MEDIASI PERTUKARAN INFORMASI PADA PENGARUH INSENTIF TERHADAP KUALITAS KEPUTUSAN DENGAN KEPERCAYAAN SEBAGAI VARIABEL MODERATING
Abstract
kualitas keputusan telah dilakukan sebelumnya oleh Kelly (2010). Struktur insentif
yang digunakan adalah insentif grup dan individu. Riset kali ini merupakan
pengembangan dari penelitian Kelly (2010), yaitu dengan mempertimbangkan
variabel kepercayaan dalam kondisi grup. Partisipan dalam penelitian ini adalah
mahasiswa Universitas Katolik Soegijapranata Semarang. Teknik analisis data
dengan pengujian SmartPLS.
Dari hasil analisis data, didapatkan bahwa kepercayaan tidak memiliki efek kontijen
terhadap hubungan struktur insentif dan pertukaran informasi dan kepercayaan lebih
baik menjadi variabel independen daripada variabel moderasi. Hasil analisis yang
lain, didapatkan bahwa pertukaran informasi tidak dapat memediasi hubungan
struktur insentif dan kualitas keputusan. Sehingga dapat disimpulkan bahwa struktur
insentif dan kepercayaan tidak selalu bisa meningkatkan kinerja.
Keywords
Full Text:
PDFReferences
Beersma, Hollenbeck, 2002. ?Coorperation, Competitive, and TeamPerformances: Toward a
Contingency Approach?. Hal 7,16
Dwyer, F. Robert,. Schur, Paul H., Oh, Sejo., 1987. Developing Buyer-Seller Relationship.
Herdian Dito, Anoki. 2010. Pengaruh Kompensasi Terhadap Kinerja Karyawan PT. Slamet
Langgeng Purbalingga Dengan Motivasi Kerja Sebagai Variabel Intervening.
Hollingshead, A. B. 1996. The rank-order effect in group decision making. Organizational
Behavior and Human Decision Processes 68 3: 181193.
Johnson, D. W., G. Maruyama, R. Johnson, and D. Nelson. 1981. Effects of cooperative,
competitive, and individualistic goal structures on achievement: A meta-analysis.
Psychological Bulletin 89 (1) : 4762.
Kelly, Khim, 2010. The Effects of Incentives on Information Exchange and Decision Quality
in Groups.
Kohn, Alfie, 1993. Why Incentive Plans Cannot Work?.
Koontz, H. 1986. Manajemen. Alih bahasa oleh: Budi Susetyo Edisi 8. Jakarta: Erlangga.
Ravenscroft, S., and S. Haka. 1996. Incentive plans and opportunities for information
sharing. Behavioral Research in Accounting 8: 114133.
Rowe, C. 2004. The effect of accounting report structure and team structure on performance
in crossfunctional teams. The Accounting Review 79 (4) : 11531180.
Shirani, A., M. Aiken, and J. G. P. Paolillo. 1998. Group decision support systems and
incentive structures. Information & Management 33 (5) : 231240.
Sprinkle, G. B. 2003. Perspectives on experimental research in managerial accounting.
Accounting, Organizations and Society 28 (2/3) : 287318.
Stasser, G., and W. Titus. 1985. Pooling of unshared information in group decision making:
Biased information sampling during discussion. Journal of Personality and Social
Psychology 48 (6) : 14671478.
, S. I. Vaughan, and D. D. Stewart. 2000. Pooling unshared information: The benefits
of knowing how access to information is distributed among group members.
Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes 82 (1): 102116.
Taylor, E. Z. 2006. The effect of incentives on knowledge sharing in computer-mediated
communication: An experimental investigation. Journal of Information Systems 201:
116.
Towry, K. L. 2003. Control in a teamwork environmentThe impact of social ties on the
effectiveness of mutual monitoring contracts. The Accounting Review 78 (4) : 1069
Van Alstyne, M. S. 2005. Create colleagues, not competitors. Harvard Business Review 83
(9) : 2428.
Winquist, J. R., and J. R. Larson, Jr. 1998. Information pooling: When it impacts group
decision making. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology 74 (2) : 371377.
Wittenbaum, G. M., A. B. Hollingshead, and I. C. Botero. 2004. From cooperative to
motivated information sharing in groups: Moving beyond the hidden profile
paradigm. Communication Monographs 71 (3) : 286310
Zand, D. E. 1972. Trust and managerial problem solving. Administrative Science Quarterly
(2) : 229239.
DOI: https://doi.org/10.24167/jab.v12i24.440
Print ISSN : 1412-775X | online ISSN : 2541-5204 JAB Stats