Track: Decision Sciences

Abstract

The objectives of the study include 1) To determine and measure the level of influence of training on self-efficacy in employees, 2) To determine and measure the level of influence of motivation on self-efficacy in employees, 3) To determine and measure the level of influence of self-efficacy on job satisfaction in employees, 4) To determine and measure the level of influence of training on job satisfaction through self-efficacy in employees, 5) To measure the level of influence of motivation on job satisfaction through self-efficacy in employees. The research method used in this study is a survey method using a quantitative approach, namely by focusing on hypothesis testing on the population of employees at the regional secretariat of Bantaeng Regency. Determination of the sample in the population is done by the census method. The number of pieces is 50 respondents. Data was collected by distributing questionnaires, interviews, and direct observation. The data obtained were then analyzed using quantitative descriptive analysis techniques that utilize the SPSS program and the Multiple Linear Regression analysis method. The results of these studies indicate several things, among others; (1) training has a positive and significant direct effect on efficacy as much as 42.6%, (2) motivation has a positive and significant direct effect on self-efficacy as much as 17.2%, (3) training has a positive and significant effect on job satisfaction through self-efficacy up to 42%, (4) motivation has a positive and significant effect on job satisfaction through self-efficacy as much as 11.7%, (5) Then self-efficacy has a direct and positive effect on job satisfaction as much as 20.6%. The actual influence given by the training variable (X1) on the job satisfaction variable (Y2) through the self-efficacy intervening variable (Y1) is 50.6%, where the direct influence is 42%, and the indirect effect is 8.6%. Then the real influence given by the motivation variable (X2) on the job satisfaction variable (Y2) through the self-efficacy intervening variable (Y1) is 15.2%, where the total direct effect is 11.7%, and the indirect effect is 3.5%.