EMPLOYEE PERFORMANCE MEASUREMENT OF PT.

PERTAMINA (PERSERO)
TBBM SEMARANG GROUP WITH AN APPROACH
HUMAN RESOURCES SCORECARD

Dyah Aisyah Putri, Naniek Utami Handayani*)

Industrial Engineering Study Program, Faculty of Engineering, Diponegoro University

Abstract
PT. PERTAMINA (PERSERO) Fuel Oil Terminal (TBBM) Semarang Group has the task
the main function is as a place for Reception, Storage, and Distribution. TBBM Semarang Group
targeting the company's position to be ranked 'GOLD' in 2014 with standard criteria
overall assessment percentage of 90%. From the data obtained, the audit score results POSE (Pertamina)
Operation & Service Excellent) reached 92% in 2013, and in 2014 it increased to
93.9%. However, there was a decrease in 4 elements related to the Human Resources aspect. Objective
from this research to identify selected KPI (Key Performance Indicator) that can support
the increase in POSE value by using the HR Scorecard design, as well as calculating the weight of each
each KPI using the Analytical Hierarchy Process method and measuring performance achievement values with
Scoring System method and evaluation of performance measurement results using Traffic Light System. Design
performance measurement using the Human Resources Scorecard framework generates 17 KPIs that can
supporting the improvement of POSE values, which are 5 KPIs from the perspective of High Performance Work System, 3 HR KPIs
System Alignment, 4 KPIHR Efficiency, and 5 KPIHR Deliverable. From the performance measurement results of TBBM
The Semarang Group is at a green level with a performance result of 98% which is already good. However, it still
there are 2 KPIs that are at the red level, namely employee lateness and maintenance costs
environment. Therefore, the company must make immediate improvements to both KPIs in order to
increase the percentage value of POSE in the Human Resources aspect.

Keywords: human resources scorecard; key performance indicator; performance measurement; analytical
hierarchy process; scoring system and traffic light system

Abstract
The main roles of PT. Pertamina (Persero) Fuel Oil Terminal (TBBM) Semarang Group consist of
Receiving, Storing, and Distribution. In 2004, TBBM Semarang Group targeted the 'GOLD' rank with the
standard of 90% total scoring. The data obtained from POSE (Pertamina operation & Service Excellent)
An audit in 2013 showed a score of 92%, which increased to 93.9% in 2014. However, a downturn was present.
in aspects of Human Resources. The purpose of this study is to identify the selected KPI (Key performance
indicator) to support the increased value POSE using HR Scorecard design, calculate the weight of each
KPI using Analytical Hierarchy Process, measure the value of performance achievement with the Scoring
System, and evaluate performance measurement with Traffic Light System. Designing performance
Measurement framework with Human Resources Scorecard KPI produces 17 KPI scores that could support.
increasing value of POSE, namely 5 KPI score from High Performance Work System, 3 KPI score from HR
System Alignment, 4 KPI score from HR Efficiency, and 5 KPI score from HR Deliverable. Performance
Measurement performed in TBBM Semarang Group shows that the company is currently at the green level.
with 98% performance or satisfactory. On the other hand, there are two KPIs in the red level, which are
delays of employees and environmental preservation. To conclude, improvements on both KPIs should be
urgently implemented for the company to boost POSE percentage in aspects of Human Resources.

