kata kata

kata kata cuma pemanis

rayuan yang paling lihai

waktu dan kesabaran

mata uang dalam memancing

wanita butuh kata kata, katanya

membuai dalam harapan

atau mengaburkan kenyataan

luluh diam diam

pada semua perlakuan manis

habis habisan di awal pertemuan

apakah kau merasa akan mendapatkan

semua yang bisa kuberikan

jika kau kerahkan upaya

mengutarakan semua 

bersabar menunggu celotehanku

pura pura menyimak semua perkataanku

katanya kau telah mengupayakan semua

yang kau kira bisa kau lakukan

menggenggam hatiku

dan kau akan terus menanyakan

mengapa aku tak memahami

semua yang telah kau lakukan

mungkin kau tak seingin itu

dan aku sudah tak mau lagi

22/06

pada akhirnya

terlalu naif untuk percaya

tulus tanpa kata kata

mengharapkan sesuatu

entah apapun halnya

aku yang menutup telinga

atau ia yang lupa bicara

pada akhirnya ternyata

semua hal yang telah aku kira

satu hal dan dua hal

alasan demi alasan

menyenangkan atau memilukan

fakta adalah fakta

yang berdiri tegak

di antara dua kepala

dan dua hati yang membicarakan

semua kata kata di dunia

pada akhirnya hanya sekedar

sadar untuk akhir dari jalan yang kita temukan

mungkin ada kabut yang menghalangi pandangan

tapi semua akan sejelas itu pada waktunya

pada awal, 

dan akhir

yang selalu kau paham,

tapi kau tau kemana semua ini

bisa berakhir

21/6

setiap pagi

setiap ku terbangun

terbenamkan pada

semua penungguan

yang dinantikan

apa yang tak lagi dituju

semua lara yang tak lagi datang

hanya keheningan

di setiap pagi

rindu datang tiap pagi

pada masa yang lewat

masa yang belum datang

satu ingatan yang kutelan

dan hati yang tak turut

dalam perintah pikiran

bagaimana bisa bertahan

sedang pertengkaran demi pertengkaran

menghabiskan semua kedamaian

di balik layar akankah yang pahit

awal dari semua hal baik

yang menunggu datang

20/6

telepon

suaramu menggema sampai jauh

meresap ke relung relung

kebodohan yang terulang dua kali

mungkin suka, mungkin ingin 

hening dan jeda sebentar

memberikan kesempatan

pada semua keraguan

pesan yang dibalas dingin

lebih gemar bertelepon, katamu

terlalu cepat berpikir

untuk aku yang memikirkan semuanya

merangkaikan kata kata

mengetikkan yang sebenar benarnya

kau baca sambil lalu,

telepon saja

tapi berbicara denganmu

hati tak karu karuan

semua kata yang terucap

telah aku sesalkan

apakah kau benar benar mendengarkan

sedang aku, terlalu cepat melupakan

6/6

The Pitfall of Super Apps- How Over Centralization Undermines Local Government's Autonomy

Karina Oktriastra- March 2025

The rapid adoption of super apps in government operations has been promoted as a breakthrough in public service digitalization. These one-command applications promise seamless service, standardization, and efficiency across different regions. However, behind this progress lies a worrying issue: the erosion of local government autonomy and the imposition of centralized standards that often do not align with the strengths and challenges of different regions.

Overuse of Technology - The Double Edge Sword

Technology should be a tool to enhance governance, not dictate policies without considering local needs. The current trend of developing one-size-fits-all super apps limits local governments’ ability to tailor solutions based on their unique socio-economic conditions. Instead of enabling local governments to build on their own strengths, these apps enforce uniformity, often overlooking disparities in infrastructure, human resources, and economic priorities across regions.

Super apps are often assumed to be a universal solution for all issues, but this approach is flawed. Local governments operate in vastly different contexts—what works in the capital city may not be applicable in smaller cities, rural areas, or regions with different socio-economic dynamics. Imposing a standardized system restricts innovation, hinders context-based problem-solving, and forces local governments to conform to a framework that is more suitable for metropolitan areas than their actual needs.

According to Janssen & Estevez (2013) in their study on e-Government, excessive standardization in digital governance can reduce policy effectiveness at the local level by limiting governments’ ability to customize technology to their own needs.

Dependence on Centralized Control: A Threat to Autonomy

In an era where digital governance is expanding, super apps are instead increasing local governments’ dependence on national policies. This dependency creates several challenges:

1. Loss of Decision-Making Power: Local governments are forced to align their policies with centrally designed applications, reducing their ability to independently create policies that address local issues.
2. Lack of Flexibility and Customization: These apps are often rigid, compelling regions to adjust their service models to predetermined features, even if they are irrelevant to local needs.
3. Resource Drain: Implementing centralized applications, maintaining compatibility, and meeting national standards consume resources that could otherwise be used for more pressing local needs.

The result? Instead of crafting policies based on regional potential, local governments struggle to adapt to national mandates that often fail to consider their capacities and realities. Research by Heeks (2008) in the Journal of Information Technology for Development shows that the success of digital governance initiatives depends on how well technology adapts to local socio-political structures rather than simply implementing a top-down technology framework.

Forgetting the Strength of Local Autonomy

Before the rise of super apps, many regions thrived through decentralized decision-making, allowing them to develop solutions tailored to their unique socio-political and economic landscapes. Autonomy gave local governments the freedom to innovate and build regional cooperation among local stakeholders—a far more sustainable approach than merely following national standards.

