The Performance of Forestry Human Resources in Licensing Forest Utilization, The Lease of Forest Area, and The Release of Forest Area

Performance assesment includes the quantity and quality measurements of individual or group works within organization in carrying out duties and functions. It is based on norms, standard operational procedure (SOP), and specified criteria in an organization. Factors affecting quality and quantity of individual performance in an organization are skills, experience, ability, competence, willingness, energy, technology, leadership, compensation, clarity of purpose, and security. This study aims to identify and analyze the performance of forestry human resources (HR) related to licensing forest utilization, releasing forest area, and leasing forest area. The results of the study are: (1) the performance of forestry HR in licensing forest utilization was relatively still poor; (2) the structure (rules, norms, cultural cognitive) of forestry HR was unclear and is not well developed; and (3) the culture of learning organization, including personal mastery, mental models, shared vision, team learning, and system thinking is still insufficient and needs to be developed at the ministerial, provincial, and district/city levels. Some suggestions for improving the performance of forestry HR are: (1) establishing an appraisal team/task force of forestry HR performance; (2) developing commitment for high quality service at the bureaucratic elites and their highest level networks; and (3) considering the development of one stop licensing supported by online system to promote transparency and public accountability.


Introduction
The concept of performance started from kinetic energy performance of work which is defined as output generated by functions or indicators of a job or a profession in a certain time (Wirawan 2009).Assessment or evaluation of performance has various synonym such as performance appraisal, performance review, performance evaluation, performance assessment, development needs assessment, staff development review, performance rating, personal rating, annual review, and annual merit review.Factors affecting quality and quantity of individual performance within an organization, according to some experts, are skill, experience, ability (Stone et al. 2006;Rothstein et al. 2006;Lance 2008), competence, willingness, energy, technology, leadership, compensation, clarity of purpose, and security (Parker et al. 2008).Dimensions in measuring quality of organizational performance are reliability, responsiveness, assurance, empathy, tangibles, individual, psychological, organizational, internal dimensions, and external dimensions (Wirawan 2009; Table 1).
Beside the definition of performance, factors that affect performance are also important to be elaborated.Wibowo (2012) formulated 7 factors influencing performance comprising: ability (include knowledge and skill), clarity (role perception), organizational support, incentive (motivation or willingness), evaluation (coaching and performance feedback), validity (valid and legal personnel practices), and environmental fit.Furthermore, performance indicators include objectives, standards, feedback, means, competence, motive, and opportunity (Wibowo 2012).On organizational performance, usually the criteria and concepts for evaluating managers and organizations are measured using efficiency and effectiveness (Wibowo 2012).
Associated with the performance of human resources (HR), Bartel AP et al. (2011) andBakker AB et al. (2012) states that achievement motivation (giving duties and responsibilities, freedom to be creative and initiative, providing feedback on given tasks) and organizational culture (setting norms/employee behavior, exemplary actions of leaders, clarity and fairness of standard assessment and decision-making, cooperation and good interpersonal communication) have positive influence on human performance improvement.Additionally, compensation and assessment of work systems influence human behavior which in turn affects the performance of HR (Wirawan 2009).Wu and Katok (2006) state that leadership and interpersonal communication significantly affects employee performance.Moreover, inovation, interpersonal communication and performance-measurement systems have significant and positive impact on employees performance (Fleming 2009).More detail, Judge TA et al. (2010) argues that there is important relationship between payment and job satisfaction.In education sector, Junco and Cotten (2012) explore relationship between multitasking and academic performance.
There is a positive correlation between conflict management skills and attitude towards tasks (either individually or jointly) with work effectiveness (Dalkir 2005).Attitude towards the task in question is an innovative action, creative thinking, have a high sense of responsibility, develop leadership potential, sensitivity, and future-oriented.Lastly, Davoudi and Kaur (2012) argues link between internal marketing and human resource management.Based on foregoing description, it is known that quality of work is very dependent on performance.Efforts to improve quality of work should be done by all elements in an organization in order to achieve good performance improvement and quality (Spreitzer et al. 2012;Kramer et al. 2014).Other researchers discovered phenomenon that there is a positive relationship between quantitative organizational culture, reward, and motivation on HR performance (Wahyudi 2010).Evaluation of individual performance can also be done independently (self appraisal), by direct supervisor, by immediate supervisor manager, by a multidisciplinary expert panel, by professional appraisers, by colleagues, by clients/customers, and by subordinate (Figure 1).

