Keywords

Center of Excellence, Change Management Model, Procurement Knowledge.

Introduction

Public sector spending in Indonesia is allocated through the State Budget (APBN). The APBN itself according to the National Development Planning Agency (Bappenas) is a tool of state financial power used to achieve state goals through integrated governance of development management starting from planning, budgeting, implementation, control (evaluation and supervision), and reporting (accountability). Based on the monitoring of the Government Procurement Policy Institute (LKPP), the allocation of Government spending in Indonesia every year has increased in terms of budget size, currently the total government procurement budget in Indonesia for the last three years has reached more than 50% of the total APBN/APBD.

However, the expenditure target in the APBN which continues to increase in this country is not followed by the realization of the stated expenditure, especially from the Government PBJ sector. Based on LKPP data in 2019 from financial realization and physical procurement realization, both of them did not reach the set target. Even the physical realization for the last 3 (three) years did not reach the set target. This is as seen in the graphic sequence taken from the LKPP online monev site as shown in Table 1 below:

Table 1 Financial and Physical Realization of Government Expenditures, Source Lkpp
Performance Procurement	2018		2019		2020
	Budget	Physique	Budget	Physique	Budget	Physique
Target	63.11%	70.85%	93.71	Target	63.11%	70.85%
Realization	82.50%	62.44%	86.69	Realization	82.50%	62.44%

Furthermore, the effectiveness of government procurement is often highlighted in addition to the increasing budget value, and the realization that has not been optimal, is also prone to fraud. Based on data from the Corruption Eradication Commission (KPK), most cases of corruption in government circles occur through the procurement of goods and services. The KPK stated that 80% of corruption cases that had been handled so far were related to cases in the government's PBJ process (Meilisa, 2019).

For this reason, in order to reduce losses and increase the effectiveness of the provision of goods and services to support the economy, the Government has issued Presidential Regulation Number 16 of 2018 concerning the procurement of government goods/services, where this regulation encourages a paradigm shift in the actors of procurement of goods/services in creating value for money, creating procurement innovations, as well as developing procurement science for sustainable procurement of goods/services. One of the mandates of Presidential Regulation 16 of 2018 to realize the above is the establishment of UKPBJ which is the center of procurement excellence (Center of Excellence). UKPBJ as a center of excellence for procurement is a work unit that has strategic, collaborative, performance-oriented characteristics.

In 2020, the fastest K/Ls to meet the proactive UKPBJ level are the UKPBJ Ministry of Finance, Ministry of Education and Culture, and the Government Procurement Policy Institute. So that by analyzing the key success factors of UKPBJ achievement in the 3 (three) K/Ls, it can be replicated as procurement knowledge related to increasing UKPBJ maturity in other K/L environments. In proving UKPBJ as the application of procurement science for sustainable procurement of goods/services, one of the research gaps in this study proves the influence of organizational change variables as independent variables that are able to influence the capacity maturity model variable as the dependent variable in four variables: Process, Organization, HR, and Information System to develop UKPBJ maturity level in Indonesia.

Formulation of the Problem

Based on the above background, the problem in this research is to systematically describe the management of organizational change to increase the optimal level of UKPBJ maturity in Indonesia, by identifying:

1. What is the effect of organizational change on increasing UKPBJ maturity;

2. What is the specifics of the Change Management Model built;

3. How to map the risk mitigation needed to control the critical path;

4. How the change strategy can be implemented.

Research Purposes

The research objectives to be achieved as an effort to solve problems and understand the symptoms (phenomena) described in the background are as follows:

1. Analyze the effect of organizational change on UKPBJ maturity level;

2. Build a change management model to increase UKPBJ maturity;

3. Carry out risk control of critical paths;

4. Designing UKPBJ Maturity Improvement Strategy.

Benefits of Research

Research on change management in developing UKPBJ maturity levels is expected to produce several benefits, including the following:

1. Gaining a scientific understanding of the urgency of the Change Management strategy to increase the Maturity Level of the UKPBJ organization;

2. As a reference for procurement kowledge to improve UKPBJ policies in Indonesia;

3. Completing the results of previous research on change management in government organizations, especially in the field of public sector procurement.

