CC BY
0
UDC 331; DOI 10.18551/rjoas.2022-06.13
THE INFLUENCE OF ERM AND ORGANIZATION CULTURE TOWARDS TEAM PERFORMANCE AT BRAINFIT INDONESIA
Gregory I., Student
Magister Study Program of Management, Asia Institute of Technology and Business,
Malang, Indonesia
Pradiani T., Alamsyaha A.R., Lecturers Asia Institute of Technology and Business, Malang, Indonesia
*E-mail: ian.gregory.w@gmail.com
ABSTRACT
BrainFit is an education company that provides services for students to improve their learning skills through various brain training in form of small classes. The services they have are on-site and online activities. For students to do brain training, trainers are provided to guide them throughout the session. BrainFit has a standard to provide their best experience towards the customers as well as the employees. In this observation, the researcher would like to understand whether employee relationship management can influence the employee performance and whether organization culture can influence the employee performance in BrainFit Indonesia. Descriptive analysis and inferential analysis completed using SPSS version 28. The researcher distributed a questionnaire to 30 respondents of BrainFit Indonesia located in Jakarta. Validity test, reliability test, normality test, multicollinearity test, and heteroscedasticity test are used to determine whether the results of the questionnaire can be used for determining the influences of employee relationship management and organization culture towards employee performance. Linear regression test is also used to determine the influences. Based on the results, employee relationship management does not influence employee performance significantly, while organization culture does influence employee performance significantly. It is suggested to experiment on other such as work stress variables, leadership style, and work discipline as to whether it could influence employee performance.
KEY WORDS
ERM, organization culture, team performance, team.
The successes of businesses come from the performance of the employees within the company. It is to build a strong relationship between the company and the employees. It will significantly increase the productivity and outcome towards the goal of the company from the first place. Employee performance is involved within companies, especially with the rise of competition throughout the industry of any category. To dominate the industry, the company should stand with good employee performance as it will boost the company in reaching their target. It is crucial for every employee to have the sense of awareness, discipline, responsibility, punctuality, and loyalty to achieve it. Therefore, employee performance should have the element of employee relationship management and organizational culture.
Employee Relationship Management is a device that supports the relationship and motivation of an employer and other employees. A company implementing ERM can increase the effectiveness and productivity of the employer. With groups of employers working together under ERM, it is going to support employee performance in the long run. The effectiveness of employee performance comes from several elements that should be used, such as goal setting, team-building, and problem solving among teammates. Along the way, it is needed to evaluate every progress to understand upsides and downsides of their results.
Organizational culture is an important element to increase the employee performance resulting in a better workflow within the company. A good culture usually makes the environment of the workspace influence how the employers work in the long run. Leadership is involved, where usually a supervisor or manager leads the team. Providing shared goals and values allow each employee to have the same understanding and goals. It should also come along with the employees that need to be committed in their responsibilities as well as supporting each other. Employees with a different understanding and mindsets will affect the productivity within the company, resulting in the energy used to solve problems.
The researcher would like to focus on the company, BrainFit Indonesia. BrainFit is an education company that focuses towards building the brain skills of children from 2 to 18 years old. The activities done are in the form of physical training activities as well as virtual learning platforms. They provide options for the children to learn offline immediately with the coaches or do it online. BrainFit, among the rest of the education schools, does not provide school lessons such as Math and English, but instead focuses towards building the brain skills of the student to strengthen their mindset, motoric skills, listening skills, and so on. BrainFit aims to provide the best customer satisfaction by keeping in touch with the parents and providing tips and support that could support the growth of the child during BrainFit.
To understand the effectiveness and productivity of BrainFit, an employee performance indicator is used. Employee performance measures each employee in terms of meeting the company standard performance, duties and responsibilities (Rahman, et al, 2017). Key performance indicators are used to measure each factor of employee performance, such as work quality, punctuality, and independence. Understanding the employee status can help determine whether the system of the company should be revised or the company should put more involvement in the HR department (hire more employees, release, or switch positions to suit based on employee's specialties). Better performance can be indicated with changes in the company and can create immense outcomes at work (Sarmad et al, 2011).
