Analysis shows that physical and non-physical work environments significantly affect employee productivity, highlighting the need for optimizing both factors.
This study aims to analyze the effect of physical and non-physical work environments on employee productivity in the Production Division of PT Rubber. The physical work environment includes lighting, ventilation, temperature, and noise, while the non-physical environment covers coworker relationships, communication, work atmosphere, and workload. The research population consisted of 171 employees, with a sample of 120 respondents determined using the Slovin formula (5% margin of error). Data were collected through a 5-point Likert scale questionnaire comprising 30 items (10 physical, 10 non-physical, 10 productivity), all tested for validity and reliability (Cronbach’s Alpha physical = 0.932; non-physical = 0.937; productivity = 0.959). Data analysis was performed using multiple linear regression with SPSS. The t-test results show that the physical work environment significantly affects productivity (t-value = 6.411; sig. 0.000), while the non-physical work environment has a more dominant effect (t-value = 9.384; sig. 0.000). The F-test obtained an F-value of 1073.772 > F-table = 3.07 (sig. 0.000), indicating a significant simultaneous effect. The resulting regression equation is Y = -0.530 + 0.427X₁ + 0.594X₂. These findings highlight the importance of optimizing physical work conditions and fostering a positive psychological work climate, with priority given to non-physical factors, to support sustainable productivity
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Firmansyah et al. (2025) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: