Governing through Competition: Alternative Approach to Transform Bureaucracy (A Case of Implementation of Program Pendanaan Kompetisi-Indeks Pembangunan Manusia in West Java Province,

7/28/2019 Governing through Competition: Alternative Approach to Transform Bureaucracy (A Case of Implementation of Program Pendanaan Kompetisi-Indeks Pemba

1/17

". . . ." 1 " - .~ . .~ . . . . . . ,

N E W P H E N O M E N AU B L IC A D M IN IS T R A T IO NS IA N C O U N T R IE S

e d in g B o o kI te rn a t i on a l C o n f e re n c e o n P ub l ic O rg a n i z a tio n (I C O N P O )

a iz e d b y In te r n a t ion a l P u b lic O r g a n iz a tio n A s s oc ia t ion ( I P O A )F eb r u a ry 2 1 s t, 2 0 1 3


2/17

THE NEW PHENOM ENA O F PUB L IC A D M IN IS TR A TIO N IN A S IA N C O UN TR IESA P roce ed ing Boo kBy Internationa l Pub lic Organiza tion AssociationF or the 3rd International C onference on P u blic O rganization

E ditor:P rof O r. S unhyuk K im, Korea UniversityP rof O r. J in-wook C hoi, K orea UniversityP rof O r. C hristope Behrens, C enter of G ood G overnanceProf. O r. Ahmed Murtadha, Universiti U tara Malays iaProf. O r. Ampom Tamrolak, Thammasat U niversityProf. Dr. Darwin Manubag, M indanau State UniversityDr. Achmad Iurmandi, Universitas Muhammadiyah Y ogyakartaDr. Dyah Mutiarin, U niversitas Muhammadiyah Y ogyakartaProf. O r. Azhari Samudra, Universita s Ngu rahrai, BaliO r. T irka, Universitas NgurahraiP rof. Dr. W i rman Syafri, Ins titut Pemerintahan Oalam NegeriO r. Abdullah Sumrahadi, Universitas Ngurahrai, BaliC ove r & Layout:AksaraBum i J ogja ka rtaaksarabumi.jogja@ gmail.com

Spe cia l E d itio n 150 e xp, F ebruary 2013P rinted on B ook P aper 200x280 mm ; 860 p.IS BN : 978-947124-6

P ublished by:International P ublic O rgan ization As socia tionF or the 3rd International C onference on P ublic Organization


3/17

oo 1300

GOV ER NIN G TH RO UGH COMPET I T ION :A L T E RNA TIVE A PPROA CH TO TRA NSFORM B UREAUCRA CY(A CA SE OF IM PL E ME NTA T IO N O F PROGRA M PENDA NA AN K OMPET IS I IN DEK S PEM BA NGUNA N MA NUS IA IN W EST J A V A PROV IN C E, INDONES I A )

Caroline Paskarina, S.IP., M.Si.Lecturer, Universitas Paqjaqjaran, [email protected]

AbstractIn various studies on governance practices, the discussion of approaches to govern publicinterest usually described innormative or technical sense. Formal authority or legitimacy is thebasis for the state toregulate therelationship between humans and tomanage various resourcesfor public interest. This conceptualization ignores the political process behind the emergenceof aregime and reasons underlying the choice of aparticular way to govern. In this context,the idea of governing through knowledge offers an alternative to understand how the varioussystems of knowledge used asatechnology to create more effective governance. To reveal thepractice of governing through knowledge, this paper uses the concept of governmentality toanalyze the implementation of PPK-IPM (Competition-based Budget Allocation ProgrammetoAccelerate Human Development Index) asacasestudy inwhich bureaucracy is transformedthrough the institutionalization of the competition regime in development The program wasimplemented during theperiod 2005-2010 with theaimof accelerating theachievement of HDIin \\esr JavaProvince to reach 80in theyear 2010. Competition discourse dissemnated by thisprogram offers a new approach to manage development programs. Typically, developmentprograms are formulated and implemented in bureaucratic and technocratic approaches, butwith the idea of competition, government officials are introduced to a selection system indetermning the allocation of grants. Through this discursive process, the workings ofbureaucracy wasproblematized and deconstructed byreference totheprinciples of competition.At theend, bureaucrats were disciplined tobecome innovative and creative subjects, so that theachievement of HDI score can beaccelerated.Keywords:Governmentaliry, competition, bttreattcrary transformation

A . IN TR OD UC TIO NPeople used to think 'government' as formal and authoritative institution, with specificorganization structure and procedure to conduct public affair. Despite the debate of the scope

1 7 0


4/17

171

The New P henomena of P ublic A dminis tration In A sia n C ountries

vernment intervention in public affairs, the presence of government remains pervasive,2001). More recently, as the effect of democratization, most of the government havered the samepremises about the need to reduce the sizeof government and havemadeted attempts to reduce the role of government in the liveof their citizens, while at therime, using government as an instrument to improve the lives of their citizens. Theseesinvalues havebeen accompanied by radical transformations both in the public sector

- bureaucracy. The changes have included privatization, downsizing employment,Iernentation of performance indicators, and restructuring bureaucracy organization.Those changes arepart of bureaucracy reform, generally defined asprocess to transform

_ ucracy into more effective and efficient apparatus. Nevertheless, this process usuallyarded as technical or managerial matter. In conventional perspective, authority or formal~irnation is abasis for government to regulate relationship between human and various of

, including to manage various resources for public interest. Meanwhile, in managerialective, mode of governing is understood in technical sense, to use various tools anddures toachievegoalseffectivelyand efficiently.Although these perspective could beusedderstand how government perform their functions, but they tend to ignore the politicalwhereby theprocess of government isheld. Government isapracticeof power, because

--..,rrlent isanactivitythatundertakes toconduct individualsthroughout their livesbyplacingder theauthority of aguideresponsible forwhat theydoand for what happens to themnlr in Rose, O'Malley, and Valverde, 2006, p. 83). Government means more than just aorganization structure or statemanagement, because the activities held by governmentredto shape individuals according to certain norms.

