THE IDEAL POSITION OF PUBLIC RELATION IN THE GOVERNMENT OF INDONESIA IN MINISTRY OF COOPERATIVE AND SMEs

  • Ngadisah Ngadisah Institut Pemerintahan Dalam Negeri
  • Erliana Hasan Institut Pemerintahan Dalam Negeri
  • Yunita Sari Universitas Prof. DR. Moestopo (Beragama)
  • Conrita Ermanto Universitas Krisnadwipayana
  • Darmono Darmono Universitas Prof. DR. Moestopo (Beragama)

Abstract

Since the existence of Public Relation sector in Indonesia, Public Relation Unit as an institution has not been managed properly, although the Presidential Decree Number 45 of 1974 concerning the organizational structure of governmental departments has regulated the placement of Public Relation Unit, promoting its important existence until it gradually gains improvement. In the government circles, the attitude and view on Public Relation has only recently developed, at first as a unit dealing with matters relating to the mass media and having not directly involved people as a target of its activities. This study aims to evaluate the position of Public Relation in the bureaucracy of the Ministry of Cooperatives and SMEs to answer the questions of the study: (1) how is the relation between the position of echelon III and the performance level of Public Relation, and (2) what is the ideal position of Public Relation in the Ministry of Cooperatives and SMEs. This study applies Weber’s model of bureaucracy with a combination of two-way asymmetrical and two-way symmetrical models initiated by James Grunig and Todd Hunt (1984) and Cybernetics Model proposed by Littlejohn (1999). The findings show that (1) the position of Public Relation in the bureaucracy of the Ministry of Cooperatives and SMEs inhibits its functions and role because it is not given the opportunity to play the role as a communication technician and placed not in a dominant position. Therefore, Public Relation takes longer time to provide public services, and (2) the ideal Public Relation in the bureaucracy of the Ministry of Cooperatives and SMEs should be positioned at a more strategic level within the organizational structure, granted special authority from the supreme leader, and capable of deciding actions and serving without having to go through a long bureaucratic process.

References

Bungin, B. (2007). Penelitian Kualitatif: Komunikasi, Ekonomi, Kebijakan Publik, Dan Ilmu Sosial Lainnya. Jakarta: Kencana.

Cutlip, S. M., Center, A. H., & Broom, G. M. (2009). Effective Public Relation (10th ed.). New Jersey: Prentice Hall.

Gilboa, E. (2008). Searching for a theory of public diplomacy. The annals of the American academy of political and social science, 616(1), 55-77.

Gregory, A. (2000). Systems theories and Public Relation practice. Journal of Communication Management, 4(3), 266-277.

Grunig, J. E., & Hunt, T. (1992). Managing Public Relation. New York: Holt, Rinehart and Winston.

Grunig, J. E., Grunig, L. A., Sriramesh, K., Huang, Y.-H., & Lyra, A. (1995). Models of Public Relation in an international setting. Journal of Public Relation Research, 7(3), 163-186.

Grunig, L. A. (1990). Power in the Public Relation department. Journal of Public Relation Research, 2(1-4), 115-155.

Guba, E. G., & Lincoln, Y. S. (1994). Competing paradigms in qualitative research. Dalam N. K. Denzin, & Y. S. Lincoln (Penyunt.), Handbook of qualitative research (hal. 105-117). London: Sage.

Guiniven, J. E. (2002). Dealing with activism in Canada: an ideal cultural fit for the two-way symmetrical Public Relation model. Public Relation Review, 28(4), 393-402.

Hupe, P., & Hill, M. (2007). Street‐Level bureaucracy and public accountability. Public Administration, 85(2), 279-299.

King, D. Y. (1995). Bureaucracy and implementation of complex tasks in rapidly developing states: evidence from Indonesia. Studies in Comparative International Development, 30(4), 78-92.

Kuhn, T. S. (1996). The Structure of Scientific Revolutions (3rd ed.). Chicago, IL: University of Chicago Press.

Ledingham, J. A. (2001). Government-community relationships: Extending the relational theory of Public Relation. Public Relation Review, 27(3), 285-295.

Littlejohn, S. W. (1999). Theories of Human Communication. California: Wadsworth.

Liu, B. F., Horsley, J., & Yang, K. (2012). Overcoming negative media coverage: Does government communication matter? Journal of Public Administration Research and Theory, 22(3), 597-621.

Long, L. W., & Hazelton, V. (1987). Public Relation: A theoretical and practical response. Public Relation Review, 13(2), 3-13.

Moore, H. F., & Kalupa, F. B. (1985). Public Relation: Principles, Cases, and Problems (9th ed.). Homewood, Illinois: R. D. Irwin.

Muhadjir, N. (2000). Metodologi Penelitian Kualitatif (4th ed.). Yogyakarta: Rake Sarasin.

Nawawi, H., & Martini, M. (1996). Penelitian Terapan. Yogyakarta: Gajah Mada University Press.

Rachmadi, F. (1994). Public Relation Dalam Teori dan Praktek. Jakarta: Gramedia Pustaka Utama.

Rohdewohld, R. (1995). Public administration in Indonesia. Melbourne: Monash University Press.

Sugiyono. (2010). Metode Penelitian: Kuantitatif, Kualitatif dan R&D. Bandung: Alfabeta.

Sunarto. (2012). Humas Pemerintah dan Komunikasi Persuasif. Bandung: Alfabeta.

Weber, M. (1958). From Max Weber: Essays

in Sociology. (H. H. Gerth, C. W. Mills, Penyunt., H. H. Gerth, & C. W. Mills, Penerj.) New York: Oxford University Press.

Published
2018-02-28
Section
Articles