Abstract:

This research was conducted to see the determination of interpersonal relationships, leadership styles, and communication against work productivity with team cooperation as intervening variables in the general section in the Bintan Regency Regional Secretariat. The respondents in this study were civil servants and non-permanent employees, a general part in the Regional Secretariat of Bintan Regency, amounting to 96 people. Validity and reliability were tested using SEM-PLS, then independent variables, mediator variables, and dependent variables were analysed using the SEM-PLS. From the research results, it is known that interpersonal relationships do not directly determine teamwork, leadership style directly determines teamwork, Communication directly determines teamwork, teamwork does not directly determine work productivity, interpersonal relationships directly determine work productivity, determination gave the variables of interpersonal relationships, leadership style and Communication on work productivity was 44.7%, and teamwork was 53.2%. At the same time, the rest were explained by other variables outside this study.

Key Words:

Interpersonal Relationships, Leadership Style, Communication, Team         Cooperation, Work Productivity

Background

The implementation of good governance is the prerequisite for realizing the people's Aspirations in achieving the goals and ideals of the nation and state. The basic concept of accountability is based on the classification of managerial responsibility for each environment in the organization that aims to carry out activities in each section. Each individual in each rank of the apparatus is responsible for the activities carried out on their part. In the world of bureaucracy, accountability of government agencies is a manifestation of the obligations of government agencies to be responsible for the success or failure of the implementation of the mission of the agency concerned. The Bintan Regency Regional Secretariat is part of the Bintan Regency Regional government. It is a supporting element led by the Regional Secretary who is under and is responsible to the Regent. The Bintan Regency Regional Secretariat was formed based on the Bintan Regent Regulation No. 7 of 2016 concerning the formation and composition of the Regional Secretariat Apparatus. Regions have organizational structures/instruments, duties and obligations to assist the Regent in formulating policies and coordinating Regional Offices and Regional Technical Institutions and carry out other tasks assigned by the Regent. The General Section is authorised to the service section, which consists of the Administrative Subdivision, Household Subdivision, and Financial Subdivision. Each subsection has its duties and responsibilities in the field of service. In the administration section, services related to correspondence matters for each section of the Regional Secretariat and the correspondence services of the Regional Apparatus Organization in the Bintan Regency for specific purposes. Household Subdivision is the kitchen of the Regional Secretariat of Bintan Regency, which deals directly with the community in every activity of the regent and deputy regent of Bintan, Financial Subdivision, services related to the submission of expenditure accountability letters for each section in the Regional Secretariat. For the sake of the smoothness of the speed of the activities of the general section above, each section's business cannot be separated from the role of human resources.  

Research Questions

The study attempts to answer the following research questions: 

a. Does the interpersonal relationship directly determine teamwork in the General Section at the Bintan Regency Regional Secretariat?

b. Does the leadership style directly determine teamwork in the General Section at the Bintan Regency Regional Secretariat?

c. Does communication directly determine the effect of teamwork on the General Section at the Bintan Regency Regional Secretariat?

d. Does the interpersonal relationship directly determine work productivity in the General Section in the Bintan Regency Regional Secretariat?

e. Does the leadership style directly determine work productivity in the General Section in the Bintan Regency Regional Secretariat?

f. Does communication directly determine work productivity in the General Section in the Bintan Regency Regional Secretariat?

g. Does teamwork directly determine work productivity in the General Section at the Bintan Regency Regional Secretariat

Theoretical Basis

Work Productivity Theory

According to Hasibuan (2009: 125), "Productivity contains a mental attitude that always holds that life today must be better than tomorrow and better than today." Productivity also reflects the work ethic of employees. There also reflected the right mental attitude. Thus, both employers and employees involved strive to increase productivity, with a variety of policies that can efficiently increase employee productivity (Sulaeman, 2014: 91). Productivity is generally defined as the relationship between output (goods and services) and input (labor) work, materials, money).

Theory of Interpersonal Relations

Humans live as solitary creatures as well as social beings. As individuals, human beings are unique to other creatures. Besides, humans are also social beings who cannot live alone but need help with other creatures. Humans want to establish relationships with other individuals and need each other. This relationship is often referred to as interpersonal relationships. According to (Novriani: 2018: 13), interpersonal relationships are interactions carried out by one person to another in a work situation to generate excitement to work and work activities into a productive spirit.

