International Journal of Civil Engineering and Technology (IJCIET)
Volume 10, Issue 03, March 2019, pp. 832–840, Article ID: IJCIET_10_03_080
Available online at http://www.iaeme.com/ijmet/issues.asp?JType=IJCIET&VType=10&IType=3
ISSN Print: 0976-6308 and ISSN Online: 0976-6316
© IAEME Publication
Scopus Indexed
INVESTIGATING THE EFFECT OF
GOVERNMENT BUREAUCRACY CAPABILITY
ON PUBLIC SERVICE QUALITY
Abdul Kadir, Aminuddin Aminuddin, Samiruddin T.
Halu Oleo University, Kendari, Indonesia
Udin Udin*
Diponegoro University, Semarang, Indonesia
* Corresponding Author
ABSTRACT
This study aims to analyze the effect of government bureaucracy capability on
public service quality. The population of this study is (1) all civil servants in 2016,
totaling 62 people working at the civil registry service in Kendari City - Indonesia;
and (2) service users who have obtained civil registry service totaling 6,378 people.
By using proportional random sampling, the sample of this study is 137 people. Data
collection is done by using structured questionnaires. Quantitative data is processed
using multiple regression analysis. The results showed that government bureaucracy
capability has a significant effect on public service quality.
Key words: Government Bureaucracy Capability, Public Service Quality.
Cite this Article: Abdul Kadir, Aminuddin Aminuddin, Samiruddin T., Udin Udin,
Investigating the Effect of Government Bureaucracy Capability on Public Service
Quality, International Journal of Civil Engineering and Technology 10(3), 2019, pp.
832–840.
http://www.iaeme.com/IJCIET/issues.asp?JType=IJCIET&VType=10&IType=3
1. INTRODUCTION
Demand for public services will always increase both in quality and quantity, along with the
increase in population, increasing public welfare and environmental changes. The results of a
survey conducted by Gajah Mada University in 2008 generally assessed that the public
service quality had improved after the implementation of regional autonomy. However, in
terms of efficiency, responsiveness, equality of treatment (non-discrimination) is still far from
what is expected and has various weaknesses, namely; less responsive, less informative, less
accessible, and less coordinated and bureaucratic.
Sinambela et al. (2010) stated that at least, there were 385 types of public services
provided by the government to the community, ranging from birth certificate matters to death
certificates. All types of services are provided and provided to the community by the
http://www.iaeme.com/IJCIET/index.asp
832
editor@iaeme.com
Investigating the Effect of Government Bureaucracy Capability on Public Service Quality
government, both at the central and regional governments, which generally have not satisfied
the community much. The service provided is too convoluted with various reasons for the
procedure, the number of service costs and a very long time so that the services provided tend
to be ineffective and inefficient.
To fulfill the improvement in the quality of service to the community, the government
bureaucracy must have high capacity and continuously follow developments in the
community. Based on this, the formulation of this research problem is (1) does government
bureaucracy capability have a significant effect on public service quality; and (2) how much
the influence of government bureaucracy capability on public service quality.
The purpose of this study is (1) to analyze the influence government bureaucracy
capability on public service quality; and (2) to analyze the magnitude of the influence of
government bureaucracy capability on public service quality.
2. LITERATURE REVIEW
2.1. Government Bureaucracy Capability
The capability of the government bureaucracy is not just obtained but requires a continuous
process so as to produce quality human resource output, both in terms of formal knowledge,
expertise, skills, work discipline and the creation of a harmonious working relationship.
Public sector organizations are often described as unproductive, inefficient, always losing,
low quality, poor innovation and creativity, and various other criticisms. The emergence of
such harsh criticism led to a movement to carry out public sector management reform which
was marked by the emergence of the concept of New Public Management (NPM) pioneered
by Gaebler and Osborne (1992).
Thoha (2008) argues that the concept of NPM wants to change the way public
bureaucracy works by giving and transforming business performance labels into the public
bureaucracy. Market orientation must also be applied in the performance of the public
bureaucracy. Public bureaucracy must recognize citizens who are served as customers who
need to satisfy their individual needs. Meanwhile, residents who have other needs that are not
visible in this relationship need not be considered.
The NPM model received strong criticism from many experts, such as Box, and Denhardt
& Denhardt. According to Box (1998), the actual public interest owner is a community, so the
public administrator should focus on the responsibility of serving and empowering the
community through the management of public organizations and the implementation of public
policies.
Denhardt & Denhardt (2003) asserted that public services should not only focus on the
interests of customers or service users (customers or clients) but must be oriented to the
interests of the wider community. Changing the orientation of the position of citizens, the
value put forward and the role of this government gave rise to a new perspective of public
administration called by Denhardt and Denhardt as the New Public Service (NPS).
To realize the capabilities of government bureaucracy, Denhardt & Denhardt (2003)
propose 7 principles in NPS, namely:

