Digital Governance Of Asset Management, A Study Of The Planning Bureau At The Indonesian Attorney General’s Office
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.37385/msej.v6i4.8152Keywords:
Digital Governance, Inivation, State Asset Management, Indonesian Attorney General’s Office, Bureaucratic Transformation.Abstract
The digital transformation of State-Owned Assets (BMN) management has emerged as a strategic imperative for government institutions to address demands for accountability, transparency, and bureaucratic efficiency. This study analyzes the implementation of the State Asset Management Information System (SIMAN) in the Planning Bureau of the Indonesian Attorney General’s Office (Kejaksaan Agung RI), serving as a case study to evaluate the effectiveness of digital governance in asset management under Minister of Finance Regulation (PMK) No. 118/2023. Employing a descriptive qualitative approach, the research focuses on three pillars of digital governance strategy, policy, and digital standards as a theoretical framework to identify gaps between system design and implementation realities. Findings reveal that while SIMAN is designed as a centralized platform for real-time asset data consolidation, its integration at the Attorney General’s Office faces multidimensional challenges. First, the diversity of BMN (movable/immovable) and their wide geographic distribution complicate data harmonization, particularly in remote regions with limited digital infrastructure. Second, non-technical factors such as employee resistance to systemic changes, reliance on manual procedures (e.g., wet signatures), and insufficiently adaptive work culture emerge as critical barriers. These findings align with the 2023 Supreme Audit Agency (BPK) report, which confirms that 68% of SIMAN implementation obstacles in government institutions are non-technical. The study underscores the necessity of a holistic approach to digital governance, where technological aspects must be balanced with organizational alignment, human resource competency development, and business process transformation. Policy recommendations include enhancing employee capacity through case-based training, revising standard operating procedures (SOPs) to integrate digital-physical hybrid systems, and optimizing supportive infrastructure in underserved regions. Theoretically, this research enriches academic discourse on public sector digitalization by emphasizing the balance between technological innovation and socio-cultural adaptation within Indonesia’s bureaucratic context.
References
L. Welchman, Managing chaos: Digital governance by design. Rosenfeld Media, 2015.
R. Heeks, “Implementing and managing eGovernment: an international text,” 2005.
P. Weill and J. W. Ross, IT governance: How top performers manage IT decision rights for superior results. Harvard Business Press, 2004.
P. J. DiMaggio and W. W. Powell, “The iron cage revisited: Institutional isomorphism and collective rationality in organizational fields,” Am Sociol Rev, vol. 48, no. 2, pp. 147–160, 1983.
L. Welchman, Digital Governance: Applying Agile Principles to Adaptive Enterprises. O’Reilly Media, 2015.
S., et al. Gregor, Resistance to Digital Transformation in Public Sectors: A Institutional Perspective. Government Information Quarterly, 37(4), 101540., 2020.
Y. K. , et al. Dwivedi, “ Achieving Digital Transformation Success Through Alignment: A Literature Review,” Journal of Strategic Information Systems, 31(3), 101718., 2020.
B. Rothstein and D. Stolle, “The state and social capital: An institutional theory of generalized trust,” Comp Polit, vol. 40, no. 4, pp. 441–459, 2008.
F. M. Idzi and R. C. Gomes, “Digital governance: government strategies that impact public services,” Global Public Policy and Governance, vol. 2, no. 4, pp. 427–452, 2022.
M. Flyverbom, R. Deibert, and D. Matten, “The governance of digital technology, big data, and the internet: New roles and responsibilities for business,” Bus Soc, vol. 58, no. 1, pp. 3–19, 2019.
F. A. Algazo, S. Ibrahim, and W. S. Yusoff, “Digital governance emergence and importance,” Journal of Information System and Technology Management, vol. 6, no. 24, pp. 18–26, 2021.
H. Margetts and P. Dunleavy, “The second wave of digital-era governance: a quasi-paradigm for government on the Web,” Philosophical transactions of the royal society A: mathematical, physical and engineering sciences, vol. 371, no. 1987, p. 20120382, 2013.
N. McBride, “Digital governance challenges in public sector asset management: Infrastructure, innovation, and cybersecurity,” Government Information Quarterly, 36(2), 210-219, 2019.
Kaganova and J. Mckellar, Managing Government Property Asset. Washington DC: The Urban Institute Press, 1996.
A. G. Sugiama, Manajemen Aset Pariwisata. Bandung: Guardaya Intimarta, 2013.
Y. Lu, Public Asset Management: Empirical Evidence from the State Goverments in the United States. Florida: Florida Atlantic University, 2011.
