Logic model evaluation and the analysis of job motivation for pre-paring the performance indicators of government institution: case of Klungkung, Bali

Authors

  • Made Aristia Prayudi Universitas Pendidikan Ganesha
  • Gusti Ayu Ketut Rencana Sari Dewi Universitas Pendidikan Ganesha
  • Putu Riesty Masdiantini Universitas Pendidikan Ganesha

DOI:

https://doi.org/10.14414/tiar.v10i2.2039

Keywords:

Performance indicator, Logic Model Analysis, Four-Quadrant Analysis, Institutional Theory, mixed-method research, governmental organization

Abstract

When compared to other districts in Bali Province, Klungkung has the lowest performance accountability score. The current study aims to evaluate the technical and psychological aspects of performance indicators development process of the local government. The technical aspect evaluation was done by implementing logic model analysis procedures and adopting a four-quadrant analysis approach. The  psychological aspect analysis was conducted by examining the motivational factors taken from the perspective of Institutional Theory for determining individual behavior in developing performance indicators in governmental organizations. The results show that there is a discrepancy in the number of performance indicators presented in the planning and performance reporting documents, as well as an absence of logical relationships among them. Psychologically, the quality of Klungkung’s performance indicators development is determined by the perception of the performance indicators matrix difficulty, the perceived usefulness of technical training, the level of top management commitment, the assertiveness enforcement of the regulations, and the existence of social pressure and pressure on professionalism. It can be implied that technical policies need to be formulated by local government organizations.  

References

Akbar, R., Pilcher, R. and Perrin, B. (2012), “Performance Measurement in Indonesia: The Case of Local Governmentâ€, Pacific Accounting Review, Vol. 24 No. 3, pp. 262–291.

Ashworth, R., Boyne, G. and Delbridge, R. (2009), “Escape from the Iron Cage? Organizational Change and Isomorphic Pressures in the Public Sectorâ€, Journal of Public Administration Research and Theory, Vol. 19, pp. 165–187.

Australian Capital Territory. (2011), Strengthening Performance and Accountability: A Framework for the ACT Government, Policy Division, ACT Chief Minister‘s Department, Canberra.

Badan Pengawasan Keuangan dan Pembangunan (BPKP). (2014), “Tingkatkan Kualitas Capaian Kinerja dengan Penyusunan LAKIP Yang Benarâ€, available at: http://www.bpkp.go.id/bali/berita/read/11822/50/Tingkatkan-Kualitas-Capaian-Kinerja-dengan-Penyusunan-LAKIP-Yang-Benar.bpkp.

Bandy, G. (2015), Financial Management and Accounting in the Public Sector, 2nd ed., Routledge, New york.

Cavalluzzo, K.S. and Ittner, C.D. (2004), “Implementing Performance Measurement Innovations: Evidence from Governmentâ€, Accounting, Organizations and Society, Vol. 29, pp. 243–267.

Chun, Y.H. and Rainey, H.G. (2005), “Goal Ambiguity and Organizational Performance in U.S. Federal Agenciesâ€, Journal of Public Administration Research and Theory, Vol. 15, pp. 529–557.

Creswell, J.W., Qudsy, S.Z. and Fawaid, A. (2012), Research Design: Pendekatan Kualitatif, Kuantitatif Dan Mixed, Ke-3., Pustaka Pelajar, Yogyakarta.

DiMaggio, P.J. and Powell, W.W. (1983), “The Iron Cage Revisited: Institutional Isomorphism and Collective Rationality in Organizational Fieldsâ€, American Sociological Review, Vol. 48 No. 2, pp. 147–160.

Frumkin, P. and Galaskiewicz, J. (2004), “Institutional Isomorphism and Public Sector Organizationsâ€, Journal of Public Administration Research and Theory, Vol. 14 No. 3, pp. 283–307.

Hair, J.F., Black, W.C., Babin, B.J. and Anderson, R.E. (2010), Multivariate Data Analysis: A Global Perspective, 7th ed., Pearson Education, Inc., New Jersey.

Kekahio, W., Cicchinelli, L., Lawton, B. and Brandon, P.R. (2014), Logic Models: A Tool for Effective Program Planning, Collaboration, and Monitoring, U.S. Department of Education, Institute of Education Sciences, National Center for Education Evaluation and Regional Assistance, Regional Educational Laboratory Pacific, Washington, DC.

Kementerian Pendayagunaan Aparatur Negara dan Reformasi Birokrasi (KEMENPANRB). (2013), “Hasil Evaluasi Akuntabilitas Kinerja Pemerintah Kabupaten/Kota Tahun 2012â€, available at: https://menpan.go.id/publikasi/unduh-dokumen-2/akuntabilitas-kinerja/category/91-hasil-evaluasi-akip-kab-kota-tahun-2012.

Kementerian Pendayagunaan Aparatur Negara dan Reformasi Birokrasi Republik Indonesia. (2015), “Peraturan Menteri Pendayagunaan Aparatur Negara dan Reformasi Birokrasi Republik Indonesia Nomor 12 Tahun 2015 Tentang Pedoman Evaluasi atas Implementasi Sistem Akuntabilitas Kinerja Instansi Pemerintahâ€, Jakarta.

