Development of an Initial Prototype of an Electronic-Based Government Agency Performance Accountability System (SAKIP) at State Universities with Legal Entities
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.70211/wesw.v3i3.669Keywords:
Digital Governance, Electronic SAKIP, Legal-Entity State University, Performance Accountability, System PrototypeAbstract
Digital transformation in performance management at legal-entity state universities remains constrained by fragmented data, manual document exchange, disconnected SAKIP stages, and limited access to integrated performance information. This study aims to develop an initial prototype of an electronic Government Agency Performance Accountability System for Universitas Negeri Surabaya (UNESA), named SAKINA. Using a research and development approach, the study applied the 4D model limited to the define, design, and develop stages. Data were collected from July 2023 to June 2026 through document review, regulatory analysis, semi-structured interviews, focus group discussions, and work-process observations involving 30 purposively selected informants and 80 institutional, regulatory, and scientific documents. The define stage identified user, functional, non-functional, regulatory, and user-experience requirements. The design stage produced a three-layer architecture, module structure, role allocation, interface specifications, and integrated workflows. The develop stage generated SAKINA version 1.0 using Laravel, PostgreSQL, and Nginx. The prototype includes six module groups covering monitoring, planning, measurement, reporting, evaluation, and supporting documentation. SAKINA integrates indicators, targets, realization data, evidence, evaluation results, and follow-up actions through centralized storage, role-based access, process status, and activity logging. Further testing is required to assess usability, security, acceptance, interoperability, and implementation effects.
References
[1] T. Janowski, “Digital government evolution: From transformation to contextualization,” Government Information Quarterly, vol. 32, no. 3, pp. 221–236, 2015. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.giq.2015.07.001
[2] I. Mergel, N. Edelmann, and N. Haug, “Defining digital transformation: Results from expert interviews,” Government Information Quarterly, vol. 36, no. 4, Art. no. 101385, 2019. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.giq.2019.06.002
[3] G. Vial, “Understanding digital transformation: A review and a research agenda,” The Journal of Strategic Information Systems, vol. 28, no. 2, pp. 118–144, 2019. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jsis.2019.01.003
[4] J. R. Gil-Garcia, S. S. Dawes, and T. A. Pardo, “Digital government and public management research: Finding the crossroads,” Public Management Review, vol. 20, no. 5, pp. 633–646, 2018. https://doi.org/10.1080/14719037.2017.1327181
[5] N. Haug, S. Dan, and I. Mergel, “Digitally-induced change in the public sector: A systematic review and research agenda,” Public Management Review, vol. 26, no. 7, pp. 1963–1987, 2024. https://doi.org/10.1080/14719037.2023.2234917
[6] L. Tangi, M. Janssen, M. Benedetti, and A. Noci, “Digital government transformation: A structural equation modelling analysis of driving and impeding factors,” International Journal of Information Management, vol. 60, Art. no. 102356, 2021. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijinfomgt.2021.102356
[7] D. Agostino, M. Arnaboldi, and M. D. Lema, “New development: COVID-19 as an accelerator of digital transformation in public service delivery,” Public Money & Management, vol. 41, no. 1, pp. 69–72, 2021. https://doi.org/10.1080/09540962.2020.1764206
[8] J. Zhang, L. F. Luna-Reyes, and S. Mellouli, “Transformational digital government,” Government Information Quarterly, vol. 31, no. 4, pp. 503–505, 2014. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.giq.2014.10.001
[9] A. Omar, V. Weerakkody, and A. Daowd, “Studying transformational government: A review of the existing methodological approaches and future outlook,” Government Information Quarterly, vol. 37, no. 2, Art. no. 101458, 2020. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.giq.2020.101458