The Scope of Research

The scope that limits this research includes the following:

1. The research locations are K/L that are able and fastest to reach a proactive level in 2020 after Perpres 18 is enacted, namely the Ministry of Finance (Kemenkeu), Ministry of Education and Culture (Kemendikbud), and LKPP;

2. The UKPBJ Maturity Model to be analyzed consists of 4 (four) domains which include: Process, Institutional, HR, and Information Systems, as well as a total of 9 (nine) variables in each of these domains, and adopted from the Capability Maturity Model Theory.

3. Analysis of the elements of change is limited to: leadership (authentic leadership) culture (Denison Model), and human resources (individual readiness to change), which will affect the development of UKPBJ organizational maturity optimally.

Novelty

The novelty of this study is to determine the effect of organizational change: leadership (authentic leadership), culture (Denison Model), and human resources (individual readiness to change) on the UKPBJ capability maturity model variable in Indonesia which includes institutions, business processes, human resources and information systems. Furthermore, the effects of these changes were developed into the UKPBJ Strategic Model Change Management in increasing the maturity of UKPBJ in Indonesia, and complementing the model carried out the preparation of a UKPBJ Maturity Improvement Strategy in Indonesia which was equipped with assumptions & risks based on Logical Framework Analysis, and subsequently formulated Key Indicators of Change Management Strategy as Action UKPBJ Maturity Key Drivers Achievement Plan in Indonesia.

Literature Review

Capability Maturity Model

The application of the maturity model within the Government is aimed at increasing the benefits of supply and services, especially in this case the government must take action to optimize the involvement of contractors and suppliers who carry out procurement to support functions that support development performance and social welfare. Furthermore, the government should pay attention to the compliance of core competencies regarding procurement and assignment in contract management, and strengthen capacity in assessing the process of strategic procurement tasks undertaken by the government (Burt, 2003; Burman, 1999; Kelman, 2001; Garrett & Rendon, 2005). Although government organizations have more merits and efficiency facts for assessing work, continuous improvement is needed to deal with issues of complexity, multivariate dimensions.

Previous research on the capability maturity model recommended the establishment of a framework to improve analysis and planning for goal-oriented change management. This is also as the results of research conducted by that in the public sector that requires strengthening the framework, among others: assessing of project management process knowledge areas (Putri et al., 2019), health information systems in the public sector (Katuu, 2019), a service innovation framework (Kohlegger et al., 2009), evaluating public service delivery in emerging markets (Sharma et al., 2011), and delivering public sector efficiencies (Jeong et al., 2006)

Change Management

Change in the course of an organization is an ever-present feature, both at the operational and strategic levels (Burnes, 1996). As a result, organizational change cannot be separated from organizational strategy, or vice versa (Burnes, 2004; By, 2005). Furthermore, it is important in changing an organization to have good governance in the management of much needed managerial skills (Pich, 2002).

Furthermore, the need for change in organizations is often unpredictable and can be triggered by many things, for example something that is reactive, partial, impermanent and often triggered by organizational crisis situations (Burnes, 2004; De Wit & Meyer, 2005; Luecke, 2003; Nelson, 2003). Organizations that can survive and succeed in a highly competitive and continuously evolving environment are those that can accept the success of a change management (Luecke, 2003; Okumus & Hemmington, 1998), and of all change programs initiated, the failure rate is around 70 percent (Balogun & Hailey, 2008).

Based on a search on previous research on change management, provides an explanation of the results of management research in the public sector, based on five factors including: context, content, process, leadership, and change outcomes (Kuipers et al., 2014), with significant factors, among others, Behavior in leadership is related to the change process that occurs, and most research on public sector change management identifies planned change increasing organizational efficiency as the main result of change and its essence. implementation of New Public Management (NPM).

In the quantitative method there are several proposed hypotheses which include:

Leadership

H1: Leadership affects the Process

H2: Leadership has an effect on Institutions

H3: Leadership affects HR

H4: Leadership has an effect on Information Systems

Culture

H5: Culture affects Process

H6: Culture affects Institutions

H7: Culture affects HR

H8: Culture affects the Information System

Impact

H9: Human Resources affect Procurement Management

H10: Human Resource Affects Provider Management

H11: Human Resources have an effect on Performance Management

H12: Human Resources have an effect on Risk Management

Research Conceptual Framework

The research framework that will be carried out is to achieve the research objectives based on the expected analysis and kebraun as shown in Figure 1 below:

Research Methods

This research uses a combination research method approach (mixed methods research). According to Creswell & Clark (2017), mixed methods research is a research approach that involves collecting quantitative and qualitative data, integrating the two data, and using a different research design between quantitative and qualitative.

