Publication Search

The practice of nepotism in the employee selection process at Regional Owned Enterprises (BUMD) in North Sumatra, which has an impact on transparency, fairness and organizational effectiveness. BUMDs have an important role in regional economic development, but nepotism practices often damage the integrity of the recruitment process. Through a qualitative approach and case studies, this research reveals that nepotism creates inequality in employee selection, reduces the quality of human resources, and reduces public trust in BUMD. This article also identifies the factors that cause nepotism and offers solutions in the form of selection transparency, anti-nepotism policies, independent supervision, and outreach to build a culture of meritocracy in BUMD. By overcoming nepotism, BUMD is expected to be able to create a fair and professional recruitment system, thereby supporting the achievement of optimal performance.

The debate on the age limit for presidential and vice-presidential candidates is an important issue in the context of Indonesian democracy. Democracy emphasizes the principles of equality and participation, while meritocracy emphasizes competence and experience. Currently, the minimum age limit for presidential candidates in Indonesia is 35 years old. Debates have arisen over the relevance of this age in the current political context, with arguments in favor of the role of younger generations bringing innovation versus the need for experience and wisdom. This study aims to re-evaluate the age limit for presidential candidates in Indonesia from historical, constitutional and international comparative perspectives, and examine its impact on political dynamics and leadership quality. The research methodology involves literature analysis and recent case studies. The results are expected to contribute significantly to the discussion on the age limit for presidential candidates and its implications for democracy and meritocracy in Indonesia.

There are various government agencies around us; perhaps this raises the question of why some agencies seem more efficient and effective than others. One of the main factors that influences the performance of an agency is the implementation of a meritocracy system, where civil society is promoted and given responsibility based on their abilities and achievements, not connections or seniority alone. In this article, we will discuss in depth the importance of implementing a meritocracy system in government agencies to increase work accountability, supervision, and bureaucratic reform. We will also provide examples of agencies that have successfully implemented a meritocracy system.

This article examines the dynamics, challenges, and opportunities in implementing the merit system policy within the context of Indonesia’s bureaucratic reform, employing a narrative literature review approach using a triangulation of scholarly sources. Thematic analysis identifies five critical themes that hinder the implementation of the merit system: structural tensions between political patronage and meritocracy that create a hybrid spoils–merit system; significant institutional capacity gaps between central and local governments; digital transformation through platforms such as CAT, SmartASN, and SIPINTER as catalysts for transparency and objectivity; organizational cultural resistance rooted in patrimonial and seniority values; and the weakening of independent oversight exacerbated by the dissolution of KASN’s mandate. Although a progressive regulatory framework has been established through Law No. 5 of 2014, the implementation of the merit system remains constrained by persistent clientelism, limited institutional capacity, and cultural resistance. This study contributes to the theoretical discourse on Weberian bureaucracy, New Public Management, and good governance by confirming that the implementation of the merit system in developing countries constitutes a political–cultural transformation that requires fundamental changes in political incentive structures, institutional capacity, and organisational values. Managerial implications include strengthening independent oversight, making substantial investments in institutional capacity, accelerating inclusive digital transformation, and implementing systematic change management programs to expedite the transition toward a performance-based bureaucracy that is professional and integrity-driven in support of Indonesia’s Golden Vision 2045