The Effect of Financial Incentives, Organizational Commitment, and Job Satisfaction on Employee Performance

― Organization or business performance always have close relation with its own member or employee performance and productivity. Most of them only focus on raising the wealthy of its member by giving financial incentives hoping it will reflect with significant improvement of member performance. But in some case giving the incentives not always bring significant increase to member productivity. This study was made with the aim to determine the effect of financial incentives, organizational commitment, and job satisfaction on employee performance. This study uses quantitative study. Data collection procedures used in this study are structured data collection. The population used is 10 persons of installation and maintenance employees of PT. KONE Indo Elevator throughout Indonesia that has implement some financial incentive to boots up their employee performance. The result of the study was financial incentives and job satisfaction have positif and significant effect to employee performance while organizational commitment not having signifficant effect to employee performance.


I. INTRODUCTION
MPLOYEE performance involves behavioral patterns that are directly involved in producing goods or services, or activities that provide indirect support for the organization's core technical processes. With regard to employee performance, human factors are the basic driving force and efficient factors, among the factors of production, because they have unlimited energy and upon which continuous development depends [1] so that the role of human resources is a vital role in achieving organizational goals effective.
Apart from an increase in effective human resources, there are things that need to be considered in triggering good performance. One of them is the provision of financial incentives can result in employee feelings as an integral part of the organization and encourage to work towards the achievement of the organization's vision and mission, and this is achieved through the establishment of a fair reward and incentive system [2]. Economists widely assume that financial incentives represent the dominant stimulators of productive human activities [3] but thats not the only factors that affect employee performance.
Organizational commitment is related to job satisfaction which can more specifically affect employee performance and competitiveness and profitability of the organization. Commitment itself is the overall attitude about work and organization, a number of aspects or dimensions that influence it, including working conditions, supervision, nature of work, colleagues, salary and benefits as well as personal characteristics [4]. While job satisfaction becomes an important factor related to factors such as employee work conditions, wages, stress levels, colleagues, top managers and workloads.
KONE Indo Elevator (KIE) as a fast growth organization these past 7 years had quiet a lot of experimental company programs regarding incentive and benefits for their field operative personel (installation and maintenance division) aiming for better productivity of their employee performance. Programs like company motor cycle for all maintenance technician, and many incentives for spare parts and add on service selling is created to boots their job satisfaction that lead to better job performance. That makes this company is suitable for this study of understanding the effect of financial Incentives, organizational commitment, and job satisfaction on employee performance.

A. Job Performance
The term job performance refers to the core technical behavior and activities involved in work. Behavior in the domain of job performance is usually recognized as a formal requirement for individual work. Job descriptions often explicitly stipulate that job holders must carry out these activities [5]. Job performance includes one's contribution to organizational performance, referring to actions that are part of the formal reward system, discussing requirements as specified in the job description [6]. Job performance can be defined as the skills (competencies) with which a person performs core work tasks [7]. Other labels sometimes used for job performance are job specific task skills [8][9], technical skills or performance in roles [10][11]. This includes, for example, work quantity, quality of work, and job knowledge [7].

B. Financial Incentives
Financial incentives are another form of direct compensation outside the salary provided by a particular company. This incentive is another form of performancebased compensation. Financial incentives are gifts or replies in financial forms that are given to employees who have a production level that exceeds the specified standard [12]. The provision of incentives can be used as a means to direct the strength and potential of employees to be willing to work hard and enthusiastically in achieving optimal work in realizing specified goals [13].
Financial incentives and rewards are consi dered to have a positive influence on employee commitment or loyalty. An employee would prefer to remain in an organization that has high incentives than to be involved in other organizations that do not yet have a clear future [14]. Where financial incentives and rewards create a relationship between the company and employees that are harmoniously established because they create a high level of employee commitment and motivation. So, companies must develop strategies that include incentives or employee benefits due to good performance, bonuses, or profit sharing [15].

