836-Article Text-1330-2-10-20210225

INFLUENCING FACTORS OF INNOVATION IN SURAKARTA CITY
GOVERNMENT, CENTRAL JAVA, INDONESIA
FAKTOR-FAKTOR YANG MEMPENGARUHI INOVASI DI PEMERINTAH KOTA

SURAKARTA, JAWA TENGAH, INDONESIA
Perdani Budiarti Hayuningtyas1* , Jun Matsunami2, Bakti Setiawan1,

1
Universitas Gadjah Mada, Yogyakarta, Indonesia
2
Kobe University, Kobe, Japan
Corresponding author email: perdanibudiarti@gmail.com
Diterima: 10 November 2020, Direvisi: 30 November 2020, Disetujui: 11 Desember 2020
ABSTRACT
After the fall of the New Order regime in 1998, Indonesia changed from a centralized
government system to decentralization. By the issuance of Grand Design of Bureaucratic Reform
Year 2010-2025 in 2010, public sector innovation cannot be neglected due to the needs for new,
innovative, adaptive, and entrepreneurial approaches to bureaucratic reform. Many innovations have
been produced in local government to improve their performance. Surakarta City Government is
recognized as an innovative city, produce innovative programs, often become examples of good
practice in public sector innovation, and appointed as Innovation Laboratory in 2017. This study
aims to describe public sector innovation in Surakarta City Government and what factors
influencing it. The study was conducted using qualitative research methods with a case study
approach and collecting data from interviews and document analysis. The findings of this study
reveal that most of the public sector innovation in Surakarta City are ICT based innovation and
provides benefits in improving the performance of local governments. Even though there is shifting
leadership, the visionary leadership supported by upper-middle managers still plays a crucial role in
encouraging innovation in local government, followed by supportive regulations from both central
and local government, as well as participation and strong cooperation between sectors. Further, this
study draws some recommendations to create an integrated policy to strengthened, evaluate, and
maintain the sustainability of public sector innovation in the local government. The local
government may provide opportunities to collaborate with NGOs to create public sector innovation.
Keyword: innovation, governance, public sector, local government, Surakarta City
ABSTRAK
Setelah jatuhnya rezim Orde Baru pada tahun 1998, Indonesia berubah dari sistem
pemerintahan terpusat menjadi desentralisasi. Dengan dikeluarkannya Grand Design
Reformasi Birokrasi Tahun 2010-2025 tahun 2010, inovasi sektor publik tidak dapat
diabaikan karena kebutuhan akan pendekatan baru, inovatif, adaptif, dan kewirausahaan
terhadap reformasi birokrasi. Berbagai inovasi telah dihasilkan pemerintah daerah untuk
meningkatkan kinerjanya. Pemerintah Kota Surakarta diakui sebagai kota yang inovatif,
menghasilkan program-program inovatif, sering menjadi contoh praktik yang baik dalam
inovasi sektor publik, dan ditetapkan sebagai Laboratorium Inovasi pada tahun 2017.
Penelitian ini bertujuan untuk mendeskripsikan inovasi sektor publik pada Pemerintah
Kota Surakarta dan faktor-faktor apa saja yang mempengaruhinya. Penelitian dilakukan
Influencing Factors of Innovation in Surakarta City Government, Central Java, Indonesia– Perdani Budiarti 233
Hayuningtyas, Jun Matsunami, Bakti Setiawan
menggunakan metode penelitian kualitatif dengan pendekatan studi kasus dan
pengumpulan data melalui wawancara dan analisis dokumen. Temuan penelitian ini
mengungkapkan bahwa sebagian besar inovasi sektor publik di Kota Surakarta merupakan
inovasi berbasis TIK dan memberikan manfaat dalam meningkatkan kinerja pemerintah
daerah. Meski terjadi pergeseran kepemimpinan, kepemimpinan visioner yang didukung
oleh pengelola menengah ke atas tetap memegang peranan penting dalam mendorong
inovasi di pemerintahan daerah, diikuti oleh regulasi yang mendukung baik dari
pemerintah pusat maupun daerah, serta partisipasi dan kerjasama yang kuat antar sektor.
Lebih lanjut, studi ini menghasilkan beberapa rekomendasi untuk membuat kebijakan yang
terintegrasi untuk memperkuat, mengevaluasi, dan memelihara keberlanjutan inovasi
sektor publik di pemerintah daerah. Pemerintah daerah dapat memberikan kesempatan
untuk bekerjasama dengan LSM untuk menciptakan inovasi sektor publik.
Kata kunci: inovasi, tata kelola, sekor publik, pemerintah daerah, Kota Surakarta
INTRODUCTION objects which are considered as something

