Performance of Bureaucratic Reform in Indonesia (Case Study in Banyumas Regency)

Authors

  • Denok Kurniasih Departement of Public Administration, Universitas Jenderal Soedirman Purwokerto, Indonesia
  • Wahyuningrat Departement of Public Administration, Universitas Jenderal Soedirman Purwokerto, Indonesia
  • Shadu Satwika Wijaya Departement of Public Administration, Universitas Jenderal Soedirman Purwokerto, Indonesia
  • Paulus Israwan Setyoko Departement of Public Administration, Universitas Jenderal Soedirman Purwokerto, Indonesia

DOI:

https://doi.org/10.8888/ijospol.v7i3.286

Keywords:

Digital government, Bureaucratic Reform, Performance

Abstract

Improving the performance of Bureaucratic Reform (RB) in Indonesia is a crucial agenda for improving governance. Since its launch in 2010, Bureaucratic Reform has become the primary foundation for transforming the Indonesian bureaucracy. The implementation of RB includes institutional restructuring, improving governance, enhancing the quality of human resources, and enhancing public services. Evaluation of the performance of bureaucratic reform is necessary to identify its weaknesses. As a measuring tool, the Bureaucratic Reform Index (IRB) is used to monitor RB achievements from year to year. In 2023, Banyumas Regency's IRB increased to 76.90, compared to 73.08 in 2022, placing it in the BB category. Although this improvement is significant, the A predicate has not yet been achieved, so continued improvement efforts are needed. This study used various methods such as field surveys, document studies, interviews, and Focus Group Discussions (FGDs). Data analysis techniques used included qualitative and quantitative approaches to assess the performance of bureaucratic reform in Banyumas Regency. The results of the data analysis show that Banyumas Regency has recorded several achievements in the implementation of RB, such as the improvement of the Government Agency Performance Accountability System (SAKIP) of Banyumas Regency, which recorded a score of 80.53 in 2023, indicating a good level of accountability. However, several challenges remain, such as the Legal Reform Index which is still low with a score of 57.55 out of 100, and the low development of the Integrity Zone with a score of 0.75 out of 3.5. In addition, the achievement of bureaucratic simplification is also inadequate, with a score of 2 out of 5, and the implementation of the Electronic-Based Government System (SPBE) is still low with a score of 1 out of 5, indicating limitations in bureaucratic digitization.

Downloads

Download data is not yet available.

References

Bryer, T. A., & Cooper, T. L. (2012). H. George frederickson and the dialogue on citizenship in public administration. Public Administration Review, 72(SUPPL.1), S108–S116. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1540-6210.2012.02632.x

Farazmand, A. (2010). Bureaucracy, Democracy, and Public Administration: Editor’s Brief Introduction to the Symposium. Public Organization Review, 10(3), 205–207. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11115-010-0139-y

Farazmand, A. (2012). The Future of Public Administration: Challenges and Opportunities-A Critical Perspective. Administration and Society, 44(4), 487–517. https://doi.org/10.1177/0095399712452658

Farazmand, A. (2018). Handbook of bureaucracy. In Handbook of Bureaucracy. https://doi.org/10.4324/9781315093291

Farazmand, A. (2022). Bureaucracy, Bureaucratic Politics, and Democracy. In Global Encyclopedia of Public Administration, Public Policy, and Governance. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-66252-3_3076

Frederickson, H. G., & Frederickson, H. G. (2010). Social Equity and the New Public Administration. In SOCIAL EQUITY AND PUBLIC ADMINISTRATION: ORIGINS, DEVELOPMENTS, AND APPLICATIONS.

