Using Best Practice Case Studies to Envision Organisational
Transformation in the Indonesian Tax Office
Kate Collier
University of Technology Sydney
INTRODUCTION
This paper will explore how the development of a series of case studies of ‘best practice’, was used by the authors as a creative and transformational approach to
organizational change during the development of a Learning and Development Strategy (L&DS) in the Indonesian Tax Office (DGT). Case studies were part of an integrated research approach used by the authors during the investigative process for the L&DS. Other research strategies used in conjunction with the case studies were structured interviews, surveys, the Delphi Method (Evans & Collier, 2012), document analysis and observation and whilst these will be mentioned as part of the context of the L&DS project, the focus of this paper will be on the use of case studies as a promoter of change within the DGT.
The case study is an established, qualitative research approach that has the ability to illustrate the complexities of a situation in a specific context (Blaxter, Hughes & Tight,
2006;Merriam, 1988). It provides a representation or ‘snapshot’ of an event or ‘case’ and
employs a narrative form to describe the situation so those engaging with it are able to see the event presented in a holistic manner. Two particularly useful characteristics of case studies are their breadth and flexibility; this allows for the inclusion of examples of the key professional and personal research issues. Case studies are also ‘bounded’ and ‘contained’
which makes thematic and comparative analysis of the data more focused (Robson, 2007). In the DGT, however, the case study approach was used for a different purpose: as a creative tool to help personnel in the organization, especially top management, see what was possible, and by doing so, envision how the organization could be transformed in the future. This paper will focus on the rationale for the development of the best practice case studies and analyse their effectiveness as a creative strategy for promoting organisational change.
This study uses as its conceptual framework Heron’s (1992 p.139) definitions of creativity focusing on the “imaginal nature of the creative process”. By looking at Heron’s
ideas of the imagination it is possible to gain a better understanding of imaginative thought and its place in the reflection process (Collier, 2010). The authors also draw on transformative learning theory (Mezirow, 1991, 2009; Brookfield, 1986, 1987, 2005, 2012). Transformational learning theory provides a basis for identifying attitudinal change in adults
and the stages involved in this alteration. Brookfield’s interpretation of transformative
learning focuses on issues of critical reflection which is extremely relevant to the change process that took place during the development of the L&DS in the DGT.
BACKGROUND TO THE PROJECT
In 2009, the DGT identified the need for a comprehensive review of its Learning and Development (L&D) infrastructure and with AusAID funding, retained the authors of this
paper as consultants to “Improve the Indonesian Directorate General Taxation (DGT)
Learning and Development (L&D) systems so that they better align with DGT Strategic Goals
and Change Programs” (AusAID Request for Tender document 2009)
The consultants had previously worked with the DGT on four projects over a period of five years, the most recent being a Training Needs Analysis (TNA), conducted in 2007. The recommendations of this TNA had been positively received but not fully implemented. On reflection and after discussions with HR professionals within the DGT, it was determined that a contributing factor was the lack of interest and engagement by senior DGT management in the TNA process and therefore a lack of understanding of how the recommendations could be implemented or why they were significant. In developing the research methodology for the 2009 project, these were important issues to address.
There were a number of other issues to be considered in the initial formulation of the methodology.
The DGT’s organisational structure was hierarchical with little or no information
flowing in an upwarddirection and the bureaucratic culture was predominantlyslow moving, risk averse and struggling with the rate of change, complexity and uncertainty.
Many Western models of leadership and change demand organizations move from these hierarchical, highly stratified, bureaucratic, top-down models of leadership to ‘flatter’,
democratic organization models (Carnoy & Rhoten, 2002; Goyal, 2006; Ortenblad, 2010; Schwandt & Marquardt, 2000). This was the case for the DGT when they implemented their
‘modernization’ or ‘transformation’ organizational change process (TAMF Training and
Capacity Building Program, 2006-2007; DGT Draft Strategic Plan 2007; & DGT Strategic Plan 2009).
In making such changes in large organisations, there are often difficulties in communicating a clear and consistent message, sharing ideas and successes and the channels for upward feedback and communication are limited. This was certainly the case with the DGT and facilitating the flow of ideas and information was important for this project.
