The Implementation of Government Regulation on Regional Apparatus Organization (Haris Faozan & Zulpikar 2010)

The Implementation of Government Regulation on Regional Apparatus Organization | 1

The Implementation of Government Regulation on Regional Apparatus Organization: Case study

in the Local Government of the Provincial of South-East Sulawesi*

Haris Faozan The National Institute of Public Administration, Jakarta, Jl. Veteran 10 Jakarta, Indonesia,

E-mail: [email protected]

Zulpikar The Center for Research and Apparatus Training I, the National Institute of Public Administration,

Bandung, Jl. Kiara Payung Km. 4.7, Jatinangor, Sumedang, Jawa Barat, Indonesia, E-mail: [email protected]

Implementasi Peraturan Pemerintah Tentang Organisasi Perangkat Daerah: Studi kasus di Pemerintah Daerah di Provinsi Sulawesi Tenggara

Diterbitkannya Peraturan Pemerintah No. 41 Tahun 2007 tentang Organisasi Perangkat Daerah bertujuan untuk memberikan pedoman yang menyeluruh bagi penyusunan dan pengendalian organisasi perangkat daerah sehingga dapat menangani seluruh urusan pemerintahan yang diselenggarakannya. Peraturan Pemerintah tersebut diharapkan mampu memberikan jalan keluar atas kelemahan-kelemahan yang terdapat dalam dua kebijakan sebelumnya. Penelitian ini bertujuan untuk mendeskripsikan kinerja Peraturan Pemerintah Nomor 41 Tahun 2007 tentang Organisasi Perangkat Daerah. Penelitian ini merupakan studi kasus deskriptif. Pemerintah daerah yang dijadikan lokus Penelitian ini yaitu pemerintah kabupaten Konawe, kota Kendari, dan provinsi Sulawesi Tenggara. Data primer diperoleh melalui kuesioner dengan pertanyaan terbuka-tertutup. Sedangkan data sekunder diperoleh melalui dokumen-dokumen yang relevan dari pemerintah daerah yang bersangkutan. Responden Penelitian ini adalah meliputi seluruh Kepala Satuan Kerja Perangkat Daerah. Analisis data dilakukan dengan menggunakan metode triangulasi. Interpretasi dilakukan terhadap tingkat capaian kinerja kebijakan.Temuan Penelitian ini menunjukan bahwa tingkat capaian kinerja Peraturan Pemerintah Nomor 41 Tahun 2007 di pemerintah kabupaten Konawe, kota Kendari, dan provinsi Sulawesi Tenggara menunjukkan bahwa kinerja Peraturan Pemerintah No. 41 Tahun 2007 dinilai ”cukup memadai” tetapi dalam pelaksanaannya masih membutuhkan fasilitasi dan pengawasan (pembinaan dan pengendalian) secara intensif dalam rangka tercapainya tujuan kebijakan tersebut secara optimal. Keywords: local government, policy implementation, regional apparatus organization.

A. Background

The management reforms of regional governance in Indonesia had started since the enactment of Law Number 22 Year 1999 regarding Regional Governance. In relation to the management of the regional governance at that time, the Government Regulation Number 25 Year 2000 regarding Authorities of Central and Provincial Government as Autonomous * Terbit dalam Jurnal Administrasi Negara, Vol. 16 No. 3/September 2010. STIA-LAN Makassar.


Region was then enacted. Article 2 of the Government Regulation stated that the authorities of the Central Government includes 5 (five) main authorities and other national scale authorities. It further elaborates (article 2 paragraph 1) that the 5 main authorities includes: 1) foreign politics, 2) defense and security; 3) justice; 4) monetary and fiscal; and 5) religion. Article 3 then states the scope of the provincial authorities that is basically that of cross boundaries of regency/city, that of certain aspects and that of regional scale, that of unable or not yet able to be performed by regency/city.

As an effort to follow up the Government Regulation Number 25 Year 2000, the Government enacted the Government Regulation Number 84 Year 2000 regarding Guidance of Regional Apparatus Organization that regulates institutionalization of provincial, regency and city apparatus organization. With the enactment of these three rules of laws, i.e., Law Number 22 Year 1999, Government Regulation Number 25 Year 2000, and Government Regulation Number 84 Year 2000, next appeared diverse implications towards governmental institutionalization in the Central, Provincial, and Regency/City Governments.

The Implications towards institutionalization/institution of the Central Government were the adoption of rationalization and/ reformulation of the functions of the institution whose authorities had been turned to the Region (those other than the 5 aspects). Meanwhile, the implications that appeared towards the institutionalization of the regional government, amongst others, were the occurrence of less harmonious work relations between provincial and regency/city governments. Another implication that was also very important to be further observed was the establishment of increasingly fatter regional apparatus organizations. The main cause of this condition was the fact that the Government Regulation Number 84 Year 2000 had no clear and strict criteria as parameters and indicators that can be used as guidance in determining the size of an organization.

In response to such phenomena, the Central Government enacted the Government Regulation Number 8 Year 2003 concerning Guidance of Regional Apparatus Organization as an effort to amend and concomitantly a substitute of the Government Regulation Number 84 Year 2000. The new regulation not only stipulated the considerants for establishment (Article 2 paragraph 1), but it also stipulated criteria for establishment (Article 3) and clarity of structure or size of an organization (Article 15 and 16).

