Proposed Determination of Work Criteria Standards on OMAX Ratio Performance to Increase Productivity

Abstract

This study focuses on measuring the productivity of PT.X, especially the welding and painting unit, based on the total realization of production, several employees, working hours, overtime hours, and lost hours of employees. The purpose of this study is to propose a strategy for improving the productivity ratio of the welding and painting unit, which is still below the standard by setting performance criteria standards. The method used is the objective matrix (OMAX) and root cause analysis (RCA) which is carried out using six ratios of productivity measurement and looking for the root cause of the ratio at a level below the standard. The results show that three ratios are still below the standard of the six productivity measurement ratios, such as ratios 2, 3, and 5. These ratios need to be improved by increasing the realization of production results, reducing the number of absent workers, and reducing the total working hours of employees every month. Based on the study results, improvements in the three ratios were able to increase the productivity index of PT.X's welding and painting units.

Full text

JURNAL ILMIAH TEKNIK INDUSTRI
ISSN: 1412-6869 (Print), ISSN: 2460-4038 (Online)
Journal homepage: http://journals.ums.ac.id/index.php/jiti/index
doi: 10.23917/jiti.v21i1.17432
49
Proposed Determination of Work Criteria Standards on OMAX
Ratio Performance to Increase Productivity
Umi Tri Utami
1a

, Utaminingsih Linarti
1b
, Annie Purwani
1c
, Susanto Sudiro
2d
Abstract. This study focuses on measuring the productivity of PT.X, especially the welding and painting unit, based
on the total realization of production, several employees, working hours, overtime hours, and lost hours of
employees. The purpose of this study is to propose a strategy for improving the productivity ratio of the welding and
painting unit, which is still below the standard by setting performance criteria standards. The method used is the
objective matrix (OMAX) and root cause analysis (RCA) which is carried out using six ratios of productivity
measurement and looking for the root cause of the ratio at a level below the standard. The results show that three
ratios are still below the standard of the six productivity measurement ratios, such as ratios 2, 3, and 5. These ratios
need to be improved by increasing the realization of production results, reducing the number of absent workers, and
reducing the total working hours of employees every month. Based on the study results, improvements in the three
ratios were able to increase the productivity index of PT.X's welding and painting units.
Keywords: objective matrix, performance standards, productivity, root cause analysis
I. I
NTRODUCTION
1
The development of technology and
information in Indonesia, which is increasingly
advanced, will bring competition for the industrial
world increasingly tight. This competition occurs,
especially in the manufacturing world. This
becomes a reference for changing existing
management and resources for the better. The
benchmark that companies can use to improve
management and resources is productivity.
Productivity in a company must always be
considered and monitored because productivity
can be one of the benchmarks for companies to
be successful in resource utilization. Productivity
measurement is a method to determine the
1
1
Industrial Engineering Department, Industrial Technology
Faculty, Ahmad Dahlan University, Yogyakarta, 55116,
Indonesia
2
Department of Mechanical Engineering, Faculty of
Engineering, Pancasila University, Jakarta Selatan, 12640,
Indonesia
a
email: umi1800019089@webmail.uad.ac.id
b
email: utaminingsih.linarti@ie.uad.ac.id
c
email: annie.purwani@ie.uad.ac.id
d
email: susantosudiro@yahoo.co.id

corresponding author
Submited: 03-02-2022 Revised: 25-04-2022
Accepted: 12-06-2022
balance between human resources contributed
and the output obtained.
Productivity has a relationship with
effectiveness and efficiency in the use of resource
(inputs) in producing output. The effectiveness
and efficiency of the company can be used as a
benchmark for productivity because the goal of
productivity is effectiveness and efficiency itself
(Nurmayetti, 2019).
Existing resources in a company must be
used effectively by utilizing the organizer's skills
(Ramadhani, 2004). There is a balance between
the output obtained, and the input processed.
Good productivity will help reduce the wastage of
time, energy, and various other inputs that exist in
a company. This will result in multiple benefits for
the company, such as saving time, using power
effectively, and achieving business goals that are
carried out optimally.
Employee performance, commonly called
human resources, is one indicator that has an
important role for the company. One company
that makes human resources an indicator that has
an important role is PT. X. PT. X is a company
engaged in manufacturing, especially the
manufacture of hospital equipment. Industry
competition is increasing every year. The number
of requests from consumers, which is also
increasing, is a boost for companies always to
strive to increase productivity in existing
production units. One of the existing production

