VSRD International Journal of Business and Management Research, Vol.

V Issue VIII September 2015 / 207

e-ISSN: 2231-248X, p-ISSN: 2319-2194 © VSRD International Journals: www.vsrdjournals.com

RESEARCH PAPER

PROBE EFFECT LEVEL OF EDUCATION, KNOWLEDGE

MANAGEMENT, MOTIVATION AND CAPABILITIES ON
MANAGERIAL PERFORMANCE AT THE LOGISTIC INDUSTRY
IN BANTEN PROVINCE, INDONESIA
Bambang Dwi Suseno
Associate Professor, Department of Management, Banten Business School, Banten, INDONESIA.
Corresponding Email ID: senadwi_bam@yahoo.co.i

ABSTRACT
Aims this study find a picture on the effect of Education Level, Knowledge Management (KM), Motivation and ability to Managerial
Performance. This study uses test reliability and validity of test data through approaches Structural Equation Model (SEM) with Partial
Least Square (PLS). The data was collected by a questionnaire that has been distributed to the logistics companies in Banten by using
purposive sampling.

The results of the data analysis of this study showed that there is a positive relationship between level of education and Managerial
Performance, there is a positive relationship between Knowledge Management and Managerial Performance, there is a positive
relationship between Motivation and Managerial Performance, there is a positive relationship between ability and Managerial
Performance Based on the results of these studies indicate that of any exogenous variables have a significant relationship to the
endogenous variables.

Keywords: Level of Education, Knowledge Management, Motivation, Ability, and Managerial Performance.

