Collaborative Governance in Eradicating Corruption in Indonesia: Challenges and Opportunities

Corruption is one of the fundamental problems in Indonesia. Ineffective efforts to eradicate corruption are influenced by the lack of synergy among stakeholders. This study aims to describe the factors affecting collaborative governance in eradicating corruption in Indonesia. The approach used is post-positivist with mix method data collection techniques through existing statistics and in-depth interviews. There were some factors affecting the collaboration in eradicating corruption in Indonesia. First, despite mutual agreement among upholders about corruption eradication commision establishment, conflicts among upholders occurred. They happened because of Corruption Eracidication Commision's (KPK) investigation strategies. This disturbs their esprits de corps and the cases involving prosecutors or policemen resulted in conflicts of interests. Nevertheless, in other cases, some of their cooperation have been built. Second, leadership has affected the collaboration. There were some factors influencing the leadership skills, such as knowledge, experience in bureaucracy, political will, communication skills to produce engagement, psychological conditions, human resources management skills, and power distribution. Thirdly, imbalances of power, human resources, knowledge, and infrastructures has appeared and it potentially become collaborative incentives. Nevertheless, leaders have not completely reaped its benefits. Moreover, there is an integrity imbalance among upholders that results in low trust building. Upholders have not yet held a massive improvement in integrity. Fourth, There is no grand strategy of corruption eradication which regulates reliable actions with clear trajectory, time coverage, responsible stakeholders, and measurable objectives. They have established a Memorandum of Understanding among upholders and mid term and short term national eradicating corruption strategies, but it could not fully be implemented under the collaborative circumstances. Fifth, each upholders's institutional design affects their independence in operational levels. Sixth, the perspective that KPK is not include in executive actors, consequently, the other institutions have not yet encouraged to fully participate in collaborative process.