Research Location and Time

Data collection will be carried out in 2020 to 2021. Data collection through respondents in the Ministry of Finance Headquarters, Ministry of Education and Culture and LKPP.

Data Collection Techniques

The data collection carried out at this stage was through semi-structured in-depth interviews with face-to-face sources. In a structured interview, the researcher has a list of questions and asks the interviewees the same questions to obtain data that can then be compared (Taylor et al., 2015).

Sampling Technique

The sampling method applied in this study is convenience sampling which is part of non-probability sampling. Non-probability sampling method, ie every consumer who meets the population criteria does not have the same opportunity or opportunity to be selected as a sample because the sample selection is based on the researcher's decision. Convenience sampling is a data collection technique based on certain research criteria. Convenience sampling is also done because the exact number of the population is not known. The criteria for respondents in this study were UKPBJ members at the Ministry of Finance, Ministry of Education and Culture and LKPP with a total of 180 (one hundred and eighty) people.

Data Analysis

In this study, the data analysis methods that will be used include: Structural Equation Model (SEM as a quantitative data analysis instrument to test the effect between the variables proposed in this study and at the same time test the proposed hypothesis. Furthermore, the resulting effect will be an action plan for strategy). proposed to meet the needs of organizational maturity development resulting from the qualitative data analysis method through the soft system methodology. In order for the strategic action plan to work, the effectiveness of the plan is assessed through the Logical Framework Approach (LFA). as an instrument to analyze project planning and management to ensure the achievement of the UKPBJ organizational maturity variable based on the required assumptions/risks.

Research Model

This study uses an explanatory sequential research model; Creswell & Creswell (2017) states that this model consists of two stages, namely quantitative data analysis and followed by qualitative analysis to clarify the results of the first stage.

Results and Discussion

Descriptive Statistics

This study involved 180 (one hundred and eighty) respondents. The distribution of respondents is dominated by male sex (75%), with a working period of less than two years (81%), with the most education being Bachelors (61.87%) and with the highest number of respondents from the Ministry of Education and Culture (60.77% ).

Inferential Statistical Analysis Results

The analytical technique used to test the quantitative model in this study is the Structural Equation Modeling-Partial Least Squares (SEM-PLS) analysis. The tool used in conducting SEM-PLS analysis is SmartPLS 3.3.3. SEM-PLS does not assume a certain distribution, such as a normal distribution for parameter estimation, so it does not require parametric techniques to test the significance of parameters (Ghozali, 2011). The PLS evaluation model has a non-parametric nature (Hair et al., 2021). The PLS evaluation model is measured through the evaluation of the measurement model (outer model) and structural model (inner model).

Evaluation of the Measurement Model (Outer Model)

According to Hair et al. (2021), the evaluation of the measurement model (outer model) is carried out based on 4 criteria, namely Convergent Validity, Discriminant Validity, Average Variance Extracted (AVE), and Composite Reliability. The evaluation criteria for the measurement model (outer model) can be seen in the following Table 2.

Table 2 Evaluation Criteria for the Measurement Model (Outer Model)
Criteria	Standard	Description
Convergent validity	Load factor value >0.70	The strength of the indicator in reflecting the latent variable, if the value is < 0.70, then the indicator is removed from the model
Discriminant validity/cross loading	The square root value of AVE is greater than the correlation value between latent variables	Can use the value of cross loading indicator correlation to latent variables is greater than other latent variables
Average Variance Extracted (AVE)	AVE >0.50	AVE value must be above 0.50
Composite reliability	>0.60	Measuring internal consistency

Convergent Validity

The evaluation of the outer model is carried out on the construct that is reflected by the indicators, by running the loading factor model for 7 latent variables with 49 indicators as shown below (Figure 2).

The loading factor value of each indicator in this study is as follows:

Based on the Table 3, all loading factor values have values above 0.700, so it can be concluded that the indicators used meet the valid and reliable criteria.

