Optimizing Higher Education Archives Through Integrated Participatory Commitment and Archival Competence to Enhance Performance Accountability

1. Introduction

To achieve good governance, the principles of good governance must be firmly applied and consistently implemented across all levels of society and government. According to the World Bank, there are five essential requirements for achieving good governance: efficiency in public sector management, the establishment of public accountability, the availability of a robust legal infrastructure, a reliable information system that ensures public access to policy-related information, and transparency in the formulation and execution of various policies. The successful implementation of these principles requires active participation and support from a government administration system that is both transparent and accountable.

Accountability can be measured based on: (1) the decision-making process being documented in writing, accessible to citizens/staff, and adhering to applicable administrative standards; (2) the accuracy and completeness of information related to methods for achieving a program's objectives; (3) the clarity of the goals to be achieved; (4) the feasibility and consistency of operational targets; and (5) the management information system and monitoring of results (Shafritz & Russel, 1997).

Achieving the goals of archival management is critical for advancing governance toward good governance. These goals must be addressed accurately, promptly, and efficiently, in alignment withestablished objectives. Archival activities should emphasize high-quality, timely execution, proper systems, effective working methods, appropriate tools, and be supported by capable leadership, competent personnel, and sufficient facilities and infrastructure. Efficient and effective archival management greatly facilitates the tracing and retrieval of data or information, which serves as a valuable resource for informed decision-making by leaders. Ultimately, effective archival management contributes directly to the achievement of efficient and effective office administration.

Effective archival management is fundamental pillar in supporting the accountability of higher education institutions. Universities, as centers for education and research, generate a wide range of documents and information that possess administrative, legal, and historical value (Ding et al., 2023; Manzano et al., 2024). Consequently, archival practices in universities extend beyond mere document management; they constitute a foundational mechanism to ensure transparency and institutional accountability. Professionally managed archives can enhance good governance, improve operational efficiency, and minimize the risk of losing critical information (Loscher & Kaiser, 2022; Marshall et al., 2024). Despite the centrality of archives, many universities still  encounter significant challenges in archival organization. These challenges include limited active involvement from institutional leaders and staff, low awareness of the importance of archive management, and inadequate archival competencies among archivists and administrative personnel (Crockett, 1993). Such deficiencies result in inefficiencies in storing and managing archives; and reduce the accountability of institutional performance in administrative operations and public transparency.

Organizational commitment plays a critical role in addressing these challenges. It refers to the condition in which an employee identifies with a particular organization and its goals and intends to maintain membership within it. Commitment is understood as the willingness of a social actor to devote energy and loyalty to social systems or relationships perceived as self-expressive (Mowday et al., 1982). Specifically, commitment is manifested in three dimensions: identification (belief in the organization’s values), involvement (the willingness to exert effort for the organization’s bestinterests), and loyalty (the desire to remain a member), as expressed by employees toward their organization (Mowday et al., 1982:50). This study further emphasizes the integration of participatorycommitment in the workplace as a strengthening variable (Meyer, Allen& Smith, 1993; 2022).

The resilience of an organization depends not only on its productivity but also on its alignment with the surrounding environment. Even highly productive organizations that generate goods or services with limited market value may fail to sustain themselves. Therefore, resilience factors—such accurate market assessment, sound decision-making regarding when and how to seize opportunities, and effective change management to adapt to evolving business conditions—are crucial for organizational survival and long-term success.

Figure 1: Theoretical Framework of Integrated Participatory Commitment

Source: Processed by the Author (2023)

Based on its level of effectiveness, participation can be categorized as effective or ineffective. Effective participation occurs when participatory activities achieve all intended objectives, whereas ineffective participation arises when few or none of the objectives are met. Participation can also be classified by the participants involved: local community members (residents, leaders), government officials, and external parties. By purpose and, it can be grouped into participation in regional development, social planning, or social activities. The model of community organization practice is closely linked to community development and seeks to actively involve communities in development initiatives. Its aims include stimulating participation (a process goal) and mobilizing social energy to facilitate self-help. the community in social planning helps align programs with actual needs and enhances program effectiveness (Khairuddin (1992; Bahua, 2018).

Participation is synonymous with involvement or engagement, encompassing a process of mutual learning, understanding, analyzing, planning, and taking action among community members. The mobilization of participation relies on mutual understanding, which is fostered through communication and interaction. Citizen participation has shifted the concept of participation from mere concern for aid recipients or marginalizedgroups active involvement in policy formulation and decision-making on issues that significantly impact community life. Unlike general social participation, citizen participation emphasizes public policy-making by citizens rather than using policy platforms solely for learning purposes.

Figure 2. Proposition Model 1

Source: Developed by the author for this research

Higher education institutions are organizations operating in the education sector, where daily and historical activities inherently generate records, both dynamic and static. As institutions serving the academic community and various stakeholders, effective records management must ensure high-quality services to all users. Therefore, the presence of an archival unit within universities, functioning as a record management body, is essential. This requirement aligns with Article 27, Paragraph (1) of Law Number 43 of 2009 concerning Archiving, which mandates public universities to establish a university archive. This demonstrates that higher education institutions are entrusted with the reliable management of records to provide optimal services to all users.

The accountability of archival performance is influenced not only by archival resources but also by integrated participatory commitment. Participatory commitment indirectly affects performance accountability. Proposition Model 2 is presented in Figure 3 below.

Figure 3: Proposition Model 2

Source: Developed by the author for this research

Competence refers to the authority to make decisions or manage specific tasks. In this context, competence pertains to the authority to manage archives. An officer is an individual assigned specific responsibilities; in this case, the officer is tasked with managing archives, which includes recording, controlling, distributing, storing, maintaining, supervising, transferring, and destroying records (KBBI, 2016).

According to Law Number 43 2009, archiving encompasses all matters related to archives. This includes all activities within government and private organizations associated with archival management. From this definition, it can be concluded that the competence of archiving officers is a fundamental requirement for anyone authorized in the field of archiving to carry out the duties and responsibilities of managing archives effectively.

The primary tasks of the archival unit include receiving documents, recording documents, distributing documents according to organizational needs, storing, organizing, and retrieving archives according to a systematic method, providing services to parties requiring archives, maintaining archives, and planning or implementing the reduction or disposal of archives (Sedarmayanti, 2003:19).

Addressing these challenges requires a comprehensive solution, one of which isthe implementation of an integrated participatory commitment model (Chrysanthopoulos et al., 2023; Clavaud, 2015). This model emphasizes the active involvement of all stakeholders including leadership, archivists, administrative staff, and archive usersin collaboratively optimizing archival management. By fostering shared commitment, all members of the higher education institution can support one another in achieving effective and accountable archive management (Caswell & Mallick, 2014; Iacovino, 2015; Pang & Kai Khiun, 2014).

In addition to participatory commitment, archival competence is a critical element in enhancing the quality of archive management. Archival competence encompasses the knowledge, skills, and attitudes required to manage archives professionally (Cheng et al., 2023; Kroon & Alves, 2023). Higher education institutions must ensure that archivists and administrative staff possess adequate skills to manage documents and information systematically, securely, and in an accessible manner Competency improvement can be achieved through continuous training, certification, and the adoption of relevant information technology.

This study emphasizes the development of an integrated participatory commitment model and the enhancement of archival competence as strategies to optimize archiving in higher education institutions. The model aims to foster synergy mong stakeholders involved in archival management while promoting practices that are professional, efficient, and aligned with established archival standards. By doing so, higher education institutions can strengthen the accountability of their performance to the public and supervisory authorities.

Optimizing archiving through a participatory approach and improving archival competency is particularly crucial in addressing the challenges posed by the digital era. As higher education undergoes digital transformation, the management of archives must adapt to digital platforms to enhance accessibility, security, and long-term sustainability of information. Successful digital transformation, however, depends on a strong collective commitment from all parties and sufficient competency in handling electronic archives.

