Performance Evaluation of Pasaman Communication Office in Implementing SPBE and Public Services

Marliani Marliani

doi:10.69812/ijsps.v2i1.99

Authors

Marliani Marliani Universitas Proklamasi 45 https://orcid.org/0009-0005-9125-4683

DOI:

https://doi.org/10.69812/ijsps.v2i1.99

Keywords:

SPBE Implementation, Digital Governance, Accountability, Performance

Abstract

This study evaluates the performance of the Pasaman Regency Communication and Information Office (Diskominfo) in implementing the Electronic-Based Government System (SPBE) and delivering public services, as mandated by national digital transformation agendas. In recent years, the Indonesian government has emphasized digital governance as a pathway to enhance transparency, accountability, and efficiency in public administration. Within this context, regional governments are expected to meet SPBE indicators as documented in annual performance reports such as LAKIP. The primary objective of this research is to assess how effectively Diskominfo Pasaman has implemented SPBE, identify enabling and inhibiting factors, and provide recommendations to strengthen regional digital governance. Utilizing a qualitative descriptive method with a case study design, the research draws on document analysis of the 2023 LAKIP report, supported by related regulations and strategic planning documents. The analysis reveals significant progress, with SPBE implementation rising from 20% in 2022 to 50% in 2023, supported by consistent BB predicate ratings in SAKIP assessments and overachievement in program realization (102.12%). However, the study also identifies critical constraints, including limited ICT human resources, regulatory delays, and infrastructure disparities in remote areas. The findings suggest that while numerical indicators show advancement, structural and strategic reforms are needed for sustainable digital transformation. This research concludes that regional SPBE success depends not only on technological tools but also on institutional readiness, legal frameworks, and inclusive access—highlighting the importance of holistic governance in Indonesia’s digital reform efforts.

Downloads

Download data is not yet available.

References

Agostino, D., Bracci, E., & Steccolini, I. (2022). Accounting and accountability for the digital transformation of public services. Financial Accountability and Management, 38(2), 145–151. https://doi.org/10.1111/FAAM.12314

Agostino, Deborah., Saliterer, I., & Steccolini, I. (2022). Digitalization, accounting and accountability: A literature review and reflections on future research in public services. Financial Accountability and Management, 38(2), 152–176. https://doi.org/10.1111/FAAM.12301

Botelho, F. H. F. (2021). Accessibility to digital technology: Virtual barriers, real opportunities. Assistive Technology, 33(sup1), 27–34. https://doi.org/10.1080/10400435.2021.1945705

Bowen, G. A. (2009). Document analysis as a qualitative research method. Qualitative Research Journal, 9(2), 27–40. https://doi.org/10.3316/QRJ0902027/FULL/XML

Cordery, C., Belal, A. R., & Thomson, I. (2019). NGO accounting and accountability: past, present and future. Accounting Forum, 43(1), 1–15. https://doi.org/10.1080/01559982.2019.1593577

Cordery, C., & Deguchi, M. (2018). Charity registration and reporting: a cross-jurisdictional and theoretical analysis of regulatory impact. Public Management Review, 20(9), 1332–1352. https://doi.org/10.1080/14719037.2017.1383717

Cordery, C., Goncharenko, G., Polzer, T., McConville, D., & Belal, A. (2023). NGOs’ performance, governance, and accountability in the era of digital transformation. The British Accounting Review, 55(5), 101239. https://doi.org/10.1016/J.BAR.2023.101239

Cordery, C. J., Crawford, L., Breen, O. B., & Morgan, G. G. (2019). International practices, beliefs and values in not-for-profit financial reporting. Accounting Forum, 43(1), 16–41. https://doi.org/10.1080/01559982.2019.1589906

Creswell, J. W., & Poth, C. N. (2016). Qualitative Inquiry and Research Design: Choosing Among Five Approaches. In Sage Publications. Washington DC, United States of America: Sage publications.

Emanuel, E. J., & Emanuel, L. L. (1996). What is accountability in health care? Annals of Internal Medicine, 124(2), 229–239. https://doi.org/10.7326/0003-4819-124-2-199601150-00007

Flick, U. (2022). An Introduction to Qualitative Research. SAGE Publications.