Leadership Style Theory

Hasibuan (2016: 170) states that: "Leadership Style is a way a leader influences the behavior of subordinates who aim to encourage workplace passion, job satisfaction, and high employee productivity to achieve maximum organizational goals." Rivai (2014: 42) states Leadership Style is a set of characteristics used by leaders to influence subordinates so that organizational goals are achieved. It can also be said that the leadership style is a pattern of behavior and strategies that are preferred and often applied.

Communication Theory

According to Ruslan (2008: 83): "Communication is an important tool in the function of public relations." The public shelter and appreciate an excellent performance in communication activities effectively and, at the same time, excellent performance to attract public attention and other important objectives of the public relations function. According to Suprapto (2011: 6), Communication is: "A process of interaction that has meaning between fellow humans." Based on the expert's opinion, it can be concluded that Communication is an essential tool for interaction between human beings. Effective Communication in work will increase work productivity and build cooperation.

Team Cooperation Theory

According to Manurung (2013: 15), teamwork is a necessity in realizing work success. Teamwork will be a driving force that has energy and synergy for individuals who join teamwork. Without good cooperation will not bring up bright ideas. According to Bachtiar (2004: 7), the definition of cooperation is the synergy of several people's strengths in achieving a common goal. Team collaboration is the involvement of several people in contributing to carrying out the tasks of the organization in order to achieve the vision and mission of the organization and offer optimal joint results. 



Hypothesis

Conditional statements (provisional) which are allegations or guesses about what researchers observe to understand them. A hypothesis must show a clear structure so that it is easy to know the type of the variable and the direction of the relationship between variables, whether positive or negative. A short answer to the research problem is as follows:

a. Interpersonal Relationship Determines Teamwork

b. Leadership Style Determines Team Cooperation

c. Communication Determines Teamwork

d. Interpersonal Relationship Determines Work Productivity

e. Leadership Style Determines Work Productivity

f. Communication Determines Work Productivity

g. Team Cooperation Determines Work Productivity

Research Methods

The location of this research was carried out in the General Section at the Regional Secretariat of Bintan Regency

Population 

The population is a generalization of all subjects and objects of existing research. The population in this study were all civil servants and non-permanent employees totaling 96.

Sample

Withdrawal of sample members by sampling technique, the results are expected to represent the characteristics of the study population (representative). Researchers use data processing using SEM with PLS software, which states for optimal data collection to use a sample of <100 samples. In this study, the researchers used the census method, so that respondents numbered 96, respondents must fill out a questionnaire that has been distributed.

Data Collection Technique 

For the analysis of the problem under study, the data collection is done using techniques

Questionnaire

This technique is carried out to obtain primary data by asking respondents to fill out questionnaires to obtain the necessary data regarding the Determination of Interpersonal Relationships, Leadership Style, and Communication on Work Productivity with Team Cooperation as Intervening Variables in the General Section in the Bintan Regency Regional Secretariat.

Interview

This technique is carried out by observing directly in the daily activities of employees of the Regional Secretariat of Bintan Regency.

Research variable

This research was conducted using three exogenous variables, namely interpersonal relations (X1), leadership style (X2) communication (X3), namely teamwork (Y) as intervening variables, one endogenous variable work productivity (Y).

Data analysis technique

Editing

Editing is the process of checking and adjusting the obtained research data to facilitate coding and processing, as well as with statistical techniques.

Coding

Coding is the activity of marking in the form of numbers on the answers to the questionnaire and then grouped into the same category to simplify answers.

Scoring

Scoring is changing qualitative data into the quantitative form.

Tabulating

Tabulating is the presentation of data obtained in the table so that the reader is expected to be able to see the results of the research clearly after the tabulating process is occasionally carried out, then processed with the SEM-PLS (Structural Equation Model Partial Least Square) program




Results and Discussion

In addition to seeing the value of the factor loading construct as a validity test, in the measurement model, a reliability test is also performed. Reliability tests are carried out to prove the accuracy, consistency, and accuracy of instruments in measuring a construct. In PLS-SEM using SmartPLS, to measure the reliability of a construct can be done in two ways, namely with Cronbach's Alpha and Composite reliability. However, the use of Cronbach's Alpha to test the reliability of a construct will give a lower value (underestimate), so it is advisable to use Composite Reliability. The validity and reliability criteria can also be seen from the reliability of a construct and the value of Average Variance Extracted (AVE) of each construct.

