Swastanisasi PNS

Korupsi di Indonesia sudah sangat parah dan pelik untuk diselesaikan. Dari yang terbawah sampai teratas. Memberantas korupsi sampai ke akarnya berarti mengganti sebagian besar aparat pegawai negeri sipil (PNS). Komisi Pemberantasan Korupsi (KPK) tidak akan mampu menyelesaikan masalah ini.

Masalah korupsi jika tidak diselesaikan tuntas 10 tahun lagi akan menjadi penghambat serius kemajuan Indonesia. Padahal selain korupsi, jeleknya infrastruktur transportasi akan juga semakin memburuk karena ditentukan oleh kualitas PNS.

Sistem PNS sendiri tidak akuntabel dan akibatnya membolehkan korupsi berlangsung, melembaga, dan tumbuh pesat. Pimpinan eselon atas dikaderkan dari bawah dan sistem pengkaderan ini bisa jadi sudah korup dari awal. Menteri adalah jabatan politik dan diisi orang parpol, tapi parpol sendiri juga banyak yang busuk. Intinya, PNS tidak mengerti konsep untung-rugi (reward & punishment) yang sangat dipahami pegawai swasta, apalagi sukar buat PNS untuk dipecat.

Satu cara untuk memberangus korupsi di jajaran PNS adalah menswastanisasi PNS. Jasa yang diberikan jajaran administrasi PNS sampai ke pimpinan dua level dibawah menteri sebaiknya dilelang lewat tender (outsourced). Jasa pengurusan administrasi tiap kementrian ditenderkan dan pemenang tender karena aspek harga, pengalaman, dan kualitas akan mengerjakan tugas administrasi kementrian tersebut.

Tidak perlu risau rahasia negara akan bocor karena (1) hanya beberapa kementrian saja yang strategis, seperti Luar Negeri, Pertahanan, dan Dalam Negeri; (2) pimpinan kementrian dua level dibawah menteri kebanyakan pelaksana keputusan; (3) pengambil keputusan dan perumus kebijakan strategis tetap ditangan menteri dan pejabat satu level dibawahnya.

Jika PNS menjadi pegawai swasta lewat proses tender maka (1) mereka akan takut dipecat jika kinerja tidak bagus; (2) ada atasan mereka yang sangat peduli kinerja mereka mengingat kontrak kerja berdasarkan waktu terbatas; (3) mereka akan lebih diawasi oleh perusahaan2 yang kalah tender jika ada penyelewengan; (4) target pencapaian dengan kriteria pemberantasan korupsi, biaya jasa, dan target kerja bisa disebutkan jelas dan mengikat di dokumen tender.

Proses tenderisasi jasa administrasi PNS ini juga akan memberikan peluang pemerintah memperbaiki upah buruh. Pemerintah bisa mendongkrak standar gaji lewat biaya gaji yang ditenderkan. Pemerintah berkompetisi langsung dengan sektor swasta yang lain dalam merekrut tenaga kerja berkualitas.

Sistem kaderisasi tetap bisa berjalan karena yang bagus kinerja bisa dipromosikan ke level yang lebih tinggi. Meritokrasi akan lebih berjalan karena perusahaan swasta yang menang tender akan terus memperbaiki diri dan memilih pekerja yang unggul untuk dipertahankan. Bisa juga pimpinan administrasi di level dua dibawah menteri dipromosikan menjadi PNS dengan menjadi pegawai satu level dibawah menteri.

Sistem pengawasan melekat akan berjalan. Pegawai kontrak dari perusahaan yang menang tender akan mengawasi atasan mereka, termasuk menteri dan jajaran satu level dibawah menteri, demikian juga menteri akan menuntut kinerja bagus dari pegawai tersebut. Karena tidak ada lagi status permanen, maka sistem perkoncoan yang mengakibatkan korupsi melembaga akan terputus cepat.

Dengan tenderisasi ini, PNS menjadi jauh lebih ramping. Selain menteri dan pimpinan dibawahnya, PNS juga bisa terdiri dari jajaran pengawas kinerja pemenang tender.

