The making of competitive bureaucracy: A case of bureaucratic reform in West Java province

Abstract

In this study, bureaucratic reform is understood as the practice of power operating through discursive process, that is, through the creation of a claim of truth on certain reform model, which subsequently is followed by disciplining practice to transform bureaucrat’s behavior. To analyze it, this study uses a case study of the implementation of Competition Funding Program to accelerate the achievement of Human Development Index in West Java Indonesia during the period of 2005–2010. The result shows how normalization and performativity is operated as technologies of power to construct an identity of innovative bureaucracy. This construction is justified by the idea of competition as a system of knowledge to produce regime of truth of competitive bureaucracy as a counter identity for conventional bureaucracy. Through normalization, bureaucracy is categorized into innovative bureaucracy (an expertise-based identity) and conventional bureaucracy (an clerical-based identity). Performativity is embodied through standardization of new procedures of work based on knowledge management to enhance expertise. The result suggests that bureaucratic reform has become the practice of power that operates on minds (through the creation of a system of knowledge) and bodies (by disciplining), which occurs simultaneously.

Keywords:

• bureaucratic reform
• disciplining
• governmentality
• regime of competition

Public Interest Statement

Bureaucratic reform is a buzzword to show how government is responding to external changes and public demand for effective, efficient, and professional bureaucracy. Since then, bureaucracy has been targeted from various model of reform. Bureaucratic reform actually is more than choosing one model over the others. In fact, reforming bureaucracy is creating new identity for bureaucracy and ensuring that identity is well-performed by bureaucrats. This article describes how bureaucracy embraces the idea of innovative bureaucracy and embodies it by complying to the standard of performance. Understanding this process can improve future formulation and implementation of bureaucratic reform programs. Exploration of how bureaucrats' physical body is adapting and eventually institutionalizing the new identity can help policy makers to formulate an agency-based bureaucratic reform model.

1. Introduction

This study offers a new perspective to understand bureaucratic reform as a discursive practice, shown through discipline process to construct new identity of bureaucracy. Discipline and embodiment are both practices of power to subject individu into certain rule of conduct. Through this perspective, this study wants to reveal bureaucratic reform as subjection process that operates on mind and bodies. Bureaucratic reform is not merely discusses the instrumental or technical dimension to form a pro-market figure of bureaucracy, but it also switches the control system from direct control through hierarchy and command system to self-disciplining conducted through the implementation of performance standard and measurement. Although bureaucratic reform offers autonomy, it actually contains the desire to subject bureaucracy into an internalized control system.

The will to control bureaucracy is indicated through paradigms of bureaucratic reform. The traditional approach (old public administration) is established based on a top-down and elitist approach, in which the bureaucratic apparatus is controlled with the values of hierarchy, autonomy, integrity, and it is separated from the politicians and the public. The focus of this classical paradigm is on the efficiency of the structure and organization which is resulted by the mechanism of control, order, and firm separation in its position as the public sector.

This characteristic is contrary to the paradigm of new public management. In this model, the principles of competition, delegation, performance, and responsiveness are utilized to regulate the bureaucracy’s behavior and to stimulate the increase in the performance outcomes (Robinson, 2015). Bureaucracy apparatus need to be continuously watched to control their behavior that tends to be oriented to their own interest. Control over bureaucracy becomes a precondition to overcome the inefficiency of the organization and corruption which are considered as the cause of the dysfunction of bureaucracy, which in turn will affect the economic growth. In order to control bureaucracy, Niskanen (in Peters, 2002) has suggested utilizing the market mechanism, by giving organizations a chance to provide some kinds of service like those provided by bureaucracy. Through this practice, bureaucracy is driven to work more effectively and efficiently because it will always face its competitor. Although the impact of this practice was then criticized because it emerged new problem, that is, commercialization of public services, the idea of adopting the market mechanism has emerged a new identity of bureaucracy as a market friendly figure.

Conceptual framework which forms the basis of each of the approaches makes bureaucracy the object of power which is formed according to the idealization of each idea of bureaucracy reform. Bureaucracy, with its criterion, has become its own identity, so that bureaucratic reform is not only a response to the requirements of the changing time, but also a process to change the identity of bureaucracy. Bureaucratic reform has become a power practice which cannot be separated from the context of the conflict of interest. In this context, understanding bureaucratic reform as a power practice becomes relevant. Bureaucratic reform is present as a sign that the technologies of power works to replace disciplining methods, which rely on different system of knowledge. In line with Althusser (1971) who offers a textual approach to reveal the power practice implied behind the truth claim, Foucault also develops the paradigm of productive power, in which power is explained as the reality contruction which determines the choice of controlling mechanism of anything.¹ In the concept of productive power, debate on the model of bureaucratic reform, even the reason to determine a certain model applied to reform the bureaucracy, is a struggle arena of different regimes of knowledge.