Public sector reform has become a new by an individual or society.
big agenda in the world. In the late 1970s Meanwhile, Koch and Haukness (2005)
and 1980s, New Public Management say that innovation is a matter of using
(NPM) reforms, guided by fiscal stresses, learning outcomes, namely the use of
slowly replaced the conventional competencies as a basis for finding new
governance paradigm central to the ways of doing things that improve the
command and control management style quality and efficiency of the services
with a risk-averse culture that discouraged provided.
creativity in many high-income countries In terms of public sector reforms,
(Arundel et al., 2014). The weakness in innovation cannot be neglected. It is
the NPM model led to the creation and caused by the need for new, more
inefficiency of separate silos within the innovative, adaptive, and entrepreneurial
government. This, in turn, led to approaches to bureaucratic reform. Thus,
experiments in other forms of government, bureaucratic reform is carried out by
such as "joining government" and finding specific solutions to problems that
networked management, which can foster are deeply explored (Cummings,
innovation (Hartley et al., 2013). Such 2015). On the other hand, the government
governance types not only provide space officials who carried out a repetitive and
for top-down innovation decisions, but persistent manner argue that bureaucratic
also for 'bottom-up' influences, in which reforms negatively influence the
middle management and front-line organizational culture that is oriented to
workers may suggest creative ideas and innovation. However, the relationship
promote their growth. between public sector reforms and
Regarding innovation, there is a innovation can be mutually supportive if
broad concept of innovation so that the arrangements are properly seated
innovation can be defined in various ways. (Wynen et al., 2017).
Previous scholars, such as Rogers (2003), The Indonesian Government has
defined innovation as an idea, product, also realized the importance of public
information technology, institution, sector reforms. After the fall of the New
behavior, values, and new practices or Order regime in 1998, Indonesia changed
234 Jurnal Litbang Provinsi Jawa Tengah, Volume 18 Nomor 2 – Desember 2020
from a centralized government system to (GII) published by Cornell University,
decentralization. It is followed by the INSEAD, and WIPO (2019). It is a very
issuance of Presidential Regulation alarming situation since the same report
Number 81 of 2010 on the Grand Design actually states that the most mushrooming
of Bureaucratic Reform Year 2010-2025 innovation activities are in Asia, following
as a starting point to do bureaucratic the economic slowdown in developed
reform in Indonesia in 2010. This Grand countries and the world. Based on this
Design is divided into three phases of report, strong government planning in
Road Maps, such as the 1st phase policies that drive innovation is the key to
Bureaucratic Reform Road Map (2010- success. However, Indonesia is still
2014), 2nd phase Bureaucracy Reform lagging behind in terms of R&D and
Road Map (2015-2019), and 3rd phase investment activities.
Bureaucratic Reform Road Map (2020- In order to improve innovation in
2024). the public sector, the need to mainstream
Moreover, Indonesia has already innovation in governance can be seen in
had strategic documents that refer to the increasing number of awards given for
innovation as the government's efforts to public sector innovation in Indonesia. For
reform the public sector and instrumental instance, Public Service Innovation
in achieving its broader transparency Competition (Sinovik) organized by the
goals. Notably, the National Medium- Ministry of Administrative Reform and
Term Development Plan 2015-2019 Bureaucratic Reform has been running
highlights public innovation as since 2014, Innovative Government
instrumental in improving public services Awards (IGA) by the Ministry of Home
quality and moving towards greater Affairs, and the Solution Innovation
transparency and enhanced accountability. Contest and Open Government
The provisions of the plan regarding Competition both of which are provided
public administration and open by the Presidential Work Unit for
government reforms emphasize efforts to Development Supervision and Control.
find new ways of delivering information to In terms of improving local
the public, to establish e-government government performance, it can be done
systems, and to enhance public through public sector innovation to bring
engagement in public policy formulation. services closer to the community. In
The current administration's government Indonesia, by the enactment of President
program (Nawa Cita) commits the of Republic Indonesia Regulation Number
government to encourage innovation and 38 the Year 2017 regarding Regional
development (OECD, 2016). Innovation, it gives authority to local
The importance of developing governments to develop policies. In this
public sector innovation is also part of a case, Sururi (2017) stated that the role of
general call for Indonesia to increase its local public officials in innovating public
level of innovation. As can be seen in policies will increase and have a positive
some global reports related to innovation, impact on the quality of policies or
Indonesia still occupies a low position and regulations that will be developed and
lags behind neighboring countries produced.
(Prasetyo, 2017). For instance, Indonesia Moreover, public sector innova-
is far behind in terms of innovation, tions are on the rise in Indonesia.
ranked 85th out of 129 countries in the According to Yunita (2017), there are two
report called Global Innovation Index causes for the rise of innovation, namely
the existence of a regional innovation State Minister for Administrative Reform
laboratory and leadership training. Thus, of the Republic of Indonesia (2009),
since 2015, the National Institute of Public Award from the Ministry of Finance in the
Administration through the Innovation form of a grant of 19.2 billion for the
Laboratory uses their original method implementation of good financial
called 5D (Drum-up, Diagnose, Design, management (2009), the field of Excellent
Deliver, and Display) to assist local Service Innovation Pioneer (2010), and the
governments in improving their best cities for implementing the
performance through innovation creation development program to create a Child-
(Prasetyo, 2017). Friendly City (2011) (Zulsyid, 2014).
In the case of Surakarta City, even Surakarta City was also
though categorized as a big city, this city categorized as a very innovative city by
is only 44 Km2 width. This causes the Ministry of Home Affairs.1 The
Surakarta City to face challenges that are innovative programs carried out by the
also faced by other regions in the Surakarta City Government are often used
population sector. Apart from population as models for Central Government and
density that happened because of the other Local Government. For example,
increasing population, the development in Surakarta City had already created an
Surakarta City is slightly hampered due to Incentive Child Card to provide some
infrastructure inequality, lack of natural facilities and support children’s welfare
resources, transportation congestion, since 2009 and the Central Government
poverty, as well as limited City budget adopted this program and made it into a
sources. Thus, Surakarta City needs to do national program called Child Identity
innovation in solving various complex Card, by issuing Minister of Domestic
public service problems. Affairs Regulation Number 2 of 2016 on
Surakarta City Government has Child Identity Cards. This condition
already implemented innovation in some makes other regions come to Surakarta
of its policies for more than a decade. Post City to learn about their innovative
Reformation era (New Order) in 1998 and programs and later adopted it to their
the leadership of former mayor Joko policy in their region.
Widodo from 2005-2012, Surakarta City Furthermore, in 2017, this city
Government experienced a new era of became an Innovation Laboratory to
governance and was recognized as an strengthen the local government’s capacity
innovative city by receiving some awards to innovate. By the end of 2017, Surakarta
in public sector innovation due to some City Government held an event called
innovative policies and programs applied Exhibition of Innovation Works as the last
in the city. For instance, UNICEF Award step of the 5D model of innovation created
for Child Protection Program (2006), City by the National Institute of Public
with the 2nd Best Spatial Planning in Administration. This event highlighted 70
Indonesia Citra Bhakti Abdi Negara innovations developed in 44 offices in
Trophy and Charter from the President of Surakarta City Government. Among three
the Republic of Indonesia for the city's winners of Innovation Lab in 2017, two
performance in providing public service innovations have been chosen as the
facilities, deregulation policy, discipline winners of innovation competition in the
enforcement, and service management
development (2009), Citra Trophy for 1
Based on Ministry of Home Affairs Decree
National Level Excellent Service by the Number 002.6-415 of 2019
Provincial and Central Government. Meanwhile, Gabris et al (2009)
However, one innovation is rarely known stated that the public sector can arise and
by the public and some function of this be successful with three factors. The first
innovation has to be merge with other factor is leadership credibility since
previous innovation. On the other hand, organizations need managers who are
there are some innovations created before innovative leaders; managers who are
Innovation Lab which are still running believable, acting in a logical, coherent
until now, such as Surakarta Complaint way, and able to implement by
Service Unit, proving the sustainability of themselves. The second factor is team
this innovation. management, in which innovation requires
There have been previous studies the teamwork of individuals who have
regarding public sector innovation. frequent communication, who have
Borins’ (2001a) study which uses research complementary skills and knowledge, and
based on applications to the Ford-KSG who trust and respect each other. The team
awards and two other innovation awards in member who creates innovation will have
the US, investigate about how public a sense of ownership of the innovation and