The culture within the company is to build up a strong growth mindset within each coach. This becomes a challenge because of each coach's unique traits and perspective towards teaching. Every week, they have their weekly meetings to discuss the importance of growth mindset and develop more upon it, along with discussing situations whenever coaches have problems in teaching students. Despite the routine and discussion, there have been cases where coaches did not implement a growth mindset. Therefore, there could be problems within the company that are not able to prevent such conflicts in the short term.
The researcher would like to understand more about BrainFit in terms of the implementation of ERM and organizational culture. Both ERM and organization culture will be used to determine the effectiveness of employee performance. The result of the employee's performance can support the company to ensure every aspect of their work brings positive and immense outcome.
LITERATURE REVIEW
The researcher provides theories that will be used in the research: Employee Relationship Management, Organizational Culture, and Employee Performance.
Oluchi (2013) states that ERM manages the interactions of employees and supports achieving the goals of the organization. ERM is also supported by Pareek (2012) that it also builds communication, building employee confidence, trust, loyalty, and knowledge. The effectiveness of ERM is that employees can be more motivated and are more oriented to autonomy and freedom compared to less motivated employees (Grant, 2008). Levinson (2007) and Cleland et al (2008) stated engaged employees work as the 'backbone' of the organization. Al-Khozondar (2015) explained that Employee relationship management consists of components that impact the organization:
• HR Practices: A habit routine that provides training, job rotation, job satisfaction, performance appraisal, and more towards the employees. This is to ensure satisfaction and improved performance of the organization (Sinha & Bajaj, 2013);
• Trust: The most required elements to support the growth of the employee's relationship with each other, becoming a key relationship element (Herington et al,
2009). Without it, communication towards managers and employees become negatively impacted (Daniel, 2003);
• Communication: It builds connections with employees to increase the trust of employees from various departments. It is used for meetings, calls, e-mails, and much more that are needed to share ideas with other employees (Noordin et al.,
2010);
• Leadership Style: An organization needs a person that can provide major influence and shape the performance of the organizations (Wang et al., 2005);
• Shared Goals and Values: Defined when values are shared towards different employees. This allows the employees to aim specifically at a particular goal. This can positively impact on the employee performance and the organizational outcomes (Chinomona & Sandada, 2013).
According to Schein (1985), organizational culture consists of values, beliefs, and norms of behaviour shared among the employees to have the similar behaviours, thinking, and feeling in the organization. By achieving this, the organization can target common goals and prevent unfavorable behaviours that could disrupt the flow of their productivity.
Sarpin (1995) stated that organizational culture is a system of scoring, trust, and habit within an organization where it is needed for them to have the expected organizational norms. A positive organizational culture directly improves efficiency and performance. Every organization needs to understand their situation to take action on any changes needed to build up a positive organizational culture.
According to Susanto (2006:112), organizational culture works as a tool to lead the organization on what needs to be done and to control the employee relationship to prevent acts of conflict internally and externally. Robbins (2006:283) stated there are several functions within the organizational culture:
• Culture has the role of implementing boundaries, meaning that culture creates clear empowerment between organizations;
• Culture provides a sense of identity to the members of the organization;
• Culture develops the commitment from the person in the organization;
• Culture increases the stability of the social system;
• Culture works as a mechanism that guides and shapes attitudes and behaviour of the employees.
Organizational culture consists of indicators that are used to identify the status within the company. Stated by Umar (2008:18), the following are the indicators:
• Organizational tolerance for risky work;
• Organizational efforts to create good coordination between organizational units;
• Employee commitment;
• Communication pattern.
A working company requires employee performance in order for the employees to be productive in their work. It serves as a way for employees to stay motivated and be on the right track with the common goal from the company. Leadership is also involved, where usually the head of the company controls the workflow of the employees to remain motivated and productive.