Nevertheless, that did not mean that the new regulation was free from diversely new issues. The research findings of the Evaluation of the Regional Apparatus Organization conducted by the State Ministry of Administrative Reforms in 2005 showed a number of issues in implementing the new regulation. The important findings in the practices could be classified in detail as follows: a) The existing conditions of fat regional apparatus organizations as a result of the

implementation of the Government Regulation Number 84 Year 2000 and the adoption of decentralization had made it difficult to apply the new regulation;

b) The reform of the regional apparatus organizations had an impact on human resource management. The implementation of the new regulation had an impact on rationalization of personnel and the abolishment of structural (managerial) positions, but things such as these failed to be anticipated by the Government so that they created chaos in the regions, and no solution offered by the Government;

c) The employees and officials that were impacted by the rationalization became underperformed so that it induced instability in the management of government;


d) The criteria in the new regulation were perceived very rigid in regulating the regional apparatus organizations so that they were unable to explore specific potentials inherited by the regions;

e) The criteria did not reflect the real needs of the regions; f) The criteria were difficult to understand and to implement; g) The criteria confined the regions so that it was hard for the regions to develop

themselves and to divide the tasks; h) The occurrence of split understanding and perception in the main tasks and functions of

a work unit; and i) There were political interventions in managing regional apparatus organizations.

With the occurrences of complex issues in the implementation of the Government Regulation Number 8 Year 2003, the Government then enacted the Government Regulation Number 41 Year 2007 concerning the Regional Apparatus Organization. This regulation was expected to be able to give a solution against the shortcomings of the two previous regulations. The enactment of the latest regulation was intended to serve as comprehensive guidance for designing and controlling regional apparatus organizations so that they were able to deal with all governmental affairs in their regions.

Based on that, this study was aimed at describing the extent of performance of the implementation of the Government Regulation Number 41 Year 2007 that included effectiveness, efficiency, sufficiency, accuracy, and responsiveness.

B. Literature Review

“Any policy is a decision. A public policy is whatever a government decides to do or not to do” (Shafritz, Russel & Borick, 2007: 42). In line with the above perception, Mustopadidjaja (1999) defined public policy as a decision that was intended to solve certain problems, to do certain activities, or to achieve certain goals, which was made by an authorized institution in the framework of the management of state government and development.

The public policy itself was the product of a government institution in response to the dynamics that took place within the scope of policy. Mustopadidjaja (1999) further emphasized the needs to pay attention on position, roles, and conditions of the target groups in the process of public policy. This is because they would influence accuracy, efficiency, effectiveness, and performance of a policy. This also applied to the policy formulation concerning the Regional Apparatus Organization as a small part of overall available public policy. The Government Regulation on the Regional Apparatus Organization was a public policy that was enacted to response to the dynamics within the scope of policy.

Every policy was a result of a series of process of a cycle. In the technical- technocratic activities of a policy, basic issues usually appeared during the formulation of policy issues, which was an initial stage in the cycle of policy process (Jan and Wegrich, 2007:43-62). This was understandable because a policy issue was a very complex and unstructured phenomenon. Because of that in this stage an analyst or policy formulator had to have sufficient capacity, well-informed, and sharp intuition to be able to have an insight into the


policy issue clearly. Fault in formulating the issue would result a total failure in every policy offered. In this case, the failure of a policy took place not in the implementation process, but rather on the formulation of the issue. This condition was caused by providing wrong alternatives to the wrong issues. This was in line with Ackoff (1974): “Successful problem solving requires finding the right solution to the right problem. We fail more often because we solve the wrong problem then because we get the wrong solution to the right problem”.

The concept above could be related with the way a policy of the Regional Apparatus Organization was formulated. I meant that the pros and cons of the current policy of the Regional Apparatus Organization could be initiated by scrutinizing the formulation of the issue. The policy issue formulation in reality was not a simple matter. When a policy issue had been formulated, that did not mean that the policy made would always be an answer of the issue. The development of policy alternatives and choices of an alternative that was considered the most feasible was very much influenced by the ability and the knowledge of the policy formulator in looking at the dynamics within the scope of the policy.

In relation to the process, Dunn (1981) then formulated three important elements in the system of public policy, namely: 1) Policy environments were the context that caused the emergence of a policy issue that

influenced and was affected by the policy makers and the policy itself. 2) Public policies themselves were decisions over a number or a series of choices that

were, more or less, related one to another (including the decision of not doing anything) made by government agencies or offices and intended to achieve certain goals.

3) Policy stakeholders were individuals or groups that influenced and were affected by the government’s decisions.

Apart from the above elaboration, in the stage of policy formulation it is necessary to consider various stages in implementing a policy. The policy implementation requires various operational activities that are detailed, entailed, and integrated in the day-to-day life of administration. So that it could be said that the policy implementation is an activity that is complex and critical. Therefore it requires an awareness and understanding towards the complexity of the policy implementation to be able to formulate and to implement well-planned and systematic efforts.