Utami et al./ Proposed Determination of Work Criteria Standards on OMAX…. JITI, Vol.21(1), Jun 2022, 49-62
50
units at PT. X stands for Welding and Painting
Unit. The increase in the number of consumer
demands makes the production targets that must
be achieved by operators also increase. However,
the reality is that companies often do not meet
the production targets that have been set. The
following is the target data, realization, and
production shortage of PT. X from June 2020 to
May 2021.
Figure 1 shows the production targets and
realizations that have not yet been achieved. The
blue diagram in Figure 1 shows the production
target, while the orange chart shows the
completion or achievement of production. The
production target always has more value than the
production achievement. This indicates a
difference between the production target set by
the company and the production realization every
month. The difference in numbers or the
difference between the target and the production
realization set by the company is between 3% to
12% in each period. The non-achievement
between the target and the realization of
production in each period or month will cause a
production shortage, as shown in Figure 2.
The shortage of products shown in the form
of percentages and product units is shown in
Figure 2. The larger the rate is shown in Figure 2,
the more distant the achievement of production
against the production targets that have been set.
Of course, this needs to be improved and
addressed because this problem can affect the
company's productivity, so it is necessary to
analyze the causes of production, which often
does not meet the target.
Several factors can cause production not to
meet targets, such as high employee lost hours,
the number of defective products produced in
production, too few employees, incorrect total
working hours, material delays, damaged
materials, or traffic jams during delivery. These
factors have the same potential in decreasing and
increasing productivity, so in conducting research,
some of these factors will be very considered in
measuring productivity.
Dominant factors that can cause production
targets not to be achieved are material delays,
damaged materials, and congestion at the time of
delivery (dispatch). Researchers categorize these
factors as external factors. However, other factors
can cause production targets in a company not to
be achieved, such as damage to production
machines, maintenance of production machines,
accumulation of goods, and employee
attendance. These factors are categorized as
internal factors (Sumarna & Rabbani, 2016). In
this study, the factor that dominates the
production target that is not achieved is the
performance factor. An undisciplined workforce
will make lost hours at the company high. The
lost hours consist of absences, absenteeism,
lateness, illness, and leave. However, internal
Figure 1. Production Target and Realization of PT. X
Figure 2. Production Shortage of PT. X
3213
2531
2456
2821
3265
2895
2376
2743
2675
2267
2215
1435
3079
2296
2287
2589
3197
2794
2253
2567
2458
2063
2054
1264
June
July
August
September
October
November
December
January
February
March
April
May
Production Target and Actual June
2020 to May 2021
Actual Production Production target
June, 134,
7% July, 235,
12%
August,
169, 8%
September,
232, 12%
October,
68, 3%
November,
101, 5%
December,
123, 6%
January,
176, 9%
February,
217, 11%
March,
204, 10%
April, 161,
8%
May, 171,
9%
Short Production Month June 2020 To
May 2021

Jurnal Ilmiah Teknik Industri
p
-ISSN 1412-6869 e-ISSN 2460-4038
51
factors such as labor positively and significantly
influence production results. The more workers
there are in a company, the more production will
increase. However, other factors can change the
statement that the more workers, the more
production will increase, namely, workers who are
less capable of technology and workers with low
human resources (Putra & Sobandi, 2019).
Difficulties in meeting production targets are
common in companies. This can affect company
productivity, and it is necessary to measure and
analyze the causes of the problem. Several
methods can be used in measuring productivity.
One method of measuring productivity is the
Objective Matrix (OMAX). Company productivity
is influenced by many factors, both internal and
external. These factors are very complex and
interrelated. Therefore, OMAX is widely used by
researchers to measure productivity.
Measurement using OMAX involves many factors
and ratios, so it is very suitable for companies to
know their productivity level through OMAX. In
this study, OMAX was used to analyze the factors
that caused the production target not to be
achieved. OMAX will show ratios with flawed
criteria that cause the problem.
II. R
ESEARCH
M
ETHOD
The research methodology used in this study
has three main stages. The first stage of the
research is a field study and literature study. The
field study was conducted by conducting a
preliminary survey at PT.X. Researchers conducted
interviews with operators in the welding and
painting unit at the field study stage. Interviews
were conducted in several locations so that the
information obtained through interviews came
from in-depth information. Meanwhile, the
literature study was carried out by collecting
accurate sources of information from several
references such as journals, the web, and other
literature. In addition, at this stage of the
literature study, researchers conducted in-depth
learning with field supervisors at PT.X. The lesson
discusses previous research with the same topic
and in the same unit so that this research
produces a new discussion compared to previous
research. Based on the stages that have been
carried out, the problems and objectives of the
research can be formulated.
The second stage of research is data
collection and processing. Primary data and
interviews with the parties concerned were
conducted to obtain some views on current
conditions. The parties selected as resource
persons were the head of a production, the
welding, and painting unit, and the welding and
painting unit, operator. Data processing in this
study was carried out using the objective matrix
(OMAX) method as a tool to measure the
productivity level of the welding and painting
unit.
Measurement of productivity using the
Objective Matrix (OMAX) can be done using six
ratios, including (Setiowati, 2017):
1.  


(1)
2.   


(2)
3.   


(3)
4.   
!"# 
 
(4)
5. $  
%&'&
'&
(5)
6. (  
)" 

(6)
The standard performance and performance
scale of the OMAX method consists of a scale of 1
to a scale of 10. Calculating the average for each
performance ratio is placed at level 3. Then the
smallest scale obtained from the smallest value
when calculating the ratio is set at level 0. the
company wants to achieve is placed at level 10.
When level 0, level 3, and level 10 have been
filled, the next step is to determine level 1 to level
3 and level 3 to level 10. This determination is
called performance scale calculation. Determining
the scale at each level is done using the following
formulation (Avianda, Yuniati, and Yuniar 2014).
*+,+- . -+,+- 
"/0" 1
2/013
(7)
In addition, the formula used to determine the
value of level 3 to level 10 is as follows.