[10] J. D. Twizeyimana and A. Andersson, “The public value of e-government—A literature review,” Government Information Quarterly, vol. 36, no. 2, pp. 167–178, 2019. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.giq.2019.01.001
[11] Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development, Government at a Glance 2025. Paris, France: OECD Publishing, 2025. https://doi.org/10.1787/0efd0bcd-en
[12] J. Xiao, H. Zhang, and L. Han, “How digital transformation improve government performance: The mediating role of partnering agility,” IEEE Access, vol. 11, pp. 59274–59285, 2023. https://doi.org/10.1109/ACCESS.2023.3284793
[13] M. I. Sarwar, Q. Abbas, T. Alyas, A. Alzahrani, and M. Alghamdi, “Digital transformation of public sector governance with IT service management—A pilot study,” IEEE Access, vol. 11, pp. 6490–6512, 2023. https://doi.org/10.1109/ACCESS.2023.3237550
[14] A. M. Alvarenga, F. Matos, R. Godina, and J. C. O. Matias, “Digital transformation and knowledge management in the public sector,” Sustainability, vol. 12, no. 14, Art. no. 5824, 2020. https://doi.org/10.3390/su12145824
[15] A. Yukhno, “Digital transformation: Exploring big data governance in public administration,” Public Organization Review, vol. 24, no. 1, pp. 335–349, 2024. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11115-022-00694-x
[16] E. Dobrolyubova, “Measuring outcomes of digital transformation in public administration: Literature review and possible steps forward,” NISPAcee Journal of Public Administration and Policy, vol. 14, no. 1, pp. 61–86, 2021. https://doi.org/10.2478/nispa-2021-0003
[17] S. P. Osborne, M. Powell, T. Cui, and K. Strokosch, “Value creation in the public service ecosystem: An integrative framework,” Public Administration Review, vol. 82, no. 4, pp. 634–645, 2022. https://doi.org/10.1111/puar.13474
[18] B. Szedmák, L. Varga, and R. Z. Szabó, “Digital transformation of public services: The case of the document management application,” International Journal of Public Administration, vol. 49, no. 10, pp. 647–664, 2026. https://doi.org/10.1080/01900692.2025.2520522
[19] O. Karpenko, T. Zaporozhets, M. Tsedik, and V. Akimov, “Digital transformations of public administration in countries with transition economies,” European Review, vol. 31, no. 6, pp. 569–588, 2023. https://doi.org/10.1017/S1062798723000522
[20] D. Battisti, “The digital transformation of Italy’s public sector,” JeDEM—eJournal of eDemocracy and Open Government, vol. 12, no. 1, pp. 25–39, 2020. https://doi.org/10.29379/jedem.v12i1.591
[21] P. Datta, L. A. Walker, and F. Amarilli, “Digital transformation: Learning from Italy’s public administration,” Journal of Information Technology Teaching Cases, vol. 10, no. 2, pp. 54–71, 2020. https://doi.org/10.1177/2043886920910437
[22] A. Shibambu, “Transformation of digital government services in the public sector in South Africa,” Africa’s Public Service Delivery and Performance Review, vol. 12, no. 1, 2024. https://doi.org/10.4102/apsdpr.v12i1.753
[23] I. Mergel, “Digital service teams in government,” Government Information Quarterly, vol. 36, no. 4, Art. no. 101389, 2019. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.giq.2019.07.001
[24] R. Tassabehji, R. Hackney, and A. Popovič, “Emergent digital era governance: Enacting the role of the ‘institutional entrepreneur’ in transformational change,” Government Information Quarterly, vol. 33, no. 2, pp. 223–236, 2016. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.giq.2016.04.003
[25] B. U. Adie, M. Tate, and E. Valentine, “Digital leadership in the public sector: A scoping review and outlook,” International Review of Public Administration, vol. 29, no. 1, pp. 42–58, 2024. https://doi.org/10.1080/12294659.2024.2323847
[26] H. van Roekel, M. Branderhorst, L. Tummers, and A. Meijer, “Digital transformation leadership: A public value-centered measurement scale,” Government Information Quarterly, vol. 42, no. 4, Art. no. 102091, 2025. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.giq.2025.102091
[27] T. Volodina and G. Grossi, “Digital transformation in public sector auditing: Between hope and fear,” Public Management Review, vol. 27, no. 5, pp. 1444–1468, 2025. https://doi.org/10.1080/14719037.2024.2402346
[28] B. W. Wirtz and W. M. Müller, “An integrated artificial intelligence framework for public management,” Public Management Review, vol. 21, no. 7, pp. 1076–1100, 2019. https://doi.org/10.1080/14719037.2018.1549268