The final process of the policy process is policy performance evaluation. The evaluation has a status and a role that are equally important with the other policy cycle stages. The evaluation is a systematic assessment towards a policy in the framework of determining the policy impacts both long term and short term. The essence of evaluation is to provide feedback that leads to successful outcomes based on real and objective measures. Virtually the objectives of the evaluation are to improve (if necessary), not to prove. There are two things that will be revealed by evaluation, i.e., policy outputs (i.e., what have been produced as a result of policy formulation); and policy outcomes (i.e., the results of the consequences that have been caused by the issuance and implementation of a policy).

One of the types of policy performance evaluation is result evaluation. This is done in the framework of determining achievement level of policy objectives. The results evaluation includes analysis towards the strengths and weaknesses of a policy along with the


recommendation for future improvement. The standard that is used as the basis of evaluating a policy according to Mustopadidjaja (1999), includes: 1) Compliance, that is in line with the auditory efforts through questioning to what extent

the transactions conducted by the government are compliance with the prevailing rules and regulations;

2) Efficiency, that is to what extent the government institution has reached optimum level of productivity based on deployed resources; and

3) Effectiveness, that is to what extent the achievement level of policy objective based on the exploitation of public resources.

According to Dunn (1981) the criteria in evaluating the policy are as follows: 1) Effectivenes: concerned with achievement level of predetermined results. 2) Efficiency: concerned with the level of efforts to achieve the predetermined results. 3) Sufficiency: achievement level in solving a problem. 4) Equality: level of equal distribution of expenses and benefits to different target groups. 5) Responsiveness: satisfactory achievement of certain groups as a result of a policy. 6) Accuracy: usefulness level of policy result that are achieved.

According to Riant Nugroho (2009: 661) the values that become the main characteristics of an ideal policy are the following: 1) Smart, on condition that the problems solved are the core issues so that the policy

makers become focus on the policy issues that will be managed by the public policy. 2) Wise, on condition that it does not create a new problem that is bigger than the

supposedly solved. 3) Giving hope, on condition that the public can reach a better future.

The evaluation of the performance of the Government Regulation Number 41 Year 2007 includes five (5) criteria, namely: 1) Effectiveness: Achievement level of objectives that are intended by the implemented

policy. 2) Efficiency: Ratio level between required inputs and achieved outputs in the

implementation. 3) Sufficiency: Achievement level of solved problems by the implemented policy. 4) Accuracy: Benefit level gained by the regional government apparatus and/or society as

a result of policy implementation. 5) Responsiveness: Satisfactory level of the regional government apparatus and/or

society as a result of the implemented policy.

An initial stepping stone of a policy performance evaluation is specification of evaluation topics that include: background of the problems in order to produce a policy with the objectives and benefits that are expected to be achieved. This also applies to policy performance evaluation concerned with Regional Apparatus Organization as stipulated in the Government Regulation Number 41 Year 2007.

The next step in the policy performance evaluation is design of evaluation procedure that maps core content performance of a policy. Things that are described are how the policy performance in line with the respective criteria. Furthermore it also describes various supporting factors and obstacles in achieving policy performance in accordance with the criteria of policy performance. The last but not least is describing steps that are necessary to do in formulating and/or implementing similar policy in the future.


One of the things that is necessary to be paid attention to concerned with reformulation of similar policy in the future is the content materials of the policy itself, particularly that of most closely related with the cause of the birth of a policy. This has become very important and essential because without the presence of a comprehensive and integrated regulation that is included in the policy contents materials, probably the objectives of a policy become hard to achieve. Consistency between what will be achieved and the contents regulation that needs to be further explored in the Government Regulation Number 41 Year 2007 on at least three things, namely: 1) The Government Regulation Number 41 Year 2007 serves as comprehensive guidance

for designing Regional Apparatus Organization. This means that in terms of contents materials it regulates comprehensively: the size of regional apparatus organization; the criteria to determine the size of regional apparatus organization of the respective regional government; the number of organizational structure, all must be fitted in with workloads of the respective regional apparatus; and the establishment of other institutions in the framework of implementing the government policy as part of regional apparatus.

2) The Government Regulation Number 41 Year 2007 is comprehensive guidance for controlling the Regional Apparatus Organizations. This means that in terms of contents materials it comprehensively regulates: Application of coordination, integration, synchronization and simplification of cross regions and cross sectors, so that the respective regional government is compliance towards principles and norms in managing the regional apparatus organization; Cancellation of regional regulations concerning regional apparatus that is disharmonious with rules of laws with the consequence of canceling the rights for finance and personnel as well as other administrative measures; The role of the government in facilitating is by way of assistancy, orientation, guidance, consultancy, supervision, training, and cooperation with the regional apparatus organizations, so that synchronization and simplification can be achieved optimally in the framework of the Unitary State of the Republic of Indonesia.

3) Regional Apparatus Organization can handle all governmental affairs that are conducted by the Regional Government. This means that the Regional Apparatus Organization that is established with reference to the Government Regulation Number 41 Year 2007 will be able to adopt organizational principles, amongst others, clear vision and mission, institutionalizing functional, core and supporting staff in a strict, efficient and effective manner, line of control as well as clear work procedures, so that all governmental affairs that are mandated can be well taken care of.