~-evertheless, theideaof governing aspolitical process isnot completely original. In classic-:==:::a1literatures,governing isidentifiedwith theactivitiesheldby thestateasasovereignbody

c.zimsamonopoly of independent territorial power andmeans of violence, that inheres inbehind the apparatuses or institutions of organized and formal political authority and

.s separate from the rulers and theruled (Dean, 1999, P: 9). Central concerns of suchways'==1kl'n,gnvolvethesearch for asource of thepower heldbythestate, theattempt toidentifyagents hold that power, andwhether that power islegitimate or not. In this perspective,dy of government remains normative, and the analytics of political process reflects a

.:;o::=:::l.alltet of power relations. Foucault (1978) criticized thiswayof thinking and suggestedframework to analyze governing as rational activity, undertaken by amultiplicity ofriries and agencies, employing avariety of techniques and forms of knowledge (Dean,. 11).This perspective offers analternative approach tounderstand governing process by

~ the reason behind the emergence of various techniques and forms of knowledge to:: :: X :x :: ;: : :i:: l other's behaviours. Tounderstand whypeople areregulated incertainnorms, oneshould'=~UlIld the systemof knowledge behind themode of governing.

~,-analysisof government then, isconcerned with theforms of knowledge and techniques--'-~_"pd todeliberate on and to direct human conduct. Knowledge isused toregulate, control,

and turn human conduct to specific ends. The government of human conduct entailsanZ::~I~ to affect and shape in somewaywho andwhat weareand should be. In other words,~ isessentially thepractice tocreateasetof identity asbasis toregulatehuman conduct.. ieaof governing through knowledge offers an alternative to understand how thevarious

.....,...-,-,,~f knowledge used asatechnology to createmore effectivegovernance. To reveal the- e of governing through knowledge, this paper uses the concept of governmentality toetheimplementation of PPK-IPM (Competition-based Budget Allocation Programme to

----",-",-,eHuman Development Index) as a case study inwhich bureaucracy is transformed==~_P theinstitutionalization of the competition regime indevelopment.


5/17

A P ro c e e d in g B o o k B y In te m a t ion a l P u b lic O r g a n iz a tio n A s s o c ia tio n F o r th e 3 rd In te m a tio n a l C o n fe re n c e o n P u b lic O r g a n iz a tio n

Toreveal how theideaof competition could transform bureaucracy, thispaper will proceedby6.rsdyoutline theframework of governmentality asanalytic tool tounderstand how governingispracticed through discursive process to produce and reproduce regime of truth. The paperwill continue byexplaininghow the implementation of PPK-IPM could transform bureaucracythrough the idea of competition, how this idea subjected bureaucracy into new identity asinnovative bureaucracy. Thepaper willbeclosed byexamining theimpact of competition regimeasmode of governing bureaucracy.

B . K NOW L EDGE B A SED GOVERN INGThe ideaof Foucault (1991;1994/2002) about productive power offers analternative tomanagepower in a positive way in order to empower and achieve humanitarian objectives, namelyhappiness, prosperity, freedom. Through this concept, the act of govern islinked topower, notin term of shifting power into authority, but in the creation and useof technologies to regulatebehavior. Governmentality concept interpretate power as a set of strategies, programs,calculations, techniques, tools, documents, and procedures through which authorities manifestand create an impact to the ruled. Power is not only practiced by formal institutions that havetheauthority, but takeinall dimensions of life, including social relations which areinformal andpersonal for individual. Questions about the legitimacy of power are replaced by a focus ontechnique and rationality asthe basis of the operation of power.

For Rose (1999), governmentality is understood as a range of formal and informaltechnologies, programmes and strategies for regulating and shaping the 'conduct of conduct'.Such technologies arise out of and gain their legitimacy through certain 'regimes of truth'whereby political, social and cultural norms become the taken-for-granted and normativefoundation of social systems. Governmentality studies thus pursue a 'distinctive family ofquestions' (Rose, 1999,p. 19),which examine theemergence and effect of regimes of truth. Thisexamination focuses on how knowledge and truth come into being in particular historicalcircumstances, and how this knowledge becomes applicable. Governmentality studies unravelparticular hierarchies of power in which conduct is regulated and shaped according to theauthority of some systemof truth or of some authoritative individual. Rose's approach to thestudy of governmentality lends itself to theconstruction of genealogies. Foucauldian genealogiesare an account of the emergences of contemporary norms. The genealogy looks for keymoments, key discursive shifts that seem to have shaped the taken-for-granted; keymomentswhen prior norms ceased to be normal and new languages and new truths emerged. Unlikeveridical investigations of thepast, Foucauldian genealogies donot search for asingular definitivecause or moment of origin as such, nor do they assume that the past has unfolded inevitablytowards the present - there isno assumption that weare embedded in ateleological unfoldingof time that can be understood necessarily as 'progress' or evolution (and the concomitantmovement fromworse to better or less tomore that is thus implied - see discussion in Dean,1992; Rose, 1999;McKinnon, 2008).Rationality of power isestablished byvarious actors that have the capacity toundertake theformation of discourse, so that power relations understood asastrategy practiced to establishtruth claimsunderlying thediscourse. The contention, which took placeintherelations of powernot in terms of the ownership of the resource, but the struggle to create aregime or rules thatdirect human behavior on thebasis of certain systemof knowledge'. In thisview,to analyzethe

Knowledge isaconstruction of reality that shape perceptions, agenda, and policies to response the reality (pieterse, 2010).System of knowledge is not limted as product of academc, but include the whole construction about reality, whichdetermne how reality is defined, managed, and explained in relation to other realities.


6/17

The New P henomena of P ublic Adminis tration In A sian C ountries

=~;e of power isbasicallytounderstand theinteraction of thevarious systemsof knowledge--"..- mterrelated or opposite eachother.

ystemof knowledgeispracticed through theproducing andreproducing thecategoriesidentify subjects, which region can intervene, who is entitled to regulate, subject as toowant to set up, and so on. The creation of truth through adiscursive process is a

==~:.onof theworkingsof power. Conversely, systemof knowledge alsoprovide justificationreproduction of themeaning of areality,which determines how the subject is treated.- . ; . . , - . _ - - - h this interaction, system of knowledge forms the power, and reversely,power has

m:z:=red asystemof knowledge. This process leadstonewwaystomanage and organize the--'-: =yhere.Thus, themainobjectiveof theexerciseof power through knowledge isnot simply___ .,.,~of behavior, but to reshape the entire systemof social relations that determine how

rganized. Discursiveprocess toestablish systemof knowledge canbetraced to identify..,...,..".."..,nousnterests gathered and compromised. Therefore, the sensitivity to the emergence

ideabehind thenewprograms in themanagement of public affairsneeds toberaisedto-=:e:~nd how identity and subjectivation reshaped._ - understanding of the operation of power can help analyze whether the practice is

::D :==:S _ or closing thepossibility of establishing the identity of the subject (Brigg,2001). This~-~~nwer isproductive, when it leads tosubjectivation. Subjectivation isbasicallytheprocess=::S:1i>llS hingtheidentity of aparticular subject, how thesubject represented or displayed.This-...,-.;-,,-' apracticeof power because of the representation of identity is formed on thebasis

method or order of aparticular regime of truth. Subjectivation process iswhat needs toed to find out how the mechanism works and what interests behind the process.