Table 3 Third Model Loading Factor
Variable	Indicator	Load Factor Value
Authentic Leadership	AL1	0.741
	AL10	0.795
	AL11	0.789
	AL12	0.840
	AL13	0.812
	AL4	0.762
	AL7	0.740
Culture	C10	0.803
	C11	0.793
	C12	0.843
	C6	0.760
Human Resources	HR1	0.756
	HR2	0.879
	HR3	0.878
	HR4	0.792
	HR5	0.762
Process	P1	0.805
	P2	0.867
	P3	0.734
	P5	0.846
	P6	0.893
	P7	0.812
	P8	0.892
Institutional	K1	0.813
	K2	0.746
	K3	0.887
	K4	0.874
HR	S1	0.834
	S2	0.876
	S3	0.818
	S4	0.837
Information Systems	SI1	0.822
	SI2	0.848
	SI3	0.837

Discriminant Validity

Discriminant validity shows the correlation value of the indicator with the construct. The method used to assess discriminant validity is to compare the square root of the Average Variance Extracted (AVE) for each construct with the correlation between the construct and other constructs in the model. The square root value of AVE for each construct can be seen in the following Table 4.

Table 4 Discriminant Validity - Fornell-Larcker Criterion
Variable	Authentic Leadership	Culture	Human Resources	Process Domain	Institutional Domain	HR Domain	Information System Domain
Authentic Leadership	0.784	-	-	-	-	-	-
Culture	0.689	0.800	-	-	-	-	-
Human Resources	0.498	0.560	0.815	-	-	-	-
Process	0.680	0.703	0.670	0.837	-	-	-
Institutional	0.500	0.591	0.749	0.705	0.832	-	-
HR	0.445	0.576	0.418	0.535	0.446	0.842
Information Systems	0.546	0.541	0.427	0.561	0.521	0.661	0.835

Based on the Table 4, it can be seen that the square root value of AVE for each construct is greater than the correlation between constructs and other constructs.

Average Variance Extracted (AVE)

The Average Variance Extracted (AVE) value for each construct can be seen in the following Table 5.

Table 5 Average Variance Extracted (AVE)
Variable	Average Variance Extracted (AVE)
Authentic Leadership	0.614
Culture	0.640
Human Resources	0.665
Process Domain	0.701
Institutional Domain	0.692
HR Domain	0.708
Information System Domain	0.698

According to Hair et al. (2021), the recommended AVE value should be greater than 0.50. Based on the Table 5, it can be seen that the AVE value for all constructs has an AVE value above 0.50.

Table 6 Composite Reliability
Variable	Cronbach's Alpha	rho_A	Composite Reliability
Authentic Leadership	0.895	0.896	0.917
Culture	0.813	0.817	0.877
Human Resources	0.872	0.876	0.908
Process Domain	0.928	0.932	0.942
Institutional Domain	0.850	0.859	0.900
HR Domain	0.863	0.865	0.907
Information System Domain	0.790	0.816	0.874

Composite Reliability

The composite reliability value in the measurement model (outer model) is used to measure the stability and internal consistency of the indicator. A measurement model (outer model) is declared to have stability and internal consistency of indicators if it has a composite reliability value greater than 0.60 (>0.60) ρc.

Based on the Table 6, it can be seen that the values for all constructs are greater than 0.60. In addition, all constructs in the research model also have Cronbach's alpha values greater than 0.60. This shows that all constructs in this study have good internal stability and consistency indicators ρc.

Evaluation of the Structural Model (Inner Model)

Structural model testing (inner model) is to evaluate the influence between latent variables and test hypotheses. Structural model is evaluated by using R Square for endogenous variables and comparing t-count with t-table (t-table with 95% confidence level is 1.96). PLS-SEM uses a non-parametric bootstrap procedure to test its significance coefficient. Calculation of primary data as many as 180 respondents, then the boostratpping method is carried out as many as 2000 sub samples according to the following picture (Figure 3).

Based on the results of calculations using bootstrapping, it can be seen that the inner model relationship between constructs and the significance value and R Square value is shown in the following Table 7.

