Regional Legislative Council Service Performance Acceleration Through Innovation
Case Study of Medan Regional Legislative Council Secretariate
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.21787/jbp.14.2022.159-174Keywords:
public sector innovation, Regional Legislative Council Innovation, stakeholder satisfaction survey, public service innovation, local government agencyAbstract
Public organizations' outputs are services both inside and outside the organization. Medan Regional Legislative Council Secretariate is one of the regional apparatus organizations (OPD) whose performance output is service to the bureaucracy, which in this case is to members and leaders of the Regional Legislative Council. The service performance of the Medan Regional Legislative Council Secretariate is still considered dissatisfaction, and the Government Agency Performance Accountability Report (LAKIP) scores B. The purpose of this study is to provide an overview of the novelty of the Medan Regional Legislative Council Secretariate in accelerating its performance through a stakeholder satisfaction survey and innovation. This study uses a mixed method of both quantitative and qualitative research methods. The research questions are (1) What innovation acceleration does the Medan Regional Legislative Council Secretariate conduct to achieve organizational performance goals, and how? (2) How does the results of innovation development on the level of satisfaction of stakeholders on the performance of the Medan Regional Legislative Council Secretariate services in 2019-2021? (3) What lessons were learned from efforts to improve performance through surveys and innovations at the Secretariate? This study results from a stakeholder satisfaction survey followed up with four innovations to accelerate the performance of the Medan Regional Legislative Council Secretariate. The results of this study found that the development of these four innovations was not optimal; there was only one innovation that directly impacted organizational performance. Although technocratic studies have been carried out through stakeholder satisfaction surveys and innovation assistance, however, the innovation decisions made in the context of accelerating performance are highly dependent on the competence of human resources and priority activities.
Downloads
References
Aminah, S., & Wardani, D. K. (2018). Readiness Analysis of Regional Innovation Implementation. Jurnal Bina Praja, 10(1), 13–26. https://doi.org/10.21787/jbp.10.2018.13-26
Ansell, C. K., & Torfing, J. (Eds.). (2014). Public Innovation Through Collaboration and Design. Routledge.
Aramo-Immonen, H. (2013). Mixed Methods Research Design. In M. D. Lytras, D. Ruan, R. D. Tennyson, P. Ordonez De Pablos, F. J. GarcÃa Peñalvo, & L. Rusu (Eds.), Information Systems, E-learning, and Knowledge Management Research (Vol. 278, pp. 32–43). Springer Berlin Heidelberg. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-642-35879-1_5
Boon, W., & Edler, J. (2018). Demand, Challenges, and Innovation. Making Sense of New Trends in Innovation Policy. Science and Public Policy, 45(4), 435–447. https://doi.org/10.1093/scipol/scy014
Borins, S. (2014). The Persistence of Innovation in Government: A Guide for Innovative Public Servants. IBM Center for The Business of Government.
Chen, J., Walker, R. M., & Sawhney, M. (2020). Public Service Innovation: A Typology. Public Management Review, 22(11), 1674–1695. https://doi.org/10.1080/14719037.2019.1645874
Cinar, E., Trott, P., & Simms, C. (2019). A Systematic Review of Barriers to Public Sector Innovation Process. Public Management Review, 21(2), 264–290. https://doi.org/10.1080/14719037.2018.1473477
Creswell, J. W., & Creswell, J. D. (2018). Research Design: Qualitative, Quantitative, and Mixed Methods Approaches (5th ed.). SAGE Publications.