human resources scorecard

hierarchy process; scoring system and traffic light system

-------------------------------------------------------------

*)
Correspondence Writer.
[email protected]
Industrial Engineering Journal, Vol. X, No. 3, September 2015 187
Introduction having a strong relationship with the role
PT. PERTAMINA (PERSERO) Terminal the importance of HR in the Semarang Group TBBM, however
Semarang Group Oil Fuel Terminal (TBBM) of the 13 elements contained in the POSE, each
is one of the state-owned enterprises that each sub-element does not have coverage in
moving in the oil and gas sector. One of the duties the field of Human Resources or in other words, not
the main function of TBBM Semarang Group is as there are sub-elements that support achievement
Reception, Storage, and Distribution Place. performance Its SDM if must helping
TBBM Semarang Group plays an important role improving the values of efficiency, effectiveness, and
in distributing fuel in the Java region productivity of company performance.
Center and its surroundings. According to Moeheriono (2012), Therefore, an evaluation is necessary.
one of the most important and capable factors performance measurement system of the company with
determining the success or failure of something a more in-depth approach to Human Resources,
the organization is a factor of human resources or so that with the provision of improvement proposals on
called HRM. In the 'New Economy', Resources several aspects of Human Resources are expected to
Humans (HR) are the foundation for creation. forming a company to improve performance
value. Various studies show that up to 85 its employees. Because, the improvement in performance in
the value percentage of a company is based on Human Resources aspects are very influential for
intangible asset (Ulrich, et al., 2009). companies especially in terms of creating value
As one of the State-Owned Enterprises benefits for the company.
(State-Owned Enterprises) in Indonesia, the Semarang Group TBBM also Based on that problem, then
has performance evaluation. Performance evaluation that specifically the objective of the research is to
located in the Semarang TBBM Group is divided into 2, identifying Key Performance Indicator (KPI)
that is the assessment of organizational performance and assessment selected that can support the increase in value
employee performance. Performance assessment of the organization that POSE using HR design
located in the Semarang Group TBBM is often referred to as POSE Scorecard. Measuring the value of performance achievement
or Pertamina Operation & Service Excellent. each KPI using the method
POSE provides information about the assessment Scoring System and evaluation of performance measurement results
the organization as a whole that is carried out by with the Traffic Light System method. Providing
Pertamina. The assessment system is carried out with recommendations for improving company performance on
cross audit method, meaning TBBM Semarang Human Resources aspect with achievement score
The group evaluates another TBBM, meanwhile another TBBM still low with the brainstorming method.
assessing the Semarang Group TBBM. From the assessment
the results obtained from Research Methodology
each TBBM. This research was conducted in three stages, namely
POSE has 13 elements that are assessed based on preliminary survey, data collection, and analysis.
the entire company, consists of leadership The design phase of the HR Scorecard begins with
and accountability, information and documentation, elaborate the company's vision and mission into
Occupational Health and Safety Risk Assessment Strategy Objectives (SO) and KPIs that can be
Environmental protection K3LL, design and construction presenting human resource performance.
the safety, security, and protection of the operator,
quantity and quality assurance, maintenance and Research Conceptual Model
reliability SDM yang professional and This research is developed based on the model
housekeeping in previous research by Beatty et al. (2003)
state of emergency presented in Figure 1. Based on the model
focus, as well as contractor management and related parties. the design of the HR Scorecard is carried out,
PT. PERTAMINA (PERSERO) TBBM Semarang thus a conceptual model of this research is obtained
The group aims to position the company at as presented in Figure 2.
"GOLD" ranking in 2014 that has
standard criteria percentage assessment in HR Efficiency

the total is 90% (PT. PERTAMINA

(PERSERO) TBBM Semarang Group, 2014). From
the audit result of POSE in 2013 was 92% High Performance Vision and Mission HR Deliverable
and in 2014 it increased to 93.9%. Work System

Based on the observations of the results

audit assessment of POSE, there are 4 elements that
experiencing a decline, the four elements are HR System Alignment

