Penilaian Maturity Level Sistem Manajemen Kinerja Pendidikan Tinggi Berdasarkan Critical Success Factors

Aulia Sri Dharma Nova, Henmaidi Henmaidi, Dicky Fatrias, Irna Ekawati


Higher education institution is an organization whose role is to produce professional, qualified and competitive human resources. Thus, it is required to be able to implement a good performance management system by building a common understanding of the goals to be achieved and how they can be achieved, as well as the approaches needed to manage and develop resources to improve individual, team and organizational performance. In order to be able to implement a performance management system effectively, adequate initial information is needed to determine the current level of organizational maturity as a basis for further improvement. In this study, a model of the maturity level of a performance management system was developed which was adapted to the form of higher education organization. The results show that the maturity level of the Polytechnic ATI Padang's performance management system is at level three, which means the organization already has clear and integrated policies and guidelines in carrying out its education and management processes followed by the use of up-to-date technology. The development and management of resources have been identified based on needs, as well as the formation of a participatory culture in most work units. Improved technology infrastructure is needed to enable effective use of data and the development of HR skills and knowledge regarding performance management systems so as to increase awareness of the influence of individual performance on the overall performance of the institution.


Critical Success Factors, Maturity Level, Performance Management System

Full Text:



Kementerian Perindustrian, “Rencana Induk Pembangunan Industri Nasional 2015 -2035,” 2015.

Politeknik ATI Padang, “Rencana Strategis Politeknik ATI Padang Tahun 2020-2024 Review 2,” 2021.

Politeknik ATI Padang, “Laporan Akuntabilitas Kinerja Instansi Pemerintah,” 2020.

Politeknik ATI Padang, “Laporan Hasil Evaluasi Implementasi SAKIP Politeknik ATI Padang 2021,” Padang, 2021.

M. Weisberg, “Lumen Performance Management Maturity Model,” no. January, 2015, doi: 10.13140/2.1.3114.7849.

K. Verweire and L. Van Den Berghe, “Integrated Performance Management,” 2004.

S. Maria, C. Loureiro, and M. Amorim, “Critical success factors as drivers to quality and sustainable in higher education institutions.,” no. December 2014, 2011, [Online]. Available:

A. H. Abdullah, R. Razman, and R. Muslim, “A Review on Critical Success Factors of Governance towards Sustainable Campus Operations,” IOP Conf. Ser. Mater. Sci. Eng., vol. 226, no. 1, 2017, doi: 10.1088/1757-899X/226/1/012057.

S. J. Alharthi, “Performance management systems in UAE government organisations,” p. 326, 2014, [Online]. Available: Accessed date: 01-11-2018

S. Ghosh, “Cause and Effects of Performance Management in Higher Educational Institutions (HEI),” pp. 58–63, 2014.

J. Assish, “Factors That Influence the Effectiveness of Performance Management System Adoption in Organisation,” Glob. J. Hum. Resour. Manag., vol. 6, no. 1, pp. 51–66, 2018, [Online]. Available:

A. M. Tambi, “Total Quality Management In Higher Education: Modelling Critical Success Factors,” Sheffield Hallam University, 2000.

N. N. A. Mansor, A. R. Chakraborty, T. K. Yin, and Z. Mahitapoglu, “Organizational Factors Influencing Performance Management System in Higher Educational Institution of South East Asia,” Procedia - Soc. Behav. Sci., vol. 40, no. September 2014, pp. 584–590, 2012, doi: 10.1016/j.sbspro.2012.03.234.

F. Sole, “A management model and factors driving performance in public organizations,” Meas. Bus. Excell., vol. 13, no. 4, pp. 3–11, Nov. 2009, doi: 10.1108/13683040911006747.

S. J. Marshall, “A Quality Framework for Continuous Improvement of E-learning: The E-learning Maturity Model,” J. Distance Educ. Rev. L’Éducation À Distance, vol. 24, no. 1, pp. 143–166, 2010.

R. Manjula and J. Vaideeswaran, “A New CMM-Edu Process Improvement and Assesment Model Using SEI-CMM Approach – Engeneering Education Capability Maturity Model :(E2 -CMM),” October, vol. 1, no. 4, pp. 39–52, 2010, doi: DOI : 10.5121/ijsea.2010.1403.

J. M. BASS, “A New ICT Maturity Model for Education Institutions in Developing Countries,” Manchester, ISBN: 978-1-905469-12-3, 2010.

SEI - Software Engineering Institute, “Capability Maturity Model® for Development Version 1.2 (CMMI-DEV v1.2),” no. August, 2006.

C. Demir and I. Kocabaş, “Project Management Maturity Model (PMMM) in educational organizations,” Procedia - Soc. Behav. Sci., vol. 9, pp. 1641–1645, 2010, doi: 10.1016/j.sbspro.2010.12.379.

T. Wettstein and P. Kueng, “A maturity model for performance measurement systems,” Manag. Inf. Syst., no. 199 1, pp. 113–122, 2002.

R. Y. Alemu, “Assessment of Project Management Maturity at The Ministry of Urban Development and Construction –The Case Of The Federal Government Buildings Construction Project Office,” Addis Ababa University, 2019.

M. Baig, S. Basharat, and M. Maqsood, “A Maturity Model for Quality Improvement in Higher Education,” Int. Conf. Assess. Qual. High. Educ., 2006.

A. Suppa and N. J. Webb, “What Factors Contribute To Success in Performance Management in the Public Sector? An International Comparative Study of Two Large Defense Organizations,” Int. Public Manag. Rev., vol. 17, no. 2, pp. 1–35, 2016.

A. Jääskeläinen and J. M. Roitto, “Designing a model for profiling organizational performance management,” Int. J. Product. Perform. Manag., vol. 64, no. 1, pp. 5–27, 2015, doi: 10.1108/IJPPM-01-2014-0001.

M. Aho, “What is your PMI ? A Model for Assessing the Maturity of Performance Management in Organizations,” Pma, no. July, pp. 1–22, 2012.

P. Cocca and M. Alberti, “A framework to assess performance measurement systems in SMEs,” Int. J. Product. Perform. Manag., vol. 59, no. 2, pp. 186–200, 2010, doi: 10.1108/17410401011014258.

U. S. Bititci, P. Garengo, A. Ates, and S. S. Nudurupati, “Value of maturity models in performance measurement,” Int. J. Prod. Res., vol. 53, no. 10, pp. 3062–3085, 2015, doi: 10.1080/00207543.2014.970709.


  • There are currently no refbacks.