The next step in policy performance evaluation is concerned with”ways or methods used” in order to produce sufficient policy recomendations. This study adopted the method that used validation instruments, performance data collection and analisis, and results validation of policy performance analisis. From all of them it was expected that it could formulate policy recommendations that were more applicable and implementable.

C. Methodology The method used in this study was case study. It was an in-depth written description of an issue. In general this study was aimed at revealing the facts about the performance of the Government Regulation Number 41 Year 2007. Based on the general objectives, the strategy used in this study was descriptive. This study was, therefore, a descriptive case


study. In this context the case study was aimed at describing the performance of the Government Regulation Number 41 Year 2007 objectively through a series of steps of collecting, managing and analyzing data.

The data used in this study included primary and secondary data where the former was obtained through questionnaires distributed to all management of Regional Apparatus Work Units in the Regency Government of Konawe, City Government of Kendari and Provincial Government of South East Sulawesi, and through focused group discussion with key informants from the National Institute of Public Administration. Whereas the collection of secondary data was obtained through the research findings, rules of laws and relevant documents, such as Regional Regulations concerning Regional Apparatus Organization or Organizational Structure and Work Procedures, Relations Procedures that were developed and implemented.

The analysis of the researched data led to 5 (five) dimensions of policy performance. The five dimensions were effectiveness, efficiency, sufficiency, accuracy and responsiveness. The level of achievement of policy performance was an average calculation from the achievement of the five dimensions.

To get the score of the level of achievement of policy performance in a region, the following steps were used: 1) Answer Scoring;

Each answer from the point statement was scored differently. Completely Disagree was scored 0, Disagree was scored 1, Agree was scored 2 and Completely Agree was scored 3. Then each score was multiplied by the number of respondents that answered.

2) An average of each point statement (AoS i) where i was the statement to I; Average of each point statement was average answers from all Regional Government Work Units that answered. This score was obtained from the total multiplication between scores and respondents in the first step divided by the number of Regional Government Work Units that became the respondents.

3) Level of Achievement of Dimension (AcD j) Level of Achievement was obtained by way of dividing the total of the average of each point statement with the number of questions in that dimension. Mathematically the following formula were used:

Where: AcD j = Level of Achievement of Dimension j Σ AoS i = Total Average of Point Statement n = Number of questions in that dimension

Category for Level of Achievement of Dimension for Policy Performance was as follows (Table 1):

AcD j = ∑ AoS i n


Table 1: Category for Level of Achievement of Performance Dimension of Government Regulation Number 41 Year 2007

Category Score Achieved Interpretation

Low 0 < AcD j ≤ 1,00 Performance dimension of Government Regulation Number 41 Year 2007 is scored insufficient so that it requires comprehensive changes towards contents materials and implementation.

Moderate 1,01 < AcD j ≤ 2,00 Performance dimension of Government Regulation Number 41 Year 2007 is scored relatively sufficient, but it still requires intensive facilitation and supervision in its implementation.

High 2,01 < AcD j ≤ 3,00 Performance dimension of Government Regulation Number 41 Year 2007 is scored sufficient, but it requires periodic and comprehensive evaluation in the framework of anticipating environmental changes.

4) Level of Achievement of Policy Performance (AcP)

The level of achievement of policy performance is obtained by averaging level of achievement of all dimensions. Mathematically the following formula can be used:

Where: AcP = Level of Achievement of Policy Performance Σ AcD j = Total Level of Achievement of Dimension

Criteria for Level of Achievement of Performance of Government Regulation Number 41 Year 2007 as follows (Table 2):

Table 2: Category for Achievement Level of Performance of Government Regulation Number 41 Year 2007

Category Achievement Score Interpretation

Low 0 < AcP j ≤ 1,00 Performance dimension of Government Regulation Number 41 Year 2007 is scored insufficient so that it requires comprehensive changes towards contents materials and implementation.

Moderate 1,01 < AcP j ≤ 2,00 Performance dimension of Government Regulation Number 41 Year 2007 is scored relatively sufficient, but it still requires intensive facilitation and supervision in its implementation.

High 2,01 < AcP j ≤ 3,00 Performance dimension of Government Regulation Number 41 Year 2007 is scored sufficient, but it requires periodic and comprehensive evaluation in the framework of anticipating environmental changes.

AcP = ∑ AcD j 5


D. Findings And Discussion

Policy of Government Regulation Number 41 Year 2007 was intended to give clear direction and guidance to the Regions in managing efficient, effective and rational organizations in accordance with the needs and capacity of the respective regions and the presence of coordination, integration, synchronization and simplification as well as institutional communication between Central and Regional. To find out whether the policy performance of Government Regulation Number 41 Year 2007 was considered high, moderate or low score that was measured based on the five dimensions that were used as a standard. The five dimensions were effectiveness, efficiency, sufficiency, accuracy and responsiveness.

The dimension of effectiveness sees to what extent the policy implementation can achieve the desired goals. The dimension of efficiency sees to what extent policy implementation requires less input compared with more output produced. The dimension of sufficiency sees to what extent the policy implementation did not generate bigger problems from the existing problems that were supposed to solve. The dimension of accuracy sees to what extent the policy implementation gives benefits in increasing personnel capacity of the regional government. The dimension of responsiveness sees to what extent the policy implementation gives job satisfaction for the personnel in the regional government.