Methods
The study was conducted at the Ministry of Forestry (MoF, now the Ministry of Environment and Forestry) and East Kalimantan Provincial Goverment.The process of evaluating how well employees perform their job when compared to set of standards, and then communicating that information to employees

Erdogan B (2002)
Performance appraisal refers to the whole procedure, including establishment of performance standards, appraisal related behaviors of raters within the performance appraisal period, determination of performance rating, and communication of the rating to the rate resources individually and collectively used the concept of learning organization (Senge 1990) known as the 5 disciplines: personal mastery, mental models, shared vision, team learning, and system thinking (Figure 2).Techniques of data collection were using a structured questionnaire survey method (quantitative).Qualitative approach was conducted with in-depth observation, key informant interviews by snowball technique, study documents, and building integrated analysis and synthesis of such various data and information obtained.Data collection techniques with snowball started with recognizing key informants and addressing key informant interviews.The process of snowball technique was completed if there has been repetition of same information from the key informants.

degree appraisal of forestry HR performance
Assessment of the forestry HR using 360 degree appraisal of licensing units in Ministry of Forestry and East Kalimantan Province are presented in Table 2.It appears that there is a considerable difference among result of self-assessment, assessment by superiors, assessment by colleagues, and assessment by subordinates.This implies that the 360 degree appraisal system is quite balanced.The appraisal method is a comprehensive assessment method.In an ideal implemention of the method, the assessment is conducted proportionally on each assessment by parties.For example, assessment by external parties and expert panels occupy larger proportion than internal assessment.The smallest placed on self-assessment in order to avoid excessive subjectivity.This is in line with one of the concept of performance evaluation that customers determine the shape of desired service, not evaluation by internal employees (Ulrich 2014).
Other assessment by external parties is an assessment by professional expert panel in HR management.The expert panel could be a team of consultants who work to examine planning, organizing, actuating, and controlling of HR management policies such as the implementation of career and training patterns and supervision of HR management policies within an institution.Unfortunately, forestry HR assessment by an expert panel was not implemented by MoF and East Kalimantan Province thoroughly and sustainably, but it was conducted temporarily when the organizations need a set of specific criteria of HR for the purpose of filling certain positions.Based on in-depth interviews, the implementation of HR assessment ever was undertaken by the Directorate General of Forest Planning based on individual considerations of the director general and the board of directors.It was interesting to be noted that an assessment by expert panel is conducted because of discretionary policy of leaders elite, not the implementation of policies that have been planned well in the organization as a whole.Other forestry HR assessment by an expert panel was not implemented at other directorates in the MoF and East Kalimantan Province at the time.By enhancing evaluation through the involvement of customers and expert parties, an organization tries to improve transparency and wider stakehorder's participation (Wirawan 2009).Figure 2 Component of learning organization (Senge 1990).

Personal mastery
Mental models Team learning resources within the organization that are used to achieve the goals.Ethical competency contains management organizations work values, reasoning ability, personal morality, and implementation of organizational ethics (Haryatmoko 2011).Based on result of in-depth interview, some respondents suggests that ethical competency had the lowest value after leadership competency and technical competency.
From data obtained in Table 3, it shows that value of leadership competency, technical competency, and ethical competency at central level (MoF: DG of Forest Planing and DG of Forest Utilization) are relatively higher than the value of institutions at local level (East Kalimantan Province: Forestry Office and Mining and Energy Office).It is interesting to observe value of the 3 competencies for technical implementation unit (UPT) in the central region (BPKH Samarinda and BPPHP Samarinda).The value at UPTs tend to be lower than supervisor agencies in MoF, although the units are essentially a central institution.From the available data it can be concluded that forestry HR at central agencies tend to adapt to local conditions, not in line with supervisor institutions at the MoF.

