Evaluating the E-Office Policy in the Corporate Secretary Department of PT Agrinas Jaladri Nusantara (Persero): A Public Policy Implementation and Evaluation Perspective
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.62951/ijsw.v3i3.677Keywords:
E-Office, Policy Implementation, Policy Evaluation, Digital Administration, State-Owned EnterpriseAbstract
This study evaluates the implementation of the E-Office policy within the Corporate Secretary Department of PT Agrinas Jaladri Nusantara (Persero), an Indonesian state-owned enterprise that recently diversified its core business. While digital administration is widely promoted to improve public-sector effectiveness, many initiatives stall at the implementation stage. Framed by George C. Edwards III’s implementation model (communication, resources, disposition, and bureaucratic structure) and William N. Dunn’s policy-evaluation criteria (effectiveness, efficiency, adequacy, equity, responsiveness, and appropriateness), the research asks how the E-Office workflow operates, how the system supports administrative management, and how ready the staff are to operate it. A descriptive-qualitative case-study design was used; data were gathered through observation, in-depth interviews with four key informants selected purposively, and document analysis, then examined using the Miles, Huberman, and Saldana interactive model and source triangulation. The findings show that E-Office accelerates correspondence, increases transparency through digital trails, and eases document tracking, yet its appropriateness and equity remain limited by tiered-approval bottlenecks, technical instability, off-system drafting, rigid letter-numbering rules, under-used features, and uneven staff competence after organisational restructuring. The study concludes that the success of an E-Office policy is not determined by the technology alone but by the interaction among system design, organisational structure, and user behaviour, requiring continuous communication, capacity building, and policy-instrument updates.
Downloads
References
Bélanger, F., & Carter, L. (2008). Trust and risk in e-government adoption. The Journal of Strategic Information Systems, 17(2), 165–176. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jsis.2007.12.002
Creswell, J. W., & Creswell, J. D. (2018). Research design: Qualitative, quantitative, and mixed methods approaches (5th ed.). SAGE Publications.
Davenport, T. H. (1993). Process innovation: Reengineering work through information technology. Harvard Business School Press.
Davis, F. D. (1989). Perceived usefulness, perceived ease of use, and user acceptance of information technology. MIS Quarterly, 13(3), 319–340. https://doi.org/10.2307/249008
Dawes, S. S. (2008). The evolution and continuing challenges of e-governance. Public Administration Review, 68(s1), S86–S102. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1540-6210.2008.00981.x
DeLone, W. H., & McLean, E. R. (2003). The DeLone and McLean model of information systems success: A ten-year update. Journal of Management Information Systems, 19(4), 9–30. https://doi.org/10.1080/07421222.2003.11045748
Dunn, W. N. (2018). Public policy analysis: An integrated approach (6th ed.). Routledge. https://doi.org/10.4324/9781315181226
Edwards III, G. C. (1980). Implementing public policy. Congressional Quarterly Press.
Fountain, J. E. (2001). Building the virtual state: Information technology and institutional change. Brookings Institution Press.
Gil-García, J. R., & Pardo, T. A. (2005). E-government success factors: Mapping practical tools to theoretical foundations. Government Information Quarterly, 22(2), 187–216. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.giq.2005.02.001
Grindle, M. S. (Ed.). (1980). Politics and policy implementation in the Third World. Princeton University Press. https://doi.org/10.1515/9781400886081
Heeks, R. (2006). Implementing and managing eGovernment: An international text. SAGE Publications.
Lipsky, M. (2010). Street-level bureaucracy: Dilemmas of the individual in public services (30th anniversary ed.). Russell Sage Foundation.
Luna-Reyes, L. F., & Gil-García, J. R. (2014). Digital government transformation and internet portals: The co-evolution of technology, organizations, and institutions. Government Information Quarterly, 31(4), 545–555. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.giq.2014.08.001
Mazmanian, D. A., & Sabatier, P. A. (1989). Implementation and public policy. University Press of America.
Meijer, A., & Bekkers, V. (2015). A metatheory of e-government: Creating some order in a fragmented research field. Government Information Quarterly, 32(3), 237–245. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.giq.2015.04.006
Miles, M. B., Huberman, A. M., & Saldaña, J. (2014). Qualitative data analysis: A methods sourcebook (3rd ed.). SAGE Publications.
Patton, M. Q. (2015). Qualitative research & evaluation methods (4th ed.). SAGE Publications.
Pressman, J. L., & Wildavsky, A. (1984). Implementation (3rd ed.). University of California Press.
Rogers, E. M. (2003). Diffusion of innovations (5th ed.). Free Press.
Stufflebeam, D. L. (2003). The CIPP model for evaluation. In T. Kellaghan & D. L. Stufflebeam (Eds.), International handbook of educational evaluation (pp. 31–62). Springer. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-94-010-0309-4_4
Van Meter, D. S., & Van Horn, C. E. (1975). The policy implementation process: A conceptual framework. Administration & Society, 6(4), 445–488. https://doi.org/10.1177/009539977500600404
Venkatesh, V., Morris, M. G., Davis, G. B., & Davis, F. D. (2003). User acceptance of information technology: Toward a unified view. MIS Quarterly, 27(3), 425–478. https://doi.org/10.2307/30036540
Venkatesh, V., Thong, J. Y. L., & Xu, X. (2012). Consumer acceptance and use of information technology: Extending the unified theory of acceptance and use of technology. MIS Quarterly, 36(1), 157–178. https://doi.org/10.2307/41410412
Weiss, C. H. (1998). Evaluation: Methods for studying programs and policies (2nd ed.). Prentice Hall.
Yin, R. K. (2018). Case study research and applications: Design and methods (6th ed.). SAGE Publications.
Downloads
Published
How to Cite
Issue
Section
License
Copyright (c) 2026 International Journal of Social Welfare and Family Law

This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike 4.0 International License.


