Bureaucracy: Roles, Challenges, and Cultural Impact

Bureaucracy In the public sphere, the concept of bureaucracy is defined as processes and systems that are created rationally to ensure orderly, definite and easily controlled work mechanisms and systems. As can be read in many books on bureaucracy that the main characteristics of bureaucratic structure as described by Max Weber are as follows: "Bureaucracy is a system of administration and implementation of daily tasks that are structured, in a clear hierarchical system, carried out by written rules, carried out by certain sections that are separate from other sections, by people selected because of their abilities and expertise in their fields." (Said, 2007: 2) Governance so that state goals can be achieved effectively and efficiently. As a method or method, our attitude towards bureaucracy must be objective, open to innovation according to the needs of its space and time context. As a way or method of organizing work, bureaucracy should not be an end in itself. Bureaucracy exists to achieve common goals. Government Bureaucracy as the Engine of the State Government is closely related to bureaucracy. Bureaucracy is a tool of the state. In the state, before it is run by the bureaucracy, there must be a government that regulates the bureaucracy. Bureaucracy in the public context is the management of government functions. Government is the entire structure, institutions and units in the state that are tasked with regulating the implementation of government tasks both internal and to the general public. (Said, 2007: 9). Bureaucracy can be divided into two classifications, namely as a government administrative process and also as a static structure or function. Thus there is a bureaucracy that runs a structure commonly called bureaucrats. Bureaucrats, officials and administrative staff are always associated with government and become important actors in a country, both in political affairs, administration and state policy making.

The modern state needs a modern bureaucracy. It is the bureaucrats who implement the politics and policies of the state. Bureaucracy is a small form of government, minus the politicians in government. Bureaucratic Culture and Its Transformation in State Administration The experience of bureaucratic failure in carrying out its ideal function as a tool to achieve state goals, namely prosperity and community justice, during the New Order period is certainly a bad experience that must be corrected in the future. But it is not an easy job like turning the palm of the hand. The mentality that has been habitual for more than 30 years during the New Order era cannot be erased quickly. The cultural heritage of the Orba bureaucracy is still strong, making it difficult to carry out bureaucratic reforms. The tradition of militaristic bureaucracy in the past, did not accustom the state apparatus to work with vision, they were used to waiting for orders and even then had to do it technically. However, how difficult it is, bureaucratic transformation must still be carried out considering the magnitude of the challenges faced by the nation and state in the present and future. In addition to regime change, another change that surrounds the bureaucratic world in Indonesia today is the enactment of regional autonomy. The implementation of regional autonomy is a manifestation of the project to build an increasingly democratic and participatory national life system. The existence of two moments, namely regime change and the implementation of regional autonomy, is a golden opportunity for the bureaucracy to develop itself into a new bureaucracy that is far more qualified and more effective than before. The question that arises is "The direction of the bureaucracy must change in the implementation of good governance?" The figure of bureaucratic culture that is able to support the implementation of good governance is carried out through a symbiosis of two determinants of bureaucratic behavior, namely between behavioral consequences of formal structures and procedures that refer to the weberian bureaucracy , on the one hand. And on the other hand , behaviora l consequences of cultural determinants rooted in the social history of the nation. Bureaucratic weberian values based on the principles of efficiency,

rationality, certainty, calculability rooted in intellectual culture can encourage various administrative reforms among the bureaucracy. (Moelyarto, 1996: 4) The experience of the Orba period shows that through the mechanism of supervision of governance by Irjenbang, BPKP, Inspectorate, waskat and others are able to exert pressure in its implementation to be on its tracks. However, the rational elements of Weberian culture are still inherent determinants of bureaucratic behavior. This tendency is more or less influenced by the nature of national leadership which undergoes a process of socialization to Javanese culture, so that the bureaucracy reflects the Javanese style of leadership . Javanese cultural values such as the principles of harmony and harmony, patience, ojo nggege mongso, ing ngarso sung tuladha, ing madya mangun karsa and tut wuri handayani strongly color the bureaucratic culture. The patron client relationship that colors the relationship between government and society, the principle of monoloyalty that reflects the relationship of the wrestlers, the emphasis on ritual aspects that embody the theatrical state posture, more than the substantial aspects, all prove the influence of Javanese culture in the bureaucracy. And more than that, the value of Javanese culture was indirectly through the acculturation process also socialized to non-Javanese bureaucrats. However, it should be remembered that culture that at first glance is detrimental to the process of structural transformation, but can actually be converted into a positive cultural source for governance. The principles of paternalism, for example, can be a powerful source for mass mobilization. Shame cultute can be transformed into a vehicle of effective control and remain relevant to the basis of the surveillance system of society. (Moeljarto, 1996: 7)