Published date: Mar 15 2022

Journal Title: KnE Social Sciences

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

Pages: 563–574

DOI: 10.18502/kss.v7i5.10578

Sutirja Wijayasutirjawijaya75@gmail.comDepartment of Public Administration, Faculty of Social and Political Sciences, Padjajaran University

Sinta NingrumDepartment of Public Administration, Faculty of Social and Political Sciences, Padjajaran University

Rita MyrnaDepartment of Public Administration, Faculty of Social and Political Sciences, Padjajaran University

Nina KarlinaDepartment of Public Administration, Faculty of Social and Political Sciences, Padjajaran University

The demands on public organizations increasingly place leaders in complex situations. Leaders are required to be able to unravel the complexity of the organization and deal with various problems, both internal and external. The leadership role necessitates responding and being proactive. The purpose of this research was to analyze the relationship between bureaucratic leadership, organizational agility and organizational performance in the tax sector. This research involved an explanatory survey by the SAMSAT office in Banten Province, conducted with 238 participants who were members of the public and regional tax officials who were randomly selected without differentiating positions in management. The variant SEM procedure was used for data analysis. The findings showed that the demands of bureaucratic leadership in the digital era are very high. Acceleration is an important aspect inherent in leadership in the digital era. Control over changes in local politics and administration, and demands for acceleration, necessitate leaders who have capacity. Bureaucratic leadership has an influence on organizational agility and organizational performance in the tax sector. Bureaucratic leadership influences organizational performance either directly or through organizational agility. The theoretical implication is the need to develop the concept of leadership in the context of the digital era in order to encourage public performance. The practical implication is the need for leadership that is agile in responding to public demands and acts quickly by integrating administrative orientation, understanding local political dynamics and being ready to face acceleration challenges.

Keywords: bureaucratic leadership, organizational agility, organizational performance, the taxation sector

[1] Rey C, Pitta N, Ramonas D, Sotok P. Agile purpose: Overcoming bureaucracy. Management Ideas for a Better World. Barcelona: Palgrave Macmillan; 2019. 75– 86 p.

[2] Berkowitz D, GA K. How bureaucratic leadership shapes policy outcomes: Partisan politics and affluent citizens’ incomes in the American states. J Public Policy. 2018;40(2):1–24.

[3] Huque A, Ferdous J. Bureaucratic and political leadership in Bangladesh: Dynamics of administrative reform and the public interest. Asia Pacific J Public Adm. 2019;41(3):169–80.

[4] Uhl-Bien M, Arena M. Leadership for organizational adaptability: A theoretical synthesis and integrative framework. Leadersh Q. 2018;29(1):89–104.

[5] Wiraeus D, Creelman J. Aligning the financial and operational drivers of strategic success. In Agile Strategy Management in the Digital Age. Springer International Publishing. 2019. 129–149 p.

[6] Taing H, Chang Y. Determinants of tax compliance intention: Focus on the theory of planned behavior. Int J Public Adm. 2020;44(5):1–12.

[7] Medinilla A. Agile management: Leadership in an agile environment. Berlin: Springer- Verlag; 2012.

[8] Sahin S, Furkan A. Agile Leadership Model in Health Care: Organizational and Individual Antecedents and Outcomes [Internet]. Emerald Publishing Limited; 2020. Available from: https://www.researchgate.net/publication/344438635_Agile_Leadership_Model_in_Health_Care_Organizational_and_Individual_Antecedents_and_Outcomes

[9] Lumby J. Distributed leadership and bureaucracy. Educ Manag Adm Leadersh. 2019;47(1):5–19.

[10] Akkaya B, Tabak A. The link between organizational agility and leadership: A research in science parks. Academy of Strategic Management Journal. Acad Strateg Manag J. 2020;19(1):1–17.

[11] Rzepka A, Bojar E. Leadership as one of the factors shaping the development of an agile organization. Rev Integr Bus Econ Res. 2020;9(3):383–91.

[12] Khoshlahn M, FS A. The role of organizational agility and transformational leadership in service recovery prediction. Procedia - Soc Behav Sci. 2016;230(1):142–9.

[13] Pidd M. Measuring the performance of public services. Principles and practice. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press; 2012.

[14] Attar M, Abdul-Kareem A. The role of agile leadership in organizational agility. Agil Bus Leadersh Methods Ind 40. 2020;9(1):171–91.

[15] Meynhardt T, Brieger S, Strathoff P, Anderer S, Baro A, Hermann C, et al. Public Value Performance: What Does It Mean to Create Value in the Public Sector? Springer Gabler. Wiesbaden; 2017.

[16] Bennis W. Post-bureaucratic leadership. Society. 1969;6(9):44–52.

[17] Ohemeng F, Amoako-Asiedu E, Obuobisa TD. The relationship between leadership style and employee performance: An exploratory study of the Ghanaian public service. Int J Public Leadersh Int J Public Leadersh. 2018;4(14):274–96.

[18] Tallon P. Competing perspectives on the link between strategic information technology alignment and organizational agility: Insights from a mediation model. MIS Q. 2011;35(2):463.

[19] Kaplan R, Norton D. The balanced scorecard – Measures that drive performance. Harv Bus Rev. 1992;70(1):71–19.