Utami et al./ Proposed Determination of Work Criteria Standards on OMAX…. JITI, Vol.21(1), Jun 2022, 49-62
52
*+,+- . -+,+-4  
"510"/
2510/3
(8)
Levels 1 to 10 in the calculation of
productivity in this study can be seen in Figure X.
The values listed in the matrix are generated from
analyses using formula (7) and formula (8).
Quality Efficiency Effectivity
Ratio (1)
Ratio (2) Ratio (3)
Ratio (4)
Ratio (5)
Ratio (6)
130.061 28.959 22.875 42.125 36.233 4.865 10
126.190 27.315 21.273 39.285 34.042 4.593 9
122.320 25.671 19.672 36.446 31.850 4.321 8
118.449 24.027 18.070 33.606 29.659 4.049 7
114.578 22.384 16.468 30.767 27.468 3.777 6
110.707 20.740 14.866 27.927 25.277 3.505 5
106.837 19.096 13.265 25.088 23.085 3.233 4
102.966 17.452 11.663 22.248 20.894 2.961 3
102.685 14.688 10.358 19.524 17.311 2.667 2
102.404 11.923 9.052 16.799 13.728 2.374 1
102.123 9.159 7.747 14.075 10.145 2.080 0
18.405 17.791 17.791 15.337 14.724 15.951
Weighted
score
Figure 3. OMAX Matrix
The measurement of the productivity index is
carried out to know the increase or decrease in
the performance ratio during the study period.
The productivity index can be measured minus
the standard by the current performance
indicator (PI(t)). Performance indicators (PI) show
the percentage increase or decrease to the
current performance indicators (PI(t)). The formula
for calculating the index of productivity (IP) is as
follows (Avianda et al. 2014).
67  
89::;<=>;:?@:AB<C;D<EFCB=@: 0/11
/11
x100 `(9)
The third stage of the research is analyzing
productivity measurement using Root Cause
Analysis (RCA). Problems in a company need to
be investigated and analyzed in a structured
manner so that the things that cause problems
can be identified and the actions that need to be
taken to eliminate problems can be identified.
The method used to identify issues and find
appropriate measures is Root Cause Analysis
(RCA). Various approaches, tools, and techniques
to identify root causes of problems can be found
in RCA (Wangen et al. 2017).
The RCA method consists of five stages
(Kuswardana, Andikha, Novi Eka Mayangsari
2017), Namely: Problem identification (problem
identification stage is carried out to reveal the
problem in detail and clarity regarding what
happened what was the cause of the problem);
Data analysis (data analysis stage is a critical stage
that must be passed before a researcher looks at
the factors that cause problems); Causal mapping
(this stage is carried out using the "the five why's"
method. This method contains five questions that
will be used as a tool to study the things that
underlie the problem); Identification of root
causes (if the analysis has exceeded its capacity in
finding the root of the problem, the researcher
will eventually identify the facts that exist in the
community); Recommendation or implementation
(this stage is carried out to validate the problem
will arise from the root cause and ensures that
corrective steps are appropriate to manage what
is causing the pain, or it will become a new
problem).
The RCA method has been analyzed by three
studies regarding its usefulness and limitations.
All three studies have agreed that the RCA
method has a constraint that focuses on the
dynamic error of the researcher. Root Cause
Analysis has proven to be a method that
produces decisions as expected in theory. This is
because many recommendations are generated
from this technique and can prevent the same
thing from happening again (Martin-Delgado et
al. 2020). The performance standards are
determined through simulations based on critical
points in the ratio measure. This simulation is
based on the objective matrix ratio (OMAX).
III. R
ESULT AND
D
ISCUSSION
This section will discuss the results of
measurement and analysis of productivity using
the factual matrix (OMAX) and further
investigation of productivity that is at a poor level
using Root Cause Analysis (RCA). Based on the
calculations and analysis that has been done, it
can be concluded about the root of the problem
and the proposal for the productivity ratio of PT.
X, which is at an insufficient level.
Objective Matrix (OMAX)
The calculation of productivity using the
objective matrix (OMAX) method involves six

Jurnal Ilmiah Teknik Industri
p
-ISSN 1412-6869 e-ISSN 2460-4038
53
ratios, including ratio one regarding total
production to total good product, ratio two
regarding total production to the entire
workforce, ratio three regarding total production
to full working hours, ratio four regarding total
hours overtime to total hours worked, a ratio of 5
regarding the entire absent workforce to the real
force and a ratio of 6 regarding the total defective
products to the whole production.
Productivity calculations show that several
ratios are still at an insufficient level. These ratios
are indicated by ratio 2, ratio 3, and ratio 5. In the
graph, each ratio has been marked with a red line
that shows the minimum percentage that must be
achieved each period to be included in the
excellent level. The existence of several ratios that
are still at a lousy level indicates that it is
necessary to conduct further analysis of the
causes and suggestions that can make each
productivity ratio within the suitable criteria. The
following are the results of the calculation of
productivity ratios at PT.X.
Figure 4 shows ratio one, which compares
the number of good products and the total
number of products produced. The highest value
was obtained in the August 2020, which was
104.04%, where the total products made were
2287, and the sound effects were 2198.
Compared with the initial stage value of 102.12%,
there is an increase of 2%. The lowest value was in
January 2020, with a ratio of 102.12%, where the
total production was 3079, and the excellent
product was 3015. The higher the ratio 1, the
better the performance of ratio 1. The standard
value for ratio 1 is 102.96%. When the ratio
exceeds the value of 102.96%, the balance is said
to be good, but it is said to be harmful if it is
below the standard value. The red line on the
graph shows the normal weight at ratio 1. In this
ratio, points experience a significant decline,
namely in April and May 2021. This ratio is
influenced by good products and the total
produced product. The number of good products
produced depends on the thoroughness and
focus of the workers. In April and May 2021, there
were restrictions on community activities (PPKM)
launched by the DIY government to control the
rate of Covid-19 (Dan et al. 2020). In April and
May 2021, the company also implemented WFH
(Work From Home) and WFO (Work From Office)
due to the company's increasing number of
Covid-19 cases. This shows a link; workers have
decreased focus due to high Covid-19 chances
and government policies that impose restrictions
on activities that affect companies to carry out a
work shift system.
Figure 5 shows ratio two, which compares
the number of products produced and the
amount of labor used. This ratio states the level of
speed of labor production. The highest value was
obtained in the balance for October 2020, which
was 23.16%, where the total products produced
were 3197 units with a workforce of 138 people.
Compared with the initial stage value of 22.31%,
there was an increase of 3.83%. The lowest value
is in May 2021, with a ratio of 9.15%, where the
total production is 1264 units with a workforce of
138 people. Compared with the initial stage value,
Figure 4. Ratio Graph 1
Figure 5. Ratio Graph 2
101
101.5
102
102.5
103
103.5
104
104.5
June
July
August
Septem…
October
Novem…
Decem…
January
February
March
April
May
Number of Good Products to Total
Number of Products Produced
0
5
10
15
20
25
Number of Products Produced Against
Number of Workers