Serve citizen, not customers. Public interest is the result of dialogue about transferring shared
values rather than aggregating individual interests. Therefore, public servants not only respond
to customer needs but must focus on building trust and collaboration with citizens.

Seek public interest. Administrators must contribute to building shared interests and values.
The aim is to be able to get a solution that is not only determined by individual choices but
also by shared responsibility for common interests.
http://www.iaeme.com/IJCIET/index.asp
833
editor@iaeme.com
Abdul Kadir, Aminuddin Aminuddin, Samiruddin T., Udin Udin

Value citizenship over entrepreneurship. Public interests are carried out by public servants and
the public who make a commitment to contribute to the public interest, not to become public
managers who have entrepreneurial values.

Think strategically and act democratically. Policies and programs will be able to meet public
needs effectively and responsibly through collective and collaborative efforts and processes.

Recognize that accountability is not simple. Public services must care more about the
community than the market. They must also pay attention to constitutional rules and laws,
community values, political norms, professional standards and the interests of society.

Serve rather than steer. It is very important for public servants to use value-based leadership to
help people articulate and fulfill their interests rather than trying to control or direct society.

Value people, not just productivity. Public organizations and networks are more likely to
achieve long-term success if running a government through collaboration and leadership based
on appreciation to the entire community.
2.2. Public Service Quality
Lewis and Gilman (2005) define public service as public trust where citizens hope that public
services can serve honestly and manage income sources appropriately and can be accounted to
the public. Fair and accountable public services can generate public trust as a basis for
realizing good governance.
The Center for Population and Policy Studies (CPPS) (2001) suggests that to assess the
performance of public services, the following indicators can be used:

Accountability. An activity of a public organization has high accountability if the activity is
considered true and in accordance with the values and norms that develop in society.

Responsiveness. Responsiveness is indispensable in public service because it is a form of the
organization's ability to recognize community needs, set an agenda, prioritize services, and
develop public service programs in accordance with the needs and aspirations of the
community.

Orientation to serve. Service orientation shows a measure of how much resources an officer
has used to serve service users.