:::';~ter, governmentality does not provide analytic framework to reveal resistance expressedet. Butler (1993) argued that rationality and subject are two things that cannot be

:e:::~~ in the construction of reality. Subjects could respond to systemof knowledge thatreceivedandreinterpretate it according to the local context .. ecognition of thevarious responses, including resistance indicates that power isnot always~e to knowledgeable actors, such as administrators or technocrats in the case of

lI5~P. ment process. Most of the development process consist of technology and technical- . . . . ~ " T fromdevelopment agencies to recipients, and through this process thepower relationsshed based on expertise. As aconsequen~y, subject or recipient must be re-educated toce and implement new knowledge. In this context, power relations contained in such:edgeled to adependency on theagent who has knowledge of something..ticsof the hegemony of bureaucracy and technocracy is important because of theuse

~>eru:.seto justifystate intervention in reshaping thesubject, aswell asredefine thepolitical~for subjects to participate in development. In this paper, it is assumed that bureaucracyectivated externally through normalization and internally through performativity. Thisputs discursivepractices of power asanongoing process, inwhich the subject is formeds+stemof knowledge while also deconstructing systemof knowledge that are considered

:::,.;.....hshed or hegemonic.

173

E EMERG ING OF NEW IDENT ITY FOR B UREAUCRACYopment isanarenaof discourse todebateon how resources should bemanaged toachieve_ rity. The first argument emphasizes the hierarchical mechanism, the centrality of therity of, and compliance with various normative procedures set by the state. While thedargument turns to themarket mechanism works on the basis of an exchange, thepriceand the autonomous individual rationality. Although both discourses are fightingeach


7/17

A P ro c e e d in g B o o k B y In te rn a ti o na l P u ~ic O 'g a n i z a tio n A s s o c ia tio n F o r th e 3 rd In te r n a tio n a l C o n fere n c e o n P u ~ic O 'g a n iz a tio n

other inthe scramble truth claims, but they still takeseriously theexistence of bureaucracy.discourse forms a system of knowledge about how the bureaucracy should play a roledevelopment.

Discourse centered on theauthority founded on theconception of bureaucracy asamoorganization that serves asatool to implement state policies. In carrying out its functions,bureaucracyassumed to be neutral, not bound by any political power. The workings -bureaucracy tied to the discipline rules, procedures, and chain of command to makebureaucracy as an institution depends on the orders of the higher hierarchy. The success-performance of thebureaucracy ismeasured from itsability to achieve the standards set byauthorities to maintain the loyalty of the bureaucracy.In this system, the orientation -bureaucratic work isthehigher leader, not thepublic who should beserved, which in turnthe bureaucracy as an instrument of power to shape the public in compliance with the sauthority.

Critics of the performance of the slow bureaucracy in response to changing deman~become the root of bureaucratic problematization in pro-market discourse. This is due tocompliance with procedures and mechanisms of normative hierarchy in decision-making,led bureaucracy into unability to compete with private organizations in managing resourTherefore, role of bureaucracy needs to be limted, even theway it works needs to be chaJJgecto resemble private organizations. Bureaucracy subjectivation to the pro-market discodirected to change thehierarchy mechanism into anetwork mechanism, the instruction intoinitiative, centralized todecentralized authority, standardization of norms asameans of conbe converted into performance measures, while instrument of control be replaced withcoordination mechanism based on collaboration resource exchange.The contention between the twodiscourses implicated to the decontruction of the sourcof authority for bureaucracy. Pro-market discourse is questioning the claims of truthbureaucracy is the only actor who has the authority to determne the resource managementbehalf of the state. The inability of the bureaucracy to be proactive coping to the chang=~dynamcs isthebasis of the argument for pro-market discourse to deconstruct the bureauc ~by delegitimzing bureaucratic capacity to manage resources effectively and efficie -Problematization of bureaucracy capacity iswhat started the reconstruction of the bureaucraasthesubject of apro-market, with newvalues andwaysof working that adapting theprin .of pro-market.Adaptation is part of theexerciseof power because thereis new system -knowledge generated byvarious international donors and technocrats (academcs) to legi .subjectivation of bureaucracy.

The notion of subjectivity is informed by available and legitimate discourses embed . ~within particular conditions and consequences (Winkler, 2012). As the mode of goveshifted togovernance, theidentity of bureaucracy isreformed bytheemergence of newmn -that bureaucracy isnot part of theproblem but part of the solution toarange of social conceand objectives (Styhre, 2007). This point of view argued that thenegative images of bureaucrac-was legitimzed by the documented study, academc literature, and publications playedmainstreams discourse. Therefore, bureaucracy could be reformed by defamliarized what 0already knows by creating new identity differs from the mainstream. In order to defamliarizewhat is, one needs to conceive of images of wba: mqy be; thinking emerges through conceptstherefore new images, vocabularies andmetaphors mayhelp usto think alongnew routes (Sty2007). Rather than reproducing tritemechanistic images of bureaucracy, anorganic imageoforganization formmaintaining its form, yet responding to external changes and influencesbe enacted.