sector organizations could be made more a responsibility in ensuring that the
innovative. He categorizes the reasons innovation will be successful. The last
motivating innovation in the public sector factor is the governing board functioning
into five main groups. First, initiatives or the collaboration of the town council
coming from the political system due to an representatives or politicians.
election mandate to the legislation or In their study in 2011, Osborne &
political pressures; second, new leadership Brown summarized five lessons to
or new managers of a public organization; encourage and support public service
third, a crisis, which is defined as a current innovation in the UK. First, understanding
or anticipated publicly visible failure or the complexity of innovation to allow
problem; fourth, a variety of internal more clear and effective policymaking, as
problems, such as the inability to reach a well as the more successful management
target population, inability to meet the of the innovation process. Second, the
demand for a program, resource individual agency by itself is a necessary
constraints, or an inability to coordinate but not a sufficient condition for
policies; and fifth, the new opportunities innovation in public service organization
that resulting from technology or related to and political mandate for innovation is
other causes. Based on his study, Borins also essential. The third lesson, it is not
explained that the most influencing factor possible to promote and sustain innovation
is internal problems, followed by crises, simply by focusing on the organization
political influence, new opportunities, and alone since an open systems orientation is
the last one is new leadership. Moreover, important. The fourth lesson is to embrace
Borins explained that there is a great deal a service-oriented approach that
of innovation coming from the front lines emphasizes the distinctive characteristics
and in middle management. Most of it is of services, the primacy of process in
not crisis-driven, but instead a proactive services delivery, and the role of the
reaction to internal challenges or service user as the co-producer of
opportunities. Thus, these innovative ideas innovation. The final lesson is that
have to be supported by top managers, and political context must at the very least be
crisis is not a necessary condition for understood as the environment for
public sector innovation. innovation in public services and should
not obscure the need for organizational (Leadership, Political, and Climate) to
and service-learning from innovation, design innovation in local government.
especially failed innovation. Moreover, The first one is leadership that is consists
this study also suggested further studies of leadership style and leadership vision.
about innovation in the public sector need The second factor is a conducive political
to explore organizational, environmental, environment, which related to a political
and institutional conditions to ensure the party and political provenience. The last
continuity of public sector innovation. factor is a supportive organizational
In 2016, De Vries et al. investigate climate, which consists of structure and
181 articles and books on public sector rewards. Those three factors in LPC
innovation, published between 1990 and Model can act as leverage innovation as
2014 through a systematic literature well as a barrier to innovation. Noor said
review. They develop an empirically based that innovation is not linear and influenced
framework of potentially important by many factors. It is required
antecedents and effects of public sector comprehensive knowledge in terms of
innovation. Some antecedents can be local government value to develop an
drivers or barriers in the public sector innovation culture in the public sectors
innovation. First, the environmental level, organization such as local government.
such as media attention, political demands, Furthermore, Noor suggested testing his
public demands, regulatory aspects, proposed model in another local
participation in the network and inter- government in Indonesia with different
organizational relationship. Second, an condition.
organizational level that is related to Based on the existence of
organizational structure, information, time, Surakarta City as innovative city and
money, ICT facilities, leadership style, previous studies, it can be found that study
incentives/rewards, and clear goals. Third, of innovation in the public sector has
innovation characteristics in which the emerged in recent decades. However, most
complexity of the innovation ease in the of them are carried out mostly in
use of innovation, relative advantage, developed countries, such as the U.S. and
compatibility, and trialability. The last Canada (Borins, 2001a; Borins, 2001b),
factor is the individual/employee level or and the U.K (Osborne & Brown, 2011).
ability, such as empowerment, skills, However, studies about innovation in the
creativity, and commitment. De Vries, et public sector in developing countries focus
al. (2016) also suggested future studies on local government using in-depth
need to focus more on theory development interview is under-researched. Thus, it is
and testing as previous studies were important to conduct studies to investigate
theoretically weak. Furthermore, more the innovation development in Surakarta
cross-sectional as well as cross-sectoral City Government and what factors
studies connecting various governance and influencing it. This study will potentially
state traditions and the effects of public provide input to make improvements and
sector innovation. recommendations to policy-related
A previous study about Innovation innovation in the local government.
Design in Local Government is conducted Moreover, the result of this study may
by Noor in Jembrana Regency in 2017. He become a reference for other city
used quantitative approach using governments in order to create and
secondary data methods and proposed a improve its innovative programs.
model that he called the LPC model
METHOD In this study, there are three
This research uses a qualitative independent variables and a dependent
approach with a case study method. variable to examine the innovation in the
Through exploratory activities, the results local government. Based on these
are presented in the form of descriptive variables, some questions are developed to
narrative. According to Yin (2014), the explore perspectives of the stakeholders
case study method allows researchers to on innovation the public sector. The
retain the holistic and meaningful independent variables consist of visionary
characteristics of real-life events such as leadership, organizational climate, and
individual life cycles, organizational, and enabling environment, while the
managerial processes. Accordingly, the dependent variable is innovation in the
qualitative research method was chosen to local government. The first factor is a
address the proposed questions. Thus, this visionary leadership. A leader who has a
study is conducted by qualitative method vision, understands the potential of the
which focus on the actors who involves in region, believable, welcome new idea, and
the birth of public sector innovation in supported by a supportive upper-middle
Surakarta City as spatial scope. manager will encourage innovation in the
There were two kind of data in this public sector. A participative leadership
study, primary and secondary data. The who involves the use of various decision-
primary data is collected through in-depth making procedures that determine the
interviews using a semi-structured extent to which people can influence
questionnaire as an interview guide for the leaders’ decisions and have autonomy to
researcher in this study. The in-depth design and guide their tasks. A visionary
interviews are conducted with purposive leadership is perceived as an essential
sampling to reveal opinions about the factor who understands the potential of the
current innovation condition in Surakarta region, believable, welcome new idea, and
City Government. The informants consist involves the use of various decision-
of the government officials who involved making procedures (Gabris et al., 2009;
in innovation process, such as government Noor, 2017).
officials from Regional Research and The second independent variable is
Development Planning Board, Regional organizational climate. Organizational
Employment Board, Regional Financial climate is identified by several indicators,
and Asset Management Revenue Board, such as organizational structure, time,
Organization Division of Regional money, ICT facilities, incentives/rewards,
Secretariat, Development Administration and clear goals. In the public sector,
Division of Regional Secretariat, Public individuals who have frequent
Works and Urban Planning Office, communication, who have complementary
Population and Civil Registration Office, skills and knowledge, and who trust and
and Inspectorate. Moreover, NGOs, respect each other, will build a good
academicians, and political party, are also teamwork (Gabris et al., 2009). A positive
being interviewed to provide their opinion organizational climate will enhance
about innovation in the local government. innovation in the public sector (Noor,
The secondary data is collected by 2017).
conducted literature study from The last independent variable is
documents, government report, books, enabling environment. It is related with
journals, newspapers, websites, and other political demands, public demands,
reliable sources of evidence. regulatory aspects, as well as participation
in network and inter-organizational innovation in the public sector (De Vries
relationship. The governing board et al., 2016; Noor, 2017). Thus, a
functioning or the collaboration of the combination of those three variables will
town council representatives or politicians affect innovation in the public sector and
to create regulatory that support its sustainability. Innovation in the local
innovation (Gabris et al., 2009). A positive government is identified as some
political situation (Noor, 2017), a good innovations created in Surakarta City
participation in the network, and inter- Government.
organizational relationship will support
Figure 1
Theoretical framework modified from Noor (2017) supported by Borins (2001a), Gabris et
al. (2009), and De Vries et al. (2016)
According to Miles et al. (2014), 2012, Surakarta City Government

