MINIMUM SERVICE STANDARD AS PUBLIC SERVICE IMPROVEMENT EFFORTS: THE INDONESIAN EXPERIENCE

Service Quality in Public Sector: An Outcome-Based Approach MINIMUM SERVICE STANDARD AS PUBLIC SERVICE IMPROVEMENT EFFORTS: THE INDONESIAN EXPERIENCE (Draft Only) By Dr. Ismail Mohamad (Indonesia) 1

A. Background The State Administration System of The Republic of Indonesia defines public service management as the overall activities of service provisions conducted either by the government, the state owned enterprises, or the private sectors on the basis of the authorities mandated to them. These service provisions can be delivered directly or indirectly to the public. For this reason, the state constitution among others requires the government to fulfill the basic needs of the people on the basis of civil rights of each citizen and the public for goods, service, and/or administrative service provisions by public service institutions via qualified, transparent, accountable, easy, reasonable, fast, worthy, just, and participative manner. In order to do so, the decentralization and regional autonomy policies are established to further accelerate the improvement of public service quality. Nevertheless, after more than six years of the implementation of decentralization and regional autonomy, which are supported by other policies, the present condition of the Indonesian public services in general remains unsatisfied to the eyes of their customers. Public service provisions conducted by government apparatus in fulfilling the civil rights and basic needs of the citizen are still unable to meet the public expectation. Such problems as uncertain administrative fees, slow service delivery, dense bureaucratic procedures, as well as discriminative, distrusting, and unskilled service providers occasionally hinder the process of the service delivery. These unhealthy and illegal practices have burdened the public because they have to pay expensively for the services that are supposed to be the constitutional responsibilities of the state and the government. These problems even get worse when such things as illegal fees, bribery and gratification are 2

considered as usual and common practices by some citizen and bureaucrats. For those reasons, several breakthroughs are required to strengthen those government s policies in order to accelerate the improvement of public service quality in Indonesia. B. Filling the Gaps The massive structures and the tremendous amount of public services, which are not well supported by adequate resources as well as good delivery strategies, may cause inefficiency as well as several unwanted excesses as corruption, collusion, and nepotism, and would finally burden the public. On the other hand, to fulfill the needs and concerns of the public is not an easy thing. There are many challenges that are needed to be answered. Among others are: How to improve service quality with limited resources? How to stimulate bureaucracy to benefit from the market strategy to create incentives and to diminish pathology in bureaucracy? How to use market mechanism for driving bureaucracy to improve their service to the customers (client-orientedness) How to drive the bureaucracy to formulate public service policy proactively and responsively? How to enable bureaucracy to implement decentralized responsibility to improve service quality? How to drive bureaucracy to focus more on the outputs or outcomes rather than on process or structure (rigid service procedures) 3

How to change the mindset of bureaucracy from top-down and rule-driven system to bottom-up and result driven system? How to measure public service performance objectively? To answer those challenges, and in order to carry out the constitutional mandates as well as to face the challenge of current demand of public services, there are several efforts that have been done to optimize public service in Indonesia. These efforts have been conducted and transformed into the establishment of several policies designed to push the implementation of such principles of public services as transparency, accountability, conditionality, participation, and equity as determinants of service quality in Indonesia. First, the implementation of integrated service unit which is based on Home Affairs Minister Regulation No. 24/2006 on Guidance of One Stop Integrated Service Provision. Second, Implementing Service Standard, which is based on Ministry of State Reform s Regulation No. 20//M.PAN/2006 on Guidance of Service Standard Formulation in all public service institutions. Third, the importance of establishing Standard Operating Procedures which is based on Ministry of State Reform s Decree No. 26/M.PAN/2004 on Technical Guidance on Transparency and Accountability in Public Service Provision. Forth, the importance of formulating service charters which have been applied in several local governments in Indonesia. Finally, the milestone of our public service improvement efforts, the importance of establishing Minimum Service Standards which is based on Government Regulation number 65/2005 on Guidance in Setting Minimum Service Standard and Ministry of Home Affair Regulation number 6/2007 on the Guidance of Minimum Service Standard Formulation. 4

These efforts are in line with the reform movements that took place since 1998 in Indonesia which among others also demanded the government commitment to improve the quality of public services. Since that moment, there have been various development and changes on several policies, laws, and regulations of government administration and development which are based on the shifting of the service behavior paradigms from centralistic to decentralized manners. The establishment of Law No. 22/1999 which was later revised by Law No. 32/2004 on Local Government has changed the paradigm of the state administrative system of the Republic of Indonesia. The government which was once very centralistic has reformed itself into decentralized. Authorities which were once dominated by the central government have been passed to the local governments. This also means the transfers of responsibilities of public service provisions from central government to local government in accordance with local government authority and capacity. Besides, it also diminishes the long bureaucracy of decision making in the efforts of improving public service quality. C. Strategies In line with the development and demand of public service quality, the Indonesian National Middle Term Development Plan of 2004 2009 has set up objectives of Indonesian public service with emphasis on the development of qualified, transparent, accountable, cheap, fast, worthy and just public service management for all the people in order to fulfill their needs as well as to support entrepreneurships and to encourage public participation and people empowerment. To achieve these objectives, there are several things need to be done as follows: 5

