IDENTIFYING BARRIERS IN PUBLIC SECTOR DIGITAL TRANSFORMATION: A CASE STUDY IN INDONESIA CITY OFFICE FOR POPULATION ADMINISTRATION AND CIVIL REGISTRATION (COPACR) CONTEXT

Authors

DOI:

https://doi.org/10.26668/businessreview/2024.v9i4.4500

Keywords:

Digital Transformation, External Barrier, Internal Barrier, Public Sector, Population Administration, Civil Registration

Abstract

Purpose: This paper presents a case study of the Surabaya City Office for Population Administration and Civil Registration (COPACR), which is currently undergoing digitization and digital transformation across all its civil registration service lines. This research identifies internal and external barriers relevant to digital transformation in the context of Surabaya COPACR.

 

Theoretical Framework: This study combines qualitative and quantitative methods to identify internal and external barriers relevant to the implementation of digital transformation in the COPACR sector. The barriers are validated through Focus Group Discussions (FGDs) applying the Analytic Hierarchy Process (AHP) and Expert Choice tools. Priority barriers are determined based on the highest relevance weight values from the perspectives of Top Management and Field Officers.

 

Design/Methodology/Approach: This research adopts an action research methodology, leveraging the researcher's position within the system to directly intervene and facilitate change. A mixed-method approach is employed, combining qualitative and quantitative methodologies. Twenty literature sources are utilized to identify internal and external barriers within public sectors to adopt digital transformation. A total of 63 barriers (33 internal and 30 external) are categorized and their relevance tested through Focus Group Discussions (FGDs). Barrier priorities are selected using the Analytic Hierarchy Process (AHP) method and expert choice tools.

 

Findings: The Surabaya COPACR in developing countries exhibits characteristics such as low employee motivation, inadequate officer competency, rigid bureaucratic structures, and limited innovation. With these conditions, the internal priorities for adopting digital transformation in Surabaya COPACR include lack of political support, traditional bureaucracy, organizational complexity, and lack of competency. External barriers include inflexible regulations, bureaucracy, lack of data standardization, and inadequate funding allocation.

 

Research, Practical & Social Implications: This research contributes theoretical insights into internal and external priority barriers that need to be considered to adopt digital transformation in the COPACR context of developing countries. The identified barriers can serve as references for public sectors with similar organizational characteristics in developing countries to design strategies for adopting digital transformation effectively.

 

Originality/Value: This study identifies internal and external barriers to digital transformation in the Surabaya COPACR context, involving assessments from both strategic (Top Management) and technical (Field Officer) perspectives.

Downloads

Download data is not yet available.

References

Aminah, S., & Saksono, H. (2021). Digital Transformation of the Government: A Case Study in Indonesia. Malaysian Journal of Communication, 37(2), 272-288.

Amit, R., & Zott, C. (2001). Value creation in E-business . Strategic Management Journal, 22(6-7), 493-520.

Andersson, P., & Mattsson, L.-G. (2018). Digital Transformation-Supporting-Public-Service Innovation Business Model Challenges and Sustainable Development Opportunities. 34th IMP-conference. Marseille.

Bjerke-Busch, L. S., & Aspelund, A. (May de 2021). Identifying Barriers for Digital Transformation in the Public Sector. Em Digitalization (pp. 277-290). Springer. Fonte: Researchgate.com: https://www.researchgate.net/publication/351977640

Bjerke-Busch, L. S., & Aspelund, A. (May de 2021). Identifying Barriers for Digital Transformation in the Public Sector. Fonte: Researchgate.com: https://www.research

gate.net/publication/351977640

Dougherty, D., & Dunne, D. D. (2011). Digital Science and Knowledge Boundaries in Complex Innovation. Organizational Science, 23(5), 1467–1484.

George, T. (24 de November de 2022). Mixed Methods Research | Definition, Guide & Examples. Fonte: https://www.scribbr.com/methodology/mixed-methods-research/

Gölzer, P., & Fritzsche, A. (2017). Data-driven operations management: Organisational implications of the digital transformation in industrial practice. Production Planning & Control, 28(16), 1332-1343.

Gottschalk, P. (2009). Maturity levels for interoperability in digital government. Government Information Quarterly, 26(1), 75-81.

Gunawong, P., & Gao, P. (2017). Understanding e-government failure in the developing country context: A process-oriented study. Information Technology for Development , 23(1), 153-178.

Gupta, S. (06 de 12 de 2018). Organizational Barriers to Digital Transformation. Degree Project in Industrial Management. Stockholm, Sweden.

Hafseld, K. H., Hussein, B., & Rauzy, A. B. (2021). An attempt to understand complexity in a government digital transformation project. International Journal of Information System and Project Management, 9(3).

Heeks, R. (2003). Most eGovernment for development projects fail: How can risks be reduced. Manchester: Institute for Development Policy and Management.

