Published date: Mar 15 2022

Journal Title: KnE Social Sciences

Issue title: 2021 Annual Conference of Indonesian Association for Public Administration

Pages: 471–490

DOI: 10.18502/kss.v7i5.10572

Pratiwi Pratiwipratiwisaja@gmail.comCenter for State Civil Aparatus Training and Development and Competency Mapping, National Institute of Public Administration

Krismiyati KrismiyatiCenter for State Civil Aparatus Training and Development and Competency Mapping, National Institute of Public Administration

Agus WahyuadiantoCenter for State Civil Aparatus Training and Development and Competency Mapping, National Institute of Public Administration

Masrully MasrullyCenter for State Civil Aparatus Training and Development and Competency Mapping, National Institute of Public Administration

E-Learning has been used extensively in the public sector during the coronavirus pandemic. However, the lack of IT capability has led to irresponsive user experience measures. Agile bureaucracy is often mentioned as a set of values to respond to uncertainty during the robust demand of online interactions. Previous studies including systematic literature reviews have suggested that agile bureaucracy in the public sector is hindered by a culture of hierarchy and a lack of IT competency. Using empirical data that was derived from actual experiences, this study aimed to: 1) investigate participant perceptions of agility in e-learning for civil servants in Indonesia; and 2) recommend interventions to deal with the hinderances and prerequisites for agile bureaucracy in e-learning. This research collected data through open-ended interview questions and online surveys, and data were analyzed using the Atlas.ti software. This study considered several agile bureaucracy principles in e-learning, such as continuous improvement, collaboration, merit-based management, responsive and bottom-up decision making, and flexible support. The findings suggested that bottomup decision-making and competency-based human resource management were two critical challenges in agile e-learning provision. Further, this study recommends practical measures that can be taken by e-learning providers to solve these challenges.

Keywords: agile bureaucracy, training, competency development, e-learning

[1] Riva G, Wiederhold BK, Mantovani F. Surviving COVID-19: The neuroscience of smart working and distance learning. Cyberpsychology, Behavior, and Social Networking. 2021;24(2):79–85. https://doi.org/10.1089/cyber.2021.0009

[2] Rahman MA, Amarullah R, Hidayah K. Evaluasi penerapan model pembelajaran e-learning pada pelatihan dasar calon pegawai negeri sipil. Jurnal Borneo Administrator. 2020;16(1):101–116.

[3] Mergel I, Ganapati S, Whitford AB. Agile: A new way of governing. Public Administration Review. 2020;81(1):161-165.

[4] Vijay D, Ghosh D. The Sabar Shouchagar Project (toilets for everyone): Making Nadia District the first open-defecation-free district in India. Emerald Emerging Markets Case Studies. 2018;8(1): 1-15. https://doi.org/10.1108/EEMCS-03-2017-0061

[5] Berger H. Agile development in a bureaucratic arena - A case study experience. International Journal of Information Management. 2007;27(6):386–396. Available from: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijinfomgt.2007.08.009

[6] Nazarova OB, Pulekha IR, Maslennikova OY, Osipov YV. Rationale for choosing the model and tool for developing an e-learning course. Journal of Physics: Conference Series. 2020;1661(1): 1-5. Available from: https://doi.org/10.1088/1742- 6596/1661/1/012184

[7] Mergel I. Agile innovation management in government: A research agenda. Government Information Quarterly. 2016;33(3):516–523. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.giq.2016.07.004

[8] Onwujekwe G, Weistroffer H. Agile development in bureaucratic environments: A literature review. Lecture Notes in Business Information Processing. 2019;341:316- 330. Available from: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-11395-7_26

[9] Soe RM, Drechsler W. Agile local governments: Experimentation before implementation. Government Information Quarterly. 2018;35(2):323–335. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.giq.2017.11.010

