Factors influencing non-tax revenue sustainability in Indonesian government institutions: the mediating role of accountability

Figures & data

Figure 1. Research framework and hypotheses.

Table 1. Operationalization of research variables.

Variable’s name, Code, and Role	Definition of Operation	Dimensions, Indicators, Code	Sources
NTR sustainability, NTR-S, endogenous	The NTR sustainability is a condition in which NTR remains a priority in the execution of the tasks and functions of ministries/ agencies, continues to be one of the main contributors to the State Budget (APBN), and requires budget allocation in the Ministry and Agency Work Plans and Budgets (WPB)	Strategic Planning (5 indicators, NTR-S01-NTR-S05) Service capacity (7 indicators, NTR-S06-NTR-S12) Revenue capacity (6 indicators, NTR-S13-NTR-S18) Expenditure management (5 indicators, NTR-S19-NTR-S23) Performance of budget execution quality (NTR-S24-NTR-S27) Total indicators in this variable = 27 items	Developed from the dimension of leadership and strategic vision by León (2001) Developed from the dimension of service capacity proposed by IPSASB (2013) Developed from the dimension of revenue capacity proposed by IPSASB (2013) Developed from regulation concerning NTR Developed from regulation concerning monitoring and evaluation of budget execution at LMA
NTR Accountability, NTR-A, exogenous, endogenous, and intervening	The NTR accountability indicates employee accountability reprerepresentsncept of accountability focuses on what is perceived by individual civil servants who manage NTR in complying with the formal provisions governing NTR accountability	Atributability (5 indicators, NTR-A01-NTR-A05) Observability (3 indicators, NTR-A06-NTR-A08) Evaluability (3 indicators, NTR-A09-NTR-A11) Answerability (3 indicators, NTR-A 12- NTR-A 14) Consequentiality (5 indicators, NTR-A 15- NTR-A 19) Political aspect (4 indicators, NTR-A20-NTR-A23) Spirituality aspect (4 indicators, NTR-A24-NTR-A27) Total indicators in this variable = 27 items	Developed from Han & Perry, (2019) and regulation concerning NTR Developed from Han & Perry, (2019) and regulation concerning NTR Developed from Han & Perry, (2019) and regulation concerning NTR Developed from Han & Perry, (2019) and regulation concerning NTR Developed from Han & Perry, (2019), regulation concerning NTR, and regulation concerning public servant’s performance assessment Developed from Ahyaruddin & Akbar, (2017), Bovens, (2006) Developed from Fares and Noordin (2016); Mennita & Priyanto (2022)
Sustainable leadership, SL, exogenous	Sustainable leadership is a leadership concept aimed at ensuring that the management of Non-Tax State Revenue can continue to be carried out in the long term.	Cohesive diversity (3 indicators, SL01-SL03) Organizational justice (4 indicators, SL04-SL07) Employee Development (4 indicators, SL08-SL11) Progress orientation (3 indicators, SL12-SL14) Work-life balance (3 indicators, SL15-SL17) Total indicators in this variable = 17 items	Developed from Lee (2017) and regulation concerning NTR Developed from Lee (2017) and regulation concerning NTR Developed from Lee (2017) and regulation concerning NTR Developed from Lee (2017) and regulation concerning NTR Developed from Lee (2017) and regulation concerning NTR
Sustainable information system, SIS, exogenous	A sustainable information system is a condition that the NTR system could serve for long-lasting at a satisfactory level	Quality (8 indicators, SIS01-SIS08) Usage (4 indicators, SIS09-SIS12) Benefit (3 indicators, SIS13-SIS15) Sustainable (5 indicators, SIS16-SIS20) Total indicators in this variable = 20 items	Developed from Abdulkareem & Ramli, (2021); Ariyanto et al., (2022); DeLone & McLean, (2003); Indriani et al., (2020); Petter et al., (2008) Developed from Abdulkareem & Ramli, (2021); Ariyanto et al., (2022); J. V. Chen et al., (2015); DeLone & McLean, (2003); Indriani et al., (2020); Petter & McLean, (2009); Ziemba, (2019)
Human resource competency. HRC, exogenous	Employee competency (HR) shows the ability and expertise of employees in understanding and mastering something, in this case competency in managing NTR both hard and soft skills.	Technical competency (11 indicators, HRC01-HRC11) Managerial competency (8 indicators, HRC12-HRC19) Social-cultural competency (HRC20-HRC22) Total indicators in this variable = 22 items	Developed from Arlini et al., (2014); Haryati, (2018); Mustapha, (2018) Regulation concerning the handbook of civil servant’s competency in Indonesia Regulation concerning the handbook of civil servant’s competency in Indonesia
Internal control, IC, exogenous	An integral process of actions and activities carried out continuously by leadership and all employees to provide adequate confidence in achieving organizational goals through effective and efficient activities, reliability of financial reporting, security of state assets, and compliance with laws and regulations	Control environment (4 indicators, IC01-IC04) Risk assessment (4 indicators, IC05-IC08) Control activity (3 indicators, IC09-IC11) Information and communication (3 indicators, IC12-IC14) Internal control monitoring (3 indicators, IC15-IC17) Total indicators in this variable = 17 items	Government regulation concerning the Government Internal Control System
Working experience, WE, exogenous, control variable	The tenure of public servants working for government entities	Two indicators: Years of experience as government as government officer Years of experience assigned in the field of NTR Total indicators in this variable = 2 items	Bartram (2021); Kalaiwanen et al., (2021)
		The total indicators for all variables are 132 items

Table 2. Outer loading.