Efficiency. Public services are said to be efficient if service users can be served in the shortest
possible time and the cheapest costs. The more efficient the service, the better service
performance produced.
Figure 1. Research Framework
http://www.iaeme.com/IJCIET/index.asp
834
editor@iaeme.com
Investigating the Effect of Government Bureaucracy Capability on Public Service Quality
3. HYPOTHESIS
Ha: Government bureaucracy capability has a significant effect on public service quality
Ho: Government bureaucracy capability has no significant effect on public service quality
4. RESEARCH METHODS
The population of this study was (1) all civil servants in 2016, totaling 62 people working at
the Population and Civil Registry Service in Kendari City - Indonesia; and (2) service users
who have obtained population and civil registration services totaling 6,378 people. By using
proportional random sampling, the sample of this study amounted to 137 people. Data
collection is done by using structured questionnaires. Quantitative data is then processed
using multiple regression analysis.
4.1. Variable, Dimension, and Indicator of the Study
Table 1 Variable, Dimension, and Indicator
Variable
Government
Bureaucracy
Capacity (X)
Dimension
X1.
Serve citizen, not
customers
X2. Seek the public interest
Indicator
Responding to community needs
Building community trust
Contributions by government officials as
servants for the benefit of society
Prioritizing community rights
Communities contribute to their interests
Community participation in determining
policies and programs
Accountability based on legal rules,
professional standards, and community
interests
Value-based leadership to meet community
needs
Directing for the benefit of society
Award-based leadership of every work of
the apparatus and its productivity
Truth
Suitability
Service reference
Pleasant service
Agility at work
Main work
Meeting service needs
Satisfying service
Time
Costs
X3.
Value citizenship
over entrepreneurship
X4.
Think strategically
act democratically
X5. Recognize that
accountability is not simple
X6. Serve rather than steer
X7. Value people, not just
productivity
Y1.
Accountability
Public Service
Quality (Y)
Y2.
Responsiveness
Y3. Orientation to serves
Y4. Efficiency
4.2. Data Analysis
The influence of the government bureaucracy capability on public service quality is analyzed
using multiple linear regression, can be formulated with the following regression equation:
Y = a + b1X1+b2X2+...+bnXn
Note:
Y
=
Public service quality
http://www.iaeme.com/IJCIET/index.asp
835
editor@iaeme.com
Abdul Kadir, Aminuddin Aminuddin, Samiruddin T., Udin Udin
X1
X2
X3
X4
X5
X6
X7
=
Serve citizen, not customers
=
Seek the public interest
=
Value citizenship over entrepreneurship
=
Think strategically, act democratically
=
Recognize that accountability is not simple
=
Serve rather than steer
=
Value people, not just productivity
The regression coefficient test results using hypothesis testing with the value of the t-test.
If the significant value is smaller than the significant level specified, or t-test is greater than t
table it means significant. This test is done by observing t-test at the 95% confidence level or
α = 0.05.
5. RESULTS
The summary of the result of the calculation of linear regression analysis in the study can be
seen in the table below :
Table 2 Result of the Multiple Linear Regression Analysis
Independent Variable
Constant
Government Bureaucratic
Capability
R = 0.893
R Square = 0.798
Source : Primary data (2016)
Coefficient
Regression
1.984
0.506
T-test
Sig.
Result
3.537
23.092
0.001
0.000
Siginificant
Siginificant
ttable = 1.980
Sig = 0.000
Based on the results of the regression analysis in the table above, the regression equation
is as follows:
Y =
a + b1X1 + b2X2 + ... + bnXn
=
1984 + (2.416)x1 + (-2.652)X2 + (1.325)x3 + (0.482)x4 + (0.381)x5 +
(1.990)x6 + 1.396)x7
The regression equation above can be explained as follows:

The constant value of 1.984 indicates that the amount of the government bureaucracy
capability without public service quality.

The regression coefficient (X1) of 2.416 shows that if other independent variables remain,
public service quality will increase.

The regression coefficient (X2) of -2,652 shows that if other independent variables remain,
public service quality will decline.

The regression coefficient (X3) of 1,325 shows that if other independent variables remain,
public service quality will increase.

The regression coefficient (X4) of 0.482 indicates that if other independent variables remain,
public service quality will increase.

Regression coefficient (X5) of 0.381 indicates that if other independent variables remain,
public service quality will increase.
http://www.iaeme.com/IJCIET/index.asp
836
editor@iaeme.com
Investigating the Effect of Government Bureaucracy Capability on Public Service Quality

The regression coefficient (X6) of 1990 shows that if other independent variables remain,
public service quality will increase.