Table 1. Composite Reliability

Variable	Cronbach's Alpha	Composite Reliability	Average Variance Extracted(AVE)
Communication	0.929	0.941	0.638
Inter_relationship	0.964	0.970	0.821
Style leader	0.910	0.929	.651
Teamwork	0.839	.886	0.609
Work productivity	0.910	0.934	0.739

Table 1. Composite Reliability

Source: Primary data processed, 2020

From Table. It can be seen that the value of all variables in reliability testing using either Cronbach's Alpha or Composite Reliability is> 0.7. Therefore, it can be concluded that the tested variables are valid and also reliable so that it can proceed to test the structural model.

Convergent Validity

Convergent validity is used to see how a measurement is positively correlated with alternative measurements of the same construct. To see an indicator of a constructed variable is valid or not, it is seen from the outer loading value. If the outer loading value is more significant than (0.4), then an indicator is valid. (Hair, Hult, Ringle, & Sarstedt, 2014).

Table 2. Outer Loading

Variable	Communicate	Inter_ relationship	Style leader	Team work	Work Product
Inter Relations2		0875
Inter Relations3		0.923
Inter Relations4		0908
Inter Relations5		0.949
Inter Relations6		0891
Inter Relations7		0.887
Inter Relations8		0.909
Style Leader2			0.765
Style Leader4			0835
Style Leader6			0819
Style Leader7			0866
Style Leader8			0.856
Style Leader9			0.860
Communication3	0.805
Communication4	0814
Communication6	0857
Communication7	0747
Communication8	0835
Communication9	0.793
Communication10	0740
Communication11	0.797
Communication13	0.796
Teamwork2				0723
Teamwork3				0.775
Teamwork4				0.778
Teamwork6				0.785
Teamwork8				0835
WorkProductivity3					0.736
WorkProductivity5					0868
WorkProductivity6					0880
WorkProductivity7					0.929
WorkProductivity8					0873

Source: Primary data processed, 2020

Based on the above table, it can be seen that the outer loading value for Interpersonal Relationship, Leadership Style, Communication, Team Cooperation, and Work Productivity where the value of all items in the five tested variables is more significant than 0.4, then all indicators on five variables are declared valid.

Discriminant Validity

Discriminant validity did ensure that each concept of each latent variable is different from the other variables. The model has good discriminant validity if each loading value of each indicator of a latent variable has the highest loading value with a loading value. Other than other latent variables. The discriminant validity test results are obtained as follows:

Table 3. Detroit-Monotrait Ratio (HTMT)

	Communication	Inter_relationship	Style Leader	Teamwork	Work Productivity
Communication
Inter_relationship	0.534
Style Leader	.113	.186
Teamwork	0.712	0.461	0.428
Work Productivity	0.595	0.541	.339	0.581

Source: Primary data processed, 2020

Based on table 4.6 could value interpersonal relationships Heteroit-Monotrait Ratio smaller than 0.9, 0.534, the value leadership style variable Heteroit-Monotrait Ratio smaller than 0.9 which is 0.113, the value of teamwork variables Heteroit-Monotrait Ratio smaller than 0.9 which is 0.712 and the value of work productivity variable Heteroit-Monotrait Ratio smaller than 0.9, 0.595, which means that all variables have good discriminant validity, or are entirely different from other constructs (the construct is unique). 

Kolinierity (Colinierity / Variance Inflation Factor / VIF)

Collinearity testing is to prove the correlation between latent / construct variables is reliable or not. If there is a strong correlation, it means that the model contains problems if viewed from a methodological point of view. It has an impact on the estimation of statistical significance. This problem is called colinearity. The value used to analyze it is to look at the value of the Variance Inflation Factor (VIF). (Hair, Hult Ringle, & Sarstedt, 2014; Garson, 2016).