1. INTRODUCTION
Human resources play an important role in determining
the success of an organization. It has been widely
recognized that knowledge is an important organizational
resource for any company, regardless of location,
organization size (small, medium or large), to survive and
succeed in the world economy. As for facing the difficult
aspects of management in all organizations today is how to
make their employees work efficiently. Thus the need for
good decision on the part of management. Fligstein (1990)
revealed that the educational background of managers is
very important for a company considering that it can affect
the processes they use in decision making.
Several studies have investigated the impact of human
resources practices in performance oganisasi. For years,
researchers have suggested many human resources
practices have the potential to improve and sustain
organizational performance (Ahmad & Schroeder, 2003).
Vionita (2008) said that all the human resource potential
influence on the organization's efforts to achieve its
objectives. So that aspect of the organization has led to
most of the industry uses a strategy that is used to motivate
their work force. In improving the performance of
employees and to motivate employees in working is
through education. According Hasbullah (2009) states that
education is often defined as a human endeavor to foster
appropriate personality cultural values of society. So it can
be said that education is the deliberate effort made either
directly or indirectly, a person run to achieve a higher
level of life (Vionita, 2008).
Jalbert (2002) also test manager compensation related to
educational background, found a significant difference
between the placement and performance of their roles.
Then they find a company's performance can be affected
by some level of educational background. The information
about the performance of the organization can be used to
evaluate whether the process of organization of work done
so far has been in line with the expected goals or not. To
that end, knowledge management (knowledge
management) that effectively has been recognized as an
important strategic tool for achieving certain objectives of
an organization and even a country, as well as to sustain
economic growth and to gain a competitive advantage
(Chong et al., 2011). Then the knowledge management
support organization is also actively identifying and
acquiring quality knowledge - knowledge that exists in the
external environment of the organization (Tiwana, 2000).
It is essential in the formation of knowledge management
is the learning environment (learning environment) that is
conducive to the employees are motivated to continue to
learn, take advantage of the opportunity or the knowledge
that the information provided by the organization and
develop their individual knowledge (Tjakraatmadja, 2006).
Therefore, developing knowledge of the performance will
be better.
Mitchell (1983) in Wijaya and Suhaji, (2013) holds an
organization can succeed where members must be willing
and able to do their work at their own pace. In this case
also the Soekidjo Stoner (2009: 125) expresses the
Bambang Dwi Suseno
performance of a labor or employee is affected by
motivation, ability and perceptual factors. In fact, not all
employees have the ability and skill and morale of the
organization in line with expectations. A person who has
the ability to conform to the expectations of the
organization, sometimes it does not have high morale so
that its performance is not as expected. (Sumarsono,
2004). So Gana (2011) stated performance jointly
determined by the ability and motivation. This is important
because to some extent, the lack of ability cannot be
compensated with high motivation and conversely the lack
of motivation cannot be compensated with higher
capabilities. Both are important components of effective
performance in organizations. According to Ivancevich
M.John (2007:85) the performance of the individual is the
foundation of organizational performance. A critical factor
in the success of an organization is the employees who are
capable and skilled and have high morale, so it can be
expected that a satisfactory work.
2. OBJECTIVE
Measurement of knowledge management will be done by
comparing the evaluation or supervision of specified
performance with real, whether it is in accordance with the
planning made.
Comparison the management can determine how much
deviation is and how much progress has been achieved and
not achieved, so that action can be taken to address them.
Performance of the company is essentially an achievement
by a business organization logistic sector in Banten
Province, Indonesia.
3. RESEARCH METHODOLOGY
Research Design: This study uses survey. Data used in
the study was obtained by the distribution of a
questionnaire given to the respondents directly by first
doing interviews (Wiyantoro, et al, 2011).
Sample and Data Collection Procedure: Retrieval of
data through mail surveys and ushered to respondents,
while the instrument used was a questionnaire or a
questionnaire. The sample in this study was 39
respondents who are already at random. The criteria of
respondents were Logistics Company in Banten province,
Indonesia.
4. METHODS OF DATA ANALYSIS
In this study data analysis approaches Partial Least Square
(PLS) using PLS Smart Software. PLS is a structural
equation model (SEM) based on components or variance
(variance). According Ghozali (2006) PLS is an
alternative approach that shifts from covariance -based
SEM approach is based variant. General covariance-based
on SEM causality test or theory while PLS is more
predictive models. PLS is a powerful analytical method
(Wold, 1985 in Ghozali, 2006) because it is not based on
many assumptions. For example, the data should not
normally distribute, the sample does not have to be huge.
It can be used to explain the relationship between the
latent variables. PLS can simultaneously analyze
VSRDIJBMR, Vol. V (VIII) September 2015 / 208
constructs formed with reflexive and formative indicators.
It cannot be done by a covariance -based SEM as a model
would be unidentified.
5. THEORETICAL FRAMEWORK
The Effect of Education on Managerial Performance:
Education is traversed by a manager or individual is very
influential in determining his personality. With the
provision of education held by the manager will be able to
deal with the problems faced related to his profession.
Tertiary education so that high of a person will affect its
ability to achieve optimal performance. Soekidjo (2003)
argues that education in the organization is a process
towards the development of capabilities desired by the
organization concerned. So if a manager has a higher
education, it would be helpful for the company, because
with higher education then science would be better applied
in the process of execution of work.
The Hariandja (2002) stated that the level of education a
manager can improve the competitiveness of enterprises
and improve company performance. So it can be