The regression coefficient (X7) of 1,396 shows that if other independent variables remain,
public service quality will increase.
The correlation coefficient (R) of 0.893 shows a strong degree of relationship between
variables (X) and variables (Y). The coefficient of determination (R2) is 0.798.
5.1. Hypotheses Testing
In this section contains an explanation and analysis of the results of testing the hypothesis.
Simultaneous testing using a simple regression analysis model through the F-test.
Table 3 Hypotheses testing
Model
1
(Constant)
Government
bureaucracy
capability
Unstandardized Coefficients Standardized
Coefficients
B
Std. Error
Beta
2.147
.607
.506
.022
.893
T
Sig.
3.537
.001
23.092
.000
a. Dependent Variable: Public service quality
Table 3 shows that the regression coefficient value of government bureaucracy capability
(X) is 23,092, so it can be said that the government bureaucracy capability has a positive
effect on public service quality (Y). Positive influence is interpreted, that the increasing
government bureaucracy capability (X) will increase public service quality (Y).
The results of the regression analysis obtained t count value of 23,092> t table 1,980 and
significance value (Sig.) 0,000 <0,05, it can be concluded that Ho is rejected and H1 is
accepted, which means the government bureaucracy capability has a significant effect on
public service quality.
5.2. Partial Regression Analysis
Table 4 Result of the partial analysis
Independent Variable
(X1) Serve citizen, not customers
(X2) Seek the public interest
(X3) Value citizenship over entrepreneurship
(X4) Think strategically act democratically
(X5) Recognize that accountability is not simple
(X6) Serve rather than steer
(X7) Value people, not just productivity
Constant
= 1.984
ttable
= 1.660
Sig.t = 0.000
Source: Primary data (2016)
t-test
Sig.t
Result
5.280
-8.866
3.025
2.425
2.317
6.854
3.059
0.000
0.000
0.000
0.000
0.022
0.000
0.003
Significant
Significant
Significant
Significant
Significant
Significant
Significant
The results of partial analysis show that the dimensions of the government bureaucracy
capability include: serve citizen, not customers (X1), seek the public interest (X2), value
citizenship over entrepreneurship (X3), think strategically and act democratically (X4),
http://www.iaeme.com/IJCIET/index.asp
837
editor@iaeme.com
Abdul Kadir, Aminuddin Aminuddin, Samiruddin T., Udin Udin
recognize that accountability is not simple (X5), serve rather than steer (X6), value people,
not just productivity (X7) affect public service quality (Y). For more details, see the
following:

Serve citizen, not customers (X1) has a positive and significant effect on the Y variable
because the value of t count 5.280 is greater than the value of t table 1.660.

Seek the public interest (X2) has a negative effect on the Y variable because the value of t
count of -8866 is smaller than the value of t table 1.660.

Value citizenship over entrepreneurship (X3) has a positive and significant effect on the Y
variable because the value of t count 3.025 is greater than the value of t table 1.660.

Think strategically act democratically (X4) has a positive and significant effect on the Y
variable because the value of t count 2.425 is greater than the value of t table 1.660.

Recognize that accountability is not simple (X5) has a positive and significant effect on the Y
variable because the value of t count 2.317 is greater than the value of t table 1.660.

Serve rather than steer (X6) has a positive and significant effect on the Y variable because the
value of t count 6.854 is greater than the value of t table 1.660.