C. Organizational Commitment
Organizational commitment is the extent to which an employee believes to remain in the organization and the desire to always be with the organization [16]. This is the level of willingness of workers to pursue a future career with the organization. Organizational commitment defines as a reflection of three main characteristics, namely affective commitment, continuance commitment, and normative commitment [17]. In this view, commitment is something that is seen as a reflection of the affective orientation towards the organization. Recognition of the costs associated with leaving the organization, and the moral obligation to remain with the organization.
Organizational commitment is also defined as an individual who has a psychological bond with the organization, including a sense of work involvement, loyalty and trust in organizational values [18]. Organizational commitment from this point of view is marked by the acceptance of employees towards the goals of the organization and their willingness to exert efforts on behalf of the organization [19].

D. Job Satisfaction
Job satisfaction is a feeling of satisfaction or shortcomings in employees related to work, affective and positive attitudes towards one's work and the feelings and emotions that come from work experience [20]. Job satisfaction is an individual's subjective perspective which includes how he feels about his work and the work of his organization. In addition, job satisfaction is also defined as a pleasant emotional state that results from achieving work values [21].
Job satisfaction becomes an important factor related to factors such as employee work conditions, wages, stress levels, colleagues, top managers and workloads [22]. Job satisfaction alone is seen as any form of a combination of psychological environment and physiological conditions that can make a person admit in all honesty that I am grateful for the work I do for leave. On the basis of this definition, the level of job satisfaction is represented by what actually causes feelings of satisfaction [23].

II. METHODOLOGY
This study uses quantitative study with the approach taken is a causal study that examines the causal relationship between two or more variables. The study method consists of four stages of identification, data collection and processing, data analysis and interpretation, then conclusions. The identification stage used in this study consists of 1) identification of the problem, 2) determining the purpose of the study, 3) the study of literature can be sourced from books, journals, or previous study, 4) Field studies conducted at KIE company and establish communication with prospective respondents and which is Feeling guilty of leaving organization. X218. Loyality of organization. X219. Sense of obligation to organization. X220. Owe to company related to coordination for secondary data that can be used to support the study process.
Data collection procedures used in this study are structured data collection through the submission of a formal questionnaire that presents questions that have been arranged regularly beforehand. The questionnaire compiled included questions related to financial incentives, job performance, and organizational commitment. Where the scale used to provide questionnaire scoring in this study is the Likert scale. In this study the population used was all employees of the installation and maintenance department of PT. KONE Indo Elevators throughout Indonesia with 104 people. The role of the number of respondents is divided into 3 role functions, namely technicians, supervisors and managers.

A. Operational Definition and Variable Measurement
Before data result is analyzed deeper, all of these variables will be verified by validity test (r < 5%) and realibility test (cronbach's alpha >0,6) to eliminate invalid variable. After that, valid variable will have descriptive statistics by calculate mean and std.dev (Table 1).

B. Data Analysis
This study aims to determine the effect of financial incentives, organizational commitment, and job satisfaction on the job performance of PT Kone Indo Elevator employees. Testing the influence of the variables is done using parametric statistics, namely multiple linear regression models. Therefore, it is necessary to test the classical assumptions on the resulting regression model before proceeding with the analysis of the resulting regression model. Because a good regression model must be free of classical assumptions that have been set, namely that the model must meet the assumptions of normality, free of multicollinearity, and free of heterocedasticity.
This study applies three regression models to examine the effect of financial incentives, organizational commitment, and job satisfaction on the job performance of PT Kone Indo Elevator's employees on the total sample, on the installation staff, and on non-installation staff. Data model will be analyzed with some test:

1) Normality Test
One assumption in the regression model is that the residuals are normally distributed. To see whether the residuals were normally distributed or not the Kolmogorof-Smirnoff test was used. The testing hypothesis is: H0: residuals are normally distributed, H1: residuals are not normally distributed. If the significance value in the Kolmogorof-Smirnoff test is greater than 5%, then H0 is accepted or residuals are normally distributed.