The analysis of the achievement level of policy performance that is broken down based on the achivement level per dimension for the researched locus is as follows (Tabel 3): Table 3: Achievement Level of Dimension (AcD) and Achievement Level of Performance (AcP) of Government Regulation Number 41 Year 2007 in the Regency Government of Konawe, City Government of Kendari and Provincial Government of South East Sulawesi.

Dimension

Achievement Level of Dimension

Regency Government of Konawe

City Government of Kendari

Provincial Government of South East Sulawesi

Score Category Score Category Score Category

Effectiveness 1,70 Moderate 2,02 High 1,83 Moderate

Efficiency 1,87 Moderate 2,02 High 1,89 Moderate

Sufficiency 1,79 Moderate 1,72 Moderate 1,61 Moderate

Accuracy 1,86 Moderate 2,05 High 1,81 Moderate

Responsiveness 1,80 Moderate 1,93 Moderate 1,87 Moderate Achievement Level of

Policy Performance 1,80 Moderate 1,95 Moderate 1,80 Moderate

From the table above, it showed that the policy performance of Government Regulation Number 41 Year 2007 was at the range of “moderate” category. However, if seen from the score of the policy performance achievement, the City Government of Kendari had the highest score compared with two other locuses. The following was the figure of policy performance in each locus.


1. Performance of Government Regulation Number 41 Year 2007 in the Regency

Government of Konawe

Konawe Regency with the capital city of Unahaa was one of the autonomous regions in the South-East Sulawesi Province that was located 70 km from the central provincial capital city of Kendari. Konawe regency had 1.80 achievement level of policy performance that fell under the range of moderate category (see Figure 1). This achievement score was the accumulation of score per dimension (see table 3). The respondents gave the lowest score in the effectiveness dimension with a score of 1.70. This indicated that Government Regulation Number 41 Year 2007 was not all fully effective as policy guidance in conducting comprehensive reforms for the regional apparatus organization in the Regency Government of Konawe.

Figure 1: Achievement Level of Performance Dimension (AcD) of Government Regulation Number 41 Year 2007 in the Regency Government of Konawe

Government Regulation Number 41 Year 2007 provided clarification in determining the size of organization (Regional Apparatus Organization) and classification of governmental affairs in establishing regional apparatus. This could be found out from Regional Regulations Number 11 Year 2007, Number 12 Year 2007 and Number 13 Year 2008 that regulate the establishment Regional Apparatus Organization. Based on the regional regulations The Regency Government of Konawe conducted downsizing of the size of the organization, adjustment of type and title of Regional Apparatus Organization. However, Government Regulation Number 41 Year 2007 could not be used as guidance in formulating main tasks and functions of Regional Apparatus Organization. This resulted in the occurrence of overlapping in formulating main tasks and functions of regional apparatus within the Regency Government of Konawe.

Other obstacles in applying Government Regulation Number 41 Year 2007 were not yet optimal in fostering and controlling conducted by the Governor, that is, in providing facilitation towards regional regulation draft concerning Regional Apparatus Organization.


Furthermore intervention from the government (Technical Ministry) still occurred in deciding the types and echelonering of Regional Apparatus Organization that had to be formed although it was not in line with the workloads and needs of the regent in taking care of the governmental affairs. This issue also influenced the scoring in efficiency dimension that was in the moderate category with a score of 1.87.

The highest score towards efficiency dimension was on the basis of the occurrence of downsizing on the size of the organization so that it reduced the cost in the input of regional government administration resources. The positive impacts towards efficiency dimension were on the contrary with sufficiency dimension.

The sufficiency dimension was scored 1.79 although it fell under moderate category, it was the second lowest position compared with effectiveness dimension. This indicated that the application of Government Regulation Number 41 Year 2007 generated new problems, that is, that of concerned with the management of personnel. Downsizing of the size of the organization and the adjustment of regional apparatus types impacted on reducing the available formation of position compared with the number and personnel competency. This problem had an impact towards the scoring of accuracy dimension.

Accuracy dimension was scored the second highest after the effectiveness dimension that was 1.86. The fact was that Government Regulation Number 41 Year 2007 was able to motivate the personnel capacity building within the regional government. The motivation was based on the consideration of personnel competency apart from normative requirements (merit system) in placing personnel to seat in a position formation in the Regional Apparatus Organization. However the normative requirement that was the rank had bigger proportion compared with that of competency, both in seating position formation and in implementing other personnel development function. These conditions, amongst others, caused personnel satisfaction relatively low, which could be seen from the scoring of responsiveness dimension with only 0.01 different with that of sufficiency dimension. Accumulation towards the problem that was encountered in applying Government Regulation Number 41 Year 2007 was the absence of significant changes towards public service as the result of limited observation and chance interview that was conducted by the researcher.

2. Performance of Government Regulation Number 41 Year 2007 in the City

Government of Kendari

Kendari city was one of the two city governments that was located and positioned at the central capital city of South-East Sulawesi Province. The width of land territory of Kendari city was 295,89 Km2 or 0.70% of the total land territory of South-East Sulawesi Province with the number of population amount to 251,477 inhabitants in 2007 that were spread out in 10 (ten) districts. Total income of Kendari city in 2007 was 391,667,713,991.14. The sources of the income were Regional Revenues amounted to 28,159,253,500.82; Balance Fund was 351,473,004,434.00 and other legitimate incomes amounted to 12,035,456,056.32. Based on this condition, Kendari City reformed their regional apparatus organization through Regional Regulation Numbers 08, 09, 10 and 11 Year 2008 with reference to Government Regulation Number 41 Year 2007.


