Strengthening Higher Education performance Management
Abstract
This study aims to examine the institutional and operational dimensions of performance management of the Government Agency Performance Accountability System (SAKIP) of Higher Education. Empirically, the strengthening of both dimensions in higher education performance management includes, 1) Institutional guarantees stably through commitment, legitimacy, and digital leadership. 2) Operational systems through planning, measurement, and internal reporting and evaluation. To achieve the objectives of this research qualitative descriptive method was used. This research method is used to reveal the problems of higher education performance management. This research was conducted at Gorontalo State University (UNG). The informants of this research include elements of leadership, management team, lecturers, and education personnel who are directly involved and influenced by decision-making. Data collection was carried out by interview, observation, and documentation which were then analyzed using the Miles and Huberman data analysis technique. The research findings show that performance management at UNG can be seen fundamentally and in a more macro perspective by, 1) The legality of providing internal policies as guidelines in carrying out university performance in a stable manner. 2) Information technology support through an integrated system of information systems in supporting the operational mechanism of higher education performance data management.
Keywords: technology support, data integration, electronic system, internal policy, legality
References
[1] Sinambela L. Management kinerja pengelolaan, pengukuran dan implikasi kinerja. Volume 1. 2019.
[2] Hvidman U, Anderson SC. “Impact of performance management in public and private organization,”. J Public Adm Res Theory. 2014;24(1):35–8.
[3] Wu, B, “Goverment Performance Management in china,” springer singapore, Vols. 136-4047, 2020.
[4] Listiani T. “Manajemen kinerja, kinerja organisasi serta implikasinya terhadap kualitas pelayanan organisasi sektor publik,” jurnal ilmu administrasi, vol. iii, no. 2, pp. 312- 321, 2011.
[5] Roh J. “Improving the goverment performance management system in south korea focusing on central goverment agencies,” Asian Education and development studies, vol. 7, no. 3, pp. 266-278, 2018.
[6] Evalianda N. Pengaruh implementasi prinsip-prinsip good universiry governance terhadap kinerja perguruan tinggi. STIESIA Surabaya; 2020.
[7] Aneta y, noho y. “bureaucray behavior in expanding access to education in gorontalo regency,” 2022.
[8] Risanty, Kusuma SA. “Tata kelola universitas yang baik: pengalaman dari universitas di indonesia,” 2019.
[9] Reddy KS, Xie E, Tang Q. “Higher education, high impact research and world university rankings. a case of india and comparison with china,” pasific review B: Humanities and social sciences, vol. 2, no. 1, pp. 1-21, 2016.
[10] Mahmudi. “New Public management: pendekatan baru manajemen sektor publik,” vol. 6, no. 1, 2003.
[11] Mahmoud MH, Othman R, Taher MM. “Performance management system of jordania public sector organization: greater municipality’s GAM Experience,” International journal of Human resource studies, vol. 10, no. 2, p. 308, 2020.
[12] Subhan M, et al. Study of servant leadership in building educational organizational comitment at SDIT ABFA. TADRIS. 2022;17(1):32–42.
[13] Santati, et al. “stategic performance measurement system in rugnei education in indonesia,” Sriwijaya international journal of dynamic economics and business, vol. 6, no. 2, p. 107, 2022.
[14] Yakup. “Pengaruh keterlibatan kerja, budaya organisasi dan motivasi kerja terhadap kepuasan kerja pegawai,” Perisai: islamic banking and finance journal, vol. 1, no. 3, pp. 273-290, 2017.
[15] Andiani I, et al. “Penerapan sistem akuntabilitas kinerja instansi pemerintah (SAKIP) dalam mewujudkan good governance pada politeknik negeri padang,” 2015.
[16] Ojo AO, Fauzi MA. “Enviromental awarness and leadership commitment as determinants of IT Profesionals engangement in green IT Practices for enviromental performance,” sustainable production and consumption, vol. 24, pp. 298-307, 2020.
[17] Kirana, “Influence of leadership commitment to good corporate governance and budget managemetn,” humanities and education journal SHE Journal, vol. 3, no. 2, pp. 135-141, 2022.
[18] Nurhayati H, Ahmar Nurmala, “Pengaruh GUG Terhadap manajemen sebuah tinjauan pustaka,” jurnal ilmu sosial, vol. 1, no. 2, pp. 56-71, 2022.
[19] Noviandini, S, “analisis komitmen pimpinan terhadap penerapan sistem manajemen k3 di PT Krakatau steel TBK,” E-Journal undip, vol. 3, p. 3, 2015.
[20] Silva S, et al. “stakeholder expectations on sustainability performance measurement and assesment : a systematic literature review,” journal of cleaner production, vol. 217, pp. 204-215, 2019.
[21] Asmawati, et al, “Dimensi akuntabilitas kinerja instansi pemerintah daerah,” journal of applied accounting and taxatlon, vol. 5, no. 1, pp. 85-94, 2020.
[22] Budur, “leadership style and affective commitment at family business,” international journal of social sciences and educational studies, vol. 9, no. 1, pp. 318-335, 2022.
[23] Wang F, Hu Q. “Design and implementation of digital platform of academic test in colleges and universitas,” journal of physics: conference series, vol. 1881, no. 3, 2021.
[24] Biondi L, Russo S. “Integrating strategic planning and performance management in universities: a multiple case-study analysis,” journal of management and governance, vol. 26, no. 2, pp. 417-448, 2022.