The Influence of Work Discipline, Work Ethos and Work Environment on Employee Work Achievement: Lessons from Local Organization in an Emerging Country

The Office of Industry, Trade, Cooperatives, and Small and Medium Enterprises (DPPKUKM) of Yapen Islands Regency, Papua, is a regional service established by Regional Regulation Number 5 of 2018 concerning Amendments to Regional Regulation Number 1 of 2017 concerning the Organizational Structure of Regional Apparatus (OPD). The existence of this office as a government agency is obliged to carry out tasks in community service, namely as a supervisor, protector, and observer of issues related to the industry, trade, cooperatives, and small and medium enterprises. This office oversees five fields: the industrial sector, the trade sector, the cooperative sector and small and medium enterprises, the market management sector, and the secretarial affairs (Dwiyanto, 2018). Like other public sector organizations, this local agency office's employees must give their best performance (Bright, 2007). According to Lie et al. (2019), performance is not an individual characteristic such as talent or ability but is a manifestation of the talent or ability itself. The manifestation of the talents and abilities of these individuals is the key to the success of employees in achieving their targets (Lie et al., 2019; Rizan et al., 2020). Abstract

Therefore, to achieve this good performance, it is necessary to increase optimal performance and take advantage of employees' potential (Akbar, 2017;Warokka et al., 2012).
Employee work performance assesses how employees can carry out their duties (Dapu, 2015;. Chen and Silverthorne (2008) add that employee performance is related to how well employees complete their tasks and goals and are assessed based on predetermined performance standards. According to Kelibulin et al. (2021) and Ramlall (2008), employee work performance is critical to help companies achieve their targets.
In the context of local organization performance, some variables play an essential role, such as work discipline, work ethic, and a good work environment (Abdiyanto & Warokka, 2015). Based on field observations, some investment and SMEs' office employees still have a low level of discipline, seen from the low level of attendance and punctuality of employees' work time. Employee work ethic is also low because there are still employees who do not make good use of working hours, fill their work time by sitting around chatting, or leaving the office for matters unrelated to their job duties. In addition, the field observation found that there were obstacles related to the facilities and infrastructure to support services in the office of investment and SMEs service.
Work discipline is an essential factor for improving performance in all organizational activities. Employee performance is closely related to the results of one's work in an organization or company (Mora, 2020). Employee performance is closely related to the results of one's work in an organization or company (Martapina & Warokka, 2018;Edward, 2020). According to Yahya et al. (2012), employees will excel if they have the discipline to do their job well. According to Tammubua et al. (2015), good discipline reflects the amount of responsibility a person has for the assigned task. In this case, it can encourage morale and achieve goals desired by the organization (Febrilia et al., 2011). Wardani and Riyanto's research (2019) shows that civil servants in Bekasi City are disciplined by obeying organizational rules to produce quality work performance. While the study of Pratiwi et al. (2020), who researched civil servants in Halmahera and Rumondang and Nawangsari (2020), who examined civil servants at the Ministry of Home Affairs, showed that the dimension of work discipline that most influences job performance is adherence to time. Then Priyandi et al. (2020) stated that the use of facilities is a dimension of work discipline that most influences the performance of civil servants in Medan. Meanwhile, Rachmawati and Mauludin (2018) concluded that civil servants in Pasuruan City pay more attention to the dimensions of punishment and rewards on the variable of work discipline.
In addition to work discipline and work ethic, Imran et al. (2012) added that the work environment is also an essential factor in influencing work performance. The work environment is where a person works (Ollukkaran and Gunaseelan, 2012;Gallato et al., 2012). According to Putri et al. (2019), a good work environment will make employees feel comfortable at work and will then improve the employee's work performance. Unsuitable or inadequate workplace conditions can cause employees to not work appropriately in the workplace, causing a decrease in performance (Dalbokova & Krzyzanowski, 2002;Taib et al., 2012).
Previous research that examined the effect of the work environment on civil servant work performance showed mixed results. Some studies stated that the physical work environment had the most influence on the work performance of civil servants. In contrast, the other studies stated that the non-physical work environment had the most influence. The study of Rumondang and Nawangsari (2020) and Bakhri et al. (2015) shows that the dimensions of the physical work environment have a more substantial influence on the work performance of civil servants. In contrast, Rismawati (2016) shows that the non-physical work environment has a more decisive influence than the physical work environment on the work performance of civil servants in Makassar. The study of Aksan and Djati (2017) concluded that the physical and non-physical work environment has a positive but insignificant effect on the work performance of civil servants in West Jakarta.
The results of previous research on the effect of work discipline, work ethic, and work environment on civil servant work performance that differ from one government agency to another provide room for further research in different government and regional institutions. In addition, there are differences in findings of the influence of work discipline, work ethic, and work environment on performance. Dapu (2015) and Priyambodo and Nugraha (2019) found a significant effect of work discipline on work performance, whereas they found no significant effect. Rismawati (2016) and Susmianto et al. (2018) found that work ethic significantly affects employee work performance. Meanwhile, work ethic does not significantly affect employee performance. Furthermore, Akbar (2017) and Fatihudin (2018) found a significant effect of the work environment on employee work performance, meanwhile found an insignificant effect.
Based on the described phenomena and research gaps, this study aims to examine the influence of work discipline, work ethic, and work environment factors on the work performance of public officers in a local organization context. It specifically examines and analyses the effects of work discipline, work ethic, and work environment on employees' work performance of local government investment and SMEs' office.