8/17

175

The N ew P h enomena o f P u blic A dmin is tra tio n In A sia n C o untrie s

ubjectivation of bureaucracy aspart of the discursive process begins with the formation- -identity that distinguishes subject from theother. Developing anotion of who weareis~ ssiblethrough definingwhowearenot. Thismeansself[]identity isaccomplished through- esof differentiating the self fromothers within aparticular social environment (Ybena_009).This identity contains statements about how subject should havecertain frameof

!III:;:Jg and behaviour to fit the reality created by those statements. Identity of bureaucracyedinthePPK-IPM understood aspart of discursivepractices toestablish, maintain, andthereality of theworking mechanism of bureaucracy in development. This practice is

- rral because behind the deconstruction of reality, there is an interest to oppose the__=...on of the previous reality. On the other hand, the deconstruction of identity isalsoa=-.A....of control to steer the subject to think and behave as desired by the formation of a

reality.emergence of competition into development planning discourse establishes anew

---- '::orthebureaucracy. In this paper, identity isunderstood asbeing formed, maintained,ed by making self[]otherlJ world differentiations (Deetz, 1992). Deconstruction of:a:~:=S:::::::ICYbegunwiththeidentification of 'what isthesubject', inthiscase, 'what isbureaucracy'.

_007)made aclassification of what bureaucracy is.According to Styhre (2007, p. 5):::rst, theimageof bureaucracy isunnecessarily negative in terms of efficiency,performance,sromer satisfaction and work-life experiences among eo-workers. Second, the view ofucracy as some kind of primordial organization form, an instituted benchmark for whatsupposedly proven to function poorly. Third, since the notion of bureaucracy is closely. tedwithsocial formations favouringlargepublic sectors andother forms of administration

- exposed to market forces and the pressure of competition, some authors tend to invoke_ ucracywhen criticizing "predatory capitalism" and the emergence of an ideology of an~rising self, emphasizing individualism, careerism andmeritocracy.In this debate, bureaucracy isplaying theroleof asafehaven providing predictable careers,nablymeaningful job opportunities and other increasingly valued and praised qualitiesand

~life opportunities. Taken together, bureaucracy becomes cast aswhat is either failingtoanemechanisms enabling continuous improvement and adaptation to external changes, ort isrepresenting supposedly past virtues and social formations: Therefore, bureaucracy is

ved asasupplement, aswhat isalwaysalready different and lessaccomplished than other, of organization.-:-'nosecharacteristics of bureaucracy alwaysbeput asopposite asideal typeof bureaucracyeberian thinking. Meanwhile, deconstruction is focused to critized the conceptual

--,.-.lction that assume bureaucracy only has a single identity. Bureaucracy is not a simple=-.nity,therefore it canbeviewed asaset of principles and practices that maybearticulatedrhersinparticular organizational settings (DuGay,2005; Newton, 2005). New identity ofcracy can be formed by combining features of bureaucracy and professionalism, ofcracy and managerialism, and even bureaucracy and entrepreneurship. In other words,~cracyis not primarily regarded afixed, immutable structure but is instead treated as the

.E:::::c:neromarule-governed process of organizing complex undertakings.

OVERN ING THRO UG H CO MPETIT IO N: THE CASE OF PPK IPM IN W ESTVAPROV INCE_- part, acasewill bedisscused asanexample of the implementation of governing through_eririon,The caseis about Program Pendanaan Kompetisi Indeks Pembangunan Manusia--:PM) or Competition-based Budget Allocation Programme to Accelerate Human


9/17

A P ro c e e d in g B o o k B y In te rn a tio n a l P ub lic O rg a n iz a tio n A s s o c ia tio n F o r th e 3 rd In te rn a tio n a l C o n fe re n c e o n P ub lic O rg a n iza t io n

Development Index, implemented in West Java Province, during the period of 2005-2010. Thiswas the prominent programme of the West Java Province to accelerate the achievement of HDin West Java Province to reach 80 in the year 2010. Since the beginning of reformation era in2001, the Government of West Java Province had adopted human development as model 0development in West Java, including the Human Development Index (HDI) as the indicator ofprogress in education, health, and economic development (Strategic Plan of West Java Provinc2001). The vision of achieving HDI 80 in the year 2010 was not just the parameter to evaluatedevelopment, but also embedded as part of identity projected as the most advanced province inIndonesia.

On the contrary to the vision, the fact shown that West Java's position inHDI rank continuesto drop among other provinces in Indonesia. In 1996, West Java was at the position of 14, an'then drop to position 17in 2002 (Regional Development Planning Board of West Java Province,2007). This condition motivated the government to find the root of the problem and solve .;immediately in order to achieve the vision at the time determined. The discursive process startedfrom the problematization of development in West Java which resulted to the evaluation of theperformance of local government bureaucracy asthe strategic institution that plan and implemenrdevelopment programmes. Bureaucracy is accustomed to work according to the normativeregulations and considered development as part of the routine administrative work. Standar -of performance that created as a measure turned into formalism, so that compliance with thestandards and procedures are considered to be part of the performance itself. This condition r,the basic argument to change the workings of bureaucracy in development.

For more than 3 (three) decades, bureaucracy plays dominant role in planning, implernen .and controlling development. With its authority as aplanning board, Badan Perencanaan Dae(Regional Development Planning Board) ispositioned at ahigher position than the other regioorganizations. Bappeda has authorities to formulate macro plan that are further described byorganizations of other sectors, including the authority to make decision to determine wich =the propo ed program would be funded. Funding is allocated based on the budgeting parrnormarivelv regulated. This practice continued for decades to form the minds et that developmm:3l.Ilagocnenbelong to Bappeda. Bappeda considered to have more knowledge than the0

e organization, so the attitude is formed obedience what is decided by the Plarui::;this context, the opportunity for the emergence of alternative ideas, innovation, -

G'eall:1~ '- ,ery limited.The idea of the competition emerged as an alternative to break the routine and for1llill!s::::.development planning. In the initial discussions that took place among the membe

Komire Perencana (planning Committee)", appeared critique of bureaucratic procedures andhierarchical structure of the bureaucracy that is considered as abarrier to innovate and creaz;in designing development programs. Although there were some government officials, inchinside the Bappeda, which has progressive ideas but often has no impact on the changethe hierarchical organizational structure.