If the VIF value is more significant than 5.00, then there is a colinearity problem, and

vice versa there is no colinearity problem if the VIF value <5.00 (Hair, Hult, Ringle, & Sarstedt, 2014)



Table 4. Colinearity Statistics (VIF)

	Communication	Inter relationship	Style Leader	Teamwork	Work Productivity
Communication				1,344	2,106
Inter_relationship				1,378	1,387
Style Leader				1,030	1,258
Teamwork					2,135
Work Productivity

Source: Primary data processed, 2020

From the above data, it can be described as follows:

a. The VIF for the correlation of Interpersonal Relationship with Work Productivity is 1.387 <5.00 (there is no colinearity problem)

b. VIF for leadership style correlation with Work Productivity is 1.258 <5.00 (there is no colinearity problem) \

c. VIF for correlation of Communication with Work Productivity is 2.106 <5.00 (there is no colinearity problem)

d. VIF for the correlation of Team Cooperation with Employee Performance is 2.135 <5.00 (there is no colinearity problem)

Thus, from the data above, the structural model, in this case, does not contain a colinearity problem.

Direct Effect

Direct Effect Analysis (direct effect) is useful to test the hypothesis of the direct effect of an influential variable (exogenous) on the variable affected (endogenous) (Nur Azizah, 2019: 10).

Table 5. Bootstrapping Path Coefficients

	Original Sample	Sample Mean	Standard Deviation	T statistic (|O/…	P Values
Communicat…	0.597	0.588	0.113	5.265	0.000
Communicat…	0.353	0.365	0.151	2.333	0.020
Interperson…	0.065	0.071	0.101	0.645	0.519
Interperson…	0.254	0.253	0.119	2.121	0.034
Leader Style…	0.327	0.344	0.112	2.929	0.004
Leader Style…	0.207	0.210	0.086	2.407	0.016
Team Work-…	0.106	0.094	0.127	0.834	0.404

Source: Primary data processed, 2020

In PLS statistical testing, every hypothesized relationship is carried out using simulations. In this case, the bootstrap method is performed on the sample. Bootstrapping testing is also intended to minimize the problem of research data abnormalities. The bootstrapping test results from the PLS analysis are as follows:

a. Hypothesis 1 Testing (There is an effect of interpersonal relationships on increasing teamwork). The first hypothesis testing results showed that the relationship between Interpersonal Relations with Teamwork Variable showed a path coefficient of 0.065 with a P-Value of 0.519. This value is higher than 0.05. These results mean that interpersonal relationships have a positive but not significant relationship to teamwork, which means it is not by the first hypothesis that interpersonal relationships do not directly affect team collaboration. This means that Hypothesis 1 is rejected.

b. Hypothesis 2 Testing (there is an effect of leadership style on increasing teamwork. The first hypothesis testing results indicate that the relationship between leadership style variables and teamwork variables shows a path coefficient of 0.327 with a P-Value of 0.004. The value is smaller than 0.05. This result means that the leadership style has a positive and significant relationship to teamwork, which means that it is by the second hypothesis. Interpersonal relationships affect direct teamwork. This means that Hypothesis 2 is accepted.

c. Hypothesis 3 Testing (There is a communication effect on increasing teamwork). The first hypothesis testing results show that the relationship between the Communication variable and the Teamwork Variable shows a path coefficient of 0.597 with a P-Value of 0.000. This value is smaller than 0.05. This result means that Communication has a positive and significant relationship to teamwork, which means it is by the third hypothesis, where Communication affects teamwork directly. This means that Hypothesis 3 is accepted.

d. Hypothesis 4 Testing (There is an effect of interpersonal relationships on increasing work productivity). The results of testing the first hypothesis indicate that the relationship between variables Interpersonal Relations with Work Productivity Variable shows a path coefficient of 0.254 with a P-Value of 0.034. This value is smaller than 0.05. These results mean that interpersonal relationships have a positive and significant relationship to work productivity, which means that the fourth hypothesis where interpersonal relationships affect work productivity directly. This means that Hypothesis 4 is accepted.

e. Hypothesis 5 Testing (There is an effect of leadership style on increasing work productivity). The results of the first hypothesis testing showed that the relationship between leadership style variables and work productivity variables showed a path coefficient of 0.207 with a P-Value of 0.016. This value is smaller than 0.05. This result means that the leadership style has a positive and significant relationship to work productivity, which means it is by the fifth hypothesis. The leadership style directly affects work productivity. This means that Hypothesis 5 is accepted.

