Professional Documents
Culture Documents
COMMUNICATION TO
EMPLOYEE
PRODUCTIVITY OF
FOOD AND BEVERAGE
DEPARTMENT IN HOTEL
PITAGIRI JAKARTA
(INTAN LISTIANA M.)
Presented by:
AGASTIO 201016707
GLADY LORETTA 201016721
SAK 4
Background of research
Grand Teories of
Communication
Grand Theory of
Productivity
Problem Identification
Review of internal
communications
Review of productivity
Administered questionnaire consisting of:
1. motivation
2. self-development
3. quality
4. efficiency
Analysis
The analysis was done by comparing the
real with the ideal conditions Events that
are expected of the variables studied
Assessment questionnaire in the analysis
of this problem using a Likert Scale, a
questionnaire has been spread to 26
people
Minimu
m
Maximu
m
Mea
n
Std.
Deviatio
n
2
6
3.08
.744
Penyampaian informasi
mengenai peraturan yang
berlaku
2
6
3.23
.652
2
6
2.88
.653
2
6
3.08
.688
2
6
2.88
.653
Komunukasi horizontal
2
6
3.23
.587
2
6
3.04
.824
Assessment of internal
communication
N
Komunikas 8
i
Minimum
Maximum Mean
Std.
Devation
2.88
3.35
16792
3.0963
Valid N
8
(listwise)
Based on the above table express the descriptive value of the
percentage of employees who earned 64.67% in the category of
enough.
Assessment of labor
productivity
N
PRODUKTI 6
VITAS
Valid N
(listwise)
Minimum Maximu
m
Mean
Std.
Deviatio
n
2.81
3.02
.13282
3.15
From the above table it can be seen that the average value of the
productivity of employees f & b dept. Hotel in Jakarta Pitagiri
obtained minimum value and maximum value 2.81 3:12, while the
average value obtained is 3:02 or less can be categorized. And
after conversion it will display the percentage of 65.77%
MInimu
m
Maximu
m
Mea
n
Std.
Deviation
Kemampuan
26 2
3.15
.834
Meningkatkan hasil
yang dicapai
26 2
2.96
.662
Semangat kerja
26 2
2.81
.694
Pengembangan diri
26 2
3.12
.588
Mutu
26 2
3.12
.816
Efisiensi
26 2
2.96
.662
Valid N (listwise)
26
Conclusion
1.) In F & B Department the percentage of
internal communication only 64 .67%, the
reason are:
1. Explanation from the manager of a task that
must be implemented
2. Submission of information about the tasks
that have been implemented
3. The submission of suggestions for
improvement of the subordinate
4. Complaints from employees about himself
or his work.
5. Sharing of information
References
Teguh , Ambar dan Rosidah.2009, Manajemen Sumber Daya Manusia Konsep Teori dan
Pengembangan dalam Konteks Organisasi Politik. Yogyakarta, Graha Ilmu
Stiawan, Edy.2009, Manajemen Sumber Daya Manusia. Jakarta, Kencana
Robert L and Jackson, John H. 2006, Human Resource Management. Jakarta, Salemba
Empat
Sondang. 2009, Manajemen Sumber Daya Manusia. Jakarta, Bumi Aksara
Sugiyono. 2007, Metode Penelitian Administrasi. Bandung, Alfabeta
Prabu Mangkunegara, Anwar. 2008, Manajemen Sumber Daya Manusia Perusahaan.
Bandung, Ronda
Panggabean, Mutiara. 2004, Manajemen Sumber Daya Manusia. Bogor, Ghalia
Indonesia
Tus Efendi Hariandja, Marihot. 2009. Manajemen Sumber Daya Manusia. Jakarta,
Grasindo
Dessler, Garry. 2006, Manajemen Sumber Daya Manusia jilid satu. Klaten, Indeks
Dessler, Garry. 2006, Manajemen Sumber Daya Manusia jilid dua. Klaten, Indeks
H. Syaiful Rohim. 2009, Teori Komunikasi Perspektif, Ragam dan Aplikasi. Jakarta, Rineka
Cipta
Davis, Keith. 1989, Perilaku Organisasi jilid 1. Terjemahan Agus Dharma. Jakarta,
Erlangga
Oppinions
Reccomendation
Thankyou