Portrayal of defense bureaucracy reform at Indonesia for effective public governance service

This study aims to examine the dynamics, constraints, and institutional factors that shape defense bureaucracy reform in Indonesia. Specifically, it seeks to identify structural, cultural, and governance-related barriers; analyze leadership orientation, digital fragmentation, and meritocracy-related challenges; and develop a conceptual understanding of how these factors collectively influence the effectiveness of defense governance. This research employs a descriptive qualitative approach with thematic analysis. Data were collected through in-depth interviews and field observations involving 15 key informants from the Ministry of Defense, the Defense Technology Agency, and the Headquarters of the Indonesian National Armed Forces. The analytical process involved open coding, axial coding, and selective coding using NVivo 12. In addition, a Fishbone Analysis was utilized to map the root causes comprehensively, encompassing institutional, structural, and cultural determinants that affect the progress and effectiveness of reform. The findings reveal persistent institutional rigidity, fragmented digital governance, inconsistent policy direction resulting from leadership turnover, and weak implementation of meritocracy dominated by seniority norms. Coordination gaps between civilian and military components further impede reform progress. Significant disparities were also observed between the reform achievements of the Ministry of Defense and the Headquarters of the Indonesian National Armed Forces. Defense bureaucracy reform in Indonesia remains constrained by deeply rooted structural and cultural factors. Core principles of modern governance adaptiveness, transparency, and performance orientation have not yet been fully realized. Comprehensive reforms are required in digital adaptation, leadership transformation, the application of meritocratic systems, and the development of defense-specific reform indicators that are contextually grounded rather than relying solely on national reform standards designed primarily for civilian institutions. Such measures are essential to establishing an effective and accountable defense governance framework.