Lewis, J.M. (2015), “The Politics and Consequences of Performance Measurementâ€, Policy and Society, Vol. 34 No. 1, pp. 1–12.

Markić, D. (2014), “A Review on the Use of Performance Indicators in the Public Sectorâ€, Technology, Education, Management, Informatics (TEM) Journal, Vol. 3 No. 1, pp. 22–28.

Metzenbaum, S.H. (2006), Performance Accountability: The Five Building Blocks and Six Essential Practices, Managing for Performance and Results Series, IBM Center for The Business of Government, Washington, DC.

Pemerintah Daerah Kabupaten Klungkung. (2017a), “Buka Rakor LAKIP, Wabup Made Kasta Bedah Kelemahan Kinerja OPDâ€, available at: https://klungkungkab.go.id/index.php/baca-berita/7553/Buka-Rakor-LAKIPkoma-Wabup-Made-Kasta-Bedah-Kelemahan-Kinerja-OPD.

Pemerintah Daerah Kabupaten Klungkung. (2017b), “Website Resmi Pemerintah Kabupaten Klungkungâ€, available at: https://klungkungkab.go.id/index.php/.

Peters, B.G. (2007), “Performance-Based Accountabilityâ€, in Shah, A. (Ed.), Performance Accountability and Combating Corruption, The International Bank for Reconstruction and Development / The World Bank, Washington, DC, pp. 15–31.

Pratiwi, I. and Akbar, R. (2018), “Komitmen Afektif Manajemen, Implementasi Sistem Pengukuran Kinerja, Akuntabilitas, dan Kinerja Organisasi Publik dalam Perspektif Teori Institusional dan Teori Strukturasiâ€, Jurnal Akuntansi Keuangan Dan Bisnis, Vol. 11 No. 1, pp. 1–10.

Prayudi, M.A. and Basuki, H. (2014), “Hubungan Aspek Power, Penerapan Sistem Pengendalian Administratif, Akuntabilitas, dan Efisiensi Program Jaminan Kesehatanâ€, Jurnal Akuntansi Dan Keuangan Indonesia, Vol. 11 No. 1, pp. 57–77.

Rahmadoni, F. and Erwandi. (2018), “Evaluasi atas Laporan Akuntabilitas Kinerja Instansi Pemerintah Berbasis Hasilâ€, JEM: Jurnal Ekonomi Dan Manajemen STIE Pertiba Pangkalpinang, Vol. 4 No. 1, pp. 53–69.

Republik Indonesia. (1999), “Instruksi Presiden Republik Indonesia Nomor 7 Tahun 1999 Tentang Akuntabilitas Kinerja Instansi Pemerintahâ€, Jakarta.

Republik Indonesia. (2014), “Peraturan Presiden Republik Indonesia Nomor 29 Tahun 2014 Tentang Sistem Akuntabilitas Kinerja Instansi Pemerintahâ€, Jakarta.

Ridha, M.A. (2012), Pengaruh Tekanan Eksternal, Ketidakpastian Lingkungan, Dan Komitmen Managemen Terhadap Penerapan Transparansi Pelaporan Keuangan (Studi Empiris Atas Pemerintah Daerah Di Wilayah Provinsi D. I. Yogyakarta), Akuntansi, Universitas Gadjah Mada, Yogyakarta.

Scott, W.R. (2014), Institutions and Organizations: Ideas, Interest, and Identities, 4th ed., Sage Publications, Inc, USA.

Sofyani, H. and Akbar, R. (2013), “Hubungan Faktor Internal Institusi dan Implementasi Sistem Akuntabilitas Kinerja Instansi Pemerintah (SAKIP) di Pemerintah Daerahâ€, Jurnal Akuntansi Dan Keuangan Indonesia, Fakultas Ekonomi dan Bisnis Universitas Indonesia, Vol. 10 No. 2, pp. 184–205.

Tatian, P.A. (2016), Performance Measurement to Evaluation, Urban Institute, Washington, DC.

Thiel, S. van and Leeuw, F.L. (2002), “The Performance Paradox in The Public Sectorâ€, Public Performance & Management Review, Vol. 25 No. 3, pp. 267–281.

Wijaya, A.H.C. and Akbar, R. (2013), “The Influence of Information, Organizational Objectives and Targets, and External Pressure towards the Adoption of Performance Measurement System in Public Sectorâ€, Journal of Indonesian Economy and Business, Vol. 28 No. 1, pp. 62–83.

Zakaria, Z., Yaacob, M. ‘Aini, Yaacob, Z., Noordin, N., Sawal, M.Z.H.M. and Zakaria, Z. (2011), “Key Performance Indicators (KPIs) in the Public Sector: A Study in Malaysiaâ€, Asian Social Sience, Vol. 7 No. 7, pp. 102–107.

Downloads

Published

2020-09-15

How to Cite

Prayudi, M. A., Dewi, G. A. K. R. S., & Masdiantini, P. R. (2020). Logic model evaluation and the analysis of job motivation for pre-paring the performance indicators of government institution: case of Klungkung, Bali. The Indonesian Accounting Review, 10(2), 147–168. https://doi.org/10.14414/tiar.v10i2.2039