Compensation has a relationship with work motivation. In the context of work, a person will be compensated if he or she has performed his duties and responsibilities. Rewarding employees monetarily might inspire them to work harder. Workers will be more motivated to accomplish a good job if they are well compensated for their efforts. People will work harder and more efficiently if their pay is commensurate with their expectations. Prior studies by Sholeh et al. (2024) and Nugraha (2023) corroborate this idea, showing that pay boosts motivation in the workplace.

Workers' pay is the money they get from their employer in exchange for the work they do. Workplace discipline, on the other hand, is the mentality of a person who is eager to follow the rules and regulations that are in place. Employees' actions in performing their jobs can be influenced by the amount of money they get. Workers will be more likely to follow corporate policy and

discipline themselves if their pay is commensurate with the work they put in. By providing appropriate compensation, of course, it will increase the work discipline of employees. This is supported by previous research conducted by Aryani et al. (2021) results that compensation has a positive and significant influence on work discipline.

A salary or wage administration process or it can be called compensation requires consideration or balance in a calculation. In this case, compensation is something that needs to be considered before being given to employees in the form of salaries or wages. These considerations can be in the form of the results of the employee's performance that are optimal and in accordance with what the boss expects or not. If employees get compensation in accordance with their expectations, then compensation can arouse employee motivation, this will certainly make employees better. Several studies have shown that compensation can motivate employees to perform better on the job. For example, Handoko et al. (2021), Lestari & Febrian (2024), Sholeh et al. (2024), Nugraha (2023), and Sudaryono & Sutianingsi (2023) all hit this mark.

Workers' pay is the money they get from their employer in exchange for the work they do. Workplace discipline, on the other hand, is the mentality of a person who is eager to follow the rules and regulations that are in place. Employees' actions in performing their jobs can be influenced by the amount of money they get. Workers will be more likely to follow corporate policy and discipline themselves if their pay is commensurate with the work they put in. Naturally, it will promote work discipline by paying people appropriately. The findings of prior studies by Handoko et al. (2021), Lestari & Febrian (2024), Aryani et al. (2021), Sutianingsih (2023), Nurhalizah & Oktiani (2024) corroborate this idea, demonstrating that remuneration significantly and positively affects employee performance via work discipline.

Work Motivation

Motivation is a process that explains an individual's intensity, direction and perseverance to achieve his or her goals (Pratikno; & Sutianingsih, 2023) Work motivation includes efforts, organizational goals, and needs. The elements of effort are a measure of intensity. The directed efforts must be consistent with the organization's goals, while the need is an internal situation that causes certain results to appear attractive (Busro, 2018) Fitria & Sunuharyo (2017)), stated that motivation is a process that is carried out to motivate people so that their behavior can be directed to real efforts to achieve the goals that have been set. Motivation is a reaction that arises from within a person because of external stimuli that affect him (Manizar, 2015) Motivation can be interpreted as a group

of factors that cause individuals to behave in certain ways. Motivation is an important consideration for leaders because motivation together with the ability of environmental factors greatly affects individual performance (Rachmawati, 2009)

According to Rumondor (2013) motivation is an encouragement in directing the power and potential of subordinates or employees, so that they can work together productively and successfully achieve goals. So, it can be said that motivation is an effort that generates enthusiasm or encouragement at work. With motivation in subordinates or employees, it will cause high enthusiasm for work, which will affect employee performance so that employees can be more productive and can achieve their goals. This is supported by previous research conducted by Sudaryono & Sutianingsi (2023) showing that work motivation has a positive and significant influence on employee performance.

Work Discipline

Discipline in the workplace is a technique or way that an organization does to survive. Highly disciplined employees will follow all the rules to get the job done on time (Sutianingsih, 2023) Managers can use work discipline as a communication technique to make their staff members improve their behavior and become more aware and eager to follow relevant company policies and social standards (Sutrisno, 2019) Work discipline is defined by Muna and Isnowati (2022) as "the disposition of respect, appreciation, obedience, and compliance with all relevant regulations, whether written or unwritten," and the ability to carry out one's responsibilities and authority without fear of repercussions.

According to Sutrisno (2019) work discipline is one of the aspects of the work system that must be considered by every organization or company in order to improve the performance or productivity of an organization. So, in this case, work discipline is an important thing in an organization or company so it needs to be considered, because an organization or company that has employees with a high spirit of work discipline can help productivity so that the work can be completed on time. When employees are deeply committed to their profession and have a strong feeling of personal responsibility, the level of discipline in the workplace improves. Work discipline has a favorable and substantial impact, as shown by prior study by Sutianingsih (2023) and Nurhalizah & Oktiani (2024).