The idea of the competition offers a different way to managing development becauseare aspects of the innovation and creativity that allows new programs to emerge differs -the routine of bureaucracy. PPK-IPM is a kind of shortcut to change the workings ofbureaucracy through the introduction of the values of innovation, creativity, and competirs X:.~!:2 Komte Perencana established by Governer Danny Setiawan (2003-2008), with amssion to invoke achanging

bureaucracy toward more innovative and creative organization. This Commttee consisted of various pstakeholders inWest Java Province, such as academcians, private sectors, pers, civil society activists, and comrnunir-The Commttee played a role as consultant that give second opinion or critics to development programs p.--.. ...:.bureaucracy. In other word, this Commttee is a 'sparring partner' of Bappeda to design development program.;Java Province.

176


10/17

Th e N ew P h enome na of P u blic A dminis tration In A sia n C o untrie s

. elopment planning. PPK-IPM adopted acompetitive grant formulated by the Directorateeral of Higher Education Ministryof National Education aspart of its strategy to enhancecompetitiveness of higher education in Indonesia (Natsir, 2010). In 2004, the Directorateeral of Higher Education published aLong-Term Strategy for Higher Education (Higher

- cation Long Term Strategy) 2003-2010. This document isareference to the changing role: higher education institutions in Indonesia in order to strengthen the competitiveness at theallevel. The keyassumptions used inpreparing the 2003-2010 HELTS is that the nation'setitiveness can be enhanced when healthcare organizations of higher education, both atnational and university can be realized (Tadjudin, 2007). Efforts to achieve a healthy

~ation of higher education is implemented through organizational restructuring thatinswiththechangingroleof higher education organizations. Higher education organizationsed fromtheregulator andexecutor toaregulator, facilitator and enabler, whileuniversitiesgivenautonomy inmanaging their respective institutions.These changes are to response the higher education management paradigm shift fromzralizedto decentralized. Management of education, including higher education, isapublicthat needs to beheld inatransparent and accountable way,so the chances toparticipatevarious stakeholders element should beexpanded. In addition, theeconomic crisis in 1997edtheNational Government to formulate asustainable policy that enhances the efficiency

- effectiveness of the development funds in various sectors, including higher education.~r>rIntnent begun to identify other funding sources outside the government budget that cansedto fund education. Various schemes of participation, partnership with theprivate sectorecommunity, aswell asgranting greater autonomy touniversities developed to support a

_~effectiveallocation and efficient.This system introduces collegemanagement scheme participatory, involving avariety of~olders. Through changes in thehigher education institutions and patterns of relationships

stakeholders, will be an exchange of knowledge that leads to strengthening thetitivenessof higher education at theglobal level. Competitiveness isthen indicated bythe

-::Z:=~of universities in Indonesia compared to other universities in the world. Rank systemrepared with avariety of indicators related touniversity governance. Tobeabletoget intoposition, theuniversities must make improvements and capacity building, so that inthis~e universities aresubjected to the standar4s established by the rank system.

ument of HELTS 2003-2010 includes thebasic framework of systemdevelopment and:::::~.:ement of higher education which basically encourages universities to develop their'---_-~ without havingtorelyon theresources of thegovernment. The ideaof thecompetition_. - ...oduced not only asanoutcome toproduce human resources with high competitiveness

= = oballevel, but alsoamotivation for universities to develop creativity and innovation in:::::.magementof the resources within them. Thus, the reduced role of government was

~=rl bythe enhanced capabilities of universities management._-~ltonomyor freedom played as an incentive for universities to develop excellence that

_ ..........iateoneuniversity toanother incompeting with others at thelocal; national, and global- Universities need to do a self-evaluation process that is transparent and accountableuously.It isnecessary for theuniversity toassessthecapacityof itsown, in theorganizationeducational process in accordance with the outputs and outcomes to stakeholderssed.Based on this regime, since thebeginning of 1990, efforts to develop thecapacityof.tieshasbeen attempted bytheDirectorate General of Higher Education. The approach- develope thecapacity of higher education has alsochanged from an investment-based

~-. ..."to outcomes-based approach designed through a competitive funding mechanism.s of disparity of quality due to the centralized approach in the past, has also been

177


11/17

A P ro c e e d in g B oo k B y In te rn a tio n a l P u b lic O rg a n iz a tio n A s s o c ia tio n FOf th e 3 rd In te rn atio n a l C o n fe re n c e o n P u b lic O rga n i z a tio n

considered in the competitive funding mechanism with the tiered system of competition.Competitive funding schemes in universities aregenerally used to determine the allocation offunding for activities,programs, or specificunits. One of theinitial competition-based programmeiscompetition for funding research activities for individuals or groups.

The idea of competitive funding for higher education was initially implemented in theUnited States in 1980, by the National ScienceFoundation and inEngland in the 1990s bytheUniversity Funding Council (Tadjudin, 2007). In Indonesia, theschemewasimplemented in1994through the University Research for Graduate Education (URGE), the allocation of funds fortheprovision of higher education institutions that implement programs of graduate education.Although successful in strengthening the capacity of individuals or research groups, but thescheme does not havemuch effect on the development of human resources and the relevancefor solving social problems in society.Competitive grants that arespecificallygiven to the courseof study was first conducted in 1996 through ascheme of theDevelopment of UndergraduateEducation (DUE) project using evaluation indicators are likely to be more complex and usequalitative performance indicators.

The idea of competition is used in the university introduced anumber of principles thatdetermine the success of the program, such as the specificity of purpose; autonomy anddecentralization; consistency in execution; competition on an equal scope; objective selectionprocess; evaluation and monitoring, aswell as incentives and disincentives. Shifting patterns ofuniversity management opened anopportunities for theparticipation of stakeholders, aswellasthe widespread decentralization and autonomy of universities to form acontext similar to thechange in the pattern of governance, which is also characterized by increased participation,decentralization and autonomy. The problem faced is also relatively common, namely budgetconstraints and the tendency of program implementation asroutine.

The need to produce subject who has competitive skillsapparently made the adoption ofHigher Education Grant Program Competition easily accepted by the Governor of WestJavaProvince and later implemented as PPK-IPM. The transfer of knowledge from differentstakeholders shows the power circuit that took place in the course of an idea is not limited bythe boundaries of sector. The inclusion of ideas from different agencies isnot separated fron:thepresence of agents that transfer the idea, but these agents do not determine the acceptanof the idea by the other agents. The flow of an idea ismore determined by the context tha;trigger the emergence of keymoments in favor for the ideaor otherwise reject the idea.In the context of West Java, transfer idea of competition can get apositive response &01::the Governor because there was akeymoment in the political context. Sinceestablished asindicator of the performance of development in 2003, HDI achievement did not incrsignificantly, while the target IPM 80must be achieved by 2010. Meanwhile, the term of ofJlJof thegovernor will beended in2008, or approximately 3 (three) yearslater.Failure toachie .HDI as targeted would be abad record for the performance of the governor, who wantsrunning for the office next period.