Table 7 Value of R Squares
Variable	R Square
Process Domain	0.650
Institutional Domain	0.604
HR Domain	0.347
Information System Domain	0.361

The results of the SEM-PLS calculation, based on the literature from Hair et al. (2021), SEM-PLS aims to maximize the R Square value of the endogenous latent variables in the path model. Thus, the goal is a high R Square value. In this study, the process and institutional variables had a moderate value, while the HR and Information System variables had a low value

Overall Model Construct Test

The evaluation of the combined significance estimate can answer the proposed null hypothesis whether it is accepted or rejected for all the data that has been collected. Evaluation of the structural model through the bootstrapping procedure as many as 2000 sub-samples is shown in the following Table 8.

Table 8 Value of Path Coefficients
Code	Correlation	Original Sample (O)	Sample mean (M)	Standard Deviation (STDEV)	T Statistics (|O/STDEV|)	P Values
H1	Authentic Leadership → Process Domain	0.296	0.296	0.081	3,665	0.000
H2	Authentic Leadership → Institutional Domain	0.049	0.045	0.074	0.659	0.510
H3	Authentic Leadership →HR Domain	0.065	0.070	0.088	0.736	0.462
H4	Authentic → Information System Domain	0.302	0.305	0.090	3.362	0.001
H5	Culture → Process Domain	0.301	0.300	0.074	4.058	0.000
H6	Culture → Institutional Domain	0.220	0.241	0.110	2.008	0.045
H7	Culture → HR Domain	0.459	0.445	0.119	3.861	0.000
H8	Culture →Information System Domain	0.260	0.269	0.100	2.606	0.009
H9	Human Resources →Process Domain	0.354	0.355	0.075	4.692	0.000
H10	Human Resources →Institutional Domain	0.601	0.586	0.087	6.894	0.000
H11	Human Resources → HR Domain	0.129	0.141	0.090	1.428	0.153
H12	Human Resources → Information System Domain	0.131	0.123	0.092	1.415	0.157

Based on the Table 8, it can be concluded as follows:

1. The results of the t-statistical test of the Authentic Leadership variable on the Process Domain is 3.665, so the null hypothesis is rejected, so Authentic Leadership affects the Process Domain.

2. The results of the t-statistical test of the Authentic Leadership variable on the Institutional Domain is 0.659, so the null hypothesis is accepted, so Authentic Leadership does not affect the Institutional Domain.

3. The results of the t-statistical test of the Authentic Leadership variable on the HR Domain is 0.736, so the null hypothesis is accepted, so Authentic Leadership does not affect the HR Domain.

4. The results of the t-statistical test of the Authentic Leadership variable on the Information System Domain is 3.362, so the null hypothesis is rejected, so Authentic Leadership affects the Information System Domain.

5. The results of the t-statistical test of the Culture variable on the Process Domain is 4,058, so the null hypothesis is rejected, so that Culture affects the Process Domain.

6. The results of the t-statistical test of the Culture variable on the Institutional Domain is 2008. Then the null hypothesis is rejected, so that Culture affects the Institutional Domain.

7. The results of the t-statistical test of the Culture variable on the HR Domain is 3,861, so the null hypothesis is rejected, so that Culture affects the HR Domain.

8. The results of the t-statistical test of the Culture variable on the Information Systems Domain is 2,606, so the null hypothesis is rejected, so that Culture affects the Information Systems Domain.

9. The results of the t-statistical test of the Human Resources variable on the Process Domain is 4,692, then the null hypothesis is rejected, so that Human Resources affects the Process Domain.

10. The results of the t-statistical test of the Human Resources variable on the Institutional Domain is 6,894, so the null hypothesis is rejected, so that Human Resources affects the Institutional Domain.

11. The results of the t-statistical test of the Human Resources variable on the HR Domain is 1,428, so the null hypothesis is accepted, so that Human Resources does not affect the HR Domain.

12. The results of the t-statistical test of the Human Resources variable on the Information System Domain is 1.415, so the null hypothesis is accepted, so that Human Resources does not affect the Information System Domain.