analysis in qualitative is divided into three experienced a new era of governance.
stages that occur together, such as data Different from their predecessor who
condensation, data display, and drawing implemented the technocratic approach
and verifying conclusions. Data obtained using experts’ ability to apply for
through observations, interviews, analysis programs but lack of communication and
of documents, field notes, and literature dissemination of government policies with
review is compiled and elaborated in the the stakeholders (Holidin, & Handini,
form of narrative descriptions to get 2014), Joko Widodo and F.X. Hadi
findings to be discussed and draw Rudyatmo chose to do open
conclusions from these data. communication and collaborate with the
stakeholders. Their efforts to revitalize the
FINDINGS AND DISCUSSION Banjarsari Park as an open green space by
Findings relocating secondhand goods street traders
Development of Innovation in experienced nearly no turmoil. They held
Surakarta City Government more than 50 meetings with
After the Reformation era (New representatives of the street vendors and
Order) in 1998 and the leadership of NGOs to collect their demands, asked the
former mayor Joko Widodo from 2005- city officials and academics to conduct
research about the street vendors real
conditions in the field, and met legislative from 2017 to 2019. In 2019, Surakarta
councils to discuss the relocation’s budget successfully propose 41 innovations
so that the best solution for both city consist 4 governance innovations, 21
government and street vendors would be public service innovations, and 16 other
generated. This program is considered as innovations originating from 27 offices in
one successful innovation from Joko Surakarta City Government to Innovative
Widodo and F.X. Hadi Rudyatmo in Government Awards Competition. In the
making good communication with people same year, Surakarta City also became the
(Majeed, 2012). General Champion of the Regional
The programs carried out by the Competitiveness Index Award of the
Surakarta City Government are often used Central Java Province.
as models for implementing innovations After Joko Widodo elected as
that are generally not carried out by the Governor of Special Capital Region of
regional government in general (Handini, Jakarta in 2012, F.X. Hadi Rudyatmo
2016). For example, Surakarta City had replaced him as the mayor, and his
already created Incentive Child Card to leadership has not differed much from his
provide some facilities and support predecessor. He continued some programs
children’s welfare since 2009. As stated that have been planned in the Regional
by the Head of Data Utilization and Mid-Term Development Plan 2010-2015.
Service Innovation Division of Population By the end of 2015, together with Achmad
and Civil Registration Office, this Purnomo as the vice mayor candidate,
innovative policy then adopted by the F.X. Hadi Rudyatmo run as Mayor for
Central Government and made it into a 2016-2021 in the Regional Election and
national program called Child Identity won against Anung Indro Susanto and
Card, by issuing Minister of Domestic Muhammad Fajri by gaining around 60%
Affairs Regulation Number 2 of 2016 on vote (Wibowo, 2015).
Child Identity Cards. The vision and mission of the
Other than that, Surakarta City also elected Mayor and Vice Mayor, as
received some awards in public sector explained in Surakarta Mayor Regulation
innovation for some of its innovative Number 9 of 2016 on Regional Mid-Term
programs applied in the city. For instance, Development Plan of Surakarta City
Surakarta City was awarded as the Government 2016-2021, is the realization
Number One Pro-Investment City in of Surakarta as a cultural, independent,
Central Java in 2009 and for Pioneer advanced, and prosperous city. Innovation
Service Innovation from the Ministry of is one of the strategic issues in this mid-
Administrative and Bureaucratic Reform term development plan document, and the
and Innovative Government Award 2010 implementation of innovation is one of the
from Ministry of Home Affairs. In 2017, target indicators that need to be achieved
Surakarta City was chosen as one of the by Surakarta City Government. Therefore,
100 Smart Cities Pilot Project of the Surakarta City Government has tried to
Ministry of Communications and encourage innovation in every work
Information Technology. In the same year, program of the Mayor, including
Surakarta City became an Innovation enhancing the government officers’
Laboratory of the National Institute of capacity.
Public Administration of the Republic of The existence of a regional
Indonesia. Furthermore, Surakarta City innovation laboratory and leadership
received Innovative Government Awards training there are two causes for the rise of
innovation in the public sector (Yunita, best 7.5 million IDR, which is allocated to
2017). In Surakarta City Government, the further developing their innovation in the
initiation of the Innovation Laboratory future.
started in 2017, when the National Among three winners of
Institute of Public Administration offered Innovation Lab in 2017, two innovations
Surakarta City Government assistance to called Death Certificate Administration
develop the Innovation Lab. As stated by Service and Online Tax Payment System
Head of Sub-Division of Selection and have been chosen as the winners of
Certification of Education and Training innovation competition in the Provincial
Division of Regional Employment Board: and Central Government. However, since
“the Mayor delegated the assistance to the there are some innovations created before
Regional Employment Board due to his Innovation Lab which are still running
opinion that Innovation Laboratory is until now, such as Surakarta Complaint
related with government officer’s capacity Service Unit which is created in 2013.
building. The Head of the Regional Thus, it is important to compare three
Employment Board then instructed the innovations produced through the 2017
Training and Education Division to handle Innovation Laboratory and one innovation
this task since this division facilitated the that resulted from collaboration with
government officers who will participate NGOs since 2013 to examine the
in the leadership training to create Project development and the longevity of these
of Change.” Thus, the collaboration of innovations.
Innovation Lab and Leadership Training is 1) Innovation in Death Certificate
expected to encourage the birth of Administration Service
innovation in local government. Without This innovation was developed
too complicated procedures, the idea to since the level of awareness of citizens to
implement Innovation Lab can be register the death certificate documents in
executed in the same year. Surakarta City is still low. This situation
By the end of 2017, Surakarta City happened because of limited time to obtain
Government held an event called death certificates and most people only
Exhibition of Innovation Works as the last register it when they are in need in
step of the 5D model of innovation created managing inheritance rights. The problem-
by the National Institute of Public solving initiative of making death
Administration. This event highlighted 70 certificates was supported by the Mayor
innovations developed in 44 offices in since this innovation uses proactive
Surakarta City Government. The top three service so that government officers can
innovations are selected in order as: 1) deliver the administration population
Death Certificate Administration Service service directly to the community. He
that belongs to the Population and Civil even asked the Population and Civil
Registration Office; 2) Online Tax Registry Office to prepare the ICT
Payment System that belongs to the infrastructure to support the
Regional Revenue, Financial implementation of the Death Certificate
Management, and Asset Board; and 3) Administration Service program.
Public Works Integrated Information Moreover, the Mayor was also
System created by Public Works and supportive of this innovation since the
Spatial Planning Office. The top death certificate administration service
innovation won 15 million IDR, the collaborates technology with local
second-best 10 million IDR, and the third- manners. It is stated by the Head of Data
Utilization and Service Innovation the requested file can still be processed at
Division of Population and Civil Population and Civil Registration Office.
Registration Office: “The Head of Urban This innovation has increased the
Village, who gives a speech at funerals to number of death certificates issued in
express condolences to grieving citizens, Surakarta City. In 2015, the Surakarta City
can directly provide families with Death Population and Civil Registry Office
Certificates, an updated Family Card, and issued 2,961 death certificates, and in
an electronic Identity Card. This 2016, 3,513 death certificates were issued.
innovation shortens the steps required to In 2017, 4,220 death certificates were
make a death certificate as surviving issued, an increase of 20.13% compared to
family members no longer have to go the previous year. The recent data show
directly to the Population and Civil that from January 2018 through July 10,
Registry Office to apply for the death.” 2018, 3,774 death certificates were issued.
The Population and Civil If it is compared with the issuance of the
Registration Office has the most death certificate in 2017, the achievement
innovative programs since they have the for approximately 6.5 months was
Innovation Division in order to increase 89.43%. Meanwhile, the achievement in
their performance in giving public the first 6.5 months of 2018 was 107.42%
services. The innovation division of of the total issuance of deeds in 2016
Population and Civil Registration Office (3,513 death certificates). It is in line with
focus on its job to create innovative the goals of this program: to shorten the
programs to solve the problems face in the procedure of providing death certificate
office’s daily jobs. There is a routine making service and to increase the number
meeting hold by the Head of Population of death certificates issued to provide an
and Civil Registration Office to discuss accurate population registration database.
the problem so that they will find an The success of this innovation
innovative solution for their internal leads the Ministry of Communication and
problem. Information to believe that the Death
Death Certificate Administration Certificate Administration Service can be
Service is an innovative program that duplicated in other regions. The Ministry
simplifies procedures by using the considers the program is effective in
population administration registrar in providing information technology public
every Urban Village to serve the services (Ariawan, 2020).
community and decreases the processing The Regional House of
time for documents by utilizing ICT. All Representatives as the legislative body
population and civil registration data are supports the idea of the Death Certificate
integrated in the Information System of Administration Service by providing
the Population Administration, and the budget during the budget planning
ICT infrastructure is provided by process. As informed by the Head of the
Communication, Information, Statistics, Prosperous Justice Party who also a
and Encoding Office. The main obstacle member of Commission III: Economy and
faced when using ICT facilities is network Financial Issue of Regional House of
problems. The connection is sometimes Representatives, “political parties tend to
unstable, not allowing for uploading or support the innovative program since it
downloading files. To overcome this provides benefits to community.
problem, an alternative way to upload the Innovation in basic population services in
required files is through WhatsApp so that Surakarta City, such as Death Certificate
Administration Service, is already quite Population and Civil Registration Office
effective, so there is a need to manage the does. However, the head of the Regional
sustainability of that innovation.” Financial Revenue and Asset Management
Death Certificate Administration Board, is an innovative person who
Service innovation supports the existence strongly engaged with ICT development.
of Surakarta City Regional Regulation As stated by former Head of Tax Division
Number 1 of 2015 on Implementation of of Regional Financial Revenue and Asset
the Population Administration. After Management Board 2016-2019: “He
implemented in 5 pilot Urban Village in encourages staff members to generate
2017, in early 2018, all Urban Village in ideas related to innovation in ICT to
Surakarta City implemented this increase office performance. Online Tax
innovative administration service by the Payment System was a direct result of this
enactment of Surakarta Mayor Regulation encouragement.”
Number 1 of 2018 on the Condolence This online tax payment system is
Death Certificate Program. This regulation also supported by the Mayor since the
regulates the targets and types of goals of this innovation is to increase
documents issued, requirements, Local Government Revenue. Moreover,
procedures for reporting and issuance of this innovation prevents criminal acts of
documents, and document submission. corruption, supports the disclosure of
This innovation is a sustainable policy that public information, and transparency in
is strengthen Surakarta City commitment. tax collection. Another goal is budget
This innovation can be considered as efficiency, human resources, to
continuity of population policy in transparency and accountability in
Surakarta City to integrate population data governance.
with development planning so that Since Online Tax Payment System
development programs are better targeted. is an innovative program that simplifies
Due to this commitment, Surakarta City is procedures of the tax payment system,
also chosen Best City in the 2016 ICT became the main tool in this public
Population Development Category service. All staff members involved in the
(Rakhmatullah, 2016). implementation of this tax payment
2) Innovation in Tax Payment System system are trained in this new system.
The Online Tax Payment System is Online Tax Payment System is also
a more accurate, fast, and accountable tax integrated with Solo Destination, a mobile
payment system that accelerates and phone application based on Android and
simplifies the monitoring system by top IOS platforms. However, this ICT related
managers and middle managers of local innovation need a good infrastructure and
tax services. The innovative tax payment need a good
system is developed constantly due to an Not only improves the
unintegrated potential tax database due to transparency and accuracy of services as
manual system applied in the office. The well as optimizes the achievement of
taxpayers still pay taxes conventionally in Local Government Revenue targets of the
the Regional Financial Revenue and Asset local tax sector, but this innovation also
Management Board, and the reported encourages the increasing of Local
income from taxpayers is not real-time. Government Revenue. It can be seen from
The Regional Financial Revenue the figure below that there is an increase in
and Asset Management Board does not Local Tax Revenue from 252 billion IDR
have an innovation division like (17 million USD) to 360 billion IDR (250
million USD) in 2019 since the launching Revenue and Asset Management Board
of the Online Tax Payment System in that the local tax revenue will reach 370
2017. It is predicted by Regional Financial billion IDR (260 million USD) in 2020.
Figure 2
The Tax report before and after Online Tax Payment System
Source: Regional Financial Revenue and Asset Management Board, 2019
The implementation of Online Tax including Communication, Information,

