Human resources are the primary asset of any organisation, as the success of operations heavily relies on the competence, motivation, and satisfaction of employees[cite: 354]. Employees not only perform operational tasks but also drive organisational goals, innovation, and productivity[cite: 355]. Competent and motivated employees who are satisfied with their work demonstrate punctuality, produce high-quality outputs, show initiative in problem-solving, collaborate effectively, and take responsibility for their duties[cite: 356]. Conversely, insufficiently skilled or unmotivated employees, or those dissatisfied with their work, negatively affect individual and team performance, operational efficiency, and overall organisational outcomes[cite: 357].

Employee performance and job satisfaction are interdependent. Satisfied employees are more motivated, proactive, and committed to quality, while dissatisfaction can result in reduced engagement, higher error rates, and lower productivity[cite: 358]. Effective human resource management, particularly attention to training, intrinsic motivation, and job satisfaction, is therefore a strategic priority to maintain operational stability and high performance[cite: 359]. In companies with diverse operational and supporting units, employee quality is a decisive factor for organisational success[cite: 360].

PT Setia Group Investama (SGI), located in Tenggarong, East Kalimantan, Indonesia, exemplifies an organisation where employee performance and satisfaction are critical[cite: 361]. The company operates multiple business units with varying operational complexities, requiring robust strategies to enhance employee satisfaction and maintain optimal performance[cite: 362]. Empirical data from 2024-2026 indicate a decreasing trend in employee turnover, from 181 in 2024 to 117 in 2025, and 22 by April 2026, highlighting ongoing workforce dynamics that warrant strategic attention to job satisfaction as a mechanism for sustaining performance[cite: 363].

Previous research suggests that the effects of training and intrinsic motivation on employee performance are not always direct; job satisfaction can mediate these relationships, though findings are inconsistent across contexts (Pamungkas et al., 2024; Shen & Tang, 2018)[cite: 364, 365]. Therefore, this study examines job satisfaction as an intervening variable that bridges Transfer of Training and intrinsic motivation with employee performance at SGI[cite: 366]. Transfer of Training ensures that employees apply skills and knowledge acquired from training effectively in their daily work, while intrinsic motivation enhances initiative, commitment, and quality of performance[cite: 367]. Understanding this mechanism is crucial to optimise the benefits of training and motivational strategies in improving employee performance[cite: 368]. This study aims to investigate the influence of Transfer of Training and intrinsic motivation on employee performance, with job satisfaction acting as an intervening variable, thereby addressing gaps in previous research and providing practical insights into human resource management in organisations with diverse operational units[cite: 369].

AMO Theory

The Ability-Motivation-Opportunity (AMO) framework explains that employee performance is influenced by three main factors: ability, motivation, and opportunity[cite: 373]. Ability refers to the skills and competencies of employees, motivation refers to the willingness to exert effort, and opportunity refers to the organizational environment that enables employees to apply their skills and motivation effectively[cite: 374]. According to Boxall & Purcell (2003), high performance is achieved when employees possess sufficient ability, are motivated, and are given the opportunity to apply their skills in the workplace[cite: 375]. In this study, Transfer of Training represents the ability component, Intrinsic Motivation represents the motivation component, and Job Satisfaction reflects how employees respond positively to opportunities provided by the organization[cite: 376].

Transfer of Training

Transfer of Training refers to the extent to which employees can apply knowledge, skills, and attitudes acquired during training into their actual work environment[cite: 378]. Effective transfer improves task execution, problem-solving, and overall performance[cite: 379]. Blume et al. (2019) state that transfer of training reflects the degree to which trainees maintain and generalize competencies learned in training across different settings over time[cite: 379]. Furthermore, Roberts et al. (2021) note that training transfer involves the generalization of learned skills to the job environment and the maintenance of those skills over time[cite: 380]. Meanwhile, Noe et al. (2023) define transfer of training as trainees effectively and continually applying what they have learned in training to their jobs[cite: 381].

Intrinsic Motivation

Deci & Ryan (2023) suggest that in organizational contexts, intrinsic motivation is related to the desire to perform tasks because the activity itself is interesting or inherently satisfying, rather than for extrinsic rewards[cite: 383]. Meanwhile, according to Robbins & Judge (2023), intrinsic motivation is the internal drive that energizes and directs behavior toward work activities for inherent satisfaction rather than external rewards[cite: 384].