Discussion

Organizational changes that occur in order to develop UKPBJ maturity include involving leadership abilities based on openness and honesty in UKPBJ which play a role in the successful management of the integrated PBJ process throughout the procurement process chain. This leadership ability has no influence on the condition of the UKPBJ organization which is responsible for the function of procurement of goods/services as well as in HR planning in order to expand the role and fulfillment of PBJ's functional positions. Furthermore, the culture that has been prevailing in the UKPBJ organization has played a role in the successful management of the integrated PBJ process throughout the procurement process chain, making UKPBJ the organizational unit responsible for the function of procurement of goods/services, implications of UKPBJ's role for personnel in it, and the successful management of the procurement information system is in accordance with service standards and information system security. For this reason, it is important for organizations to instill and implement a culture related to change management to all parties involved, including personnel involved in changes in UKPBJ, which play a role in the successful management of the integrated PBJ process throughout the procurement process chain while helping to strengthen UKPBJ's position as an organizational unit that responsible for the function of procurement of goods/services. Organizations need to develop and find personnel with leadership abilities based on openness and honesty. For this reason, it is important for organizations to instill and implement a culture related to change management to all parties involved, including personnel involved in changes in UKPBJ, which play a role in the successful management of the integrated PBJ process throughout the procurement process chain while helping to strengthen UKPBJ's position as an organizational unit that responsible for the function of procurement of goods/services. Organizations need to develop and find personnel with leadership abilities based on openness and honesty. For this reason, it is important for organizations to instill and implement a culture related to change management to all parties involved, including personnel involved in changes in UKPBJ, which play a role in the successful management of the integrated PBJ process throughout the procurement process chain while helping to strengthen UKPBJ's position as an organizational unit that responsible for the function of procurement of goods/services. Organizations need to develop and find personnel with leadership abilities based on openness and honesty. including personnel involved in changes in UKPBJ play a role in the successful management of the integrated PBJ process throughout the procurement process chain while helping to strengthen UKPBJ's position as an organizational unit responsible for the procurement function of goods/services. Organizations need to develop and find personnel with leadership abilities based on openness and honesty. including personnel involved in changes in UKPBJ play a role in the successful management of the integrated PBJ process throughout the procurement process chain while helping to strengthen UKPBJ's position as an organizational unit responsible for the procurement function of goods/services. Organizations need to develop and find personnel with leadership abilities based on openness and honesty.

Furthermore, to realize these changes, it is recommended strengthening which includes:

1. Implementing an inline organizational culture policy with the SKOPPER Philosophy;

2. Strengthening through Completion of Policies and SOPs that are inline with Sustainable Public Procurement;

3. Optimization of competency improvement and strengthening of the remuneration system;

4. Develop digital leadership that supports digital transformation through sustainable knowledge management.

Conclusion

Based on the results of data processing, related to the development of UKPBJ organizational maturity, it was concluded that Organizational changes have an influence on the maturity level of UKPBJ, especially from organizational culture factors that are in line with UKPBJ organizational principles (SKOPPer). For this reason, to realize the impact of organizational change, an effective change management strategy in the context of developing UKPBJ maturity is based on a strategic approach, namely leadership, culture, and human resources. The change management strategy requires risk control indicators for UKPBJ maturity development to have Key Indicators to realize the formation of key drivers for UKPBJ maturity variables. After the key indicators for the formation of the maturity variable key drivers can be determined.

Suggestion

In connection with the conclusions above, the suggestions that can be put forward in this study are from the perspective ofIn the process, it is necessary to develop various breakthroughs and innovations in the procurement of government goods/services that can increase efficiency and effectiveness, as well as the value added ratio from the previous process. Regarding organizational strengthening, further research can be developed on the health of UKPB organizations in Indonesia. As for strengthening human resources, it is necessary to refine policies regarding remuneration and build a road map regarding the need for Functional Positions for the procurement of goods/services with competency standards that support Sustainable Public Procurement. Furthermore, regarding the strengthening of information technology/systems, it is necessary to develop a comprehensive Government Procurement Management Information System architecture.

References

Balogun, J., & Hailey, V.H. (2008). Exploring strategic change. Pearson Education.

Indexed at, Google Scholar

Burnes, B. (1996). No such thing as… a “one best way” to manage organizational change. Management decision.

Indexed at, Google Scholar, Cross Ref

Burnes, B. (2004). Managing change: A strategic approach to organisational dynamics. Pearson Education.

Indexed at, Google Scholar

Burt, D.N. (2003). World Class Supply Management: The Key To Supply Chain Management 7th Ed.