Payment System is based on Surakarta Statistics, and Encoding Office as the
Mayor Regulation Number 21 of 2017 on network infrastructure coordinator that
Procedures for Implementing the Online integrates Online Tax Payment System in
System on Tax Business Transaction Data Solo Destination application, and private
in Regional Tax Payments Supervision. sector as the network service provider.
Furthermore, since one of the goals of Moreover, Regional Financial
Online Tax Payment System is increasing Revenue and Asset Management Board
local tax to enhance Local Government collaborates with the Audit Board of the
Revenue, the legislative body supports the Republic of Indonesia, and the Inspectorate
idea of Online Tax Payment System. of Surakarta City to supervise the financial
Innovations such as Online Tax Payment system used in Online Tax Payment
System that utilize the online tax system System. The Online Tax Payment System
run smoothly and target certain potential is being awarded at the Provincial level as
taxpayer sources. a Top 10 Central Java Public Service
Surakarta City Government Innovation in 2019 from Central Java
collaborates with some banks to provide Province (Priyanto, M.A. (October 23,
the online tax payment service since 2016. 2019).
Regional Financial Revenue and Asset 3) Innovation in Public Work
Management Board not only cooperates Integrated Information System
with banks to develop Online Tax Payment Public Works Integrated
System, but also with other stakeholders, Information System is the third winner of
Exhibition of Innovation Works in 2017. to be integrated with Surakarta Complaints
This innovation is arisen to be an integrated Service Unit so that the complaints send by
system to compile work reports from the people can be manage through that
division in Public Works and Urban application. Now the function of Public
Planning Office due to lack of integrated Works Integrated Information System is
data base in the field of this office that still compiling work reports from division
affects reporting performance and delay in in Public Works and Urban Planning
report submission (E.N. Andraini, Public Office and giving information related
Works and Urban Planning Office. Public Works to public in the website.
Moreover, there is a complaint function in Public Works Integrated
this website to encourage people to apply Information System is strengthened by the
their complaints related to Public Works Head of the Public Works and Urban
and Urban Planning Office field such as Planning Office Decree to implement this
infrastructure through website or mobile integrated system and also manage
phone. innovation in the office. On the other hand,
The Head of the Public Works and there is no regulation in the city level for
Urban Planning Office supported the Public Works Integrated Information
emergence of Public Works Integrated System that makes this innovation barely
Information System by encouraging staff to recognized by the people.
develop the Project of Change and allowed Just like other information systems
to use the inactive Urban Planning Office’s in Surakarta City Government, Public
website. As there is no innovation division Works Integrated Information System is
in the Public Works and Urban Planning managed by the Public Works and Urban
Office, most innovation ideas in this office Planning Office with the help of
come directly from the staff who attend the Communication, Information, Statistics,
Leadership Education and Training. and Encoding Office as the leading sector
Maintenance of Public Works Integrated in ICT and web-based innovation. This
Information System is managed by the system is integrated with the Surakarta
Head of Sub-Section of Planning, Complaint System Unit so that all
Evaluation and Reporting of the Public complaints submitted in Public Works
Works and Urban Planning Office. Integrated Information System will also
Not only was the innovator of this appear in the Surakarta Complaint System
innovation awarded third place and 7.5 Unit. Thus, the utilization of technology
million IDR to develop this innovative will make system integration easier among
program in Exhibition of Innovation Works several division of the organization
2017, but she was also promoted. It proves (Andhika, 2018).
that Project of Change created through the The legislative body support the
Leadership Education and Training can existing of Public Works Integrated
give benefit to the initiator. Information System just like other
However, there is similar function innovations created by participants of The
between Public Works Integrated Leadership Education and Training.
Information System with Surakarta Moreover, the integrated system of
Complaints Service Unit that created in infrastructure project is really needed by
2013, which is report complaints from all the City Government. On the other hand, as
fields to Surakarta City Government. Thus, stated by a member of Indonesian
after one-year implementation, Public Democratic Party of Struggle, who also a
Works Integrated Information System has Member of Commission I of Regional
House of Representatives: “since there is a namely Procurement Reform and Public
similar function with Surakarta Complaints Complaint Handling System.
Service Unit, it is better to maximize Moreover, the idea of Surakarta
Surakarta Complaints Service Unit Complaint Service Unit is relevance with
function without making new application the main task and function of Inspectorate,
with the same function.” which is helping the mayor foster and
4) Innovation in Complaint Service supervise the implementation of
Unit government affairs that are the authority of
Different from three previous the region and the assistance task by the
innovation that became winners in regional apparatus. The Inspectorate was
Exhibition of Innovation Works 2017, the chosen as leading sector of Complaint
Surakarta Complaint Service Unit is Handling Management due to their
developed in 2013. The initiation of function that could provide added value in
Surakarta Complaint Service Unit even encouraging the other offices to follow up
existed before the establishment of Online on public complaints.
People's Aspirations and Complaints The mayor accepted the initiation of
Services managed by the central Surakarta Complaint Service Unit, a pilot
government. project proposed by an NGO, in order to
The Surakarta Complaint Service encourage community participation in
Unit is established due to the collaboration monitoring and evaluating development
idea from Bandung Trust Advisory Group programs in Surakarta City as well as
(B_Trust) and European Union and building community trust and showing that
Inspectorate of Surakarta City Government. complaints can lead to improvements if
B_Trust is an NGO that concerned in managed well. This argument from an
increasing public trust in the government auditor of Inspectorate is aligned with the
through the concept of Complaint Handling statement of a former staff of B_Trust who
Management. involve in the making of Surakarta
Surakarta City Government has Complaint Service Unit, “the mayor’s
received a Fair Opinion without Exception commitment started from the establishment
from the Audit Board of Indonesia so it can of Surakarta Complaint Service Unit and
be seen as a benchmark for the success of positive mindset about complaints that
the Surakarta City Government in carrying considered as an opportunity to increase
out the planned program. However, it is public service is said as the main factors
important for the local government to give that maintain the existence of Surakarta
space to the community to provide Complaint Service Unit.”
opinions (assessments, suggestions, and In terms of budgeting, Surakarta
proposals) for the implementation of the Complaint Service Unit was fully funded
program, as a reference for future by the European Union through the
evaluation and planning of the program. B_Trust from 2013 to 2015. After the
Hence, this reason encourages Surakarta commitment of the mayor to support
City Government to initiate the Surakarta Complaint Service Unit, it
collaborative innovation with B_Trust and became fully funded by the Surakarta City
the European Union who had a program to Budget in 2015. As this innovation accepts
improve public services in the local complaints from the community to enhance
government, namely NSA-LA II (Non- the local government performance, the
State Actors-Local Authorities). This legislative body supports this innovation by
program targeted two major programs,
providing budget for Surakarta Complaint Statistics, and Encoding Office will remind
Service Unit development. the office. This collaboration cannot run
Surakarta Complaint Service Unit smoothly without participation of all
was initially established with Surakarta stakeholders in this complaint system.
Mayor’s Regulation Number 25 Year 2013, From 2017 to 2019, there are increasing
which then renew every year, and most complaints that issue by the community
recently renewed in 2019 with Surakarta from 421 to 843 complaints.
Mayor’s Regulation Number 29 of 2019 on For the community, Surakarta
Surakarta Complaint Service Unit. It is also Complaint Service Unit is considered as a
strengthened with Mayor Decree Number forum or mediation that can guarantee the
337.05/171 of 2019 on Managers of the arrival of complaints, proposals, and