The core strength of local governance lies in community-based problem-solving, where local knowledge, cultural nuances, and regional expertise play a crucial role. In contrast, super apps prioritize individual efficiency over collective progress, pushing a hyper-standardization model that disregards the power of community engagement and collaborative governance.

Reclaiming Digital Sovereignty for Local Governments

To address this issue, we must rethink how digital governance is implemented:

1. Adopt a Hybrid Approach: Instead of enforcing a top-down digital policy, governments should develop modular and flexible digital solutions that local governments can adapt to their needs.
2. Promote Interoperability, Not Uniformity: Rather than forcing a single application across all regions, we should build interoperable systems that allow local applications to communicate with national platforms without sacrificing their specific functionalities.
3. Empower Local Digital Innovation: Encourage local governments to develop needs-based digital solutions, supported by central funding and expertise but without unnecessary restrictions.
4. Strengthen Local Collaboration: Prioritize intergovernmental cooperation, ensuring that best practices are shared and adapted based on regional strengths rather than imposed through a centralized system.

Conclusion

Super apps are not inherently bad—but when they become tools for enforcing uniformity instead of empowering local innovation, they undermine the essence of local autonomy. If we want to adopt digital governance, we must do so in a way that enhances local governments’ strengths rather than merely making them conform to a system designed for the capital.

The future of governance should not be about making local governments fit into a centralized digital mold—but about leveraging technology to empower them based on their unique strengths.

As Sen (1999) asserts in Development as Freedom, technology must fulfill its true purpose: assisting marginalized communities, strengthening societies, and ensuring governance is built on inclusivity rather than centralized control. Only then can technology truly serve as a tool for effective and inclusive policymaking.

* Sen, Amartya. (1999). Development as Freedom. Oxford University Press.

The Tale of The Incompetent Leaders

Karina Oktriastra- June 2025

The Incompetence May Create The Dysfunctional Workplaces

Mostly in public organizations, workplace is not a byproduct of bad systems or lazy staff. Its more often than not, a reflection of the leader’s incompetence. A leader that have the key to determine how the organization’s will run or just going in the same place all over again, draining the operational budget without having output or outcome. A leader who lacks character, clarity and courage breeds confusion, distrust and disengangement. As the saying goes, “a fish rots from the head down”.

People may get the leadership role through a nasty politics, and then its up to their own moral commitment on how to run the rules. At the core of great leadership lies integrity- even when they got the place with some ‘push’ but people would watch, about how they doing the right thing even when its hard, when no one watching. Incompetents leaders would fail if they talk about values, but not embody them. When they demand loyalty, but betray the trust of their coworkers or clients. They make the staff making sacrifice, yet unwilling to sacrifice their own ego or convenience. 

Albert Schweitzer have a great quote for that “example is not the main thing in influencing others. It is the only thing”. If the leader can’t show the right moves, they can create the rejection and rebellion that would run on the grass. A dysfunctional workplace under poor leadership marked by indecisiveness, finger-pointing, and a lack of psychological safety. Team members would afraid to speak up, reluctant to take initiatives, and unsure where the organizations heading. Eventually, the best ones leaves, other may rest stay and survive- but stop thriving. 

What A Good Leader Actually Does

In my opinion, with a few workplace in my career. I define the good leadership is not about the charisma, seniority or power. They lead by example, by hearing and understanding our needs, values, strength, to overcome our weakness and then leading to be the best version of ourselves. They’re first to take responsibility, they’re the last to leave when things go wrong, and the first to act when tough choices must be made. They dont just ask people to be better, they show them how. In my experience, most people just want to make their work great and impactful, naturally, if we aim the same purpose, to make things great, the rest would follow the lead without any resistance if there’s no big sacrifice that must been made. 

“Before you are a leader, success is about growing yourself. When you become a leader, success is about growing other” - Jack Welch 

The best leaders are often not the loudest, but the most consistent. Their people dont fear them, but feel safe around them. They know where the theme is going. And they know their leader wont throw then under the bus to protect their own image. This need trust that made by earning that. That safety-emotional, professional, and ethical- is what separates functional workplaces from toxic ones. 

What Incompetent Leaders Leave Behind

To knowing the damage left by poor leadership isnt always immediate. In my observation, it would build the certain situation slowly, that finally the crisis create the other martyr or leadership without position that they would listen and asking the advice or just get the most popular votes. 

Sometimes people are not really that lazy, they’re just disillusioned. Most professionals wants to care, but when they dont see the leaders living the values they talk about- integrity, fairness, service- they slowly stop believing in the work, too.

“If you want to improve the organization, you have to improve yourself and the organization gets pulled up with you” - Indra Nooyi.

What Makes a Leader Worth Following

Some core or basic values of leadership in common maybe most of them have:

• Live their values, not pushing people around, but influence and inspire them
• Put team goals above personal gain
• Make people heard, safe to speak, fail and grow
• Consistent of their word and their action- not just charismatic
• Understand that leadership is service- not self-promotion

In the public service, especially the stakes are higher. A director or department head who leads poorly doesnt just damage an office- they damage the public trust. And in this era, maybe the stakes are too high and maybe we cant afford it.

The nice workplace are shaped daily by the behaviour and modeled from the top. Great leaders dont have to be perfect, but they have to be authentic and clear about the vision where they were lead. They have to be willing to go first. To be the kind of person other people can rely on when the things get hard. Because when the leader are competent and courageous, people rise. When they’re not, everything else slowly falls apart and would be not nice to work in.

---