Digital Transformation and Cross-Organizational Interoperability in Electronic-Based Government Systems

Aulia Nur Kasiwi; Hermin Indah Wahyuni; Ratminto

doi:10.32890/jgd2025.21.2.5

Pengarang

Aulia Nur Kasiwi Department of Public Policy and Management, Universitas Gadjah Mada, Indonesia
Hermin Indah Wahyuni Department of Communication Science, Universitas Gadjah Mada, Indonesia
Ratminto Department of Public Policy and Management, Universitas Gadjah Mada, Indonesia

DOI:

https://doi.org/10.32890/jgd2025.21.2.5

Kata kunci:

Digital transformation, cross-organizational, interoperability, e-government

Abstrak

Digital transformation in government is reshaping the way public institutions deliver services, manage data, and interact with citizens. In Indonesia, the push toward an integrated electronic government system has been hindered by fragmented institutional behaviors and limited interoperability across ministries. This study addresses the gap by analyzing how organizational structures and interministerial dynamics affect system integration within Indonesia’s national digital governance framework. This research employs a mixed-methods approach, combining qualitative and quantitative strategies. Qualitative data were collected through in-depth interviews and document analysis to explore institutional behaviors and coordination mechanisms. Quantitatively, interoperability maturity was measured across four dimensions: technical, semantic, organizational, and legal, using network analysis mapping to visualize interministerial relationships and data exchange structures. The study focuses on three key ministries: The Ministry of Home Affairs, the Ministry of Bureaucratic Reform, and the Ministry of Communication and Information Technology. Findings reveal asymmetries in the maturity of interoperability among ministries. While legal and organizational dimensions show moderate alignment, semantic and technical interoperability remain underdeveloped. The Ministry of Communication and Information leads in technical and semantic areas, whereas the Ministry of Home Affairs demonstrates weaker integration. These disparities reflect autopoietic tendencies where ministries operate through self-referential logic, hindering systemic coordination. Interview data support the presence of loose coupling, symbolic compliance, and institutional path dependency that obstruct integration efforts. The research integrates systems theory and institutional theory to argue that digital transformation requires structural coupling between autonomous government systems. Without shared standards, semantic alignment, and cross-sectoral governance mechanisms, integration efforts risk being superficial. The study proposes the establishment of a National Interoperability Council to facilitate coordinated digital governance, mediate inter-agency challenges, and foster accountability. These findings offer both theoretical contributions and policy recommendations for building a more responsive and integrated digital government in Indonesia.

Rujukan

Aichholzer, G., & Schmutzer, R. (2000). Organizational challenges to the development of electronic government. In Proceedings of the 11th International Workshop on Database and Expert Systems Applications (pp. 379–383). IEEE.

Blanc-Serrier, F., Boudjlida, N., & Gibaud, V. (2018). Toward a framework for cross-organization in teroperability in public administrations. Journal of Theoretical and Applied Electronic Commerce Research, 13(1), 1–18. https://doi.org/10.4067/S0718-187620180001 00101

Clark, B. Y., Brudney, J. L., & Jang, S.-G. (2018). Do collaborative governance principles matter in interagency collaboration? Public Administration Review, 78(4), 601–614.https://doi.org/10.1111/puar.12894

Darusalam, M., Abdullah, N., & Ramli, R. (2024). Digital system fragmentation and interoperability in Indonesian public administration. Journal of E-Government Studies, 12(1), 55–72.

De Seta, G. (2023). Fractured infrastructures: Understanding digital fragmentation in public data systems. Digital Society Review, 9(2), 88–103.

DiMaggio, P. J., & Powell, W. W. (1983). The iron cage revisited: Institutional isomorphism and collective rationality in organizational fields. American Sociological Review, 48(2), 147–160. https://doi.org/10.2307/2095101

Dunleavy, P., Margetts, H., Bastow, S., & Tinkler, J. (2006). Digital era governance: IT corporations, the state, and e-government. Oxford University Press.

El Benary, S., & El Beqqali, O. (2017). Assessing interoperability maturity in e-government: A model proposal. International Journal of Advanced Computer Science and Applications (IJACSA), 8(9), 206–213. https://doi.org/10.14569/IJACSA.2017.080927

Endrodi-Kovács, V., & Stukovszky, T. (2022). Institutional adaptation and digital innovation in public services: Interoperability and integration. Government Innovation Journal, 7(3), 21-35.

European Commission. (2017). New European interoperability framework: Promoting seamless services and data flows for European public administrations. Publications Office of the European Union. https://data.europa.eu/doi/10.2799/78681

Ferreira, A., & Janssen, M. (2023). Governing interoperability in digital government: A review of frameworks and implementation practices. Government Information Quarterly, 40(1), 101674. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.giq.2022.101674

Gao, X., Yang, L., & Wang, Y. (2023). Interoperability in smart governance: The role of digital in frastructure and data standardization. Information Policy Journal, 28(1), 33–47. Journal of Governance and Development, Vol. 21, Number 2 (July) 2025, pp: 64-

Gerontas, A. (2020). Reconsidering Luhmann’s systems theory in the digital government era: Institutional communication, complexity, and self-reference. Journal of Public Administration and Policy Research, 12(2), 13–22. https://doi.org/10.5897/JPAPR2020.0456

Gil-Garcia, J. R., Zhang, J., & Puron-Cid, G. (2018). Conceptualizing smartness in government: An integrative and multi-dimensional view. Government Information Quarterly, 35(3), 524–534. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.giq.2018.06.002

Hidayat, R., & Musari, K. (2022). Bridging e-government services through interoperability: Evidence from Indonesia. International Journal of Public Sector Management, 35(5), 553–570.