In order to reveal the power practice, this study will use the case of the implementation of Competitive Funding Program-Human Development Index (CFP-HDI) in West Java Province to reveal how competition operates as self-disciplining regime to construct a competitive bureaucracy as its new identity.

2. Theoretical framework

This study develops the theoretical framework of Foucault’s idea on governmentality to reveal how the power practice works productively. Governmentality includes some efforts to discuss the human behavior and how to direct it.² Human behavior is understood as something that can be put in order, controlled, formed, and directed toward a certain goal. This behavior is based on a certain form of knowledge, that determines which behavior is considered good, valuable, proper, and responsible. By the existence of the values, behavior is directed to meet the values in order that it can be categorized as normal. However, the formation of normality is not conducted through the direct power instruments (Foucault in Burchell et al., 1991).

The starting point to analyze the practice of governmentality is to identify a certain situation in which a regulating activity started to be questioned or regarded as a problem (Dean, 2010). This phase is called problematization. Problematization is constructed by requestioning the argument that forms the base of particular regimes of practices which have been used to regulate many things, including one’s behavior.

Disclosure of the regimes of practices is conducted by analyzing four dimensions that construct it, namely: first, fields of visibility of government, that is, how the control defines an object and on contrary, ignores another object. These fields map out what or who must be controlled, how the relation of authority and conformity is established, how the agents are connected each other, what problem that must be solved, and what is the goal to achieve. Various regimes of practice can be identified through their fields of visibility, for example, medical practice makes the body as its fields of visibility, while public health regimes makes the individual body, connected with social and political spaces, as the subject to be controlled. The second is the concern for the technical aspect of government. This dimension is also called the techne of government (Dean, 2010), which includes by what means, mechanisms, procedures, instruments, tactics, techniques, technologies and vocabularies is authority constituted and rule accomplished. This technical aspect means a condition of governing and often imposes limits over what it is possible to do to achieve the goal. The third is the approach to government as rational and calculative activity. This dimension includes various forms of knowledge that arise and inform the activity of governing. This dimension is also called the episteme of government (Dean, 2010). The focus is to reveal the forms of thought, knowledge, expertise, or rationality employed in practices of governing. The fourth is the attention to the formation of identities. This dimension is concerned with the formation of individual or collective identity, that is, what kind of identity is expected to be constructed through certain practices of governing and what kind of changes are expected to achieve through the practices. Although these regimes of practices have many dimensions to determine certain forms of government on the behavior, these regimes do not determine the form of subjection resulted from the control. The regimes of practices control the behavior needed to obtain particular identity, but not through coercion, but by justifying the behavior.

In order to understand bureaucratic reform as a form of system of control, this study is focused on three aspects, i.e. regimes of practices, technology of power, and technology of the self which construct the behavior of bureaucracy apparatus. The field of visibility is the body of bureaucracy apparatus. The body becomes the arena of power where the regime of knowledge is transformed into action through various instruments of power, which come from both the outside and inside of the individuals. The first process is a form of fabrication, in which the body is shaped by the regime outside the self. In Foucault’s conception, fabrication occurs through the interaction of knowledge and power as a form of practice of power which create normality. The technique utilized is surveillance from the distance as explained in the concept of panopticon. Individuals are continuously watched, directly and indirectly. Through direct surveillance, docility is formed when the “figure” of supervisor is physically present in front of the subjects; and on contrary, in indirect surveillance, although the supervisor is not seen, his or her presence is always felt by the subjects, so that the subjects conduct themselves as if they are being watched.

The obedience of the subjects, although they are not directly being watched, in Foucault’s next explanation, is not merely formed by the disciplining mechanism. Foucault shifts the explanation on the subjection to the internal mechanism which works internally in the subjects (in Harrer, 2005). Subjection to a rule is a product of habituation conducted continuously by the subject through a practice called tekhnê.³ This practice is the essence of self-constitution or technology of the self process. The subjects not only become the target and the effect of the operating system of knowledge, but also actively change themselves to be the subject through exercises that refer to particular rule (Devos in Harrer, 2005).

As a mode of governmentality, competition works based on the interest, desire, and aspiration of individuals. It does not directly force individuals to have a certain behavior. The concept of competition wants to change the working method of bureaucracy by encouraging individuals to work better, to optimize their self-potentials, and to spur creativity in their performance. In the effort to create individuals with such capacities, the concept of competition has developed various technologies to make the body of individuals accustom to doing the activities that enable the task accomplishment more efficient and more effective. The idea of competition which forms the base of CFP-HDI has become a practice of power when the idea is translated into various technologies of the power to direct behavior (Burchell et al., 1991). The target of disciplining is the body because it aims to correct and to educate. The result of the study has found 3 instruments utilized to discipline the body of bureaucracy apparatus, that is, through normalization, performativity, and surveillance.