Jakob, M., & Krcmar, H. (2018). Which Barriers Hinder A Successful Digital Transformation in small and Medium-Sized Municipalitiez in a Federal System. CEE e|Dem and e|Gov Days, (pp. 141-150).

Leviäkangas, P. (2016). Digitalisation of Finland's transport sector. Technology in Society, 47(1), 1-15.

Li, F., Nuccirelli, A., Roden, S., & Graham, G. (2016). How smart cities transform operations models: A new research agenda for operations management in the digital economy. Production Planning & Control, 27(6), 514-528.

Li, L., Su, F., Zhang, W., & Mao, J.-Y. (2017). Digital transformation by SME entrepreneurs: A capability perspective . Information System Journal, 28(6), 1129-1157.

Liva, G., Misuraca, G., Barcevičius, E., Codagnone, C., & Gineikyte, V. (2020). Exploring digital government transformation: a literature review. Athens, Greece: ICEGOV 2020: 13th International Conference on Theory and Practice of Electronic Governance.

Loebbecke, C., & Picot, A. (2015). Reflections on societal and business model transformation arising from digitization and big data analytics: A research agenda. The Journal of Strategic Information Systems, 24(3), 149-157.

Matt, C., Hess, T., & Benlian, A. (2015). Digital Transformation Strategies . Business & Information Systems Engineering, 57(1), 339–343.

Meijer, A. (2015). E-governance innovation: Barriers and strategies. Government Information Quarterly, 32(3), 198-206.

Meijer, A. (2015). E-governance innovation: Barriers and strategies. Government Information Quarterly, 198-206.

Mergel, I., Haug, N., & Edelmann, N. (June de 2019). Defining Digital Transformation: Results From Expert Interviews. Government Information Quarterly, 36(4), 101385.

Nachit, H., Jaafari, M., El Fikri, I., & Belhcen, L. (18 de June de 2021). Digital Transformation in the Moroccan Public Sector: Drivers and Barriers. Fonte: SSRN: Nachit, Hicham and Jaafari, Mouna and El Fikri, Islame and Belhcen, Lhacen, Digital Transformation in the Moroccan Public Sector: Drivers and Barriers (June 18, 2021). Available at SSRN: https://ssrn.com/abstract=3907290 or http://dx.doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.

O.Nyumba, T., Wilson, K., Derrick, C., & Mukherjee, N. (2017). The use of focus group discussion methodology: Insights from two decades of application in conservation. Methods in Ecology and Evolution. 9, pp. 20 - 32. John Wiley & Sons, Ltd. doi:DOI: 10.1111/2041-2

Pagani, M., & Pardo, C. (2017). The impact of digital technology on relationships in a business network. Industrial Marketing Management, 67(1), 185-192.

Ramaswamy, V., & Ozcan, K. (2016). Brand value co-creation in a digitalized world: An integrative framework and research implications. International Journal of Research in Marketing, 33(1), 93-106.

Sebastian, I. M., Ross, J. W., Beath, C., Mocker, M., Moloney, K. G., & Fonstad, N. O. (2017). How Big Old Companies Navigate Digital Transformation . MIS Quarterly Executive, 16(3), 197-213.

Syed, R., Bandara, W., & Eden, R. (2022). Public Sector Digital Transformation Barriers: A Developing Country Experience. Information Polity, Pre-press(Pre-press), 1-23.

Tobias , O., Wilson, K., Derrick, C., & Mukherjee, N. (2018). The use of focus group discussion methodology: Insights from two decades of application in conservation. Methods in Ecology and Evolution, 20-32. doi:https://doi.org/10.1111/2041-210X.12860

Torfing, J., Sørensen, E., & Røiseland2, A. (2016). Transforming the Public Sector Into an Arena for Co-Creation: Brriers, Drivers. Administration & Society OnlineFirst,, (pp. 1-31).

Verhoef, P. C., Broekhuizena, T., Bart, Y., Bhattacharya, A., Dong, J. Q., Fabian, N., & Haenlein, M. (2021). Digital transformation: A multidisciplinary reflection and research agenda. Journal of Business Research, 122(1), 889–901.

Ziyadin, S., Malayev, K., Fernández-Plazaola, I., Ismail, G., & Beyzhanova, A. (2020). Digital Modernization of the System of Public Administration: Prerogatives and Barriers. E3S Web of Conferences 159,, (pp. 1-11). doi:https://doi.org/10.1051/e3sconf/202015905003

Downloads

Published

2024-04-04

How to Cite

Sonhaji, A. I., Anityasari, M., & ER, M. (2024). IDENTIFYING BARRIERS IN PUBLIC SECTOR DIGITAL TRANSFORMATION: A CASE STUDY IN INDONESIA CITY OFFICE FOR POPULATION ADMINISTRATION AND CIVIL REGISTRATION (COPACR) CONTEXT. International Journal of Professional Business Review, 9(4), e04500. https://doi.org/10.26668/businessreview/2024.v9i4.4500