Understanding Anomalies of Public Service Reform in Indonesia (AGPA Conference 2013)

UNDERSTANDING ANOMALIES OF PUBLIC SERVICE REFORM IN INDONESIA: Patterns, Driving Forces, Impacts

Eko Prasojo, Defny Holidin, Desy HariyatiAGPA Conference 2013

Menu

• Existing Condition of Reform

• Indicative Cases

• Patterns

• Driving Forces

• Impacts

• Further Challenges

EXISTING CONDITION OF REFORM

Features of Recent Administrative Reform

Pragmatic

Weak ideological

basis

Lack of Strategic

Vision

Undesignated

Donors’ interest-driven

Uncoordinated Development

Sporadic

Self-Initiatives

Fragmented in nature

Chronology of Administrative Reform

• Response to Pressures

• No matured strategic plan

Reactionary Reform

• Different Initiatives between agencies

• Local governments pioneered innovations

Trial Process of Reform • Grand design &

Road map available

• Integrated with Development Plan

More Institutionalized Reform

1998-2003

2010-now

2003-2010

Portrait of Indonesian Administration:

Organization Big structure and many unfit in their functions

Law & Regulation

Contradictive and many ambiguous regulations

Human Resource

Overstaffed and Understaffed at the same time

Problem of integrity

Business Process in

Public service

Unclear procedures, cost and time in public service; Improper service quality; many uncertainty and loopholes for corruption

Minset and Culture Set

No spirit and culture for producing innovation, creation, and invention

Challenge

Problems Remaining in Public Service Delivery

Representativeness

Information

Access

Redress

Corruption

• Costly• Distance with citizen• Insufficient Number• No complaint handling

• Unsuitable with public needs

Quality

• Discrimination based on kinship and political affiliation

• Bribery

• Lack of punishment for malpractice

• Lack of public service standard

• No clarity on price and procedures

• Lack of awareness in service quality

• Poor service quality

Approach of Administrative Reform in Indonesia

1. Construction or reconstruction of a state(Institutions or process of political and economic change)

2. Modernization of the state (administrative structure, managerial capacities, financial management, technological adequacy)

3. Reconfiguration of the role of the state(partnerships with private sector)

4. Revitalization of democracy (enhance public participation in policy making)

Indonesian Administrative Reform Program Logics

Macro

Mezzo

Micro

National Policies

Coordinating Macro and Micro Level

Organizational-level Reform (Agencies and Loc. Gov)

Goals

• Creating Corruption-Free Government

• Enhancing Performance Capacity and Accountability

• Improving Quality of Public Service

Goals

Areas of Change:• Mindset & Culture Set• Organization Restructuring• Re-regulation and Deregulation• Human Resources Development• Government Process Reengineering• Strenthening internal Oversight• Strenthening Performance Accountability• Public Service Innovation

9 Accelarated Administrative Reform Program

Rightsizing of Number of Civil Service and Redistribution

Open Recruitmentand Promotion System

Civil Service Professionalization

Compensation Reform

e-Government Enhancement

Improving service quality for better Trust and Invesment Climate

Transparency and Accountability Enhancement

Organization Restructuring

Efficiency of Ressourceand Budget

⑨ .⑤ .

⑥ .

⑦ .

⑧ .

④ .

③ .

② .

① .

How to Improve Public Service Delivery in Indonesia?

Service Manufacturing

Service Delivery

Improving Public Service Delivery

Administrative Reform Program

1. Public Service Law2. Ombudsman Law3. Information Disclosure Law

Achievements in Indexes

121st/187 HDI 2012

118th/176 CPI 2012

6.53/10 BTI 2012

38th/148 GCI 2013

GCI: Global Competitiveness IndexBTI: Bertelsmann Transformation IndexCPI: Corruption Perception IndexHDI: Human Development Index

INDICATIVE CASES

Integrated One-Stop Services

e-Services

Government Procurement

Integrated OSS: Problems

• Merely gathering different agencies in one place, fragmented mechanism remaining

• Partial authority of licensing delegated to OSS Body

• Working officers are on behalf of their agency in origins

• Too much domination of head of local government

E-Services

• e-citizen ID: single use (data inventory only) without any further electronic processing function

• e-Immigration: data inventory function prior application but manual passport processing

• e-procurement: simplifying processes to prevent bribery but uncontrolled self-estimation price prior to procurement process

Government Procurement

• Too rigid in procedures

• Lack of consideration of various functions held by different agencies/bodies

• Procurement in SOEs has to comply with Law 17/2003 on Public Finance

• bureaucratic accountably > professional

accountability

PATTERNSwhat are patterns of anomalies in public service reform in Indonesia?

Kinds of Problems Occurred

• fashionable services reform programs

• Individual earning benefit upon institutional loopholes

• gap between standards and actual practices

• too much complicated procedure rather than preventing corruption

• using public service reform programs against desired goals (conflict of interest)

DRIVING FORCESwhy have those patterns occurred?

Factors Determining Patterns

• Pragmatic, Image-making political will

• opportunistic principal-agent relations,

• mutualism symbiosis between officials and citizen

• Failed to get big picture of reform

• lack of consideration of precondition and contextual adaptability in reform replication

IMPACTS

how those anomalies implies to further public service delivery in Indonesia?

Consequences

• Stagnant improvement in public service delivery

• Too much efforts & budget, less results in public service improvements

• Low degree of ownership by the citizen to public service reform programs

Further Challenges

• Sustaining reform upon turning administration

• Creating strong leadership to leverage further public service reform

• Making reform agenda owned by entire citizen

• Decreasing sectored-egoism amongst government agencies

• Shifting institutional into behavioral approaches

• Initiating owned innovation in each agency

THANK YOU