Value people, not just productivity (X7) has a positive and significant effect on the Y variable
because the value of t count of 3.059 is greater than the value of t table 1.660.
6. DISCUSSION
Based on the results of simultaneous analysis shows that the government bureaucracy
capability has a significant effect on public service quality by 79.8% and the remaining 20.2%
is influenced by other factors not included in this study. This indicates that public services
will be of higher quality if the government bureaucracy capability is increased. According to
Robbins (1996) that the capacity of an individual to do his job consists of intellectual capacity
and physical capacity. Intellectual capacity is the ability to carry out mental activities while
physical capacity is the ability to carry out tasks that require stamina, dexterity, strength, and
talents. Furthermore, Siagian (1998) argues that capacity is a combination of theory and
experience of bureaucrats obtained in practice in the field including the ability to apply
appropriate technology in increasing work productivity.
Based on partial analysis shows that the dimensions of the government bureaucracy
capability that have the greatest influence on public service quality are the X6 dimension and
the least influential dimension is the X2 dimension. Denhart and Denhart said that the
government cannot regard the community as the customer that needs to be served but the
government should empower and serve as citizens because of the owner of the actual public
interest in the community.
One of the most important indicators of civil service, in order to be qualified, is the
availability of facilities, service infrastructure and the clarity of service standards
implemented. In line with what was stated by Tjiptono and Rahayu in Napitupulu (2006) that
one element that can provide satisfaction in service is the quality of office facilities,
computerization, administration, waiting rooms and information sites. The results showed that
the quantity and quality of office buildings, waiting rooms and information sites in Kendari
City Population and Civil Registry Office was still low. Computerization and other
information technology sometimes experience problems because the quantity and quality of
the apparatus are still weak. Management operators, especially in Technical Implementation
Units at the sub-district level, are generally contract employees with inadequate skill levels.
Human resources have the necessary qualifications in their field and are trained in their
fields of expertise. However, the conditions that occur in the Kendari City Population and
http://www.iaeme.com/IJCIET/index.asp
838
editor@iaeme.com
Investigating the Effect of Government Bureaucracy Capability on Public Service Quality
Civil Service Office that knowledge of the apparatus through training still lacks the attention
of the leadership so that the ability of the apparatus is only carried out autonomously based on
orders from superiors which causes poor quality service. Therefore, to improve the quality of
service, there needs to be a leadership commitment to the development of human resources. In
connection with that, the World Bank in Keban (2010: 22) argues that capacity building is
primarily focused on the development of human resources, especially training and
recruitment.
Information disclosure is also one of the media to fulfill satisfaction in service. This is in
line with Lovelock's view in Napitupulu (2006) that a measure of community satisfaction as a
customer of public service products begins with the availability of information, the provision
of fast and precise information channels that directly facilitate the community to meet their
needs. People, in general, are reluctant to ask questions, they are more likely to seek
information through the media, one of which is through the provision of information boards.
Furthermore, after the information is obtained, then try at the level of consultation both
technical, the cost of procedures and policies of the service apparatus.
The results showed that the Kendari City Population and Civil Registry Service provided
information boards and flow of service mechanisms and also carried out outreach activities,
but the community's understanding varied, there were people who understood and obeyed the
prescribed mechanism but most people wanted to be served but the requirements service
standards that cannot be fulfilled so that services sometimes take a long time. Service
problems are more hampered at the Sub-District Level Technical Implementation Unit so that
people who have relations with the Population and Civil Service Office do management
directly without going through a predetermined mechanism.
Based on this, the government bureaucracy's maximum effort is needed to disseminate
and improve the information system in order to improve the quality of population and civil
registration services. In addition, the bureaucracy and apparatus have a very broad task scope.
The apparatus is not only required to master technical issues, but also activities that are
tactical and strategic in value. Increasing the capacity of the bureaucracy is the center of all
the success of the task of the officials effectively.
7. CONCLUSIONS
The conclusions of this study are as follows:

Government bureaucracy capability consisting of 7 dimensions simultaneously influences
public service quality.

The results of the analysis of the coefficient of determination indicate that government
bureaucracy capability has a positive and significant effect of 79.8% on public service quality
in the Kendari City Population and Civil Registry Service and the remaining 20.2% is
influenced by other factors. It means that public services will be more qualified if the
government bureaucracy capability is increased.

The results of the partial analysis show that from 7 dimensions of government bureaucracy
capability, the most dominant influence is the dimension of service rather than steer and the
lowest influence is the dimension of seeking the public interest.
RECOMMENDATION
The recommendations of this study are as follows:

It is necessary to increase the government bureaucracy capability which consists of 7
dimensions to improve public service quality at the Kendari City Population and Civil
Registry Service.
http://www.iaeme.com/IJCIET/index.asp
839
editor@iaeme.com
Abdul Kadir, Aminuddin Aminuddin, Samiruddin T., Udin Udin

It is better if the Kendari City Government can take a policy to increase bureaucracy capability
because it significantly affects public service quality in Kendari City.