Surakarta Complaints Service Unit. suggestions for the Government in carrying
At first, Surakarta Complaint out programs in order welfare of the
Service Unit was a web-based complaint community. Surakarta Complaint Service
system, but it currently accepts complaints Unit has a big role as a means of
on the City Government’s official social facilitation and transparency for the City
media sites, by telephone, email, and the Government of Surakarta in order to build
websites/applications of a number of City trust from the community.
Government Offices. Since Surakarta Moreover, the existence of
Complaint Service Unit is integrated with Surakarta Complaint Service Unit has had
Solo Destination, all relevant users- a positive impact on the performance of the
application managers, Communication, Surakarta City Government. Some
Information, Statistics, and Encoding government policies in the form of
Office, related City Government Offices, regulations emerged after there were
and people making complaints-can access complaints from the public. For example,
it via smartphone. Each complaint can be Regional Regulation Number 9 of 2014 on
directly followed up within a period of Conducting a Boarding House Business
three days. that arises after there is a citizen complaint
Even though the leading sector of related to the boarding house which is used
Surakarta Complaint Service Unit shifting for improper activities.
from Inspectorate to the Statistical and
Coding Informatics Communication Office Discussion
since 2017, Surakarta Complaint Service The in-depth interviews of four
Unit still running until now. Inspectorate cases described on the previous section
role changes only as supervisor for the revealed some findings related to
implementation of its innovation and the influencing factors of innovation in
Communication, Information, Statistics, Surakarta City Government.
and Encoding Office as leading sector 1) Leadership
manage Surakarta Complaint Service Unit The findings of this study indicate
24 hours. The complaints that are that leadership is the most important factor
submitted by the community in Surakarta to foster and accommodate innovation. A
Complaint Service Unit have to be leader who has a vision and mission to
answered immediately within three days by enhance the organization performance will
the office that received complaints from the support and welcome idea from the staff
public. If there is complaint that have not that will increase the performance of the
been answered by the office, the admin organizations. It can be seen by the
from Communication, Information, acceptance of the National Institute of
Public Administration’s assistance to foster public innovation. Adaptive
develop the Innovation Lab by the Mayor. leadership is aimed at deciding which
Moreover, Rudyatmo also accept public practices should be preserved and
innovative program proposed by an NGO which should be adapted and transformed.
to encourage community participation in Pragmatic leadership seeks to change the
monitoring and evaluating development culture of public institutions by modifying
programs in Surakarta City as well as established processes in ways that promote
building community trust and showing that double loop learning and using current
complaints can lead to improvements if resources to solve problems.
managed well. He has a positive mindset However, different from Joko
about complaints that considered as an Widodo who gives innovation ideas based
opportunity to increase public service. on a comparative study from other cities or
These findings support previous research developed countries that sometimes make
by Gabris et al. (2009) and Noor (2017) the local government officials cannot
that acknowledged leadership credibility as follow Joko Widodo’s idea, especially due
factor that encourage the rise of innovation. to limitation of the regional budget, F.X.
Furthermore, a change of leadership Hadi Rudyatmo tend to create policy based
from the previous mayor to the recent on basic needs of the community. This
mayor can bring new era for innovation. finding is in line with the It can be seen as
The new leadership of Joko Widodo from his supportive acts in the birth of Death
his predecessor bring a new style in the Certificate Administration Service that use
local government to produce solutions to proactive service in which the government
solve their problems. His transformational officers give direct public service to the
leadership encourage the birth of community. It is in line with the mission of
innovative programs that later can be the Mayor that is explained in the Surakarta
benchmark for other cities or region, even Mayor Regulation Number 9 of 2016 on
for the central government. It is in line with Regional Mid-Term Development Plan of
previous study by Borins (2001a) and Noor Surakarta City Government 2016-2021. On
(2017) that stated about the new leadership the other hand, even though F.X. Hadi
can motivate the birth of innovation. Rudyatmo supports the innovation idea
The head of local government still from the local government officials, he has
has a key role in innovation development, not issued innovations that appear directly
because if the regional head is active in the from him yet. Most of his innovative ideas
"public campaign" regarding the came from his subordinates.
application of innovation, the innovation Furthermore, in the era of F.X. Hadi
will develop. If not, it will fall into the trap Rudyatmo leadership, there is a greater
of procedural/formal pathology. After the number of innovations. However, it cannot
competition finish, no more development be interpreted immediately because of the
of the innovation. The mayor’s leadership of the mayor. A lecturer of
commitment in supporting the development Faculty of Social and Political Sciences of
of innovation can be considered as the one university in Surakarta argues, “even
driver to maintain the innovation in the though the characteristics of the application
public sector, for instance in Surakarta claimed as innovation, most of them arise
Complaint Service Unit that was developed because of the replication of something that
since 2013. As mentioned by Sorensen & is required by the central government, not
Torfing (2015), a combination of adaptive purely from the regions.” Thus, it takes a
and pragmatic leadership is needed to visionary leader who knows well all the
potentials and problems in the city he leads only 44 Km2 so it will become more
to produce a sustainable innovative policy. compact.
Moreover, the supportive head of In order to make community access
office who encourage staffs to do application easily through smart phone and
innovation, will give a chance to the staffs website, it is important to connect all those
to create innovations. Middle-to-lower- application on a Solo Destination platform.
level employees are particularly critical to It is aligned with the study from Bekkers et
the successful implementation of new al. (2013) about ICT as an important source
ideas. Aligned with this argument, a of innovation, which makes new services,
government officer stated that he proposed new types of organization, new service
an innovation due to the staff own interest processes, or new governance
to improve the performance of their office arrangements possible. In addition, ICT
that will make their routine works easier to may provide a knowledge-sharing,
be done. In this case, the emergence of information-sharing and communication
Online Tax Payment System and Public infrastructure that helps to connect and
Works Integrated Information System, develop ideas across all kinds of
arise from staff creative solution to solve boundaries. However, when innovation is
the challengers they face in the office. It is understood to be limited to the application
also in line with Arundel et al. (2014) study of ICT, then the quantitative level will
in which stated that middle management grow rapidly, but the probability of
and front-line workers might suggest sustainability is likely to stagnate. It is in
creative ideas and promote their growth. line with the opinion from a member of
Indonesian Democratic Party of Struggle,
2) Organizational climate also a Member of Commission I of
The findings in this study show that Regional House of Representatives who
the organizational climate is related with said: “it is better to maximize existing
incentives/rewards, ICT facilities, clear innovation-based ICT’s function without
goals, and organizational structure. It can making new application with the same or
be seen that the incentives/rewards for staff similar function.”
who initiate innovation and ICT facilities, Among four cases being compared,
have an impact to enhance innovation in only Death Certificate Administration
the public sector. Service that created through the innovation
In public service delivery, distance division of Population and Civil
and time are indirect costs for the citizen. Registration Office. With good
In the case of Surakarta City Government, communication with all divisions in this
ICT facilities are used to shorten the time office, the Innovation Division and discuss
to deliver public service to the community. it in the routine meeting so that they find an
The development of ICT facilities brings a innovative solution. Meanwhile, in other
