The Digital Bureaucracy Paradox: The Dilemma of Visionary Leadership in Balancing Work From Anywhere (WFA) Flexibility and Civil Servant Discipline at the Regional Secretariat of Sorong City
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.61132/greeninflation.v3i1.686Keywords:
Work From Anywhere (WFA), Public Accountability, Civil Servant Discipline, Digital LeadershipAbstract
This research aims to conduct an in-depth analysis of the complex dynamics termed the "Digital Bureaucracy Paradox," a phenomenon that emerged significantly following the implementation of the Work From Anywhere (WFA) policy within the Regional Secretariat of Sorong City. The primary focus this study lies in the strategic dilemma faced by visionary leadership in balancing modern flexible work patterns with the obligation to enforce Civil Servant (ASN) discipline, which has historically been conventional and rigid. Amidst massive digital transformation, local-level bureaucracy is forced to adapt to work models requiring high agility, while simultaneously remaining bound by formalistic disciplinary regulatory standards. Quantitative findings indicate that although digital platforms have been effective as instruments for work instructions, the effectiveness visual supervision remains irreplaceable in maintaining the integrity of working hours, particularly regarding low scores in separating personal and professional matters during WFA. Conversely, submissions the E-Kinerja (E-Performance) system show very high level of administrative compliance, yet do not fully guarantee the quality of substantive outputs. Statistical analysis confirms that adaptive digital leadership has decisive influence on the successful implementation of the Electronic-Based Government System (SPBE). These findings offer theoretical contribution to the study of bureaucratic behaviour within digital ecosystems and provide practical recommendations for redefining the ASN discipline from formalistic patterns toward a result-based substantive discipline. The synergy between visionary leadership and the strengthening of bottom-up accountability mechanisms through public participation is expected to realise a governance framework that is not only technologically modern but also functionally accountable in the post-pandemic era.
Downloads
References
Al-Fatih, S., & Aditya, S. (2019). Public service standards and civil servant discipline (Standar pelayanan publik dan disiplin aparatur sipil negara). Jurnal Administrasi Publik, 15(2), 120-135.
BKN. (2023). Report on the implementation of the integrated performance management system (E-Kinerja). Jakarta: National Civil Service Agency (Badan Kepegawaian Negara).
Creswell, J. W. (2014). Research design: Qualitative, quantitative, and mixed methods approaches (4th ed.). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publications.
Cristóvão, R. J., & Pudjiarti, E. S. (2024). Bureaucratic transformation and public service innovation in the administrative capacity dynamics of the Dili City Government, Timor-Leste. Jurnal Magister Administrasi Publik, 10(1), 1-15.
Denhardt, J. V., & Denhardt, R. B. (2015). The new public service: Serving, not steering. Armonk, NY: M.E. Sharpe. https://doi.org/10.4324/9781315699356
Dunleavy, P., Margetts, H., Bastow, S., & Tinkler, J. (2006). New public management is dead—Long live digital-era governance. Journal of Public Administration Research and Theory, 16(3), 467-494. https://doi.org/10.1093/jopart/mui057
Eisenhardt, K. M. (1989). Agency theory: An assessment and review. Academy of Management Review, 14(1), 57-74. https://doi.org/10.2307/258191
Fountain, J. E. (2001). Building the virtual state: Information technology and institutional change. Washington, DC: Brookings Institution Press.
Heeks, R. (2006). Implementing and managing e-government: An international text. London: Sage Publications. https://doi.org/10.4135/9781446220191
Jatmiko, B. (2021). ASN work culture transformation in the digital era. Jurnal Kebijakan Publik, 12(1), 45-60.
Kasim, A. (2013). Bureaucratic reform and human resource management for the apparatus. Jakarta: Universitas Indonesia Press.
Kotter, J. P. (2012). Leading change. Boston, MA: Harvard Business Review Press. https://doi.org/10.15358/9783800646159
Mayer, R. C., Davis, J. H., & Schoorman, F. D. (1995). An integrative model of organisational trust. Academy of Management Review, 20(3), 709-734. https://doi.org/10.2307/258792
Miles, M. B., Huberman, A. M., & Saldaña, J. (2014). Qualitative data analysis: A methods sourcebook. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publications.
Moon, M. J. (2002). The evolution of e-government among municipalities: Rhetoric or reality? Public Administration Review, 62(4), 424-433. https://doi.org/10.1111/0033-3352.00196
Moore, M. H. (1995). Creating public value: Strategic management in government. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
North, D. C. (1990). Institutions, institutional change and economic performance. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. https://doi.org/10.1017/CBO9780511808678
Osborne, S. P. (2010). The new public governance: Emerging perspectives on the theory and practice of public governance. London: Routledge. https://doi.org/10.4324/9780203861684
Pollitt, C., & Bouckaert, G. (2011). Public management reform: A comparative analysis (3rd ed.). Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Prasojo, E. (2020). Democracy, bureaucracy, and administrative reform. Jakarta: Department of Administrative Science UI.
Rainey, H. G. (2009). Understanding and managing public organisations (4th ed.). San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass.
Republic of Indonesia. (2014). Law Number 5 of 2014 concerning Civil Servants. Jakarta: State Secretariat.
Republic of Indonesia. (2018). Presidential Regulation Number 95 of 2018 concerning Electronic-Based Government Systems. Jakarta: State Secretariat.
Republic of Indonesia. (2023). Law Number 20 of 2023 concerning Civil Servants. Jakarta: State Secretariat.
Romzek, B. S., & Dubnick, M. J. (1987). Accountability in the public sector: Lessons from the Challenger tragedy. Public Administration Review, 47(3), 227-238. https://doi.org/10.2307/975901
Sedarmayanti. (2017). Bureaucratic reform, change management, and the development of information technology. Bandung: Refika Aditama.
Sugiyono. (2018). Mixed methods research (Metode penelitian kombinasi). Bandung: Alfabeta.
Thoha, M. (2016). Civil service management in Indonesia. Jakarta: Kencana.
Van de Walle, S., & Bouckaert, G. (2003). Public service performance and trust in government: The missing link? Evaluation, 9(3), 291-313.
World Bank. (2020). World Development Report 2020: Digital dividends for the public sector. Washington, DC: The World Bank.
Downloads
Published
How to Cite
Issue
Section
License
Copyright (c) 2026 Green Inflation: International Journal of Management and Strategic Business Leadership
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike 4.0 International License.