Even so, it isnot easy to introduce the idea of competition to the bureaucrats. In variforums of socialization and discussions with bureaucrats, the question generally asked byapparatus iswhy there should beacceleration for over theyears, similarprograms had facedobstacles, especially if it is associated with the absence of sufficient regulatory policy asa1basis. Resistance also emerge as indicated by the argument that the usual programs reimplemented proven tobesuccessfully applied, the fundswereadequate, sononeed tocornfor the allocation of funds for each regent or municipal. The usual transfer scheme to rand municipal have also been suited to the conditions of the population in their eachQuestions about the use of HDI as an indicator also faced a resistance that this indica


12/17

179

Th e New Phenomena of P ublic Administration In Asian C ountries

nt fromother indicators that arecommonly used, suchasmacroeconomic indicators thatconsidered to bemore easilycalculated.Discussion tooperationalize ideasof competition also takes place internally' in the Komite

_ cana'smeetings. Themembers of theKomite Perencana continued todiscuss thechallenges- may arise in the implementation of the program, such as how to convince the variousolders, particularly decision-makers in the executive and legislative branches to support- program, whether its human resources, such aspersonnel, the community, the educators,meprivatealsohavethesamepassion for implementing thisprogram, andhow commitmentessfully built across sectors. Discussions to answer these questions are recorded asideration given to the Governor of WestJavaProvince at the time._-\lthoughtheKomite Perencanawasformed bytheGovernor andhealsoinitiallyrequestedKomite to designan accelerated program for improving HDI, but this does not mean thatconsiderations delivered by the Komite would automatically accepted by the Governor. Incontext of regional autonomy at that time, there was no hierarchical relationship betweenprovincial and regent ormunicipal, so there alwaysbepossibility of rejection from regent oricipal against the policies or programs of the province. On the other hand, an increase inHDI isnot possible without theparticipation of regent andmunicipal, so the design of theamshould alsobeable tomotivate theregent andmunicipal toparticipate in theprogramusetheregent andmunicipal istheauthority that directly serve the public.The discursive process takesplace through avariety of dialogue forums with stakeholdersestJava, including bytheregional organizations in theProvincial Level of Government, thency andMunicipal Level of Government, and theParliament of WestJavaProvince. With

~organization of local government in the province, the Komite discussed the urgency ofpetition to accelerate HDI, technical implementation, and the difference between thisamwith other routine program. With theRegent andMunicipal Level of Government, the

'ogue leads to theissueof budget allocation. Regent andMunicipal Government questionedhould compete, because asusual the allocation of budget will continue to grow eachyearspecificmultiplier coefficients, whyshould more funding begiventotheregent ormunicipaldy achieve high HDI score. While dialogue with the Provincial Parliament, discussion isciallygeared tomobilize political commitment and support toapprove thebudget allocation

- z : thisprogram..)To convince Parliament and bureaucrats, Governor formed atask force (Satuan Pelaksana

--IPM) consist of bureucrats from Bappeda West Java and team of reviewer consist ofber of Komite Perencana, Bappeda, and other stakeholders from society, namely pers,. t, and academicians. These academicians are also reviewer in the Council for Highercation Directorate General of Higher Education which has long been involved inHighercation Competitive Grant Program. One of themain media used to carry out the transfer

- - owledgeand introduce anew culture different from the culture of bureaucracy is throughsion in themeeting held by PPK-IPM task force and reviewers' team.Byadopting the patterns commonly used in universities, such as decision-making through

zrocess of discussion, bureaucrats in the task forcewere introduced to the academic culture,as freedom to give opinion, freedom to be different in amatter of opinion, equality insion, how tocommunicate ideaswith agood argument, ete.The introduction of academice is used to reinforce the operation of the competition because competition can only

cion optimally inastateof openness, equality,and there isfreedom for theongoing exchange~ s.In thebureaucratic regime, thesepreconditions arenot available'because of bureaucraticthrough hierarchical mechanism, based on the authority of, and adherence toprocedures,


13/17

sothat innovation or the freedom tocomeupwith ideasisnot compatible with theworkings0~thebureaucracy.

PPK-IPM'mainly designed to change the mindset of leaders and bureaucrats in planningdevelopment. This means that thePPK-IPM isatechnology of power that isused to construanew identity in the planning process, as opposed to an established identity that planning canonly be prepared based on the existing budget pIafond. There are alternative systems thatgenerated through PPK-IPM whose orientation is changing thewaygovernment bureaucracyworks to be more open and responsive to the changes, The initial source of the idea0competition similar to the context of early human development, namely the context 0~liberalization. Strengthening competitiveness andvision of themost advanced province equallvbe achieved through the idea of competition. Both of the ideas contruct problematizatiodiscourse about thecondition of WestJava, on theonehand, this province has thepotential bon theother hand thecapacitytomanagethispotential islimited. Through thisproblematization.raised areas of new interventions to improve the capacity, through changes in resourcemanagement institutions, which was originally dominated by bureaucratic institutionsamended by opening opportunities for the inclusion of other institutions, such asmarkets ancthepublic, inthiscasetheacademicians. Interactions betweenmarket institutions andacademicianshavebeen going ahead with the transfer of knowledge in the university environment, throdiscussion forums, and through anetwork of partnerships ascontained in thehigher educationstrategy that hasalreadybegun theprocess of institutionalization beforePPK-IPM. Thepresenceof academicians in Komite Perencana and then asthe reviewer teaminPPK-IPM becomes theentry point to introduce alternative ways of working to overcome the institutional inertia 0-bureaucracy.Thus, the introduction of the ideaof competition through thePPK-IPM is thebeginninzof the deconstruction of bureaucratic institutions, Deconstruction has become an exerciseo;power because youwant to deconstruct themindset andwork mechanism of bureaucracy asinstitution. Target for subjectivation isnot individuals but bureaucratic organizations. Throthe reshaping of the subject, control over the subject behavior isalso changing. However,process does not takeplace in a linear method aswhen the subject behaves according toidentity that they represent, they are also involved in the exercise of power to reproduce theeidentity through the repetition of behavior, which eventually turn them into new subjects.exercise of power, as such, does not stop the formation of a new identity but lead toinstitutionalization of values,mindset, andbehavior toreproduce thesystemof knowledgereinforce thenewidentity. In thisprocess, circuit of powers takesplacecontinuously andbecoinstitutionalized.