According to Sondang (1995: 227), employee performance serves as a way for the employees to be able to work optimally while maintaining a minimal ratio of disturbance towards reaching the results.
According to Mangkunegara (2011:75), employee performance consists of indicators:
• Quality productivity explains how well the employees do their tasks;
• Quantity productivity explains how long and the amount of work employees need to work within the day;
• Responsibility represents the awareness of the employees in doing their work.
According to Rahman et al (2017), the components of ERM support employee performance in building a stronger relationship and reinforce the commitment within the company to improve the performance of the employees. Implementing and observing the ERM components in the organization allow building strategies and communication to be optimal. The combination of ERM and employee performance has been done in a previous research by Taniya and Rahman (2017), concluding that ERM brings impacts towards private commercial banks in Bangladesh.
According to Cushway and Lodge (2000), Organizational Culture has the organization values that can influence the way employees work and behave. Tjahjadi (2001) stated that a strong organizational culture can show a clear orientation for the employees to perform their duties. On the other hand in the previous research done by Nathania (2018), organizational culture affects partially towards employee performance. Therefore, it is to say that organizational culture can bring impact towards employee performance in companies. The relationship between organizational culture and employee performance has been done previously by Kawiana et al. (2018) where organizational culture has impacted positively towards the employee performance in Bank Perkreditan Rakyat (BPR) in Bali.
METHODS OF RESEARCH
To measure the effectiveness of ERM, organizational culture, and employee performance within BrainFit, the researcher will implement quantitative research. A quantitative research is the observation to generate results that come from the amount of data collected, usually from questionnaires. The data collected should be from a large number of participants in order to gather the overall result. As stated by Cohen (1980), it serves as a social research and generates empirical methods and statements. Cresswell (1993), stated it is to explain a phenomena by collecting numerical data that are analysed with mathematical methods.
The implementation of the quantitative research will involve questionnaires towards the employees of BrainFit. With the elements of employee relationship management and organizational culture, the questionnaire will be divided to discover the results of every variable (from ERM and OC). The results of the questionnaires will be made using a 5-point Likert Scale, ranging from 1("strongly agree") to 5("strongly disagree"). This is to determine whether ERM and organizational culture can bring impact towards employee performance.
This research will take place at BrainFit, an education company that is located in Jakarta, Indonesia. BrainFit has several outlets located in and out of Jakarta. For this research, it will be done within Jakarta, as it is managed by the same owner throughout. The questionnaires are made with Google Forms. The observation is made from October, 2021 to November, 2021.
According to Supriyanto and Maharani (2012:35), sampling means the amount and the characteristics of the population that is being observed. Depending on the amount of the population, the researcher can use methods that require only selecting several participants or to select every participant at once. Sugiono (2012:91) also stated sampling as presenting the characteristics of the population.
The research will collect the results based on every employee at BrainFit. The observation made with questionnaires will be focused towards the employees of BrainFit Indonesia located in Jakarta. Therefore, non-probability sampling will be used. Non-probability sampling is used for targeting a specific subject rather than collecting randomized data.
The questionnaire made in the form of non-probability sampling will consist of 3 categories that fulfil the results of each variable from ERM and organizational culture. Each variable will have around 18 questions. The amount of the sample will be as much as 30 respondents.
The source of data will come from respondents of BrainFit as the primary data used for this research. The method used for this observation will be in a questionnaire.
According to Sudaryono (2017:207), questionnaire is a method used to collect data without the need of having to communicate face-to-face/interview the person directly. It should consist of questions or statements that the respondents need to answer. The questionnaire method will be implemented towards the employees of BrainFit Indonesia.
The research implements the 5-point Likert Scale. Every variable that is used will have the results based on the scale. The scale ranges from 1 for the lowest up to 5 for the highest score. The scale will determine the response from the respondents based on their opinions, hence the selection of the questionnaire:
• Very disagree (1);
• Disagree (2);
• Neutral (3);
• Agree (4);
• Very Agree (5).