Utami et al./ Proposed Determination of Work Criteria Standards on OMAX…. JITI, Vol.21(1), Jun 2022, 49-62
54
there was a decrease of 58.948%. The red line on
the graph shows the standard value for ratio 2.
The standard weight for ratio 2 is 17.45%. If the
value of the ratio 2 exceeds 17.45%, the better
the ratio performance. The greater the value of
the ratio 2, the better the performance.
Figure 6 shows ratio three, which compares
the number of products produced and the total
hours worked. This ratio states the amount of
production per hour. The highest value was
obtained in the balance for June 2020, 18.3%,
where the total products produced were 3079
pieces with a full working hour of 168.25 hours.
The highest value was in the early period of the
study. The lowest value is in May 2021, with a
ratio level of 7.74%, where the total production is
1264 pieces with a total of 163.15 working hours.
Compared with the initial stage value, there was a
decrease of 57.66%. The red line on the graph
shows the standard weight at ratio 3. The
standard value at ratio 3 is 11.66%. If the ratio 2
exceeds the normal value, the perrformance will
be better.
Figure 7 shows ratio four, which compares
the number of overtime hours and the total
number of hours worked. The highest value is the
smallest ratio percentage value, namely in April
2021, with a ratio rate of 14.07%, where the
number of overtime hours is 27.56 hours.
Compared with the initial stage value, there was
an increase of 58.23%. The lowest value was in
June 2020, which was 33.70%, where the number
of overtime hours was 56.7 hours. The lowest
value was in the initial period of the study, namely
June 2020. The red line on the graph shows the
standard value for ratio 4. The standard weight
for ratio 4 is 22.24%. The lower the value of the
ratio 4, the better the performance. So, if the ratio
value on the graph is below the red line, it shows
the better the ratio's performance.
Figure 8 shows the five ratios, which
compare the number of absent TK and the total
number of workers. The highest value is the
smallest ratio percentage value, namely in March
2021, with a ratio level of 10.14%, where the
absent workforce is 14 people. Compared with
the initial stage value of 16.66%, there was an
increase of 39.13%. The lowest value is in January
2021, which is 28.98%, where the number of
absent workers is 40 people. Compared with the
Figure 8. Ratio Graph 5
Figure 6. Ratio Graph 3
Figure 7. Ratio Graph 4
0
5
10
15
20
25
30
35
Number of Absent Labor to total Labor
0
5
10
15
20
Number of products produced to total
working hours
0
10
20
30
40
Number of Overtime Hours to Number
of Working Hours

Jurnal Ilmiah Teknik Industri
p
-ISSN 1412-6869 e-ISSN 2460-4038
55
initial period value of 16.66%, there was a
decrease of 73%. The higher the value in the ratio
5, the worse the performance. The red line on the
graph shows the standard weight at a ratio of 5.
The standard value at ratio 5 is 20.89%. If the ratio
value on the chart is below the red line, the better
the ratio's performance will be. There was a
significant increase in the ratio in January 2021.
This shows the company's unfavorable condition.
This condition is related to the Java-Bali PPKM on
11 to 25 January 2021, which the DIY central
government launched (Pratiwi and Hidayati 2021).
This is the background for the company to carry
out a work shift system for workers so that the
number of absent workers has increased.
Figure 9 shows the ratio six, which compares
the number of defective products and the total
number of products produced. The highest value
is the smallest percentage ratio, namely in June
2020, with a rate of 2.08%, with 64 defective
products. The highest value was in the early
period of the study. The lowest value was in
August 2021, which was 3.89%, where the number
of defective products was 89 pieces. Compared
with the initial stage value of 2.08%, there was a
decrease of 87.22%. The lower the weight in ratio
6, the better the ratio performance. The red line
on the graph shows the standard value at ratio 6.
The standard value at ratio 6 is 2.96%. If the ratio
value is below the red line, the better the ratio
performance will be. There was a significant
increase in the ratio in March. The increase in the
ratio in March indicates the poor performance of
the balance. Defective products in March were
caused due to the high transmission of Covid-19
at the company. The head of the production unit
conveyed this.
The productivity index is used as a reference
for companies to carry out strategies that can be
done to improve the work performance of
employees at the company. The following is a
graph of the current productivity index.
Figure 10 shows the productivity index
values for several periods from June 2020 to May
2021. There are still several indices that are at
minus values. The poor productivity index is
caused by several ratios still in the wrong criteria.
This ratio shows that the lost hours of employees
are still in the poor category. Lost hours of
employees consisting of employee attendance
that exceeds the allowance must be corrected to
increase the company's productivity index.
Productivity is good or bad conditions; efforts
should still be made to increase productivity. This
is done to prevent the occurrence of consumptive
behavior that can increase the costs incurred by
the company. Several calculations can be
assumed to increase productivity, such as the
same amount of production is obtained with the
same resources, more production results are
obtained with fewer resources, more production
results are obtained with the same resources,
production results are obtained much more is
received with more resources (Sarjono, 2001).
Root Cause Analysis
(RCA)
The calculation of productivity using the
objective matrix (OMAX) method shows three
Figure 10. Productivity Index Graph
Figure 9. Ratio Graph 6
23%
-2%
35%
26%
34%
12%
-17%
16%
-32%
-22%
-51%
-53%
June
July
August
September
October
November
December
January
February
March
April
May
0
1
2
3
4
5
The Number of Defective Products
for the Resulting Product

