Workforce Empowerment in Digital Innovation Governance in the Management of Regional Own-source Revenue of Makassar City
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.18502/kss.v10i18.19547Keywords:
workforce empowerment, governance, digital innovation, local original incomeAbstract
Optimal management of regional own-source revenue will encourage better regional development. In the current digitalization era, governance based on digital innovation is a key factor in increasing the amount of regional own-source revenue. Therefore, this study aims to analyze workforce empowerment in digital innovation governance in managing regional own-source revenue.
This study uses a qualitative approach with a case study strategy. The research informants are the leaders and staff at the Makassar City Regional Revenue Agency, as the leading sector in regional revenue management. Data sources include primary and secondary data. Data collection through observation, in-depth interviews, and documentation. Data analysis includes data collection, data reduction, data presentation, and drawing conclusions.
The results of the study show that the readiness of the Regional Revenue Agency to carry out digital innovation is not optimal. Digital innovations currently used include the PAKINTA application, payment integration with Qris and Virtual Account, electronic regional government transactions (ETPD), and digital socialization and education. From the perspective of human resource empowerment, it shows that the level of digital literacy of the State Civil Apparatus is not evenly distributed. This is also due to the lack of digitalization-based training for operators to manage various digital innovations in the Regional Revenue Agency. The organizational culture is supportive at the top level (top-down), but has not been fully integrated into the daily operational level of ASN. The reward system has not been designed to encourage ASN involvement in digital innovation structurally and systematically. These findings are obstacles in optimizing digital innovation governance in the management of Makassar City’s Regional Original Income (PAD).
References
[1] Mergel I, Edelmann N, Haug N. Defining digital transformation: results from expert interviews. Gov Inf Q. 2019;36(4):101385.
[2] Luna-Reyes LF, Gil-Garcia JR. Digital government transformation and internet portals: the co-evolution of technology, organizations, and institutions. Gov Inf Q. 2011;28:S59–66.
[3] Makassar City Government. Makassar Smart City Masterplan. Makassar. Makassar Communication and Information Service; 2020.
[4] Janssen M, Charalabidis Y, Zuiderwijk A. Benefits, adoption barriers and myths of open data and open government. Inf Syst Manage. 2012;29(4):258–68.
[5] EY. How to make innovation everyone’s job. London: Ernst & Young; 2017.
[6] Koch P, Hauknes J. Innovation in the public sector. Oslo: NIFU STEP; 2005.
[7] Amusan L. Nigeria and the burden of governance in the digital age. J Internet Bank Commerce. 2017;22 S8:267.
[8] Corydon B, Ganesan V, Lundqvist M. Digital by default: A guide to transforming government. McKinsey & Company; 2016.
[9] Bekkers V. Innovation in the public sector: Linking capacity and leadership. Rotterdam: Erasmus University; 2011. https://doi.org/10.1057/9780230307520.
[10] OECD. Rethinking e-Government Services: User-centred Approaches. Paris: OECD Publishing; 2008.
[11] Bughin J, Chui M, Johnson B. The internet of things: Mapping the value beyond the hype. McKinsey Global Institute; 2010.
[12] Bisong A, Oguwmike F. ICT governance and public financial management in Sub- Saharan Africa. Int J Inf Technol Bus Manag. 2020;74(1):12.
[13] Martin C. ICT governance: Managing IT investment and performance. Hoboken: Wiley; 2008.
[14] Salman A. ICT, the new media (internet) and development: malaysian experience. J Knowl Commun Dev. 2009;1(1):5.
[15] Dodgson M, Gann D, Phillips N. The Oxford Handbook of Innovation Management. Oxford: Oxford University Press; 2014. https://doi.org/10.1093/oxfordhb/9780199694945.001.0001.
[16] Nylen D, Holmström J. Digital innovation strategy: A framework for diagnosing and improving digital product and service innovation. Bus Inf Syst Eng. 2015;57(5):345– 55.
[17] Organization for Economic Co-operation and Development (OECD). Open Government: The Global Context and the Way Forward. Paris: OECD Publishing; 2016.
[18] McNabb DE. Knowledge Management in the Public Sector: A Blueprint for Innovation in Government. Armonk (NY): M.E. Sharpe; 2007.
[19] Martin NL, Gregor S. Developing a governance model for IT: Insights from the public sector. In: Proceedings of the 19th Australasian Conference on Information Systems; 2008 Dec; Christchurch, New Zealand.
[20] Haines S. The Product Manager’s Desk Reference. 2nd ed. New York: McGraw-Hill Education; 2014.
[21] Gekara V, Snell D, Molla A, Karanasios S, Thomas A. The fourth industrial revolution: The implications of technological disruption for Australian VET. Melbourne: National Center for Vocational Education Research (NCVER); 2020.
[22] Creswell JW. Research Design: Qualitative, Quantitative, and Mixed Methods Approaches. 3rd ed. Thousand Oaks: Sage Publications; 2010.
[23] Yin RK. Case Study Research: Design and Methods. 5th ed. Thousand Oaks: Sage Publications; 2014.
[24] Miles MB, Huberman AM, Saldana J. Qualitative Data Analysis: A Methods Sourcebook. 3rd ed. Thousand Oaks: Sage Publications; 2014.
[25] Corydon B, Ganesan V, Lundqvist M. Transforming government through digitization. McKinsey & Company; 2016.
[26] George B, Pandey SK. Digital technology adoption, public sector innovation, and workforce empowerment. Public Adm Rev. 2019;79(6):853–64.
Published
How to Cite
Issue
Section
License
Copyright (c) 2025 Muhammad Fuad Arfandi
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License.