element 1 (Leadership and Accountability), element

3 (Risk Assessment of K3LL), element 12 (Customer Figure 1. Huseid, Beatty Research Reference Model
Focus), and element 13 (Contractor Management and Dan Scheier (2003)
Related Parties). Each of these elements
Industrial Engineering Journal, Vol. X, No. 3, September 2015 188
KPI Confirmation a. Creating Hierarchy
At this stage, confirmation is made from Key The arrangement of the problem hierarchy is
performance indicator (KPI) that has been designed steps to identify problems
researchers obtained from the formulation of vision, mission, the complex into subsystems, elements, sub
and the company's strategy. The confirmation that was made, element, and so on which ultimately
by providing a confirmation questionnaire become clearer and more detailed (Nurmita,
KPI to several people who understand the system 2010).
performance measurement conducted at TBBM b. Determination of Priorities
Semarang Group, specifically to the PPP Supervisor, AHP performs element priority analysis with
HSE Supervisor, and TMC Admin TBBM Semarang pairwise comparison method
Group. comparison) between two elements, until all
the included elements. This matrix form
Analytical Hierarchy Process (AHP) commonly referred to as a square matrix (Nurmita,
At this stage, weighting will be carried out. 2010). This priority is determined based on
against the existing key performance indicators the views of experts and parties that
inside it. The method used is the method interested in that decision, both
Analytical Hierarchy Process (AHP) through directly through discussions, interviews
pairwise comparison questionnaire. Based on either directly or indirectly through a questionnaire.
results of the questionnaire to three respondents (experts) To determine priorities, it is necessary to create
performance measurement of TBBM Semarang Group which is a pairwise comparison among criteria.
PPP Supervisor, HSE Supervisor, and TMC Admin The determination of priorities is obtained from the results
TBBM Semarang Group, thus the result is obtained pairwise comparison questionnaire filling
the pairwise comparison. Answer by the respondents. Respondents to the questionnaire in terms of
respondents on average using the mean these are those who are considered experts in
geometric and then calculations were carried out Human Resources field, namely Supervisor and
weighting using expert choice software Senior Supervisor in each division. The result of
v11. Stages in performing weighting with the questionnaire is then processed using
AHP is as follows: bantuansoftware expert choice v11.

HR Efficiency (HRE)
Employee compensation costs
2. Recruitment costs
3. CostTurnover
4. Environmental maintenance costs
5. Occupational Accident Costs
6. Facility maintenance costs
High Performance Work System
(HPWS) HR Deliverable (HRD)
Optimization of Work Schedule 1. Transfer Information
2. Minimum operational cost Vision of the company. Company Process
3. Sales amount PERTAMINA Job Satisfaction
4. The number of proposals that (STATE OWNED ENTERPRISE) TBBM

Semarang Group 3. Transfer knowledge

implemented 4.Transfer Skill
Employee Training 5. Leadership
6. Reward Cost
7. Employee Delays Level
8. Employee Workload Level
HR System Alignment (HRSA)
Number of customer complaints
2. Computer Availability Ratio
3. Technology availability ratio
4. Service time
5. Delivery accuracy

Figure 2. Conceptual Model of Research

Industrial Engineering Journal, Vol. X, No. 3, September 2015 189

 Employee Performance

HR System
HR Efficiency
Alignment

Cost Cost Cost Cost Ratio Ratio Amount

Cost insurance Cost Time Precision
compensation care treatment availability availability Complain
turnover Recruitment service Delivery
employee environment accident sarsaparilla computer technology Customer
work

High Performance HR System

Work System Alignment

Optimization Cost Number of proposals

Training Level Level Transfer
Cost Amount Transfer Transfer Satisfaction
work schedule operational that employee delay productivity Information Leadership
reward Sales Knowledge Skill Work
implemented employee employee Company
fish

Figure 2. Research Hierarchy Structure before Confirmation

c. Measuring Logical Consistency performance indicators show assessment (Efendi and