First, changing the culture of government apparatus from power oriented to customer oriented. This can be achieved, among others, by allowing the public to take parts in the process of service provision and delivery. This will also be realized in the formulation and implementation of service standards and charters as well as in form of public private partnerships. Second, managing on time budget expenditure, which is identified as the most pressing problems that public institutions face nowadays. Third, establishing and enacting a public service act for legal basis of public service provision and management, this is now in the process of approval from the parliament. As previously mentioned above, since 1999 Indonesia has adopted decentralized policy and regional autonomy in the efforts of improving public welfare via qualified public service provisions to the citizen. It is a priority to improve the capacity of local governments in order to diminish disparities among them in achieving the development goals in Indonesia. This policy aims at improving public service and public welfare; improving democratic live; improving justice and equality; and maintaining the good relationships between central and local governments as well as among local governments in safeguarding the unity of the state of the Republic of Indonesia. By adopting the decentralized policy, the government commitment to improve the quality public service to the citizen has been strengthened. The Indonesian decentralization actually carries two objectives, political and prosperity objectives. In order to achieve these objectives, authorities are passed to the regional governments which are, in term 6

of space, closer to the public, the government service beneficiaries. This would make the public policy smoothly transfer into relevant public service, which is more effective, efficient, economic, and accountable to its beneficiaries. For absolute administration by the central government, the service would comprise from defense and security, monetary, judicial, foreign affairs, religious affairs administrations. While in term of concurrent administration shared by central and local government, the service would be in the forms of obligatory (basic) services and optional (prioritized) services. The basic services would include health, educational, environmental, public works, and transportation while the optional can be any services prioritized by the regions such as agricultural, industrial, trading, tourism, fishery and oceanary, etc. In order to provide those services to the public, the local governments (both provincial and regency/municipality governments) are encouraged to fulfill the minimum requirements. To provide such minimum requirement, it is necessary to set up an equalized standard of services for each region from the western (Sabang) to the eastern (Merauke) parts of Indonesia. This is to ensure that the basic services meet the requirements and needs of the people. This standard is defined as Minimum Service Standards (MSS), which are regulated under Government Regulation No. 65/2005 and Ministry of Home Affairs Regulation No. 6/2007 on Technical Guidance of Formulating and Establishing Minimum Service Standards for Government s Departments. Minimum Service Standard (MSS) is actually a central government public policy which aims at ensuring the local government to provide basic standardized services which can be accessed by the public. In 7

other words, Minimum Service Standard is the specification of types and quality of basic services required to be provided by local government and should be minimally accessible to all citizens. This minimum service standard is in fact the actualization of the Indonesian decentralization policy. On the other hand, the central government is also required to provide supports, financially or technically, to the local government to provide such services. Therefore, there is a balance for both sides of governments. Minimum Service Standard is expected to provide guidance and advice for all local governments while maintaining local uniqueness and is also used as one of the indicators in the improvement of people s social welfare. Minimum service standards are expected to become guarantee that each basic service should be provided and accessible to all citizens. MSS is guidance among local governments to provide equally qualified service to their respective citizens as well as instrument for measuring local governments performance in basic service provisions. For local governments MSS can be used as benchmarks in determining the costs required for providing certain kinds of services while for the public in general may use MSS as milestones for measuring the quality of public service provided by the local governments. This MSS policy outlines the following measures: MSS is established only for obligatory authorities that are strongly related to basic service provisions. MSS is applied within local obligatory authorities, for other authorities, central government will establish norms, standards, procedures, to carry out certain government authorities. MSS is nationally established by the central government and to be implemented in all local governments. 8

MSS should guarantee public access to the basic services provided by the local governments in their efforts to carry out their obligatory authorities. MSS is dynamic and needs to be reviewed and improved from time to time in line with the changes of national needs and the developments of local capacities equally. MSS is established on the national minimum standards that can be expected for certain kinds of service provision. MSS should be referred in local planning, local budgeting, scrutiny, reporting and instruments for evaluating Head of Local Government Performance Accountability Reports as well as evaluating local government capacity. MSS establishment is prioritized on basic services while also considering the national and local scale of priority as well as national and local financial capacity. MSS should be integrated in the process of national and local planning and budgeting formulation. Monitoring and Evaluation on MSS should be continuously conducted in terms of supervision and continuous improvement. There are several principles required to be followed when formulating and establishing MSS as: Consensus, that is, MSS should be formulated under agreement among stakeholders, related service providers, operational units in the government institutions concerned. Simple, that is, MSS should be easily comprehensible and understandable. Realistic, that is, MSS should have space and time dimension as well as requirements or technical procedures. 9

Measurable, that is, MSS should be measurable and analyzable. Open, that is, MSS should be accessible for all citizens or the public. Achievable, that is, MSS for all basic services should be attainable within the financial and other resources available. Accountable, that is, MSS should be accountable to the public. Step by step, that is, MSS should be implemented step by step by considering the development of public needs and demands on one side as well as financial, institutional, and personnel capacity in achieving the targets on the other side. D. Roles of the Governor and the Mechanism of Reports The role of a Governor as a representative of central government is to make agreement with local governments (municipalities and regencies) on activities and time frames allocated in achieving targets of MSS based on the conditions as well as capacities of each local government. Governor also plays important role in monitoring and supervising the implementation of MSS in each local government and reports the performance as well as strategic issues within his/her jurisdictions to obtain advises from the central government. Moreover, the governor also plays significant roles in disseminating information, training and guiding local governments in the process of MSS implementation in his/her province. Meanwhile, the roles of municipalities and regencies are to formulate and to establish local regulations on MSS implementation. In the efforts of monitoring and supervising the implementation MSS, a reporting mechanism is established as follows: 10

Mayors and Regents are to report the performance of MSS implementation to the Minister of Home Affairs via the Governor. Governor is to compile yearly general reports on the performance of MSS targets attainment to the Minister of Home Affairs. The Minister of Home Affairs is to conduct an evaluation on those reports and to conduct monitoring and evaluation on MSS attainment. Local governments (municipalities and regencies) are to make yearly technical reports of MSS attainment to technical ministries/departments and/or non department government institutions. Technical ministries/departments and/or non department government institutions, on the basis of the reports received are to conduct technical guidance and supervisions on MSS implementation. The results of monitoring and evaluations of the MSS implementation are to be used for further development, capacity building, guidance and supervision, as well as continuous improvement. With this approach in mind, the minimum service standards should be set under considerations of regional financial capacity, institutional capacity, human resources capacity, previously achieved service standards, availability of information system for data processing, monitoring, and evaluation as well as relationships among minimum service standards (MSS). When we do have these things figured out, then we can start the performance management in order to achieve the best result with limited resources and satisfy the public interests. Throughout feedback from the public via performance monitoring and 11

evaluation as well as performance reporting, sustainable and continuous improvement is better enhanced. E. Current Progress Eventhough the initiative to establish Minimum Service Standard have started since 2002, but the efforts to implement the standars have just begun since last year (2006). Therefore, its impact to the service quality improvement in Indonesia would take at least another three to five years to come. Nevertheless, throughout the last ten year since the national reforms began, there have been successes in our efforts to improve the public service provision in our country. Among the best practices are the following local governments: Sragen Regency (Central Java Province) Sidoarjo Regency (East Java Province) Lamongan Regency (East Java Province) Jembrana Regency (Bali Province) City of Pare-Pare (South Celebes Province) City of Balikpapan (East Borneo Province) These cities and regencies have shown consistent improvement in their service provisions to the public. They made a lot of breakthrough by changing the paradigm of their service provision to the public, from institutional focus to more customers/citizens focus. They are successful in improving the quality of lives of their respective citizens by standardizing licensing services, improving foreign direct investments, creating new industries, absorbing local labors, improving local revenues, as well as fostering economic growth and improving public welfare. 12

They are successful because of several factors. First, Public service quality improvement is a success achieved through innovations and breakthroughs conducted by the head of local governments and supported by their parliaments and the people. Second, these successes are achieved though observing, developing, and actuating the policies and guidance from the central government as well as through learning from best practices of other countries and private sectors. Third, most of these regions developed one stop service unit as means of fulfilling the needs of the public and improving the quality of the service provisions so that they have proved to give wider access for the public to benefit the services provided. They have also established their own service standards and managed to deliver their services based on the standards set. Other key elements of their successes are: Strong willingness to make new innovations and breakthroughs in government administering to prosper the people and supported by the parliaments. Pioneering in organizational culture and in apparatus mindset changes which are obeyed by all apparatus. Aligning the perceptions and goals among the parliaments, bureaucracy, and other stakeholders to improve the people s prosperity. Strong and sovereign leaderships and consistent in aligning as well as actuating policies, strategies, and programs. 13