f. Hypothesis Testing 6 (There is a Communication Effect of an increase in work productivity) The results of the first hypothesis testing indicate that the relationship between the Communication variable and the Work Productivity Variable shows a path coefficient of 0.353 with a P-Value of 0.020. This value is smaller than 0.05. This result means that Communication has a positive and significant relationship to work productivity, which means that it is by the sixth hypothesis where Communication has a direct effect on work productivity. This means that Hypothesis 6 is accepted.

g. Hypothesis 7 Testing (There is an effect of teamwork on increasing work productivity)

The results of the first hypothesis testing showed that the relationship between leadership style variables and work productivity variables showed a path coefficient of 0.106 with a P-Value of 0.404. This value is higher than 0.05. This result means that teamwork has a positive but not significant relationship to work productivity, which means it is not by the seventh hypothesis, where teamwork does not directly affect work productivity. This means that Hypothesis 7 is rejected.

Indirect Effect

Indirect Effect Analysis is useful to test the hypothesis of the indirect effect of an influential variable (exogenous) on the affected variable (endogenous), which is mediated/mediated by an intervening variable (mediator variable) (Nur Azizah, 2019: 11).

Table 6. Indirect Effect

	Original Sample	T-Statistics	P-Values
Inter_relation Teamwork Work Productivity	0.063	0.768	.443
Leader Style Teamwork Work Productivity	0.007	.362	0.717
Communication Teamwork Work Productivity	0.035	0.632	0.528

Source: Primary data processed, 2020

Based on table 4.11, it can be concluded that the P-Value of interpersonal relations is 0.443; the value is higher than 0.05. This result means that teamwork determines indirect interpersonal relationships. P-Value value of leadership style is 0.717; the value is higher than 0.05. This result means that teamwork determines the leadership style indirectly. P-Value value of Communication is 0.528; the value is higher than 0.05. This result means that teamwork determines indirect Communication.

Total Effect

The total effect is the total of direct effect (direct effect) and indirect effect (indirect effect) (Nur Azizah, 2019: 12).

Table 7. Total Effect.

Variable	Koefisen Value		Variable	Coefficient Value
X1 -> X4	0.065
X4 -> Y	0.106
	Total Effect	0.171	X1 -> Y	0.254
X2 -> X4	0.207
X4 -> Y	0.106
	Total Effect	0.313	X2 -> Y	0.327
X3 -> X4	0.597
X4 -> Y	0.649
	Total Effect	1,246	X3 -> Y	0.353

Based on table 4.12 that the results of the calculation of the coefficient value for each variable both directly and indirectly contribute to the value of the variable work productivity. It can be explained that the total influence of interpersonal relations and teamwork has a coefficient of 0.171 or 17.1%, contributing to work productivity. The variable style of leadership and teamwork has a coefficient of 0.313 or 31.3%, contributing to work productivity. Variable Communication and teamwork have a coefficient of 1246, or 214.6% contribute to work productivity.

Table 8. R-Square

Endogenous Variables	R Square
Teamwork	0.532
Work productivity	0.447

Based on table 4.7 it can be concluded that the model of determination of interpersonal relationships, leadership style, and Communication on work productivity gives a value of 0.447, which can be interpreted that the construct productivity variables of work that can be explained by the interpersonal relationship variables, leadership style, and Communication are 44.7%. In contrast, the rest is explained by other variables outside this study. Likewise, with the model of determination of interpersonal relationships, leadership and Communication styles towards teamwork gave a value of 0.532, which can be interpreted that the construct variables of teamwork that can be explained by the construct variables of interpersonal relationships, leadership, and communication styles are 53.

Discussion Determination of Interpersonal Relationships with Team work

Based on the statistical calculations, it can be concluded that the construct of Interpersonal Relationships has a positive but not significant effect on the construct of Team Cooperation directly. This can be seen from the path coefficient of 0.065 with a P-Value of 0.519. This value is higher than 0.05. Thus, the H1 hypothesis in this study was rejected. Therefore, the first hypothesis which states that there is a determination of interpersonal relationships with teamwork is not proven right. This shows that interpersonal relationship variables do not have a significant direct effect on teamwork. The reason for rejecting this hypothesis is alleged because an employee who does not have an excellent interpersonal relationship does not always have a low level of cooperation towards his institution. Veolia supports this (Supriyadi: 2016). Interpersonal relationships are interactions conducted by someone to other people in work situations to arouse the excitement of work and work activities into productive enthusiasm.