From the 7 dimensions of government bureaucracy capability, the most dominant dimension
of influence is the dimension of seeking public interest. This means that this dimension needs
the most attention compared to other dimensions.
REFERENCES
[1]
[2]
[3]
[4]
[5]
[6]
[7]
[8]
[9]
[10]
[11]
[12]
[13]
[14]
[15]
[16]
[17]
[18]
Akbar, A. B., Udin, Wahyudi, S., & Djastuti, I. (2018). Spiritual Leadership and
Employee Performance: Mediating Role of Organizational Commitment in Indonesian
Public University. Journal of Engineering and Applied Sciences, 13(12), 4344-4352.
Box, Ricard C. (1998). Citizen Governance: Leading American Communities into the 21
st century.thousand Oaks: Sage Publications.
Center For Population and Policy Studies (CPPS) .(2001) Policy Brief, Gajah Mada
University, Yogyakarta
Denhardt, Janet Vinzat, dan Robert B. Denhardt (2003). The New Public Service: Serving
Not Steering. Amonk, New York: M.E.Sharpe.
Handayani, S., Udin, Suharnomo, Yuniawan, A., Wahyudi, S., & Wikaningrum, T.
(2017). A Systematic Literature Review of Managing Workplace Diversity for Sustaining
Organizational Competitive Advantage. International Journal of Mechanical Engineering
and Technology, 8(12), 398–406.
Keban, Yeremis T. (2010) Good Governance dan capacity Building Sebagai Indikator
Utama dan Focus Penilaian Kinerja Pemerintahan.
Lewis Carol W, and Stuart C. Gilman. (2005). The Ethics Challenge in Public Service: A
Problem - Solving Guide, Market Street, San Fransisco: Jossey-Bass.
Napitupulu, Paimin. (1986). Pelayanan Publik dan Customer Satisfaction, PT. Bumi
Alumni, Bandung.
Osborne, D & Gaebler, T. (1992). Mewirausahakan Birokrasi: Mentransformasikan
Semangat Wirausaha ke dalam Sektor Publik, Pustaka BinamanPressindo, Jakarta
Riduwan dan Akdon, 2007, Rumus dan Data Dalam Analisis Statistika Untuk Penelitian
(Administrasi
Pendidikan-Bisnis-Pemerintahan-Sosial-Kebijakan-Ekonomi-HukumManajemen-Kesehatan). Alfabeta, Bandung
Robbins, S. P. (1996). Bureaucratic in Comparative Perspektive, Duke University Press,
Durhan NC.
Santosa, Purbaya Budi dan Ashari (2005). Analisis Statistik Dengan Microsoft Exceldan
SPSS, Andi, Yogyakarta.
Shahab, A., Sobari, A., & Udin, U. (2019). Empowering Leadership and OCB: The Roles
of Psychological Empowerment and Emotional Intelligence. Wseas transactions on
business and economics, 16, 97-106.
Shahab, M. A., Sobari, A., & Udin, U. (2018). Empowering Leadership and
Organizational Citizenship Behavior: The Mediating Roles of Psychological
Empowerment and Emotional Intelligence in Medical Service Industry. International
Journal of Economics & Business Administration, 6(3), 80-91.
Siagian, S. P. (1998). Birokrasi Pemerintah Orde Baru, Perspektif Kultur dan Struktur,
PT.RajaGrafindo Persada Jakarta
Sinambela, dkk. (2010). Reformasi Pelayanan Publik, PT. Bumi Aksara Jakarta.
Sulistiyani, E., Udin, & Rahardja, E. (2018). Examining the effect of transformational
leadership, extrinsic reward, and knowledge sharing on creative performance of
Indonesian SMEs. Quality - Access to Success, 19(167), 63-67.
Thoha, Miftah (2008). Ilmu Administrasi Publik Kontemporer, Kencana Jakarta.
http://www.iaeme.com/IJCIET/index.asp
840
editor@iaeme.com