By, R.T. (2005). Changes in employee perceptions during organizational change. Journal of Change Management, 5(4), 369-380.

Indexed at, Google Scholar, Cross Ref

Creswell, J.W., & Clark, V.L.P. (2017). Designing and conducting mixed methods research. Sage publications.

Indexed at, Google Scholar

Creswell, J.W., & Creswell, J.D. (2017). Research design: Qualitative, quantitative, and mixed methods approaches. Sage publications.

Indexed at, Google Scholar

De Wit, B., & Meyer, R. (2005). Strategy synthesis: Resolving strategy paradoxes to create competitive advantage London: Thomson.

Indexed at, Google Scholar

Garrett, G.A., & Rendon, R.G. (2005). Contract management: Organizational assessment tools. National Contract Management Association.

Indexed at, Google Scholar

Ghozali, I. (2011). Multivariate analysis application with SPSS program. Semarang: Diponegoro University Publishing Agency.

Google Scholar

Hair Jr, J.F., Hult, G.T.M., Ringle, C.M., & Sarstedt, M. (2021). A primer on partial least squares structural equation modeling (PLS-SEM). Sage publications.

Indexed at, Google Scholar

Jeong, K.S., Haigh, R.P., & Amaratunga, R.D.G. (2006). Delivering public sector efficiencies: the potential role of capability maturity models in construction.

Google Scholar

Katuu, S. (2019). Health Information Systems, eHealth Strategy, and the Management of Health Records: The Quest to Transform South Africa's Public Health Sector. In Healthcare Policy and Reform: Concepts, Methodologies, Tools, and Applications (pp. 493-517). IGI Global.

Google Scholar

Kelman, S. (2001). Putting contracting at the core. Government Executive, 33(11), 16.

Kohlegger, M., Maier, R., & Thalmann, S. (2009). Understanding maturity models. Results of a structured content analysis (pp. 51-61). na.

Kuipers, B.S., Higgs, M., Kickert, W., Tummers, L., Grandia, J., & Van der Voet, J. (2014). The management of change in public organizations: A literature review. Public administration, 92(1), 1-20.

Indexed at, Google Scholar, Cross Ref

Luecke, R. (2003). Managing change and transition (Vol. 3). Harvard Business Press.

Indexed at, Google Scholar

Meilisa, H. (2019). The KPK said that 80% of corruption is related to the procurement of goods and services. Detik news.

Nelson, L. (2003). A case study in organisational change: Implications for theory. The Learning Organization.

Indexed at, Google Scholar, Cross Ref

Okumus, F., & Hemmington, N. (1998). Management of the change process in hotel companies: an investigation at unit level. International Journal of Hospitality Management, 17(4), 363-374.

Indexed at, Google Scholar, Cross Ref

Pich, M.T., Loch, C.H., & Meyer, A.D. (2002). On uncertainty, ambiguity, and complexity in project management. Management science, 48(8), 1008-1023.

Indexed at, Google Scholar, Cross Ref

Putri, S.M., Pratami, D., Tripiawan, W., & Rahmanto, G. (2019). Assessing of project management process knowledge area: procurement based on project management maturity model pmmm)(case study of pqr company). In IOP Conference Series: Materials Science and Engineering (Vol. 505, No. 1, p. 012004). IOP Publishing.

Google Scholar

Sharma, A., Gangadharan, G.R., Kummamuru, K., Somasekhara, J., & Hartman, A. (2011). Evaluating public service delivery in emerging markets. In Proceedings of 2011 IEEE International Conference on Service Operations, Logistics and Informatics (pp. 214-219). IEEE.

Google Scholar, Cross Ref

Taylor, S.J., Bogdan, R., & DeVault, M. (2015). Introduction to qualitative research methods: A guidebook and resource. John Wiley & Sons.

Indexed at, Google Scholar

Received: 27-Jan-2022, Manuscript No. ASMJ-22-11006; Editor assigned: 29-Jan-2022, PreQC No. ASMJ-22-11006(PQ); Reviewed: 14- Feb-2022, QC No. ASMJ-22-11006; Revised: 23-May-2022, Manuscript No. ASMJ-22-11006(R); Published: 30-May-2022