POLA KOORDINASI STAKEHOLDER PADA PENGELOLAAN HUTAN KOTA LANGSA
Abstract
Abstrak
Proyek pengembangan Kawasan hutan kota Langsa melibatkan banyak pihak yang berkepentingan dimana terdapat interaksi dan interdependensi di dalamnya. Pengaturan interaksi antar personel proyek dengan banyak stakeholders seringkali mengalami kesulitan karena adanya batasan yang sulit untuk dilewati karena perbedaan orientasi waktu, bisnis, teknis, dan regulasi pada masing-masing organisasi. Penelititan ini melakukan observasi awal yang menemukan terdapat banyak instansi pemerintah daerah yang terlibat. Hal ini menyebabkan terjadinya gejala dalam operasional proyek antara lain tingkat kunjungan sudah mencapai kejenuhan dan fasilitas wisata yang tidak terawat dan tidak lagi menarik untuk dikunjungi. Paper ini bertujuan untuk mengetahui hubungan interaksi antar stakeholders dalam pengelolaan kawasan hutan kota Langsa. Metode yang digunakan adalah analisis deskriptif dari data yang diperoleh melalui wawancara mendalam dengan pengelola Kawasan hutan kota. Hasil dari penelitian ini berupa pola interaksi berdasarkan hasil analisis interface management system dalam empat aspek utama yaitu finansial, infrastruktur, lingkungan, dan pariwisata.
Kata kunci: koordinasi, pola interaksi, stakeholders, interfaces
Abstract
The Langsa City Forest Area development project involves many stakeholders, where there is interaction and interdependence. Arranging interactions between project personnel and many stakeholders often experiences difficulties because of boundaries that are difficult to cross due to differences in time orientation, business, technical, and regulations in each organization. This study conducted initial observations that found that many local government agencies were involved. This causes symptoms in project operations, including the level of visits that have reached saturation and tourist facilities that are not maintained and are no longer interesting to visit. This paper aims to determine the relationship between interactions between stakeholders in managing the Langsa City Forest Area. The method used is descriptive analysis of data obtained through in-depth interviews with City Forest Area managers. The results of this study are in the form of interaction patterns based on the results of the interface management system analysis in four main aspects, i.e., financial, infrastructure, environment, and tourism.
Keywords: coordination, interaction patterns, stakeholders, interfaces
References
Agarwal, K., 2023. What is asset lifecycle management? 2023 comprehensive guide [online]. Available at: https://www.selecthub.com/cmms/eam/asset-lifecycle-management/ [Accessed 28 Jun. 2023].
Chan, W.T., Chen, C., Messner, J.I. & Chua, D.K., 2005. Interface management for China’s build-operate-transfer projects. Journal of Construction Engineering and Management, 131(6), pp.645–655.
Chen, Q., Reichard, G. & Beliveau, Y., 2008. Multiperspective approach to exploring comprehensive cause factors for interface issues. Journal of Construction Engineering, 134(6), pp.432–441.
Checkland, P., 2000. Soft systems methodology: A thirty year retrospective. Systems Research, 48.
Comparesoft, 2023. The four stages of asset lifecycle management & best practices [online]. Available at: https://comparesoft.com/asset-management-software/asset-life-cycle/ [Accessed 28 Jun. 2023].
Daellenbach, H.G. & McNickle, D.C., 2005. Management science: Decision making through system thinking. New York, USA: Palgrave Macmillan.
Daniels, C., Farnsworth, C.B. & Weidmann, J., 2014. Interface management on megaprojects: A case study. In: Associated Schools of Construction.
Huang, R.Y., Huang, C.T., Lin, H. & Ku, H.W., 2008. Factor analysis of interface problems among construction parties: A case study of MRT. Journal of Marine Science and Technology, 16(1), pp.52–63.
Kirkwood, C.W., 1998. System dynamic methods: A quick introduction. Ventana Systems Inc.
Li, T.H.Y., Ng, S.T. & Skitmore, M., 2016. Modeling multi-stakeholder multi-objective decisions during public participation in major infrastructure and construction projects: A decision rule approach. Journal of Construction Engineering and Management [online], 142(3), p.04015087. Available at: http://ascelibrary.org/doi/10.1061/%28ASCE%29CO.1943-7862.0001066 [Accessed 11 Oct. 2019].
Lin, Y.C., 2013. Construction network-based interface management system. Automation in Construction, 30, pp.228–241.
Ma, G., Jia, J., Ding, J., Shang, S. & Jiang, S., 2019. Interpretive structural model-based factor analysis of BIM adoption in Chinese construction organizations. Sustainability [online], 11(7), p.1982. Available at: https://www.mdpi.com/2071-1050/11/7/1982 [Accessed 24 Jan. 2022].
Malone, T.W., 1987. Modeling coordination in organizations and markets. Management Science [online], 33(10), pp.1317–1332. Available at: http://pubsonline.informs.org/doi/abs/10.1287/mnsc.33.10.1317 [Accessed 13 Dec. 2019].
Malone, T.W. & Crowston, K., 1994. The interdisciplinary study of coordination [online]. Available at: https://www.google.com/search?q=T.W.+Malone%2C+K.+Crowston%2C+The+interdisciplinary+study+of+coordination [Accessed 12 Dec. 2019].
Meredith, J.R. & Mantel, S.J., 2011. Project management: A managerial approach. New York, USA: John Wiley & Sons.
Schuman, C.A. & Brent, A.C., 2005. Asset life cycle management: Towards improving physical asset performance in the process industry. International Journal of Operations & Production Management [online], 25(6), pp.566–579. Available at: https://www.emerald.com/insight/content/doi/10.1108/01443570510599728/full/html [Accessed 28 Jun. 2023].
Singh, R.K., Garg, S.K. & Deshmukh, S.G., 2007. Interpretive structural modelling of factors for improving competitiveness of SMEs. International Journal of Productivity and Quality Management (IJPQM) [online], 2(4), p.423. Available at: http://www.inderscience.com/link.php?id=13336 [Accessed 3 Jan. 2022].
Shokri, S., Safa, M., Haas, C.T., Haas, R.C.G., Maloney, K. & McGillivray, S., 2012. Interface management model for mega capital project. In: Construction Research Congress 2012, pp.447–456.
Shokri, S., Ahn, S., Lee, S., Haas, C.T. & Haas, R.C.G., 2016. Current status of interface management in construction: Drivers and effects of systematic interface management. Journal of Construction Engineering and Management, 142(2).
Son, J. & Rojas, E.M., 2011. Evolution of collaboration in temporary project teams: An agent-based modeling and simulation approach. Journal of Construction Engineering and Management [online], 137(8), pp.619–628. Available at: http://ascelibrary.org/doi/10.1061/%28ASCE%29CO.1943-7862.0000331 [Accessed 11 Oct. 2019].
Tan, F. & Wang, D., 2009. Study on establishment of integration platforms of clients’ organizing interface in large construction project. IEEE.
Tellioğlu, H., 2010. Coordination of work: towards a typology. In: Proceedings of the 11th International Conference on Computer Systems and Technologies and Workshop for PhD Students in Computing - CompSysTech ’10. Sofia, Bulgaria: ACM Press, p.311. Available at: http://portal.acm.org/citation.cfm?doid=1839379.1839434 [Accessed 11 Oct. 2019].
Thekdi, S.A. & Joshi, N.N., 2016. Prioritization of capacity investment projects with stakeholder divergence criteria for coordinated infrastructure development. Journal of Infrastructure Systems [online], 22(2), p.04015019. Available at: http://ascelibrary.org/doi/10.1061/%28ASCE%29IS.1943-555X.0000276 [Accessed 11 Oct. 2019].
Tuomikangas, N. & Kaipia, R., 2014. A coordination framework for sales and operations planning (S&OP): Synthesis from the literature. International Journal of Production Economics [online], 154, pp.243–262. Available at: https://linkinghub.elsevier.com/retrieve/pii/S0925527314001522 [Accessed 11 Oct. 2019].
Wen, Q. & Qiang, M., 2016. Coordination and knowledge sharing in construction project-based organization: A longitudinal structural equation model analysis. Automation in Construction [online], 72, pp.309–320. Available at: https://linkinghub.elsevier.com/retrieve/pii/S0926580516301200 [Accessed 11 Oct. 2019].