The AHP process includes consistency measurement. Hanoum, 2011):
that is what gift value in 1. Higher is Better, indicating the higher the better.
comparison between objects has been conducted systematically achievement/score, then the indication is getting better.
consistency (Nurmita, 2010). Consistency Ratio Score = (actual/target) x 100%
is a parameter that is used for Lower is Better, indicating that the lower it is
checking whether the paired comparison achievement/score, then the indication is getting better.
has been done consistently or not. If Score = (2 - (actual/target)) x 100%
criteria and alternative selection has been carried out 3.Must be Zero, score = 100 if actual = 0, or score
Consistently, the CR value should be < 0.10. = 0 if actual ≠ 0
If there is inconsistency in 4. Must be One, score = 100 if actual = 1, or score
an assessment is still needed = 0 if actual ≠ 1
evaluation revision.
After obtaining the KPI performance achievement score,
Scoring System next each score said
The next stage is scoring. categorized into the Traffic Light System. Limit
system with the method Higher is from each color category is determined
Better, Lower is Better, Must be Zero, and Must be through discussions with the company.
One, this is done to determine the value The colors can simplify matters for the parties involved.
achievement against each key target the company in this case TBBM Semarang Group
performance indicator (KPI), so that it can to evaluate the performance of HR that is not in accordance
an identification of the need for an improvement was conducted. with the desired target (Nurmita, 2010)
Calculation of the performance achievement score for each individual mention that:
KPI is generated with the following provisions, if

Industrial Engineering Journal, Vol. X, No. 3, September 2015 190

The red color indicates that the KPI score is not Evaluation of performance measurement results with
to achieve the target or below the target, it is necessary to The Traffic Light System indicates that KPI 1
improvements will be made. Score limit: KPI < 60. is in the yellow indicator because the KPI score is at
The yellow color indicates that the score between 60–80.
what has been achieved needs to be improved. Score limit: 60 ≤
KPI ≤ 80. Results and Discussion
3. The green color indicates that the score is a. Identify Key Performance Indicators
achieved has met the desired target The objectives that have been set will
company. Score limit: KPI ≥ 80. producing measurement indicators
The following is an example of incorrect calculation performance.
Indicators main (Key
one KPI in the perspective of High Performance Work Performance Indicators) serve as a reference for
System. measuring human resource performance at
Employee Productivity Rate company. The determination of indicators is obtained from
Category: Higher is Better library study that aligns with the objectives
Score = (actual/target) x 100% desired.
Score = (75/100) x 100% Key Performance Indicators obtained
Skor = 75 through stages design
using a Human Resources approach
The scorecard is in table 1.

Table 1. List of Key Performance Indicators for HR Scorecard

Perspective Key Performance Indicator

No
1 HR Efficiency a. Employee compensation costs
b. Recruitment costs
c. Cost turnover
d. Environmental protection costs
e. Work accident insurance costs
f. Maintenance costs of facilities
2 High Performance Work a. Work schedule optimization
System b. Operational costs
c. Total sales
d. The number of proposals that
implemented
e.EmployeeTraining
f. Benefit/award
g. Employee tardiness level
h. Employee workload level
3 HR System Alignment a. Computer availability ratio
b. Technology availability ratio
c. Number of customer complaints
d. Delivery accuracy
e. Service time
4 HR Deliverable a. Transfer Knowledge
b.Transfer of Company Process Information
c.Transfer Skill
d. Leadership
e. Job Satisfaction
Reference source: Becker, 2009

Table 2. List of KPIs After Confirmation

No Perspective Key Performance Indicator

a. Employee compensation costs
1 HR Efficiency b. Turnover cost
c. Environmental maintenance costs

Industrial Engineering Journal, Vol. X, No. 3, September 2015 191

 d. Cost of work accident insurance
e. Routine maintenance costs of infrastructure
2 High Performance a. Work schedule optimization
Work System
Operational costs
c. Number of proposals implemented
Employee Training
e. Reward/award costs
f. Employee tardiness level
g. Employee workload level
3 HR System Alignment a. Computer availability ratio
b. Technology availability ratio
c. Service time
4 HR Deliverable a. Transfer Knowledge
b.Transfer Company Process Information
c.Transfer Skill
d. Leadership
e. Job Satisfaction