Overcrowded Jakarta

I biked today to work after a 2 month hiatus. The rain season contributed to my laziness, but I did not have a driver for more than a month as well. I experience again the massive traffic jam Jakarta is known for first hand since I cannot hide inside an air conditioned car cabin.

It is stressful to be trapped in traffic jams everyday. For a month I had to drive my son to school 20 km one-way. It took me 30 minutes in which 2/3 of the time is consumed by traffic jam due to cars entering and leaving a school on a narrow street. Driving back to work can take 1 hour due to a huge rush hour volume entering tool highway and a lane reduction. I spent 2 hours every morning and 1.5 hours every afternoon for this activity.

A 4 hour commute time for a worker in Jakarta is apparently not unusual. Some people in my office spend 5 hours everyday for commuting. The total cost due to this wasted time is staggering. A conservative estimate of 1 million commuter everyday will put the cost at about Rp 60 billion everyday. That's "Rp 60 milyar setiap hari" in Indonesian. Every year it will cost Rp 18 trillion, which is 1.5% of the national budget. It is simply ridiculous.

It amazes me therefore that there is no continued systematic effort by government to reduce this crippling traffic jam. I have lived in Jakarta for 10 months and notice three main reasons for the traffic jam:

1. Business and government activities are centered in Jakarta. People - including me - flock to Jakarta to find jobs. Jakarta simply cannot handle more than 10 million residents.

2. Minibuses (mikrolet, metromini, etc.), which are privately run, stop anywhere their passengers want them to. This includes picking up passengers. They idle at busy intersections to wait for passengers.

3. Lane markings are poor and not continuous when roads meet at ramps, intersections, and interchanges. These conditions are often the cause of traffic gridlocks in toll highways. Motorists do not know which lanes to pick at interchanges and have to slow down considerably.

No, I don't blame motorcyclists (pengendara sepeda motor) for the traffic jams. They are often squeezed in and out of their lanes by cars that fill up the entire width of a road. They zig zag their ways because they do not have dedicated lanes. They occupy opposing lanes for the same reason.

Jakarta has a population density of about 14,000/km². Beijing has a density of 1200/km², while Mexico City 6000/km². Tokyo also has a density of 6000/km², Singapore 7000/km², while Tehran 10,000/km². Two cities - Cairo and Mumbai - beat Jakarta as they respectively sit at 17,000/km² and 21,000/km². Does Jakarta want to be like Mumbai or Cairo?

A target density of 10,000/km² means that the population has to go down by at least 30%. Or Jakarta has to expand by 30%. The expansion, however, cannot mean that Jakarta incorporates nearby cities like Bogor, Tangerang, and Bekasi since they have their own populations. It is quite clear to me that a population reduction of 30% is needed to make Jakarta more livable.

This could only mean that Jakarta has to give up its business and government administration headquarters to other cities in this vast archipelago.

Indonesia's Presidential Airplane Purchase

Indonesia's State Secretary Office decided to purchase a new 737-800 Boeing Business Jet as the presidential airplane. It costs the country about Rp 800 billion (= USD 90 million). The cost is about 0.06% of the 2011 national budget. I heard this issue being discussed on the Sindo Radio on Friday, February 10th: whether it is fair and essential for Indonesia to purchase such airplane.

The Presidential Office's spokesperson cited efficiency and security as the two main reasons.  A Jakarta Globe article reports that the ROI is 35 years.

Operational cost of either rental or purchase, associated with fuel and personnel, should be approximately equal, so we can ignore this factor. We don't know the annual rental cost of airplane rented from Garuda Indonesia, which is currently used by the President. Let us call this variable x. The cost of airplane purchase - let us call it y - is obviously more expensive. The 35 years ROI roughly means

35x = y.

Given that y = Rp 800 billions, then a fair rental cost should be x = Rp 22.86 billion annually, or Rp 62.6 millions per day. The State Secretary Office should release the airplane rental cost data so that people can make informed opinion about the government's decision.