R. K. Yin, Case Study Research and Applications: Design and Methods 6th Edition, Third Edit. London: SAGE Publications, Inc, 2017.
R. K. Yin, Case Study Research and Applications: Design and Methods, 6th ed. Thousand Oaks: SAGE Publications, 2018.
J. D. Creswell, Research Design: Qualitative, Quantitative, and Mixed Methods Approaches. United State of America: SAGE Publications, 2022.
J. W. Creswell and C. N. Poth, Qualitative Inquiry and Research Design: Choosing Among Five Approaches. SAGE Publications, 2023.
Y. S. Lincoln, E. G. Guba, and J. J. Pilotta, “Naturalistic inquiry,” International Journal of Intercultural Relations, vol. 9, no. 4, pp. 438–439, 1985, doi: 10.1016/0147-1767(85)90062-8.
N. K. Denzin and Y. S. Lincoln, Handbook of Qualitative Research. SAGE Publications, 2019.
N. K. (red. ) Denzin and Y. Lincoln, Handbook of Qualitative Reserch. 2000.
A. Sulistiyo, “Digital Transformation Failures in Indonesian Public Sector,” Universitas Indonesia Press., 2023.
M. Janssen and B. Klievink, “Building Digital Governance Capability,” Public Adm Rev, 2023.
O. Kaganova and R. Nayyar-Stone, Public Asset Management: A Comparative Analysis. World Bank, 2000.
I. , et al Brusca, “Implementing IPSAS in Local Governments,” International Journal of Public Sector Management, 2015.
E. Ostrom, “Governing the Commons,” Cambridge University Press, 2010.
A. B. Sulistiyo, “Membangun Model Manajemen Aset Melalui Antarmuka Pemograman Aplikasi (Aplication Programming Interface) Pada Strategic Business Unit Marine Services BUMN Holding Jasa Survei (IDSURVEY),” 2023.
R. P. Sudirdja, “Pemanfaatan Teknologi Cloud Computing Dalam Reformasi Birokrasi Guna Mewujudkan Kejaksaan Yang Profesional, Komunikatif dan Akuntabel,” Jurnal Hukum & Pembangunan, vol. 50, p. 828, 2019, doi: 10.21143/jhp.vol50.no4.2854.
A. Suryanto, T. Wijaya, and B. Raharjo, “Digitalisasi Birokrasi: Antara Harapan dan Realita ,” Jurnal Administrasi Publik, 10(2), 145-160, 2022.
M. Janssen and E. Estevez, “Lean government and platform-based governance—Doing more with less,” Gov Inf Q, vol. 30, pp. S1–S8, 2013.
M. T. Ahmad Fauzi and A. H. Rahman, “National asset management system integration in Malaysia: A case study on inter-ministerial data alignment,” Journal of Public Sector Asset Management, 7(2), 89-104, 2021.
I. Mergel, N. Edelmann, and N. Haug, “Defining digital transformation: Results from expert interviews,” Gov Inf Q, vol. 36, no. 4, p. 101385, 2019.
M. Janssen and E. Estevez, “Lean government and platform-based governance—Doing more with less,” Gov Inf Q, vol. 30, pp. S1–S8, 2013.
M. Kranzberg, “Technology and history:" Kranzberg’s laws",” Technol Cult, vol. 27, no. 3, pp. 544–560, 1986.
B. Prasetyo and D. Santoso, “Aligning technical design with operational needs: A study of government information systems failure in Indonesia,” Journal of Public Sector Information Management, 28(4), 321-335, 2022.
S. Brand, How Buildings Learn: What Happens After They’re Built. Penguin Books, 1994.
M. Janssen and E. Estevez, “Lean government and platform-based governance—Doing more with less,” Gov Inf Q, vol. 30, pp. S1–S8, 2013.
A. Cordella and N. Tempini, “E-government and organizational change: Reappraising the role of ICT and bureaucracy in public service delivery,” Gov Inf Q, vol. 32, no. 3, pp. 279–286, 2015.
S. L. Star and J. R. Griesemer, “Institutional ecology, translations’ and boundary objects: Amateurs and professionals in Berkeley’s Museum of Vertebrate Zoology, 1907-39,” Soc Stud Sci, vol. 19, no. 3, pp. 387–420, 1989.
A. Wibowo and T. Suryanto, “Systemic asset duplication in Indonesian public sector: The role of data governance voids,” Indonesian Journal of Public Policy, 15(3), 45-62., 2021.
Template