The main challenge in this respect was involving as many of the 33,000 employees as possible in the development of the L&DS to take into account regional and cultural differences within the DGT to enable the formulation of a strategy that was based on substantial research and supported by those who would implement it. In addition to this
‘bottom-up’ development of the strategy, the consultants also needed to address the issues of engagement with senior management and other key stakeholders to gain their understanding and commitment to the principles and the implementation plan put forward.The authors drew on adult learning theory (Sokol & Cranton, 1998; Newman, 2000; Merriam & Brockett, 2007;Knowles, 2005; Engel, 1997;Beard & Wilson, 2006) andorganisational workplace learning theory (Senge, 1991; Mitchell, 2002; Marsick,& Watkins, 1990; Malloch. et al, 2011; Garratt, 1999; Hager, 2011; Fuller & Unwin, 2011; Field; 2004; Fenwick, 1998;Boud & Middleton, 2003; Argyris, 1993; Anderson and Valerie, 2009)to formulate these principles.
Examples of some of the principles developed from this literature include:
1. The DGT should aspire to be a Learning Organisation: an organisation that sees learning as an integral part of the organisational culture.
2. Learning should be relevant to the participants’ identified needs and linked to career
development.
4. A lifelong learning culture supports creativity and experimentation and allows for occasional failure.
5. Learning should be designed according to adult learning principles. Its primary aim should be to promote creative, critical thinking and autonomous learners.
These principles underpinned the recommend L&D systems and strategies. The research methodologies were designed to communicate, mediate and get agreement to them
from all involved stakeholders. Therefore a collaborative approach was vital for the project’s
success. To this end, senior management were included in semi-structured interviews, the Delphi panel, the organisational survey and the case studies. The case study approach was specifically designed as a creative tool to help senior management envision how the L&DS could be implemented. It also demonstrated that the transformational change that the DGT and other key stakeholders such as The World Bank and AusAID had determined was required, was possible. Specific links to the DGT Strategic Plan, the HR plan and the World
Bank’s 2008 PINTARdocument, a report providing data for the DGT’s strategic plan, were
continually reinforced to show the path from the proposed L&DS to achievement of management Key Performance Indicators and organisational goals.
As mentioned earlier, assisting senior management develop a vision of a desired state in addition to accepting the detailed implementation plans was a lesson learnt from the previous project. As Kotter (1995, p. 63) says:
In failed transformations, you often find plenty of plans and programs, but no vision. A vision says something that clarifies the direction in which an organisation needs to move.
Puccio et al (2011, p.77) support this need for envisioning:
Having vision – looking at how things might be instead of how they currently are or seeing things in different ways–is often identified as a key aspect of leadership.
Remembering that most stakeholders could be categorized as predominantly left-brain, rational, logical thinkers, case studies were seen as a way of tapping into the right brain imaginative areas, opening up the creative space of possibilities and new ideas.As previously noted, Heron (1992) points to the necessity of this imaginal space for the creative process.Because of their organizational context, DGT staff tend to be interested in tax, facts and numbers. The consultants aimed at shifting the focus to people and possibilities, moving conventional, rule following thinking to creative thinking that challenged the status quo and provided innovative solutions to entrenched problems.
The use of case studies encouraged divergent, rather than convergent, thinking where diverse and novel alternatives could be explored. As Puccio et al (2011, p. 56) explain:
By stretching your mind, you avoid the risk of limiting yourself to what is already familiar to you. You deliberately extend your thinking in a way that allows you to make new discoveries.
METHODOLOGY
Having looked at the rationale for using case studies, this section will describe the methodology for their use in this project.
Three examples of innovation and best practice were discovered within the DGT during the collection of data from the other research methodologies used in the investigative process of the L&DS.These were written up into case studies showing how the proposed model of L&D and theprinciples put forward were already being used effectively in small pockets within the DGT with positive results. These were examples of best practice in the three areas of performance based management, evaluation and needs analysis and are summarized below.
Case Study 1: Performance Based Management in Tax Office A.
The Head of Tax Office A, had introduced performance based management into his office. This method of management included using agreed individual scorecards, clearly defining expectations and goals, providing training and giving feedback on performance to each employee. A culture change, designed to reduce the barriers to communication that can result from a hierarchical structure and develop better working relationships, supported this new management practice. The Head of the Office says, “the positive relationships between staff were not built on hierarchy, but through mutual respect” and mentions how “staff are committed to implementing this paradigm change”.
These quotes highlight the key features of the desired change process of the DGT’s
modernisation program of a more democratic and flatter structure based on a system of performance management.
Key Performance Indicators: Objective D1. “To develop a human resource management system that is based on performance and competencies”. (DGT Strategic
Plan 2009).
Tax Office A was named ‘DGT Office of the Year’ exceeding their revenue target by 14%
while most other offices struggled to meet their targets. The Head of the Office argued that,
“itis because we prioritized L&D, that we were able to exceed our revenue target.”
Case Study 2: Ensuring Learning is Transferred back to the Workplace
This case study describes how a Tax Training Centre implemented a peer learningstrategy to ensure that knowledge and skills learnt in the training room were transferred to the workplace and shared with colleagues. The transfer of learning from the training environment to the workplace relates to the third level of evaluation in Kirkpatrick’s
Training Evaluation Model (1998). At the end of the training program trainees were asked to provide details of the content they would share with their colleagues and develop plans as to
how they would do this. The Head of Office used these plans to monitor participants’
application of learning in the workplace and on completion, signed the evaluation form and returned it to the Training Centre.
Proposal 15.Monitoring &evaluation should be built into every learning intervention at the beginning of the process linking learning objectives to improved performance at work to organisational results and to the Strategic Plan(DGT Internal document).
Case- Study 3: Mapping the Level of Tax Knowledge of Tax Officers through E-Assessment
The final case study shows a learning methodology based on the consultant’s
recommended Principle 2, (ref p.4 of this paper). This relates to the adult learning principles of relevancy and building on experience (Knowles 1990; Merriam & Brockett, 2007). It also provided an example of the use of technology to address issues of size, distance and uniformity of process. The strategy described in this case study directly links to two stated
objectives in the DGT’s Strategic Plan (2009):
Objective 4: Target 1: Program 128: Mapping of employees’ training needs [and]
Program 130: Development of e-learning and on-the-job training.
The Regional office of South Jakarta’s need to test the level of taxation knowledge of
all 1200 staff was the focus of this case study and the catalyst for the development of an on-line e-assessment software application. As a result of the gaps in knowledge identified by this new approach, a computer-training program was designed and delivered to 200 people. All training was based on the e-assessment needs analysis and therefore carefully targeted in a timely manner to meet current identified needs rather than training all staff regardless of
needs. This is an example of ‘just-in-time’ training rather than ‘just-in-case’ they might need
it one day training (Tovey, 2008).
These three case studies each exemplified a proactive and creative approach to entrenched problems within the DGT demonstrating innovative methods of making change.
Once the case studies were developed, they were circulated with an accompanying surveyto senior management and other stakeholders. The survey comprised 15 statements for participants to consider and rate using a Likert scale with space for additional comments beside each statement. Surveys were returned to the consultants and analyzed revealing the following levels of agreement in the three response areas listed for each of the 15 statements:
1. Do you agree with the identified principles of best practice? 86% agreed
2. Can you see them being implemented in Regional and Central offices? 82% answered yes.
3. Would you support their implementation? 78% answered yes.
This high level of support for the recommendations was a very positive outcome.
THE CONCEPTUAL FRAMEWORKS THAT INFORMED THE USE OF BEST PRACTICE CASE STUDIES
The case studies were primarily designed to stimulate the imagination of DGT personnel and help them use their creative ability to perceive how a change in future practice in the DGT might look. As already stated in the previous section, the DGT organisational culture promoted predominantly left-brain, rational, logical thinkers (Buzan, 1994). Case studies through theirnarrative form, access the right side of the brain which is imaginal and expansive. It is important, therefore, to examine further what is meant by creativity to appreciate the role of the case studies in this creative process.
Because creativity is such an intangible concept it is difficult to define and almost impossible to measure (Athanasou, 1999). Heron (1992, p.139) argues that the essence of
creativity is the “imagined nature of the creative process”. He further suggests that
imagination is a “presentiment” felt by the person doing the imagining and is “divined and received” rather than “logically dissected”. The creation of images is key to the creative,
imaginative process. These can consist of mental images conjured up by the person involved or images that are created by others to be used as an imaginative stimulus such as those created by artists in paintings or stories (Collier, 2010); the case studies developed for the L&DS in the DGT were the latter.