Utami et al./ Proposed Determination of Work Criteria Standards on OMAX…. JITI, Vol.21(1), Jun 2022, 49-62
56
ratios below standard or poor criteria. The three
ratios refer to the high lost hours of employees
(illness, leave, leave, lateness, absenteeism). It is
necessary to carry out a more in-depth root cause
analysis to make suggestions for improvement.
Root cause analysis is an essential part of an
overall understanding of "what happened." Seen
based on "early understanding" of a problem and
identify questions that do not have answers and
information gaps. Collecting information can be
done through interviews with employees who
have direct or indirect involvement, checking the
surrounding conditions where problems arise and
observing. The information obtained will be the
"final understanding" and then used to analyze
"why" the problem occurs (Doggett, 2005).
Identification of problems. The problem is
that the level of productivity is still poor because
the lost hours of employees are still high. The lost
hours of employees at the company consist of
working hours used for permits, sick leave, leave,
being late, and being absent from work. The
research prioritizes the problem of high employee
lost hours because the impact on company
productivity is quite significant. The issue
regarding high employee lost hours can be
concluded based on interviews that have been
conducted with the informants. The resource
persons in this study were the head of the
production division, the welding and painting
unit, and the welding and painting unit
operators.
Identification of Causes. Before identifying
the root cause of the company's high employee
lost hours, researchers must analyze what factors
can cause an employee to frequently take leave,
leave, be late, or be absent from work. Several
factors can cause employees to frequently take
leave, leave, be late, or miss work, such as
working hours that start too early, the
opportunity to do so, supervision that is not too
strict, or the influence of other employees.
Identify Root Cause. The research was
conducted using a five why analysis to dig deeper
into the real root of the problem. The root cause
of the problem can be identified by asking "why"
five times repeatedly to a point where the answer
to the question has shown a root problem (Serrat,
2017).
Based on interviews conducted with
employees of PT Mega Andalan Kalasan,
especially the welding and painting units, it can
be seen in Figure 11. Interviews to find the root
cause of the problem regarding high employee
lost hours were carried out to 21 employees out
of 100 employees. Various reasons make the lost
hours of employees have a high percentage.
These causes can be seen in Figure 11. From the
grounds that the informants have explained,
several reasons have a high rate, and this is one
of the factors considered in determining the root
cause of the problem.
Further discussion of the causes that the
resource persons have mentioned to find out the
root cause of the problem of high employee lost
hours was carried out. The determination is made
by looking at the highest percentage and input
from the company. The decision of the root cause
of the problem has been verified and approved
by the company. The company believes that the
results of the analysis are by the situation. The
root cause of the problem can be seen in Figure
Table 1. Results of Interviews Regarding Lost Hours of
Employees
No Results of Interviews Regarding
Lost Hours of Employees
%
1 Attendance check is done manually 13%
2 No sanctions 12%
3 Recruitment of permanent
employees is very rare
11%
4 Working hours start too early 10%
5 Attending a job interview 8%
6 There are things outside of work 7%
7 Working as a driver 7%
8 Attendance check is done during
the day
6%
9 Status is still an intern from long
ago
6%
10 Have other activities before leaving 5%
11 Sick 4%
12 Fatigue 3%
13 Bad weather 2%
14 Vehicle Strike 2%
15 Wake up late 2%

Jurnal Ilmiah Teknik Industri
p
-ISSN 1412-6869 e-ISSN 2460-4038
57
11. The root cause of the problem of high lost
hours consists of working hours that start too
early with a percentage of 18%, company
regulations that are less strict with a ratio of 20%,
no sanctions for employees with a rate of 20%, a
lack of employee commitment with a percentage
of 19% and a lack of company certainty in a
career by 23%.
Further discussion regarding the root cause
of the problem of high lost hours needs to be
done so that the company has an overview of
strategies to overcome these problems. Five root
causes will be discussed in this study. One of the
causes of high employee lost hours is an
inappropriate work system. The company makes a
working system to optimize the active power of
industrial machines and increase company profits.
The work system starts at 8 a.m. Until 4 p.m. It has
several advantages in terms of physiological and
social aspects. Working hours too early make
employees often late for work or deliberately
absent from work for breakfast. This condition is
related to the ratio of 5, which is about the
number of missing workers. The high number of
absent workers can reduce product performance.
In addition to working hours that start too early,
the firmness of an employee is also essential in
the company so that employees have a handle on
acting and think about the risks of the actions
taken.
The firmness of a superior greatly influences
employee discipline in a company. A boss must
have a brave and decisive nature to
consequences, disciplinary employees. The risk for
a boss who is not strict with correctional
employees is that more and more employees will
have penal attitudes because they think that the
rules and sanctions are no longer valid (Nazir,
Kunci, and dan Karyawan 2019). This can cause
employees to act arbitrarily at work. Employees
can go home early or leave late without thinking
about the risks involved. This can affect the total
working hours of employees each month, which is
not on target. This condition is related to the
OMAX calculation, namely the ratio 3, which is in
the wrong criteria. The firmness of an employee
needs to be supported by the sanctions applied
by the company. Sanctions have an essential role
in employee discipline.
The company must provide sanctions for
employees who have violated regulations and
carry out strict supervision so that employee
performance can improve (Kerja and Gaya n.d.).
Companies must have firmness and accuracy to
make decisions regarding what sanctions are
appropriate for employees so that employees no
longer violate the rules and regulations and no
longer make similar mistakes (Krisnanda &
Sudibya, 2014). Strict sanctions will bring up the
discipline of an employee. Employees who have a
good field will also create a high commitment to
the company. An employee's responsibility will be
significant for the company so that the employee
continues to provide maximum performance for
the company
Figure 11. Root Cause of Lost Employee Hours
18%
20%
20%
19%
23%
Root Cause of Lost Employee Hours
Working hours start too early
Rules are not strict
No sanctions for employees
Lack of Commitment
Lack of certainty in career

