The research was prompted partly by unexplained absenteeism in PT XYZ’s packaging department. Company data from January to October 2025 showed absenteeism rising from 0.88% in January to 4.38% in October. Six of the 10 months observed recorded unexplained absenteeism above 3%, including 4.25% in May and 3.75% in September. The researchers viewed the pattern as a potential indication of employee dissatisfaction requiring management attention.
The issue is particularly relevant in manufacturing, where employees spend substantial time in production environments and workplace conditions can directly affect their daily comfort. The study examined both the physical environment—such as temperature, cleanliness, ventilation, lighting, and workspace—and the non-physical environment, including relationships between coworkers, communication with supervisors, and cooperation.
Workplace Conditions Were Not Fully Optimal
Initial observations at PT XYZ identified several physical workplace issues. The packaging area was described as crowded and untidy, with a relatively low ceiling that contributed to hot and humid conditions. Air-conditioning performance was considered inadequate, prompting employees to use additional fans.
The researchers also observed concerns involving the toilet and storage areas. The toilet area was described as damp and unhygienic, while equipment, cleaning materials, dirty clothes, and other items were not always stored in an orderly manner.
Social conditions presented another challenge. In the preliminary survey, 70% of employees said communication among workers often caused misunderstandings during work coordination. Meanwhile, 62.5% considered cooperation among coworkers insufficient, and 72.5% said employees tended to be less concerned when colleagues experienced difficulties at work.
These observations provided the context for Azahra and Lestari’s analysis of whether physical and non-physical workplace conditions were associated with employee job satisfaction.
Forty Employees Participated in the Research
Azahra and Lestari used a quantitative research design involving all 40 employees in PT XYZ’s packaging department. Employees completed questionnaires using a semantic differential scale, while observations, interviews, and documentation provided additional information.
The researchers tested the questionnaire before analyzing the responses. They then used statistical analysis to determine whether physical and non-physical workplace conditions were associated with job satisfaction, both separately and together. The analysis was conducted using SPSS version 27.
The questionnaire contained 27 measurement items, all of which were declared valid. Reliability testing also indicated consistent measurements for the physical work environment, non-physical work environment, and job satisfaction variables.
Physical Environment Rated Good, but Cleanliness Lagged
Employees gave the physical work environment an average score of 3.68, placing it in the study’s “good” category.
Among the assessed aspects, decoration received the highest score at 3.74. Cleanliness received the lowest score at 3.59. The researchers therefore identified cleanliness as an area where PT XYZ could make further improvements to increase workplace comfort.
The non-physical work environment received an average score of 3.43, also classified as good. Relationships among coworkers at the same level recorded the highest score, 3.48, while cooperation among employees recorded the lowest, 3.38.
Overall job satisfaction received an average score of 3.39, classified as “fairly satisfied.” The absenteeism-rate dimension recorded the highest score at 3.55, while turnover received the lowest score at 3.28. The researchers interpreted the lower turnover score as an indication that some employees could still have a tendency to consider leaving the company.
Non-Physical Environment Shows the Stronger Effect
The statistical results showed positive effects from both workplace dimensions.
The physical work environment had a regression coefficient of 0.248, while the non-physical work environment had a coefficient of 0.706. Both effects were statistically significant. The results indicate that, within the study’s model, improvements in workplace relationships and social conditions were associated with a larger increase in job satisfaction than improvements in physical conditions alone.
The combined effect was substantial. Physical and non-physical workplace conditions accounted for 70.9% of the variation in employee job satisfaction. The simultaneous statistical test also confirmed that the two factors significantly affected satisfaction when considered together.
For Azahra and Lestari of Jenderal Achmad Yani University, the findings indicate that employee satisfaction cannot be viewed solely through physical facilities. The researchers’ discussion emphasizes that workplace comfort is shaped by both the condition of the work setting and the quality of social relationships among employees and supervisors.
What Companies Can Learn From the Findings
The study offers several practical recommendations for PT XYZ and other companies facing similar workplace challenges.
First, companies can prioritize routine inspections of workplace cleanliness and ensure adequate cleaning facilities. This recommendation directly addresses the lowest-rated aspect of PT XYZ’s physical work environment.
Second, management can strengthen cooperation through regular team-building activities or employee gatherings. Better communication and collaboration may help reduce misunderstandings and create stronger workplace relationships.
Third, companies can address potential turnover by improving recognition and career development. The researchers recommend performance-based incentives, employee recognition, rewards for loyal employees, training, certification, mentoring, and transparent performance evaluations as possible measures.
The findings therefore have implications beyond PT XYZ. For manufacturing businesses, improving employee satisfaction may require a combined approach: maintaining clean and comfortable facilities while also building effective communication, cooperation, recognition, and career-development systems.
Author Profile
Riska Syifa Azahra is the first author and corresponding author of the article, affiliated with Jenderal Achmad Yani University, Indonesia. Her research in this article focuses on human resource management, work environment, and employee job satisfaction.
Dian Lestari is the second author and is also affiliated with Jenderal Achmad Yani University, Indonesia. Her research contribution in the article concerns work environment and employee job satisfaction. The published article does not state the authors’ academic degrees, so no degree titles are added here.
0 Komentar