Institutional Pathologies of Bureaucratic Disagility: A Critical Case Study of Indonesia's Digital Government Transformation (2020–2025)

Indonesia invested approximately IDR 47 trillion (USD 3.1 billion) in digital government transformation between 2020 and 2024, yet its E-Government Development Index ranking declined from 70th to 77th. This critical case study investigates why Indonesia’s bureaucratic transformation failed to achieve its proclaimed "world-class bureaucracy" target. Drawing on 20 in-depth interviews across four institutions and process tracing of policy decisions from 2020–2025, we identify three institutional pathologies producing bureaucratic disagility: structural (mandate overlap, missing enforcement, decentralization paradox), cultural (risk-aversion, job-hopping cycles, silo mentality), and technocratic (vendor lock-in, system proliferation, performative digitalization). The findings challenge agile governance theory’s applicability to patrimonial bureaucratic contexts. We conclude that digital transformation without institutional surgery produces only performative agility.2020年至2024年间，印度尼西亚在数字化政府转型领域累计投入约47万亿印尼盾（折合31亿美元），但其电子政务发展指数（E-Government Development Index）排名却从第70位下滑至第77位。本关键案例研究旨在剖析印度尼西亚的官僚体系转型为何未能达成其宣称的“世界级官僚体系”目标。本研究基于对四家机构的20次深度访谈，以及对2020至2025年政策决策的过程追踪，识别出三类导致官僚体系敏捷性缺失的制度性病理：结构性维度（权责重叠、监管缺位、分权悖论（decentralization paradox））、文化性维度（风险规避、频繁跳槽循环、竖井思维（silo mentality））以及技术官僚性维度（供应商锁定（vendor lock-in）、系统泛滥（system proliferation）、形式化数字化（performative digitalization））。上述研究结论对敏捷治理理论在世袭制官僚体系语境下的适用性提出了挑战。我们最终得出结论：未伴随制度重构的数字化转型仅能催生形式化的敏捷性。