Below are the data collection method used for this observation:
• Validity Test;
• Reliability Test;
• Normality Test;
• Multicollinearity Test;
• Heteroscedasticity Test;
• Linear Regression Test;
• T Test.
Singarimbun (2006) stated that validity test works as the measurement to differentiate values. According to Sugiyono (2017:121), validity tests can be calculated by using R-count measurement (Pearson Correlation) with the R-table results. If the R- count result is higher than the R-table, therefore the instrument is valid. If the R-count result is smaller than the R-table, the instrument is not valid and the data should not be used. The Sig. variable is also used to be measured with a = 0,05. If the Sig. the variable of the output correlation is smaller than 0,05 then the instrument is valid. If the Sig. if the variable of the output correlation is larger than 0,05 then the instrument is not valid and cannot be used.
Reliability test, stated by Indriantoro and Supomo (2009), measures the consistency and the stability of the results and the scale used within the observation. According to Sugiyono (2017:122), if there are similarities in data at different times, the reliable instrument will generate the same results even if it is used several times. The analysis used is matrix correlation. Reliability coefficient is used to determine reliability of the instrument with the scale from 0 to 1. If the result of the coefficient is closer to 1, therefore the instrument used is more reliable. If the result of the coefficient is closer to 0, therefore the instrument used is less reliable. The measurement used to determine the reliability is with Cronbach's Alpha. If the Cronbach's Alpha's score is greater than 0,6, the instrument used is reliable and consistent.
The data analysis techniques used in this observation are descriptive analysis and inferential analysis with SPSS version 28. The descriptive analysis explains the result of the observation features, such as respondent characteristics and their responses based on the questionnaire distributed. The inferential analysis used is multiple linear regression that is used to test the hypothesis.
According to Ghozali (2016:154), the normality test is used to determine whether the regression model is normally distributed. The method used for this observation is Kolmogorov-Smirnov (for parametric data). The Kolmogorov-Smirnof Normality test is determined correctly if the data distributed is larger than the significance level of Sig. KS > = 0,05.
According to Ghozali (2016:103), a multicollinearity test is used to test whether the regression model found a correlation between the variables. The test can be done by observing the tolerance and VIF values on each variable. If the tolerance value is greater than 0,1 and the VIF value less than 10, it can be concluded that the data does not occur multicollinearity.
According to Ghozali (2016:134), heteroscedasticity test is used to test whether the regression model has inequality of variance from one observation to another. If the observation shows that it is similar, it is called homoscedasticity. If the observation shows that it is different, it is called heteroscedasticity. To see whether there is homoscedasticity is to look at the graph plot between the predicted value of the dependent variable, namely ZPRED with the residual SRESID. The basis of the analysis is to see if there is a certain pattern such as the existing dots forming a certain regular pattern (wavy, widening and narrowing) then identifying that there has been heteroscedasticity. Meanwhile, if there is a clear pattern and the points spread above and below 0 on the Y axis then there is no heteroscedasticity.
According to Sugiyono (2015:275), multiple linear analysis is an analytical method used to determine the accuracy of the prediction of the influence from the variables. The variables used in this research are Employee Relationship Management, Organization Culture towards employee performance variable at BrainFit Indonesia.
RESULTS AND DISCUSSION
The research collected 30 respondents that are from two branches of BrainFit Indonesia located in Jakarta. The research received the analysis of the sample characteristics based on their gender, age, education, and working experience. There are 20% respondents that are male and 80% respondents that are female. There is 16,7% respondents that ranged between 18 to 25 years old, 63,3% respondents that ranged between 26 to 35, and 20% respondents that ranged between 36-45. There are 13,3% respondents that finish their education until high school, 76,7% respondents that finish until bachelor, and 10% respondents that finish their education until diploma.