Utami et al./ Proposed Determination of Work Criteria Standards on OMAX…. JITI, Vol.21(1), Jun 2022, 49-62
58
An employee's commitment will appear
based on his organization's desires, needs, and
obligations as a place to work. Organizational
commitment is a condition that indicates that an
employee is in favor of a particular organization
and has goals and a desire to remain in the
membership of the organization concerned.
Commitment in an organization or company can
be built if an employee can develop three
interrelated attitudes with the organization such
as an understanding of the company's goals, a
feeling of being involved in the work being done,
and a feeling that the company is a place for him
to work and live (Januarti, 2019). An employee's
commitment must also be strengthened by clear
career development. An employee guaranteed a
career will have a high responsibility to maintain
his job.
Career development is something employees
want because they think that the better the
position, the more prosperous life will be. The
thing that underlies career development in a
company is promotions carried out by the
superiors of each section. A manager often
prioritizes employees with a high level of
education (diploma and bachelor's degree)
compared to employees with vocational
education to occupy positions. It is known that
even though an employee is a permanent
employee who has worked for a long time, his
educational background does not match the
criteria for career development. The employee still
cannot participate or get career development
opportunities. In this case, the superiors should
provide career opportunities to employees who
are only high school graduates with the aim that
employees can develop careers according to their
expertise (Natalia & Netra, 2020). Lack of career
certainty makes employees often leave work to
look for side jobs or more promising jobs. This
condition is related to the OMAX calculation at a
ratio of 5, namely the number of absent workers
who are still in flawed criteria.
Maintenance plan
The ratios in calculating productivity using
the objective matrix (OMAX) method have several
criteria, namely excellent and bad criteria.
Increased productivity in ratios with bad
standards can be carried out with four calculation
assumptions, including with a smaller number of
resources the same amount of production is
obtained, with fewer resources, more production
results are obtained, with the same number of
resources, more production results are obtained,
and with more resources, much more production
results are obtained (Sarjono, 2001).
After the root cause of the lost hours of
employees who have a high percentage is known,
the next researcher will analyze practical
corrective actions to reduce the high lost hours of
employees before entering into the discussion
regarding disciplinary actions to reduce high lost
hours. The researcher will perform a data
simulation of the OMAX productivity measuring
ratio component, which is below the standard
criteria as a performance standard setting based
on the OMAX ratio. These components are the
total production output, the number of absent
workers, and the total working hours of
employees. These results will be used as standard
performance criteria for PT X.
Furthermore, it is necessary to simulate the
data; some ratios are still flawed criteria. Data
simulation needs to be carried out to set standard
criteria for ratios 2, 3, and ratio 5, which were
initially in the bad criteria to become good criteria
so that the ratio performance will increase. The
following is a data simulation carried out to
increase the ratio 2, ratio 3, and ratio 5 to achieve
good criteria.
Figure 12 shows the data simulation at ratio
2, the ratio of the product produced to the
Figure 12. Simulation Data of Ratio 2
2408 2481 2553 2625 2697 2770 2842 2914 2986 3059 3131
17.5 18.0 18.5 19.0 19.5 20.1 20.6 21.1 21.6 22.2 22.7
Production realization (unit)
average ratio 2/year
Increa sing the Rati o o f
Produc tivity B ased on Realize d
Produc tion to Total Manp ower

Jurnal Ilmiah Teknik Industri
p
-ISSN 1412-6869 e-ISSN 2460-4038
59
number of workers. The higher the ratio value, the
better the productivity performance. Productivity
is in good criteria when the ratio in one
period/month reaches 19.09%. When the ratio
comes to 19.09% for each period/month, the
average percentage of 2 per year goes 22.70%.
With an average ratio of 2 per year of 22.70%, the
company must increase production output to
3131 units with a total workforce of 138 people
per period/month. When ratio 2 is in the flawed
criteria, the company only produces 2408 units
every month with 138 workers.
Figure 13 shows the simulation data at a
ratio of 3, regarding the product produced to the
total hours worked. The higher the ratio value, the
better the productivity performance. Productivity
is in good criteria when the ratio of each
period/month reaches 13.26%. When ratio 3
comes 13.26% per period/month, the company
can achieve an average balance per year of
16.66%. With an average ratio of 3 per year of
16.66%, the company must reduce the total
working hours of employees to 189 hours per
period/month. When the balance is in the flawed
criteria, the total working hours of employees
each month is 208 hours. It is not commensurate
with the amount of production achieved. With a
total of 189 hours of work in a month, workers
can work 8 hours a day and have 1 hour of
overtime if needed. The 8 hours workday is very
effective for workers to work with focus and good
results.
Figure 15 shows the simulation data at a
ratio of 5 regarding the number of absent
workers with the total number of workers. The
smaller the ratio value, the better the
performance ratio 5. Productivity is in good
criteria when the ratio for each period/month
does not reach a value of 20.89%. Ratio 5 can be
good for a ratio per year of 15.3%. When the
company can achieve an average annual
percentage of 15.3% per year, the number of
absent workers should not exceed 21 employees
out of 138 employees in each
period/month.
Figure 15 shows the productivity index
after simulating the data to increase the ratio 2,
ratio 3, and ratio 5, which previously had poor
criteria, overall productivity has increased. Five
periods had a value below 0% in the previous
productivity index. However, after implementing
the new performance standards, the productivity
index increased, and there were only two periods
below 0%. In both periods, which were below 0%,
Figure 14. Simulation of Ratio Data 5
Figure 15. Graph of Productivity Index Based on
New Performance Standards
Figure 13. Simulation of Ratio Data 3
29 28 27 26 25 25 24 23 22 21
20.920.319.619.018.417.817.116.515.915.3
Number of Absent Workers
Average Ratio 5/year
In cr ea sed Prod uc tiv it y B ased on th e
Nu mb er of Ab se nt Wo rk ers to the
To ta l W or kfor ce
59%
29%
56%
47%
72%
38%
19%
42%
5% 8%
-36%
-39%
15.162 15.631
16.13
16.662
208 201 195 189
Average ratio 3/year (%)
Total Working Hours (Hours)
Incr eased Produc tivit y Rat io of
Tota l Rea li zed P roduc tion to Tota l
Work in g H ou rs

