Testing E-Government Ranking Framework in Indonesia (PeGI): Case Study in Ministry Level

Article Sidebar

PDF (Indonesian) Copyright Statement (Indonesian) Copyright Transfer (Indonesian)
Published: Jul 18, 2017
DOI: https://doi.org/10.20422/jpk.v20i1.123
Keywords:
PeGI, e-Government, framework, testing, ICT
Dimensions
Altmetrics
Statistics
Read Counter : 1855
Download : 1695
Crossmark/ Data Version

Main Article Content

Darmawan Baginda Napitupulu
Pusat Penelitian Sistem Mutu dan Teknologi Pengujian - LIPI

Abstract

E-Government progress in Indonesia takes place since the existence of Inpres 3 of 2003 on national policy and strategy of e-government development. In that regulation, clearly regulated the responsibility of all central and regional government institutions to develop e-government system as a form of electronic based public service. One of the strategies formulated by the government is to develop e-Government systematically through the realistic and measurable stages. In other words, the government wants to encourage increased use of Information and Communication Technology (ICT) in government institution through integral, balanced, and objective evaluation. Therefore, the government needs to perform the evaluation in order to measure the use of ICT in governance ( a government institution). PeGI (e-Government Ranking in Indonesia) is an event held periodically by the Ministry of Communications and Information Technology since 2007 with the objective to improve the effectiveness and efficiency of application of ICT in government institutions. The dimensions of PeGI ratings cover the aspects: policy, institutional, infrastructure, applications, and planning. This research purpose is to test empirically the framework of PeGI that has been used to measure the use of ICT which the PeGI itself consists of 5 dimensions and 35 attributes assessment. In other words, we want to know whether PeGI framework is still relevant today, especially at the ministerial level, consider that the development of ICT is rapid and dynamic. The method used is quantitative with factor analysis approach. The results showed that all the attributes are valid and could represent each dimension of the PeGI rating: policies, institutions, infrastructure, applications, and planning. Therefore, PeGI framework is still relevant to use for assessing e-Government implementation, especially in ministry level.

Article Details

Issue
Vol. 20 No. 1 (2017)
Section
Articles

Proposed Policy for Journals That Offer Open Access


Authors who publish with this journal agree to the following terms:

  1. Authors retain copyright and grant the journal right of first publication with the work simultaneously licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution License that allows others to share the work with an acknowledgement of the work's authorship and initial publication in this journal.
  2. Authors are able to enter into separate, additional contractual arrangements for the non-exclusive distribution of the journal's published version of the work (e.g., post it to an institutional repository or publish it in a book), with an acknowledgement of its initial publication in this journal.
  3. Authors are permitted and encouraged to post their work online (e.g., in institutional repositories or on their website) prior to and during the submission process, as it can lead to productive exchanges, as well as earlier and greater citation of published work (See The Effect of Open Access).

References

Ariyani, P.F. (2013) KAJIAN KERANGKA KERJA PEMERINGKATAN E-GOVERNMENT DI TINGKAT KABUPATEN/KOTAMADYA. BIT. [Online] 10 (1), 41–49. Available from: http://riset.budiluhur.ac.id/publikasi-ilmiah/bit/vol-10-no-1/.

Cattell, R.B. (1978) The Scientific Use of Factor Analysis in Behavioral and Life Sciences. New York, Plenum.

Cronbach, L.J. (1951) Coefficient alpha and the internal structure of tests. Psychometrika. [Online] 16 (3), 297–334. Available from: doi:10.1007/BF02310555.

Direktorat e-Government. APTIKA - KEMKOMINFO RI (2014) PeGI Tingkat Provinsi pada Tahun 2014. [Online]. 2014. Pemeringkatan e-Government Indonesia (PeGI). Available from: http://pegi.layanan.go.id/download/tabel_pegi_2014/HASIL PROVINSI 2014.bmp.

Direktorat e-Government. APTIKA - KEMKOMINFO RI (2015) PeGI Tingkat Provinsi Tahun 2015. [Online]. 2015. Pemeringkatan e-Government Indonesia (PeGI). Available from: http://pegi.layanan.go.id/download/tabel_pegi_2015/2015_PROVINSI.PNG.

