JMERC
Owner
Janbazan Medical and Engineering Research Center (JMERC) is the owner of IJWPH.
0.4
Cite Score
SJR: 0.114 / SNIP: 0.090
Volume 16, Issue 2 (2024)
Iran J War Public Health 2024, 16(2): 191-199 |
Back to browse issues page
Article Type:
Subject:
History
Received: 2024/06/4 | Accepted: 2024/08/5 | Published: 2024/08/30
Received: 2024/06/4 | Accepted: 2024/08/5 | Published: 2024/08/30
How to cite this article
Ginting R, Muhdi M, Rohmansyah N. Innovative Veteran Public Service Policy in the Republic of Indonesia. Iran J War Public Health 2024; 16 (2) :191-199
URL: http://ijwph.ir/article-1-1474-en.html
URL: http://ijwph.ir/article-1-1474-en.html
Download citation:
BibTeX | RIS | EndNote | Medlars | ProCite | Reference Manager | RefWorks
Send citation to:
Rights and permissions
BibTeX | RIS | EndNote | Medlars | ProCite | Reference Manager | RefWorks
Send citation to:
1- Department of Civic Education, Faculty of Social Sciences and Sports Education, PGRI University of Semarang, Central Java, Indonesia
2- Department of Management Education, Faculty of Management, PGRI University of Semarang, Central Java, Indonesia
3- Department of Elementary School Physical Education, Faculty of Sports and Health Sciences, Yogyakarta State University, Yogyakarta, Indonesia
2- Department of Management Education, Faculty of Management, PGRI University of Semarang, Central Java, Indonesia
3- Department of Elementary School Physical Education, Faculty of Sports and Health Sciences, Yogyakarta State University, Yogyakarta, Indonesia
Abstract (291 Views)
Aims: The current research aimed to analyze the process of public service policy innovation to strengthen the government's connection with veteran of the Republic of Indonesia through improved public services.
Participants & Methods: This was an exploratory and descriptive study carried out in Indonesia in 2020. Researchers used a survey of academic literature in the field of public policy to identify relevant concepts for the study of public service innovation. Data was collected from a variety of sources, including government documents and print and electronic media serving as secondary data. The data was then processed and described in narrative form reflecting the realities of the collected information and analyzed accordingly.
Findings: The innovation in service policy focused on simplifying the service policy preparation process and facilitating easier implementation. Most of the innovation outcomes addressed solving public service challenges. This showed that public service policy innovators are focused on tackling practical issues with tangible impacts.
Conclusion: Key challenges in veteran services include long service times, outdated infrastructure, and limited contact with veterans due to aging.
Participants & Methods: This was an exploratory and descriptive study carried out in Indonesia in 2020. Researchers used a survey of academic literature in the field of public policy to identify relevant concepts for the study of public service innovation. Data was collected from a variety of sources, including government documents and print and electronic media serving as secondary data. The data was then processed and described in narrative form reflecting the realities of the collected information and analyzed accordingly.
Findings: The innovation in service policy focused on simplifying the service policy preparation process and facilitating easier implementation. Most of the innovation outcomes addressed solving public service challenges. This showed that public service policy innovators are focused on tackling practical issues with tangible impacts.
Conclusion: Key challenges in veteran services include long service times, outdated infrastructure, and limited contact with veterans due to aging.
Keywords:
References
1. Borins SF, editor. Innovations in government: Research, recognition, and replication. Washington DC: Brookings Institution Press; 2008. [Link]
2. Leijten J. Innovation policy and international relations: Directions for EU diplomacy. Eur J Futur Res. 2019;7:4. [Link] [DOI:10.1186/s40309-019-0156-1]
3. Steiber A, Alänge S. Organizational innovation: Verifying a comprehensive model for catalyzing organizational development and change. Triple Helix. 2015;2:14. [Link] [DOI:10.1186/s40604-015-0026-1]
4. Damanpour F, Schneider M. Characteristics of innovation and innovation adoption in public organizations: Assessing the role of managers. J Public Adm Res Theory. 2009;19(3):495-522. [Link] [DOI:10.1093/jopart/mun021]
5. Hensher DA. Erratum to: Customer service quality and benchmarking in public transport contracts. Int J Qual Innov. 2015;1:7. [Link] [DOI:10.1186/s40887-015-0007-5]