[29] O. Neumann, K. Guirguis, and R. Steiner, “Exploring artificial intelligence adoption in public organizations: A comparative case study,” Public Management Review, vol. 26, no. 1, pp. 114–141, 2024. https://doi.org/10.1080/14719037.2022.2048685
[30] M. J. Ahn and Y.-C. Chen, “Digital transformation toward AI-augmented public administration: The perception of government employees and the willingness to use AI in government,” Government Information Quarterly, vol. 39, no. 2, Art. no. 101664, 2022. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.giq.2021.101664
[31] J. Willems, M. J. Schmid, and D. Vanderelst, “AI-driven public services and the privacy paradox: Do citizens really care about their privacy?” Public Management Review, vol. 25, no. 11, pp. 2116–2134, 2023. https://doi.org/10.1080/14719037.2022.2063934
[32] E. Figueredo Jr. and L. C. S. Silva, “Challenges of digital services in public administration in the era of digital transformation: A systematic literature review,” Journal of the Knowledge Economy, vol. 17, no. 4, pp. 11926–11955, 2026. https://doi.org/10.1007/s13132-026-03277-z
[33] S. Park and J. R. Gil-Garcia, “Open data innovation: Visualizations and process redesign as a way to bridge the transparency-accountability gap,” Government Information Quarterly, vol. 39, no. 1, Art. no. 101456, 2022. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.giq.2020.101456
[34] Republic of Indonesia, Presidential Regulation of the Republic of Indonesia Number 29 of 2014 concerning the Government Agency Performance Accountability System, 2014.
[35] Ministry of Administrative and Bureaucratic Reform, “Trend of increasing SAKIP over 10 years: Positive correlation of performance accountability with development acceleration and poverty alleviation,” Oct. 2, 2024. [Online]. Available: https://www.menpan.go.id/site/berita-terkini/tren-kenaikan-sakip-selama-10-tahun-menteri-panrb-korelasi-positif-akuntabilitas-kinerja-dengan-akselerasi-pembangunan-dan-pengentasan-kemiskinan. [Accessed: Aug. 3, 2026].
[36] H. Latief, S. Asri, and A. Santosa, “Accountability of government agency performance in Paser Regency Government,” Journal Publicuho, vol. 5, no. 4, pp. 1367–1376, 2022. https://doi.org/10.35817/publicuho.v5i4.83
[37] N. A. Marjan, A. A. Supianto, and L. Fanani, “Designing user experience of E-SAKIP application using human-centered design method: Case study of Selayar Islands Regency,” Jurnal Pengembangan Teknologi Informasi dan Ilmu Komputer, vol. 5, no. 10, pp. 4175–4181, 2021. [Online]. Available: https://j-ptiik.ub.ac.id/index.php/j-ptiik/article/view/9904
[38] Brawijaya University, Performance Report of Brawijaya University Performance Accountability Unit 2025. Malang, Indonesia: Brawijaya University, 2026. [Online]. Available: https://sakip.ub.ac.id/wp-content/uploads/2026/02/LAKIN-SAK-2025.pdf
[39] Republic of Indonesia, Government Regulation of the Republic of Indonesia Number 37 of 2022 concerning Universitas Negeri Surabaya as a Legal-Entity State University, 2022.
[40] Republic of Indonesia, Presidential Regulation of the Republic of Indonesia Number 95 of 2018 concerning Electronic-Based Government Systems, 2018.
[41] Republic of Indonesia, Presidential Regulation of the Republic of Indonesia Number 39 of 2019 concerning One Data Indonesia, 2019.
[42] Ministry of Communication and Information of the Republic of Indonesia, Regulation of the Minister of Communication and Information Number 1 of 2023 concerning Data Interoperability in Electronic-Based Government Systems and One Data Indonesia, 2023.
[43] I. P. Rahayu, B. P. Priyadi, and A. R. Herawati, “Elements of support, capacity, and value of e-government in the Electronic Government Agency Performance Accountability System (E-SAKIP) of Demak Regency,” Jurnal Manajemen Pendidikan dan Ilmu Sosial, vol. 6, no. 3, pp. 2560–2569, 2025. https://doi.org/10.38035/jmpis.v6i3.4790
[44] N. Hayati, “Design and construction of an e-government-based government agency performance accountability information system,” KLIK: Kumpulan Jurnal Ilmu Komputer, vol. 9, no. 3, pp. 479–490, 2022. https://doi.org/10.20527/klik.v9i3.529
[45] S. Thiagarajan, D. S. Semmel, and M. I. Semmel, Instructional Development for Training Teachers of Exceptional Children: A Sourcebook. Bloomington, IN, USA: Indiana University, 1974.