concluded that the level of education is required either by
the manager or an employee, because it will be able to
bring a good influence on themselves and the organization
in which he works. The levels of education also will
influence robust against performance manager to execute
and finish the job properly (Vionita, 2008). Based on the
literature, the hypotheses are as follows:
H1: There is a positive relationship between level of
education and Managerial Performance.
The Effect of Knowledge Management on Managerial
Performance: To produce a good performance, then the
company needs a good system anyway. This system not
only regulations or existing standards, but also involve
parties that are directly related to human resources. One of
the management systems that offer an intellectual
discipline that treats as assets under management is
knowledge management (Honeycutt, 2002). With the KM
manager will be easier in the planning and execution of
work in order to achieve the goals effectively and
efficiently.
With the measurement of knowledge management will be
done by comparing the evaluation or supervision of
specified performance with real, whether it is in
accordance with the planning made. From the comparison
results, the management can determine how much
deviation is and how much progress has been achieved and
not achieved, so that action can be taken to address them.
Performance of the company is essentially an achievement
by a business organization which can be seen from the
results. In research Jaworski & Kohli (1993) measured
firm performance of the overall business performance
compared to last year and overall performance compared
to its main competitors. So to do that knowledge
management is needed to achieve the expected managerial
performance. Based on the literature, the hypotheses are as
follows:
H2: There is a positive relationship between knowledge
Bambang Dwi Suseno
management and Managerial Performance.
Effect of Motivation on Managerial Performance:
Motivation is the willingness to expend high levels of
effort for organizational goals, conditioned by the effort’s
ability to satisfy some needs (Robbins, 2001). To create
the necessary managerial performance expected optimal
motivation and ability to work a good job, this is
expressed by Stoner, (1986) where the performance of a
workforce is affected by motivation, ability, and
perceptual factors.
The things that affect motivation according to Robbins and
Judge (2009) are the intensity of work, an understanding
of the purpose of the organization, diligence work. The
motivation of the definition above is an organization of
individuals who are highly motivated to produce peak
performance. It is quite have the impression that with good
motivation, it will make a performance to be more
effective and efficient in achieving its objectives.
Similarly, says Stoner (1992) that is where the managerial
performance in achieving organizational goals and
effectiveness must be efficient. Therefore, the higher the
intensity level it works the more somebody managers
understand the objectives of the organization and work
more diligently then the higher work motivation. Based on
the literature, the hypotheses are as follows:
H3: There is a positive relationship between Motivation
and Managerial Performance.
Effect of Ability on Managerial Performance: Capacity
is the ability of an individual to perform various tasks in a
job (Robbins, 2001). So if a manager has a better ability,
then he will have to work effectiveness in the performance
of the company and can make better and efficient even
Veithzal (2009) states that performance is a function of
motivation and ability. According to Brigham and Daves
(2004) has a performance influencing factors, namely:
ability and motivation.
H4: There is a positive relationship between Managerial
Capabilities and Performance
Fig. 1: Full Model
6. DATA ANALYSIS
Descriptive Statistics: Questionnaires were distributed a
total of 100 questionnaires. Of the total questionnaires
VSRDIJBMR, Vol. V (VIII) September 2015 / 209
distributed, questionnaires were completed and returned
the questionnaire is number 39. The questionnaires were
not returned due to the respondent in the middle of the
bustle so did not have time to answer the questionnaire.
Therefore, the amount of data that can be processed for
analysis is a number of 39 questionnaires.
7. TEST DATA QUALITY
Test Validity: Testing the validity of the data in this study
is to use the software PLS Model Outer Convergent
Validity is seen that the value of the square root of average
variance extracted (AVE) of each construct in which the
value must be greater than 0.5.
Table 1 describes the value of AVE and root AVE of
constructs Education Level, Knowledge Management
(KM), Motivation and Ability, Managerial Performance. It
can be seen that each construct (variable) that has a value
above 0.5 AVE. This suggests that each of these constructs
has good validity value of each indicator or the
questionnaire used to determine the relationship Education
Level, Knowledge Management (KM), Motivation and
Ability, Managerial performance can be said to be valid.
Test Reliability: A composite of data said to be reliable if
the reliability of more than 0.7. From Table 2 it can be
seen every construct or latent variable that has a composite
reliability values above 0.7 which indicates that the
internal consistency of between variables have good
reliability.
Full Structural Model: In Figure 2 it can be seen that
each construct of each variable is explained by each
indicator. Where the model in Figure 2 is not performed
due to the elimination of these constructs there is no
correlation of less than 0.5 so that each variable met the
criteria convergent validity.
Hypothesis Testing: To test the hypothesis, it can be seen
the value of t - statistics. Limit to reject and accept the
proposed hypothesis is ± 1.96, where if the value of t in
the range -1.96 to 1.96 then the value of the hypothesis
will be rejected or otherwise accept the null hypothesis
(H0). T - Statistics estimation results can be seen in the
result for the inner weight table 4.
Hypothesis 1 states that the level of education has a
positive and significant impact on managerial performance
is indicated by the value of the original sample estimate of
0.189 and 1.989 for the T - statistic greater than the t-test
is 1.96 thus Hypothesis 1 is accepted.
Hypothesis 2 states that Knowledge Management has a
positive and significant impact on managerial performance
is indicated by the value of the original sample estimate of
0.299 and 3.556 for the T - statistic greater than the t-test
is 1.96 thus Hypothesis 2 is accepted.
Hypothesis 3 stated motivation has a positive and
significant impact on managerial performance is indicated
by the value of the original sample estimate of 0.228 and
2.857 for the T - statistic greater than the t-test is 1.96 thus
Hypothesis 3 is accepted.
Bambang Dwi Suseno VSRDIJBMR, Vol. V (VIII) September 2015 / 210