Organization and individual learning of HR forestry
Table 4 presents the institutional capacity of several units of the MoF and East Kalimantan Province based on learning organization concept: personal mastery, mental models, shared vision, team learning, and system thinking (Senge 1990).Personal mastery is defined as an encouragement to continue to learn how to create a future that can only be achieved if individuals in the organization willing and able to continue to learn and make himself as a master/expert in the specific field of science.Of the 6 organizational units studied by this research (DG of Forest Planing, DG of Forest Utilization, East Kalimantan Forestry Office, East Kalimantan Mining and Energy Office, BPPHP Samarinda, and BPKH Samarinda), all units had scores above average (scale 0-5).It implies that organizations and individuals try to improve knowledge and skills in accordance to complexity job demands.This is certainly in line with concept of development that an organization needs to continuously improve its capabilities.Interesting note is that the forestry units at national level (MoF) and its UPTs have personal mastery values higher than offices at East Kalimantan Province.Based on in-depth interviews, the diversity of entity and level of knowledge of parties served make the job of MoF units more complex.This is relatively different with work environment faced predominantly by offices at East Kalimantan Province whereas the diversity of problems tent to be simple and homogen.The other factor is that internal drive of forestry HR province level is not too strong compared to the central institutions in order to improve personal mastery.Senge (1990) defines mental models as a mental process that must be shared by all members of an organization to learn positive values that are in line with their needs and discard negative values that are not relevant.In Table 4, 6 studied organizational units have value of mental models only slightly above the average (2.50 of scale 0-5).In MoF, the values were built top-down, structured, and legalized by MoF Letter Number 01/2007.The values are known as the 9 basic values of foresters: honesty, responsibility, sincerity, discipline, visionary, fairness, caring, cooperation, and professionalism.In contrast, basically organization value is actually developed as cohesion of individual values that interact continuously in an organization.Organizational value is usually developed through a process to build a consensus view of values that are believed together.Using an institutional way of thinking in which structure/institution is a combination of rules, norms/values, and faith/belief, weak natural values owned by unit influence organizations in foundation of its 'institutional spirit' (Kartodihardjo 2010).
Shared vision is defined as a passion and commitment to always learn together, which requires ability to customize personal vision inline with vision of organization.The vision is not something imposed by leadership of an organization as normative vision (Senge 1990).In this aspect, it needs to be explored and investigated more deeply if an organization vision is awakened from collectivity personal vision or an appropriate agreed that 'given'.Some values are given and legalized such as the MoF organizational vision is known as the forester 9 basic values.In another part of the MoF also issued Decree Number 7/2004 which included four main criteria of forestry HR: moral integrity, professionalism, leadership, and team work.From the research, the overall value of the central organizational units and regions all were less than 2.50 from 0-5 scale range.It can be interpreted that the values shared vision are still derived formally, less implemented properly and not to be interpreted as a 'real' shared vision of forestry HR.
Team learning is defined as building knowledge of each individual which is then distributed to organization members to become shared knowledge of the team where all members have a mutual need in accordance with a common plan (Senge 1990).The ability to act is a prerequisite in creating added value to the organization that requires ability to communicate and coordinate honestly and correctly and ability to build an emotional bond, a passion for dialogue, cooperation skills as a team, and ability to learn and adapt, as well as efforts to increase participation.Based on the research results, values of team learning of organization units at central level and their UPTs are higher than those values at the research units at the provincial level.It means that awareness and motivation to improve knowledge and learning at national level tends to increase workloads and variations of problems faced.Based on in-dept interviews, other meaning is that complexity of coordination at province level is more modest than those at the central level and thus require a more concise learning team.Senge (1990) explained that system thinking requires an existence of linkages and interdependence among all functions of an organization so that all elements work in one system unit.Integrated thinking skills needs comprehensive thinking, and build adaptive organizations to build systemic learning discipline.In other words, system thinking reflects level of coordination and integration of all parts in an organization to think in a whole system, not segmented and promoting sectoral ego.The data result showed that, compared to other components in learning organization, organizational units at central and local levels attained a score of systems thinking better.This means that in the forestry licensing services conducted at central and local levels, forestry HR are accustomed to work connectedly and independently as the mechanism for granting licenses that involves various parts of the relevant ministries and in provinces.Standard operating procedures (SOPs) at forestry licensing regulations drive the forestry HR to coordinate and connect each other since the selection process started by scrutinizing document requirements, analysis, and decisionmaking.
Furthermore the 360 degree appraisal of forestry HR performance needs to be gradually implemented as a whole and an integrated system of HRD in MoF.In addition, ethical competency, leadership competency, and technical  Synthesis of the research presented is that there is a lower tendency of personal mastery, mental models, system thinking, team learning, shared vision, structure support, learning organization culture, and servant leadership on HR forestry working in the units studied both at the central and regional levels.This is in line with HR performance evaluation by external parties (forestry associations, forestry academicians, forestry practitioners) and in accordance with the evaluation of licensing service users.Other research of learning organization conducted in MoF also had similar result particularly on the scors of learning organization elements (Karyana 2007).
Generally, whole research results informs that ethical competence, leadership competence, technical competence, and competence of forestry public officers are in the range of 6.95-5.13(scale 0-10), which means that on average the values did not reach at good level (above 70).These indicate that competencies, performances, and institutional capacity of forestry HR are influenced each other (Wahyudi 2010).According to some studies, an important component which also must be considered in the improvement of forestry human performance, especially in the field of licensing service is a public service ethic that has several characteristics: individual motivation, professionalism, level of reliability (trust), and impartiality/neutrality (Plant 2003).Other factors to be considered in improving HR performance are level of work satisfaction, communication with subordinates, superiors, and colleagues, policy satisfaction from elites, corps spirit and togetherness (Ritchie et al. 2006).