[46] R. K. Yin, Case Study Research and Applications: Design and Methods, 6th ed. Thousand Oaks, CA, USA: Sage, 2018.
[47] V. Braun and V. Clarke, “Using thematic analysis in psychology,” Qualitative Research in Psychology, vol. 3, no. 2, pp. 77–101, 2006. https://doi.org/10.1191/1478088706qp063oa
[48] B. Ramesh and M. Jarke, “Toward reference models for requirements traceability,” IEEE Transactions on Software Engineering, vol. 27, no. 1, pp. 58–93, 2001. https://doi.org/10.1109/32.895989
[49] A. R. Hevner, S. T. March, J. Park, and S. Ram, “Design science in information systems research,” MIS Quarterly, vol. 28, no. 1, pp. 75–105, 2004. https://doi.org/10.2307/25148625
[50] K. Peffers, T. Tuunanen, M. A. Rothenberger, and S. Chatterjee, “A design science research methodology for information systems research,” Journal of Management Information Systems, vol. 24, no. 3, pp. 45–77, 2007. https://doi.org/10.2753/MIS0742-1222240302
[51] R. S. Sandhu, E. J. Coyne, H. L. Feinstein, and C. E. Youman, “Role-based access control models,” Computer, vol. 29, no. 2, pp. 38–47, 1996. https://doi.org/10.1109/2.485845
[52] W. H. DeLone and E. R. McLean, “Information systems success: The quest for the dependent variable,” Information Systems Research, vol. 3, no. 1, pp. 60–95, 1992. https://doi.org/10.1287/isre.3.1.60
[53] W. H. DeLone and E. R. McLean, “The DeLone and McLean model of information systems success: A ten-year update,” Journal of Management Information Systems, vol. 19, no. 4, pp. 9–30, 2003. https://doi.org/10.1080/07421222.2003.11045748
[54] F. D. Davis, R. P. Bagozzi, and P. R. Warshaw, “User acceptance of computer technology: A comparison of two theoretical models,” Management Science, vol. 35, no. 8, pp. 982–1003, 1989. https://doi.org/10.1287/mnsc.35.8.982
[55] V. Venkatesh, M. G. Morris, G. B. Davis, and F. D. Davis, “User acceptance of information technology: Toward a unified view,” MIS Quarterly, vol. 27, no. 3, pp. 425–478, 2003. https://doi.org/10.2307/30036540
[56] F. Lin, S. S. Fofanah, and D. Liang, “Assessing citizen adoption of e-government initiatives in Gambia: A validation of the technology acceptance model in information systems success,” Government Information Quarterly, vol. 28, no. 2, pp. 271–279, 2011. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.giq.2010.09.004
[57] V. R. Prybutok, X. Zhang, and S. Ryan, “Evaluating leadership, IT quality, and net benefits in an e-government environment,” Information & Management, vol. 45, no. 3, pp. 143–152, 2008. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.im.2007.12.004
[58] Ministry of Higher Education, Science, and Technology of the Republic of Indonesia, Regulation Number 58 of 2025 concerning the Government Agency Performance Accountability System within the Ministry of Higher Education, Science, and Technology, 2025.
[59] Ministry of State Apparatus Empowerment and Bureaucratic Reform of the Republic of Indonesia, Regulation Number 53 of 2014 concerning Technical Instructions for Performance Agreements, Performance Reporting, and Procedures for Reviewing Government Agency Performance Reports, 2014.
[60] Ministry of State Apparatus Empowerment and Bureaucratic Reform of the Republic of Indonesia, Regulation Number 88 of 2021 concerning Evaluation of Government Agency Performance Accountability, 2021.
Downloads
Published
Issue
Section
License
Copyright (c) 2026 Masita Nur Hayati, Yatim Riyanto, Sujarwanto, Amrozi Khamidi, Muhamad Sholeh, Karwanto
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License.