Analysis of the CIPPO Approach to Higher Education Institutions with BLU and SATKER Status - A Comparative Study of UNHAS, UNM, UINAM, UNG, and POLIMDO

Sep 10, 2026

Uploaded by Noah

This study analyzes the effectiveness of governance in higher education institutions using BLU and SATKER status through the CIPPO (Context–Input–Process–Product–Outcome) evaluation model. Research sites include UNHAS, UNM, and UINAM as BLU PTNs, and UNG and POLIMDO as SATKER PTNs. A mixed-method design combines document analysis, a survey of 150 respondents, and interviews with eight key informants. Findings indicate BLU universities outperform in input, process, product, and outcome aspects via flexible PNBP management, faster decisions, and stronger innovation capacity.

LanguageEnglish

CategoryResearch & Report

FormatPDF

Pages9

Reading Time23 min

AccessFree to download

Abstract

Introduction

Methods

ANALYSIS OF THE CIPPO APPROACH TO HIGHER EDUCATION INSTITUTIONS WITH BLU AND SATKER STATUS: A COMPARATIVE STUDY OFUNHAS, UNM, UINAM, UNG, AND POLIMDO Sri Hastuti1, Muh. Ardiansyah2, Israfal3 1,2,3Educational Administration, Makassar State University Email: [sri.hastuti@unm.ac.id](sri.hastuti@unm.ac.id) ABSTRACT This study analyzes the effectiveness of the governance of higher education institutions with Public Service Agency (BLU) and Work Unit (SATKER) status using the CIPPO (Context–Input– Process–Product–Outcome) evaluation model. The study locations include UNHAS, UNM, and UINAM as BLU PTNs, and UNG and POLIMDO as SATKER PTNs. The study used a mixed-method approach through document analysis, a survey of 150 respondents, and interviews with eight key informants. The results show that BLU universities excel in Input, Process, Product, and Outcome aspects due to the flexibility of PNBP management, accelerated decision-making, and higher innovation capabilities. In contrast, SATKER universities have the strength of regulatory stability, but are less adaptive in responding to changes in the higher education environment. These findings support the theories of Adaptive Governance, Agile University, and Dynamic Capability, which indicate that governance flexibility is a key factor in increasing the competitiveness of higher education institutions in the era of digital transformation. The study recommends the need for bureaucratic reform and increased flexibility for SATKER universities to improve their performance and competitiveness. Keywords: CIPPO, BLU, SATKER, higher education governance, adaptability, tridharma performance. Article history: Received 10-14-2025 Revised 11-02-2025 Accepted 11-09-2025 This is an open-access article under the CC BY-SA license INTRODUCTION Higher education in the era of digital transformation and the knowledgebased economy faces increasingly complex dynamics, particularly due to the acceleration of technology, globalization, talent competition, and rapidly changing job market needs. Universities no longer function solely as teaching institutions, but also as centers of innovation, driving forces of social development, and strategic actors in producing superior human resources. In the Indonesian context, this demand is emphasized by Law Number 12 of 2012 concerning Higher Education, which emphasizes the importance of autonomy, accountability, quality assurance, and the effectiveness of performance-based higher education implementation. Furthermore, the Key Performance Indicators (KPI) policy, implemented since 2021, has been a crucial driver for universities to shift from an administrative paradigm to an outcome-based governance paradigm, where the performance of the Tridharma (three pillars) is measured not only by activities but also by the tangible impact on students, society, and industry. Within the governance structure of higher education in Indonesia, two main models distinguish the flexibility and effectiveness of higher education management: universities with the status of Work Units (SATKER) and Public Service Agencies (BLU) . SATKER universities, such as Gorontalo State University (UNG) and Manado State Polytechnic (POLIMDO), are within a state financial management structure that fully follows the state budget (APBN) mechanism. This model provides a high level of regulatory compliance and administrative stability, but often hinders organizational agility in innovation, particularly in terms of infrastructure procurement, new curriculum development, and recruitment of non-civil servant human resources needed for research and development. In contrast, BLU universities such as Hasanuddin University (UNHAS), Makassar State University (UNM), and UIN Alauddin Makassar (UINAM) have the flexibility to manage Non-Tax State Revenue (PNBP) to directly support academic and non-academic services. This flexibility allows BLU universities to develop digital ecosystems, ex

FAQs

What evaluation model does the study use to assess higher education governance?

The study uses the CIPPO (Context–Input–Process–Product–Outcome) evaluation model to assess governance holistically from readiness and resources to outputs and long-term impact.

Which universities are compared, and how are they classified?

UNHAS, UNM, and UINAM are examined as BLU PTNs, while UNG and POLIMDO are examined as SATKER PTNs.

How does the study’s mixed-method approach gather data?

It combines document analysis, a survey of 150 respondents, and interviews with eight key informants to obtain both quantitative and qualitative evidence.

Sep 10, 2026

Uploaded by Noah