Nur Muhammaditya, Sudarsono Hardjosoekarto, One Herwantoko, Yulia Gita Fany, Mahari Is Subangun
{"title":"Institutional Divergence of Digital Item Bank Management in Bureaucratic Hybridization: An Application of SSM Based Multi-Method.","authors":"Nur Muhammaditya, Sudarsono Hardjosoekarto, One Herwantoko, Yulia Gita Fany, Mahari Is Subangun","doi":"10.1007/s11213-021-09579-4","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>This study aims to analyze institutional divergence of Beckert (2010) by measuring the reframing of three constitutive principles of Digital Weberian Bureaucracy (DWB). In contrast to the studies by Gaus et al. (2017), Sofyani et al. (2018), Muellerleile and Robertson (2018), Turner et al. (2019), and Meilani and Hardjosoekarto (2020), this study explores normative and mimetic mechanisms resulting in the mixed pattern of public administration (Traditional Public Administration (TPA), New Public Management (NPM), and Post NPM), focusing on the transformation of Digital Era Governance (DEG). Employing Soft Systems Methodology (SSM) by Reynolds and Holwell (2010), combined with Text Network Analysis (TNA) by Segev (2020) and Social Network Analysis (SNA) by Borgatti et al. (2014), this study shows the micro dynamics of relationships between actors, the meso dynamics of organizations, and the absence of regulations at the macro level, all of which lead to institutional divergence in the form of fully hybrid governance (as proposed by De Waele et al. (2015)) that is also caused by normative and mimetic mechanisms. Complementing the study of DWB, this study suggests that computer literacy and programming languages are essential to be improved by future bureaucrats as social actors to achieve the success of digital transformation.</p><p><strong>Supplementary information: </strong>The online version contains supplementary material available at 10.1007/s11213-021-09579-4.</p>","PeriodicalId":51694,"journal":{"name":"Systemic Practice and Action Research","volume":"35 4","pages":"527-553"},"PeriodicalIF":1.0000,"publicationDate":"2022-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC8559427/pdf/","citationCount":"9","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Systemic Practice and Action Research","FirstCategoryId":"91","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1007/s11213-021-09579-4","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"管理学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2021/11/1 0:00:00","PubModel":"Epub","JCR":"Q4","JCRName":"MANAGEMENT","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 9
Abstract
This study aims to analyze institutional divergence of Beckert (2010) by measuring the reframing of three constitutive principles of Digital Weberian Bureaucracy (DWB). In contrast to the studies by Gaus et al. (2017), Sofyani et al. (2018), Muellerleile and Robertson (2018), Turner et al. (2019), and Meilani and Hardjosoekarto (2020), this study explores normative and mimetic mechanisms resulting in the mixed pattern of public administration (Traditional Public Administration (TPA), New Public Management (NPM), and Post NPM), focusing on the transformation of Digital Era Governance (DEG). Employing Soft Systems Methodology (SSM) by Reynolds and Holwell (2010), combined with Text Network Analysis (TNA) by Segev (2020) and Social Network Analysis (SNA) by Borgatti et al. (2014), this study shows the micro dynamics of relationships between actors, the meso dynamics of organizations, and the absence of regulations at the macro level, all of which lead to institutional divergence in the form of fully hybrid governance (as proposed by De Waele et al. (2015)) that is also caused by normative and mimetic mechanisms. Complementing the study of DWB, this study suggests that computer literacy and programming languages are essential to be improved by future bureaucrats as social actors to achieve the success of digital transformation.
Supplementary information: The online version contains supplementary material available at 10.1007/s11213-021-09579-4.
期刊介绍：
Systemic Practice and Action Research is dedicated to advancing deeper understandings of issues that confront the contemporary world, and better means for engaging with these issues for the benefit of individuals, organizations, communities and their natural environments. To this end, a fundamental rethink of the purposes and methods of science is needed, making it more systemic and action-orientated. The journal therefore seeks to make a substantial contribution to rethinking science as well as to the reflective application of systemic practice and action research in all types of organizational and social settings. This international journal is committed to nurturing wide-ranging conversations around both qualitative and technical approaches for the betterment of people''s lives and ways of working together. It seeks to influence policy and strategy in its advocacy of action research as a primary means to gain vision and leverage in wicked problem areas. All forms of investigation and reasoning are considered potentially suitable for publication, including personal experience. There are no priorities attached to settings for studies and no greater significance given to one methodological style over another - as long as the work demonstrates a reflective and systemic quality. The journal welcomes manuscripts that are original, are well written, and contain a vivid argument. Papers normally will demonstrate knowledge of existing literature. Full papers are normally between 5,000 – 10,000 words (although longer papers will not be excluded if the argument justifies the word count) and short papers are about 2,000 words. Notes and letters are welcomed for publication in the ''notes from the field'' and ''letters'' sections. A rigorous mentoring-based refereeing system is applied in all cases. Officially cited as: Syst Pract Action Res
求助内容：
应助结果提醒方式：
京公网安备 11010802042870号
