Safeguarding SOE Meritocracy: 'Job Bidding' Must Not Become a Tool to Punish Experience
For a professional within a State-Owned Enterprise (SOE), the two years leading up to retirement should be a golden period. At this point, an executive’s maturity, depth of vision, and comprehensive understanding of the company’s business landscape are at their peak. Experience forged over decades through various corporate crises is an intangible asset of immense value. Yet, an ironic phenomenon is casting a shadow over several state-owned companies. Through a seemingly administrative but discriminatory internal regulation, the rights of workers with two years of service remaining to participate in open job bidding for structural positions are being curtailed. Instead of celebrating the pinnacle of an employee’s competence, this policy has morphed into a veiled punishment for their experience. This practice of institutional ageism triggers a deep contradiction within SOEs.
On one hand, the newly formed Investment Management Agency Danantara vigorously promotes the core value of ‘serving wholeheartedly’, a principle highly suitable for implementation by employees approaching retirement. At this stage, ‘serving wholeheartedly’ is no longer measured by ambition to occupy a new structural position, but by the professional maturity to ensure organisational sustainability. The highest form of service at this point is to leave behind a better system and a more competent successor team. The irony of human resource governance is that the core values of Danantara and the Ministry of SOEs are being sidelined at the operational level by policies set by directors in the HR sector, which erect age barriers that block the best talent from leading strategic positions and sever the legacy of the highest service that should be inherited.
Corporate management often hides behind the pretext of efficiency and organisational sustainability. The classic argument is that appointing a structural official who will retire in two years is inefficient because the company will have to hold another selection process shortly. Measuring a structural leader’s suitability based on tenure duration, rather than the quality of impact they deliver, is a fatal logical error. From the perspective of Human Capital Theory, popularised by Nobel laureate Gary S. Becker, the knowledge and skills of senior employees are an organisational asset whose value multiplies over time. Excluding them from open competition is a form of human capital waste, as the company discards the return on investment from decades of training. The modern business world is highly dynamic. A mature, visionary leader with a strong legacy can execute a major transformation or fix systemic chaos in just 12 to 18 months. Conversely, forcing an immature figure into a structural position simply because they have 10 years of service remaining could trap the SOE in prolonged stagnation.
The impact of this exclusionary policy does not stop at the disadvantaged individual but spreads through the entire organisation, violating what Jerald Greenberg termed procedural justice. When internal promotion rules are perceived as unobjective and unilaterally block a specific group, the commitment and loyalty of employees across generations collapse. Senior workers who should remain productive are forced into a ‘quiet quitting’ mode, merely fulfilling obligations while waiting for retirement because their space for self-actualisation has been locked shut. This domino effect is also observed by younger workers, who see that long-term loyalty is not rewarded fairly. If the working climate is marked by massive demotivation, the ambition for SOEs to transform into world-class corporations will surely fail. From the perspective of Indonesian labour law, this age-based restriction on employment clearly violates regulatory corridors. The Minister of Manpower, through the latest regulations, has strictly prohibited all forms of discrimination, both in the recruitment process and in setting working conditions. As an extension of the state, SOEs should be role models in upholding the Merit System principle, a promotion policy based purely on qualifications, competence, and performance without regard to age.
The solution for a healthy SOE is not to resolve concerns about short tenures through discrimination. The civilised and professional solution is to implement rigorous Succession Planning that is embedded within the job bidding system itself. Human resource management expert William J. Rothwell asserts that leadership sustainability must be built from within without sacrificing fairness. If a senior worker wins a job bidding process because their scores are genuinely the best, management can include a special clause. A primary Key Performance Indicator for that official during their two-year tenure would be the mandatory preparation, education, and formal mentoring of potential cadres under their supervision. This approach secures two benefits simultaneously: the company guarantees knowledge transfer from a highly experienced figure, while justice for all employees is upheld. It is time for SOE management to open their eyes and align their policies with the spirit of national transformation towards wholehearted service. Experience must no longer be punished. In a healthy and collaborative work ecosystem, harmony is not about uniformity, but about orchestrating the wisdom of the seniors with the energy of the juniors.