significant impact to the birth of innovation offices that do not have innovation
produced in this city. It is aligned with division, the offices tend to create
study from De Vries et al. (2016) who innovative programs due to the mandatory
stated that ICT is can be drivers or barriers to create Project of Change for some staff
in the public sector innovation. Moreover, members who become participants of the
for ICT-based innovation implementation, Leadership Training Program. So, it will be
Surakarta City has the potential to a little bit difficult for other offices to
strengthen infrastructure because the area is encourage innovation if there is no support
from the head of the office. However, with
a good positive encouragement of the head position. It is in line with Noor (2017)
of the office, innovation can be created. study about rewards as a supportive
Local governments must develop a organizational climate.
culture of learning among employees. The On the other hand, there are some
key to success in creating this condition is innovations that is developed in a short
the commitment of leaders and regional time, such as Public Works Integrated
heads so that a wave of changes in learning Information System. Even though some
culture and work culture that will occur, functions on Public Works Integrated
receive full support from elements of Information System have to be integrated
leadership in the region. It is in line with with previous innovations, such as
the government officers’ Law which has Surakarta Complaints Service Unit, the
mandated local government agencies to birth of the Public Works Integrated
draw up plans for developing government Information System is still based on the
officers’ competencies whose real problem face by the staff in doing their
implementation rules have also been daily work. The short time in developing
contained in Government Regulation innovation that is not based on real
Number 11 of 2017 on Management of problem faced in the workplace will have
Civil Servants. The government officials’ high possibility to fail in the
competency development plan is prepared implementation.
as a guideline in preparing work program
planning and implementing the work 3) Enabling Environment
program based on a merit system in the The findings demonstrate that a
context of strengthening public sector positive political situation, regulatory
accountability in the regions. aspects, good participation in the network,
Empirical work suggests that and inter-organizational relationship will
frontline employees are important sources support innovation in the public sector. It
of innovation in public sector can be found that the regulatory aspect is
organizations. By reviewing award- the second important factor in the
winning innovations in government, Borins implementation of an innovative program
(2001a) found that innovators were not and its sustainability.
usually senior managers but street-level In terms of regulatory aspects, there
bureaucrats. Middle-to-lower-level are several regulations from the Central
employees are particularly critical to the Government that try to enhance innovation
successful implementation of new ideas. in local government. The role of the central
However, Osborne & Brown (2011) study government is considered dominant. It can
stated that individual agency by itself is a be said that some of the regional innovation
necessary but not a sufficient condition for could be pseudo-innovation, which grew
innovation in public service organization. because of the supply-driven central
The existence of rewards for government, not because of demand-driven
innovation initiators are in the form of from the community that responded by the
incentives and also the promotion of city government. However, it is not that
positions. For instance, the winners of case in Surakarta City Government. From
Innovation Lab competition are entitled to four cases being analyzed, three of them
get money considered as extra coaching emerge due to problems in the real
money to develop their innovation in the situation in their office, such as Death
future. Some staffs who initiate innovation Certificate Administration Service, Online
also can get promotions to a higher Tax Payment System, and Public Work
Integrated Information system. While not simply eliminate existing innovations
Surakarta Complain Service Unit born due (Byu, 2018).
to the needs of the local government to In terms of the political situation,
increase public trust in the government both pro political party and opponent
through evaluation from the community. It political party mostly support public sector
is aligned with Borins (2001a) study which innovation that has clear goals to solve the
argues that most of innovation is not crisis- office problems and provide a good service
driven, but instead a proactive reaction to to the public. As stated by one of
internal challenges or opportunities. government officer who involve in the
Moreover, Surakarta City Project of Change to create innovation:
Government has supportive regulation to “besides providing the budget for the
enhance innovation in the public sector. innovative program, the legislative member
For instance, the Surakarta Mayor is also giving suggestions to the local
Regulation Number 9 of 2016 on Regional government officers who in the process of
Mid-Term Development Plan of Surakarta developing the Project of Change.”
City Government 2016-2021, innovation Furthermore, some innovations in
become one of the strategic issues in this Surakarta City Government are created
mid-term development plan document. through collaboration with stakeholders,
Furthermore, there is the Regional Action such as NGOs and private sectors.
Plan of Regional Innovation System 2016- Surakarta Complaints Service Unit has
2020, ICT Master Plan 2016, as well as emerged as a good collaboration between
Smart City Master Plan 2018. These an NGO and Surakarta City Government.
documents contain development programs Moreover, the Online Tax Payment System
that encourage regional innovation, one of innovation is now collaborating with five
which is the support of information and banks as partners in collecting Tax
communication technology in its Revenue through a smartphone application.
implementation. While the Population and Civil
In addition, there are some Registration Office also have a good
supporting regional regulations to maintain collaboration with Public Health Service,
the existence and the sustainability of urban village, Neighborhood Association,
innovation, for instance Surakarta and Community Association, and the
Complaints Service Unit, Death Certificate Ministry of Religion to implement their
Administration Service, and Online Tax innovation, such as the Death Certificate
Payment System. However, the Public Administration Service.
Works Integrated Information System only From the four cases above, it can be
regulated with the Head of Public Works found that three factors are related and
and Urban Planning Office Decree to have a huge influence on the birth of
implement this integrated system and also innovation and its sustainability. In terms
manage the innovation in the office. This of leadership, the Mayor and head of
condition makes this innovation barely office’s role in supporting the emergence
recognized by the people. This finding of innovation from staff members based on
aligned with an argument from a member real problems in their office is crucial. It is
from the Independent Panel Team as one of followed by enabling factors such as
the assessors at the 2018 TOP 99 KIPP regulatory aspects, as well as participation
encourages all local governments to protect in network and inter-organizational
the innovations produced by Regional relationship also play important role.
regulations, so that new regional heads will
Table 1
Influencing Factors of Innovation in the Public Sector
Public Works
Death Certificate Surakarta
Online Tax Integrated
No. Factors Administration Complaints
Payment System Information
Service Service Unit
System
1. Visionary - The mayor - The head of the - The head of The mayor
leadership involves in the office encourages office supports welcomes the
innovation the use of ICT as her staff member initiation of this
development a problem solver to develop this collaborative
The head of the - The mayor innovation to innovation with
office encourages supports the solve the NGO
his subordinate to online tax problems
find innovative payment system - The mayor only
problem solver to increase Local recognizes this
Government innovation after
Revenue. the display stage
2. Regulatory A city-level A city-level Office-level A city-level
aspects regulation regulation regulation regulation
3. Participation in A good A good A close A good
network and relationship relationship relationship among relationship
inter- between between Regional division in Public between
organizational Population and Financial Revenue Works Office and Communication,
relationship Civil Registration and Asset integrated data Information,
Office, urban Management with other offices Statistics, and
village, and Board with banks related City Encoding Office,
Neighborhood and potential Planning data other local
Association. taxpayers government
offices, and
community
Source: Author’s identification, 2020
CONCLUSIONS mayor who has adaptive and pragmatic