Determination of Leadership Style towards Teamwork

Based on the results of statistical calculations, it can be concluded that the construct of Interpersonal Relationships has a positive but not significant effect on the construct of Team Cooperation directly. This can be seen from the path coefficient of 0.327 with a P-Value of 0.004. This value is smaller than 0.05. Thus, the H2 hypothesis in this study was accepted. Therefore, the second hypothesis, which states that there is a Determination of the leadership style of teamwork, is proven to be true. This shows that the leadership style variable has a significant direct effect on teamwork. The reason for accepting this hypothesis is that a boss who has an excellent leadership style will increase teamwork, in the general section of the District Secretariat. Hasibuan (2016: 170) states that: "Leadership Style is a way a leader influences the behavior of subordinates who aim to encourage workplace passion, job satisfaction, and high employee productivity, in order to achieve maximum organizational goals. 

Determination of Communication Against Teamwork

Based on the results of statistical calculations, it can be concluded that the construct of Communication has a positive and significant effect on the construct of teamwork directly. This can be seen from the path coefficient of 0.597 with a P-Value of 0.000. This value is smaller than 0.05. The value is smaller than 0.05. Thus, the H3 hypothesis in this study was accepted. Therefore, the third hypothesis, which states that there is a determination of Communication towards teamwork, is proven to be true. This shows that the communication variable has a significant direct effect on teamwork. The reason for accepting this hypothesis is alleged because an employee who has excellent Communication will enhance teamwork. An employee who has good Communication will be able to coordinate well to create good teamwork. This is supported by Suprapto (2011: 6) communication is an interaction that has meaning between fellow humans so that Communication is a process of interaction among humans; effective Communication at work will build cooperation. 

Determination of Interpersonal Relationship to Work Productivity

Based on the results of statistical calculations, it can be concluded that the construct of interpersonal relationships has a positive and significant effect on the construct of work productivity directly. This can be seen from 0.254 with a P-Value of 0.034. This value is smaller than 0.05. Thus, the H4 hypothesis in this study was accepted. Therefore, the fourth hypothesis, which states that there is a determination of the interpersonal relationship to work productivity is proven right. This shows that interpersonal relationship variables have a significant direct effect on work productivity. The reason for accepting this hypothesis is thought to be that an employee who has an excellent interpersonal relationship will affect high productivity in his work. Good interpersonal relationships help employees in completing their work. This is supported by Barron and Byrne (Supriyadi 2016) supported this; factors that influence interpersonal relationships are internal and external. Internal factors are the need to interact; someone tries to maintain a relationship, join a group, participate in activities, enjoy activities with family friends, show cooperation behavior, support each other. In an organization, a person needs to interact with others or coworkers to be able to work together in completing work to increase work productivity with the help of coworkers. 

Determination of Leadership Style on Work Productivity

Based on the results of statistical calculations, it can be concluded that the construct of leadership style has a positive and significant effect on the construct of work productivity directly. This can be seen from 0.254 with a P-Value of 0.034. This value is smaller than 0.05. Thus, the H5 hypothesis in this study was accepted. Therefore, the fifth hypothesis, which states that there is a determination of the leadership style of Work productivity, is proven right. This shows that the leadership style variable has a significant direct effect on work productivity. The reason for the acceptance of this hypothesis is thought to be because the person who leads a superior will influence the high productivity in his work. Leaders who involve and foster employees in work and decisions to be taken will undoubtedly increase productivity. This is supported by Handoko (2002: 193) job satisfaction is a pleasant or unpleasant emotional state with employees looking at their work. High and low job satisfaction of an employee is influenced by many factors, ranging from compensation received to the work environment that is around the employee. Increased job satisfaction performed by a company is one sign that the company has been able to manage employees or human resources in the company properly. 193) job satisfaction is a pleasant or unpleasant emotional state with employees looking at their work. High and low job satisfaction of an employee is influenced by many factors, ranging from compensation received to the work environment that is around the employee. Increased job satisfaction performed by a company is one sign that the company has been able to manage employees or human resources in the company properly. 193) job satisfaction is a pleasant or unpleasant emotional state with employees looking at their work. High and low job satisfaction of an employee is influenced by many factors, ranging from compensation received to the work environment that is around the employee. Increased job satisfaction performed by a company is one sign that the company has been able to manage employees or human resources in the company properly.

