DETERMINAN PENGGUNAAN SISTEM PENGUKURAN KINERJA SEKTOR PUBLIK
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.52062/jakd.v11i1.1409Abstract
Penelitian ini bertujuan untuk mengetahui (1) pengaruh informasi terhadap system pengukuran kinerja, (2) pengaruh tujuan dan sasarn organisasi terhadap system pengukuran kinerja, (3) pengaruh tekanan eksternal terhadap system pengukuran kinerja. Jenis penelitian ini dilakukan dengan pendekatan survey. Populasi dalam penelitian ini adalah pegawai SKPD di Kota Jayapura. Sampel yang diambil dalam penelitian ini adalah sebanyak 60 responden. Data diperoleh dengan membagikan kuisioner, analisis data yang digunakan menggunakan PLS 3. Hasil penelitian menunjukan variabel informasi berpengaruh terhadap sistem pengukuran kinerja, sedangkan variabek tujuan dan sasaran organisasi tidak berpengaruh terhadap sistem pengukuran kinerja.Downloads
References
Anthonius H. Citra Wijaya dan Rusdi Akbar. 2012. Pengaruh Informasi, Tujuan dan Sasaran
Organisasi, dan Tekanan Eksternal Terhadap Penggunaan Sistem Pengukuran Kinerja di
Sektor Publik.
Abernethy, M. A. and Brownell, P. 1999. The Role of Budgets in Organizations Facing Stra
tegicChange: an Exploratory Study. Accounting, Organizations and Society 24: 189-204
Akbar, Rusdi, Pilcher Robyn and Perrin Brian. 2010. Performance Measurement in Indonesia:
TheCase ofLocal Government. Available at; www.afaanz.org/openconf
Agripa Fernando Tarigan. 2011. Analisis Faktor-Faktor Yang Mempengaruhi Kinerja Pegawai
Dalam Organisasi Sektor Publik
Bevan, G., and Hood, C. 2006. What's Measured Is What Matters: Targets And Gaming n the Englis
h Public Health Care System. Public Administration 84: 517-538
Brignall, S. and Modell, S. 2000. An Institutional Perspective on Performance Msurement and
Management in the “New Public Sectorâ€.Management Accounting Research 11:21-306
Chin, W.W., Marcolin,B.L. and Newsted, P.R. 2003. A Partial Least Squares Latent Varia
ble Modeling Approach for MeasuringInteractionEffects: Results
FormAMonteCarloSimulation Study and Voice Mail Emotion/Adoption Study.Infrmation Syst
ems Research Vol.14, No. 2, June, pp. 189-217
Creswell, John W. 2010. Research DesignPendekatan Kualitatif, Kuantitatif, dan Mixed.
Edisi Ketiga. Pustaka Pelajar. Yogyakarta
Cavalluzzo K .S. and Ittner, C. D. 2004. Implementing Performance Measurement Innov
ations:Evidence From Government. Accounting, Organizations and Society 29: 243-267
Dacin, T. Goodstein, J. Scott, W.R. 2002. Institutional Theory and Institutional Change: ntroductiont
o the Special Research Forum. Academy ofManagement Journal 45(1). 45-56
De Bruijn, H. 2002. Performance Measurement in the Public Sector: Strategies To Cope With
theRisks of Performance Measurement. International Journal of Public Sector Managem
ent15:578-594
DiMaggio, Paul J., and Walter W.Powell. 1983. The Iron Cage Revisited: Institutional Isomor
phismand Collective Rationality in Organizational Fields. American Sociological Review 48: 1
-160
Elya Wati Lismawati Nila Aprilla, 2010. Simposium Nasional Akuntansi PurwekortoPengaruh
Independensi, Gaya Kepemimpinan, Komitmen Organisasi, Dan Pemahaman Good
Governance Terhadap Kinerja Auditor Pemerintah.
Jurnal Akuntansi & Keuangan Daerah Volume 11, Nomor 1, Mei 2016: 13–28
Ferry Laurensius Sihaloho dan Abdul Halim. 2005. Pengaruh Faktor-Faktor Rasional,Politik Dan
Kultur Organisasi Terhadap Pemanfaatan Informasi Kinerja Instansi Pemerintah Daerah.