Direktorat e-Government. APTIKA - KEMKOMINFO RI (2012) Tabel PeGI 2012. [Online]. 2012. Pemeringkatan e-Government Indonesia (PeGI). Available from: http://pegi.layanan.go.id/tabel-hasil-pegi-4/.

Fitriansyah, A., Budiarto, H. & Santoso, J. (2013) Metode Pemeringkatan e-Government Indonesia (PeGI) Untuk Audit Tata Kelola Teknologi Informasi. In: Seminar Nasional Sistem Informasi Indonesia (SESINDO) 2013. 2013 pp. 10–20.

Furuholt, B. & Wahid, F. (2008) E-Government Challenges and the Role of Political Leadership in Indonesia: The Case of Sragen. In: Proceedings of the 41st Annual Hawaii International Conference on System Sciences (HICSS 2008). [Online]. January 2008 IEEE. p. 411. Available from: doi:10.1109/HICSS.2008.134.

Hair, J.F., Anderson, R.E., Tatham, R.L. & Black, W.C. (1998) Multivariate Data Analysis with Readings. 5th edition. New Jersey, Prentice-Hill.

Hernikawati, D. & Sensuse, D.I. (2016) Uji Validitas Indikator–Indikator Pemeringkatan E-Government Indonesia (Pegi) Tingkat Provinsi Dengan Analisis Faktor. Jurnal Penelitian Pos dan informatika. [Online] 6 (1), 1–18. Available from: doi:10.17933/jppi.2016.060101.

Jaya, S. (2013) Implementasi Dan Perkembangan E-Government di Indonesia. Jurnal Informatika Multimedia (JIM) STIMED NUSA PALAPA. [Online] 2 (1), 37–52. Available from: http://jim.stimednp.ac.id/wp-content/uploads/2014/03/IMPLEMENTASI-DAN-PERKEMBANGAN-E-GOVERNMENT.pdf.

Kautsarina (2015) Kajian Inventarisasi Aset Teknologi Informasi dan Komunikasi di Instansi Pemerintah. Jurnal Penelitian dan Pengembangan Komunikasi dan Informatika. 6 (1), 49–58.

Napitulu, D. (2015) Kajian Faktor Sukses Implementasi E-Government. Sistem Informasi. [Online] 5 (3), 229–236. Available from: http://is.its.ac.id/pubs/oajis/index.php/home/detail/1445/Kajian-Faktor-Sukses-Implementasi-E-Government-Studi-Kasus-Pemerintah-Kota-Bogor.

Napitupulu, D. & Sensuse, D.I. (2014) The Critical Success Factors Study for e-Government Implementation. International Journal of Computer Applications. [Online] 89 (16), 23–32. Available from: https://pdfs.semanticscholar.org/7e84/d9c75dba5d462c2b536818f5142bf2edd000.pdf.

Osborne, J.W. & Costello, A.B. (2005) Best Practices in Exploratory Factor Analysis : Four Recommendations for Getting the Most From Your Analysis. Practical Assessment, Research & Evaluation. 10 (7), 1–9.

Romayah, S., Suroso, A.I. & Ramadhan, A. (2014) Evaluasi Implementasi E-government di Instansi XYZ. Jurnal Aplikasi Manajemen. [Online] 12 (4), 612–620. Available from: http://www.jurnaljam.ub.ac.id/index.php/jam/article/view/711.

Santoso, S. (2010) Statistik Multivariat. Jakarta, PT. Gramedia.

Silalahi, M., Napitupulu, D. & Patria, G. (2015) Kajian Konsep Dan Kondisi e-Government di Indonesia. JUPITER . [Online] 1 (1), 10–16. Available from: http://id.portalgaruda.org/?ref=browse&mod=viewarticle&article=356188.

Williams, B., Onsman, A. & Brown, T. (2010) Exploratory factor analysis: A five-step guide for novices. Journal of Emergency Primary Health Care. [Online] 8 (3), 1–13. Available from: https://ajp.paramedics.org/index.php/ajp/article/view/93.