Based on the results of the organizational reforms, the City Government perceived the performance of Government Regulation Number 41 Year 2007 was at the moderate towards high category with a score 1.95 (see Figure 2). The level of performance achievement indicated that Government Regulation Number 41 Year 2007 almost achieved their predetermined objectives that were used as comprehensive guidance to reform regional apparatus organization that was efficient, effective and rational in accordance with the needs and the capacity of the region.

The score that was categorized as high from 3 out of 5 dimensions that were used as the factors for the evaluating policy performance were effectiveness dimension and efficiency dimension with a score of 2.02 and accuracy dimension with a score of 2.05, this was the proof for the achievement of parts of the objectives of the policy enactment of Government Regulation Number 41 Year 2007.

Organizing states, tasks and functions of regional apparatus; clear criteria in determining the size of organization and classification of regional apparatus served as guidance that provided clear direction in forming regional apparatus organization that was conducted by city government of Kendari. Apart from that the city government conducted restructuring regional apparatus organization based on Government Regulation Number 8 Year 2003 prior to the enactment of Government Regulation Number 41 Year 2007. Therefore the size of the organization that was formed was in line with or even less than the maximum provision that was stipulated in Government Regulation Number 41 Year 2007. This influenced positively towards the assessment in efficiency dimension that with the establishment of regional apparatus organization that was rational enabled the input management of resources to be done proportionally so that it could drive efficiency.

Figure 2: Achievement Level of Performance Dimension (AcD) of Government Regulation Number 41 Year 2007 in the City Government of Kendari The establishment of regional apparatus organization that was rational also related with selectivity in placing personnel in seating in formatted position. The limited formatted position available as a consequence of rightsizing and downsizing that was done in line with the application of Government Regulation Number 41 Year 2007 had pushed the regional personnel fostering official to be selective in placing personnel that previously


only emphasized on normative requirements, i.e., the rank, but now they also considered competency. Personnel placement that applied merit system pushed the personnel to increase their knowledge and skills in order to have a chance to seat in a position. This made the evaluation of accuracy dimension received the highest scored as compared to that of other dimensions. Apart from that, empirically there was inconsistency in the application of merit system and opportunity provision in developing human resources made the level of personnel satisfaction as one of the criteria in responsiveness dimension that scored relatively lower compared to that of effectiveness, efficiency and accuracy dimensions.

Based on the description of the 4 dimensions above, Government Regulation Number 41 Year 2007 could be considered to achieve objectives of the policy however this was not the case if it was seen from the sufficiency dimension. The fact was that there were various potentials and problems in the application of the policy. The problems were, amongst others,:

a) Formulation of tasks and functions for regional apparatus organization that accommodated several governmental affairs.

b) The decisions on title and types of regional apparatus that were formed from the classification of affairs and/or a combination of obligatory and optional affairs;

c) Organizing the institutions of district and village administration as regional apparatus;

These problems had become the enabler for the low score towards sufficiency dimension as compared to that of the other 4 dimensions.

3. Performance of Government Regulation Number 41 Year 2007 in the Provincial

Government of South East Sulawesi

The South-East Sulawesi Province consisted of the territory of South East Sulawesi Islands that comprised of several big and small islands. The width of its territory was located at 02045’-6015’ south horizontal line and 120045’-124030’ East Vertical line covered 38,140 Km2 land and 110,000 Km2 seas. Until year 2007 South East Sulawesi Province consisted of 10 regencies and 2 cities. Total population in 2007 was 2,117,456 inhabitants. Regional budget of the province in 2007 was Rp. 709,299,741,000.00. With this territory, the population and budget of the province and with reference to article 20 of Government Regulation Number 41 Year 2007 the OPD of the province was scored 61 so that it was included under the criteria of second interval class.

Evaluation towards policy performance of Government Regulation Number 41 Year 2007 in the province based on the five dimensions namely effectiveness, efficiency, sufficiency, accuracy, and responsiveness fell under the moderate category with a score of 1.80 (see Figure 3). This evaluation indicated that part of the objectives of Government Regulation Number 41 Year 2007 had been achieved, however there were some provisions that needed to be clarified in order to create effective, efficient, and rational organization in accordance with the needs and capacity of respective regions. Apart from that it could also create better coordination, integration, synchronization and simplification and line of communication between Central Government and Regional Government.


Figure 3: Achievement Level of Performance Dimension (AcD) of Government Regulation Number 41 Year 2007 in the Provincial Government of South East Sulawesi.