The results of the questionnaire that is accumulated from the respondents are tested using validity test, reliability test, normality test, multicollinearity test, and heteroscedasticity test. The results of the data collection method are shown below:
Table 1 - Validity Test
Indicator r-count r-table Significance Sig.2 Description
X1.1 0.383 0.306 0.037 0.05 Val d
X1.2 0.896 0.306 0.000 0.05 Val d
X1.3 0.754 0.306 0.000 0.05 Val d
X1.4 0.446 0.306 0.000 0.05 Val d
X1.5 0.764 0.306 0.000 0.05 Val d
X1.6 0.784 0.306 0.000 0.05 Val d
X1.7 0.675 0.306 0.000 0.05 Val d
X1.8 0.838 0.306 0.000 0.05 Val d
X1.9 0.587 0.306 0.000 0.05 Val d
X1.10 0.562 0.306 0.001 0.05 Val d
X2.1 0.740 0.306 0.000 0.05 Val d
X2.2 0.689 0.306 0.000 0.05 Val d
X2.3 0.811 0.306 0.000 0.05 Val d
X2.4 0.709 0.306 0.000 0.05 Val d
Y.1 0.651 0.306 0.000 0.05 Val d
Y.2 0.803 0.306 0.000 0.05 Val d
Y.3 0.908 0.306 0.000 0.05 Val d
Y.4 0.628 0.306 0.000 0.05 Val d
Table 2 - Reliability Test
Variable Cronbach's Alpha (a) Criteria Description
Employee relationship management 0,872 0,6 Reliable
Organization Culture 0.710 0,6 Reliable
Employee Performance 0,745 0,6 Reliable
One-Sample Kolmogorov-Smirnov Test
Unstandardize d Residual
N 30
Normal Parameters3,13 Mean .0000000
Std. Deviation 1.39943814
Most Extreme Differences Absolute .151
Positive .078
Negative -.151
Test Statistic .151
Asymp. Sig. (2-tailed)c .079
Monte Carlo Sig. (2-tailed) Sig. .077
99% Confidence Interval Lower Bound .071
Upper Bound .084
a. Test distribution is Normal.
b. Calculated from data.
c. Lilliefors Significance Correction.
d. Lilliefors' method based on 10000 Monte Carlo samples with starting seed 2000000.
Figure 1 - Normality test results
Table 3 - Multicollinearity Test
Variable Collinearity Tolerance Minimum Limit VIF Maximum Limit Description
Employee Relationship Management 0.446 0.100 2.242 10,000 Free from multicollinearity symptoms
Organization Culture 0.446 0.100 2.242 10,000 Free from multicollinearity symptoms
Scatterplot Dependent Variable: Total Question KK
-2-1012 Regression Standardized Predicted Value
Figure 2 - Heteroscedasticity test result
The results from the questionnaire is used for linear regression analysis test to determine the accuracy weather employee relationship management and organizational culture bring influence towards employee performance. The variables used in this research our employee relationship management, organization culture towards employee performance variable at BrainFit Indonesia. Below is the table of the multiple linear regression analysis test results.
Table 4 - Multiple linear regression analysis test results
Variable Symbol Coefficient
Employee performance Y 1
Constant - 3,765
Employee relationship management X1 0,094
Organization culture X2 0,562
The equation used to describe multiple linear regression is as follows:
Y = a + B1X1 + B2X2 + e
Where:
Y = Employee Performance;
A = Constant = 3,765;
X1 = Employee Relationship Management = 0,094;
X2 = Organization Culture = 0,562;
E = Error.
Y = 3,765 + 0,094 X1 + 0,562 X2 + e
Based on the equation, the independent variables have positive values, therefore it influences positively towards Y. The value for employee relationship management (X1) is 0,094 which has the lesser value than organization value (X2) at 0,562. It is concluded that the organization culture has more influence towards employees' performance compared to employee relationship management influence towards employees' performance.