The images created in the case studies also had a second function: to present scenarios of best practice that could be contemplated and critically reflected upon. According to Mezirow, (1991, 2009) and Cranton, (2006), reflection is critical when there is a focus on unearthing personal assumptions. Boud (2006) contests this definition and argues instead for a broader approach to reflective practice. Reflective practices need to be tailored to local settings, the work being done, and the people in those contexts.
Reflection in the past has been positioned as an individual activity involving a person recapturing an experience and mulling it over (Boud, Cohen & Walker, 1993). More recently however, reflection has been reconceived as a collective process with a stronger focus on its
role in professional development and renamed “productive reflection” (Boud, Cressey and
Docherty, 2006).
The L&DS case studies were seen to have the potential to promote productive reflection in DGT personnel. They did this by presenting scenarios of best professional practice that could be contemplated and discussed collectively. Productive reflection is seen
by Boud et al (2006, p.5) as providing “a key to unlocking vital creative forces in employees”
and they argue that this kind of critical reflection helps workers deal with the challenging
Critical reflectionprovides the basis for transformational learning. Transformative learning theory, initially developed by Mezirow is a complex, reconstructive theory involving critical self-reflection, which results in adults revising their values or ways of seeing the
world. It enables them to “advance and assess reasons for making a judgement –rather than
act on the assimilated beliefs, values feelings and judgements of others” (Mezirow 2009,
p.23). Newman (1994, p.170) describes the concept of transformative learning more simply. It
is about exposing “the kinds of mental filter we develop that distorts our perceptions of reality
and let us see what we think we should see”.
Mezirow proposes the ‘trigger’ that encourages transformational learning to occur is a ‘disorientating dilemma’ followed by a period of critical reflection. This disorientating
theory was based on research he did of mature women returning to college in the 1970s after a
period away from study. The mature women’s experience of returning to college, usually
from a domestic context, had jolted the habitual, stereotyped ideas they had of the role of
women in society and led to their ‘personal transformations’. Later, writers on
transformational learning (Brookfield, 2005; Cranton, 2006) show that the triggers for
transformational change need not be as dramatic and life changing as Mezirow’s women
returning to study but can be contained in stories, pictures or film extracts. The key to the effectiveness of the trigger for change is that it must challenge the established assumptions of the learner, their habitual way of seeing the world and cause them to reflect and possibly change their perceptions to ones that are “more inclusive, discriminating, reflective, open and emotionally able to change” (Mezirow, 2009, p.22). The case studies developed for the L&DS
were designed to be such a trigger as they offered a clear picture of challenging, new ways of practice that had been proven to work, in the organization.
IMPACT OF BEST PRACTICE CASE STUDIES ON THE ORGANISATIONAL CHANGE PROCESS
Both external and internal stakeholders were engaged in the change process through the case studies. Evidence of this was provided by the high response rates and animated discussions by the Delphi panel and subsequent Board of Directors meetings that led to strong support for the principles put forward and input into the L&DS development process.
The Director General, Echelon 1, and all Echelon 2 managers provided a response to the case studies and participated other elements of the research including Delphi and interviews. This level of engagement demonstrates a substantial contribution by senior management to the L&DS. Their well considered responses in the comments section of the case study survey provided valuable input into the L&D strategy that they could recognize and own. It also indicated how engaged they were by the case studies.
Being able to present three case studies of best practice in different areas with
impressive results to report as a result of changes made, for example Tax Office A’s
exceeding revenue targets, was a convincing argument. It enabled those with little exposure to other ways of thinking, to broaden and deepen their view of what was possible.Through the case studies, the consultants were able to help senior management and the Board of Directors envision how the proposed L&DS would help them achieve their strategic goals.
Unfortunately, it is the nature of aid work that rarely is there a provision for evaluation or follow-up of projects. The consultants are as yet unaware as to whether the principles and strategies have been implemented but we do know that we had strong agreement to the principles exemplified in the case studies and the implementation strategies recommended.
CONCLUSION
The case study is the method of choice when the phenomenon under study is not readily distinguishable from its context (Yin, 2003, p. 4 in Tight 2006).