Variables	Indicators			Validity (outer loading)	Reliability (Cronbach’s alpha)
	Total	Valid	Not Valid
NTR sustainability (NTR-S)	27	13	14	0.614-0.818	0.963
NTR accountability (NTR-A)	27	19	8	0.562-0.820	0.948
Sustainable Leadership (SL)	17	17	0	0.639-0.871	0.966
Sustainable Information System (SIS)	20	20	0	0.619-0.849	0.973
Human resource competency (HRC)	22	20	2	0.556-0.871	0.963
Internal control (IC)	17	17	0	0.701-0.879	0.969
Working experience (WE)	2	1	1	0.998	1.000
Total indicators	132	107	25

Table 3. Hypotheses testing result.

Hypotheses	Symbol	Coefficient	Std Dev	t-stat	p-values	Conclusion
H1	SL → NTR-S	0.103	0.068	1.523	0.128	Not supported
H2	SIS → NTR-S	−0.027	0.051	0.533	0.594	Not supported
H3	HRC →NTR-S	0.005	0.066	0.080	0.936	Not supported
H4	IC →NTR-S	0.300	0.075	4.006	0.000	Supported
H5	NTR-A →NTR-S	0.473	0.072	6.602	0.000	Supported
H6	SL →NTR-A→ NTR-S	0.167	0.038	4.418	0.000	Supported as mediating
H7	SIS →NTR-A→ NTR-S	0.037	0.019	1.937	0.053	Not supported
H8	HRC →NTR-A→ NTR-S	0.2000	0.046	4.346	0.000	Supported as mediating
H9	IC →NTR-A→ NTR-S	0.052	0.032	1.600	0.110	Not supported
Non-hypothesis	WE →NTR-S	0.010	0.031	0.310	0.757	Not supported
Non-hypothesis	WE →NTR-A→ NTR-S	0.031	0.012	2.607	0.009	Supported as mediating

Note. R-squared for these hypotheses tests is 0.675 for n = 353.

Table 4. Direct vs indirect effects.

Direct effect			Coefficients	Indirect effect	Coefficients
SL	→	NTR-S	0.103	SL →NTR-A→NTR-S	0.167**
SIS	→	NTR-S	−0.027	SIS →NTR-A→NTR-S	0.053
HRC	→	NTR-S	0.005	HRC →NTR-A→NTR-S	0.200**
IC	→	NTR-S	0.300**	IC→NTR-A→NTR-S	0.052
WE	→	NTR-S	0.010	WE →NTR-A→NTR-S	0.031**

Note: ** significant at 1% level, * significant at 5% level.

Table 5. Sensitivity analysis for NTR-S variable.

Influence Tests			Coefficient	Std Dev	t-stat	p-values	Conclusion
New Model with additional dimensions– R-squared 0,675, n = 353
SL	→	NTR-S	0.103	0.068	1.523	0.128	H1 is not supported
SIS	→	NTR-S	−0.027	0.051	0.533	0.594	H2 is not supported
HRC	→	NTR-S	0.005	0.066	0.080	0.936	H3 is not supported
IC	→	NTR-S	0.300	0.075	4.006	0.000	H4 supported
NTR-A	→	NTR-S	0.473	0.072	6.602	0.000	H5 supported
WE	→	NTR-S	0.010	0.031	0.310	0.757	Not significant
Old Model without dimensions improvement in NTR-A and NTR-S– R-squared 0.556, n = 353
SL	→	NTR-S	0.141	0.092	1.535	0.125	H1 is not supported
SIS	→	NTR-S	0.026	0.055	0.477	0.633	H2 is not supported
HRC	→	NTR-S	0.094	0.084	1.114	0.266	H3 is not supported
IC	→	NTR-S	0.296	0.105	2.818	0.005	H4 supported
NTR-A	→	NTR-S	0.267	0.078	3.389	0.000	H5 supported
WE	→	NTR-S	0.045	0.035	1.286	0.199	Not significant

León, P. (2001). Four pillars of financial sustainability (Vol. 2). The Nature Conservancy.

 Google Scholar

IPSASB. (2013). Recomended Practice Guideline. Reporting on the Long-Term Sustainability of an Entity’s Finances. (Issue July).