Government Regulation Number 41 Year 2007 clearly provided criteria and restrictions in deciding the size of organization, classification of governmental affairs and arrangement of organization that were used as basic evaluations in the effectiveness dimension so that there were scored 1.83 under the category of moderate. This evaluation was a result of the fact that regional apparatus that was established from accommodating several governmental affairs (organizational arrangement) was perceived too small so that it could not accommodate the tasks and functions comprehensively. Next there was a provision in the Government Regulation that could push proliferation of institution in the region, that is, the arrangement on the establishment of other institutions. Furthermore there was a need to have technical provisions that explained other provisions in the Government Regulation. Evaluations of efficiency dimension received the highest score as compared to that of the other dimensions because it was closely related with the basic scoring of effectiveness dimension.

Restrictions of the size and arrangement of organization would influence directly towards the needs and management of input resources in the regional government organization, such as human resources, finance, infrastructure and facilities that were required for performing the tasks. Although this dimension received relatively the highest score, there were occurrences of establishing regional apparatus organization that was exceeding maximum ceiling (Regional Service Unit), and not selective in allocating budget that resulted negative scoring in this dimension.

Other positive correlation towards the arrangement of the size of organization concerned with accuracy and responsiveness dimension was the restriction of establishing regional apparatus resulted in limited available position formation so that it could drive selected personnel placement. However empirically there were some placement that did not comply with individual competency and the needs of regional apparatus organization. This condition was mainly caused by the absence of job analysis and workload analysis that was supposed to be done in all regional apparatus organizations in the Provincial Government of South East Sulawesi. This condition was worsened by the minimum number and quality of personnel. Consequently there was lack of personnel and inappropriate placement of


several personnel and structural officials. Other factor that hindered personnel placement was the interference of political elements in the placement of human resources.

These phenomena that took place in the above dimension indicated that there were potentials and problems in policy application of Government Regulation Number 41 Year 2007 that became the criteria in the evaluation of sufficiency dimension. Other problematic potency was the government regulation did not clearly regulate the form of regional apparatus organization that had close relation with technical institution. This was because in practice it showed that incompatibility would make coordination among institution difficult.

Based the above description on achievement level of policy performance of Government Regulation Number 41 Year 2007 in the Regency Government of Konawe, City Government of Kendari and Provincial Government of South-East Sulawesi that fell under moderate category indicated that the objectives of the regulation was not yet fully achieved. Government Regulation Number 41 Year 2007 had not provided clear direction and guidance to the Regional Government in reforming organization that was efficient, effective and rational in accordance with the needs and capacity of the respective region. Furthermore, this regulation was not yet able to achieve the expectation of the establishment of better coordination, integration, synchronization, and simplification as well as line communication between Central Government and Regional Government.

Government Regulation Number 41 Year 2007 was a government policy that was intended to solve the problems of regional apparatus organization that was based on the result of the government evaluation and inputs from stakeholders that was not yet successful in designing efficient, effective, rational organization (organization fit). In the context of policy analysis process of the main policy issues was enactment of Government Regulation Number 41 Year 2007 as a substitute of Government Regulation Number 84 Year 2000 and Government Regulation Number 8 Year 2003 was correct. However, with various empirical phenomena (particularly in the researched locus) that appeared on the application of Government Regulation Number 41 Year 2007 indicated that policy analysis as one of the processes of public policy was not yet done comprehensively starting from problem structure, alternative identification, alternative selection, and best alternative recommendation to be implemented (Keban, 2008:67-76) so that all problems concerned with reform of regional apparatus organization were not yet identified that was regulated in the policy articles / provisions. Therefore there were provisions that had multi interpretation, which was potential to generate new problem or was not yet able to solve identified problems. The aforementioned provisions were amongst others:

a) General description on “….Several regional apparatus that deal with supervisory function, personnel, hospital, and finance, considering their tasks and functions were a mandate from the rules of laws, therefore the regional apparatus did not reduce the number of regional apparatus that was stipulated in the government regulation and technical guidance concerning organization and work mechanism that were regulated separately…..” this provision had made the restriction of the size of the organization become bias, and within stakeholders they might interpret it differently towards these provisions;

b) The absence of elaboration/guidance to regulate organization of technical service unit/agency;


c) There was a need for technical regulation from technical ministry such as handbook for formulating tasks and functions, research in need analysis of regional potentials to establish regional apparatus.

Furthermore there was a tendency that the policy of Government Regulation Number 41 Year 2007 was not yet formulated in the context of part of the system of public policy that carefully considered 3 important elements, that is, policy environments, public policies and policy stakeholders (Dunn, 1981). A public policy that was enacted was not only seen from the background condition (policy environments), but also from the interconnectedness with other public policies and from policy stakeholders that were impacted by the policy.

A sectoral policy that was enacted by technical ministry or government institution non ministry was one of interventions either directly or indirectly towards Government Regulation Number 41 Year 2007. Also with the readiness, interest and existing internal condition of Regional Government, namely among politicians, managers and street-level bureaucrats (May and Winter, 2010) that were impacted directly by the policy.