Job Satisfaction

Job Satisfaction is defined as the positive emotional response of employees to their work environment, tasks, and organizational policies[cite: 386]. Luthans (2021) states that job satisfaction refers to a general attitude toward one's job and represents the extent to which people like (satisfied) or dislike (dissatisfied) their jobs[cite: 387]. Furthermore, according to Spector (2021), job satisfaction is the degree to which individuals feel positively or negatively about their jobs and work experiences[cite: 388]. Meanwhile, Robbins & Judge (2023) define job satisfaction as a positive emotional state resulting from the appraisal of one's job or job experiences[cite: 389].

Employee Performance

Mathis & Jackson, (2021), employee performance is defined as the observable and measurable output of work based on competency standards, quantity, quality, and individual work behavior within the organization. Then, according to Torrington et al., (2022), employee performance is the combination of effectiveness and efficiency in carrying out tasks that are the responsibility of employees, where effectiveness indicates achievement of work targets and efficiency reflects the optimal use of resources. Furthermore, Robbins & Judge, (2023), employee performance refers to the individual’s work results evaluated against organizational objectives and agreed-upon performance indicators, both quantitative and qualitative. Meanwhile, Dessler, (2024), employee performance refers to the output or accomplishments of work activities measured against established standards of accuracy, completeness, cost, and speed.

Research Method

This study employed a quantitative approach with an explanatory research design[cite: 448]. This design was chosen because the study aims to examine the causal relationships among Transfer of Training, Intrinsic Motivation, Job Satisfaction, and Employee Performance[cite: 449]. The research was conducted at PT Setia Group Investama, Tenggarong, Kutai Kartanegara, East Kalimantan[cite: 450].

Population and Sample

The population consisted of all employees of PT Setia Group Investama[cite: 452]. Purposive sampling was applied based on the following criteria: employees were active, had at least six months of work experience, were not in top management positions, and had participated in training, work orientation, or skill development programs provided by the company[cite: 453]. Based on these criteria, 115 employees were selected as respondents[cite: 454].

Data Collection

Data were collected using a structured questionnaire. All variables were measured using a five-point Likert scale, ranging from 1 = strongly disagree to 5 = strongly agree[cite: 456]. Transfer of Training was measured through the utilization, generalization, and maintenance of training outcomes[cite: 457]. Intrinsic Motivation was assessed based on autonomy, competence, and relatedness[cite: 458]. Job Satisfaction was measured in terms of satisfaction with the job itself, compensation, promotion opportunities, supervision, and co-workers[cite: 459]. Employee Performance was measured through task performance, contextual performance, and counterproductive work behavior[cite: 460].

Data Analysis

Data were analyzed using Partial Least Squares–Structural Equation Modeling (PLS-SEM) with SmartPLS 3. The analysis included descriptive statistics, evaluation of the measurement model, assessment of the structural model, and mediation testing. The measurement model was evaluated using convergent validity (outer loadings and Average Variance Extracted), discriminant validity (Heterotrait-Monotrait Ratio), and reliability (Composite Reliability). The structural model assessment included collinearity analysis, R², effect size (f²), predictive relevance (Q²), and path coefficient significance. Hypotheses were tested using the bootstrapping procedure, with direct and indirect effects considered significant at p > 0.05. Mediation analysis was performed to examine the role of Job Satisfaction in mediating the effects of Transfer of Training and Intrinsic Motivation on Employee Performance.

Respondent Characteristics

The sample consisted of 115 employees of PT Setia Group Investama who met the inclusion criteria. The table summarizes key attributes such as gender, age, education level, years of service, work unit, and position. This profile provides context for understanding the background of respondents and ensures that the data collected on Transfer of Training, Intrinsic Motivation, Job Satisfaction, and Employee Performance reflect the characteristics of the target population. The demographic information of respondents is presented in Table 1.

Based on Table 1 shows that sample consisted of 58 male employees (50.43%) and 57 female employees (49.57%), indicating a balanced gender distribution. The majority of respondents were between 21 and 23 years old (33.04%), followed by those aged 24–26 years (29.57%), suggesting a predominantly young and productive workforce. In terms of educational background, most respondents had completed senior high school or vocational high school (64.35%), followed by bachelor’s degree holders (20.00%) and Diploma III graduates (15.65%). Regarding years of service, the largest group had 1–2 years of experience (39.13%), while 6–11 months, 3–4 years, and more than 4 years accounted for 20.87%, 26.96%, and 13.04%, respectively. The respondents were distributed across different work units: Ayam Setia (31.30%), Susu Setia (26.96%), Head Office/Supporting Division (15.65%), Kopi Tegur Sapa (15.65%), and Apotek Sejiwa (10.43%). Position-wise, most employees were Level 1 Crew (66.09%), followed by Level 2 Operational Leader/General Admin (20.87%) and Level 3 Junior Staff (13.04%). This distribution indicates that the study captured a representative sample of operational staff, which is relevant for examining Transfer of Training, Intrinsic Motivation, Job Satisfaction, and Employee Performance.

