Bogor–
Commitment-Making Officials Must Apply Risk Management in Self-Managed
Government Contracts. A recent study by Catur Sopan Permana, Ahmad Dohamid, and
Samsul Bahari of The Republic of Defense University was published in the
Contemporary Journal of Applied Sciences (CJAS).
A
recent study by Catur Sopan Permana, Ahmad Dohamid, and Samsul Bahari of The
Republic of Defense University emphasized that Commitment Making Officers (PPK)
must implement systematic risk management to control self-managed contracts and
prevent potential irregularities.
Self-Managed
Procurement: Flexible but High-Risk
Self-managed
procurement is designed to support strategic government programs, especially
for projects requiring direct institutional involvement or community
empowerment. The mechanism offers flexibility and operational control for
government units.
However,
this flexibility also introduces significant risks at every stage of
implementation, including:
- Inaccurate
needs planning
- Weak
technical specifications
- Delays
in project execution
- Work
results not meeting agreed standards
- Weak
financial accountability documentation
Because
self-managed projects are not outsourced to external providers, full
responsibility rests with the Commitment Making Official (PPK), who oversees
administrative, technical, and financial aspects.
Risk
Management as a Strategic Obligation
The
study highlights that risk management is not merely an administrative
requirement but a strategic control instrument embedded within government
governance.
Risk
management implementation in self-managed procurement refers to:
- The
Government Internal Control System (SPIP)
- Government
Regulation No. 60 of 2008
- Technical
risk management guidelines issued by BPKP
- Bureaucratic
reform policies of the Ministry of Administrative and Bureaucratic Reform
(KemenPANRB)
Under
the SPIP framework, risk management consists of four systematic stages:
1️⃣ Objective setting
2️⃣ Risk
identification
3️⃣ Risk
analysis and evaluation
4️⃣ Risk
control
Research
Findings: Risks Exist at Every Stage
Planning
Stage
Key
risks identified include:
- Inaccurate
determination of activity needs
- Weak
preparation of technical specifications
- Insufficient
early risk identification
Poor
planning increases the likelihood of implementation problems later.
Implementation
Stage
Dominant
risks at this stage include:
- Delays
in work completion
- Outputs
that do not match plans
- Weak
administrative control and documentation
The
research stresses that PPK must conduct continuous contract control throughout
implementation.
Accountability
Stage
Risks
at this stage are primarily related to:
- Financial
administrative orderliness
- Completeness
of supporting documents
- Compliance
with regulatory reporting standards
Failures
at this stage may result in audit findings and legal exposure.
PPK
as the “Risk Owner”
The
study positions the PPK as the “risk owner,” meaning the official who holds
full responsibility for identifying, managing, and mitigating risks in
self-managed contracts.
This
role requires the PPK to:
- Anticipate
potential issues from the outset
- Integrate
risk management into decision-making processes
- Treat
control mechanisms as part of daily operations rather than separate
administrative tasks
By
adopting this approach, risk management becomes a practical governance tool
rather than a compliance formality.
Theoretical
and Practical Contributions
The
study contributes theoretically by expanding public sector risk management
literature, particularly in the context of self-managed government procurement.
Practically,
the findings provide guidance for Commitment Making Officials to:
- Strengthen
regulatory compliance
- Improve
internal control mechanisms
- Minimize
audit findings
- Reduce
potential legal risks
The
research concludes that without consistent and systematic risk management,
self-managed procurement may expose institutions to governance failures and
accountability challenges.
Recommendations
The
authors recommend:
- Strengthening
PPK capacity in public sector risk management
- Ensuring
consistent implementation of SPIP and BPKP guidelines
- Conducting
broader empirical studies using field data
- Evaluating
risk management effectiveness across government institutions
These
steps are considered essential to achieving orderly, effective, and accountable
self-managed procurement practices.
Author
Profiles
- Catur Sopan Permana-- Universitas Republik Pertahanan
- Ahmad Dohamid-- Universitas Republik Pertahanan
- Samsul Bahari- Universitas Republik Pertahanan
Research
Source
Permana, C. S., Dohamid, A., & Bahari, S. (2024). Risk Management by Commitment Making Officials in Controlling Self-Managed Contracts. Contemporary Journal of Applied Sciences (CJAS).
DOI: https://doi.org/10.55927/cjas.v4i2.136
URL: https://ntlformosapublisher.org/index.php/cjas
0 Komentar