 Google Scholar

Han, Y., & Perry, J. (2019). Employee accountability : development of a multidimensional scale. International Public Management Journal, 23(2), 224–251. https://doi.org/10.1080/10967494.2019.1690606

 Web of Science ®Google Scholar

Ahyaruddin, M., & Akbar, R. (2017). Akuntabilitas dan kinerja instansi pemerintah: semu atau nyata? Jurnal Akuntansi & Auditing Indonesia, 12(2), 105–117. https://doi.org/10.20885/jaai.vol21.iss2.art3

 Google Scholar

Bovens, M. (2006). Analysing and assessing public accountability: A conceptual framework. In European Governance Papers. https://doi.org/10.1071/EA9790698

 Google Scholar

Fares, D., & Noordin, K. B (2016). Islamic spirituality, organizational commitment, and organizational citizenship behavior : A proposed conceptual framework. Middle East Journal of Business, 11(1), 28–37. https://doi.org/10.5742/MEJB.2015.92769

 Google Scholar

Mennita, R., & Priyanto, I. A. (2022). Mennita2022-spirituality and accountability.pdf. Business Management Research, 1(2), 89–98.

 Google Scholar

Lee, H.-W. (2017). Sustainable leadership: An empirical investigation of its effect on organizational effectiveness. International Journal of Organization Theory & Behavior (PrAcademics Press), 20(4), 419–453.

 Google Scholar

Abdulkareem, A. K., & Ramli, R. M. (2021). Evaluating the performance of e-government: Does citizens’ access to ICT matter? Pertanika Journal of Social Sciences and Humanities, 29(3), 1507–1534. https://doi.org/10.47836/pjssh.29.3.03

 Web of Science ®Google Scholar

Ariyanto, D., Dewi, A. A., Hasibuan, H. T., & Paramadani, R. B. (2022). The success of information systems and sustainable information society: Measuring the implementation of a village financial system. Sustainability (Switzerland), 14(7), 3851. https://doi.org/10.3390/su14073851

 Web of Science ®Google Scholar

DeLone, W. H., & McLean, E. R. (2003). The DeLone and McLean model of information systems success: A ten-year update. Journal of Management Information Systems, 19(4), 9–30. https://doi.org/10.1080/07421222.2003.11045748

 Web of Science ®Google Scholar

Indriani, Mirna, Fuadi, Raida, Nadirsyah, Evayani, (2020). Can Siskeudes support village governance in Aceh Province of Indonesia? Cogent Business and Management, 7(1, 1743617). https://doi.org/10.1080/23311975.2020.1743617

 Web of Science ®Google Scholar

Petter, S., DeLone, W., & McLean, E. (2008). Measuring information systems success: Models, dimensions, measures, and interrelationships. European Journal of Information Systems, 17(3), 236–263. https://doi.org/10.1057/ejis.2008.15

 Web of Science ®Google Scholar

Chen, J. V., Jubilado, R. J. M., Capistrano, E. P. S., & Yen, D. C. (2015). Factors affecting online tax filing - An application of the IS Success Model and trust theory. Computers in Human Behavior, 43, 251–262. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.chb.2014.11.017

 Web of Science ®Google Scholar

Petter, S., & McLean, E. R. (2009). A meta-analytic assessment of the DeLone and McLean IS success model: An examination of IS success at the individual level. Information & Management, 46(3), 159–166. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.im.2008.12.006

 Web of Science ®Google Scholar

Ziemba, E. (2019). The contribution of ICT adoption to the sustainable information society. Journal of Computer Information Systems, 59(2), 116–126. https://doi.org/10.1080/08874417.2017.1312635

 Web of Science ®Google Scholar

Arlini, M., Darwanis., & Abdullah, S. (2014). Pengaruh Kompetensi Sumber Daya Manusia, Sistem Informasi, Regulasi, dan Kompensasi terhadap Manajemen Aset. Jurnal Magister Akuntansi, 3(4), 66–75.

 Google Scholar

Haryati, T. (2018). Anteseden Kualitas Laporan Keuangan Pemerintah Daerah. Indonesian Treasury Review, 3(4), 330–346.

 Google Scholar

Mustapha, M. (2018). Organizational Characteristics and Instituional Factors on Finacial Reporting Qualit of Local Governments. Universiti Utara Malaysia.

 Google Scholar

Bartram, D. (2021). Age and Life Satisfaction : Getting Control Variables under Control. Sociology, 55(2), 421-437. https://doi.org/10.1177/0038038520926871

 Google Scholar

Data availability statement

Data regarding non-tax revenue performance can be accessed from official website of the Ministry of Finance of Republic of Indonesia (www.kemenkeu.go.id). Meanwhile, data relating to audit findings are available at Indonesian Supreme Auditor’s official website (www.bpk.go.id). Research data regarding returned surveys from respondents and SEM-PLS output can be obtained by sending us an email to: [email protected]