Keywords
performance reporting
bounded rationality
evidence-based planning
public administration
How to Cite
Abstract
This study examines how Family Information System data are used in annual government performance reporting and identifies structural conditions shaping instrumental, conceptual, and symbolic use. A qualitative interpretive-descriptive study was conducted at the Kemendukbangga/BKKBN Provincial Office of Bengkulu, Indonesia. Evidence came from repeated semi-structured interviews with one key planning and finance informant, analysis of three years of performance reports and related planning documents, and non-participant observation of internal coordination meetings. Coding followed Weiss’s three-mode knowledge utilisation taxonomy, with documentary corroboration and an audit trail. The system is a primary reference in a structured evidence-based planning cycle, but deadline pressure and data availability gaps produce satisficing strategies, especially data substitution. This pattern lies between instrumental and symbolic use. The agency’s vertical status appears to reduce local political interference, although this interpretation rests on one informant’s account. The single-informant evidence base limits informant-level triangulation and requires cautious interpretation of culture, leadership, and political-insulation claims. The study provides a diagnostic vocabulary for assessing whether performance data genuinely inform public-sector decisions. It introduces bounded rationality as a middle-range explanation for data-use patterns that fall between instrumental use and strategically symbolic use.
References
Aisyah, D. N., Manikam, L., Kiasatina, T., Naman, M., Adisasmito, W., & Kozlakidis, Z. (2025). Understanding health information systems utilization across public health centers in Indonesia: Cross-sectional study. JMIR Medical Informatics, 13, e68613. https://doi.org/10.2196/68613
Apriliani, N., Farida, F., Ramdhani, A., & Nurjaman, A. (2024). Implementasi program aplikasi Sistem Informasi Keluarga di Dinas Perlindungan Anak Kota Sukabumi. Innovative: Journal of Social Science Research, 4(1), 7175-7185.
Cepiku, D., Mastrodascio, M., & Wang, W. (2024). Factors shaping the use of performance information by public managers. Public Management Review, 1-24. https://doi.org/10.1080/14719037.2024.2435009
Davies, H., Nutley, S., & Walter, I. (2007). Why "knowledge transfer" is misconceived for applied social research. Journal of Health Services Research and Policy, 13(3), 188-190.
Deschamps, C. (2022). Performance management in public service organizations: Can data be useful to managers even when it is flawed or gamed? International Public Management Journal, 25(5), 672-691. https://doi.org/10.1080/10967494.2020.1863886
DiMaggio, P. J., & Powell, W. W. (1983). The iron cage revisited: Institutional isomorphism and collective rationality in organizational fields. American Sociological Review, 48(2), 147-160. https://doi.org/10.2307/2095101
Hood, C. (1991). A public management for all seasons? Public Administration, 69(1), 3-19. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-9299.1991.tb00779.x
Idaiani, S., Hendarwan, H., & Herawati, M. H. (2023). Disparities of health program information systems in Indonesia. International Journal of Environmental Research and Public Health, 20(5), 4384. https://doi.org/10.3390/ijerph20054384
Kasim, Z. N. R., Aneta, Y., & Mozin, S. Y. (2025). Penerapan e-government melalui aplikasi Sistem Informasi Keluarga (SIGA) di BKKBN Provinsi Gorontalo. Jurnal Riset Rumpun Ilmu Sosial, Politik dan Humaniora, 4(1), 633-640. https://doi.org/10.55606/jurrish.v4i1.5161
Laihonen, H., Kork, A. A., & Sinervo, L. M. (2024). Advancing public sector knowledge management: Towards an understanding of knowledge formation in public administration. Knowledge Management Research and Practice, 22(3), 223-233. https://doi.org/10.1080/14778238.2023.2187719
Laot, F. S., Katili, M. R., Novian, D., & Tuloli, M. S. (2025). Optimasi UI/UX berbasis design thinking pada Sistem Informasi Keluarga (SIGA). Jambura Journal of Informatics, 1(2), 98-108. https://doi.org/10.37905/jji.v1i2.33904
Miles, M. B., Huberman, A. M., & Saldaña, J. (2014). Qualitative data analysis: A methods sourcebook (3rd ed.). SAGE Publications.
Muhtar, M., Arifin, T., & Sutaryo, S. (2021). Performance accountability in Indonesian local governments: Does monitoring really work? International Journal of Business and Society, 22(3), 1673-1692. https://doi.org/10.33736/ijbs.4329.2021
Peraturan Presiden Nomor 180 Tahun 2024 tentang Kementerian Kependudukan dan Pembangunan Keluarga. (2024).
Peraturan Presiden Nomor 29 Tahun 2014 tentang Sistem Akuntabilitas Kinerja Instansi Pemerintah. (2014).
Simon, H. A. (1997). Administrative behavior: A study of decision-making processes in administrative organizations (4th ed.). Free Press.
Sofyani, H., Akbar, R., & Ferrer, R. C. (2018). 20 years of performance measurement system implementation in Indonesian local governments: Why is their performance still poor? Asian Journal of Business and Accounting, 11(1), 151-184. https://doi.org/10.22452/ajba.vol11no1.6
Sugiyono. (2015). Metode penelitian kualitatif. Alfabeta.
Weiss, C. H. (1979). The many meanings of research utilization. Public Administration Review, 39(5), 426-431. https://doi.org/10.2307/3109916