Gorda, A. A. N. O. S., & Anggreswari, N. P. Y. (2020). Socialization strategy in bureaucratic reform. Journal of Advanced Research in Dynamical and Control Systems, 12(7). https://doi.org/10.5373/JARDCS/V12I7/20202046

Haryono, B. S., Nugroho, A. A., Putera, F., & Noor, I. (2024). Narrative policy of bureaucratic reform in Indonesia: Rules of narrative in mass media. Journal of Infrastructure, Policy and Development, 8(1). https://doi.org/10.24294/jipd.v8i1.2842

Iqbal, M. (2020). Bureaucratic Reform in Indonesia: Best and Bad Practice Perspective. Asian Review, 33(2). https://doi.org/10.58837/chula.arv.33.2.2

Lin, M. (2023). Implementation of Bureaucratic Reform to Improve Public Services. Journal of Business Management and Economic Development, 1(01). https://doi.org/10.59653/jbmed.v1i01.19

Nathan, R. P. (1995). Reinventing Government: What Does It Mean? Public Administration Review, 55(2), 213. https://doi.org/10.2307/977192

Neo, B. S., & Chen, G. (2007). Dynamic governance: Embedding culture, capabilities and change in Singapore. In Dynamic Governance: Embedding Culture, Capabilities and Change in Singapore. https://doi.org/10.1142/6458

Neo, B. S., & Chen, G. (2010). Dynamic Governance - Embedding Culture, Capabilities and Change in Singapore. In Dynamic Governance - Embedding Culture, Capabilities and Change in Singapore. https://doi.org/10.1142/9789812771919

Osborne, D., & Plastrik, P. (2013). Banishing Bureaucracy?: The Five Strategies for Reinventing Government. JSTOR, 28(2), 450–454. http://eric.ed.gov/?id=ED423582 Osborne, S. P. (2006). The new public governance? In Public Management Review (Vol. 8, Issue 3). https://doi.org/10.1080/14719030600853022

Osborne, S. P. (2010). The New Public Governance?: Emerging perspectives on the theory and practice of public governance. In The New Public Governance?: Emerging Perspectives on the Theory and Practice of Public Governance. https://doi.org/10.4324/9780203861684

Osborne, S. P., Radnor, Z., & Nasi, G. (2013). A New Theory for Public Service Management? Toward a (Public) Service-Dominant Approach. American Review of Public Administration, 43(2), 135–158. https://doi.org/10.1177/0275074012466935

Peters, G., & Barzelay, M. (1996). Breaking through Bureaucracy. Public Administration Review, 56(1). https://doi.org/10.2307/3110066

Pribadi, U. (2021). Bureaucratic reform, public service performance, and citizens’ satisfaction: The case of Yogyakarta, Indonesia. Public Policy and Administration, 20(2). https://doi.org/10.13165/VPA-21-20-2-13

Siddiquee, N. A., & Mohamed, M. Z. (2007). Paradox of Public Sector Reforms in Malaysia: A Good Governance Perspective. Public Administration Quarterly, 31(3), 284–312. https://doi.org/10.1177/073491490703100303

Wahyurudhanto, A. (2020). Critical Reorientation of Bureaucratic Reform and Good Governance in Public Sector Administration in Indonesia. Webology, 17(2). https://doi.org/10.14704/WEB/V17I2/WEB17033

Webb, J., Schirato, T., & Danaher, G. (2020). Government and bureaucracy. In Understanding Bourdieu. https://doi.org/10.4324/9781003118305-5

Weimer, D. L., Barzelay, M., Armajani, B. J., Miller, G. J., Osborne, D., & Gaebler, T. (1994). Breaking through Bureaucracy: A New Vision for Managing Government. Journal of Policy Analysis and Management, 13(1). https://doi.org/10.2307/3325101

Downloads

Published

2026-03-28

How to Cite

Kurniasih, D., Wahyuningrat, W., Wijaya, S. S., & Setyoko, P. I. (2026). Performance of Bureaucratic Reform in Indonesia (Case Study in Banyumas Regency). IJOSPOL - International Journal of Social, Policy and Law , 7(3), 152-163. https://doi.org/10.8888/ijospol.v7i3.286

Issue

Vol. 7 No. 3 (2026): June 2026

Section

Articles

License

Copyright (c) 2025 IJOSPOL - International Journal of Social, Policy and Law

Creative Commons License

This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial 4.0 International License.