2) Heteroscedasticity Test
This test aims to test whether in the regression model there is an inequality of variance from the residuals of one observation to another. The test used is the Glejser Test conducted by regressing the independent variables to the absolute value of the residuals, if the sig value on the t test for all independent variables is greater than 5%, then the variance of the residuals is the same or homocedasticity.

3) Multicollinearity Test (tolerance >0,1 dan VIF<10)
This test aims to test whether the regression model found the correlation of independent variables. A good regression model should not occur correlation of independent

4) Multiple Linear Regression Coefficients Analysis
In this study, data processing and analysis was carried out using the Statistical Package for Social Science (SPSS). 20.0 software. specifically, this study uses multiple regression analysis techniques (multiple regression analysis), which is a statistical technique that can be used to analyze the relationship between one single dependent variable and several independent variables.

5) Coefficient of Determination Analysis
The coefficient of determination is a coefficient whose value is intended to find out how much the variation of changes in one independent variable. The stronger the correlation between the observed variables, the greater the coefficient of determination produced. The coefficient of determination is expressed in percent (%) so it must be multiplied by 100%. This means that the percentage of the variation in changes in the Y variable is due to the change in the variable X.

6) Hypotesis Test
Proving the hypothesis is done through the implementation of bootstrapping with a value that must be significant at p <0.05 on the basis of the following decision making: (a) If the probability value of 0.05 is smaller or equal to the probability value of p ≤ 0.05) then Ho is rejected and Ha is accepted, meaning that it is significant. (b) If the probability value is 0.05 greater or equal to the probability value p ≥ 0.05) then Ho is accepted and Ha is rejected, meaning that it is not significant.

A. Validity and Reliability Test
After all that 78 variables are having validity test, 76 variables are valid. Only two variables of Commitment Organization are not valid that is Many job choices besides at the company & Needed Personal sacrifice ( Table 2) as not meet r and ρ value requirement to be valid. All 4 main variable is reliable as the Cronbach's alpha value is more than 0.6 ( Table 3).

B. Normality Test
Analysist model is split based on the respondent's work characteristics related to the installation personel for 68 persons (model 1), and Maintenance Section Personnel for 36 persons (Model 2) thats make the total respondent of 104 (Model 3). The test results show that all three models have normal, because the resulting kolmogorov-smirnov value has a significant value above 0.05. Thus, the three models produced are worthy of further analysis (Table 4).

C. Heteroscedasticity and Multicollinearity Test
Shows on Table 5 that the t value of the independent variable in each model has a significance level of> 5%. Thus, the model analyzed in this study is free from heterokedasticity problems. Table 4 also shows that the three independent variables in each model have tolerance values > 0.1 and VIF < 10. Thus, it can be concluded that the three variables are independent of all multicollinearity-free models. Table 6 shows the magnitude of the regression coefficients generated in testing the study model. Based on the Table 6 Above equation model shows that if there is no influence of financial incentives, organizational commitment, and job satisfaction, the performance of the installation staff is lower than that of the Maintenance Personnel (2,671 <3,233). Meanwhile, when there is an influence of financial incentives, organizational commitment, and job satisfaction, the performance of the installation department's tasks has a greater tendency to increase when compared to the performance of the employee's maintenance personnel (Table  6).

