Thinking Ahead in Educational Services at Private Universities in Gorontalo Province
Emneord (Nøkkelord):
Dynamic Governance, Thinking Ahead, Private Universities, Educational Governance, Adaptive PolicySammendrag
Governance as a governance concept continues to evolve into Dynamic Governance, which emphasizes adaptive capacity in responding to environmental changes. In the context of higher education, Private Universities (PTS) in Gorontalo Province face complex challenges in realizing dynamic governance, particularly in the aspect of educational services. This study focuses on thinking ahead capabilities as an integral part of Dynamic Governance with three main indicators: policy reflection, decision evaluation, and readiness to change policies. The study was conducted using a qualitative, descriptive-explanatory case study approach through observation, in-depth interviews, and documentation. The results show that thinking ahead capabilities in PTS in Gorontalo Province are not optimal. In the policy reflection indicator, there is a misalignment between strategic planning and budget support, regulations that tend to focus on PTN, and weak long-term planning. In the decision evaluation indicator, limited human resources and the lack of data-based evaluation mechanisms hinder policy effectiveness, resulting in stagnant decisions. Meanwhile, in the readiness to change policy indicator, despite awareness of the importance of transformation, PTS still face obstacles such as limited finances, technological infrastructure, resistance to organizational culture, lack of human resource training, and slow internal bureaucracy. In conclusion, thinking ahead within the Dynamic Governance framework at Gorontalo's private universities requires strengthening through increased budget allocation, more inclusive regulations, enhanced data-driven evaluation, human resource development, and bureaucratic reform. With these strategies, private universities are expected to be more adaptive to the dynamics of higher education and able to sustainably improve service quality.
##plugins.generic.usageStats.downloads##
Referanser
Ascough Ii, J. C., Maier, H. R., Ravalico, J. K., & Strudley, M. W. (2008). Future research challenges for incorporation of uncertainty in environmental and ecological decision-making. Ecological modelling, 219(3-4), 383-399. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ecolmodel.2008.07.015
Bibri, S. E. (2018). Backcasting in futures studies: a synthesized scholarly and planning approach to strategic smart sustainable city development. European Journal of Futures Research, 6(1), 1-27. https://doi.org/10.1186/s40309-018-0142-z
Chandler, D. (2001). Active citizens and the therapeutic state: the role of democratic participation in local government reform. Policy & Politics, 29(1), 3-14. https://doi.org/10.1332/0305573012501161
Coombe, L. (2015). Models of interuniversity collaboration in higher education—How do their features act as barriers and enablers to sustainability?. Tertiary Education and Management, 21(4), 328-348. https://doi.org/10.1080/13583883.2015.1104379
Dizdaroglu, D. (2017). The role of indicator-based sustainability assessment in policy and the decision-making process: A review and outlook. Sustainability, 9(6), 1018. https://doi.org/10.3390/su9061018
Jongbloed, B., Enders, J., & Salerno, C. (2008). Higher education and its communities: Interconnections, interdependencies and a research agenda. Higher education, 56(3), 303-324. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10734-008-9128-2
Kezar, A. (2005). Redesigning for collaboration within higher education institutions: An exploration into the developmental process. Research in Higher Education, 46(7), 831-860. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11162-004-6227-5
Kisanga, D., & Ireson, G. (2015). Barriers and strategies on adoption of e-learning in Tanzanian higher learning institutions: Lessons for adopters. International Journal of Education and Development using ICT, 11(2).
Koppenjan, J. F., & Enserink, B. (2009). Public–private partnerships in urban infrastructures: Reconciling private sector participation and sustainability. Public administration review, 69(2), 284-296. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1540-6210.2008.01974.x
Li, M., Yang, C., Zhang, L., & Fan, R. (2024). Research on sustainable development strategy of energy internet system in xiongan new area of China based on PEST-SWOT-ANP model. Sustainability, 16(15), 6395. https://doi.org/10.3390/su16156395
Lockwood, M. (2010). Good governance for terrestrial protected areas: A framework, principles and performance outcomes. Journal of environmental management, 91(3), 754-766. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jenvman.2009.10.005
Nag, N. S. (2018). Government, governance and good governance. Indian Journal of Public Administration, 64(1), 122-130. https://doi.org/10.1177/0019556117735448
Neumann, A., & Terosky, A. L. (2007). To give and to receive: Recently tenured professors' experiences of service in major research universities. The Journal of Higher Education, 78(3), 282-310. https://doi.org/10.1080/00221546.2007.11772317
Popęda, P., & Hadasik, B. (2024). New Public Governance as a new wave of the public policy: theoretical approach and conceptualization of the trend. Journal of Entrepreneurship and Public Policy, 13(1), 18-36. https://doi.org/10.1108/JEPP-09-2023-0089
Purba, I. B. A. H. (2025). Enhancing budget policy alignment: Insights from local government practices. World Journal of Advanced Research and Reviews, 25(1), 019-023. https://doi.org/10.30574/wjarr.2025.25.1.4053
Widowati, L., Setyowati, K., & Suharto, D. G. (2023). Dynamic Governance As Perspective in Indonesian Bureaucracy Reform: Qualitative Analysis of Indonesian Bureaucracy Reform Based on Dynamic Governance. Jurnal Bina Praja, 15(2), 403-415. https://doi.org/10.21787/jbp.15.2023.403-415
##submission.downloads##
Publisert
##submission.howToCite##
Utgave
Seksjon
##submission.license##
##submission.copyrightStatement##
##submission.license.cc.by-sa4.footer##