Descriptive Analysis

The descriptive analysis shows that Transfer of Training obtained an average score of 3.18, which falls into the moderate category. This indicates that employees have applied training outcomes in their work, although the implementation is not yet optimal. Intrinsic Motivation obtained an average score of 3.17, also in the moderate category, suggesting that employees have internal motivation to work but still require stronger support, autonomy, and development opportunities. Job Satisfaction also obtained an average score of 3.17, indicating that employees feel moderately satisfied with their job, compensation, promotion opportunities, supervision, and co-worker relationships. Meanwhile, Employee Performance obtained an average score of 4.04, which falls into the high category. This result shows that employees generally demonstrate good work quality, initiative, cooperation, and responsibility, although timely task completion still needs improvement.

Measurement Model Evaluation (Outer Model)

The measurement model was evaluated to ensure the validity and reliability of the research constructs. The assessment included tests of convergent validity, discriminant validity, and construct reliability. Convergent validity was assessed using outer loadings and Average Variance Extracted (AVE), while construct reliability was evaluated using Composite Reliability (CR). Discriminant validity was examined using the Heterotrait–Monotrait Ratio (HTMT) to confirm that each construct is empirically distinct from the others. The results of convergent validity and construct reliability are presented in Table 2.

Based on Table 2 show that the measurement model demonstrates satisfactory convergent validity and construct reliability for all research constructs. Most indicators show outer loadings above 0.70, indicating that the items adequately represent their respective latent constructs. A few indicators, such as X1.6 (0.629), Z.3 (0.689), and Y.6 (0.670), are slightly below 0.70 but remain acceptable for exploratory research. The Average Variance Extracted (AVE) values range from 0.512 (Job Satisfaction) to 0.651 (Intrinsic Motivation and Employee Performance), exceeding the recommended threshold of 0.50, confirming that each construct explains a sufficient portion of its indicator variance. Composite Reliability (CR) values range from 0.840 to 0.918, indicating good internal consistency and reliability across all constructs. Overall, these results indicate that the measurement model is both valid and reliable, providing a strong foundation for testing the structural relationships and hypotheses in this study. Then, in addition to convergent validity, discriminant validity was assessed using the Heterotrait–Monotrait Ratio (HTMT), as suggested by Henseler et al., (2015). This method is recommended in PLS-SEM analysis to determine whether the constructs are empirically distinct from one another. According to the recommended threshold, HTMT values should be below 0.90 to confirm adequate discriminant validity. The results of the discriminant validity test are presented in Table 3.

Based on Table 3 show that all HTMT values are below the threshold of 0.90, confirming adequate discriminant validity. Specifically, the highest HTMT value is 0.896 between Job Satisfaction (Z) and Employee Performance (Y), which is still within the acceptable limit. Other HTMT values include 0.856 (Transfer of Training to Intrinsic Motivation), 0.791 (Transfer of Training to Job Satisfaction), 0.873 (Employee Performance to Intrinsic Motivation), and 0.722 (Job Satisfaction to Intrinsic Motivation), all demonstrating that each construct measures a unique concept. These results indicate that the constructs Transfer of Training (X1); Intrinsic Motivation (X2); Job Satisfaction (Z); and Employee Performance (Y) are sufficiently distinct, supporting the reliability and validity of the measurement model for subsequent structural analysis.

Structural Model Evaluation (Inner Mode)

The structural model was evaluated using collinearity, R-square, effect size, predictive relevance, and hypothesis testing. The Inner VIF values were below 5, indicating that the model was free from multicollinearity problems. The R-square value for Job Satisfaction was 0.481, meaning that Transfer of Training and Intrinsic Motivation explained 48.1% of the variance in Job Satisfaction. The R-square value for Employee Performance was 0.739, indicating that Transfer of Training, Intrinsic Motivation, and Job Satisfaction explained 73.9% of the variance in Employee Performance. These results show that the model has strong explanatory power, particularly for Employee Performance. The effect size analysis showed that Transfer of Training had a moderate effect on Job Satisfaction, while Intrinsic Motivation had a small effect on Job Satisfaction. For Employee Performance, Job Satisfaction and Intrinsic Motivation had large effect sizes, while Transfer of Training had a very small direct effect. The Q-square values were 0.222 for Job Satisfaction and 0.467 for Employee Performance, both above zero, indicating that the model had predictive relevance.

Hypothesis Testing

Hypothesis testing was conducted using the bootstrapping procedure in SmartPLS to examine the significance of the relationships among the constructs. This method allows for the estimation of path coefficients, t-values, and p-values, providing a robust assessment of direct and indirect effects in the structural model. Based on the bootstrapping results, the significance of hypothesized directly relationships was evaluated. The results of the hypothesis directly testing are presented in Table 4.

Based on Table 4 show that Transfer of Training has a positive and significant effect on Job Satisfaction, with a path coefficient of 0.455, t-value of 3.301, and p-value of 0.001. Since the p-value is below 0.05, H1 is supported. This indicates that better application of training outcomes in daily work is associated with higher employee job satisfaction. Intrinsic Motivation also has a positive and significant effect on Job Satisfaction, with a path coefficient of 0.285, t-value of 2.639, and p-value of 0.009. Therefore, H2 is supported. This result suggests that employees with stronger internal motivation tend to experience higher job satisfaction. Furthermore, Job Satisfaction has a positive and significant effect on Employee Performance, with a path coefficient of 0.438, t-value of 4.764, and p- value of 0.000. Thus, H3 is supported. This finding indicates that employees who are more satisfied with their work tend to demonstrate better performance. However, Transfer of Training does not have a significant direct effect on Employee Performance. The path coefficient is -0.029, with a t-value of 0.289 and a p-value of 0.772. Since the p-value is greater than 0.05, H4 is not supported. This means that the application of training outcomes does not directly improve employee performance in this study.

Lastly, Intrinsic Motivation has a positive and significant effect on Employee Performance, with a path coefficient of 0.540, t-value of 6.075, and p- value of 0.000. Therefore, H5 is supported. This result indicates that employees with higher intrinsic motivation tend to show stronger performance.

Mediation Analysis

Mediation analysis was performed to examine whether Job Satisfaction (Z) mediates the relationships between Transfer of Training (X1) and Intrinsic Motivation (X2) on Employee Performance (Y). The indirect effects were assessed using the bootstrapping procedure in SmartPLS, which estimates the significance of these mediating relationships. In SmartPLS, indirect effect refer on specific indirect effect with a p-value below 0.05 were considered statistically significant. The results of the mediation analysis are presented in Table 5,

Based on Table 5 show that the specific indirect effects were analyzed to examine the mediating role of Job Satisfaction (Z) in the relationships between Transfer of Training (X1) and Intrinsic Motivation (X2) on Employee Performance (Y). The results indicate that Transfer of Training indirectly affects Employee Performance through Job Satisfaction with a path coefficient of 0.199, t-value of 3.277, and p-value of 0.001, confirming full mediation. This suggests that the positive effect of training transfer on performance is fully channeled through employee satisfaction. In contrast, Intrinsic Motivation also indirectly influences Employee Performance through Job Satisfaction, with a path coefficient of 0.125, t-value of 2.083, and p-value of 0.038, indicating partial mediation. This implies that while intrinsic motivation directly contributes to performance, part of its effect is mediated by employees’ job satisfaction. These findings support the hypothesis that Job Satisfaction plays a critical mediating role in enhancing Employee Performance, particularly in translating training and motivational factors into improved work outcomes.

Transfer of Training and Job Satisfaction

The findings indicate that Transfer of Training has a positive and significant effect on Job Satisfaction. Employees who effectively apply the knowledge, skills, and attitudes gained from training in their daily work reported higher levels of satisfaction. This result aligns with previous studies (Shen & Tang, 2018; Hadaitana & Iqbal, 2023; Jumiati et al., 2023), highlighting that practical application of training enhances employees’ confidence, competence, and overall satisfaction with their work.