Table 3. Summary of Pairwise Comparison Weighting HR Scorecard

Comparison between Perspectives Weight Inconsistency Ratio

High Performance Work System 0.460
HR Efficiency 0.288
0.00153
HR Deliverable 0.164
HR Alignment 0.088
Comparison between High Criteria
Heavy Inconsistency Ratio
Performance Work System
Employee Productivity Level 0.289
Reward/Recognition Cost 0.221
0.03
Operational Costs 0.182
Work Schedule Optimization 0.091
Comparison between High Criteria
Weight Inconsistency Ratio
Performance Work System
Employee Delinquency Rate 0.078
Number of proposals implemented 0.070
Employee Training 0.069
Comparison of HR Alignment Criteria Weights Inconsistency Ratio
Technology Availability Ratio 0.545
Service Time 0.244 0.08
Computer Availability Ratio 0.212
Comparison of HR Efficiency Criteria Robot Inconsistency Ratio
Work Accident Insurance Costs 0.368
Compensation Cost 0.216
Maintenance Costs 0.176 0.07
Environmental Care Costs 0.127
Turnover Cost 0.113
Comparison between HR Deliverable Criteria Robot Inconsistency Ratio
Transfer of Information 0.284
Leadership 0.263
Transfer Knowledge 0.250 0.02
Transfer Skill 0.121
Job Satisfaction 0.083

Industrial Engineering Journal, Vol. X, No. 3, September 2015 192

b. Confirmation of Key Performance Indicator From the results of the performance measurement conducted,
KPI confirmation is carried out by It was found that out of 20 selected KPIs, 2 are located
filling out the designed KPI questionnaire on the red indicator, 6 is on the indicator
to be filled in by the respondent who king, and 12 are on the green indicator.
competent (Senior Supervisor PPP, Supervisor HSE, and KPI that is still in the red indicator
Adm. TMS) in terms of performance assessment at TBBM is the KPI of employee tardiness, and
Semarang Group. This aims to Environmental maintenance cost KPI.
synchronize the researcher’s design with Table 4 shows 2 KPIs that are in
the company's needs. After the process has been carried out red indicator. This means that
confirmation, there has been a reduction in the number of KPIs from the company must immediately make improvements
24 KPIs become 20 KPIs. The KPIs that were eliminated. on that KPI, because if not done
among others, sales volume, recruitment costs, improvement will cause negative effects and
the number of customer complaints and accuracy loss for the company. Delay level
delivery. The four KPIs were eliminated employees can be addressed by implementing
because according to the company, the KPI is not discipline reward and punishment towards everyone
KPIs that play an important role in supporting employees at the Semarang Group TBBM in particular
employee performance improvement in particular and permanent employee. For example, the punishment that
improvement of company performance in general, given to employees who are late
it can be seen in Table 2. in 1 month reaching 3 times, will be given
warning with a warning letter, and if
c. Weighting Results still violating will also be subject to sanctions
Weighting is done using firm like a salary cut.
paired comparison questionnaire that To optimize the KPI of maintenance costs.
given to 3 respondents. Respondents who the environment can be given recommendations
used in this case are those who that is, by creating 2 special budgets so that
understand about Human Resources or systems the budget that has been prepared for maintenance
performance measurement at the Semarang Group TBBM the environment is not used for other purposes,
such as Senior Supervisor PPP, Supervisor HSE, besides that, the budgeted costs are better
and Adm. TMC. From the results of the questionnaire, can be used at any time without having to
then averaged to obtain 1 number waiting in a certain period or month.
to be processed using software Meanwhile, the 6 KPIs that are on the indicators
expert choice v11. The result of the weighting is king is a KPI of productivity level
It can be seen in Table 3. employees, operational costs, number of proposals that
d. Logical Consistency implemented, employee training, ratio
From Table 3, the weighting results are obtained and availability of technology, and compensation costs
its inconsistency ratio. It has been explained on employees in Table 5.
AHP point, that logical consistency is needed Table 5 shows which KPIs are included.
to determine that the measurement has been which is on the yellow indicator. KPI that
done according to the data obtained is included in the yellow indicator means the KPI that
consistent. The requirement for logical consistency is has not met the desired target
less than 10% or CR ≤ 0.1. At the company but it is not too urgent to
Table 3 presents the results of logical consistency from it has been corrected. However, it would be better if
all pairwise comparisons, the result if the company continues to improve
stating that pairwise comparison on the KPIs mentioned above. Because,
that is done between perspectives as well as between Continuous improvement must always be given.
KPIs from a perspective are consistent, because to all aspects related to
the logical consistency is less than 0.1. the implementation of work in the company, and not
e.Scoring System and Traffic Light Evaluation only on aspects that are currently still at
System red or emergency indicator.
The process scoring system is carried out to In addition to the 8 KPIs that are still below target,
harmonizing the performance achievement units of each 12 other KPIs are already at the green indicator.
each KPI that has different units. or in other words, those 12 KPIs are already
The score obtained by each KPI meet the target. However, the company must
determined based on the calculation higher is maintain the KPIs that have been established
better, lower is better, must be zero, and must be on the green indicator in a consistent manner
one. The scoring system determination is based on maintaining employee performance, and continue
results of discussions with the company. Results carrying out continuous improvement.
scoring system and traffic light system can
as seen in appendix B.