3. Research method

Discussion on the embodiment of competitive regime will be carried out by using CFP-HDI as the case. This case is chosen because it becomes the key moment that marked the development of the discourse of human development in West Java and the entrance of the idea of competition to change the bureaucracy’s working methods. In order to elaborate how CFP-HDI orks as a discourse-based power operation, types of data needed in this research area primary and secondary data to reveal some conditions and events which constitute a background for the formation of the discourse of bureaucracy reform in West Java and their relations to the choice of competition as part of the governmentality strategy to reshape the bureaucracy.

This research utilizes the technique of data collection of in-depth interviews and documentation collection of archives which contain data and information on the concept of CFP-HDI, the implementation of the program, and other documents which do not specifically discuss CFP-HDI but they are relevant to the implementation of development in West Java. Documents which indirectly discuss CFP-HDI are utilized as data sources to trace the emergence of moments when the subject is formed. Interviews with informants aim to discover the data about the moments, what causes the idea of competition to emerge, what is the argument behind the idea, are there any other ideas that emerge, and so on. For those purposes, informants were selected purposively, that is, individuals who have followed the course of the idea of PPK-IPM since the beginning until it ended in 2010.

In order to identify the knowledge system, the approach of genealogy and archaeology of knowledge is applied (Foucault, 2002). Genealogy analyzes the power which functions through discursive strategies and tactics through the identity produced in the form of knowledge and interpretation that normalize human subjectivity in some historical periods (Shapiro, 1992). Genealogy attempts to discover key moments in which shift of discourse occurs, which is initially considered to be common, towards new discourse (Rose, 1999). Meanwhile, archaeology is applied to describe the rules of discourse formation which Foucault called episteme or systems of thought that determine the knowledge that prevails in a certain period (Bertens, 2006).

Both approaches are utilized to analyze the data to reveal why and when the working methods of bureaucracy started to be problematized and why the competition then becomes the alternative to overcome the problem. Discursive process includes combination of some discourses which are intentionally and unintentionally made, and also the effect induced by the discourse. The data which have been collected subsequently were processed based on categories prepared from conceptual framework (Strauss & Corbin, 1998), namely knowledge regime, disciplinary technologies, surveillance, and technologies of the self. Statements relating to these categories were written down, to find specific themes emerging from some statements of the informants, and then the relatedness among each other was searched to find key moments where problematization to the bureaucracy’s working methods started. Not only attempting to elaborate problematization, data analysis was also directed to identify key words used by informants to express their responses to CFP-HDI, what they had experienced during their participation in CFP-HDI, and also what was the meaning of CFP-HDI to the informants. Interpretation of the data was utilized to reveal the disciplining conducted by the implementer apparatus of CFP-HDI to the competition regime.

In presenting the data, the researcher will elaborate how the disciplining practices occurred based on the research category applied. The elaboration was focused on the practices of competition standardization to the apparatus’ bodies and the operation of surveillance mechanism to form the apparatus’ obedience.

4. Findings

4.1. Disciplining through normalization

Normalization is transforming process from a system of knowledge to norms, which include organization, procedure, method, and standards to control the behavior of bureaucracy. Normalization in CFP-HDI is identified based on various standards which have been set up to form a new identity of bureaucracy, as an innovative and creative bureaucracy which is capable of arranging competitive program plans.

Basically CFP-HDI is a development program funded by a competition scheme through selection. Aside from introducing the selection system in program funding, CFP-HDI also uses knowledge as the basis for determining the proposal of the program that will be funded. Regulation in CFP-HDI also strictly determines kinds of data needed. Since the early phase of proposal submission, bureaucracy in regencies/cities has been required to use actual data as one of the criteria of selection. In the format of proposal submission of self-evaluation, these kinds of necessary data are put in the matrix of data tabulation, which includes⁴:

(1)	General data of regencies/cities, such as the area of the region, data of districts, land use, and population.
(2)	Data on the situation of the region up to the level of districts, which comprises data on the education, health, and economic condition of the region. Data on education includes: school participation, drop out level, education facilities, and number of teachers. Data on health includes: nutrition situation of children under the age of five year old, number of health facilities (public health centers), numbers of village midwives, environment, and number of childbirths helped by health workers. Data on economy includes: economy of families, commodities found in the region, and number of markets.
(3)	Local finance includes the data on the detail of regional revenues and expenditures budget of regencies/cities, regional revenues and expenditures budget of provinces transferred to regencies/cities, and national revenues and expenditures budget transferred to regencies/cities.

Kinds and appearance of the data are standardized for all regencies/cities, so that they will be the basis of the data that can be used for program planning. The collected data provides the general description of the condition of a region and the capacity of local governments in the development. Up to now, the similar data has been provided by local Bureau of Statistics and related agencies. When the bureaucracy apparatus of regencies/cities are asked to submit the data, it is not only useful to provide the description of the achievement condition of development in education, health, and purchasing power, but also to form the reality faced by each regency/city in achieving CFP-HDI. The reality will subsequently be used to determine how the regencies/cities will be regulated through the program planning funded by CFP-HDI. Besides general data, the proposal of self-evaluation submitted by regencies/cities must also contain data on the progress of the development parameters over the period of 2000–2010, which includes the target and realization per year. The development parameters comprise:

(1)	Human Development Index, which includes Health Index, Education Index, and Purchasing Power of the people.
(2)	Population growth rate.
(3)	Number of poor people.
(4)	Unemployment rate.
(5)	Economic growth rate.
(6)	Amount of investment.
(7)	Protected area.

Guideline for CFP-HDI has explicitly determined boundaries of data considered to be relevant to proposal submission. It becomes a norm that must be obeyed by regencies/cities; hence, if a regency/city submits a proposal with different data, it will affect the assessment. Regencies/cities’ obligation to fill the data format according to the guideline shows how the practice of subjectivity works through regulation of data sorting to determine which data is useful and which data is not needed, and moreover the data needs are explicitly stated in details in the operational guidelines and technical guidelines of monitoring and evaluation. If the bureaucracy apparatus are unable to submit the data according to the stipulated format, the form will be returned to be corrected. This correction process will be repeated until the bureaucracy apparatus are able to submit the data format according to the stipulated standard.

During this practice, the assessment mechanism plays a role as the norm that regulates bureaucracy apparatus in regencies/cities to seek, collect, and display the data according to the standard stipulated by the province. This regulation is part of the practice of power to change previous working method, in which the bureaucracy apparatus organize the development program based on routine programs.

Standardization of needed kinds of data also becomes part of the technology of power to ensure the continuation of production and reproduction of knowledge on HDI. Kinds of data that must be submitted by bureaucracy apparatus in regencies/cities is the basic data utilized for development planning oriented to the condition of human resources. By collecting the data, the Province will have actual and complete data on the condition of human resources in regencies/cities that participate in CFP-HDI. Data becomes the first element to be addressed in the implementation of CFP-HDI, and although the authors of the proposal is the government officials, it is not easy to provide the data with predetermined criteria. One of the informan said that, “The data contained in the proposal should be tabulated using a spreadsheet software, such as Microsoft Excel. The data presented in table format must be display in some way that could be read and understood easily. If there is data associated with the data presented in the different sections, the data must be searched quickly through the table of contents and the correct page order. Each attachment should also be given numbering and included in a list of attachments”. In the above statement, the data processing arrangement requires physical movements carried out by following the applicable standards, namely tabulated using computer software, and then presented in a format table, made a list of the contents of the table, made the attachment and numbering. The whole stages is made to facilitate the authorities find data required. Time efficiency is achieved through the use of technology to form movements were more focused.

Bureaucracy apparatus start to be accustomed to use the data in organizing the development plan, changing the routineness before, in which the development planning was organized based on the data on macroeconomics. Different kinds of data are utilized as the technology of power for sorting the practice of conventional development planning, in which data is not use as the basic for decision-making.

4.2. Disciplining through perfomativity

Performativity occurs through physical activities conducted of the apparatus, for example, when the bureaucracy apparatus are accustomed to write according to certain systematics, adjusting the length of writing to the number of pages, adjusting the font type and the line space, and even adjusting the color of the cover of the report. Instructions on those matters are explicitly put in Guideline book for writing the proposal of CFP-HDI (2006), in the chapter of rules for writing proposal, which states:

Self-evaluation proposal, comprehensive proposal of CFP-HDI, and implementation proposal of CFP-HDI are proposed by regencies/cities. These three kinds of proposals are written based on the same general rules, i.e. they must be neatly typed, fully justified (full justification) without typing errors. Hence, it is suggested to use word processor software Microsoft Word. The manuscript is typed in single-spaced (1 space), using standard font type, Tahoma in 12 points size, so that it is more readable. Each page and attachment should be numbered with sequential page number and attachment number which are put in the list of contents.⁵

The instruction does not only regulate the technical format for writing the proposal, but also the standard for displaying the data. In the same part of the guideline book, instructions for presenting the data are as follows:

Especially for the data, it is presented in the form of tables by using tabulation software such as Microsoft Excel, using Tahoma font type in 10 points size, with the column width and the line height adjusted to the needs and they should not be excessive. The submitted document should be prepared on A4 paper format.⁶

The next rule regulates technical instructions for proposal submission, which are contained in the following instructions:

Each kind of proposals submitted to the committee should be made in 10 (ten) duplicates, bound with the cover colors adjusted to the kind of proposal, and accompanied by electronic files on 3 (three) compact discs. The cover color for Self Evaluation Proposals should be white; Comprehensive Proposals should be light blue; and Implementation Proposals should be orange (see color samples on the Attachment of Cover Format). Proposals that will be selected must be submitted to the committee, not exceeding the imposed deadline. Proposals submitted after the imposed deadline will be disqualified, without exceptions.⁷

Although the instructions contained in the excerpts above relate to technical instructions for writing the proposals, the stipulated standard also implicitly suggests the skills that should be owned by bureaucracy when they write the proposals. The standard also has a function as a surveillance mechanism for examining the bureaucracy’s subjection to the rule of writing format, cover colors of the proposal, and timeliness of submission. This standard is meant to practice bureaucracy’s precision and carefulness in accomplishing their task.

Detailed stipulation on technical requirements is meant to train the bureaucracy apparatus as the implementer of the activity to accomplish their tasks properly. By differentiating the cover colors of the proposals, for example, the reviewer team has established a simple mechanism which can be utilized by the implementer unit to find the data they need, so that the time available can be efficiently used.⁸ The same goes to the format and contents of each subpart of the proposal, which constitute the technologies used to make bureaucrats be accustomed to systematic thinking and writing. Requirements which seem to be technical, such as the deadline of the proposal submission, are generally considered as formality. The reviewer team and implementer units of the province strictly impose this rule to show their commitment to the implementation of the program.⁹

In an interview with a member of the Planning Committee who initiates CFP-HDI, he revealed that the bureaucracy apparatus are trained to make a report with certain color of cover to make it easy to find when needed.¹⁰ Efficiency is achieved by establishing bureaucracy skills to associate symbols with meanings. In this context, standardization has a function to simplify reality, aiming to facilitate bureaucracy apparatus in remembering the work that has been done and quickly accessing it again. Archives and data are prepared through a particular process which sort out important data that needs to be followed up from the unimportant one. Through categorization and classification of data, standardization becomes a practice of power which forms knowledge and determines the action on the knowledge. Therefore, the targets of disciplining are the thinking ability and the speed of the physical movement of the bureaucracy apparatus.

4.3. Disciplining through surveillance

Surveillance mechanism has also forms the subjection of bureaucracy. Formally, bureaucracy apparatus are accustomed to obey the chain of command and regulation which form the base of the accomplishment of their task and authority. However, the subjection which comes from disciplining does not depend on direct surveillance mechanism, but it comes through performance continuously practiced by the apparatus themselves; hence, even without the presence of a supervisor, the apparatus will still show their obedience.

The strictness of the imposed rule of conducts is part of the technology of power to maintain the new identity, so that the bureaucracy apparatus who are able to meet the criteria will obtain the pride of their identity as innovative and creative bureaucrats. The institutionalization of identity into the criteria and mechanism makes the power to regulate the behavior does not depend on the existence of the implementer unit or the reviewer team anymore. Even the reviewer team itself is bound by the ethical codes made by the initiator of the concept of CFP-HDI and the governor. The implementers watch each other through the mechanism of monitoring and evaluation and reporting which are designed not only to watch the implementation of the program, but particularly to be the media for sharing the knowledge.

The body of bureaucracy apparatus is formed as the body of workers because various disciplining techniques are applied to them in order to optimize their ability and to improve the skills parallel with subjection. Bureaucracy apparatus use their bodies as a tool to show the obedience, through the movements resulted by their bodies. Through the body, they maintain the existence of their selves, and even obtain the achievement within their working area. Promotion of positions or ranks and opportunities for improving bureaucracy career are determined by their obedience, both to the system and their superiors. This obedience is shown by various movements of the body, for example, the movement which shows respect to the superiors, the agility of their body movement when the superiors call them, and other behaviors which are according to protocol. In the case of CFP-HDI, the subjection is changed, not just aimed at the superiors, which are according to protocol, but particularly to various standards applied as the norm of the implementation of CFP-HDI.

The practice of standardization resulted from the regime of competition affirms the assumption that at the phase of the development of modernity at the present time, a process of subjection is occurring, in which the subject is formed and directed to conduct according to particular identity which is formed by a system of knowledge. Through the regime of competition, new subjectivation emerges, in which the subject obeys the standardization of the management of data and information, responses to various problems and realities lead to the practice of social sorting or social categorization which groups the subject into some categories. Here, the relation of power takes place in a more hidden way, in which subjects are divided based on the classification system and then they are treated and put in order based on the stipulated standard procedure. The practice of classification emerges in various contexts and it is utilized for various goals, among other things, in the form of creation of normalization as a form of disciplining and in the form of discrimination in the relation of power (Foucault, 1982). This subjection is not the result of the formation of the subject in itself, but it is a response to the information resulted from the management of data. The subject’s identity is determined based on the meaning attached to the data. This practice suggests how the art of governing are continuously maintained, renewed, or adjusted to the interest of surveillance and disciplining.

4.4. Embodying the identity

Standardization has become a practice of disciplining over the body because habituation takes place through physical activities carried out by the apparatus, for example, when bureaucracy apparatus are accustomed to collecting particular data, writing the data in particular format, and using the data for the interest which has been determined before. Data becomes the first component to reform in the implementation of CFP-HDI, and although the writers of the proposal are government apparatus, it turns out that filling the data with the stipulated criteria is not easy.¹¹

The data contained in the proposal must be tabulated by using software for processing tables, such as Microsoft Excel. The data which is presented in the format of tables should be readable and easily understood. If there are data that relate to data presented in different part, the data should be easily found through the list of contents and correct page order. Each attachment should also be numbered and put in the list of attachments.¹²

In the statement above, regulation for data processing requires physical movements conducted by following the imposed standard, that is, it should be tabulated by using software, and then presented in the format of tables, provided with list of tables, provided with attachments and its numbering. The whole stages are conducted to facilitate the apparatus to find the data they need. Time efficiency is achieved by utilizing the technology to construct more directed movements. In order to achieve the efficiency, bureaucracy apparatus learn to utilize various tools available in Microsoft Excel. Data entry process which is considered technical usually is carried out by the staff, but in the implementation of CFP-HDI, bureaucracy apparatus who become the implementer of program learn to carry out the task themselves because the data entry must be done carefully to avoid errors. If an error occurs, it is considered embarrassing, particularly for the regional head.

The control makes the body of bureaucracy apparatus accustomed to the technique of computerized data processing. It had never been done before because in the routine development planning, the program was formulated by referring to the program of previous year, with the data that was not always updated. Moreover, the data archiving method with categorization based on the colors also constructs the body of bureaucracy apparatus to work systematically and consistently. The use of colors helps the apparatus associate the stages with the substance of each stage of activity. This habituation forms the independency of the apparatus in organizing themselves, so that they must not always be monitored by their supervisors to be disciplined. Monitoring by their colleagues also becomes an effective instrument when an apparatus disobeys the standard rule for sorting the data. Actually, his colleagues will warn him, or the apparatus will be protested by his partners when he does not work according to the standard.

The willingness of bureaucracy apparatus to learn to use data processing tools shows that bureaucracy’s subjection to the stipulated standard, although the effort will degrade their physical health.¹³ Sick, fatigue, and tired feelings described by the implementer apparatus show that they had never or rarely done such activities like those they did during the implementation of CFP-HDI before, so that the additional burdens affected their stamina.

The problems faced during the implementation of various activities of CFP-HDI in Bandung Regency for two years in a row were the rules required by the Implementer Unit and the Reviewer Team. It was considered as the burden in implementing the activities and it made them worried.¹⁴

The feeling of being burdened and the stress felt by the implementer of the program are caused by the obligation to continuously do the same activities related to writing activity reports for monitoring and routine evaluation. If in the monitoring and evaluation find errors, the report will be returned and the implementer unit of regencies/cities must correct the report before they can obtain the fund for the next stage. The fear of rejection and the obligation to correct the report drive the bureaucracy to devote their energy to write the report more carefully.

In Frank’s conception (1991), the disciplined body is constructed by regimentation, the institutionalization of regime or rules into the self. During this process, 2 things occur, i.e. restriction of desire and implementation of control so that the behavior can be predicted. One of the methods utilized to maintain the restriction of desire is by creating hierarchies so that the subordinate position can be retained. In CFP-HDI, the hierarchy is not created in the institutional relation, although the program was launched by Provincial Government and the recipients of the fund are Governments of Regencies/Cities. The hierarchy is formed through standardization in the implementation of the activities and through the activities of monitoring and evaluation. The existence of the reviewer team which made up of the figures outside the bureaucracy is considered to be higher in their position because they have academic knowledge and power to determine the allocation of the grant for the regions. The existence of the assessment standard makes the regions forced to control their desire and on contrary subjugate themselves to the criterion of rationality stipulated by the reviewer team.

The reviewer team of West Java province that directly check the consistency of the content of the proposal of CFP-HDI. If the content does not accord with the commitment of creative innovation, it will much affect the assessment of the proposal. It certainly will have an impact on the proper amount of budget to be disbursed or absorbed by regencies/cities that will receive the aid of CFP-HDI.¹⁵

The standardization of assessment changes the position of bureaucracy as the party that has the authority in program planning. This position is justified by normative rationality that bureaucracy, in the name of the state, is the only party that has the authority to determine the allocation of public resources in development. The imposition of standardization results in scientific rationality which forms the authority base of technocrats. The shift of rationality places bureaucracy at the subordinate position of technocrats that join the reviewer team.¹⁶

Standardization has become an embodied practice of hegemony because the habituation occurs through physical activities conducted by the apparatus, for example, when bureaucracy apparatus are accustomed to write according to particular systematics, adjusting the length of the writing to the number of pages, adjusting the font type and the line space being used, and even adjusting the color of the cover of the report. The whole practice seems simple, but it becomes a practice of power because it is accompanied by reward and punishment to construct obedience. Reward for the obedience is given in the form of appreciation from the Provincial Implementer Unit, while the punishment varies, being announced in coordination meetings to being reported to the Regent/Mayor. The Provincial Implementer Unit does not directly punish regencies/cities which break the rule; hence it becomes the art of governing from a distance (Dean, 2010) with incentive and disincentive basis and agreement between the province and regencies/cities.

As for the bureaucracy apparatus involved in CFP-HDI, innovative and creative identity is an achievement reached through a difficult struggle. Innovative and creative identity is not only upheld through the imposed mechanism, but it is also reflected by the behavior of bureaucracy apparatus participating in the selection. Statements that arise, that they have devoted their times and energy and even they got sick because they had to meet the standard, suggest that bureaucracy apparatus are subjugated to the rule stipulated in the regime of rezim CFP-HDI. This obedience eventually does not only win the selection, but it also proves that the mechanism has been consistently carried out by the Provincial Implementer Unit and Reviewer Team. It shows that subjugation precisely arises when the subjects are able to verify the structure applied to them, which proves that that the subject actually does not naturally accept the treatment of the structure or norm to them.

Identity of competition makes the program and all actors involved in it different from other programs in the government area. Here, the practice of power confronts fellow bureaucracy apparatus with different identities, the first is competitive apparatus and the other one is apparatus who work with old methods. CFP-HDI constructs new identity by interpreting the regime of competition into technologies which lead the bureaucracy to be able to collect, understand, use, analyze, store, and communicate the data in the program planning and implementation. These are the sequence of the phases of knowledge management; hence, actually behind the regime of competition there is the interest to institutionalize knowledge-based governing in the working methods of bureaucracy.

Standardized bureaucracy apparatus are born as the reflection of the conscious and voluntary acceptance of the regime of competition. The pride felt in the success of receiving the grant becomes the standard of achievement, so that in order to achieve it, bureaucracy apparatus unconsciously have subjugated to the stipulated standardization. The subjugation is affirmed by the acceptance of the truth claim that innovative and creative figures of bureaucracy are the certainty of being able to accelerate the improvement in the achievement of human development index, so that in 2015, West Java could achieve an HDI of 80 and became the Most Advanced Province in Indonesia. This claim is a product of knowledge deconstruction of bureaucratic reform which is contextualized with the achievement of the HDI as the standard of global prosperity. By achieving the standard, West Java becomes a prosperous province. The description of this idealization constructs the awareness of bureaucracy apparatus that join the Implementation Unit of CFP-HDI to obey the regime of competition.

5. Conclusion

CFP-HDI has become an example how the discourse of competition becomes a system of knowledge which produces the truth claim to form bureaucracy apparatus with new identity. The regime of competition utilizes standardization as the technology of power for disciplining the body of bureaucracy apparatus, accustoming bureaucracy to activities of data collecting, data processing, structured presentation of the data.

The regime of competition constructs normalization which distinguishes between innovative bureaucracy apparatus that capable of organizing development planning based on the data and bureaucracy apparatus that work based on routineness. This normality is subsequently translated into the practices of habituation through physical activities which must be performed by bureaucracy apparatus to meet the criteria of normality.

The process suggests that the bureaucratic reform has become a practice of power that operates on the mind (through the creation of the system of knowledge) and the body (through disciplining), which occurs simultaneously.

Disciplining through the regime of competition results in bureaucracy apparatus as the subject accustomed to work effectively in managing the data and highly motivated to reach a higher achievement. The formation of the subject that meets the normality does not mean bureaucracy has been subjugated by the regime of competition. The obedience shows that the subject has accepted the regime of knowledge as part of its body, so that the activities done by the body will subsequently affirm the truth claim for their mind.

Bureaucracy apparatus embodying the regime of competition become the normal subject as expected by the regime of competition. The identity of normal bureaucracy apparatus in this regime is the bureaucracy apparatus that have the ability in managing data, disciplining themselves to utilize the method and technique of data processing and analysis when performing their tasks, and also being accustomed to use the methods in decision-making based on scientific logics standardized by the regime of competition.

The formation of bureaucracy apparatus as the embodied subject or the subject that embodies the regime of competition shows that disciplining is also successfully applied when the subject autonomously accepts and performs the normality. It does not mean the obedient subject becomes the subordinate subject in the regime of competition. The emergence of the embodied subject is a proof of the existence of the power relation constructed by the interaction between knowledge and power.

Additional information

Funding

Funding. The authors received no direct funding for this research.

Notes on contributors

Caroline Paskarina

Caroline Paskarina is a lecturer in Department of Political Science, Faculty of Political and Social Science, Universitas Padjadjaran, Indonesia. Her area of interest in research includes governmentality, discourse analysis, democracy, and local politics. This paper is her dissertation research for doctoral degree in Department of Political Science, Universitas Gadjah Mada, Indonesia. This paper is about disciplining bureaucracy in order to construct competitive bureaucracy. The argument is that bureaucratic reform is a practice of power operated through system of knowledge that disciplining body. Bureaucratic reform usually seen and analyzed through managerial perspective, whilst this paper offers power perspective as alternative. This perspective explains bureaucratic reform as discursive struggle manifest through technology of power and technology of self to create bureaucracy in certain identity. Hopefully this research can contribute to advance theorization of bureaucratic reform from Foucauldian study of power’s perspective.

Notes

1. Foucault criticizes the power that treats the power merely as something that “excludes”, “forces”, “censors”, “exploits”, “covers”, and “hides”, and he suggests starting to study power as something productive, as an ability to produce reality, to construct the domain of the and truth rites. See in Philpott (2003, p. 110).

2. Foucault elaborates the concept of governmentality to analyze the relation between what he calls technology of the self and technology of domination, and constitution of the subject with formation of the state (in Burchell, Gordon, & Miller, 1991). Government in the concept of governmentality means any more or less calculated and rational activity, undertaken by a multiplicity of authorities and agencies, employing a variety of techniques and forms of knowledge, that seeks to shape conduct by working through the desires, aspirations, interests and beliefs of various actors, for definite but shifting ends and with a diverse set of relatively unpredictable consequences, effects and outcomes (Dean, 2010). Hence, the analysis of governance relates to the methods of calculation, both qualitative and quantitative, types of authority institutions, forms of the utilized knowledge, techniques and method, governed entities and how the entities form, the goals to achieve, and results and consequences which emerge.

3. Tekhne is defined as proper training and exercise in order for a person to bring it to perfection (Foucault, in Harrer, 2005).

4. Attachment of the table format of data form in the proposal of self evaluation.

5. Guideline for writing the proposal of PPK-IPM 2007.

6. Guideline for writing the proposal of PPK-IPM 2007.

7. Guideline for writing the proposal of PPK-IPM 2007.

8. Interview with the informant, MS (2012).

9. It happened to Kuningan Regency, which had succeeded to be selected to the second stage, and it only needed to take the last stage of selection, namely Proposal of Implementation. The proposal had been ready to submit to Government of West Java Province to be assessed by the reviewer team. However, the region failed to receive the fund of PPK-IPM because it was late in submitting the proposal. It was due to the change of the head of the region; hence the new head of the region was late in signing the proposal. Although the reason was quite clear, the rule remained enforced and the region was forced to take the selection of PPK-IPM from the first stage in the next batch (Interview with the informant, IN, 2012).

10. Interview with the informant (MS, 2012).

11. Head of Industry, Trade, and Cooperatives Agency (Disperindagkop) of Bekasi City who is also the Manager of PPK-IPM of Bekasi City, Noviar Hermansyah explained that there are thousands of businesspersons of Small and Medium-sized Enterprises (SME) in Bekasi, but Disperindagkop still finds it difficult to collect data on the exact number of them because they are scattered around the city and sometimes they are undetected by the city government (in Anonymous, 2010).

12. Interview with the informant (MS, 2012).

13. Chief of the Implementer Unit of PPK-IPM of Ciamis Regency told: “Because PPK-IPM is a new program with a different pattern, that is, the requirement to submit a more complete and detailed proposal of clear programs, the team assigned to write the proposal worked on it tirelessly. During the proposal writing process a member had to be treated in hospital. A moment later, the Government of West Java Province stated their region as one of the recipients of the grant of PPK-IPM. The sick, fatigue, and tired feelings were paid” (in an interview, 2012).

14. Interview with the informant (SN, 2012).

15. Interview with the informant (H, 2012).

16. It was affirmed by the chief of the implementer unit of PPK-IPM of Ciamis Regency that: monitoring and evaluation system was strictly conducted by the Reviewer Team of West Java Province, so that the anticipation of the Implementer Unit of Ciamis Regency was always prepared to receive monitoring and evaluation from the Provincial Implementer Unit of PPK-IPM. We also had to be prepared to receive sharp criticism from the Monev/Reviewer Team of West Java Province which comprised not only the bureaucrat element but also the independent one. However, all of these certainly did not make us withdraw from the program; we were even motivated to correct the weaknesses (in an interview, 2012).