The influence of the competition ideaborrowed from theacademic environment not 0provides power to form the subject, but alsooffers thevalues that had been considered lostbureaucratic practice, that is integrity and honesty. In this context, the concept of Competi .Research Grant become the disciplinary institution perform thedeconstruction of bureaucrar-whilecreatinganewidentity forbureaucracy through theinternalization of thevaluesof integrittcredibility,andhonesty through thesystemand standards tocontrol thebehavior of bureaucracrThe values areexpressed through changes in the criteria defining the desired figureof sub'and organizes through the implementation of PPK-IPM. In the PPK-IPM Implementa .Guidance (2005), the criterions of the members of task force must fit these preconditinamely: (1) to implement the program properly (according to plan), (2) be accountableadministration and finance programs, and (3) there is a system for recording and repor .writing, These criterions are a form of direct definition of the subject who want to be setandalsocriticized theidentity of theother that areassumed tobetheinverseof thethreecrit

A P ro c e e d in g B o o k B y In te rn a tio n a l P u b lic O rg an iz a tio n A s so c ia tio n F o r th e 3 rd In te r na tio n a l C o n fe re n c e o n P u b lic O rg a n iz a tio n

180


14/17

181

The N ew P henomena of P ublic Administration In Asian C ountries

:-!lethree criteria are not different from the criteria of bureaucracy in general, but with theounce of these criteria, isaconfirmation of theweakness of theworking mechanism of

eaucracy.The new thing that emerged from the above three criteria is aprocess to go through byucrats toplantheprogram. Byadapting Competitive ResearchGrant, PPK-IPM implementlanningprocess basedonself-assessment or evaluation, followedbyacomprehensive planning

_ essand theplanning process implementation. In thisprocess, theactual andvalidityof dataznimportant element that shouldbeused toplanaprogram thatmeets thecriteriaof innovativecreative.This isdifferencefromtheroutine practicewhereas datadoesnot become necessary,usewhat isimportant isthe sustainability of theplan in thepast. This practice isprone torition that lead to institutionalization of certain regimeor wayof working. Accustomed toroutine, the choice of program is determined by habit, not by data processing as part ofowledge management. In PPK-IPM, data serve as evidence that reinforces the strategicortance of the program argument executed to accelerate the achievement of HD!. Inparing self-evaluation, acomprehensive and actual databaseisone of themain components

: theassessment with thehighest score (30%) than other assessment components. This scoringemrequires bureaucracy inregent andmunicipal whowrite theproposals to seek actual andevantdata. The data formthebasis for identifying theroot of theproblems intheregion, and-0been used to formulate the analysis of strengths, weaknesses, opportunities, and threadOT), and formulate alternatives of problem-solving. This approach is a new thing for

~ucracy because usually technocrats who play an important role in managing database as--ormationinput for the formulation of the program. Database serves asan important pillarePPK-IPM component's selection that hassimilaritieswith theconcept of reform of higher

.:. cation institutions as contained in HELTS 2003-2010. In this document, revamping the_- .tutions started by revamping the database through amechanism called Evaluasi Program

berbasis Evaluasi Diri or Self-Evaluation for Evaluating Study Program. This mechanism esuniversity to collect, process and store dataand information about themanagement of

_ er education. Government (in this case the Directorate General of Higher Education-try of Education) used the result to supervise higher education management. With this~ Government can alsomap the quantity and quality of lectures, as an input to determineKindof intervention that isrequired to formlectureswhomeet thestandards expected, either- e form of institutional and individual sta~dardsoThese standards were then becomes aory to deconstruct the higher education institutions to institutions that are competitive

!::::E!1llatinally.Deconstruction begins with by tearing down bureaucratic red tape to form anew identityposed to the old way of working that emphasizes routines. Therefore, by adopting the

- ciples of education to establish a subject, the identity of bureaucratic red tape beingcon tructed to create innovative and creativebureaucrats. PPK-IPM isaprogram topromoteetition as new rules in the practice of development, but, the program is facing obsticlesexecutiveof thebureaucracy that is still working with the old paradigm, which works on

basis of habit or routine. Without achange in subject, the identity of which is to bebuiltugh this program will not be realized because subject is also played arole in shaping theiry. Despite the efforts of institutions outside subject to reshape the identity of theucracy, this process will not work well when there isresistance from the subject itself.


15/17

A P ro c e e d in g B o o k B y In te rn a t i ona l P u b lic O rg a n iz a tio n A s s o c ia t ion F o r th e 3 rd In te r n a tio n a l C o nfe re nc e o n P u b lic O rg a n iz a tio n

E . CONCLUS I ONPPK-IPM asatechnology of power creates anew discourse about the ideal planning prwhich is characterized by measurement performance, scientific rationality, the procdiscussion, creativity,and innovation. This discourse criticized the formalistic planning pranormative-based, and just being apart of the routine affairs of government. GovermI:lC::r:bureaucracy as an actor who played an important role in development planningproblematized as the cause of the 'failure' of development. The workings of the bureauthat reliesonhierarchical andprocedural regimecannot respond to thedynamic changeplacerapidly, therefore to copewith the dynamic, bureaucracy must bereformed.

