Answers are grounded in this paper and cite their sources.
This study examines the effects of work motivation, compensation, and training on sales employee performance at PT Telkomsel Lubuk Pakam Branch. A quantitative associative approach was used. The population consisted of 53 permanent sales employees, all of whom were included through saturated sampling. Data were collected using a Likert-scale questionnaire and company documentation, then analyzed using descriptive statistics, validity and reliability tests, classical assumptions, multiple linear regression, t-test, F-test, and coefficient of determination. Motivation had a positive and significant effect on performance (B=0.287; β=0.283; t=2.012; p=0.050), compensation had a positive and significant effect (B=0.770; β=0.748; t=3.921; p<0.001), while training had a significant negative effect (B=-0.488; β=-0.446; t=-2.100; p=0.041). Simultaneously, the three predictors significantly affected performance (F=7.901; p<0.001). R² was 0.326 and Adjusted R² was 0.285. Compensation was the strongest predictor. The negative training coefficient highlights the importance of training-job fit, delivery methods, transfer of learning, and training-time management in sales work.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Nandani et al. (2026) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: