Strengthening Institutional Capacity of Guitar Cluster: Implementation of DEA and MACTOR

Muzakar Isa(1*)
(*) Corresponding Author

DOI: 10.24269/ekuilibrium.v16i2.2021.pp107-116


Abstract


This study aims to analyze the efficiency level of the use of guitar input and the output acquisition in guitar production and to analyze the influence and interests of stakeholders in the guitar industry. This study used a mixed-method approach. The research object is guitar business units that conduct production process, in which many business units only perform the production process with subcontracts from collectors and large producers. Efficiency and stakeholder analysis were used to determine the level of business efficiency and mapping of stakeholders in the guitar cluster. The results show the efficiency level of the guitar business was low. In general, the guitar business had not been efficient in using input and producing output. The inputs that led to the insufficient business were the number of labors and labor costs, while the outputs that caused inefficient business are turnover and profit of the business unit. The cluster organization needed to be improved by involving various key stakeholders in the development of guitar clusters and maintaining the sustainability of the guitar business.


Keywords


SMEs; Efficiency; Institutional; Stakeholders Analysis

Full Text:

References


  1. Ariyani, N., Fauzi, A., & Umar, F. (2020). Model Hubungan Aktor Pemangku Kepentingan dalam Pengembangan Potensi Pariwisata Kedung Ombo. Jurnal Ekonomi dan Bisnis, 23(2), 357–378. https://doi.org/10.24914/jeb.v23i2.3420
  2. Badan Pusat Statistika. (2020). Statistik Indonesia 2020 Statistical Yearbook of Indonesia 2020. Statistical Yearbook of Indonesia, April, 192.
  3. Fereshti, N., Saputro, E. P., & Purnomo, D. (2008). Penguatan Kapasitas Klaster Usaha Kecil dan Menengah: Kasus di Serenan, Klaten. Jurnal Ekonomi Pembangunan, 9(1): 83-95.
  4. Emrouznejad A. and E. Cabanda (2015). Introduction to Data Envelopment Analysis and its Applications, in Osman et al. (Eds.) Handbook of Research on Strategic Performance Management and Measurement Using Data Envelopment Analysis: 235-255. IGI Global, USA
  5. Fauzi, A. (2019). Teknik Analisis Keberlanjutan. PT. Gramedia Pusaka Utama.
  6. Hastiningsih, W. T., Junaedi, A. Sari, A., dan Prastowo, I. (2019). PPPUD Gitar sebagai Unggulan Daerah dan Wisata Industri Kreatif di Desa Mancasan, Baki, Sukoharjo, Jawa Tengah. Dharmakarya: Jurnal Aplikasi Ipteks untuk Masyarakat. Vol. 8 (4), Desember 2019: 235 - 238 ISSN 1410 - 5675. Retrieved from https://jurnal.unpad.ac.id/dharmakarya/article/view/23530/12147
  7. Huseini, M. (2015). Penerapan Triple Helix dalam Rangka Meningkatkan Daya Saing Daerah di Era Pembentukan MEA. Seminar Nasional AIABI, 21/07/2015.
  8. Isa, M., Fauzi, A., & Susilowati, I. (2019). Flood Risk Reduction in the Northern Coast of Central Java Province, Indonesia: An Application of Stakeholder’s Analysis. Jamba: Journal of Disaster Risk Studies, 11(1).
  9. Isa, Muzakar. (2009). Efisiensi Teknis Pendidikan di Kota Surakarta: Aplikasi Data Envelopment Analysis (Dea). Benefit Jurnal Manajemen dan Bisnis, 13, 14–22.
  10. Isa, Muzakar & Mangifera, L. (2019). Continuous Flood Risk Reduction on MSMEs: Implementation of MACTOR Program. Economic Journal of Emerging Markets, 11(1), 113–121. https://doi.org/10.20885/ejem.vol11.iss1.art12
  11. Ishak, R. F., & Somadi, S. (2019). Analisis Efisiensi Industri Kreatif Unggulan Kota Bandung dengan Pendekatan Data Envelopment Analysis. Competitive, 14(1), 1. https://doi.org/10.36618/competitive.v14i1.503
  12. Mburu, J. (2002). Collaborative Management of Wildlife in Kenya: An Empirical Analysis of Stakeholders’ Participation, Costs and Incentives. Socioeconomic Studies on Rural Development., 130.
  13. Ivanni, M., Kusnadi, N., and Suprehatin. (2019). Varietas dan Wilayah Produksi di Indonesia. Jurnal Agribisnis Indonesia, 7(1), 27–36.
  14. Ningsih, I. M., Dwiastuti, R., & Suhartini, S. (2015). Determinan Efisiensi Teknis Usaha Tani Kedelai. Jurnal Manajemen dan Agribisnis, 12(3), 216–225. https://doi.org/10.17358/jma.12.3.216
  15. Rees, G. H., & MacDonell, S. (2017). Data Gathering for Actor Analyses: A Research Note on the Collection and Aggregation of Individual Respondent Data for MACTOR. Future Studies Research Journal: Trends and Strategies, 9(1), 115–137. https://doi.org/10.24023/futurejournal/2175-5825/2017.v9i1.256
  16. Savitri, R. V. & Saifudin (2018). Pencatatan Akuntansi pada Usaha Mikro Kecil dan Menengah (Studi pada UMKM Mr. Pelangi Semarang). Jurnal Manajemen Bisnis dan Inovasi, 5 (2): 117-125
  17. Setyawan, A.A., Isa, M., Wajdi M. F., S. (2018). Disaster as Business Risk in SME: An Exploratory Study. International Journal of Research in Business and Social Science, 6(6), 52–63.
  18. Sugiarto, D., Sailah, I., & Honggokusumo, S. (2004). Pemilihan Strategi Pengembangan Klaster Industri dan Strategi Manajemen Pengetahuan pada Klaster Industri Barang Celup Lateks. Jurnal Teknologi Industri Pertanian. Vol. 20 (2), 89-100
  19. Tronvoll, B. (2017). The Actor: The Key Determinator in Service Ecosystems. Systems, 5(2), 38. https://doi.org/10.3390/systems5020038
  20. Wardono, B., Muhartono, R., Hikmayani, Y., Apriliani, T., & Hikmah, H. (2019). Analisis Prospektif Peran Aktor dalam Strategi Formulasi Pembangunan Perikanan di Kabupaten Natuna. Jurnal Sosial Ekonomi Kelautan dan Perikanan, 14(2), 179. https://doi.org/10.15578/jsekp.v14i2.8241
  21. Yustika, A. E. (2015). The Transaction Cost of Sugarcane Farmers: An Explorative Study. Journal of Indonesian Economy and Business, 23(3), 283–301. https://doi.org/10.22146/jieb.6340

Refbacks

  • There are currently no refbacks.


Creative Commons License
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike 4.0 International License.