Goncharenko, G. (2019). The accountability of advocacy NGOs: insights from the online community of practice. Accounting Forum, 43(1), 135–160. https://doi.org/10.1080/01559982.2019.1589901

Hajra, V., & Aggarwal, A. (2023). Unveiling the antecedents of senior citizens′ behavioural intentions to travel: A mixed-method approach. Tourism and Hospitality Research, 23(3), 312–331. https://doi.org/10.1177/14673584221085459

Kuruppu, S. C., Dissanayake, D., & de Villiers, C. (2022). How can NGO accountability practices be improved with technologies such as blockchain and triple-entry accounting? Accounting, Auditing and Accountability Journal, 35(7), 1714–1742. https://doi.org/10.1108/AAAJ-10-2020-4972

Madianou, M., Ong, J. C., Longboan, L., & Cornelio, J. S. (2016). The Appearance of Accountability: Communication Technologies and Power Asymmetries in Humanitarian Aid and Disaster Recovery. Journal of Communication, 66(6), 960–981. https://doi.org/10.1111/JCOM.12258

Mayumana, I., Borghi, J., Anselmi, L., Mamdani, M., & Lange, S. (2017). Effects of Payment for Performance on accountability mechanisms: Evidence from Pwani, Tanzania. Social Science and Medicine, 179, 61–73. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.socscimed.2017.02.022

McKernan, J. F., & McPhail, K. (2012). Accountability and Accounterability. Critical Perspectives on Accounting, 23(3), 177–182. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cpa.2011.12.003

Morgan, N. A., Jayachandran, S., Hulland, J., Kumar, B., Katsikeas, C., & Somosi, A. (2022). Marketing performance assessment and accountability: Process and outcomes. International Journal of Research in Marketing, 39(2), 462–481. https://doi.org/10.1016/J.IJRESMAR.2021.10.008

Mutiganda, J. C. (2013). Budgetary governance and accountability in public sector organisations: An institutional and critical realism approach. Critical Perspectives on Accounting, 24(7–8), 518–531. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cpa.2013.08.003

Roberts, J. (1991). The possibilities of accountability. Accounting, Organizations and Society, 16(4), 355–368. https://doi.org/10.1016/0361-3682(91)90027-C

Roberts, J., & Scapens, R. (1985). Accounting systems and systems of accountability - understanding accounting practices in their organisational contexts. Accounting, Organizations and Society, 10(4), 443–456. https://doi.org/10.1016/0361-3682(85)90005-4

Saliterer, I., & Korac, S. (2013). Performance information use by politicians and public managers for internal control and external accountability purposes. Critical Perspectives on Accounting, 24(7–8), 502–517. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cpa.2013.08.001

Saxton, G. D., & Guo, C. (2011). Accountability online: Understanding the web-based accountability practices of nonprofit organizations. Nonprofit and Voluntary Sector Quarterly, 40(2), 270–295. https://doi.org/10.1177/0899764009341086

Schmitz, H. P., Raggo, P., & Bruno-van Vijfeijken, T. (2012). Accountability of Transnational NGOs: Aspirations vs. Practice. Nonprofit and Voluntary Sector Quarterly, 41(6), 1175–1194. https://doi.org/10.1177/0899764011431165

Shaferi, I., Laksana, R. D., Nawarini, A. T., & Widiastuti, E. (2024). Determining performance with accountability policy as a mediating factor in agricultural public service organizations. BIO Web of Conferences, 130. https://doi.org/10.1051/BIOCONF/202413008002

Shearer, T. (2002). Ethics and accountability: From the for-itself to the for-the-other. Accounting, Organizations and Society, 27(6), 541–573. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0361-3682(01)00036-8

Simonson, I., & Nye, P. (1992). The effect of accountability on susceptibility to decision errors. Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, 51(3), 416–446. https://doi.org/10.1016/0749-5978(92)90020-8

Sinclair, A. (1995). The chameleon of accountability: Forms and discourses. Accounting, Organizations and Society, 20(2–3), 219–237. https://doi.org/10.1016/0361-3682(93)E0003-Y

Stewart, D. W. (2009). Marketing accountability: Linking marketing actions to financial results. Journal of Business Research, 62(6), 636–643. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jbusres.2008.02.005

Supriyanto, T. (2024). The Influence of Social Media on Political Participation in the Digital Era. International Journal of Social and Political Sciences, 1(1), 43–54. https://doi.org/10.69812/IJSPS.V1I1.46

Taylor, Z. (2013). Rethinking planning culture: A new institutionalist approach. Town Planning Review, 84(6), 683–702. https://doi.org/10.3828/TPR.2013.36

Tingey-Holyoak, J. L., Pisaniello, J. D., Burritt, R. L., & Spassis, A. (2013). Incorporating on-farm water storage safety into catchment policy frameworks: International best practice policy for private dam safety accountability and assurance. Land Use Policy, 33, 61–70. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.landusepol.2012.12.011

Yang, H., & Zhu, X. (2022). Research on Green Innovation Performance of Manufacturing Industry and Its Improvement Path in China. Sustainability (Switzerland), 14(13). https://doi.org/10.3390/SU14138000

Yin, R. K. (2018). Case Study Research and Applications Design and Methods Sixth Edition. In Japan Marketing Journal (6th ed., Issue 2). SAGE Publication.