6. Walker RM, Jeanes E, Rowlands R. Measuring innovation-applying the literature-based innovation output indicator to public services. Public Adm. 2002;80(1):201-14. [Link] [DOI:10.1111/1467-9299.00300]
7. Alumran A, Almutawa H, Alzain Z, Althumairi A, Khalid N. Comparing public and private hospitals' service quality. J Public Health. 2021;29(4):839-45. [Link] [DOI:10.1007/s10389-019-01188-9]
8. Kim SJ, Kim EM, Suh Y, Zheng Z. The effect of service innovation on R&D activities and government support systems: The moderating role of government support systems in Korea. J Open Innov Technol Mark Complex. 2016;2(1):1-13. [Link] [DOI:10.1186/s40852-016-0032-1]
9. Mulgan G, Albury D. Innovation in the public sector. London: Cabinet Office Strategy Unit; 2003. [Link]
10. Sueyoshi T. Damages to return with a possible occurrence of eco-technology innovation measured by DEA environmental assessment. J Econ Struct. 2017;6:7. [Link] [DOI:10.1186/s40008-017-0067-x]
11. Phenrat T, Soratana K, Kumar V, Kanel SR, Landis AE. Technological and policy innovations toward cleaner development. Clean Technol Environ Policy. 2022;24(4):1009-11. [Link] [DOI:10.1007/s10098-022-02312-2]
12. Zhao Z. Educational policy innovations: Levelling up and sustaining educational achievement. Front Educ China. 2015;10(4):660-3. [Link] [DOI:10.1007/BF03397094]
13. Zhu Y, Xiao D. Policy entrepreneur and social policy innovation in China. J Chin Sociol. 2015;2:10. [Link] [DOI:10.1186/s40711-015-0012-z]
14. McKelvey M, Zaring O, Szücs S. Conceptualizing evolutionary governance routines: Governance at the interface of science and technology with knowledge-intensive innovative entrepreneurship. J Evol Econ. 2020;30(3):591-608. [Link] [DOI:10.1007/s00191-018-0602-4]
15. Avoyan E. Collaborative governance for innovative environmental solutions: Qualitative comparative analysis of cases from around the world. Environ Manag. 2023;71(3):670-84. [Link] [DOI:10.1007/s00267-022-01642-7]
16. Megdal SB, Gerlak AK, Huang LY, Delano N, Varady RG, Petersen-Perlman JD. Innovative approaches to collaborative groundwater governance in the United States: Case studies from three high-growth regions in the sun belt. Environ Manag. 2017;59(5):718-35. [Link] [DOI:10.1007/s00267-017-0830-7]
17. Dicuonzo G, Donofrio F, Iannuzzi AP, Dell'Atti V. The integration of sustainability in corporate governance systems: An innovative framework applied to the European systematically important banks. Int J Discl Gov. 2022;19(3):249-63. [Link] [DOI:10.1057/s41310-021-00140-2]
18. Downe J, Hartley J. The shining lights? Public service awards as an approach to service improvement. Public Adm. 2007;85(2):329-53. [Link] [DOI:10.1111/j.1467-9299.2007.00652.x]
19. Fountoukidis IG, Antoniou IE, Varsakelis NC. Competitive conditions in the public procurement markets: An investigation with network analysis. J Ind Bus Econ. 2023;50(2):347-68. [Link] [DOI:10.1007/s40812-022-00251-z]
20. Giga A, Graddy-Reed A, Belz A, Terrile RJ, Zapatero F. Helping the little guy: The impact of government awards on small technology firms. J Technol Transf. 2022;47(3):846-71. [Link] [DOI:10.1007/s10961-021-09859-0]
21. Dávid-Barrett E, Fazekas M. Grand corruption and government change: An analysis of partisan favoritism in public procurement. Eur J Crim Policy Res. 2020;26(4):411-30. [Link] [DOI:10.1007/s10610-019-09416-4]
22. Governance Innovation Center Team. Handbook of public administration innovation. Jakarta: Pusat INTAN-DIAN-LAN; 2014. [Indonesian] [Link]
23. Koomey J, Schmidt Z, Nordman B, Mayers K, Aslan J. Successful efficiency programs for information and communication technologies require product-specific analysis and industry/government collaboration. Energy Effic. 2023;16(1):2. [Link] [DOI:10.1007/s12053-023-10083-y]
24. Mosweu T. Accountability for governance of liquid communication generated through the use of social media in Botswana: Whose duty is it?. Arch Sci. 2021;21(3):267-80. [Link] [DOI:10.1007/s10502-021-09359-y]
25. Handoko H. Personnel and human resource management. Yogyakarta: BPFE; 2012. [Indonesian] [Link]
26. Falcidieno ML, Bistagnino E, Ruggiero ME. Interactive actions between project and communication: New ideas for passenger orientation on board. Int J Interact Des Manuf. 2020;14(1):89-101. [Link] [DOI:10.1007/s12008-019-00620-4]
27. Van Schooten H. Towards a new analytical framework for legal communication. Int J Semiot Law. 2014;27(3):425-61. [Link] [DOI:10.1007/s11196-014-9356-y]
28. Dessie WM, Mengistu GA, Mulualem TA. Communication and innovation in the performance of weaving and pottery crafts in Gojjam, Ethiopia. J Innov Entrep. 2022;11(1):9. [Link] [DOI:10.1186/s13731-022-00204-9]
