Regulatory Grammar and Administrative Burden in Indonesia's Public Service Innovation Competition
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.38043/jids.v10i2.8072Keywords:
Administrative Burden, Institutional Grammar, Policy Design, IndonesiaAbstract
Indonesia's Public Service Innovation Competition (Kompetisi Inovasi Pelayanan Publik, KIPP) was designed to identify, reward, and diffuse public service innovations. Participation, however, was mediated by proposal formats, documentary evidence, information-system requirements, deadlines, and administrative screening. This study examined how that regulatory architecture created potential administrative burden for participating public organizations. We integrated Institutional Grammar with the administrative burden framework and conducted qualitative-quantitative content analysis of KIPP regulations and annual implementation guidelines issued between 2014 and 2025. The corpus contained 1,023 institutional statements. Each statement was unitized and coded for Attribute, Deontic, Aim, Condition, and Or Else, then mapped to learning, compliance, and psychological-cost exposure using a predefined multi-label codebook. The coding identified 616 statements containing administrative conditions. Learning-cost exposure appeared in 235 statements and compliance-cost exposure in 182, while 40 statements contained at least one psychological-cost exposure. Full ADICO rules were uncommon, whereas procedural requirements and conditionalities were widespread. Granular examination showed that burden was produced less by sanction density than by the cumulative work of translating an innovation into a standardized, evidence-supported, system-readable proposal. The study extended administrative burden research to intra-governmental policy instruments and showed how documentary capacity could become part of the effective selection mechanism. The findings supported regulatory simplification, stable proposal formats, clearer distinctions between mandatory and optional evidence, and curative administrative review before substantive exclusion.
Downloads
References
Bozeman, B., & Youtie, J. (2020). Robotic bureaucracy: Administrative burden and red tape in university research. Public Administration Review, 80(1), 157-162. https://doi.org/10.1111/puar.13105
Brodkin, E. Z., & Majmundar, M. (2010). Administrative exclusion: Organizations and the hidden costs of welfare claiming. Journal of Public Administration Research and Theory, 20(4), 827-848. https://doi.org/10.1093/jopart/mup046
Campbell, J. W., Pandey, S. K., & Arnesen, L. (2023). The ontology, origin, and impact of divisive public sector rules: A meta-narrative review of the red tape and administrative burden literatures. Public Administration Review, 83(2), 296-315. https://doi.org/10.1111/puar.13527
Christensen, J., Aarøe, L., Baekgaard, M., Herd, P., & Moynihan, D. P. (2020). Human capital and administrative burden: The role of cognitive resources in citizen-state interactions. Public Administration Review, 80(1), 127-136. https://doi.org/10.1111/puar.13134
Cinar, E., Trott, P., & Simms, C. (2019). A systematic review of barriers to public sector innovation process. Public Management Review, 21(2), 264-290. https://doi.org/10.1080/14719037.2018.1473477
Crawford, S. E. S., & Ostrom, E. (1995). A grammar of institutions. American Political Science Review, 89(3), 582-600. https://doi.org/10.2307/2082975
de Vries, H., Bekkers, V., & Tummers, L. (2016). Innovation in the public sector: A systematic review and future research agenda. Public Administration, 94(1), 146-166. https://doi.org/10.1111/padm.12209
Demircioglu, M. A., & Audretsch, D. B. (2017). Conditions for innovation in public sector organizations. Research Policy, 46(9), 1681-1691. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.respol.2017.08.004
Dunlop, C. A., Kamkhaji, J. C., & Radaelli, C. M. (2019). A sleeping giant awakes? The rise of the Institutional Grammar Tool (IGT) in policy research. Journal of Chinese Governance, 4(2), 163-180. https://doi.org/10.1080/23812346.2019.1575502
Döring, M., & Madsen, J. K. (2022). Mitigating psychological costs: The role of citizens' administrative literacy and social capital. Public Administration Review, 82(4), 671-681. https://doi.org/10.1111/puar.13472
Frantz, C. K., & Siddiki, S. (2021). Institutional Grammar 2.0: A specification for encoding and analyzing institutional design. Public Administration, 99(2), 222-247. https://doi.org/10.1111/padm.12719
Frantz, C. K., & Siddiki, S. (2022). Institutional Grammar: Foundations and applications for institutional analysis. Palgrave Macmillan. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-86372-2
Halling, A., & Baekgaard, M. (2024). Administrative burden in citizen-state interactions: A systematic literature review. Journal of Public Administration Research and Theory, 34(2), 180-195. https://doi.org/10.1093/jopart/muad023
Hartley, J. (2005). Innovation in governance and public services: Past and present. Public Money & Management, 25(1), 27-34. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-9302.2005.00447.x
Hartley, J., Sørensen, E., & Torfing, J. (2013). Collaborative innovation: A viable alternative to market competition and organizational entrepreneurship. Public Administration Review, 73(6), 821-830. https://doi.org/10.1111/puar.12136
Hayes, A. F., & Krippendorff, K. (2007). Answering the call for a standard reliability measure for coding data. Communication Methods and Measures, 1(1), 77-89. https://doi.org/10.1080/19312450709336664
Herd, P., & Moynihan, D. P. (2018). Administrative burden: Policymaking by other means. Russell Sage Foundation.