1. Income Per Capita perspective. The 2011 income per capita for Indonesia is USD 3469. Thus, the annual expense of Rp 22.86 billion is equivalent to what 730 Indonesians make in a year, or about 400 families. Based on this, the cost is reasonable. Even if the airplane lasts only for 20 years, the cost is still reasonable, as it means the cost is equivalent to 1278 Indonesians make in a year.

2. Investment perspective. If this money is instead invested by purchasing its own Government Bond, which has about 6% annual interest, then the amount of money at the end of 35 years would be

Rp 22.86 billions (1 - 1.06³⁴)/(1-1.06) = Rp 2292 billions.

The Rp 800 billions will have grown by about 3 times over 35 years. This is the future value of the money spent on buying the airplane and the decision does not look bad on this perspective either.

If, however, the Rp 800 billions payment is made as soon as the airplane is delivered by Boeing, then the future value will skyrocket to Rp 6150 billions in 35 years. It will have grown by about 8 times over 35 years. This payment scheme is the more likely scenario, and if this is the case, then the decision looks much worse. It would be good if the State Secretary Office releases information on the purchase payment schedule.

Rp 6150 billion could be spent on building a highway over 10 years. Assuming an interest rate of 6%, it is equivalent to spending Rp 467 billions per year for 10 years. The cost of building 1 km of road in Indonesia is about Rp 10 billions, so the decision to spend Rp 800 billions on the airplane is equivalent to cancelling a construction of 46.7 km x 10 = 467 km highway that will be useful for 35 years.

3. Leadership perspective. The absence of long term investment perspective is missing in this decision. I calculated in my previous blog that the Jakarta traffic jam costs about Rp 1 trillion monthly. The Rp 6.15 trillions value of the airplane purchase is equivalent of prolonging the Jakarta traffic jam by 6 months.

Another aspect is leadership. In a country where the majority of people live with a salary of USD 289, it is bordering on unethical to spend Rp 800 billion on a presidential airplane. The President could address the nation weekly on teve instead of zooming around the country in a luxurious airplane. These weekly addresses could be more effective when put in Youtube so that young Indonesians can listen on their computer tablets.

The airplane purchase does not give a good example to the government officials. In a country where people try very hard to conform to one another, the purchase decision does not set a good example.

All things considered, I doubt the purchase decision can enhance efficiency of the President's job since travel efficiency is a small part of his overall job efficiency. As for ensuring the security of the President, there is already Indonesia's Secret Service to guard him 24/7. Furthermore, I always wonder how secure the communication system in the Boeing presidential airplane, given that it will be designed and manufactured in the US.

Teaching Job v. Industry Job

I have been busy with work for the past 9 months in Indonesia. I haven't had time to hike a mountain. Two years ago during my 6-month sabbatical leave in Indonesia, I did that, backpacking, and biking intercity. That's my proof that teaching job is less stressful than industry job.

It is therefore okay to make less money as an academic because for me time is much more important than money. I enjoy outdoor sports - running, hiking, biking - where I can do fun stuff without buying something new. I just use my body - until I am dog tired - and enjoy the workout.

Free time is what I miss the most, now that I work in industry. Constantly arriving emails and phone calls keep the business go round - I guess - but we cannot work 24/7. I read a few weeks ago that Nokia stops forwarding emails to its employee's PDA's past office hours. It is a good idea.

I had a dinner with Indonesian alumnae of Canadian universities a couple of weeks ago, who are members of Calindo. Check Calindo website if you have time; it has a list of Canadian university alumnae in Indonesia. They feel the same way, that 24/7 business activities in the end do not matter in the long run. It is the legacy - what we leave behind after we die is what matters - and the families we raised.

I find Google's Do No Evil mantra makes sense now. Business - if it wants to grow - must have a purpose other than just making money. Making money should come from values it creates for customers and principles it holds.

I also don't think it is necessary for university courses to replicate what industry does. University is not for students to learn to work in a particular industry. University is a place for students to develop critical and independent thinking.

Why do not university courses replicate what industry does? First, most industry jobs are repetitive. Within a year or sooner, a new hire should be able to find the job rhythm and to work seamlessly. Second, each industry job often requires skills that combine these courses. For a great majority of jobs, it seems to me now, a well educated graduate should be able to adapt and work well within 1 year from his first day at the job.