29. Basu N. Maintaining confidence in police use of force in western liberal democracies. Camb J Evid Based Polic. 2022;6:69-82. [Link] [DOI:10.1007/s41887-022-00076-9]
30. Cai L, Gao X, Ling Y, Kellermanns FW. Governments' new policy frequency and firms' performance in an emerging industry: The difference between family and non-family firms. Int Entrep Manag J. 2023;19(4):1707-37. [Link] [DOI:10.1007/s11365-023-00864-3]
31. Asatryan Z, Feld LP, Geys B. Partial fiscal decentralization and sub-national government fiscal discipline: Empirical evidence from OECD countries. Public Choice. 2015;163(3):307-20. [Link] [DOI:10.1007/s11127-015-0250-2]
32. Effendy OU. Communication science theory and practice. Bandung: Remaja Rosdakarya; 2011. [Indonesian] [Link]
33. Gardner GE, Jones MG, Albe V, Blonder R, Laherto A, Macher D, et al. Factors influencing postsecondary STEM students' views of the public communication of an emergent technology: A cross-national study from five universities. Res Sci Educ. 2017;47(5):1011-29. [Link] [DOI:10.1007/s11165-016-9537-7]
34. Khan Y, Sanford S, Sider D, Moore K, Garber G, De Villa E, et al. Effective communication of public health guidance to emergency department clinicians in the setting of emerging incidents: A qualitative study and framework. BMC Health Serv Res. 2017;17:312. [Link] [DOI:10.1186/s12913-017-2220-5]
35. Ntorukiri TB, Kirugua JM, Kirimi F. Policy and infrastructure challenges influencing ICT implementation in universities: A literature review. Discov Educ. 2022;1:19. [Link] [DOI:10.1007/s44217-022-00019-6]
36. Sugiyono. Quantitative, qualitative and R&D research methods. Bandung: Alfabeta; 2017. [Indonesian] [Link]
37. Lammert C, Hand B, Suh JK, Fulmer G. "It's all in the moment": A mixed-methods study of elementary science teacher adaptiveness following professional development on knowledge generation approaches. Discip Interdiscip Sci Educ Res. 2022;4:12. [Link] [DOI:10.1186/s43031-022-00052-3]
38. Omar MA, Inaba K. Does financial inclusion reduce poverty and income inequality in developing countries? A panel data analysis. J Econ Struct. 2020;9:37. [Link] [DOI:10.1186/s40008-020-00214-4]
39. Vom Berge P. Population aggregates from administrative data samples-how good are they?. J Labour Mark Res. 2023;57:5. [Link] [DOI:10.1186/s12651-023-00334-x]
40. Ekholuenetale M, Onikan A, Ekholuenetale CE. Prevalence and determinants of mother and newborn skin-to-skin contact in the Gambia: A secondary data analysis. J Egypt Public Health Assoc. 2020;95:18. [Link] [DOI:10.1186/s42506-020-00050-1]
41. Hao Y, Qiu Z, Xu Q, He Q, Fang X, Wang C. Innovation strategy design of public sports service governance based on cloud computing. J Cloud Comput. 2023;12:69. [Link] [DOI:10.1186/s13677-023-00448-0]
42. Mitcheltree CM. Towards a sense of urgency for innovation realization: A case study on complacency asymmetries in interorganizational relations. J Innov Entrep. 2023;12(1):11. [Link] [DOI:10.1186/s13731-023-00267-2]
43. Rogers EM. Diffusion of innovations. 5th ed. New York: Free Press; 2003. [Link]
44. Gonzales JT. Implications of AI innovation on economic growth: A panel data study. J Econ Struct. 2023;12:13. [Link] [DOI:10.1186/s40008-023-00307-w]
45. Rupietta C, Meuer J, Backes-Gellner U. How do apprentices moderate the influence of organizational innovation on the technological innovation process?. Empir Res Vocat Educ Train. 2021;13:1. [Link] [DOI:10.1186/s40461-020-00107-7]
46. Rosa AB, Kimpeler S, Schirrmeister E, Warnke P. Participatory foresight and reflexive innovation: Setting policy goals and developing strategies in a bottom-up, mission-oriented, sustainable way. Eur J Futur Res. 2021;9:2. [Link] [DOI:10.1186/s40309-021-00171-6]
47. Carayannis EG, Campbell DFJ. Developed democracies versus emerging autocracies: Arts, democracy, and innovation in Quadruple Helix innovation systems. J Innov Entrep. 2014;3:12. [Link] [DOI:10.1186/s13731-014-0012-2]
48. Galvis ÁH, Carvajal D. Learning from success stories when using eLearning and bLearning modalities in higher education: A meta-analysis and lessons towards digital educational transformation. Int J Educ Technol High Educ. 2022;19:23. [Link] [DOI:10.1186/s41239-022-00325-x]
49. Abbasi E, Amin I, Siddiqui S. Towards developing innovation management framework (IMF) for ICT organizations at Pakistan. J Innov Entrep. 2022;11:45. [Link] [DOI:10.1186/s13731-022-00231-6]
50. Faisal, Martin SN. Science education in Indonesia: Past, present, and future. Asia Pac Sci Educ. 2019;5:4. [Link] [DOI:10.1186/s41029-019-0032-0]