Intrinsic Motivation and Job Satisfaction

Intrinsic Motivation was also found to positively influence Job Satisfaction. Employees with high intrinsic motivation driven by autonomy, competence, and relatedness experienced greater satisfaction in performing their tasks. This supports prior research (Yusuf, 2021; Aljumah, 2023; Pamungkas et al., 2024), suggesting that internal motivation enhances engagement and contributes to positive perceptions of the work environment.

Job Satisfaction and Employee Performance

Job Satisfaction positively affects Employee Performance, confirming that satisfied employees tend to demonstrate higher productivity, better task execution, and stronger organizational commitment. These findings are consistent with Robbins & Judge (2023) and Lindawati & Parwoto (2021), reinforcing the notion that satisfaction serves as a key driver of effective performance.

Transfer of Training and Employee Performance

Transfer of Training did not show a significant direct effect on Employee Performance, this suggests that the application of training alone may not automatically enhance performance unless employees are satisfied and motivated. The results highlight that skill acquisition must be complemented by a positive work experience to translate into performance improvements.

Intrinsic Motivation and Employee Performance Through Job Satisfaction

Job Satisfaction partially mediates the effect of Intrinsic Motivation on Employee Performance. This demonstrates that while intrinsic motivation directly contributes to performance, part of its effect is channeled through increased job satisfaction. Employees who are both intrinsically motivated and satisfied tend to show better overall performance.

This study examined the effect of transfer of training and intrinsic motivation on employee performance through job satisfaction at PT Setia Group Investama. The results show that transfer of training and intrinsic motivation have positive and significant effects on job satisfaction. Job satisfaction also has a positive and significant effect on employee performance. Intrinsic motivation directly improves employee performance, while transfer of training does not have a significant direct effect on employee performance.

The mediation results indicate that job satisfaction fully mediates the effect of transfer of training on employee performance and partially mediates the effect of intrinsic motivation on employee performance. These findings confirm that training outcomes do not automatically improve performance unless employees feel satisfied with their work. Meanwhile, intrinsic motivation can improve performance directly and indirectly through job satisfaction. This study contributes to human resource management literature by emphasizing job satisfaction as an important psychological mechanism linking training transfer and intrinsic motivation with employee performance. Practically, PT Setia Group Investama should strengthen post-training implementation, provide managerial support, improve intrinsic motivation, and enhance job satisfaction through fair compensation, career development opportunities, supportive supervision, and a positive work environment.

Recommendations

Based on the findings of this study, the following recommendations are proposed for both management and future research:

1. Companies should ensure that training programs are effectively applied in the workplace. Supervisors and managers should monitor post-training application, provide guidance, and offer feedback to ensure that employees can utilize the skills and knowledge gained from training.

2. Organizations should develop strategies to foster intrinsic motivation, such as recognizing employee achievements, promoting autonomy in task execution, and providing opportunities for skill development. Employees who are intrinsically motivated tend to perform better and are more likely to translate training into effective work outcomes.

3. Job satisfaction mediates the effect of training and motivation on performance. Therefore, management should focus on creating a supportive work environment, fair compensation, career development opportunities, and effective supervision to increase employee satisfaction, which in turn enhances performance.

4. Future studies can explore additional mediating or moderating variables such as organizational commitment, leadership support, or work engagement, to better understand the mechanisms linking training and motivation to employee performance. Researchers could also test the model in different industries or cultural contexts to enhance generalizability.

This study has several limitations. First, the research was conducted only at PT Setia Group Investama, so the findings may not be fully generalizable to other companies, industries, or organizational contexts. Second, the study used a cross-sectional design, meaning that data were collected at one point in time. Therefore, the causal relationships among variables should be interpreted carefully.

Third, the data were collected through self-reported questionnaires, which may create the possibility of response bias. Respondents may provide answers based on personal perception rather than actual work behavior. Fourth, this study only examined transfer of training, intrinsic motivation, and job satisfaction as predictors of employee performance. Other relevant factors, such as leadership style, organizational commitment, work engagement, compensation, and work environment, were not included in the model. Future studies are recommended to test this model in different companies or industries, use longitudinal data, and include additional variables to obtain a broader understanding of employee performance.

The author would like to express sincere gratitude to all parties who have contributed to the completion of this research. Special thanks are extended to the management and employees of PT Setia Group Investama for their cooperation and willingness to participate in this study. The author also acknowledges the guidance and support provided by academic advisors and colleagues who offered valuable insights during the research process. Finally, appreciation is given to family and friends for their continuous encouragement and motivation throughout the completion of this study.