Utami et al./ Proposed Determination of Work Criteria Standards on OMAX…. JITI, Vol.21(1), Jun 2022, 49-62
60
they also continued to grow compared to the
productivity index before using the performance
standard.
Table 2. Comparison of Productivity Index
Month
Current
Productivity
Index
Productivity Index
Using Performance
Standards
June 23% 59%
July -2% 29%
August 35% 56%
September 26% 47%
October 34% 72%
November 12% 38%
December -17% 19%
January 16% 42%
February -32% 5%
March -22% 8%
April -51% -36%
May -53% -39%
Table 2 compares the productivity index
before using the performance standard and after
utilizing the performance standard. The
productivity index using performance standards
has a higher percentage than before. This shows
that the productivity condition improves when
the company uses performance standards. After
using the performance standards in April and
May, the productivity index is still at a minus
value, and the changes still don't seem significant.
This is because the realization of production in
April and May is still far from the specified
performance standard.
The next step is to provide effective
improvement suggestions for companies to
overcome high employee lost hours (permission,
illness, leave, late, absenteeism) with several
actions such as making policies that regulate
employee attendance. The approaches made
contain employee attendance procedures and
contain appropriate follow-up from the company
to employees who are absent too often.
Employee discipline is the primary benchmark
used to see employee performance based on
their attendance. Based on attendance data
owned by the company, a company can regulate
employee attendance by considering obligations,
prohibitions, and sanctions (Sikumbang, Habibi,
and Pane 2020).
Companies need to give rewards for
employees' performance and hard work so that
employees feel more valued and can reduce the
possibility of being absent from work. In addition,
it can strengthen the commitment of employees
to continue working at the company.
Appreciation can be used as a reinforcement for
someone to stay afloat in the conditions that are
being faced (Effendi 2012).
Provide clarity regarding employee career
development patterns. Can provide motivation
and strengthen employee commitment to self-
development to achieve career targets obtained
(Melinda and Zulkarnain 2004). Career
development in a company, if not managed
properly, can make employee commitment to
below and make employees have a high interest
in getting out of the company (Ramli &
Yudhistira, 2018).
IV. C
ONCLUSION
Proposals for setting performance standards
based on below-standard ratios as a strategy to
increase productivity are urgently needed. This is
very relevant to the root cause obtained from
research sources. The reality that occurs in the
field is related to the results of the ratio
measurement, so the proposals given have an
excellent opportunity to increase company
productivity. Companies need to increase the
amount of production, decrease the total working
hours of employees and decrease the number of
absent workers every month to increase the
company's productivity index. This research is a
development of previous studies. Most of the
earlier studies discussed productivity
measurement without conducting simulations to
find the right strategy to increase productivity.
There are studies that state that productivity can
be increased by taking into account the criteria of
efficiency, effectiveness, and inferential (Bahrudin
and Wahyuni 2018). This research explains in
detail that through these criteria, there are still
references to an action that can significantly
increase productivity, such as an increase in the

