castaño, V.M. (2020). Knowledge management, technology and innovation: The learning history of muhammad yunus [Knowledge, Technology and Innovation Management: A History of Institutional Development from Muhammad Yunus]. Fronteiras, 9(3), 67–98.
Hu, L.W., Yin, X.F., Zhang, S.H., Fan, Z.J., & Guo, Z. (2020). Evaluation of driving comfort on slopes of secondary highway in mountainous area based on driver workload [Research on driving comfort evaluation of mountain secondary highway longitudinal slope section based on driving load]. Journal of Transportation Systems Engineering and Information Technology, 20(6), 240–246 and 258.
Idoko, E.C., Nebo, G.N., & Ukenna, S.I. (2020). Determinants of field salespersons’ sales performance in deposit money banks: Does organizational commitment mediate? Banks and Bank Systems, 15(4), 204–220.
Juanamasta, I.G., Wati, N.M.N., Hendrawati, E., Wahyuni, W., Pramudianti, M., Wisnujati, N.S., … & Umanailo, M.C.B. (2019). The role of customer service through Customer Relationship Management (CRM) to increase customer loyalty and good image. International Journal of Scientific and Technology Research, 8(10), 2004–2007.
Krezhevskikh, O.V. (2020). Designing a professional biography as a predictor of continuous professional selfdetermination of a teacher Designing a professional biography as a predictor of continuous professional selfdetermination and teacher learning]. Science and Education Perspective, 48(6), 430–445.
Krumbiegel, K., Maertens, M., & Wollni, M. (2020). Can employment empower women? Female workers in the pineapple sector in Ghana. Journal of Rural Studies, 80, 76–90.
Luwihono, A., Suherman, B., Sembiring, D., Rasyid, S., Kalbuana, N., Saputro, R., … & Rusdiyanto. (2021). Macroeconomic effect on stock price: Evidence from Indonesia. Accounting, 7(5), 1189–1202.
Mylona, E., & Mihail, D. (2020). Exploring public employees’ motivation to learn and develop in turbulent times. The role of perceived support and organizational commitment. International Journal of Public Administration, 43(16), 1366–1375.
Nagel, S., Seippel, Ø., Breuer, C., Feiler, S., ElmoseØsterlund, K., LlopisGoig, R., … & Scheerder, J. (2020). Volunteer satisfaction in sports clubs: A multilevel analysis in 10 European countries. International Review for the Sociology of Sport, 55(8), 1074–1093.
Oh, J.E., & Kim, K.J. (2020). How nostalgic animations bring tourists to theme parks: The case of Hayao Miyazaki’s works. Journal of Hospitality and Tourism Management, 45, 464–469.
Prabowo, B., Rochmatulaili, E., Rusdiyanto, & Sulistyowati, E. (2020). Corporate governance and its impact in company’s stock price: Case study. Utopia and Latin American Praxis, 25(10), 187–196.
Prasetyo, I., Aliyyah, N., Rusdiyanto, Tjaraka, H., Kalbuana, N., & Rochman, A.S. (2021). Vocational training has an influence on employee career development : A case. Academy of Strategic Management Journal, 20(2), 1–14.
Rusdiyanto, A.D., Soetedjo, S., & Septiarini, D.F. (2020). The effect of cash turnover and receivable turnover on profitability: The effect of cash turnover and accounts receivable turnover on profitability. Option, 36(Special Edition), 1417–1432.
Rusdiyanto, H.W., Tjaraka, H., Septiarini, D.F., Fayanni, Y., Utari, W., … & Imanawati, Z. (2020). The effect of earning per share, debt to equity ratio and return on assets on stock prices: Case study Indonesian. Academy of Entrepreneurship Journal, 26(2).
Shabbir, M.S., Mahmood, A., Setiawan, R., Nasirin, C., Rusdiyanto, R., Gazali, G., … & Batool, F. (2021). Closedloop supply chain network design with sustainability and resiliency criteria. Environmental Science and Pollution Research.
Susanto, H., Prasetyo, I., Indrawati, T., Aliyyah, N., Rusdiyanto, Tjaraka, H., … &bZainurrafiqi. (2021). The impacts of earnings volatility, net income and comprehensive income on share price: Evidence from Indonesia stock exchange. Accounting, 7(5), 1009–1016.
Zhang, X.A., Liao, H., Li, N., & Colbert, A.E. (2020). Playing IT safe for my family: Exploring the dual effects of family motivation on employee productivity and creativity. Academy of Management Journal, 63(6), 1923–1950.