Hansen, S. C. and Van der Stede, W.A. 2004. Multiple Facets Of Budgeting: An E
xploratory Analysis.Management Accounting Research 15: 415-439
Hartono, Jogiyanto dan Abdillah Willy. 2009. Konsep dan Aplikasi PLS (Partial Least Square) untu
k Penelitian Empiris. BPFE Yogyakarta
Hartono, Jogiyanto. 2011. Konsep dan Aplikasi Structural Equation Modeling Berbasiskan Va
rian dalam Penelitian Bisnis. STIM YKPN Yogyakarta
Hartono, Jogiyanto. 2011. Konsep dan Aplikasi Structural Equation Modeling Berbasiskan Va
rian dalam Penelitian Bisnis. STIM YKPN Yogyakarta
Heinrich, C. J. 2002. OutcomesBased Performance Management in the Public Seor: Implicati
onsfor Government Accountability and Effectiveness.Public Administration Review 62:712-
Hidayati. 2001. Artikel. Teori Akuntansi Keperilakuan
Ittner, C. D. and Larcker, D. F. 2001. Assessing Empirical Research In Manage
ent Accounting: aValueBased Perspective. Journal ofAccounting and Economics 32: 349-410
Julnes, P. de Lancer and Holzer,M. 2001. Promoting the Utilization of Performance Measures
inPublic Organization: an Emprirical Tudy of Factors Affecting Adoption and Impleme
ntation. Public Administration Review 61(6), P. 693–708
KeputusanKepalaLembagaAdministrasiNegaraNomor239/IX/6/8/2003tentangPerbaikanPedoman
PenyusunanPelaporanAkuntabilitasKinerjaInstansiPemerintah.Lemba a
Administrasi Negara Republik Indonesia, Jakarta
Kravchuk, R. S. and Schack, R.W. 1996. Designing Effective Performance Measurement Sy
stemsUnder the Government Performance and Results Act Of 1993.Public Administratio
n Review 56: 348-358
Lai, MingCheng and Fan, ShihLiang. 2008. Use ofFit Perception in Employee Behavioral Criteriai
n Taiwan IT Industry. Business and Information. Volume 5, Iss 1. Available also
at,http://academicpapers.org/ocs2/session/Papers/A2/234.doc
Mardiasmo. 2009. Akuntansi Sektor Publik. Andi, Yogyakarta
_________. 2006. Pewujudan Transparansi dan Akuntabilitas Publik Melalui Akuntansi
SektorPublik: Suatu Sarana Good Governance. Jurnal Akuntansi Pemerintah Vol. 2, No. 1, M
ei, Hal 1-17
Newberry, S. and Pallot, J. 2004. Freedom or Coercion? NPM Incentives in New Zealand
CentralGovernment Departments. Management Accounting Research 15: 247-266
Nurkhamid Muh. 2008. Implementasi Inovasi Sistem Pengukuran Kinerja Instansi Pemerintah. Jur
nal Akuntansi Pemerintah Vol. 3, No. 1, Oktober. 45–76
Peraturan Menteri Dalam Negeri Nomor 13 Tahun 2006 Tentang Pedoman Pengelolaan Keu
angan Daerah
Jurnal Akuntansi & Keuangan Daerah Volume 11, Nomor 1, Mei 2016: 13–28
Peraturan Menteri Dalam Negeri Nomor 73 Tahun 2009 Tentang Tatacara Pelaksanaan Eval
uasi Kinerja Penyelenggaraan Pemerintahan Daerah
Rainey, Hal G. 1999.Using Comparisons of Public and Private Organization to Assess Inno
vativeAttitudes Among Members of Organizations. Public Productivity and Management
Review.Vol. 23, No. 2, Sage Publications, Inc, hal.130-147
Salisbury, W.D., Chin, W.W., Gopal, A. And Newsted, P.R. 2002. Research Report: Better
TheoryThrough Measurement Developing a Scale to Capture Concensus on Appropiation.Infor
mation System Research 13: 91-103
Sihaloho, F. Laurensius dan Halim, A. 2005. Pengaruh FaktorFaktor Rasional, Politik dan
KulturOrganisasi Terhadap Pemanfaatan Informasi Kinerja Instans Pemerintah Daerah.Sim
posiumNasional Akuntansi VIII Solo, 1516 September. Hal. 774–790
Speklé, Roland F. 2001. Explaining Management Control Structure Variety: A ransaction C
ostEconomics Perspective. Accounting, Organizations and Society 26: 419-441
Speklé Roland F. and Verbeeten Frank H.M. 2009. The Use of Performance Measurement Systems
inThe Public Sector: Effects on Performance.Nyenrode Research & Innovation Institute
(NRI) Research Paper no. 09-08. April
Suharsimi Arikunto. 1993, Prosedur Penelitian dan Pendekatan Praktek, Rineka Cipta, Jakarta,
hlm. 197
Swindel David and Kelly Janet M. 2000. Linking Citizen Satisfaction Data to Performance Measur
es:A Preliminary Evaluation. Public Performance and Management Review Vol. 24 no.1. 30-
Verbeeten, Frank H.M. 2008. Performance Management Practices in Public Sector Organizat
ions:Impact on Performance. Accounting, Auditing & Accountability Journal Vol. 21 No.3: 427
-454
Vinzi, V. Esposito, Chin, W.W., Henseler, J., Wang, H.2010. Handbook of Partial Least S
quares:Concepts, Methods and Applications. Springer Handbooks of Computational Statistics
Wholey, Josep S.1999. PerformanceBased Mansagement: Responding to The Challenges.
PublicProductivity and Management Review Vol. 22. No. 3 Sage Publications, Inc,: 288-307
.png)
.png)
.png)
.png)
.png)
.jpg)
