Pathology Bureaucracy

Reality of the Indonesian Bureaucracy and Prevention

  • Lesmana Rian Andhika Department of Administration Sciences, Faculty of Social and Political Sciences, Padjadjaran University


The performance of a bad bureaucracy indicates a bureaucracy is riddled with problems; a pathology which arose not always coming from outside the bureaucratic body, but pathology that has been flourishing and will be exerting influence when the bureaucracy is unhealthy. This research article would like to give an overview of the incidence of the pathological bureaucracy which argumentation pathology can prevent. The phenomenon occurs that the bureaucracy could not deliver good public services and bureaucracy is a den of disease. The specific purpose of this research is focused on finding ways of preventing the pathology of the bureaucracy that comes from a variety of scientific literature. The method in this research article is systematic reviews technique that tries to identify all the written evidence exists regarding research themes. The results of this study reveal that the pathology of the bureaucracy is something to be prevented if we want the bureaucracy to run the task properly, one of the ways that can be done is to do a bureaucratic innovation (an innovation on structure, systems, culture). The innovation of bureaucracy will not only make changes to the organization to prevent the pathology of the bureaucracy but also as an ingredient to do discretion for a government policy especially regional government.


Alberti, A., & Bertucci, G. (2007). Innovations in Governance and Public Administration: Key Issues and Perspectives. In Innovations in Governance in the Middle East, North Africa, and Western Balkans (pp. 3–12). New York: United Nations.

AlKhatib, H. (2013). E-Government Systems Success and User Acceptance in Developing Countries: The Role of Perceived Support Quality. Brunel Business School - Brunel University. Retrieved from

AlQahtani, K. M. (2013). Investigating the Impact of Bureaucratic Factors on Government Organisational Performance in the Kingdom of Bahrain: A Multiple Case Study Approach. Brunel Business School - Brunel University.

Amadi, L., & Ekekwe, E. (2014). Corruption and development administration in Africa: Institutional approach. African Journal of Political Science and International Relations, 8(6), 163–174.

Eyre, C. (2011). Patronage, Power, and Corruption in Pharaonic Egypt. International Journal of Public Administration, 34(11), 701–711.

Gailmard, S., & Patty, J. W. (2012). Formal Models of Bureaucracy. Annual Review of Political Science, 15, 353–377.

Goodsell, C. T. (2004). The Case for Bureaucracy: A Public Administration Polemic (4th ed.). Washington, D.C.: CQ Press.

Goodsell, C. T. (2015). New Case Bureaucracy. Washington, D.C.: CQ Press.

Kemendagri. (2016). Peringatan Hari Otda 2016, Kemendagri Beri Penghargaan Sejumlah Pemda. Retrieved from

Moyo, S. (2014). Corruption in Zimbabwe: An Examination of the Roles of the State and Civil Society in Combating Corruption. University of Central Lancashire.

Ombudsman RI. (2016). Laporan Statistik. Retrieved from

Pinho, J. A. G. de, & Sacramento, A. R. S. (2015). Brazil: Between the Modern Bureaucracy of Weber and Resilient Patrimonialism. Management Research: Journal of the Iberoamerican Academy of Management, 13(2), 140–159.

Rose-Ackerman, S. (1999). Corruption and Government Causes, Consequences, and Reform. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

Shi, S., & Temzelides, T. (2004). A Model of Bureaucracy and Corruption. International Economic Review, 45(3), 873–908.

Tahmer, A. (2013). Reformasi Birokrasi pada Pemerintah Daerah Provinsi Banten. Universitas Padjadjaran.
How to Cite
ANDHIKA, Lesmana Rian. Pathology Bureaucracy. Jurnal Bina Praja: Journal of Home Affairs Governance, [S.l.], v. 9, n. 1, p. 101-114, june 2017. ISSN 2503-3360. Available at: <>. Date accessed: 28 june 2017. doi: