JOSR: Journal of Social Research
Januari 2022, 1 (2), 81-94
p-ISSN: 2827-9832 e-ISSN: xxxx-xxxx
Available online at http:// https://ijsr.internationaljournallabs.com/index.php/ijsr
http://ijsr.internationaljournallabs.com/index.php/ijsr
APPLYING THE INTERNAL CONTROL STRATEGY FOR
PUBLIC SECTOR ORGANIZATIONAL PERFORMANCE
Vanya Nurul Izza
1
, Nuri Aslami
2
Universitas Islam Negeri Sumatera Utara, Indonesia
1, 2
e-mail: vanyanurul2@gmail.com
1
, nuriaslami@uinsu.ac.id
2
Abstrak (Indonesia)
Received:23
Desember
2021
Revised :27
Desember
2021
Accepted:4
Januari
2022
Latar Belakang: Manajemen strategis tidak hanya
berlaku untuk sektor swasta, tetapi juga untuk sektor
publik. Penerapan manajemen strategis di kedua
sektor tersebut sebenarnya tidak jauh berbeda.
Tujuan: Penelitian ini bertujuan untuk memiliki tiga
tujuan penting, yaitu: memastikan tercapainya tujuan
atau sasaran, mengevaluasi, mengendalikan dan
memperbaiki prosedur dan proses, dan menerapkan
strategi pengendalian internal terhadap kinerja
organisasi sektor publik.
Metode: Penelitian ini menggunakan penelitian
kuantitatif dengan pendekatan deskriptif. Data yang
digunakan dalam penelitian ini adalah data primer dan
data sekunder.
Hasil: Hasil yang dicapai melalui penerapan
manajemen strategis sedikit berbeda antara sektor
swasta dan sektor publik, namun kedua sektor tersebut
memang menghadapi kondisi lingkungan yang
berbeda dan dengan sendirinya penerapan manajemen
strategis menjadi kendala. Salah satunya adalah
dengan menggunakan pendekatan SWOT (Strength,
Weakness, Opportunity, Threat) untuk analisis guna
mengatasi kendala yang muncul. Pengukuran kinerja
memiliki banyak efek positif pada organisasi sektor
publik.
Kesimpulan: Hal ini akan berdampak pada penguatan
manajemen strategis, pengukuran kinerja dapat
memiliki banyak konsekuensi negatif, antara lain
promosi permainan, peningkatan birokrasi internal,
pengekangan inovasi, pengekangan ambisi, pemutusan
profesionalisme, dan pemutusan hubungan kerja.
Vanya Nurul Izza
1
, Nuri Aslami
2
/ JOSR: Journal of Social Research, 1(2), 81-94
Applying the Internal Control Strategy for Public Sector Organizational
Performance 81
sistem akuntabilitas, juga tak terelakkan.
Kata kunci: Implementasi Manajemen Strategis;
Pengukuran Kinerja Organisasi
Sektor Publik
Abstract
Background: Strategic management does not only
apply to the private sector, but also to the public
sector. The implementation of strategic management
in the two sectors is actually not much different.
Objective: This study aims to have three important
objectives, namely: ensuring the achievement of
goals or objectives, evaluating, controlling and
improving procedures and processes, and
implementing internal control strategies on the
performance of public sector organizations.
Methods: This study uses quantitative research with
a descriptive approach. The data used in this study
are primary data and secondary data.
Results: The results achieved through the
implementation of strategic management differ
slightly between the private sector and the public
sector, but the two sectors do face different
environmental conditions and by themselves the
implementation of strategic management becomes an
obstacle. One of them is to use the SWOT (Strength,
Weakness, Opportunity, Threat) approach for
analysis in order to overcome the obstacles that
arise. Performance measurement has many positive
effects on public sector organizations.
Conslusion: This will have an impact on
strengthening strategic management, performance
measurement can have many negative consequences,
including promotion of games, increase in internal
bureaucracy, restraint of innovation, restraint of
ambition, layoffs of professionalism, and layoffs.
accountability system, is also inevitable.
Keywords: Implementation of Strategic
Vanya Nurul Izza
1
, Nuri Aslami
2
/ JOSR: Journal of Social Research, 1(2), 81-94
Applying the Internal Control Strategy for Public Sector Organizational
Performance 81
Management; Performance Measurement
of Public Sector Organizations
*Correspondent Author : Vanya Nurul Izza
Email : vanyanurul2@gmail.com
INTRODUCTION
Efforts to improve the performance of public sector organizations through
the implementation of performance management require organizations to take
strategic steps to improve their organizational performance. Implementation of
performance management began in 1999 with the introduction of the concept of
performance responsibility in good governance by government agencies, and the
issuance of Executive Order no. 7 (AKIP) of 1999 concerning Government
Performance Responsibilities. However, until now, agency performance has not
become the main focus of governance in measuring the success of programs or
activities carried out by agencies. Government management continues to focus on
performance results, not results. For this reason, it is important for public sector
organizations to implement strategic controls to link their performance with ever-
changing environmental conditions (Nasional, 1997). Basically, strategic
management is a new perspective that highlights the importance of organizations
paying more attention to strategic development and environmental change. The
right organizational strategy to adapt to the changing environment is very
important for the successful achievement of company goals. The strategic
management debate aims to connect the organization with the environment, both
in an ever-changing internal and external environment.
Strategic management is a series of decisions and actions by management
that determine the company's long-term performance (J D Hunger & Wheelen,
2001). Strategic management (J David Hunger & Wheelen, 2001). Strategic
management is a set of strategic decision-making processes that include a
framework for development, implementation, and evaluation (Putri & Shafitri,
2019). This strategic management process includes long-term and short-term
planning to achieve the goals that have been set. Strategic public sector
management must implement a management plan taking into account the factors
that support and hinder the achievement of organizational goals that may affect
the performance of public sector organizations Instruct your organization.
Therefore, the focus of strategic management is on connecting the organization
with its environment, developing strategies to adapt to it, and ensuring the
successful execution of the strategy. Organizations are also expected to be able to
Vanya Nurul Izza
1
, Nuri Aslami
2
/ JOSR: Journal of Social Research, 1(2), 81-94
Applying the Internal Control Strategy for Public Sector Organizational
Performance 81
direct the direction of achieving the goals that have been set so that public sector
organizations can achieve maximum performance.
Strategic management is basically the ability of an organization's
management to adapt to the general short and medium term future. Strategy is
important because Process determines the direction you should follow to achieve
your organization's vision and mission. Strategy can also provide a solid
foundation for decision making that leads to the achievement of company goals.
Strategic decisions increase the ability of managers to adapt to changes (Hafedh
Ibrahim & Najjar, 2008). The Effect of Interest Rates, Bond Ratings, Company
Size and Der on Yield To Maturity of Corporate Bonds on the Indonesia Stock
Exchange for the Period 2004-2006 (Weniasti & Marsoem, 2019),
Strategic decisions take into account the scope of organizational activities,
adaptation of organizational activities and their environment, allocation and
reallocation of key resources within the organization, values, expectations, and
goals of the organization. organization. Will. The impact of influential strategies
and operations will change the organization, or the organization as a whole.
Therefore, strategic management is a process that requires the participation of all
parties and the accountability of managers at all stages. Therefore, strategic
management involves creating a framework for implementing these processes
(Bovaird, Löffler, & Löffler, 2003).
RESEARCH METHODS
This research uses quantitative research with a descriptive approach. The
data used in this study are primary data and secondary data. Primary Data
Collection must provide a questionnaire (email questionnaire) containing a
structured list of questions addressed to respondents, the heads of 55 work units
of the Camper District government. Secondary data collection, on the other hand,
is taken from references from books, the internet, or data from related agencies.
The population of this survey is all of the Kamper-related offices, as many as 55
units. The respondents of this survey are the heads of each agency. The method
used in this study is a non-probability sampling method with direct sampling.
That is, choosing a sample based on inference conducted by non-random
sampling where information is obtained using certain inferences (Rozi & Darlis,
2010)
The instrument measures the performance variable using information
technology, internal control, and a Likert scale by government agencies. Rating
scale 1 to 5 (score) to measure the extent of the influence of the independent
variable on the dependent variable. Each variable received a list of questions
from the questionnaire. Second, each answer option receives 1 for a very
negative answer and 5 points for a very positive answer.
Vanya Nurul Izza
1
, Nuri Aslami
2
/ JOSR: Journal of Social Research, 1(2), 81-94
Applying the Internal Control Strategy for Public Sector Organizational
Performance 81
This study also conducted validation and reliability tests, so it was
assumed that the data measurements carried out would give very reliable results.
The results of the validity and reliability test of the three related devices are valid
and reliable. Since the item sizes were propositional ordered, Pearson correlation
was used to calculate validity. If the correlation between each metric and the total
score shows a result greater than 0.450, then each question metric can be
concluded as valid. A measure of reliability is indicated by Cronbach's alpha,
with an alpha of at least 0.60 in this study (Nunnally Jr, 1970). Analysis of the
data used in this study using SPSS version 17 software. The analytical method
used in this study is multiple regression analysis. The statistical equation model
used to test the hypothesis is:
Y = a+ b
1
X
1
+ b
2
X
2
+ e
Description :
a
:
constant
b
1
- b
2
:
coefficient regression
X
1
:
Technology Utilization
Information
X
2
:
Internal Control
Y
:
Performance of
Government Agencies
E
:
Standard Error
There are four main assumptions in the application of the regression
method. These assumptions are the assumptions of normality, multicollinearity,
autocorrelation, and non-uniform variance. You should run this test because of
the consequences if these assumptions are not met (Sarwono, Sugiyarti, &
Suyati, 2019).
RESULTS AND DISCUSSION
A.
Scope of Public Sector Organizations
The public sector is related to the provision of goods or services to the
public that are paid for through public interest and taxes or other government
revenues that are legally regulated (Daling, 2013). Due to the wide scope of
the public sector , implementation is often left to the market while regulation
and oversight is in the hands of the government. Thus, in its development, the
public sector has undergone various changes that have created prejudice
against the private sector. Public sector organizations are undoubtedly non-
profit, because there are public sector organizations that are semi non-profit
Vanya Nurul Izza
1
, Nuri Aslami
2
/ JOSR: Journal of Social Research, 1(2), 81-94
Applying the Internal Control Strategy for Public Sector Organizational
Performance 81
and can contribute to the motivation to benefit the organization's
sustainability, even though its main goal is to improve the welfare of society.
is inappropriate. For state or regional income. In other words, public sector
organizations are not just social organizations, is a non- profit organization, a
not-for-profit organization , and not just a government organization. Public
institutions are organizations that provide goods and services to the public for
the public interest, responding to the community and also, with public
services carried out by the community (Syahr, 2018).
1.
New or growing organizations need to reflect on their priority steps and
goals.
2.
The need to maintain financial stability requires a new strategy to find new
sources of funding .
3.
The desire to improve services, together with the availability of available
resources , prompts administrators to change policies, procedures, and
perhaps even consumer priorities.
4.
Expanding the role of public pressure to meet its needs.
5.
Changes in leadership are usually accompanied by a new vision that
requires the leader to understand and adapt to the new guidelines .
6.
Legal planning requirements that allow the process to change if the
government is under pressure to get the support it needs.
7.
Integration requests between departments, offices, departments, sections,
sections, etc. are very common in government organizations that require
coordination of missions, objectives and various procedures.
8.
Coordinate actions that require changes to internal policies .
A political threat that requires executives to conform company
policies to these requirements.
B.
Dimensions of Performance Measurement of Public Sector Organizations
Performance is NPM, Kouzminet. A keyword that dominates all
discussions about performance with different meanings and different contexts for
different audiences. As a result, designing performance indicators becomes
difficult for both private and public sector organizations . Although it is
technically difficult to operate the abstraction, the same performance indicators
may be needed to answer questions about different aspects of the two
performances. The task of measuring the performance of public sector
organizations is very complex. There are two common reasons used to explain the
difference between public and private performance measurement . First,
performance measurement is a technically equivalent and simple technique
because it assumes that private organizations comply with profit requirements.
Vanya Nurul Izza
1
, Nuri Aslami
2
/ JOSR: Journal of Social Research, 1(2), 81-94
Applying the Internal Control Strategy for Public Sector Organizational
Performance 81
Second, agents in public sector organizations are under social and political
pressure.
According to Mardiasmo (2004). The public sector performance
measurement system is designed to help public managers assess the achievement
of their strategies through financial and non-financial measurement tools.
Performance measurement is defined by Performance Measurement. The reward
and punishment system will be strengthened. Furthermore, the performance
measurement of public sector organizations has three objectives. First, to improve
government performance, performance metrics are designed to help the
government focus on the goals and objectives of the Work Unit program. This is
intended to increase the effectiveness and efficiency of public sector organizations
in serving the public. Second, for resource allocation and decision making. Third,
achieve public accountability and improve institutional communication (
Haryono, N. (2012). Networks to build public sector collaboration. Journal of
Public Administration Networks , 4 (1), 47-53 ). In general, the purpose of the
Mardiasmo performance measurement system is performance measurement, one
of which is related to the final result or results and the factors that determine the
results are categorized into financial performance and competitiveness. On the
other hand, the determinants are further divided into categories. Namely, service
quality , flexibility, innovation, and use of resources.
C.
The purpose of measuring the performance of public sector organizations
Performance Measurement is a business success assessment tool used in
the context of public sector organizations to gain public support and legitimacy.
The public assesses the success of an organization in terms of its ability to provide
relatively cheap and quality public services . Therefore, performance
measurement is very important to assess the accountability of organizations and
executives in providing better public services . Performance measurement has
traditionally had three main objectives. Control and improve procedures and
processes, as well as compare and evaluate the performance of various
organizations, teams, and individuals (Wilson, 2000).
According to Mahmudi (2007), the objectives of measuring the performance of
public sector organizations are:
1. Knowing the level of achievement of company goals
2. Provide learning opportunities for employees
3. Improve the performance of the next period
4. Provide systematic consideration in making decisions on giving rewards
and punishments
5. Motivate employees
6. Creating public accountability
a. better by using the top down and bottom up methods.
Vanya Nurul Izza
1
, Nuri Aslami
2
/ JOSR: Journal of Social Research, 1(2), 81-94
Applying the Internal Control Strategy for Public Sector Organizational
Performance 81
b. Measuring financial and non-financial performance in a balanced
manner so that the progress of strategy achievement can be traced.
c. Accommodate understanding the interests of middle and lower level
managers and motivate them to achieve goal congruence.
d. As a tool to achieve satisfaction based on a rational individual
approach and collective ability.
D.
Barriers and Challenges to the Performance Measurement of Public
Sector Organizations
Performance measurement is the process of recording and measuring the
achievement of an activity to achieve a goal through the results displayed in the
form of products, services, or processes. Most private organizations use profit as a
performance measure. However, this does not apply to public organizations,
because profit is not the main goal, but organizations focus on improving people's
welfare . In addition, the performance of public institutions is generally intangible
and indirect, or the performance of public sector organizations is multifaceted, so
it is a comprehensive representation of performance (Tuanaya, Tuhumury, &
Wance, 2020). This means that financial indicators alone are not sufficient to
measure the performance of public sector organizations, but non-financial
performance indicators need to be developed.
As Johnson and Kaplan point out (McAdam & Su, 2002) the scope of
measurement used by public sector organizations should include financial and
non-financial. Members of the DPR use performance indicators to determine the
appropriateness of the service fees charged to civil servants to civil servants.
Increase the efficiency and effectiveness of public services, or be obliged to
provide more services at a lower cost (do more at less cost). People don't want to
charge anymore, but the quality of service has not improved. Mahsun (2006)
suggests several barriers to measuring the performance of public sector
organizations :
1. Since the goal of public institutions is not to maximize profits, the
performance of public institutions cannot be judged solely by financial
indicators.
2. Outputs in the form of services are usually qualitative and intangible.
Difficult to measure because it is not direct
3. There is no direct relationship between input and output (discretionary cost
center) because of the difficulty of setting criteria as a measure of
productivity.
4. Independent comparisons are not possible because they do not operate on
market forces and require tools to replace market mechanisms when
measuring performance.
Vanya Nurul Izza
1
, Nuri Aslami
2
/ JOSR: Journal of Social Research, 1(2), 81-94
Applying the Internal Control Strategy for Public Sector Organizational
Performance 81
5. Measuring the level of community satisfaction that is not evenly
distributed to the services of public sector organizations is not easy.
Public services are provided on a budget, and groups of people using
these services must compete for limited resources . The market solution for
this situation is to introduce the principle of the user of a paid service into the
selected service so that the user of the service is actually the one who pays for
the service.
E.
Strengthening Strategic Management by Measuring the Performance of
Public Sector Organizations
One of the tools to measure performance is public authorities to validate
their products and services and then create indicators to measure their
performance. Product identification results and performance indicators can be
used as the basis for a planning and control cycle that can improve your
organization's performance.
The Ministry of Foreign Affairs (De Bruijn, 2002) proposes the ability
to measure the performance of public sector organizations as follows:
1. transparency i, o organizations can clarify the products they offer and how
to analyze inputs and outputs, including costs.
2. Learning , organizations go one step further when learning through
performance measurement . The transparency created teaches the
organization about its benefits and where it can thrive.
3. rating , performance ratings can be described as an organizational function
4. Sanctions , positive sanctions can be given if the performance is good,
followed by negative sanctions if the performance is bad.
Final outcome is highly dependent on many factors, making it difficult to
measure government performance. For example, the time frame for the success
achieved and the resulting effect may be too long. What can be measured later is
the direct effect (output). For example, the number of court decisions, the number
of patients treated by doctors, the number of college graduates , and so on. For
this reason, many power measurement systems focus on output. The process is as
follows: Production and services are determined, the organization sets production
goals , performance is measured, and results are reported regularly. Bruijn (2002)
suggests various positive effects of measuring the performance of public
organizations, which in turn affects the strengthening of strategic management
(De Bruijn, 2002)
Vanya Nurul Izza
1
, Nuri Aslami
2
/ JOSR: Journal of Social Research, 1(2), 81-94
Applying the Internal Control Strategy for Public Sector Organizational
Performance 81
1. Performance measurement leads to transparency
Performance measurement provides insight into key products organization,
the amount of its costs, and how the activities of the organization or a particular
part of the organization contribute to the output. Transparency can lead to various
forms of rationalization and can lead to internal debates about how different
activities can improve company performance. There are also clear guidelines on
how to evaluate new structures and processes, particularly how they can
contribute to improving company performance . The process of rationalization
and development may coincide with the point at which the organization can
measure the existence of its services (Oxborne & Gaebler, 1995).
2. Performance measurement is a performance incentive Performance
measurement in the first place
Affect output and ultimately contribute to company performance . Several
studies showing the relationship between the introduction of performance
measurement and performance improvement have been carried out, for example
by the municipalities of Osborne and Plastrik (1997) and the College of In`t Veld
(1996).
3. Measuring performance is a stylish way to create accountability.
With the increasingly complex mission of public institutions, the discourse
of autonomy becomes increasingly important, and with the existence of autonomy
affects the accountability and accountability of its performance. Systematically
measure and calculate performance data to improve efficiency over a period of
time. It is very easy to provide information, and we can provide information
regularly every year. According to (Ghobadian & Ashworth, 1994) performance
measurement is very important for public institutions. This helps improve the
quality of resource allocation and other administrative decisions . Plan, Director
and has exercised control over the plan. In addition, performance measurement is
also very important to improve accountability by clarifying accountability and
providing evidence of success or failure. It provides a systematic basis for
assessing and motivating employees. On the other hand, according to Mardiasmo
(2004), performance measurement is useful when:
1. Provide an understanding of the methods used to assess management
performance.
2. Provide instructions to help you achieve your performance goals .
3. Monitor and assess performance success , compare it with performance
goals, and take corrective actions to improve performance.
4. As a basis for objectively giving rewards and punishments for
performance measured according to the agreed performance
measurement system.
5. As a communication tool between subordinates and executives to
Vanya Nurul Izza
1
, Nuri Aslami
2
/ JOSR: Journal of Social Research, 1(2), 81-94
Applying the Internal Control Strategy for Public Sector Organizational
Performance 81
improve company performance .
6. Help determine whether customer satisfaction has been achieved
7. Help understand the process of government activities.
8. Ensuring objective decision making Existence Public sector
organizations cannot be separated from certain tasks.
In fact, the key factor in the success of public sector organizations is how
they perform the tasks they perform. For example, the level of efficiency or
responsibility. One strategy to fulfill the organization's mission in managing
public funds and creating customer satisfaction is to use an integrated quality
management (TQM) approach. According to Tjiptono and Diana (Muhammad
Ibrahim, Hassan, Iqbal, & Valeem, 2008). TQM is an approach to running a
business that aims to make the business and its environment more competitive.
Use a scientific approach to decision making and problem solving, have a long-
term commitment , and require collaboration. TQM creates and creates a set of
values and beliefs that can explain to everyone that quality is the most important
requirement for consumers and that its implementation requires good integrated
cooperation. Or, in another, more comprehensive formulation , TQM is also
understood as an integrated commitment to quality through continuous
improvement of processes by all members of the organization. Because TQM
works based on data and facts, it is often referred to as fact and database
management (Hellsten & Klefsjö, 2000).
In the UK case study , to use the performance measurement system as a
management tool to implement strategy. Indicators are used to develop
community strategies and measure how well these strategies are being
implemented. Quality of life reporting, as well as the private sector, is also an
integral part of the more strategic use of performance measurement in the public
sector. Therefore, the concept of strategic management needs to embody the
general management principles and practices used to develop strategies and their
implementation in organizations. Strategic management is not a panacea to solve
various organizational problems or guarantee the success of achieving
organizational goals, but at least it will pave the way for better collaboration
(Greiling, 2005).
Based on the results of the research that has been described previously, it
can be concluded that this requires public sector organizations to think
strategically , translating their contributions into effective strategy, and develop
the rationale needed to lay the groundwork for implementing the strategy.
Application strategic management at Public sector organizations are expected to
help organizations realize their vision and mission. The direction of the results
achieved through implementation of strategic management is slightly different
between the private and public sectors, but the two sectors do face different
Vanya Nurul Izza
1
, Nuri Aslami
2
/ JOSR: Journal of Social Research, 1(2), 81-94
Applying the Internal Control Strategy for Public Sector Organizational
Performance 81
environmental conditions and automatically apply strategic management which is
an obstacle. Wrong one is to use a SWOT (strength, Weakness, Opportunity,
Threat) approach for analysis to overcome the obstacles that arise.
CONCLUSION
The existence of public sector organizations is inseparable from certain
tasks. Even the key success factor of a public sector organization is largely
determined by how it carries out its mission. Performance measurement has
many positive effects on public sector organizations. This will have an impact on
strengthening strategic management. So leading to transparency, is an incentive
for results in an elegant way to create accountability. However, on the other
hand, performance measurement can have many negative consequences,
including the promotion of the game, the increase in internal bureaucracy, the
restraint of innovation, the restraint of ambition, the cessation of professionalism,
and the termination of the accountability system, also unavoidable. Performance
measurement is a public authority because it helps improve the quality of
resource allocation and other management decisions, facilitates future data and
factual management as a basis and control plan is very important. In addition,
performance measurement is also important for increasing accountability by
clarifying responsibilities, providing evidence of success or failure, and creating
a systematic basis for assessing and motivating employees.
BIBLIOGRAFI
Bovaird, Tony, Löffler, Elke, & Löffler, Elke. (2003). Public management and
governance (Vol. 3). Routledge London.
Daling, Marchelino. (2013). Analisis Kinerja Realisasi Anggaran Pendapatan Dan
Belanja Pemerintah Kabupaten Minahasa Tenggara. Jurnal EMBA: Jurnal
Riset Ekonomi, Manajemen, Bisnis Dan Akuntansi, 1(3).