The T test will determine whether or not the independent variables can bring significant impact towards the dependent variable. The determination of a positive and influencing variable is based on significant value less than 0.05 and if the t-count value is larger than the t-table and is in the positive value.
Table 5- T test result (partial test)
Variable T - count T - table Significance Description
Employee relationship management 1.632 2.052 0.215 Does not influence significantly
Organization culture 3.092 2.052 0.005 Positive and significant effect
Based on the observation, it is found that even though employee relationship management has a positive value; it does not have significant influence towards employee performance. This could be based on the results of the questionnaire where a few respondents answered job rotation, trust, communication, and trust to be ineffective. There are several studies that have found similar results. Stated by Ozilhan (2013) with the title "The Effect of Employee Relationships and Knowledge Sharing on Employee's Performance: An Empirical Research on Service Industry," the impact of employee relationship to employee performance is by 45% in a five-star hotel in Antalya, Turkey. However, there have been researches that claim employee relationships have influenced employee performance. Sendawula et al. (2018) with the title "Training Employee Engagement and Employee Performance: Evidence from Uganda's Health Sector," stated that employee relationship has significant influence on employee performance in terms of competence, responsiveness, and productivity. Taniya et al. (2017) with the title "Effect on Employee Relationship Management (ERM) on Employee Performance: A Study on Private Commercial Banks in Bangladesh," stated that ERM builds and enhances relationships and reinforces commitment to the company and improves employee performance. Based on this research, there could be the possibility that the category of the company differentiates the results of the employee performance, therefore not all companies get the same influence.
Organization culture brings an influence towards employee performance because the results of the questionnaire are mostly positive. There are several studies that concluded the
same where it has influenced employee performance. Stated by Kawiana et al. (2018) with the title "The Influence of Organizational Culture, Employee Satisfaction, Personality, and Organizational Commitment towards Employee Performance," stated that organization culture has impacted positively towards the employee performance in Bank Perkreditan Rakyat (BPR) in Bali. There is also research that concluded that it does not influence employee performance. Girsang (2019) with the title "Pengaruh Budaya Organisasi dan Komitmen Terhadap Kinerja Karyawan RS Putri Hijau No. 17 Medan" stated that organization culture does not affect employee performance.
CONCLUSION
Based on the analysis and discussion, several conclusions can be made:
• Employee relationship management does not influence significantly towards employee performance in BrainFit Indonesia;
• Organization culture influences significantly towards employee performance in BrainFit Indonesia.
SUGGESTIONS
The researcher would suggest BrainFit Indonesia to improve observe more in their employee relationship management side. There are five employees that disagree towards job rotation that is implemented in BrainFit, therefore they should re-evaluate on job rotation in the future. It is important to regularly check on the situation by making sure BrainFit Indonesia listens to the feedback of the employees and provide the best experience as possible.
LIMITATIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS
The research and observation are done during the new normal pandemic Covid-19 where direct contact is limited due to following the protocols, therefore the researcher is unable to interview to gather more information of the respondents.
The number of respondents collected is at the minimum of 30 respondents, therefore the results may not be accurate.
Every respondent might have a different understanding of the questionnaire. Therefore, the results can be slightly random.
The researcher in this observation used employee relationship management and organization culture as the independent variables towards employee performance as the dependent variable. The suggestion for the next researchers is to use other variables beside this research, such as work stress variables, leadership style, and work discipline that can affect employee performance. Analysing different variables can support understanding different factors to influence employee performance while still maintaining the requirements for the observation that is used for these studies.
REFERENCES
1. Supriyanto, A. S., Ekowati, V. M., Haris, A., Soetjipto, B. E., Haryanto, M. M., Rudy, D. R., & Yahya, M. (2020). The effect of organizational citizenship behavior on job satisfaction mediated with spiritual leadership. International Journal of Business and Society, 21(2), 737-748.
2. Supriyanto, A. S., & Maharani, V. (2020). The Effect of Organizational Citizenship Behavior on Job Satisfaction Mediated with Spiritual Leadership. 35.
