Transformasi Digital dalam Administrasi Publik: Studi Komparatif di Indonesia dan Korea Selatan

Authors

  • Erinaldi Erinaldi STIA Lancang Kuning Dumai
  • Angelina Ramadhani STIA Lancang Kuning Dumai
  • Murni Murni STIA Lancang Kuning Dumai
  • Mutia Rahmah Sari STIA Lancang Kuning Dumai
  • Ulfa Muti’ah STIA Lancang Kuning Dumai

DOI:

https://doi.org/10.62383/studi.v3i2.994

Keywords:

Digital Transformation, Public Administration, Digital Government, E-Government, Indonesia, South Korea

Abstract

Digital transformation in public administration has become one of the strategic agendas in modern bureaucratic reform to improve the effectiveness, efficiency, transparency, and quality of public services. This study aims to analyze the digital transformation of public administration through a comparative study between Indonesia and South Korea, particularly in the implementation of digital government. This study uses a qualitative method with a comparative study approach and is supported by library research through secondary data collection from scientific journals, international agency reports, government policy documents, and relevant previous research. The data analysis technique uses descriptive-comparative analysis with the theoretical approaches of Digital Era Governance (DEG), Institutional Theory, New Public Management (NPM), and Socio-Technical Systems Theory. The results of the study show that South Korea has succeeded in developing an integrated digital government because it is supported by consistent national policies, strong data interoperability, high bureaucratic capacity, adaptive organizational culture, and equitable distribution of digital infrastructure. In contrast, Indonesia is still in the transition stage from e-government to digital government and faces various obstacles such as fragmentation of inter-agency systems, low data interoperability, inequality in digital infrastructure, limited ASN competency, and bureaucratic resistance to change. Based on the Digital Era Governance theory, South Korea has successfully implemented the principles of reintegration, needs-based holism, and digitization of changes, while Indonesia remains suboptimal in terms of bureaucratic integration and services based on public needs. This study concludes that the success of digital transformation in public administration is determined more by institutional strength and bureaucratic reform than simply by technology adoption. Therefore, Indonesia needs to prioritize digital transformation as a comprehensive national reform agenda to create a modern, responsive, and service-oriented government.

Downloads

Download data is not yet available.

References

Aningrum, U. K. S. (2026). Strengthening Public Service Delivery Through Digital Governance: A Comparative Analysis of Indonesia and South Korea. International Journal of Multidisciplinary Research, 4(2), 112–126.

Creswell, J. W. (2018). Research Design: Qualitative, Quantitative, and Mixed Methods Approaches (5th ed.). Thousand Oaks: Sage Publications.

Dunleavy, P., Margetts, H., Bastow, S., & Tinkler, J. (2006). New Public Management Is Dead—Long Live Digital-Era Governance. Journal of Public Administration Research and Theory, 16(3), 467–494.

Fifaliana, R. M. (2026). A Systematic Literature Review of Empirical Research on the Impact of E-Government Use on Citizens’ Trust in Government. Chinese Public Administration Review, 17(3), 201–219.

Hood, C. (1991). A Public Management for All Seasons? Public Administration, 69(1), 3–19.

Kementerian Pendayagunaan Aparatur Negara dan Reformasi Birokrasi Republik Indonesia. (2018). Peraturan Presiden Nomor 95 Tahun 2018 tentang Sistem Pemerintahan Berbasis Elektronik (SPBE). Jakarta: Kementerian PANRB.

Kim, D. E., Lee, S. K., & Eom, S. J. (2026). Diffusing IT Institutionalization Through Imitation: Evidence from Local Governments in South Korea. Korean Review of Public Administration, 33(2), 145–168.

Myeong, S. (2026). Perceiving Digital Citizen Participation: A Comparative Socio-Technical Systems Analysis of Government Officials in South Korea and Indonesia. Systems, 14(4), 441.

OECD. (2023). Digital Government Index: 2023 Results. Paris: OECD Publishing.

Saeid, E. (2024). From E-Government to Digital Government: Recent Advances and Lessons Learned from the Korean Experience. EngrXiv Preprints. https://engrxiv.org/preprint/view/6574

Scott, W. R. (2014). Institutions and Organizations: Ideas, Interests, and Identities (4th ed.). Thousand Oaks: Sage Publications.

Sudirman, F. A. (2025). From E-Government to Digital Governance: A Bibliometric Analysis of Public Sector Digital Transformation. NeoRespublica, 7(1), 55–70.

Takariani, C. S. D., et al. (2026). Revisiting E-Government and Public Trust Relationship: Does Higher Maturity of E-Government Promote Greater Trust in Public Officials? Transforming Government: People, Process and Policy, 20(1), 88–104.

Trist, E. L. (1981). The Evolution of Socio-Technical Systems. Occasional Paper No. 2. Ontario Quality of Working Life Centre.

United Nations. (2024). United Nations E-Government Survey 2024: Accelerating Digital Transformation for Sustainable Development. New York: United Nations.

World Bank. (2022). GovTech Maturity Index: The State of Public Sector Digital Transformation. Washington, DC: World Bank.

Zahir, L. N., & Jati, W. R. (2025). Building Digital Governance Ecosystem Readiness for Indonesian Regional Representative Council Institution. Otoritas: Jurnal Ilmu Pemerintahan, 15(1), 77–91.

Downloads

Published

2026-05-10

How to Cite

Erinaldi, E., Angelina Ramadhani, Murni Murni, Mutia Rahmah Sari, & Ulfa Muti’ah. (2026). Transformasi Digital dalam Administrasi Publik: Studi Komparatif di Indonesia dan Korea Selatan. Studi Administrasi Publik Dan Ilmu Komunikasi, 3(2), 10–27. https://doi.org/10.62383/studi.v3i2.994

Similar Articles

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 > >> 

You may also start an advanced similarity search for this article.