[10] Jae Moon M, Suzuki K, Park TI, Sakuwa K. A comparative study of COVID-19 responses in South Korea and Japan: Political nexus triad and policy responses. International Review of Administrative Sciences. 2021; 87(3):651-671. Available from: https://doi.org/10.1177/0020852321997552

[11] Hung SY, Chen CC, Yeh RKJ, Huang LC. Enhancing the use of e-learning systems in the public sector: A behavioural intention perspective. Electronic Government. 2016;12(1):1–26. https://doi.org/10.1504/EG.2016.074237

[12] Akour Muhammad Ali, Das Anupam. Paper presented at: 2020 IEEE International Conference on Teaching, Assessment, and Learning for Engineering (TALE); 2020 December 8-11; Takamatsu, Japan. Japan: IEEE; 2021 March 08; p. 576-579. Available from: https://doi.org/10.1109/TALE48869.2020.9368373

[13] Denning S. Why agile can be a game changer for managing continuous innovation in many industries. Strategy & Leadership. 2013;41(2):5–11. https://doi.org/10.1108/10878571311318187

[14] Ramingwong L, Ramingwong S, Kusalaporn P. Solo scrum in bureaucratic organization: A case study from Thailand. Lecture Notes in Electrical Engineering. 2017; 449: 341-348. Available from: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-981-10-6451-7_40

[15] Spiegler SV, Heinecke C, Wagner S. The influence of culture and structure on autonomous teams in established companies. Lecture Notes in Business Information Processing. 2019;364: 46-54. Available from: https://doi.org/10.1007/978- 3-030-30126-2_6

[16] Janssen M, van der Voort H. Agile and adaptive governance in crisis response: Lessons from the COVID-19 pandemic. International Journal of Information Management. 2020;55: 1-7. Available from: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijinfomgt.2020.102180

[17] Lonti Zsuzsanna, Rahemtulla Hanif; OECD/ADB: Government at a glance Southeast Asia 2019. Manila: OECD/ ADB; 2019; Page 1-127. Publication No. 518351. Available from: https://doi.org/https://www.adb.org/sites/default/files/publication/518351/ government-glance-southeast-asia-2019.pdf

[18] de OJH, Luna A, Kruchten P, et al. State of the art of agile governance: A systematic review. International Journal of Computer Science and Information Technology. 2014;6(5):121–141. https://doi.org/10.5121/ijcsit.2014.6510

[19] Yuningsih Y. Implementasi e-learning di masa pandemi Covid-19: Studi kasus pada pelatihan dasar calon pegawai negeri sipil di puslatbang PKASN LAN. Jurnal Wacana Kinerja. 2021;24(1):111–136. https://doi.org/10.31845/jwk.v24i1.693

[20] Azam A, Fu Q, Abdullah MI. Determinants of e-government services adoption in Pakistan: An integrated model. Electronic Government, An International Journal. 2013;10(2):105–124. Available from: https://doi.org/doi.org/10.1504/EG.2013.052597

[21] Reddick C, Jaramillo PA. New digital media use and preferences for government: A survey of Canadians. Electronic Government, An International Journal. 2014;11(1):39– 58. https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.1504/EG.2014.063313

[22] Wan Z, Compeau D, Haggerty N. The effects of self-regulated learning processes on e-learning outcomes in organizational settings. Journal Of Management Information Systems. 2012;29(1):307–340. https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.2753/MIS0742- 1222290109

[23] Fassbinder AGDO, Barbosa EF, Fassbinder M. Massive open online courses on web development education: A case study. Paper presented at: Frontiers in Education Conference (FIE); 2018 October 3-6; San Jose, USA. USA: IEEE; 2019 March 07; p. 1-9. Available from: https://doi.org/10.1109/FIE.2018.8659120