Hypothesis 4 states ability to have a positive and 9. ACKNOWLEDGEMENT

significant impact on managerial performance as indicated Research published by this paper is based was funded by
by the value of Original sample estimate of 0.428 and the the Banten School of Business faculty to strengthen
value of T - statistic greater than 4.694 t-tests is 1.96 thus research capabilities and international publications
Hypothesis 4 is accepted. for the assistance we are very grateful. We also thank
facilities and to provide additional support for field
activities. We also thank reviewer Professor Augusty Tae
8. EXPERIMENTAL RESULTS Ferdinand, DBA, Professor. Christiantius Dwiatmaja,
Ph,D and Dr. Ahyar Yuniawan, M.Si for their comments.
Table 1: Average Variants Extracted
Average Variants
√AVE
Extracted (AVE) 10.CONCLUSION
Education Level (TP) 0.640 0.800 The results of hypothesis testing hypotheses 1 through 4
Knowledge indicate that all the independent variables and significant
0.606 0.778
Management (KM) effect on the dependent variable. A number of conclusions
Motivation (MO) 0.503 0.709 can be drawn from these results: first, all independent
Ability (KP) 0.748 0.865 variables (Level of Education, Knowledge Management,
Managerial Motivation, and Ability) and a significant influence on
0.654 0.809 managerial performance positively. Then the variable level
Performance (KMJ)
of education can positively influence managerial
Table 2: Composite Reliability performance. This is because the level of education can
Composite Reliability indeed be a performance appraisal for managers in
TP 0.838 corporate, higher education is usually the more his
KM 0.821 knowledge. That will facilitate the work performed and the
MO 0.746 effectiveness of the work. Likewise Knowledge
KP 0.852 Management where high knowledge achieved by the high
KMJ 0.849 persistence in the job and a big responsibility on
managerial performance. The motivation into a managerial
performance in the company because, every manager or
individual in need of motivation in carrying out the work
in order to create the spirit of the work and effectiveness
as well as efficiency for the company. So is the ability,
with capability then an individual has more value in
carrying out a task that has been planned by the company
or management, which means that there is an influence on
managerial performance itself. This happens, because the
Managerial Performance is an important indicator of a
company’s performance in relation that the
implementation of Managerial performance can be
measure the extent to which the company's ability to carry
out the planning, investigation, coordination, evaluation,
supervision (supervision), staffing arrangements,
negotiations. Managerial performance was a reflection of
Fig. 2: Models before Indicator Elimination
the company’s performance.

Fig. 3: Model after Elimination
11.LIMITATION
Limitations of this study are the selection of variables that
are not commonly associated with the theory of
knowledge management research that has not been
theoretically linked to managerial performance. This
condition creates a problem. If I make an empirical model
based on conditional assumptions, I have to use a variable
that is related to the theory used and practical context. As
a result, the effect of testing the model and simultaneously
managing not as applicable in the context of theoretical.
This makes it very difficult to separate the effect and
interpretation. Future studies should examine all types of
companies to determine whether there is a similar
relationship. In addition, different measures of results and
knowledge management capabilities should be explored to
determine the factors that most strongly affect managerial
performance. Research can also be tested with longitudinal
data would be more suitable for the type of future research
Bambang Dwi Suseno VSRDIJBMR, Vol. V (VIII) September 2015 / 211

to improve the reliability of the direction of causality. Hall, Inc.

