Published on

A review of administrative reforms in Indonesia.

Published in: Education, Technology, Business
1 Comment
1 Like
  • Worth to read
    Are you sure you want to  Yes  No
    Your message goes here
No Downloads
Total views
On SlideShare
From Embeds
Number of Embeds
Embeds 0
No embeds

No notes for slide


  1. 1. Private sector Society State Private sector Society State Private sector Society State Private sector Society State Dictatorship or Kingdom Countries Indonesia During The Old Era Indonesia During The New Era Democratic and Transp Countries Model 1 Model 2 Model 3 Model 4
  2. 2. 1. PARTICIPATION of society to decision making 2. RULE OF LAW implemented fairly and certainly 3. TRANSPARENCY of government information 4. RESPONSIVENESS to the needs of society 5. CONSENSUS ORIENTATION in policy making 6. EQUITY of increasing and keeping prosperity 7. EFFECTIVENESS & EFFICIENCY on tasks 8. ACCOUNTABILITY of government programs 9. STRATEGIC VISION to realize good governance
  3. 3. • The aggregate machinery (policies, rules, procedures, systems, organizational structures, personnel, etc.) funded by the state budget and in charge of the management and direction of the affairs of the executive government, and its interaction with other stakeholders in the state, society and external environment. 1 • The management and implementation of the whole set of government activities dealing with the implementation of laws, regulations and decisions of the government and the management related to the provision of public services. 2
  4. 4. Public Administration Reform can be very comprehensive and include process changes in areas such as organizational structures, decentralization, personnel management, public finance, results-based management, regulatory reforms , or it can also refer to targeted reforms such as the revision of the civil service statute (BUREAUCRACY REFORM). GOOD GOVER NANCE
  5. 5. New public management, starting in the early 1980s, began implementing wide ranging reform programmes that provided both the model and the experience that could be applied in developing countries Structural adjustment reforms -- in the mid 1980s, efforts at reforming the public administration in developing countries, focused on reducing overall costs of the government Transition from central planning to market economy and from single party systems to multi-party democracies in the 1990s. This implied the reorientation of the system of public administration
  6. 6. Recent surveys find that citizens want state institutions that are democratic, efficient in the use of public resources, effective in delivering public goods, but also strong and capable of standing up to powerful global forces. People want the state and its public administration to act as a social and economic promoter, capable of ensuring equitable distribution of opportunities, sustainable management of resources and equitable access to opportunities (political, economic, social and cultural) The objectives of Indonesian Administrative through Bureaucracy Reform: •A government free of corruption, collusion and nepotism; •Improved public service; and •A focus on performance. A WORLD CLASS GOVERN ANCE IN 2025
  7. 7. 2007 • Indonesia commenced its bureaucratic reforms (BR) in 2007 with three pilot projects: Ministry of Finance, Supreme Audit Board and Supreme Court 2010 •A number of government institutions participated in the reform. •More than 16 new government institutions submitted the BR proposal to be reviewed by the national BR management unit 2010/11 •State Ministry for Administrative and Bureaucracy Reform released the final draft of Grand Design for Bureaucracy Reform (2010 – 2025) and Road Map for Bureaucracy Reform (2010 – 2014)
  8. 8. A government free of corruption, collusion and nepotism Improved Public Service Professional performance BUREAU CRACY REFORMS A WORLD CLASS GOVERNANCE IN 2025
  9. 9. Business process improvements and subsequently Standard Operating Procedures (SOP) development and improvement for better service delivery; Human resources improvement, including pay reform; Regulation improvement and synchronization; and Governance and anti-corruption improvement
  10. 10. Steering Committee for National Bureaucracy Reform Chair: Vice President Members: Coordinating Ministers, Minister of PAN, Minister of Finance, Minister of Home Affairs, Head of UKP4 Independent Team National BR Management Unit Chair: Minister of PAN Members: Several Ministers BR Team of Ministry/Agency BR Team of Regional Government Quality Assurance Team
  11. 11. IMPLEMENTING INSTITUTIONAL REFORM Organizationrestructuring Improve business processes Improve HRM and discipline enhancement DEFINING THREE LEVELS IN THE BR PROGRAM Macro –addresses the establishment of BR structures, the BR legal/policy framework and BR tools and mechanisms Meso – addresses BR facilitation mechanisms Micro – addresses BR implementation in institutions PLANNING THREE PHASES OF BR IMPLEMENTATION PILOT PHASE - implement BR in three government institutions, allowing them for refinement of the reform framework and the implementation approach SECOND PHASE - rollout to a number of key institutions that have demonstrated readiness for reform; THIRD PHASE - roll out to all other institutions upon demonstration of their readiness for reform DEVELOPING BR GRAND DESIGN AND ROAD MAP The Steering Committee through the National BR Team developed the BR Grand Design 2010-2025 and the BR Road Map 2010-2014, along with a series of guidelines to guide reforms.
  12. 12. • Designing BR Road Map for Ministries/Institutions and Local Government1 • Submitting BR Proposal Documents2 • Evaluating BR Proposal Documents and Road Map3 • Approval Mechanism for Implementing BR and Allowances in Institutions4 • BR Criteria and Measurement5 • Business Processes6 • Implementing Change Management Program7 • Implementing Quick Wins8 • Implementing Knowledge Management Programs9
  13. 13. corruption prevention
  14. 14. READINESS FOR IMPLEMENTING BR Readiness for/ track record in conducting BR Readiness of internal BR Team Readiness of BR Design and Strategy STRATEGIC IMPACT Efficiency and/or optimization of budget Improvement in the quality of service delivery Improvement in the accountability of bureaucracy performance and corruption prevention
  15. 15. Institutional Structures - What institutional structures were established to design, manage and monitor the reform? What mandate and authorities are held by these institutions? What mechanisms were established to hold the agencies in charge of the reforms accountable for results from those reform efforts? Reform Framework - What frameworks were established to guide and support reforms, in terms of laws and regulations, policies, programs, Road Maps, guidelines? What were key substantive features (content) of those frameworks? What other support was available to those involved in planning and managing reforms? Implementation Strategy - How were reforms rolled out across ministries and local government? Were there pilot phases? Was the strategy one of incremental reform or opportunism? Civil service- wide or ministry-by-ministry approach? How was the implementation process held accountable for both taking the agreed actions but also for achieving well specified results? Compensation Reform - What were the core drivers behind compensation reform? How compensation reform was made affordable? How was it linked to administrative reform? What were the key features of compensation reform?