There are concluding points in this leadership style will encourage the foster of
study regarding influencing factors of innovation in the public sector supported
innovation in Surakarta City Government. by the head of offices who give chances to
Visionary leadership, organizational their subordinates to create innovation as
climate, and enabling environment has the problem solver to increase their
been proposed as the influential factors in performance.
the development of innovation in the public The second influencing factor is
sectors. These influential factors can be regulatory aspect. Supportive regulation
either drivers or barriers that need to be from central government combines with
addressed by the local government. regional regulation related innovation and
It can be found that the most ICT drive the birth of public sector
influencing factor is leadership. Following innovation in Surakarta City. The many
the shifting of leadership in the local ICT-based innovations are influenced by
government, the innovation process in the appointment of Surakarta City as one of
Surakarta City Government is continuing the Smart City pilot projects since
even though there are differences in the Surakarta City Government has already had
leadership style of both mayors. Such a Regional Innovation System. However, the
utilizing of ICT for public services is still government. Furthermore, an integrated
depends on how the human resources who policy regarding innovation is needed not
operate it since ICT is only an application only to create innovation through
installation. Some innovations that have a Leadership Education and Training and
huge impact to the community usually Innovation Laboratory, but also to evaluate
supported with Mayor’s regulation so that and maintain the existing innovations to
all of them can be disseminate to public. sustain local government programs.
Third, a good participation in Second, it is also important for local
network and inter-organizational government to provide opportunities in the
relationship encourages innovation and its form of local regulation that support
sustainability in the local government. collaboration with NGOs to foster
Moreover, this study found that there is one innovation in the public sector as long as
innovation in the local government that is the vision and mission and ideas offered
created through the collaboration between are innovative, useful, and in line with
local government and NGOs. This local government programs.
collaborative innovation survives for Based on the result of this study,
almost a decade which also proves that the proposed theoretical framework can be
NGOs idea combine with local government used to analyzed innovation in the public
commitment can be a good collaboration. sector in local government. It is
Fourth, the central government still strengthened some previous study about
has a strong role in encouraging local influencing factors of innovation in the
government to do innovation in local local government. However, due to the
government. This can be seen from the limitation of data sources, resources, time,
offering of innovation awards and and methods of research, this study may be
providing supervision for local government limited, this study is conducted only in one
to develop local government capacity local government, Surakarta City
through the Innovation Laboratory. Government, and focuses on ICT based
However, some innovation awards are held innovations that emerged in the recent
by different ministries in the central years following the development of ICT.
government, and they created their own Future studies could do cross-comparison
Information System to collect the between local governments in Indonesia
innovation created in local government. that not only focus on ICT based
This will lead to an unintegrated database innovation, but also non-ICT based
and inefficient tasks for local government. innovation. Moreover, this study only
focuses on the government side as the
RECOMMENDATIONS provider of innovation in the local
This study also proposes some government by using in-depth interviews
policy recommendations. First, it is with government officers, NGO, political
important to create local regulations to party, and academician. So, it is
encourage the birth of innovation in the recommended to conduct study more on
local government. Not only due to mandate public perception as the recipients of the
from the central government, but also public service innovation.
based on the real condition in the local
REFERENCE Review, 3 (1), 3–17.
Andhika, L. 2018. Element and Factor https://doi.org/10.1080/146166700
Governance Innovation in 10009423
Government Public Service. Byu. 2018. Bentengi Keberlanjutan
Inovasi Pembangunan: Jurnal Inovasi dengan Perda, Retrieved
Kelitbangan, 6(03), 207-222. from
https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.35 https://www.menpan.go.id/site/beri
450/jip.v6i03.112 ta-terkini/bentengi-keberlanjutan-
Ariawan, A. 2020. Program Besuk Kiamat inovasi-dengan-perda. (July 19,
dan Sapu Kuwat Diharapkan Bisa 2018).
Diduplikasi Daerah Lain, Cornell University, INSEAD, and WIPO.
Retrieved from 2019. The Global Innovation Index
https://www.suaramerdeka.com/re 2019: Creating Healthy Lives-The
gional/solo/221516-program- Future of Medical Innovation.
besuk-kiamat-dan-sapu-kuwat- Retrieved from
diharapkan-bisa-diduplikasi- https://www.globalinnovationindex
daerah-lain. (March 13, 2020). .org/about-gii#currentreports
Arundel, A. Bloch, & C., Ferguson, B. Cummings, C. 2015. Fostering innovation
2014. Measuring Innovation In The and Entrepreneurialism in Public
Public Sector in OECD Report. Sector Reform. Public
Retrieved from Administration and Development,
https://www.oecd.org/sti/087%20- 35(4), 315-328.
%20ARUNDEL%20BLOCH%20 De Vries, H., Bekkers, V., & Tummers, L.
Methodologies%20for%20measuri (2016). Innovation in the public
ng%20innovation%20in%20the%2 sector: A systematic review and
0public%20sector.pdf future research agenda. Public
Bekkers, V.J.J.M., Tummers, L.G., Administration, 94(1), 146–166.
Stuijfzand, B.G., Voorberg, W. https://doi.org/10.1111/padm.1220
2013. Social Innovation in the 9
Public Sector: An integrative Gabris, G. T., Nelson, K., & Wood, C. H.
framework. LIPSE Working papers 2009. Managing for innovation in
(no. 1). Rotterdam: Erasmus local government. Three core
University Rotterdam, Retrieved strategic factors. Governance
from Finance Review, 25(6), 22–28
https://www.semanticscholar.org/p Handini, R.S. 2016. Reformasi
aper/SOCIAL-INNOVATION-IN- Berorientasi pada Dampak
THE-PUBLIC-SECTOR%3A-AN- Kebijakan in Holidin, S., Haryati,
Bekkers- D, & Sunarti, E.S. Reformasi
Tummers/e94141a318649481d4f7 Birokrasi dalam Transisi. Jakarta:
83aef5dc826f31aa7b9a PT. Kharisma Putra Utama.
Borins, S. 2001a. Encouraging Innovation Hartley, J., Sorensen, J., & Torfing, J.
in the Public Sector. Journal of 2013. Collaborative innovation: A
Intellectual Capital 2(3), 310-319. viable alternative to market
Borins, S. 2001b. Innovation, success and competition and organizational
failure in public management entrepreneurship. Public
research: Some methodological Administration Review 73, 821-
reflections. Public Management 830.
Holidin, D., & Handini, R. S. 2014. Sound Innovation, public policy and
Governance Analysis in the public services delivery in the UK:
Innovation of Traditional Market The word that would be king?
Revitalization and Street Vendors Public Administration, 89 (4),
Management. International 1335–1350. https://doi.org/10.1111
Journal of Administrative Science /j.1467-9299.2011.01932.x
and Organization, 21 (1), 17–26. Prasetyo, A.P. 2017. Mengintegrasikan
https://doi.org/10.20476/jbb.v21i1. Reformasi Birokrasi dengan
4040 Inovasi Sektor Publik. Jurnal
Koch, P., & Hauknes, J. 2005. On Analisis Kebijakan 1 (1), (49-62).
innovation in the public sector – Priyanto, M.A. 2019. . Ini Daftar Top 10
today and beyond. PUBLIN Inovasi Pelayanan Publik Jawa
Project on Innovation in the Public Tengah, retrieved from
Sector, Report no. D20, Oslo: Nifu https://jateng.tribunnews.com/2019
Step /10/23/ini-daftar-top-10-inovasi-
Kusuma, H.B. 2017. Innovative pelayanan-publik-jawa-tengah.
Leadership for Innovation in (October 23, 2019)
Public Service. Jurnal Rakhmatullah. 2016. Sejumlah Kepala
Transformasi Administrasi, 07 Daerah dan Pemda Raih
(01), 1432-1443. Retrieved from Government Award SINDO
http://jta.lan.go.id/index.php/jta/iss Weekly, retrieved from
ue/view/3 2 https://nasional.sindonews.com/ber
Majeed, R. 2012. Defusing a Volatile City, ita/1100519/15/sejumlah-kepala-
Igniting Reforms: Joko Widodo daerah-dan-pemda-raih-
and Surakarta, Indonesia, 2005- government-award-sindo-weekly.
2011. Innovations for Successful (April 12, 2016).
Societies, Princeton University. Rogers, E.M. (2003). Diffusion of
Retrieved April 15, 2020 from http Innovations. 5th Edition. New
https://successfulsocieties.princeto York: The Free Press.
n.edu/publications/defusing- Sorensen, E., Torfing, J. 2015. Enhancing
volatile-city-igniting-reforms-joko- Public Innovation through
widodo-and-surakarta-indonesia- Collaboration, Leadership and
2005-2011 New Public Governance. In:
Miles, M.B., Huberman, A.M., & Saldana, Nicholls, A., Simon, J., Gabriel, M.
J. 2014. Qualitative Data Analysis (eds) New Frontiers in Social
a Methods Sourcebook (3rd ed.). Innovation Research. London:
California: SAGE Publications. Palgrave Macmillan.
Noor, I. 2017. Desain Inovasi https://doi.org/10.1057/978113750
Pemerintahan Daerah. Malang: 6801_8
UB Press. Suripto, Prasetyo, A.P. 2014. Memahami
OECD. 2016. Public-sector innovation in Inovasi Administrasi Negara. In
Indonesia, in Open Government in Dwiputrianti, S. et al. (2014:18),
Indonesia. Paris: OECD Handbook Inovasi Administrasi
Publishing, Negara [Handbook of State
https://doi.org/10.1787/978926426 Administration Innovation].
5905-10-en. Jakarta: Pusat Inovasi Tata
Osborne, S. P., & Brown, L. (2011). Pemerintahan LAN.
Sururi, A. 2017. Innovation of Policy in Public Organizations. Public
Public Administration Perspective Management Review, 19 (8), 1142-
toward the realization of Good 1164.
Public Policy Governance. Spirit Yin, R.K. 2014. Case Study Research:
Publik, 12 (2), 14-31. Design and Methods 5th Edition.
https://doi.org/10.2096/sp.v12i2.16 Thousand Oaks, California: Sage
236 Publications.
Wibowo, A.W. 2015. Pasangan Rudy- Yunita, E. (2017). Innovation and
Purnomo Ditetapkan sebagai Performance in Government.
Pemenang Pilkada Solo. Retrieved Jurnal Transformasi Administrasi,
from 07 (02), 1432-1443. Retrieved
https://daerah.sindonews.com/ from https://jta-
berita/1070181/22/pasangan-rudy- journal.com/index.php/jta/issue/vie
purnomo-ditetapkan-sebagai- w/2
pemenang-pilkada-solo. Desember Zulsyid. 2014. Prestasi Jokowi Semasa
2015 Jadi Wali Kota Solo, Retrieved
Wynen, Jan, Koen Verhoest, & Bjorn from
Kleizen. 2017. More Reforms, https://www.bersosial.com/threads/
Less Innovation? The Impact of prestasi-jokowi-semasa-jadi-wali-
Structural Reform Histories on kota-solo.13999/.Oct 17. 2014.
Innovation Oriented Cultures in

836-Article Text-1330-2-10-20210225

Uploaded by

Document Information

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

836-Article Text-1330-2-10-20210225

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

INFLUENCING FACTORS OF INNOVATION IN SURAKARTA CITY

GOVERNMENT, CENTRAL JAVA, INDONESIA

FAKTOR-FAKTOR YANG MEMPENGARUHI INOVASI DI PEMERINTAH KOTA

Perdani Budiarti Hayuningtyas1* , Jun Matsunami2, Bakti Setiawan1,

Keyword: innovation, governance, public sector, local government, Surakarta City

INTRODUCTION objects which are considered as something

According to Miles et al. (2014), 2012, Surakarta City Government

The implementation of Online Tax including Communication, Information,

CONCLUSIONS mayor who has adaptive and pragmatic

You might also like