Determination of Communication against Work Productivity

Based on the results of statistical calculations, it can be concluded that the construct of Communication has a positive and significant effect on the construct of work productivity directly. This can be seen from 0.254 with a path coefficient of 0.353 with a P-Value of 0.020. This value is smaller than 0.05. Thus, the H6 hypothesis in this study was accepted. Therefore, the sixth hypothesis, which states that there is a determination of Communication towards work productivity, is proven right. This shows that the communication variable has a significant direct effect on work productivity. The reason for accepting this hypothesis is thought to be that excellent Communication will influence high productivity in his work. Good Communication will inhibit the occurrence of miss-communication at work so that the target work is appropriate to the target, and excellent Communication provides knowledge for work that is less understood so that it helps in completing work. This is supported by Ruslan (2008: 83), who says that Communication is a tool in the public relations function. "The public shelter and appreciate a good performance in communication activities effectively. At the same time, good performance is to attract public attention and other important objectives of the public relations function," effective Communication at work will increase one's work productivity.

Determination of Team Collaboration on Work Productivity

Based on the results of statistical calculations, it can be concluded that the construct of teamwork has a positive but not significant effect on the construct of work productivity directly. This can be seen from 0.254 with a path coefficient of 0.106 with a P-Value of 0.404. This value is higher than 0.05. Thus, the H7 hypothesis in this study was rejected. Therefore, the seventh hypothesis, which states that teamwork is determined towards work productivity, is not proven right. This shows that the teamwork variable does not have a significant direct effect on work productivity. The reason for rejecting this hypothesis is thought to be that teamwork is needed in addition to making work more accessible, besides teamwork shows the cohesiveness of an employee with other employees to achieve work targets in increasing work productivity. Bachtiar supports this (2004: 7). The definition of cooperation is the synergy of the strengths of several people in achieving a common goal. Team collaboration is the involvement of several people in contributing to carrying out the tasks of the organization in order to achieve the vision and mission of the organization and offer optimal joint results, without good teamwork will not bring up bright ideas to achieve work targets. 7) the definition of cooperation is the synergy of strengths of several people in achieving a common goal. Team collaboration is the involvement of several people in contributing to carrying out the tasks of the organization in order to achieve the vision and mission of the organization and offer optimal joint results, without good teamwork will not bring up bright ideas to achieve work targets. 7) the definition of cooperation is the synergy of strengths of several people in achieving a common goal. Team collaboration is the involvement of several people in contributing to carrying out the tasks of the organization in order to achieve the vision and mission of the organization and offer optimal joint results, without good teamwork will not bring up bright ideas to achieve work targets.

