Influence Motivation Work, Leadership, And Discipline Work on Employee Performance of PT. Gama Global Tobako
Why this work is in the frame
A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Employee performance is a crucial factor that directly contributes to the achievement of company goals, but the evaluation process is often complex. This study aims to examine and evaluate the influence of work motivation, leadership, and work discipline on improving employee performance. The study used a descriptive quantitative method through a survey by distributing questionnaires to 87 employees of PT. Gama Tobako Karanganhyar. The data obtained were analyzed using multiple linear regression tests with the help of SPSS software version 29.1. The results of the analysis showed that the variables of work motivation, leadership, and work discipline had a significant effect on increasing employee performance productivity. Partially, work motivation is a dominant factor in driving productivity, with a regression coefficient value of 0.859, t-count of 5.544, and a significance level of 0.000. These findings indicate that the higher the motivation, both intrinsic and extrinsic, the greater the contribution to improving work quality, productivity, and employee commitment to the company.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.002 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it