Hilmawan, R., Aprianti, Y., Yudaruddin, R., Bintoro, R. F. A., Suharsono, Fitrianto, Y., & Wahyuningsih, N. (2023). Public sector innovation in local government and its impact on development outcomes: Empirical evidence in Indonesia. Heliyon, 9(12), e22833. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.heliyon.2023.e22833
Kementerian Pendayagunaan Aparatur Negara dan Reformasi Birokrasi. (2014). Peraturan Menteri Pendayagunaan Aparatur Negara dan Reformasi Birokrasi Nomor 30 Tahun 2014 tentang Pedoman Inovasi Pelayanan Publik.
Kementerian Pendayagunaan Aparatur Negara dan Reformasi Birokrasi. (2015). Peraturan Menteri Pendayagunaan Aparatur Negara dan Reformasi Birokrasi Nomor 15 Tahun 2015 tentang Kompetisi Inovasi Pelayanan Publik di Lingkungan Kementerian, Lembaga, dan Pemerintah Daerah Tahun 2016.
Kementerian Pendayagunaan Aparatur Negara dan Reformasi Birokrasi. (2016). Peraturan Menteri Pendayagunaan Aparatur Negara dan Reformasi Birokrasi Nomor 19 Tahun 2016 tentang Kompetisi Inovasi Pelayanan Publik di Lingkungan Kementerian/Lembaga, Pemerintah Daerah, Badan Usaha Milik Negara, dan Badan Usaha Milik Daerah Tahun 2017.
Kementerian Pendayagunaan Aparatur Negara dan Reformasi Birokrasi. (2018). Peraturan Menteri Pendayagunaan Aparatur Negara dan Reformasi Birokrasi Nomor 3 Tahun 2018 tentang Kompetisi Inovasi Pelayanan Publik di Lingkungan Kementerian/Lembaga, Pemerintah Daerah, Badan Usaha Milik Negara, dan Badan Usaha Milik Daerah Tahun 2018.
Kementerian Pendayagunaan Aparatur Negara dan Reformasi Birokrasi. (2019). Peraturan Menteri Pendayagunaan Aparatur Negara dan Reformasi Birokrasi Nomor 5 Tahun 2019 tentang Kompetisi Inovasi Pelayanan Publik di Lingkungan Kementerian/Lembaga, Pemerintah Daerah, Badan Usaha Milik Negara, dan Badan Usaha Milik Daerah.
Kementerian Pendayagunaan Aparatur Negara dan Reformasi Birokrasi. (2020). Keputusan Menteri Pendayagunaan Aparatur Negara dan Reformasi Birokrasi Nomor 44 Tahun 2020 tentang Petunjuk Pelaksanaan Kompetisi Inovasi Pelayanan Publik Tahun 2020.
Kementerian Pendayagunaan Aparatur Negara dan Reformasi Birokrasi. (2021a). Peraturan Menteri Pendayagunaan Aparatur Negara dan Reformasi Birokrasi Nomor 7 Tahun 2021 tentang Kompetisi Inovasi Pelayanan Publik di Lingkungan Kementerian/Lembaga, Pemerintah Daerah, Badan Usaha Milik Negara, dan Badan Usaha Milik Daerah.
