Model and Practice of Strategic Policy Process in Indonesia: Case Study Strategic Management in Indonesian Central Government (2009-2012)
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Since 1998, the Indonesian government had introduced an approach for Strategic Management under Government Regulation No. 108/200 the government has not evaluated experiences with this strategy. However, in 2009, the administration of President Yudhoyono introduced a new approach entitled Rencana Pembangunan Jangka Menengah (RPJMD) –Medium Term Development Planning. The interesting question regards the compliance of government with this strategic plan. In other words, is the implementation of the strategic plan proceeding? In this paper, both writers investigate experiences with the attempt to introduce the model and practice of Strategic Management in the Indonesian public sector, particularly the aspects of process and tools. The Research method used in this research is historical and descriptive using the casual loop model of system dynamics method. The study found that the model of strategic planning applied by the government was a linear process model a linked to key success factors of leadership, professional coordination among governmental units, and monitoring of the complete process and its instruments: planning, implementation and evaluation.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.004 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".