People benefits oriented in all decision makings. These experimental successes achieved by these local governments have encouraged other local governments to also improve their service provisions in their localities. This stimulates competitions among local governments in improving their service quality and learning from each other s successes as well as creating new innovations in public service provisions. F. Challenges Ahead The changes of public service paradigm from improving internal bureaucracy satisfaction to improving public satisfaction are actually the measures of success of public service performance, that is, how the service provisions satisfy the public expectations and needs. These would require understanding and commitment from all concerned stakeholders in service provisions, starting from the top management to the front-liner staff members in fulfilling the agenda of: ensuring the service provisions would meet public expectations; improving apparatus professionalism, conducts, and behaviors; reducing production costs and improving value for money (greater discipline in resource uses); and protecting the public and the citizens from authority abuses in public service provisions. There are several significant challenges (in this case, supporting requirements or preconditions) to be faced in boosting the public service quality improvement in Indonesia as follows: 14

Institutional Supports: These changes require a slim, not so much hierarchical organization which allows simple service procedures, enough authority to make decisions, creating conducive environment for fostering good governance. Administrative Supports: These changes also require modernizing administration through office administration automatication, and e-government development. This aims at improving citizens and public access to government public services, government information resources, managing public complaints as well as equalizing public service quality. This would require a service quality standard that can be expected and enjoyed by the public. Human Resource Supports: These changes inevitably require the implementation of merit system, appropriate rewards or punishments based on performance as well as improving prosperity and welfare. Scrutiny and Accountability Supports: These changes also require improvement in functional supervision, coordination among supervisory institutions, as well as improvement in effectiveness of accountability system. Public Participation Supports: These changes finally require improvement in public participation via e-government access and feedback to improve government performance in serving the public, business community, and other stakeholders. 15

In the case of MSS implementation, there have also been such challenges that need to be dealt with as (1) Over-complexity in designing MSS; (2) Budget constraints in developing MSS, where most MSS designs require large amounts of fund, which cannot be fulfilled with the current fiscal condition; (3) Process of public consultation, which is devised to avoid misperceptions among local governments in public service provisions related to the implementation of MSS, is likely to be very extensive and taking much more complexity; and (4) Process of coordination and correlation between efforts of designing appropriate standards and budget availability. G. Conclusion The present condition of the Indonesian public services mainly remains unsatisfactory to the eyes of their customers. Such problems as uncertain administrative fees, slow service delivery, bureaucratic procedures and unskilled service providers constantly occur in the process of Indonesian service delivery. As the result, an extensive number of customers complaints have steadily grown up because the customers have never been satisfied when they need to do some business with the government public service organizations. To answer those challenges, the national middle term development plan of 2004 2009 has set up objectives of Indonesian public service with emphasis on the development of qualified, transparent, accountable, cheap, fast, worthy and just public service management for all the people in order to fulfill their needs as well as to support entrepreneurships and to encourage public participation and people empowerment. 16

There are several policies that have been formulated to optimize public service in Indonesia. Among others, the milestone of Indonesian public service improvement efforts, Minimum Service Standard which is based on Government Regulation number 65/2005 on Guidance in Setting Minimum Service Standard and Ministry of Home Affair Regulation number 6/2007 on the Guidance of Minimum Service Standard Formulation. Minimum Service Standard (MSS) is a central government public policy which aims at ensuring the local government to provide basic standardized services which can be accessed by the public. Minimum service standard is in fact the actualization of the Indonesian decentralization policy. 17

FURTHER READINGS 1. KepMENPAN No. 63/KEP/M.PAN/7/2003 tentang Pedoman Umum Penyelenggaraan Pelayanan Publik. 2. KepMENPAN No. 118/KEP/M.PAN/5/2003 perihal tentang Pedoman Umum Penanganan Pengaduan Masyarakat. 3. KepMENPAN No. 25/KEP/M.PAN/2/2004 tentang Pedoman Umum Penyusunan Indeks Kepuasan Masyarakat Unit Pelayanan Instansi Pemerintah. 4. KepMENPAN No. 26/KEP/M.PAN/2/2004 tentang Petunjuk Teknis Transparansi dan Akuntabilitas dalam Penyelenggaraan Pelayanan Publik. 5. KepMENPAN No. 20 Tahun 2006 tentang Pedoman Penyusunan Standar Pelayanan. 5. Peraturan Menteri Dalam Negeri No. 6 Tahun 2007 tentang Petunjuk Teknis Penyusunan dan Penetapan Standar Pelayanan Minimal (SPM). 6. Peraturan Pemerintah No. 65 Tahun 2005 tentang Penyusunan dan Penerapan Standar Pelayanan Minimal. 7. Undang-undang No. 32 Tahun 2004 tentang Pemerintahan Daerah. 18