The choice by the consultants and authors of this paper to use case studies as part of their research approach when developing the L&DS for the DGT was partially driven by need
to provide ‘real’, existing examples of best practice in context (Robson, 2007). As Yin and
Merriam (1988) note, case studies are particularly suitable for providing clear examples of complex workplace scenarios and for allowing “the examination of an instance in action”
(MacDonald and Walker, 1977, p.181).
examples of practice that challenged existing, traditional views of practice and promoted critical reflection. Heron (1992); Brookfield (1986, 1987, 2005) and Mezirow (1991, 2009) provided the theoretical rationale for employing case studies for creative and transformative purposes.
The feedback from internal and external stakeholders who engaged with the best practice case studies suggest that they were effective in helping those involved in the organizational change process envision how the principles outlined in the L&DS, could operate in practice. The three case studies presented instances of organizational change in recognizable contexts. This enabled stakeholders who were often resistant to change, to conceive new practice as something that was achievable; this was reinforced by the case studies representing new, best practice that had already been achieved and was operating successfully within the DGT.
Further evidence of the role of best practice case studies as a research approach in the development of the L&DS was the unanimous acceptance by Board of Directors of the L&DS proposal put forward by the consultants. The top management of the DGT, through their positive vote at the Board of Directors meeting, demonstrated their engagement with the L&DS development process and support for the final model produced; the case studies were an important strategy for fostering this engagement and support.
The Non Government Organization managing this AusAID project decided not to fund the suggested follow-up evaluation of the L&DS so that the consultants could monitor its implementation and see whether the isolated examples of best practice described in the case studies had been integrated into the organization as a whole. The authors have through their repeated consultancy work with the DGT over many years, established excellent professional relationships with a range of DGT personnel at different levels, or echelons, of the organization and are in the process of getting feedback from them to find out how the L&DS is operating in practice two years after it received the Board of Directors approval.
REFERENCES
Anderson, V. (2009). Desperately seeking alignment: Reflections of senior line managers and HRD executives. Human Resource Development International, 12(3), 263-277.
Argris, C. (1993). Organizational learning. Cambridge, MA: Blackwell.
Athanasou, J. (1999). Adult education psychology. Katoomba, Australia: Social Science Press. AusAID. (May 2009). Request for tender document.
Beard, C., & Wilson, J. P. (2006). Experiential learning: a best practice handbook for educators and trainers (2nd ed.). London: Kogan Page.
Billet, S. (2003). Learning from others at work: communities of practice and informal learning. Journal of Workplace Learning, 15(3), 105-113.
Blaxter, L., Hughes, C., & Tight, M. (2006). How to research. Buckingham, Bristol: Open University Press.
Boud, D., Cohen, R., & Walker, D. (1993). Using experience for learning. Buckingham: Open University Press.
Boud, D., & Middleton, H. (2003). Learning from others at work: Communities of practice and informal learning. Journal of Workplace Learning, 15(5), 194-202.
Brookfield, S. (1986). Understanding and facilitating adult learning: a comprehensive analysis of principles and effective practices. San Francisco: Jossey Bass.
Brookfield, S. (1987). Developing critical thinkers. San Francisco: Jossy-Bass. Brookfield, S. (2005). The power of critical thinking. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.
Brookfield, S. (2012). Teaching for critical thinking: Tools and techniques to help students question their assumptions. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.
Buzan, T. (1994). The mind map book: how to use radient thinking to maximise your brain's potential. New York: Dutton.
Carnoy, M., & Rhoten, D. (2002). What does globalization mean for education: A comparative approach. Comparative and International Education Review, 46(1). Collier, K. (2010). Re-imagining reflection: creating a theatrical space for the imagination in
productive reflection. In N. Frost, S. Kilminster & M. Zukas (Eds.), Professional lifelong learning: beyond reflective practice. London: Taylor and Francis.
Collier, K., & McManus, J. (2005a). Bridging the gap: The use of learning partnerships to enhance workplace learning. Asia-Pacific Journal of Cooperative Education, 6(2), 7-16.
Collier, K., & McManus, J. (2005b). Setting up learning partnerships in VET: Lessons learnt. Journal of Vocational Education and Training, 57(3), 251-273.