Conclusion
Based on the description and analysis of the reserach results, the conclusian is that forestry HR performance especially in utilization licensing of natural forest, plantations forest and ecosystem restoration forest, forest area leasing, and forest area releasing is still poor.The structure (rules, norms, cultural cognitive) of forestry HR is relatively unclear and did not develop well both at the MoF internally and at the East Kalimantan Provincial Goverment.Assessment of the forestry HR performance needs to give greater proportion to the licensing service user group services rather than administrative performance appraisal and assessment from the internal organization.Assessment of performance by a group of professional expert panel can also be a significant and positive step to improve the performance of forestry human resources.Leadership capability to elaborate power, to coordinate various internal groups in ministries and province , and to integrate a variety of external interests may become one alternative to overcome problems of forestry human performance.The other conclusion is forestry HR performance in utilization licensing of natural forest, plantations forest and ecosystem restoration forest, forest area leasing, and forest area releasing needs to be improved in order to perform effective and efficient services as bureaucratic reform demands set out in roadmap and strategic plan of the organization.Learning organization includes personal mastery, mental models, shared vision, team learning, and system thinking is still suboptimal and needs to be developed in the internal ministry forestry and in provincial level to build a strong structure / institutions include rule in use and positive norms that implemented in the organizations.

Recommendation
Paying attention to the conclusion of the study, firstly, it is recommended to set up a team/task force appraiser on forestry HR performance consisting of various components in the internal organizations, licensing service user representatives, and an expert panel of forestry HR who really master duties and functions of licensing services in the field of forestry.Mechanism of the task force is expected to allow the team to work professionally, independently, and transparently.Furthermore, for more permanent and stable HRD mechanism, it is necessary to implement a system that can monitor and enhance the general performance of HR.
In order to improve forestry HR performance, it is also important to enhance the commitment of the highest level bureaucratic elites and their network to improve the performance of HR forestry especially practicing a merit system by addressing transparent and integrated career pattern and training pattern.With regard to forestry licenses, the MoF needs to set up one-stop online license system as bureaucratic reform implementation by promoting transparency and public accountability..
Table 3 presents competencies of forestry public officers of some units in the MoF (Directorate General of Forest Planning, Directorat General of Forest Utilization, BPKH Samarinda, BPPHP Samarinda, and East Kalimantan Province (provincial forestry office and mining energy provincial office)).

Table 2
360 degree performance apparisal on forestry HR of MoF and East Kalimantan Province

Table 3
Competency of forestry public officers of MoF and East Kalimantan Province PP = appraisal by expert panel (did not conducted on the research) Planing

Table 4
(Senge 1990) capacity of MoF and East Kalimantan Province (based on Learning Organization Concept(Senge 1990)