Kementerian Pendayagunaan Aparatur Negara dan Reformasi Birokrasi. (2021b). Keputusan Menteri Pendayagunaan Aparatur Negara dan Reformasi Birokrasi Nomor 161 Tahun 2021 tentang Petunjuk Pelaksanaan Kompetisi Inovasi Pelayanan Publik Tahun 2021.
Kementerian Pendayagunaan Aparatur Negara dan Reformasi Birokrasi. (2022). Keputusan Menteri Pendayagunaan Aparatur Negara dan Reformasi Birokrasi Nomor 50 Tahun 2022 tentang Petunjuk Pelaksanaan Kompetisi Inovasi Pelayanan Publik Tahun 2022.
Kementerian Pendayagunaan Aparatur Negara dan Reformasi Birokrasi. (2023). Pedoman Menteri Pendayagunaan Aparatur Negara dan Reformasi Birokrasi Nomor 3 Tahun 2023 tentang Petunjuk Pelaksanaan Kompetisi Inovasi Pelayanan Publik Tahun 2023.
Kementerian Pendayagunaan Aparatur Negara dan Reformasi Birokrasi. (2025). Pedoman Menteri Pendayagunaan Aparatur Negara dan Reformasi Birokrasi Nomor 4 Tahun 2025 tentang Penyelenggaraan Kompetisi Inovasi Pelayanan Publik Tahun 2025 Berdasarkan Efisiensi Anggaran.
Krippendorff, K. (2018). Content analysis: An introduction to its methodology (4th ed.). SAGE.
Kusumasari, B., Pramusinto, A., Santoso, A. D., & Fathin, C. A. (2019). What shapes public sector innovation? Public Policy and Administration, 18(4), 430-446. https://doi.org/10.13165/VPA-19-18-4-05
Lewis, J. M., Ricard, L. M., & Klijn, E. H. (2018). How innovation drivers, networking and leadership shape public sector innovation capacity. International Review of Administrative Sciences, 84(2), 288-307. https://doi.org/10.1177/0020852317694085
Madsen, J. K., Mikkelsen, K. S., & Moynihan, D. P. (2022). Burdens, sludge, ordeals, red tape, oh my!: A user's guide to the study of frictions. Public Administration, 100(2), 375-393. https://doi.org/10.1111/padm.12717
Moynihan, D., Herd, P., & Harvey, H. (2015). Administrative burden: Learning, psychological, and compliance costs in citizen-state interactions. Journal of Public Administration Research and Theory, 25(1), 43-69. https://doi.org/10.1093/jopart/muu009
Muluk, M. R. K., & Pratama, M. R. (2021). Public sector innovation in a developing country: Progress and challenges of public service innovation competition in Indonesian government. Public Policy and Administration, 20(4), 452-465. https://doi.org/10.13165/VPA-21-20-4-08
Neuendorf, K. A. (2017). The content analysis guidebook (2nd ed.). SAGE. https://doi.org/10.4135/9781071873045
Nisar, M. A., & Masood, A. (2024). Governance by artifacts: Theory and evidence on materiality of administrative burdens. Public Administration Review, 84(6), 1052-1066. https://doi.org/10.1111/puar.13821
Pratama, A. B. (2020). The landscape of public service innovation in Indonesia: A comprehensive analysis of its characteristic and trend. Innovation & Management Review, 17(1), 25-40. https://doi.org/10.1108/INMR-11-2018-0080
Siddiki, S., Basurto, X., & Weible, C. M. (2012). Using the institutional grammar tool to understand regulatory compliance: The case of Colorado aquaculture. Regulation & Governance, 6(2), 167-188. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1748-5991.2012.01132.x
Siddiki, S., Weible, C. M., Basurto, X., & Calanni, J. (2011). Dissecting policy designs: An application of the Institutional Grammar Tool. Policy Studies Journal, 39(1), 79-103. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1541-0072.2010.00397.x
Downloads
Published
How to Cite
Issue
Section
License
Copyright (c) 2026 Muhammad Rizki Pratama, Fatin Nuha Astini
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial 4.0 International License.