Discourse of competition brings new identity for bureaucracy, namely the innovativecreative bureaucracy. By establishing a justification in the context of democratizadecentralization, and governance, the discourse of competition stand against theclaimofused to be the domain of technocracy in practice development.Deconstruction of identity becomes the exercise of power because in this process than attempt to control the thinking and behavior of the subject. PPK-IPM drive change inworkings of bureaucracy which wasoriginally based on theauthority then converted intoon the standard. The conventional technology of power in the old bureaucratic traditiononauthority, hierarchymechanisms and centralized decisionmaking. Even if thereisinvolvof non-bureaucratic elements, but their role is limited to the functions of technocracy.the PPK-IPM is applied, there is a new way of working which threatens the existencebureaucracy who works on the basis of authority. New power technology introduced thJ:oc~the idea of competition works on the basis of standardized measures. Standardizationestablished toensure anobjective selectionmethod works, therefore variousmeasures havecreated asaguide in the implementation of the program. When the standard wasmore d .than theauthority, this could reshapes the areaof bureaucratic action and resistance. Resis ~arising from theuseof such standards has intervened conventional basis of bureaucratic pobut on theother hand italsocreates anew action areas for bureaucracy to takeadvantage ofknowledge acquired through the learning process with the various stakeholders to formulatedevelopment program that cansolvetheproblems facedinthearea.The identity of theinnovariand creative bureaucracy realized through, instrument of control in order to complybureaucratic requirements and procedures that havebeen developed for eachphase of ac . .By adopting the method of selection as commonly applied in university, PPK-IPMstandardization as a critical assessment of the program. Although the final decision isinhands of thegovernor, but bypresenting the results of the selection in the form of scoresrankings, then the decision-making process aimed at an objective rationality, rather than onrationality of political or bureaucratic. Through objective rationality, recognition of thecrea.and innovation is established, and power could be accessed not only through bureauprocedures asinprevious planning and budgeting regime.

Resistance of the bureaucratic apparatus to PPK-IPM is asymptom that arises asarof the contention between the new system of knowledge based on competition with thesystemof knowledge baseon authority. However, thebiggest obstacle for thecompetitionof governing istheconsistency insystemimplementation, financialmanagement, andbureaumanagement which often conflict with the desire to run aprogram in an accountableBarriers inthedisbursement of funds duetothedifferent timebudgeting systemwithanobscourse planning system that can disrupt the course and might jeoperdize the sustainabilityprogram implementation in accordance with aplanned and expected quality. This meansthe construction of the new system cannot be separated from the support of other syst


16/17

The N ew P he nome na of P ublic A dministra tio n In A sian Couriries~~l1c interconnectedness becomes necessary precondition to ensure the sustainability of a--~ s+stem. Significant deficiencies in the construction of the new system based on competition

lack of capacity building program to ensure the sustainability of the rules that have been- - ransfer of ideas that took place among the task force and reviewer team is unadequate as~rrument to produce and reproduce the idea of competition as the basis of development'-''-~o-,ement. As well as the spread of modernization theories involving the government, donor

cies, and companies that collaborate with universities to produce research that gives truth- of modernization, the idea of competition in development is also needs to be supported

cross-sectoral collaboration. Capacity building is not only intended to form the subject who_ the regime, but mainly to establish technological instruments to reproduce the truth claims- - tified the idea of competition for more effective and efficient development management.

r_ ERENCES~er, J. (1993) Bodies that matter:on the discursive limits of "sex': New York and London: Routledge.

M. (1992) A genealogy of the government of poverty, Economy and Sociery 21(3): 215-251.__ . (1999) Governmentaliry: Power and rule in modern sociery. London: Sage Publications.

- tz, S.A. (1994). The micropolitics of identity formation in the workplace: The case ofknowledge intensive firms. Human Studies, 17(1), 23-44.

_ Gay, P. (2005) The values of bureaucracy: an introduction. In Du Gay, P. (Ed.) The Values ofBureaucrary (pp. 1-13). Oxford and New York: Oxford University Press.

- = - c.ault,M. (2002). Pengetahuan dan metode: karya-karya penting Foucault. Arief (Trans.). Yogyakana:Jalasutra. (Original work published 1994).__ . (1991). Governmentality. In G. Burcell, C. Gordon, and P.Miller (Eds.), The FOl( '(Jl{U d f o . .Studies ingovernmentaliry (pp. 87-104). Chicago: The University of Chicago Pres .__cKinnon, K. (2004) Taking post-development theory to the field: Issues in developmentresearch, Nothern Thailand, Asia Pacific Viewpoint, 49 (3): 281-293.

ir,T. (Ed.). (2010). Refleksi PPK -IPM [an/a Barat: Berkiprah dalam memballg1t1t daerah. Bandung:Satlak PPK-IPM Jawa Barat.

_ .ewton, J. (2005) Bending bureaucracy: leadership and multi-level governance. In Du Gay, P.(Ed.) The Values of Bureaucracy (pp. 191-209). Oxford and New York: Oxford UniversityPress.

- eterse, J.N. (2010) Development theory: Deconstructions/reconstructions. London: SagePublications._ ers, B.G. (2001) The politics of bureaucracy. London: Routledge.: e, N. (1999). Powers of freedom: Reframing political thought. Cambridge: Cambridge University

Press.e, N., O'Malley, P., and Valverde, M. (2006). Governmentality. Annual Review Law and Social

Science, 2, 83-104.:~e, A. (2007) The innouatiue bureaucracy: Bureaucracy in at! age of f/ttidiry. London: Routledge.- - = - djudin, M.K. (2007, September 18-19). Competitive funding as a tool of improving higher education

management. Paper presented at the Regional Seminar "Competition, Cooperation andChange in the Academic Profession: Shaping Higher Education's Contribution toKnowledge and Research", held by UNESCO Forum on Higher Education, Research,and Knowledge, Cina.

inkier, 1. (2012). Employee identities in corporate codes of ethics: The equal, responsible,subordinating, and self-monitoring employee. Canadian J ournal of Administrative Sciences,29, 191-202.

183


17/17

Ybena, S., Keenoy, T., Oswick, c., Beverungen, A., Ellis, N., and Sabelis, 1. (2009). Articulatingidentities. Human Relations, 62(3), 299-322.

Strategic Plan of West Java Province, 2001-2005 (2001).Regional Development Planning Boar-.:::of West Java Province (2007). Perencanaan berbasis[PM .

A P ro c e e d in g B o o k B y In te rn a tio n a l P u b lic (}g a n iz a tio n A s s o c ia tio n F o r th e 3 rd In le m a tio n a l C o n f e re n c e o n P u b lic (}g an iz a tio n

184

Documents

Governing through Competition: Alternative Approach to Transform Bureaucracy (A Case of Implementation of Program Pendanaan Kompetisi-Indeks Pembangunan Manusia in West Java Province,