Denhardt, J. V., & Denhardt, R. B. (2015). The New Public Service Revisited. Public Administration Review, 75(5), 664–672. https://doi.org/10.1111/puar.12347
Gonçalves, T., Teixeira, M. S., Dias, J. G., Gouveia, S., & Correia, R. J. (2021). Commitment to Exporting as an Antecedent of Organizational Skills and Firm Performance. Journal of Business Economics, 91(7), 1063–1084. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11573-021-01028-x
Iqbal, Q., & Piwowar-Sulej, K. (2021). Sustainable Leadership in Higher Education Institutions: Social Innovation as a Mechanism. International Journal of Sustainability in Higher Education, 23(8), 1–20. https://doi.org/10.1108/IJSHE-04-2021-0162
Kurniawan, R. C. (2016). Inovasi Kualitas Pelayanan Publik Pemerintah Daerah. Fiat Justisia: Jurnal Ilmu Hukum, 10(3), 569–586. https://doi.org/10.25041/fiatjustisia.v10no3.794
Kusumasari, B., Pramusinto, A., Santoso, A. D., & Fathin, C. A. (2019). What Shapes Public Sector Innovation? Public Policy and Administration, 18(4), 430–446. https://doi.org/10.13165/VPA-19-18-4-05
Lægreid, P., Roness, P. G., & Verhoest, K. (2011). Explaining the Innovative Culture and Activities of State Agencies. Organization Studies, 32(10), 1321–1347. https://doi.org/10.1177/0170840611416744
McGann, M., Blomkamp, E., & Lewis, J. M. (2018). The Rise of Public Sector Innovation Labs: Experiments in Design Thinking for Policy. Policy Sciences, 51(3), 249–267. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11077-018-9315-7
Odumeru, J. A. (2013). Innovation and Organisational Performance. Kuwait Chapter of Arabian Journal of Business and Management Review, 2(12), 18–22.
OECD. (2011). Together for Better Public Services: Partnering with Citizens and Civil Society. OECD. https://doi.org/10.1787/9789264118843-en
OECD. (2017a). Fostering Innovation in the Public Sector. OECD. https://doi.org/10.1787/9789264270879-en
OECD. (2017b). Government at a Glance 2017. OECD. https://doi.org/10.1787/gov_glance-2017-en
Pratama, A. B. (2019). The Landscape of Public Service Innovation in Indonesia: A Comprehensive Analysis of Its Characteristic and Trend. Innovation & Management Review, 17(1), 25–40. https://doi.org/10.1108/INMR-11-2018-0080
Shanker, R., Bhanugopan, R., van der Heijden, B. I. J. M., & Farrell, M. (2017). Organizational Climate for Innovation and Organizational Performance: The Mediating Effect of Innovative Work Behavior. Journal of Vocational Behavior, 100, 67–77. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jvb.2017.02.004
Torfing, J. (2019). Collaborative Innovation in the Public Sector: The Argument. Public Management Review, 21(1), 1–11. https://doi.org/10.1080/14719037.2018.1430248
Torugsa, N. (Ann), & Arundel, A. (2016). Complexity of Innovation in the Public Sector: A Workgroup-Level Analysis of Related Factors and Outcomes. Public Management Review, 18(3), 392–416. https://doi.org/10.1080/14719037.2014.984626
van der Wal, Z., & Demircioglu, M. A. (2020). Public Sector Innovation in the Asiaâ€Pacific Trends, Challenges, and Opportunities. Australian Journal of Public Administration, 79(3), 271–278. https://doi.org/10.1111/1467-8500.12435
Wahyudi, A. (2016). Value-added in Public Service Innovation: The Practice at Integrated Service Units in Pontianak Municipality and Tanah Bumbu District. Jurnal Bina Praja, 08(01), 49–58. https://doi.org/10.21787/JBP.08.2016.49-58
Wayne Gould, R. (2012). Open Innovation and Stakeholder Engagement. Journal of Technology Management & Innovation, 7(3), 1–11. https://doi.org/10.4067/S0718-27242012000300001
Downloads
Published
How to Cite
Issue
Section
License
Copyright (c) 2022 Evi Maya Savira, Renny Savitri, Madya Putra Yaumil Ahad, Erisda Hutasoit, Andres Willy Simanjuntak
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-ShareAlike 4.0 International License.
