Between Status and Performance: Testing ASN PPPK in the Work From Anywhere Policy
REPUBLIKA.CO.ID, BOGOR – The ‘Work From Anywhere’ (WFA) policy is often seen as a sign that bureaucracy is moving towards a more modern, cost-effective, flexible approach, capable of adapting to digital developments.
However, WFA is not just a technical choice but part of a larger effort to reform the bureaucracy and create a government that is more agile, responsive, and no longer trapped in rigid work patterns. Although it may not address the most fundamental issue: performance.
Through Circular Letter from the Minister of PANRB Number 3 of 2026, the government affirms that the Civil Servant (ASN) work system is directed to be more efficient, effective, adaptive, flexible, responsive, and digitally based.
In other words, WFA is not just about cost savings but also a tool to encourage improved performance and public service quality.
However, this explanation raises an important question: does this change truly affect the quality of performance, or is it merely a technical adjustment without updating the work assessment system?
Regulations that Demand Discipline and Accountability
In practice, WFA rules are quite strict. One example can be seen in the ministry that oversees basic and secondary education. This ministry regulates working patterns with two schemes: Working from the Office (WFO) and WFA.
WFO is carried out from Monday to Thursday, while WFA is on Friday. Even though they work from home, ASN employees are still required to do online attendance, prepare daily reports, always be available for contact, and remain responsive to official communication.
In fact, they must still come to the office if requested by their superiors at any time.
Basically, this pattern is almost uniform in various government agencies.
These rules show that WFA is not a form of leniency but a change in the work system that still demands high discipline. However, the question is, does the existing system ensure that all these obligations truly reflect objective performance?
ASN PPPK, at the Crossroads of Status and Performance
In this situation, the position of Contract-Based Civil Servants (ASN PPPK) becomes very interesting and crucial. As contract-based employees, they are required to continuously demonstrate real and measurable performance.
However, in bureaucratic practice, they are often treated differently than permanent ASN employees. Referring to Aristotle’s thought in Nicomachean Ethics, justice should be based on contribution and capacity, not just status.
He emphasised that fair treatment means treating people according to their contributions. This thought is relevant to the current state of bureaucracy, where employment status often determines more than work results. In fact, logically, those who contribute more should receive equal or even better treatment.
This dilemma can be further felt with the WFA policy. On the one hand, an output-based work system should provide space for ASN PPPK employees to prove their abilities. However, on the other hand, when performance indicators are not truly objective, it is PPPK employees who are potentially most affected by assessment bias.
WFA: An Opportunity for Meritocracy or Reproduction of Bias?
According to regulations, the government has affirmed that flexible work must still be oriented towards performance. Heads of agencies are required to ensure that work adjustments do not disrupt the functioning of government or the quality of public services.
In addition, monitoring and supervision of organisational and employee performance achievement are also emphasised. This means that WFA should run in tandem with a strong control system.
However, in reality, the biggest challenge lies in the implementation stage. Without clear and measurable indicators, WFA has the potential to become a grey area where performance is difficult to assess objectively and assessments still depend on subjectivity.
The question is, do all government agencies really have a strong control system to ensure this?
A Paradox of Policy: Efficiency without Performance Certainty
Regulations explicitly state that flexible work should not reduce productivity and performance. On the other hand, there is a policy paradox.
The state demands high efficiency and productivity but has not fully provided a transparent, objective, and uniform performance measurement system.
As a result, high demands are not always followed by clear measuring tools.
The thoughts of Immanuel Kant provide an interesting perspective in looking at this issue. He emphasised that every rule must be universal and apply fairly to everyone.
In the context of WFA, this means that the evaluation system must be able to assess all ASN employees, both PNS and PPPK, with the same standards. If not, the policy will only strengthen hidden subjectivity and injustice.
In such conditions, ASN PPPK employees are once again the most vulnerable. They continue to be required to prove their performance but are not fully protected by a fair assessment system.
Towards Real Reform: From Flexibility to Accountability
If WFA is to truly become a policy that brings change, then improving the performance system becomes unavoidable. Strengthening KPIs (Key Performance Indicators), utilising technology in work monitoring, and transparency in evaluation must be top priorities.
In addition, equal treatment between PNS and PPPK employees must be upheld. Bureaucratic professionalism will not be achieved if status still dominates over work results. In a healthy system, contribution should be the main measure.
Ultimately, WFA is not just about working from home. This policy becomes a test of the state’s seriousness in building a fair bureaucracy.