Convergent validity measures the consistency between variable measurement indicators and the theoretical notion that underlies their existence. The concept of convergent validity requires highly linked construct indicators. The convergent validity test may be assessed using outer loadings and average variance retrieved. Tables with outer loadings indicate the large association between an indicator and a latent variable. The loading factor must exceed 0.6 to be valid. PLS Algorithm Report SmartPLS provides output outer loadings. The table and route graphic below show construct indicators:

Within the criteria-satisfying measurement model. We may conclude that all question items for each variable utilized in this study are legitimate and can be used for the next step of analysis since, as indicated in Table 1 and Picture 1. Conceptual Framework, all items have a loading value larger than 0.60. It is claimed that each of these indicators may accurately assess latent variables, and these data prove it. Reliability will be considered after convergent validity. One definition of reliability is an indicator's capacity to consistently and frequently provide deep values across all research activities. When evaluating dependability, AVE is the metric employed. By taking the error rate into account, the AVE value attempts to quantify the extent to which a build component's indications vary. It is more important to test using AVE values than with composite reliability. An AVE rating of 0.50 is considered minimally acceptable. The following table displays the AVE results generated from the SmartPLS 3.0 PLS Algorithm Report.

From table 2 above, it can be seen that the AVE output obtained by each latent variable is greater than 0.5, which shows that each latent variable is said to be valid.

Discriminant validity measures an indicator's distinction in assessing instrument constructs. Cross loading, the correlation coefficient of the indicator to its association (loading) compared to the counter construct, may be used to verify discriminant validity. The variable indicator's cross loading value must be

> 0.70 and greater than other variable indicators' in reflecting a construct.

From the table above, it can be seen that the cross loading value of the indicator on the variable (printed in bold) is the largest value compared to the cross loading of the indicator on other variables. From this evaluation, it can be said that the indicators of all research variables for variable indicators that are reflective are valid to reflect the variables they measure.

Composite reliability requirements of the indicator block assess build dependability. The build is trustworthy if its composite reliability is over 0.70. Cronbach's Alpha SmartPLS 3.0. The following table shows composite reliability values.

From the table above, it can be seen that the output composite reability obtained by each latent variable is greater than 0.70. With the resulting value, all constructs have good reliability according to the minimum value limit that has been required.

According to the three determination coefficient analysis results in the table above, the employee performance variable's R2 value is 0.437. This suggests that remuneration, work incentive, and work discipline explain 43.7% of employee performance characteristics, whereas other variables not included in this study explain the remainder. Additionally, the determination coefficient (R2) for the work motivation variable is 0.386, meaning that 38.6% of its variance can be explained by the compensation variable and the rest by other variables not included in this study. In addition, the determination coefficient (R2) for the work discipline variable is 0.189, meaning that 18.9% of its variance can be explained by the compensation variable and the rest by other variables not included in this study.

Employee performance is significantly impacted by the salary component, according to the study's conclusions. Given that the computed t-value (9.472) > t table (1.652) and the P value at the compensation level of (0.000) < (0.05), it is clear that this is the case. Thus, it is clear that pay rates significantly impact productivity in the workplace. Handoko et al. (2021) and Lestari & Febrian (2024) found that pay had a favorable and substantial effect on workers' productivity, lending credence to these findings.

The study found that pay is a key determinant of intrinsic motivation. That is evident from the estimated t-value of 8.979, which is more than the t-table value of 1.652, and the P-value at the compensation level of 0.000, which is less than 0.05. This proves that monetary reward significantly and positively affects the desire to labor. The findings are corroborated by studies that show that remuneration significantly and positively affects motivation to work Sholeh et al. (2024) and Nugraha (2023).

The study found that pay rate is a key determinant of workplace discipline. This is evident from the t-value value (5.550) being more than the t table value (1.652) and the P value at the compensation level of 0.000 being less than 0.05. Thus, it is clear that pay has a substantial and favorable effect on discipline in the workplace. Aryani et al. (2021) found that pay had a positive and statistically significant effect on workplace discipline, lending credence to these findings.

The study found that pay rate is a key determinant of workplace discipline. The results may be observed from the t-value calculation, which is more than the t-table value (3.289) and the P value on work incentive, which is less than 0.05 (0.001). Employee performance is positively and significantly affected by job motivation. Work motivation significantly and positively affects employee performance, according to study by Sudaryono and Sutianingsi.

The study found that pay rate is a key determinant of workplace discipline. Based on the t-value calculated (3.346) > t table (1.652) and the P value in the work discipline (0.001 < 0.05), it is evident that this is the case. Employee performance is positively and significantly impacted by work discipline. Sutianingsih (2023) and Nurhalizah and Oktiani (2024) found that work discipline significantly and positively affects employee performance, lending credence to these findings.

According to the study's findings, the remuneration component motivates employees and hence affects their performance. This is evident from the t-value, which is more than the t table value (1.652) and the P value at compensation, which is less than 0.05 (0.005). Paying employees a fair wage motivates them to do a good job, which in turn boosts their performance. Past studies by Handoko et al. (2021), Lestari & Febrian (2024), Sholeh et al. (2024), Nugraha (2023), and Sudaryono & Sutianingsi (2023) have all reached the same conclusion: that pay motivates workers to do a good job.

The study found no statistically significant relationship between the salary variable and employee performance as measured by intrinsic motivation. This is evident from the t-value, which is more than the t table value (1.652) and the P value at compensation, which is less than 0.05 (0.005). These findings demonstrate that remuneration significantly and positively influences employee performance through disciplinary measures at work. Prior studies by Handoko et al. (2021), Lestari & Febrian (2024), Aryani et al. (2021), Sutianingsih (2023), and Nurhalizah & Oktiani (2024) substantiate the idea that pay has a positive and substantial impact on performance in the workplace via enforcing discipline.