Industrial Engineering Journal, Vol. X, No. 3, September 2015 193

 Table 4. Results of KPI Score Calculation using Scoring System Method located at Red Indicator

Traffic Score
Scoring
No Key Performance IndicatorWeight Score Light Ter-
System
System weight
Rate of delay Lower is
5 8% 2.2 0.17
employee Better
Higher is
14 Environmental protection costs 13% 25 3.18
Better

Table 5. Results of KPI Score Calculation using the Scoring System Method located in the Yellow Indicator

Traffic Score
Scoring
No Key Performance IndicatorBobot Score Light Ter-
System
System weight
Productivity level
1 29% Higher is Better 75 21.68
employee
3 Operational costs 18% Higher is Better 67.16 12.22
The number of proposals that
6 7% Higher is Better 73.08 5.12
implemented
7 Employee training 7% Higher is Better 76.19 5.26
Availability ratio
8 55% Higher is Better 75 40.88
technology
Compensation costs
12 22% Higher is Better 68.57 14.81
employee

Conclusion the total achievement of the company's performance is

Results of the performance measurement system evaluation 98.15% and it can be concluded that the performance
that has been done is that there are 20 KPIs that the company in the aspect of Human Resources at present
must support the increase in the value of POSE that It's already good because it's almost reaching 100%.
divided into 4 perspectives HR Scorecard, among From the evaluation of the performance measurement results that
seven KPIs in the perspective of High Performance Work has been performed on 20 KPIs that have been validated,
System, 3 KPIs in the HR System Alignment perspective, It was found that 12 KPIs are in the Green indicator.
5 KPI pada perspektifHR Efficiency, dan 5 KPI pada 6 KPIs are at the Yellow indicator, and 2 KPIs
perspektifHR Deliverable. is on the Red indicator. Recommendation
From the 20 KPIs obtained after conducting the most important improvement at this time is given
evaluation of the performance measurement system with to the 2 KPIs that are on the red indicator,
In the Human Resources approach, there are 17 KPIs that namely employee tardiness and costs
should support the improvement of achievement value 4 environmental care. Level of delay
the POSE element that has decreased since the year employee turnover can be minimized by
The year 2013, in 2014, element 1 is supported by 17. applying discipline to the reward system and
KPI (5 KPIs from the HPWS perspective, 3 KPIHR) punishment, example for employees who are late
System Alignment, 4 KPI HR Efficiency, and 5 KPI more than 3 times in 1 month are given punishment
HR Deliverable), element 3 supported by 6 KPI (1 like a warning letter, and if it still violates
KPIs from the HR System Alignment perspective, 2 HR KPIs subject to strict sanctions such as a deduction
Efficiency, and 3 KPIHR Deliverables), element 12 salary. Meanwhile, to optimize costs
supported by 4 KPIs (3 KPIs from the HR perspective environmental care can be done in ways such as
System Alignment, and 1 KPIHR Deliverable), and allocating the budget into 2 types
element 13 is supported by 5 KPIs (1 KPI on budget, namely multiyears/local investment and
perspectiveHR System Alignment, 2 KPIHR fixed/annual budget, so the budget that has been
Efficiency, and 2 KPI from the HR perspective designed to be optimized.
Deliverable).
After measuring the achievement score References
the performance of each KPI results in Beatty, R.W., Huselid, M.A., Schneier, C.E., (2003).
as follows, namely HPWS of 32.68%, HR New HR Metrics: Scoring on the Business
System Alignment 8.84%, HR Efficiency Scorecard, Organizational Dynamics,32(2),
34.51%, and HR Deliverables 22.12% 107-121.

