Published date: Mar 06 2023

Journal Title: KnE Social Sciences

Issue title: IAPA 2022 International Conference and International Indonesia Conference on Interdisciplinary Studies (IICIS)

Pages: 147–162

DOI: 10.18502/kss.v8i5.12995

Renny Savitrirenn004@brin.go.idResearch Center for Public Policy, National Research and Innovation Agency of Republic of Indonesia

Benedicta Retna CahyariniResearch Center for Public Policy, National Research and Innovation Agency of Republic of Indonesia

Madya Putra Yaumil AhadResearch Center for Public Policy, National Research and Innovation Agency of Republic of Indonesia

Nurhuda FirmansyahResearch Center for Public Policy, National Research and Innovation Agency of Republic of Indonesia

Rori GusparirinResearch Center for Public Policy, National Research and Innovation Agency of Republic of Indonesia

Ladiatno SamsaraResearch Center for Public Policy, National Research and Innovation Agency of Republic of Indonesia

In the last few years, Indonesia and many other countries have been increasing their innovations. As an appreciation of the implementation of innovations carried out by Government agencies, in 2014, the Ministry of State Apparatus Empowerment and Bureaucratic Reform began to hold the Public Service Innovation Competition (KIPP). The purpose of the studies is to describe the trend of public service innovation in 2014-2019 based on the innovators, innovation categories, and sectors. The archival method is used to analyze top public service innovations from the KIPP annual event held by the Ministry of State Apparatus Empowerment and the Bureaucratic Reform Republic of Indonesia in 2014-2019. Furthermore, the innovation data were filtered based on the innovators and focused on innovations from Ministries, Government Institutions, and Regional Governments, while the innovations initiated by state-owned companies were excluded. Finally, the data were analyzed based on three keywords: innovators, innovation categories, and sectors. The results showed that based on innovators, the Provincial Government group is the most innovative agency, followed by the Ministry and the Municipal Government. In terms of innovation category, it was found that technological innovation dominated top public service innovation, followed by process innovation and product/service innovation. Finally, in the sector keywords, it can be seen that the health sector is leading the innovation creation, followed by the agriculture/plantation/livestock sector and the environment and forestry sector.

Keywords: innovation, public sector, public service

[1] Claus L. HR disruption—time already to reinvent talent management. Bus Res Q. 2019;22(3):207–215.

[2] Chen J, Yin X, Mei L. Holistic Innovation: An Emerging Innovation Paradigm. Int J Innov Stud. 2018;2(1):1–13.

[3] Damanpour F, Schneider M. Characteristics of innovation and innovation adoption in public organizations: assessing the role of managers. J Public Adm Res Theory. 2009;19(3):495–522.

[4] Scott I. Context and innovation in traditional bureaucracies: A Hong Kong study. Public Adm Dev. 2021;41(1):12–22.

[5] Georgiou G. The innovative bureaucrat: evidence from the correctional authorities in Washington State. Int Rev Appl Econ. 2018;32(3):348–373.

[6] Arundel A, Bloch C, Ferguson B. Advancing innovation in the public sector: aligning innovation measurement with policy goals. Res Policy. 2019;48(3):789–798.

[7] Newman J, Mintrom M, O’Neill D. “Digital technologies, artificial intelligence, and bureaucratic transformation.” Futures. 2022;136:102886. April 2021. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.futures.2021.102886

[8] Goggin G. COVID-19 apps in Singapore and Australia: Reimagining healthy nations with digital technology. Media Int Aust Inc Cult Policy. 2020;177(1):61–75.

[9] O’Sullivan D, Dooley L. Applying innovation. 2009. https://doi.org/10.4135/9781452274898.

[10] Fuglsang L. “Bricolage and invisible innovation in public service innovation.” J Innov Econ Manag. 2010;5(1):67–87. https://doi.org/10.3917/jie.005.0067

[11] Open Goverment Indonesia. “Open Goverment Indonesia.” 2022.

[12] Widodo S, et al. “What makes public sector innovation sustainable? A case study from Indonesia.” TEM J. 2022;11(3):1376–1384. https://doi.org/10.18421/tem113-48.

[13] Imanuddin M. “One Agency One Innovation dan Telaah Keilmuannya.” 2016.

[14] Utara DK. “Inovasi SIpelandukilat.”

[15] Bekkers V, Edelenbos J, Steijn B. Innovation in the public sector linking capacity and leadership - IIAS Series : Governance and Public Management. 2011.

[16] OECD/Eurostat. Oslo Manual 2018: Guidelines for collecting. Reporting and using data on innovation; 2018.

[17] Kahn KB. Understanding innovation. Bus Horiz. 2018;61(3):453–460.

[18] Jalonen H, Helo T. Co-creation of public service innovation using open data and social media. Int J Innov Digit Econ. 2020;11(3):64–77.

[19] Pratama AB. The landscape of public service innovation in Indonesia: A comprehensive analysis of its characteristic and trend. Innov Manag Rev. 2020;17(1):25–40.

[20] Suranto S, Darumurti A, Eldo DH, Habibullah A. Potret Kebijakan Inovasi Pelayanan Publik di Indonesia Tahun 2020. J Public Policy. 2021;7(2):97.

[21] Das B, Jain KK, Mishra Su K. “Article information : Archival research : A neglected method in organization studies.” 2018.

[22] Negeri KD. “KEMENDAGRI MUTAKHIRKAN KODE, DATA WILAYAH ADMINISTRASI PEMERINTAHAN DAN PULAU DI SELURUH INDONESIA.” 2022. https://ditjenbinaadwil.kemendagri.go.id/berita/detail/kemendagri-mutakhirkan– kode-data-wilayah-administrasi-pemerintahan–dan-pulau-di-seluruh-indonesia

[23] KPAN dan R. Birokrasi, “Lembaga Pemerintah Pusat.” 2022.

[24] Kompas.com, “Sri Mulyani Keluhkan 24.000 Aplikasi Pemerintah Bikin Boros Anggaran, Kemenkominfo: Akan ditutup,” 2022.