Jurnal Ilmiah Teknik Industri
p
-ISSN 1412-6869 e-ISSN 2460-4038
61
amount of production. A decrease in the total
working hours of employees and a decline in the
number of absent workers.
ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS
Thank you to the Institut Teknologi Telkom
Purwokerto for providing the costs and project
implementing contractors providing
opportunities in the research process as well as
those who have assisted in completing the
research.
R
EFERENCES
Avianda, D., Yuniati, Y., & Yuniar. (2014). “Strategi
Peningkatan Produktivitas Di Lantai Produksi
Menggunakan Metode Objective Matrix (OMAX).”
Jurnal Online Institut Teknologi Nasional, 1
(4), 202–
13.
Bahrudin, M., & Wahyuni, H.C. (2018). “Pengukuran
Produktivitas Kerja Karyawan Pada Bagian Produksi
Dengan Menggunakan Metode Objective Matrix
(OMAX) Dan Root Cause Analyze (RCA).”
PROZIMA
(Productivity, Optimization and Manufacturing
System Engineering), 1
(2):, 116. doi:
10.21070/prozima.v1i2.1299.
Doggett, A.M. (2005). “Root Cause Analysis: A
Framework for Tool Selection.”
Quality
Management Journal, 12
(4), 34 – 45. doi:
10.1080/10686967.2005.11919269.
Effendi, R. 2012. “Hubungan Budaya Organisasi Dan
Penghargaan Terhadap Motivasi Karyawan : Studi
Kausal Terhadap Karyawan Universitas Megoupak
Tulang Bawang.”
Jurnal Manajemen Dan Keuangan
Darmajaya, 10
(2), 218879.
Januarti, I. (n.d). “
Terhadap Hubungan Antara Etika
Kerja Islam
.” 13–26.
Krisnanda, N., & Sudibya, G. (2014). “Pengaruh Disiplin
Kerja, Motivasi Kerja Dan Kompensasi Terhadap
Kinerja Karyawan Respati Sanur Beach Hotel.”
E-
Jurnal Manajemen Universitas Udayana, 3
(7),
254025.
Kuswardana, Andikha, Novi Eka Mayangsari, Haidar
Natsir Amrullah. 2017. “
Analisis Penyebab
Kecelakaan Kerja Menggunakan Metode RCA
(Fishbone Diagram Method And 5 – Why Analysis)
Di PT . PAL Indonesia
.” Conference on Safety
Engineering and Its Application (2581):141–46.
Martin-Delgado, J., Martínez-García, A., María-Aranaz,
J., Valencia-Martín, J.L., & Mira, J.J. (2020). “How
Much of Root Cause Analysis Translates into
Improved Patient Safety: A Systematic Review.”
Medical Principles and Practice, 29
(6), 524–31. doi:
10.1159/000508677.
Safitri, L.A., & Dewa, C.B. (2020). “Analisa Kebijakan
Pemberlakuan Ppkm Pada Masa Pandemi Covid 19
Terhadap Industri Skala.” 97–107.
Melinda, T., & Zulkarnain. (2004). “Budaya Perusahaan
Dan Persepsi Pengembangan Karir Pada Karyawan
Yang Bekerja Di PT Telekomunikasi Indonesia.”
Jurnal Psikologi
(1):55–62.
Natalia, N.K.S.S., & Netra, I.G.S.K. (2020). “Pengaruh
Motivasi Kerja Dalam Memediasi Pengaruh
Pengembangan Karir Terhadap Kinerja.”
E-Jurnal
Manajemen Universitas Udayana, 9
(4):1507. doi:
10.24843/ejmunud.2020.v09.i04.p14.
Nazir, A. (2019). “Pengaruh Pelatihan Dan Disiplin Kerja
Terhadap Kinerja Karyawan Pada Pt Surya Mustika
Nusantara.”
J. Mandiri 3
(1):150–69.
Nurmayetti. 2019. “Manajemen Produktivitas.”
Journal
of Chemical Information and Modeling, 53
(9), 1689
– 1699.
Pratiwi, D.K., & Hidayati, R. (2021). “
Analisis Kebijakan
Penanganan Covid-19 di Daerah Istimewa
Yogyakarta (Sebuah Prespektif Hukum Responsif).
”
Fakultas Hukum Universitas Islam Indonesia,
Program Doktor Fakultas Hukum UII 117–29.
Putra, Y.D., & Sobandi, A. (2019). “Pengembangan
Sumber Daya Manusia Sebagai Faktor Yang
Mempengaruhi Produktivitas Kerja.”
Jurnal
Pendidikan Manajemen Perkantoran, 4
(1), 127. doi:
10.17509/jpm.v4i1.14963.
Ramadhani, G.A. (2004). “Hubungan Antara Kepuasan
Kerja Dengan Produktivitas Kerja Karyawan.” Jurnal
Psyche, 1
(1), 50 – 60.
Ramli, A.H., & Yudhistira, R. (2018). “
Pengaruh
Pengembangan Karir Terhadap Kinerja Karyawan
Melalui Komitmen Organisasi Pada PT. Infomedia
Solusi Humanika Di Jakarta
.” Prosiding Seminar
Nasional Cendekiawan 811–16.
Sarjono, H. (2001). “Model Pengukuran Produktivitas
Berdasarkan Pendekatan Rasio Output Per Input.”
The Winners, 2
(2), 130. doi: 10.21512/tw.v2i2.3821.
Serrat, O. (2017). “The Five Whys Technique.”
Knowledge Solutions, (February)
, 307–10. doi:
10.1007/978-981-10-0983-9_32.
Setiowati, R. (2017). “Analisis Pengukuran Produktivitas
Departemen Produksi Dengan Metode Objective
Matrix (Omax) Pada Cv. Jaya Mandiri.”
Faktor Exacta
10
(December 2017), 199–209.
Sikumbang, M.A.R., Habibi, R., & Pane, S.F. (2020).
“Sistem Informasi Absensi Pegawai Menggunakan
Metode RAD Dan Metode LBS Pada Koordinat
Absensi.”
Jurnal Media Informatika Budidarma, 4
(1),
59. doi: 10.30865/mib.v4i1.1445.

Utami et al./ Proposed Determination of Work Criteria Standards on OMAX…. JITI, Vol.21(1), Jun 2022, 49-62
62
Sumarna, D.L., & Rabbani, F. (2016). “Faktor Penyebab
Tidak Tercapainya Target Program Produksi
Kemasan Botol Di Pt Pertamina Lubricant Produksi
Unit Jakarta.”
Jurnal Logistik Bisnis, 6
(2), 14–24.
Wangen, G., Hellesen, N., Torres, H., & Braekken, E.
(2017). “
An Empirical Study of Root-Cause Analysis
in Information Security Management Gaute
.” The
11th International Conference on Emerging Security
Information, Systems, and Technologies (c):26–33.