Janssen, M., & Estevez, E. (2013). Lean government and platform-based governance—Doing more with less. Government Information Quarterly, 30(1), S1–S8. https://doi.org/10.1016/j. giq.2012.11. 003

Janssen, M., Charalabidis, Y., & Zuiderwijk, A. (2020). Benefits, adoption barriers and myths of open data and open government. Information Systems Management, 37(3), 258–268.

Kalvet, T. (2012). Innovation: A factor explaining e-government success in Estonia. ElectronicGovernment, An International Journal, 9(2), 142–157.

Kanagwa, B., Basajja, M., & Mbaziira, J. (2018). Measuring e-government interoperability in developing countries: A maturity model. Government Information Quarterly, 35(1), 145–158. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.giq.2017.11.006

Kristensen, S., & Andersen, K. V. (2023). Institutional logics in digital government: The case of fragmented e-service delivery. Journal of Digital Government Research, 5(1), 22–40.

Livson, N., Prakoso, D., & Ambarwati, R. (2021). ICT in governance: Opportunities and in teroperability challenges in Indonesia. Asia-Pacific Journal of Public Administration, 43(4), 293–309.

Luhmann, N. (1995). Social systems (J. Bednarz Jr. & D. Baecker, Trans.). Stanford University Press.

Luhmann, N. (2003). Organization. In T. Bakken & T. Hernes (Eds.), Autopoietic organizationtheory: Drawing on Niklas Luhmann (pp. 31–52). Copenhagen Business School Press.

Mahoney, J. (2000). Path dependence in historical sociology. Theory and Society, 29(4), 507–548.

Margetts, H., & Naumann, A. (2017). Government as a platform: What can Estonia, South Korea, and the UK teach the world? Public Digital Discussion Paper Series, 1, 1–22.

Margariti, S. V., Karyda, M., & Daoutis, C. A. (2020). Organizational interoperability in the public sector: A systematic literature review. Information Polity, 25(3), 353–373. https://doi.org/10. 3233/IP-190135

Mergel, I., Edelmann, N., & Haug, N. (2019). Defining digital transformation: Results from expert interviews. Government Information Quarterly, 36(4), 101385. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.giq. 2019.06.002

Meyer, J. W., & Rowan, B. (1977). Institutionalized organizations: Formal structure as myth and ceremony. American Journal of Sociology, 83(2), 340–363.

Misuraca, G., Codagnone, C., & Rossel, P. (2011). From practice to theory and back to practice: Reflexivity in measurement and evaluation for evidence-based policy making in the information society. Government Information Quarterly, 28(2), 188–199. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.giq.2010.05.009

Moore, M. H. (1995). Creating public value: Strategic management in government. Harvard University Press.

Mutiarin, D., & Lawelai, A. (2023). Policy implementation of SPBE in Indonesia: Progress and bottlenecks. Journal of Public Policy and Administration, 18(1), 78–95.

Nugraha, I., Fatimah, S., & Wicaksono, A. (2022). The role of ICT in accelerating digital transformation: An Indonesian perspective. Journal of E-Governance, 15(2), 87–101. Journal of Governance and Development, Vol. 21, Number 2 (July) 2025, pp: 64-

Othman, Z., Hakim, L., & Maulana, F. (2023). Public digital architecture in Indonesia: Toward an integrated service delivery model. International Review of Administrative Sciences. Advance online publication. https://doi.org/10.1177/00208523231105012

Rakhman, A., Zaini, M., & Kurniawan, A. (2019). Interoperability and public service integration: Case study of local e-government in Indonesia. Journal of Government and Development, 15(3), 77–89.

Roengtam, S., Zhao, Y., Tang, Y., & Srivastava, A. (2017). Determinants of e-government adoption in ASEAN: A comparative study of Thailand and Indonesia. Telematics and Informatics, 34(3), 525–537. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tele.2016.08.007

Sakir, A., Putra, H. A., & Mulyadi, M. (2023). Transforming public services through ICT: The role of digital innovation in Indonesian governance. Journal of Digital Administration, 10(1), 102-119.

Scholl, H. J., Klischewski, R., & Mantzana, V. (2012). Organizational interoperability in egovernment: Lessons from 70 years of administrative behavior. Government Information Quarterly, 29(S1), S94–S102. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.giq.2011.08.007

Scott, W. R. (2001). Institutions and organizations (2nd ed.). Sage Publications.

Shaharudin, S., Malik, R., & Azman, N. (2025). Digital integration and public service delivery in Southeast Asia: Governance challenges and opportunities. Journal of E-Government Studies, 16(1), 41–63.

Tolbert, P. S., & Zucker, L. G. (1996). Institutionalization of institutional theory. In S. R. Clegg, C. Hardy & W. R. Nord (Eds.), Handbook of organization studies (pp. 175–190). Sage.

United Nations Department of Economic and Social Affairs (UNDESA). (2022). E-Government Survey 2022: The future of digital government. United Nations. https://publicadministration. un.org/egovkb

Van Staden, W., & Mbale, J. (2012). Cross-organizational interoperability and public service integration: A South African local government perspective. Electronic Journal of E Government, 10(2), 157–169.

Zaoui, F., Souissi, A., & Ghenima, A. (2019). Interoperability in e-government: A literature review. International Journal of Advanced Computer Science and Applications (IJACSA), 10(1), 546-554. https://doi.org/10.14569/IJACSA.2019.0100168