promise of digitalization is realized only partially when it is not accompanied by parallel
investment in human resource capacity, institutional culture, and procedural discipline
(Zacharias et al., 2021).
Public service delivery functions as one of the clearest indicators of how citizens perceive
the performance of the state, whether that service originates from civil servants or from private
providers acting on the government's behalf (Fakhriyah et al., 2022). Public service, in this
sense, denotes every activity conducted by government or private actors that produces goods or
services intended to satisfy collective needs (Fakhriyah et al., 2022). This framing is broadly
consistent with Indonesia's Public Service Act No. 25 of 2009, which remains the subject of
ongoing scholarly review regarding its adequacy in guiding contemporary service standards
(Oktarina & Israhadi, 2023). More recent theoretical developments have moved beyond the
transactional New Public Management paradigm toward a Public Service Logic that positions
citizens as co-creators of value rather than passive recipients of standardized output (Andhika,
2025). This shift carries direct implications for how correspondence and records units should be
evaluated: not merely by procedural compliance, but by their capacity to generate trust through
consistent, responsive interaction with the people they serve.
Public sector organizations occupy a strategic position in Indonesia's governance
architecture precisely because the sheer number of government institutions places corresponding
pressure on them to demonstrate accountability and responsiveness (Dewi & Suparno, 2022).
Good governance principles, transparency, accountability, and public participation, have
increasingly been treated as measurable determinants of citizen trust rather than abstract
normative ideals (Yuniarta & Purnamawati, 2020), and bibliometric evidence suggests that good
governance scholarship in Indonesia has expanded rapidly over the past decade without a
corresponding increase in practice-based, sector-specific studies (Fauzan & Jahja, 2021). Public
institutions are consequently expected to innovate continuously, streamlining internal processes
to achieve productivity, responsiveness, transparency, accountability, and freedom from
corruption, collusion, and nepotism (Linelejan, 2021).
Administrative service is an inseparable component of state governance, closely tied to the
pursuit of transparency, efficiency, and accountability in public management (Masengi et al.,
2023). In the Indonesian context, ensuring that administrative processes run smoothly and in
accordance with regulation remains a persistent challenge, one closely linked to the quality of
human resources, the maturity of supporting systems, and the availability of enabling
infrastructure such as information technology (Gusliana et al., 2026). Empirical evidence drawn
from local government audit and financial data likewise indicates that administrative and
oversight quality is directly associated with the public service quality that citizens ultimately
experience (Furqan et al., 2020), while cross-regional studies show considerable disparity in
service quality outcomes between more developed and less developed regions of the country
(Aryani et al., 2023).
North Sulawesi Province illustrates these national dynamics at the subnational level. As
digital infrastructure expands, provincial government agencies face mounting pressure to
modernize administrative processes while continuing to confront familiar constraints: limited
numbers of competent personnel, inconsistent internet connectivity, and inadequate supporting
facilities (Pane et al., 2020). Within the General Bureau of the Regional Secretariat of North
Sulawesi Province, the Administrative Service Unit (Unit Layanan Administrasi/ULA) is tasked
with managing personnel, finance, general administration, records, and official vehicles. Earlier
studies conducted within this same institutional setting examined the effectiveness of data
management within the unit (Pane et al., 2020) and the implementation of e-office-based
administrative policy across the provincial government (Linelejan, 2021); both reported that
human resource limitations and infrastructural gaps continued to undermine otherwise well-