De Bruijn, Hans. (2002). Performance measurement in the public sector:
strategies to cope with the risks of performance measurement.
International Journal of Public Sector Management.
Ghobadian, Abby, & Ashworth, John. (1994). Performance measurement in local
government–concept and practice. International Journal of Operations &
Production Management.
Greiling, Dorothea. (2005). Performance measurement in the public sector: the
German experience. International Journal of Productivity and
Performance Management.
Hellsten, Ulrika, & Klefsjö, Bengt. (2000). TQM as a management system
consisting of values, techniques and tools. The TQM Magazine.
Hunger, J D, & Wheelen, T. L. (2001). Strategic Management. 1996. Fifth
Vanya Nurul Izza
1
, Nuri Aslami
2
/ JOSR: Journal of Social Research, 1(2), 81-94
Applying the Internal Control Strategy for Public Sector Organizational
Performance 81
Editions. Addison-Wesley Publishing Company, Inc. Agung
J.(penterjemah).
Hunger, J David, & Wheelen, Thomas L. (2001). Manajemen strategis (Julianto
Agung, Trans). Yogyakarta: Andi.
Ibrahim, Hafedh, & Najjar, Faouzi. (2008). Assessing the effects of self‐
congruity, attitudes and customer satisfaction on customer behavioural
intentions in retail environment. Marketing Intelligence & Planning.
Ibrahim, Muhammad, Hassan, A., Iqbal, Muhammad, & Valeem, E. Elahi. (2008).
Response of wheat growth and yield to various levels of compost and
organic manure. Pak. J. Bot, 40(5), 2135–2141.
McAdam, Doug, & Su, Yang. (2002). The war at home: Antiwar protests and
congressional voting, 1965 to 1973. American Sociological Review, 696–
721.
Nasional, Badan Pembinaan Hukum. (1997). Majalah Hukum Nasional. Jakarta.
Nunnally Jr, Jum C. (1970). Introduction to psychological measurement.
Oxborne, D., & Gaebler, Ted. (1995). Reinventing government. Journal of
Leisure Research, 27(3), 302.
Putri, N., & Shafitri, N. (2019). Community institution development strategy as
fisheries management authority institution at Ponggok Village, Klaten.
IOP Conference Series: Earth and Environmental Science, 348(1), 12136.
IOP Publishing.
Peraturan Perundangan terhadap Akuntabilitas Kinerja Instansi Pemerintah.
Jurnal Ekonomi Universitas Riau, 18(01), 8780.
Sarwono, Agus, Sugiyarti, Gita, & Suyati, Sri. (2019). Investigation of
Information Technology Capability in Improving Employee Perfor-mance
through Knowledge Management Capability. Proceeding: International
Conference on Business, Economics and Governance (ICBEG)-ISBN 978-
602-14119-3-3, 129–134.
Syahr, Zulfia Hanum Alfi. (2018). Improving the Function of the Supreme Court
Research and Development Center: Implementation of QSPM and SWOT.
Jurnal Bina Praja: Journal of Home Affairs Governance, 10(2), 209–220.
Tuanaya, Wahab, Tuhumury, Joana J., & Wance, Marno. (2020). Management
Model And Village Fund Allocation During Pandemic Covid-19 In
Waiheru Village Ambon Cityindonesia. PalArch’s Journal of Archaeology
of Egypt/Egyptology, 17(7), 13357–13369.
Weniasti, Ayudha, & Marsoem, Bambang Santoso. (2019). The Effect of Bonds
Rating, Profitability, Leverage, and Firm Size on Yield to Maturity
Corporate Bonds. International Journal of Innovative Science and
Research Technology, 4(8), 286–295.
Wilson, Alan. (2000). The use of performance information in the management of
Vanya Nurul Izza
1
, Nuri Aslami
2
/ JOSR: Journal of Social Research, 1(2), 81-94
Applying the Internal Control Strategy for Public Sector Organizational
Performance 81
service delivery. Marketing Intelligence & Planning.