[24] Golra FR, Beugnard A, Dagnat F, Guerin S, Guychard C. Using free modeling as an agile method for developing domain specific modeling languages. Paper presented at: 19th ACM/IEEE International Conference on Model Driven Engineering Languages and Systems (MODELS 2016); 2016 October 2-7; Saint Malo, France. New York, USA: SIGSOFT, IEEE-CS. p. 24-34. Available from: https://doi.org/10.1145/2976767.2976807

[25] Fernández JA. The agile leader: Conditions for succeeding in China. Advances in Global Leadership, vol. 4. Bingley, UK: Emerald Group Publishing Limited; 2006. p. 255-275. Available from: https://doi.org/10.1016/S1535-1203(06)04017-2

[26] Hajjdiab H, Taleb AS. Agile adoption experience: A case study in the UAE. Paper presented at: IEEE 2nd International Conference on Software Engineering and Service Science; 2011 July 15-17; Beijing, China. China: IEEE; 2011 August 12; p. 31-34. Available from: https://ieeexplore.ieee.org/document/5982247

[27] Creswell JW, Poth CN. Qualitative inquiry and research design: Choosing among five approaches. California: Sage Publications; 2016. P. 1-488.

[28] Banning EB. The Archaeologist’s Laboratory. Cham, Switzerland: Springer; 2020. Summarizing data: Descriptive statistics. p. 1-375. Available from: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-47992-3_2

[29] Manikandan S. Measures of central tendency: The mean. Journal of Pharmacology and Pharmacotherapeutics. 2011;2(2):120.

[30] de Chiusole D, Spoto A, Stefanutti L. Extracting partially ordered clusters from ordinal polytomous data. Behavior Research Methods. 2020;52:503–520. https://doi.org/10.3758/s13428-019-01248-8

[31] Huang P. Aerospace project management handbook. Boca Raton, USA: CRC Press; 2017. Available from: https://doi.org/10.1201/9781315154886

[32] Balter B. Toward a more agile government: The case for rebooting federal it procurement. Public Contract Law. 2011; 41:149–171.

[33] Lapham M. DoD Agile Adoption: Necessary Considerations, Concerns, and Changes. 2012 January: Crosstalk: High Maturity, Payoff: p. 31-3, Carnegie-Mellon University, Pittsburgh PA Software Engineering Institute, USA; 2012.

[34] Creswell JW. Research design: Qualitative, quantitative, mixed methods approaches. California, USA: Sage Publications; 2014. Available from: https://books.google.co.id/ books?id=4uB76IC_pOQC&printsec=copyright&hl=id#v=onepage&q&f=false

[35] Karvonen T, Sharp H, Barroca L. Enterprise agility: Why is transformation so hard? Lecture Notes in Business Information Processing. 2018;314: 131-145. Available from: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-91602-6_9

[36] Nazar D, Vahid P. Agility evaluation in public sector. Chinese Business Review. 2009;8(10):283.

[37] Sudirman I, Aisha AN, Monang J, Prasetyo IR. Civil servant’s e-govemment adoption levels: Are age and context matters? Paper presented at: 6th International Conference on Electrical Engineering, Computer Science and Informatics (EECSI); 2019 September 18-20; Bandung, Indonesia. Indonesia: IEEE; 2020 February 03; p. 234-240. Available from: https://ieeexplore.ieee.org/document/8976952/authors#authors

[38] The World Bank. Preparing ICT skills for digital economy: Indonesia within the ASEAN context. The World Bank; Jakarta, Indonesia. 2018. Available from: https: //blogs.worldbank.org/sites/default/files/preparing_ict_skills_for_digital_economyrevised_ 7mar2018.pdf

[39] Wang X, Conboy K. Understanding agility in software development from a complex adaptive systems perspective. Paper presented at: 17th European Conference on Information Systems (ECIS 2009); 2009 date not available. Verona, Italy. Italy: Association for Information Systems AIS Electronic Library (AISeL); 2009; p. 2182-2193. Available from: https://www.researchgate.net/publication/242416702_Understanding_ agility_in_software_development_from_a_complex_adaptive _systems_perspective