[24] Stoner, James A.F. (1986). Management, Jilid 2, Edisi
Kedua, Jakarta: Erlangga.
12.REFERENCES [25] Sumarsono, Sonny. (2004). Metode Riset Sumber Daya
[1] Ahmad, O., & Schroeder, R.G. (2003). “The impact of Manusia.Yogyakarta: GrahaIlmu.
human resource management practices on operational [26] Soekidjo Notoatmojo (2009). Pengembangan Sumber Daya
performance: Recognizing country and industry Manusia. Jakarta: Rieneka Cipta.
differences.”Journal of Operations Management, 21(1): 19- [27] Tiwana, A. (2000).The Knowledge Management Toolkit:
43. Practical Techniques for Building a Knowledge
[2] Andrews, A.O. (1995). “Meeting the challenge of a new Management System, Prentice Hall, Upper Saddle River,
environment: Boards of directors as legitimacy signals at NJ.
initial public offering.”Doctoral dissertation, Cornell [28] Tjakraatmadja, J.H (2006). “Hakekat Manusiadalam
University. Kerngka Manajemen Pengetahuandan Organisasi Belajar”.
[3] Brigham, E.F. dan Phillip R. Daves, (2004). Intermediate Jurnal Manajemen Teknologi MBA – ITB.
Financial Management, Singapore: South-Western. [29] Veithzal Rivai dan Ella Jauvani Sagala. (2009) Manajemen
[4] Chong, C. W., Chong, S. C., & Gan, G. C. (2011). “Inter- Sumber Daya Manusiauntuk Perusahaan. Jakarta: Rajawali
organizational knowledge transfer needs among small and Press.
medium enterprises.”Library Review, 60(1), 37-52. [30] Vionita, G, V,. (2008). Pengaruh Tingkat Pendidikan Dan
[5] Fligstein, N. (1987). “The intra-organizational power Motivasi Kerja Terhadap Kinerja Pegawai Tata Usaha SMK
struggle: Rise of power of Finance Personnel to top Negeri Di Kota Payakumbuh.Universitas Negeri Padang.
Leadership in Large Corporations, 1919-1979.”American [31] Wijaya and Suhaji, (2013).The Effect of Ability and
Sociological Review, 52, 44-58. Motivation On Employee’s Performance. Sekolah Tinggi
[6] Fligstein, N. (1990). The transformation of corporate Ilmu Ekonomi Widya Manggala. Semarang.
control. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
[7] Ghozali, I. (2006). Structural Equation Medeling; Metode
Alternatifdengan PLS. Badan Penerbit Undip. Semarang. 13.APPENDIX
[8] Hariandja, M.T.E., (2002), Manajemen Sumber Daya
Manusia, Jakarta: Grasindo
[9] Hasibuan, Malayu SP, (2003), Manajemen Sumber Daya
Manusia, Edisi Revisi, Jakarta: PT Bumi Aksara.
[10] Hasbullah. (2009). Dasar-dasarilmu Pendidikanedisi Revisi.
Jakarta: Rajawali Pers.
[11] Honeycutt, J. (2005). Knowledge Management Strategis;
Strategismanajemenpengetahuan. Jakarta: PT. Elex Media
Komputindo.
[12] IvancevichM, Johndkk, (2007) Perilaku dan Manajemen
Organisasi, Jilid 1, Edisi Ketujuh, Jakarta: Erlangga.
[13] Jaworski BJ & Kohli AK (1993) “Market orientation:
antecedents and consequences, “Journal of Marketing 57 (3)
53-70.
[14] Jalbert, T., Ramesh, R., & Mercedes, J. (2002).Does School
Matter? An Empirical.
[15] Jalbert, T., Furumo, K., & Mercedes, J. (2010). “Does
education affect CEO Compensation and firm
performance?”Journal of applied business research, 1 (1),
15-40.
[16] Mahoney, T. A., T. H. Jerdee and S. J. Carroll. (1963).
Development of Managerial Performance: A Research
Approach, Cincinnati: South Western Publ.Co.
[17] Mulyadidan Johny Setiawan, (1999). Sistem
Perencanaandan Pengendalian Manajemen: Sistem
Pelipatgandaan Kinerja Perusahaan, Edisi 1, Aditya Media,
Yogyakarta.
[18] Newman, Brian (1996), “What Is Knowledge
Management”, WWW Virtual Library on The Knowledge
Management Forum, hal.3.
[19] Robbins, P, Stephen., (1998) Perilaku Organisasi, Edisi
Bahasa Indonesia CetakanKe 2, Prenhallindo, Jakarta.
[20] Robbin, P, Stephen, (2001). Perilaku Organisasi, Konsep,
Kontroversi, Aplikasi, Jilid I dan II, Edisi Kedelapan,
Jakarta: Prenhallindo.
[21] Robbins, S. P., & Judge, T. A. (2009).Power and politics. In
D. Parker & J. Collins (Eds.), Organizational Behavior (pp.
448-481). Upper Saddle River, NJ: Pearson Education, Inc.
[22] Simamora, Henry. (2004). Manajemen Sumber Daya
Manusia. Edisi Ketiga. Yogyakarta: STIE, YKPN.
[23] Stoner, James A. F., R. Edward Freeman, Daniel R. Gilbert
(1992), Management, Fifth Edition, New Jersey: Prentice
Bambang Dwi Suseno VSRDIJBMR, Vol. V (VIII) September 2015 / 212