Job Performance
Employee work performance is the work performed in terms of the quality and quantity expected of each employee (Yahya et al., 2012). According to Saefi et al. (2020), employee work performance is the result or overall success rate of a person during a specific period in carrying out their duties.
The achievement of organizational goals is very dependent on human resources and other resources owned by the company (Warokka, 2010). For this reason, employee work performance is considered very significant in achieving organizational goals. The achievement of organizational goals is the success of employees in achieving their best performance. However, each employee may have different influences from different things in the workplace. Some empirical evidence shows evidence of various factors affecting the weak performance of employees. These influencing factors can be used as an evaluation of the causes of decreased employee performance.

Work Discipline
Discipline is a procedure that corrects or punishes subordinates for violating rules or procedures (Budirianti et al., 2020). This finding means that discipline is made to supervise employees in working according to the rules that have been set (Mardalena et al., 2020). According to Dapu (2015), employee discipline can be seen from the responsibilities, attitudes, behavior, and actions of an employee in complying with all forms of regulations while working in the agency. Hidayat (2018) added that the disciplinary factor plays a vital role in implementing employee work, where disciplined employees will come regularly and on time, obey leadership instructions, and work by following predetermined work methods to impact performance improvement.
Previous research conducted by Dapu (2015), Priyambodo and Nugraha (2019), and Suprapti et al. (2020) found a significant effect of work discipline on employee performance.
According to Hidayat (2018), high work discipline is needed by every company to achieve its goals effectively and efficiently. Mardalena et al. (2020) added that efforts to improve discipline are an effort to improve employee performance at the company. Therefore, referring to previous empirical findings, the first hypothesis proposed in this study is: H1: Work discipline affects the work performance of employees.

Work Ethic
Work ethic is a standard of behavior that guides workers in carrying out work and has social relations with other workers (Osibanjo and Akinbode, 2015). According to Nasution et al. (2016), work ethic is a feeling, speech, and action of humans who work within the company. The consistency of an employee's work ethic will result in accountable work results (Arifin and Putra, 2020). According to Lie et al. (2019), employees who have the views and attitudes to appreciate work as noble have a good work ethic. Petty and Hill (2005) add that a better understanding of work ethic will have implications for increased performance.
Previous research conducted by Herawati et al. (2020), Raja et al. (2019), Rismawati (2016), Saban et al. (2020), and Susmianto et al. (2018) found that work ethic had a significant influence on employee work performance. According to Herawati et al. (2020), the low work ethic of employees will affect employees at work, which in turn prevents employees from realizing their targets. Therefore, referring to previous empirical findings, the second hypothesis proposed is: H2: Work ethic affects the work performance of employees.

Work Environment
Work environment is a place where employees carry out their work activities every day (Badrianto and Ekhsan, 2020). According to Dalbokova and Krzyzanowski (2002), inappropriate or bad workplace conditions can cause employees to be unable to work properly, thereby reducing their performance.
Previous research conducted by Akbar (2017) (2014) found a significant influence of the work environment on employee work performance. According to Putri et al. (2019), a good work environment will make employees feel comfortable at work so as to improve their performance. Therefore, referring to the previous empirical findings, the third hypothesis proposed is: H3: Work environment affects the work performance of employees.
The three hypotheses proposed in this study are then summarized in the research model in Figure 1.