3. Sugiyono, D. (2013). Metode penelitian pendidikan pendekatan kuantitatif, kualitatif dan R&D.
4. Sudaryono, D. (2017). Metodologi Penelitian: Penelitian Kualitatif.
5. Al-khozondar, N. (2015). Employee relationship management and its effect on employees performance at telecommunication and banking sectors.
6. Robbins, Stephen P. (2006). Perilaku Organisasi, Jakarta: Gramedia.
7. Susanto. (2006). Strategi Organisasi. Yogyakarta: Amara Books.
8. Umar, H. (2008). Desain Penelitian MSDM dan perilaku karyawan. Jakarta: PT. Raja Grafindo Persada.
9. Sondang, S. P. (1995). Teori Pengembangan Organisasi. Jakarta, Bumi Aksara, Sinar Grafika Offset.
10. Mangkunegara, A. A. P. (2011). Manajemen sumber daya manusia perusahaan.
11. Harwiki, W. (2016). The impact of servant leadership on organization culture, organizational commitment, organizational citizenship behaviour (OCB) and employee performance in women cooperatives. Procedia-Social and Behavioral Sciences, 219, 283-290.
12. Girsang, W. S. (2019). Pengaruh Budaya Organisasi dan Komitmen Terhadap Kinerja Karyawan RS Putri Hijau No. 17 Medan.Asian Journal of Innovation and Entrepreneurship, 4(2), 159-170.
13. Sugiyono. (2017). Metode Penelitian dan Pengembangan. Bandung: Alfabeta
14. Singarimbun, M., & Effendi, S. (2006). Metode Penelitian Survei, LP3ES. Jakarta: PT Pustaka LP3ES Indonesia.
15. Indriantoro, N., & Supomo, B. (2009). Metodologi Penelitian Bisnis Akuntansi dan Manajemen.
16. Rahman, M. S., & Taniya, R. K. (2017). Effect of employee relationship management (ERM) on employee performance: A study on private commercial banks in Bangladesh. Human resource management research, 7(2), 90-96.
17. Marampa, A. M., Khananda, R. W. V., & Anggraeni, A. I. (2021). The Effect of Organizational Culture on Organizational Performance. ICORE, 5(1).
18. Ahmed, M., & Shafiq, S. (2014). The impact of organizational culture on organizational performance: a case study on telecom sector.Global journal of management and business research.
19. Shahzadi, I., Javed, A., Pirzada, S. S., Nasreen, S., & Khanam, F. (2014). Impact of employee motivation on employee performance. European Journal of Business and Management, 6(23), 159-166.
20. Sendawula, K., Nakyejwe Kimuli, S., Bananuka, J., & Najjemba Muganga, G. (2018). Training, employee engagement and employee performance: Evidence from Uganda's health sector. Cogent Business & Management, 5(1), 1470891.
21. Bedarkar, M., & Pandita, D. (2014). A study on the drivers of employee engagement impacting employee performance.Procedia-Social and Behavioral Sciences,133, 106-115.
22. Kuzu, O. H., & Ózilhan, D. (2014). The effect of employee relationships and knowledge sharing on employees' performance: An empirical research on service industry. Procedia-Social and Behavioral Sciences, 109, 1370-1374.
23. Wanza, S. L., & Nkuraru, J. K. (2016). Influence of change management on employee performance: A case of university of Eldoret, Kenya. International Journal of Business and Social Science, 7(4), 190-199.
24. Kawiana, I. G. P., Dewi, L. K. C., Martini, L. K. B., & Suardana, I. B. R. (2018). The influence of organizational culture, employee satisfaction, personality, and organizational commitment towards employee performance. International research journal of management, IT and social sciences, 5(3), 35-45.
25. Awadh, A. M., & Alyahya, M. S. (2013). Impact of organizational culture on employee performance. International review of management and business research, 2(1), 168.