In relation to the above matters, in order to make the policy of Government Regulation Number 41 Year 2007 achieve desired performance, it was necessary for all stakeholders to perform their functions based on the respective authorities and rule compliance that was stipulated in the policy. E. Closing 1. Conclusion The performance of Government Regulation Number 41 Year 2007 in the Provincial Government of South East Sulawesi, City Government of Kendari and Regency Government of Konawe was at moderate category. Moderate category meant that performance of Government Regulation Number 41 Year 2007 was perceived relatively sufficient, but still required facilitation and supervision intensively during its implementation. In the contexts of facilitation and supervision they included all implementation dimensions of the performance of Government Regulation Number 41 Year 2007, namely effectiveness, efficiency, sufficiency, accuracy and responsiveness. Based of the description of the findings and review as elaborated, basically the performance of Government Regulation Number 41 Year 2007 was far from expectation. Without the support from various technical policies that were simultaneously implemented optimally, it could be predicted that Government Regulation Number 41 Year 2007 would not change the current performance condition. 2. Recommendation a) In the framework of making comprehensive guidance for designing regional apparatus

organization, the implementation of Government Regulation Number 41 Year 2007 was very important to be supported by optimum facilitation by way of assistancy, consultancy, supervision, and training in a sufficient manner regarding the application of workload analysis as stipulated in Home Affairs Minister Regulation Number 12 Year 2008 concerning guidance for workload analysis in the Ministry of Home Affairs and Regional Government. If this could be done quickly, accurately, and continuously, the size and the arrangement of Regional Apparatus Organizations that was established


would also consider seriously concerning the important of observing scope of tasks that included types and number of tasks, targets of tasks that had to be manifested. The inability of regional government to conduct workload analysis within their units accurately and comprehensively became the main cause of not doing the analysis in developing their organization. This condition appeared to be a general picture that was taking place in the regional government.

b) It was also important that Government Regulation Number 41 Year 2007 was

optimally able to become comprehensive guidance for designing Regional Apparatus Organization, it was necessary and important to issue various guidance concerned with optimalizing work mechanism of Regional Apparatus Organization. Those guidance, amongst others, were guidance for designing formulation of tasks and functions of Regional Apparatus Organization (Regional Apparatus Work Units), guidance for designing description or elaboration of managerial tasks (from the highest to the lowest echelons), guidance for applying coordination within regional government, guidance for describing work procedures within regional government, and guidance for applying performance management of regional government.

c) Other matters that became very important and dominant in order to make Government

Regulation Number 41 Year 2007 to be optimally able to become comprehensive guidance for controlling Regional Apparatus Organization, it was very important to issue “Guidance for Applying Coordination, Integration, Synchronization and Simplification (CISS) across regions and cross sectors”. It was necessary for the government to note that the application of CISS across regions and cross sectors often became never ending problems so that they often disturbed the implementation of tasks and functions of regional government. If this guidance could be designed comprehensively and integratedly, it could be predicted that the process and the output of the control of Regional Apparatus Organization would contribute positively towards the outcome, benefit and impact for the Regional Apparatus Organization itself.


Bibliography

Ackoff, Rusell L. 1974. Redesigning the Future: System Approach to Societal Problems, New York: John Wiley.

Dunn, William N. 1981. An Introduction to Public Policy, Analysis, Englewood Cliffs, N.J: Prentice Hall. Inc.

Jan, Werner, and Kai Wegrich, 2007. Handbook of Public Policy Analysis; Theory, Politics and Methods. Edited by: Frank Fischer, Gerald J. Miller, and Mara S. Sidney. New York: Taylor & Francis Group.

May, Peter J., and Sǿren C. Winter. 2010. Politicians, Managers, and Street-Level Bureaucrats: Influences on Policy Implementation. Journal of Public Administration Research and Theory 19:453-476.

Mustopadidjaja AR. 1999. Management of Policy Process (Handout for Middle to Highest Level Government Official Education and Training), National Institute of Public Administration, Jakarta. 1999. (in Indonesian Language)

Keban, Yeremias T. 2008. Six Strategic Dimensions of Public Administration, Concept, Theory and Issue, second edition, Yogyakarta: Gava Media (in Indonesian Language)

Riant Nugroho D,. 2009. Public Policy, Jakarta: Elex Media (in Indonesian Language)

Shafritz, Jay M., E.W. Russel, Christopher P. Borick. 2007. Introducing Public Administration, 5th ed. US: Pearson Education. Inc

Documents: Law Number 10 Year 2004 concerning establishment of rules of laws (in Indonesian

Language)

Law Number 32 Year 2004 concerning Regional Governance (in Indonesian Language)

Government Regulation of the Republic of Indonesia Number 84 Year 2000 concerning Guidance for Regional Apparatus Organization (in Indonesian Language)



Minister of Home Affairs Regulation Number 57 Year 2007 concerning Technical Guidance for Reforming Regional Apparatus Organization (in Indonesian Language)

Regional Regulation of South East Sulawesi Year 2008 that regulates concerning Regional Apparatus Organization and Work Procedures in the Provincial Government in South Sulawesi (in Indonesian Language)


Regional Regulation of the City Government of Kendari Year 2008 that regulates concerning Regional Apparatus Organization and Work Procedures of City Government of Kendari (in Indonesian Language)

Regional Regulation of the Regency Government of Konawe Year 2008 and 2009 that regulates concerning Regional Apparatus Organization and Work Procedures of Regency Government of Konawe (in Indonesian Language)

State Ministry of Administrative reforms 2005. Evaluation of Regional Apparatus Organization.

Business

The Implementation of Government Regulation on Regional Apparatus Organization (Haris Faozan & Zulpikar 2010)