E. Analysis Coefficient of Determination Analysis
The coefficient of multiple determination (adjusted R2) shows the magnitude of the ability to predict financial incentives, organizational commitment, and job satisfaction on improving employee job performance. Table 7 shows that the predictive ability of financial incentives, organizational commitment, and job satisfaction towards improving the performance of the installation department's employee duties is 0.165 (Model 1). This means that the predictive ability of financial incentives, organizational commitment, and job satisfaction towards improving the performance of the employees of the installation department is 16.5%. This means that 83.5% of the performance of the installation part of the task is influenced by other variables not observed in this study ( Table 7).
The ability to predict financial incentives, organizational commitment, and job satisfaction to improve the performance of employees' tasks in the Maintenance Section is 0.295 (Model 2). This means that the predictive ability of financial incentives, organizational commitment, and job satisfaction on improving the performance of employee duties that are Maintenance Personnel is 29.5%. This means that 71.5% of the job performance of the Maintenance Department Personnel is influenced by other variables not observed in this study.
The ability to predict financial incentives, organizational commitment, and job satisfaction towards improving employee job performance is 0.217 (Model 3). This means that the predictive ability of financial incentives, organizational commitment, and job satisfaction to improve employee job performance is 21.7%. This means that 79.3% of employee job performance is influenced by other variables not observed in this study. The amount of adjusted R2 shows that the predictive ability of financial incentives,

F. Hypothesis Test
Hypothesis Testing 1 (Table 8): (1) In Model 1 (installation personel), the value of ρ value is greater than 5% so that it can be explained that in Model 1, Hypothesis 1 is rejected. Thus, it can be concluded that "financial incentives have no effect on the performance of the employees of the PT Kone Indo Elevator installation". (2) In Model 2 (the Maintenance Personnel), the value of ρ value is less than 5% so it can be explained that in Model 2, Hypothesis 1 is accepted. Thus, it can be concluded that "financial incentives have a positive and significant effect on the performance of the employees of PT Kone Indo Elevator's Maintenance Personnel". (3) In Model 3 (all personnel), the ρ value is less than 5% so it can be explained that in Model 3, Hypothesis 1 is accepted. Thus, it can be concluded that "financial incentives have a positive and significant effect on the job performance of PT Kone Indo Elevator employees.
Hypothesis Testing 2: (1) In Model 1 (installation personnel), the value of ρ value is greater than 5%, so it can be explained that in Model 1, Hypothesis 2 is rejected. Thus, it can be concluded that "organizational commitment does not affect the job performance of PT Kone Indo Elevator installation employees". (2) In Model 2 (the Maintenance Personnel), the value of ρ value is greater than 5%, so it can be explained that in Model 2, Hypothesis 2 is rejected. Thus, it can be concluded that "organizational commitment does not affect the job performance of PT Kone Indo Elevator's Maintenance Personnel personnel". (3) In Model 3 (all personnel), the value of ρ value is greater than 5%, so it can be explained that in Model 3, Hypothesis 2 is rejected. Thus, it can be concluded that "organizational commitment has no effect on the job performance of PT Kone Indo Elevator employees". Hypothesis 3 Testing: (1) In Model 1 (installation personnel), the value of ρ value is less than 5%, so it can be explained that in Model 1, Hypothesis 3 is accepted. Thus, it can be concluded that "job satisfaction has a positive and significant effect on the performance of the employees of the PT Kone Indo Elevator installation". (2) In Model 2 (Maintenance Personnel), the value of ρ value is greater than 5%, so it can be explained that in Model 2, Hypothesis 3 is rejected. Thus, it can be concluded that "job satisfaction has no effect on the job performance of PT Kone Indo Elevator's Maintenance Personnel personnel". (3) In Model 3 (all personnel), the ρ value is less than 5%, so it can be explained that in Model 3, Hypothesis 3 is accepted. Thus, it can be concluded that "job satisfaction has a positive and significant effect on the job performance of PT Kone Indo Elevator employees".

IV. CONCLUSION
The conclusions of this study are: (1) Financial incentives have a positive and significant effect on maintenance section employees (ρ value 0,025) and the total sample (ρ value 0,035), but do not have a significant effect on the performance of the installation department employees (ρ value 0,487). (2) Organizational commitment has no effect on the job performance of PT Kone Indo Elevator employees (ρ value 0,487 -0,112 -0,390). (3) Job satisfaction has a positive and significant effect on the employees of the installation section (ρ value 0,005) and the total sample (ρ value 0,001) , but does not affect the performance of the maintenance department employees (ρ value 0,099).