Math Thinking Skills

It is obvious that a good majority of Indonesian science and math teachers are not used to and do not practice and develop math thinking skills. I roughly estimate about 75% of these teachers teach their students math and physics using formulaic approach, where math and physics problems are understood and solved using standard formulas given in classroom.

One can only blame Department of National Education (DepDikNas) for this bad teaching strategy. It does not produce tough students who have abiding interests in rigorous, consistent thinking. It only creates students who are lazy in thinking through problems; these students do not have disciplined, supple mind.

I am of the opinion that the mess Indonesia now experiences - corruption, bad infrastructure planning and network - is partially caused by state planners who are not rigorous and thorough in their planning deliberations.

It would be good if someone could share with me data that link bad infrastructure planning and execution with poor math teaching. The connection for me is obvious. These state planners are normally economists and engineers. They took math in high schools and universities, but they never learned it rigorously enough so that math thinking skills are never embedded in their thinking.

What are math thinking skills? They are learned when one solves math problems. Math problems are normally goal-oriented. To prove a theorem, or to show using algebraic manipulations a math formula. The way this goal-oriented problem is solved is, however, equally important.

Math thinking skills involve the following activities. One cannot use circular argument to get an answer. One must map the problem in terms of what variables he can manipulate and what the constraints are. One needs to know how to construct the answer based on previously available theorems and results. One must be diligent and careful to not make algebraic mistakes - mixing negative and positive signs, or forgetting a term in an equation, for example. One must be able to map a broad strategy to attack the problem; in fact, this broad strategy has to be available first before making a first step. A lot of thinking goes into getting this broad strategy. All these skills are practiced constantly when solving math problems.

When one spends enough time solving math problems, one develops an understanding of a standard for himself how a problem - any problem - is solved. One is not happy if a problem is not solved completely. One becomes an independent thinker since he applies his own thinking and standard.

A lot of Indonesians are not taking seriously what lacks in Indonesia's education system. At their own perils.

Poor's Numbers

I like to talk to a lot of people. Their problems seem limitless. I haven't found a compelling person to tell in this blog to update my interview with poor Indonesians. Their stories become increasingly ordinary as there are so many of them.

A husband had to move back to his village in Ungaran, Central Java because he got laid off as a restaurant cook. He has about 2500 meter square of land on which he plants corn and green beans. The price of fertilizer and herbicide is so expensive so that from Rp 1,000,000 investment he can get only Rp 300,000. A 30% return, of course, but the proceed is spread over 3 months and quite miniscule. And he cannot scale up his business since that's all the land he has. His wife works in Jakarta and wires Rp 1,000,000 per month. The snack for their 2 kids costs Rp 30,000 per day and pretty much eats up the wired money. To make ends meet, the husband becomes a farm laborer and gets Rp 35,000 per day.

They dream to open a food stall in the Ungaran market. They cannot save Rp 5,000,000 to realize this dream since what they earn is always gone by the end of each month. For most Indonesian poor, Rp 5,000,000 is an astronomical amount.

Another story is a driver with 6 children, from university age to 1.5 years old baby. He hopes to make Rp 2,500,000 per month to feed 7 people in the family in Jakarta. His rented house is leaky during rains and he looks like 60 years old although he is only 43. His eyes tell a life with many hardships.

I have grown more pessimistic with the human development prospect of Indonesia as I spend more time in Indonesia. There are 2 main problems. First, the capital owners are not willing to share their profits with their employees to allow for the workers to improve their children's education and health. There have been a lot of labor disputes in the past 2 months, mostly due to the minimum wage amount issue. Second, these employees have low quality. They form a vicious cycle. It is hard to unravel them until one has to give: either the capital owners or the workers.

The truth is that the Indonesian poor do not feel the impact of progress happening in Indonesia. The solution is education, but the quality of education is not good and education is getting more expensive as well. The government has to increase health and education subsidy for poor.

As I write this I am saddened. I left Indonesia 22 years ago. I have seen a lot of progress, but some things never change.