III. Research Methods
This type of research is a quantitative research method with causality analysis. Causality analysis is a research design that deals with the formation of cause and effect and involve four elements: correlation, time, theory, and alternative causes (Rohlfing & Schneider, 2018). The sampling method used was the census method, in which all 66 employees of the Yapen Islands Regency Industry, Trade, Cooperatives, and Small and Medium Enterprises Office were the samples.
The research instrument used was in the form of a questionnaire arranged on a 5-point Likert scale. Data were analyzed with the help of SPSS software. The analytical method used for hypothesis testing is multiple linear regression analysis. First, the data were analyzed using validity, reliability, and classical assumptions.

IV. Discussion
Respondents in the study amounted to 66 employees of DPPKUKM, Yapen Islands Regency. The characteristics of the respondents in this study are as follows: From the descriptions of the characteristics of the respondents, it can be seen that the majority of observed employees are male employees (59.1%), with the majority of S1 (42.4%) final education level.  Respondents' answers are then categorized by an interval scale calculated from the highest score minus the lowest score divided by five so that the interval is 0.80. With an interval of 0.80, the categorization system is as follows: 1.00-1.80 (very low); 1.81-2.60 (low); 2.61-3.40 (sufficient); 3,41-4,20 (high); and 4.21-5.00 (very high). The descriptions of the respondents' answers show that the average answers to work discipline, work ethic, work environment, and employee work performance are 4. 52, 4.53, 4.43, and 4.45, respectively, which are in the same category high. Based on these results, the employees' work discipline, work ethic, and work environment are already excellent and are expected to have a strong influence on employee work performance. The validity test was conducted to determine whether the research instrument was valid or not by correlating the scores of each item using the product-moment correlation formula. The validity test results show that all items have a value of r statistics > r table (0.2387) so that all items are declared valid. Furthermore, the reliability test is carried out to determine the reliability of the research instrument using the Cronbach's Alpha coefficient method. Reliability test results show that all variables have a Cronbach's Alpha value > 0.6. Therefore it can be stated that all variables are reliable. This study conducted the classical assumption tests to ensure that the data are normally distributed and free of multicollinearity and heteroscedasticity problems. The normality test is carried out to determine whether, in the regression model, the dependent and independent variables have normally distributed data or not. The normality test was carried out by Kolmogorov Smirnov. The results of the normality test show that the value obtained at Asymp. Sig is 0.200> 0.05, so it can be said that the data is normally distributed.
Furthermore, the multicollinearity test is carried out to determine whether there is a linear relationship between the independent variables. The multicollinearity test in this study was carried out with a correlation matrix. The results show that all independent variables have a tolerance value greater than 0.1 from a VIF value less than 10. This finding means the regression model does not have a multicollinearity problem.
The further test is the heteroscedasticity test. It is to see whether the variants of the independent variables have the same value (homoscedasticity) or different. Heteroscedasticity was analyzed using the Park test, which saw the significance of the independent variable on the dependent variable. The test results show that the significance value of the three independent variables is> 0.05. The finding means that there is no heteroscedasticity problem in the regression model. After the data is declared valid, reliable, and meets the classical assumption test, multiple linear regression tests are carried out. Through the unstandardized coefficients (B) in Table 5, the regression equation can be formed as follows Y = 5.050 + 0.202 X1 + 0.467 X2 + 0.109 X3 In this equation, it can be seen that the work discipline regression coefficient (X1) is positive, meaning that the higher work discipline the employees have, the better their work performance. Then the work ethic (X2) also has a positive coefficient, meaning that the higher the work ethic of the employees, the better their work performance. Finally, the work environment (X3) has a positive coefficient, meaning that the more comfortable the environment will make the employee's work performance better.
The regression analysis results in table 5 show that the work discipline variable has a statistical r-value of 4.212> t table (1.996) and a significance value of 0.000 <0.05. Thus, work discipline affects employees' work performance. So the first hypothesis, which states that work discipline affects employees' work performance, is accepted.
The results of this study provide empirical evidence that the higher the work discipline of employees, the better their work performance. These results support previous research, which found a significant effect of work discipline on employee performance (Dapu, 2015;Priyambodo and Nugraha, 2019;Suprapti et al., 2020). Work discipline that employees have carried out has succeeded in improving their performance. The observed employees as a whole are obedient to work regulations and are always present on time. Starting from carrying out work following the assigned tasks and functions, completing additional work on time, complying with government regulations, and working according to the specified time.
This research also supports the discipline theory put forward by Handoko (2012) and Husein's work discipline (2000). Employees have been moved to follow and comply with work regulations and rules that have been made with a preventive disciplinary approach and already know and understand all existing regulations in the organization without coercion by organizational management, such as the imposition of sanctions in corrective disciplines (Handoko, 2012). This research proves that the formation of work discipline in a preventive way can increase employee work performance.
Further hypothesis testing shows that the work ethic variable has a statistical t-value of 5.864 > t table (1.996) and a significance value of 0.000 <0.05. Thus it can be concluded that work ethic affects the work performance of employees. So these results support the second hypothesis. The higher the work ethic that the employee has, the better his work performance will be.
This study is in line with the findings of previous studies, which state that work ethic variables have a significant relationship with employee performance (Herawati et al., 2020;Raja et al., 2019;Rismawati, 2016;Saban et al., 2020;Susmianto et al., 2018). This finding means that the high work ethic of the employees can improve their performance. Employees have a good work ethic, which can be seen from being neatly dressed and polite following the stipulated provisions and being earnest in carrying out their work, and always maintaining politeness. In addition, a reasonably high educational background for employees can also be a factor in shaping a good work ethic. According to Anoraga's theory(2001), work ethic cannot be separated from the quality of human resource education. Increasing human resources' quality will make a person have a hard work ethic.
The results of testing the third hypothesis indicate that the work environment variable has a statistical t-value of 3.253> t table (1.996) and a significance value of 0.002 <0.05. Thus, it can be concluded that the work environment affects employees' work performance, supporting the statement of the third hypothesis. The more comfortable the work environment is, the better the employee's work performance will be. This study is in line with the findings of previous studies, which found a significant relationship between work environment variables and employee performance (Akbar, 2017;Fatihudin, 2018;Putri et al., 2019;Pratomo & Warokka, 2013;Widodo, 2014). This finding means that every employee has well received the work environment in DPPKUKM to improve their performance. The observed work environment has affected employees where employees try to complete work on time, are confident that they can complete work, are on time at work, and are aware of time discipline. In addition, the observed work environment supports employees to have good relationships with colleagues.
Furthermore, the researcher also conducted the R² test (coefficient of determination) to measure the ability of the variable model work discipline (X1), work ethic (X2), and work environment (X3) in explaining the variations in the employee work performance variable (Y). Based on the results of the Adjusted R Square value of 0.731. This finding means that the model ability of work discipline, work ethic, and work environment variables can affect employee performance by 73.1%. The remaining 26.9% is influenced by other independent variables not examined in this study.

