THE INFLUENCE OF SITUATIONAL LEADERSHIP, INTERNAL CONTROL, AND EMPLOYEE COMMITMENTS TO EMPLOYEE PERFORMANCE AT PT. SURYA MADISTRINDO MEDAN

Abstract

Situational leadership, internal control, and commitment are factors that can affect employee performance. In this case, the variable X or the independent variable is classified as good, but it has not been able to provide the maximum contribution to employee performance. The problem of this research is whether there is any influence of leadership, supervision, and commitment on the performance of employees of PT. Surya Madistrindo Medan Partially and Simultaneously. The purpose of this study is to determine whether there is an effect of situational leadership, internal control, and commitment to performance partially and simultaneously. The population of this study was all employees of PT. Surya Madistrindo Medan is 30 employees. The sampling technique in this study was to use the census technique. This technique is used because the study population is less than 100 people. The data collection method used is a questionnaire (questionnaire) and documentation method. The data collected will be analyzed with multiple linear regression by testing the partial test hypothesis (t-test) and simultaneous test (F test). The results of the data regression analysis showed the following equation Y = -10,690 + 0.271 X1 + 0.251 X2 + 0.622 X3 +e. These results indicate that constitutional leadership (X1) has an influence of 0.271 on employee performance, motivation (X2) has an influence of 0.251 on employee performance (Y), and commitment (X3) has an influence of 0.622 on employee performance (Y). The results showed that situational leadership, internal control, and employee commitment positively and significantly employee performance at PT. Surya Madistrindo Medan. Based on the description of respondents' answers, the coefficient of determination was obtained at 0.638, meaning that situational leadership, internal control and, employee commitment to performance were 63.8% described in this study and the remaining 36.2% could be explained by other factors not examined in this study.