Published date:Feb 18 2025

Journal Title: KnE Social Sciences

Issue title: The 2024 AAPA-EROPA-AGPA-IAPA Joint Conference

Pages:55 - 77

DOI: 10.18502/kss.v10i4.18028

Dinoroy Marganda Aritonangdinoroy.aritonang@gmail.comPublic Law and Development Department, Politeknik STIA LAN Bandung, Indonesia

Refri ShafrudinStaff at the Pancasila Ideology Development Agency (BPIP), Indonesia

Endang WirjatmiPublic Administration Department, Politeknik STIA LAN Bandung, Indonesia

Saekul AnwarStaff at the Pancasila Ideology Development Agency (BPIP), Indonesia

This research examines the Pancasila Ideology Development Agency (BPIP’s) bureaucratic simplification process. Bureaucratic simplification has eliminated Echelons III and IV by altering their functions. The policy impacts broadly on organizational structure, design changes, performance, personnel, and the workplace. The study used a mixed method with a focus on qualitative approaches. Interviews, observations, questionnaires, and source triangulation were used to collect data and evaluate its validity. The research findings from the CIPP dimension show that the bureaucratic simplification agenda are still not performing well. It is acknowledged that some indicators related to its adoption are yet to produce favorable results. It is concerned with changes in the work system that each work unit has not fully recognized and adjusted. As a result, it is critical to strengthen the work system by formalizing the squad team system, increasing productivity, and establishing a clear division of tasks and authority among deputies, directorates, and functional groups. Deputies and directors encounter difficulties, in overseeing and directly managing job completion in functional roles since the middle line previously occupied by the head of the sub directorate and the head of the section has been eliminated. Furthermore, structural changes are required to shift the structural function of general administration from the Main Secretariat Unit to the Deputies and Directors in BPIP. It indicates that the functionalization and simplicity of bureaucracy still need organizational structures.

Keywords: BPIP, bureaucracy, evaluation, policy, simplification

[1] Byrkjeflot AW. Public Sector Organizations and Reputation Management: five Problems. Int Public Manage J. 2012;15(2):186–206.

[2] Kadir AG. Cultural-Value-Based Bureaucratic Reform in North Halmahera Regency. BISNIS & BIROKRASI: Jurnal Ilmu Administrasi Dan Organisasi. 2015;21(2):97–102.

[3] Dwiyanto A. Reformasi Birokrasi Publik di Indonesia (Third). Gadjah Mada University Press; 2008.

[4] Arifin DA. Bureaucratic reform as an effort to prevent corruption in Indonesia. Cogent Soc Sci. 2023;9(1):1–11.

[5] Cabinet Secretariat of the Republic of Indonesia. (2021). Minister: State Apparatus’ Transfer of Position Aims to Improve Public Services. https://setkab.go.id/en/minister state-apparatus-transfer-of-position-aims-to-improve-public-services/

[6] Ihsanuddin BG. sebagai Presiden (2019, October 2019-2024, Ini 20). Isi Pidato Pertama Lengkapnya. Jokowi Kompas.Com. https://nasional.kompas.com/read/2019/10/20/17412951/pidato-pertama-jokowi sebagai-presiden-2019-2024-ini-isi-lengkapnya?page=all

[7] Luthfiyah Rosyida, Abdul Hakim, & C. S. (2020). Competency Based State Civil Apparatus Structuring in The Framework of Bureaucracy Reform. BIS NIS & BIROKRASI: Jurnal Ilmu Administrasi Dan Organisasi, 27(3), 130–140. https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.20476/jbb.v27i3.1238..

[8] Hill M. The Public Policy Process (Fourth). Pearson Education Limited; 2005.

[9] Creswell, J. W. C. & J. D. (2018). Research Design: Qualitative, Quantitative, and Mixed Methods Approaches (Fifth). SAGE Publications..

[10] Sugiyono. (2019). Metode Penelitian Kuantitatif Kualitatif dan R&D. Alfabeta..

[11] Biklen, R. C. B. & S. K. (1998). Qualitative Research for Education (Third). Allyn and Bacon..

[12] Strauss, J. M. C. & A. L. (2015). Basics of Qualitative Research: Techniques and Procedures for Developing Grounded Theory (Fourth). SAGE Publications.