Collier, K., Rokham, A., & Ayundini, S. (2012). The impact of workplace learning groups on ethical behaviour in the Indonesian Tax Office. In N. Sharkey (Ed.), Tax in China and ASEAN. United Kingdom: Routledge.
Cranton, P. (2006). Understanding and promoting transformational learning. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.
DGT Draft Strategic Plan. (2007).
DGT Strategic Plan. (2009).
Engel, C. E. (1997). Not just a method but a way of learning. In D. Boud & G. Felletti (Eds.), The challenge of problem-based learning. London: Kogan Page.
Evans, C., & Collier, K. (2012). The Delphi Method. In L. Oates (Ed.), Taxation: A fieldwork handbook. United Kingdom: SAGE Publications.
Fenwick, T. (1998). Questioning the concept of the learning organisation. In S. Scott, B. Spencer & A. Thomas (Eds.), Learning for life: Canadian readings in adult education (pp. 140-152). Toronto: Thompson Educational Publishing.
Field, L. (2004). Rethinking 'organisational learning'. In G. Foley (Ed.), Dimensions of adult learning: Adult education and training in a global era. Sydney: Allen and Unwin.
Garratt, B. (1999). The learning organisation 15 years on: some personal reflections. The Learning Organization, 6(5), 202-206.
Goyal, K. A. (2006). The impact of globalization of developing countries with special reference to India. International Research Journal of Finance and Economics, 5(166). Hager, P. (2011). Theories of workplace learning. In M. Malloch, L. Cairns, K. Evans & B.
O'Connor (Eds.), The SAGE Handbook of workplace learning (pp. 17-31). London: SAGE Publications.
Heron, J. (1992). Feeling and personhood: psychology in another key. london: SAGE Publications.
Kirkpatrick, D. (1998). Evaluating training programs: the four levels. San Francisco: Berrett Koehler.
Knowles, M., Holton III, E., & Swanson, R. A. (2005). The Adult Learner: The deinitve classic in adult education and human resource development. USA & UK: Elsevier.
Kotter, J. (1995). Leading change: Why transformation efforts fail. Harvard Business Review(March-April).
MacDonald, B., & Walker, R. (1977). Doing research: A handbook for teachers. United Kingdom: Taylor and Francis.
Malloch, M., Cairns, L., Evans, K., & O'Connor, B. (2011). The SAGE handbook of workplace learning. London: SAGE Publications.
Marsick, V., & Watkins, K. (1990). Informal and incidental teaming in the workplace. London: Routledge.
Merriam, S., & Brockett, R. (2007). Philosophical perspectives. In S. Merriam & R. Brockett (Eds.), The profession and practice of adult education (pp. 27-50). San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.
Merrian, S. (1988). Case study research in education: a qualitative approach. San Francisco: Jossey-Bassey.
Mezirow, J. (1991). Transformative dimensions of adult learning. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.
Mezirow, J. (2000). Learning as transformation: Critical perspectives on a theory in progress. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.
Mezirow, J. (2009). Transformative learning in practice: Insights from community, workplace and higher education. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.
Mitchell, J. (2002). The potential for communities of practice. Melbourne: Australian National Training Authority.
Newman, M. (1994). Defining the enemy. Sydney: Stewart Victor Publishing.
Newman, M. (2000). Program development. In G. Foley (Ed.), Understanding adult education and training. Sydney: Allen and Unwin.
Puccio, G., Mance, M., & Murdoch M. (2011). Creative leadership: skills that drive change (2nd ed.). Thousand Oaks, California, London, Delhi and Singapore: Sage Publications.
Robson, C. (2007). How to do a research project. United Kingdom: Blackwell.
Schwandt, D., & Marquardt, M. (2000). Organisational learning; From world class theories to global best practices. St Lucie Press: USA.
Senge, P. (1991). The fifth discipline; The art and practice of the learning organization. New York: Doubleday.
Senge, P., Ross, R., Smith, B., Roberts, C., & Kleiner, A. (1994). The fifth discipline fieldbook: Strategies and tools for building a learning organization. New York: Doubleday.
Sokol, A. V., & Cranton, P. (1998). Transforming, not training. Adult Learning, 9(3), 14-16.
TAMF Training and Capacity Buidling Program. (Feb 2006-Mar 2007).