Industrial Engineering Journal, Vol. X, No. 3, September 2015 194

Efendi, R., and Hanoum, S., (2011). Measurement Nurmita, S. A. (2010). System Design
Corporate Shared Service Performance Employee Performance Measurement with
(Department of Information Technology) PT. HR Scorecard Approach (Case Study at PT.)
Pertamina (Public Corporation) using Kubota Indonesia). Industrial Engineering
IT Scorecard Framework (Case Study: IT) Online Journal. Semarang.
Marketing and Trading Surabaya).ITS Digital Ulrich, D., Huselid, M.A., and Becker, B.E., (2009).
Repository. Sepuluh Institute of Technology The HR Scorecard: Linking People, Strategy
November, Surabaya. and Performance (Indonesian edition).
Moeheriono. 2012. Performance Measurement Based Harvard Business School Press, Boston.
Competence. Jakarta. Rajawali Press.

Industrial Engineering Journal, Vol. X, No. 3, September 2015 195

 Table 6 Results of KPI Score Calculations using the Scoring System Method (Higher is Better, Lower is Better, Must be Zero, and Must be One)
Traffic Light Score
No Key Performance Indicator Unit Weight Current Target Scoring System Score
System Weighted
High Performance Work System 46% 71.05 32.68
1 Employee productivity level % 29% 75 100 Higher is Better 75 21.68
2 reward/award Rp 22% 2500000000 3000000000Higher is Better 83.33 18.42
3 Operational costs Rp 18% 9000000000 13400000000 Higher is Better 67.16 12.22
4 Optimization of work schedules % 9% 90 100 Higher is Better 90 8.19
5 Employee lateness rate % 8% 69.23 35 Lower is Better 2.2 0.17
6 The number of proposals implemented % 7% 73.08 100 Higher is Better 73.08 5.12
7 Employee Training % 7% 76.19 100 Higher is Better 76.19 5.26
HR System Alignment 9% 100.42 8.84
8 Technology availability ratio % 55% 75 100 Higher is Better 75 40.88
9 Service time day 24% 3 7 Lower is Better 157.14 38.34
10 Computer availability ratios % 21% 100 100 Higher is Better 100 21.20
HR Efficiency 29% 119.81 34.51
11 Work accident insurance costs Rp 37% 0 1000000000 Lower is Better 200 73.60
12 Employee compensation costs Rp 22% 2400000000 3500000000 Higher is Better 68.57 14.81
13 Routine maintenance costs for facilities Rp 18% 2500000000 3000000000 Higher is Better 83.33 14.67
14 Environmental protection costs Rp 13% 100000000 400,000,000 Higher is Better 25 3.18
15 Turnover costs Rp 11% 2000000000 2500000000 Lower is Better 120 13.56
HR Deliverable 16% 134.88 22.12
16 Transfer of Information Company Process % 28% 83 75 Higher is Better 110.67 31.43
17 Leadership % 26% 80 50 Higher is Better 160 42.08
18 Transfer Knowledge % 25% 88 60 Higher is Better 146.67 36.67
19 Transfer Skill % 12% 90 75 Higher is Better 120 14.52
20 Job Satisfaction % 8% 92 75 Higher is Better 122.67 10.18
Company HR Performance 98.15

Industrial Engineering Journal, Vol. X, No. 3, September 2015 196