V. Conclusion
This study tested the variables of work discipline, work ethic, and work environment on employees' work performance at DPPKUKM, Yapen Islands Regency. From the results of the tests carried out, the following conclusions can be drawn: 1) there is a significant effect of work discipline on the employees' work performance. The higher the level of employee discipline, the higher the work performance. 2) There is a significant influence of work ethic on the work performance of employees. The better the employee's work ethic, the better their work performance. 3) There is a significant influence of the work environment on the work performance of the employees.
This study has several limitations and weaknesses so that it can improve future studies. The limitations in this study are the selection of variables that affect the work performance of employees, only based on previous research studies and observations of researchers about the situation in the field so that there could be other factors that also influence. The limited sampled employees are also the limitation, suggesting a more considerable number of respondents as the sample.
These findings provide several critical implications for work practices at DPPKUKM, and Yapen Islands Regency. Regarding work discipline variables, leaders in the observed location need to re-evaluate the salary system for employees because some employees feel that their salary is insufficient to meet their needs.
Related to work ethic variables, leaders in the observed location need to increase supervision when employees carry out their work. In addition, the assignment of work must be accompanied by an apparent target time for completion so that employees can maximize their time to work on the task. Furthermore, related to work environment variables, leaders in the observed location must fix noise problems in the workplace by renovating the division of workspace by providing boundaries such as barriers between one room and another. Thus employees will be more focused on work so that their work performance can be even better.
For further researchers, they should develop a research model by adding mediation and moderation variables to explain employee performance better and differentiate from other studies that have researched the direct influence of factors on employee performance. The next researcher also needs to conduct an initial survey to get the variables that are a problem in the research location.