References

• Arifin. (2016). The Effect of Competence, Communication, and Trust on Team Cooperation (Study at the Tulungagung District Inspectorate). Islamic University Attends Kediri.
• Azuar, J. (2019). Structural Equation Model Partial Least Square (SEM-PLS) Training Module Using Smartpls. Batam University,
• Oktrima, M. (2018). The Effect of Communication on Employee Productivity in the CV. Bintang Pratama Promosindo, Pamulang University.
• Cucu, S. (2019). Influence of Leadership Style, and Organizational Culture on Employee Productivity of Public Companies in Logistics Affairs. Singapore State University, Karawang
• Dwi, Dian, Putra The Influence of Organizational Culture, Motivation, and Communication on Work Productivity of the Wonogiri Regency Environmental Service. Surakarta Islamic University, Surakarta, 2019.
• F Fahmi Maulana Septia, The Effect of Interpersonal Communication on Employee Productivity in the Bandung City Manpower Office. Bandung State Islamic University, 2014.
• Firdaus et al. The Effect of Leadership Style on Employee Productivity of the Manpower and Transmigration Office Murung Raya, Central Kalimantan Province. Singapore State University, Karawang, 2018.
• Fitria, Hardiati, The Effect of Interpersonal Trust on Team Work on Pizza Hut Employees in Yogyakarta Branch, Semarang State University, 2017.
• Hamali, A, Yusuf, Understanding of Human Resource Management, Yogyakarta: Matter 1, Caps, 2016.
• Hanna Fransiska, et al Teamwork mediated the Impact of Transformational and Transactional Leadership on the Work Performance of Private Companies in the City of Bandung. Vol. 18 Number 2, May 2019.
• Hartatik, Indah Puji, Organization and Basic Motivation for Increasing Productivity, Jakarta: Bumi Aksara, 2014.
• Hasibuan, Malayu, Organizations, and Basic Motivation for Increasing Productivity, Jakarta: Bumi Aksara, 2009
• Hasibuan, Malayu, Human Resources Management, Jakarta: Bumi Aksara, 2016.
• Indriyani, Linda, The Effect of Career Development and Organizational Communication on Employee Job Satisfaction of PT. Cogindo Daya Bersama. Syam Hodayatullah State Isam Negeri University, 2015
• Layla, Angraeni, The Effect of Team Cooperation on the Employee Productivity of PT. PLN (Persero) Transmission in Central Java. Telkom University. e-Proceeding of Management: Vol.6, No.1 April 2019.
• Manurung, Hendro, Natael, The Effect of Team Cooperation on the Effectiveness of Employee Work at PT Bank Perkreditan Rakyat Solider Pancur Batu., Medan: Universitas Sumatera Utara Medan, 2013.
• Minarti Luhat, The Effect of Leadership and Communication Style on Employee Productivity at PT. Gunta Samba Jaya Miau Baru Estate in Miau Baru Village. Volume 5, Number 3, 2017: 840-85,2017.
• Nikolus, Duli, Analysis of the Effect of Leadership Style on the Performance of Educators and Education Personnel in SD, SMP, and SMA Yos Sudarso-Batam with Team Cooperation as Intervening Variables. STIE Bentara Persada Batam. Journal of Computer Science and Business, Volume 10, Number 2, Nov 2019.
• Tilapia, Fikrotul, The Effect of Work Responsibility, Work Environment, and Interpersonal Relationships on Work Productivity of UD. Kudus Electronic Arofah. Muria Kudus University, 2014.
• Novriani, The Influence of Leadership, Interpersonal Relations, Work Discipline and the Work Environment on Employee Job Satisfaction of the Investment Office and One-Stop Integrated Services in Riau Islands Province. Raja Ali Haji Maritime University, 2018.
• Rahmat Hidayat, et al, The Relationship of Communication to Employee Productivity in Bingka Nayadam Batam. Vol. 4, No. 1, July 2016, 15-20 p-ISSN: 2337- 7887,2016.
• Raksi, Ulfa, Widyaswari, et al, The Effect of Organizational Culture and Leadership Style on Team Cooperation (Study of Gondorukem and Turpentine II Factory Employees, Ponorogo. Brawijaya University, 2019.
• Rivai, Veithzal, Leadership in Organizational Behavior, Jakarta: Rajawali Press, 2014.
• Rivai. Human Resource Management for Companies: From Theory to Practice (Issue 3). PT. Main Gramedia Library. Jakarta, 2014.
• Salfadri, et al, The Effect of Leadership Style, and Employee Commitment on Employee productivity of PT. Kunango Male. Semarang State University, 2019.
• Shintia Hotono, et al. The Mediation Effect of Team Cooperation in the Relationship between Leadership Style and Project Performance. Udayana Bali, 2017.
• Sugiyono, Qualitative Quantitative Research Methods and R&B. Bandung. Alfabeta, 2012.
• Sugiyono, Administrative Research Methods. Bandung: Alfa Beta, 2014.
• Sukarja, R, The Effect of Leadership and Communication on Job Satisfaction and Employee Performance of the Riau Provincial Education Office, Riau: Vol 7 No.2 May 2015.
• Sulaeman, Ardika. The Effect of Wages and Work Experience on the Productivity of Carving Craft Employees in Subang Regency. Journal of Trikonomika Vol. 13, No. June 1. ISSN 2355-7737,2014
• Sutrisno, Edy, Human Resource Management First Edition, Jakarta: Kencana, 2017
• Sutrisno, Edy, Human Resource Management, Jakarta: Kencana, 2011.
• Tjutju and Suwanto, Human Resource Management Application Theory and Research Issues. Bandung: Alfabeta, 2016.