Previous research on archive management in higher education has largely focused on information technology, digital archiving, and the implementation of modern archival management systems (Nakayama et al., 2024; Paul et al., 2023; Reshma et al., 2023). Nevertheless, there remains a significant gap in studies that investigate the combined role of participatory commitment and archival competence as primary factors in enhancing institutional performance accountability. Most prior studies emphasize technical aspects, often neglecting the active involvement of all stakeholders, including leaders, administrative staff, and archivists. This underscores a clear need to explore how collective commitment and professional competence can jointly improve the quality and effectiveness of archival management.

This study seeks to address the existing research gap by developing an Integrated Participatory Commitment model that integrates two critical components: shared commitment among stakeholders and archival competency. This approach is distinctive because it emphasizes cross stakeholder collaboration in archival management within higher education, an area that has not been extensively explored. Furthermore, the study’s focus extends beyond technical aspects of archive managementto enhancing the capabilities of archivists and administrative staff, enabling them to perform their duties more efficiently and accountably. Such improvements are anticipated to strengthen the overall institutional performance.

The study, aims to identify the key factors that influence the successful implementation of the Integrated Participatory Commitment model and archival competency in higher education institutions. The findings are expected to make a meaningful contribution to the development of archival policies within universities and offer strategic recommendations to optimize archival management practices. Accordingly, the main objective of this research is to analyze how the Integrated Participatory Commitment model and archival competency affect the accountability of archival performance in higher education. Ultimately, this study provides a deeper understanding of the importance of active stakeholder involvement and enhanced archival competence in achieving an effective and accountable archival management system.

2. Method

This study employs a quantitative approach aimed at analyzing the influence of Integrated Participatory Commitment and Archival Competence on Performance Accountability in archival management within higher education institutions. The research design is a quantitative survey, in which data is collected through a structured questionnaire developed based on relevant theoretical frameworks. Given that the study seeks to test relationships between variables, the quantitative approach is appropriate for generating objective, statistically measurable results.

The population of this study comprises archivists and administrative staff at several universities in Indonesiawho are directly involved in managing archives. A purposive sampling technique was employed to select participants based on specific criteria, namely individuals who actively participate in archival management. The final sample included 248 respondents, considered sufficient to provide a representative overview of the impact of participatory commitment and archival competence on performance accountability in higher education.

The data collected through the questionnaire were analyzed using multiple regression analysis with SmartPLS. This technique was employed to examine the effect of the independent variables Integrated Participatory Commitment and Archival Competence—on the dependent variable Performance Accountability Prior to conducting the regression analysis , assumption tests including normality, heteroscedasticity, and multicollinearity were performed to ensure that the regression model met the required statistical criteria. This analysis aims to determine whether the independent variables have a significant effect on Performance Accountability, either partially or simultaneously, within higher education archival management.

The hypotheses proposed in this study are: (1) Integrated Participatory Commitment has a positive and significant effect on Performance Accountability, and (2) Archival Competence has a positive and significant effect on Performance Accountability. The findings of this study are expected to offer a deeper understanding of the critical roles of participatory commitment and competency in archival management, as well as provide strategic recommendations for universities to optimize their archival systems and enhance institutional performance accountability.

3. Results

This study demonstrates that the Integrated Participatory Commitment Model effectively enhances performance accountability in managing archives within higher education institutions. The analysis shows that active involvement of all stakeholders, from leadership to operational staff, significantly influences the efficiency and effectiveness of archival management. Such participation not only raises awareness of the importance of accountable archiving but also motivates stakeholders to adhere more consistently to established procedures. This is reflected in improved compliance with institutional archival regulations and policies.

Table 1: Convergent Validity

Convergent validity assesses whether multiple measurements intended to capture the same concept produce highly correlated results. As shown in Table 1, all statement items have a loading factor greater than 0.70. A loading factor above 0.70 indicates that the items are convergently valid. In the context of this study on the Integrated Participatory Commitment Model, convergent validity suggests that the questionnaire items or other measurement instruments consistently capture the same dimensions of participatory commitment, archival management, or performance accountability. This indicates that the constructs measured accurately represent the intended theoretical concepts, and there is no substantial discrepancy among items that should be related.

The subsequent stage involves testing validity using the Average Variance Extracted (AVE. The results obtained are summarized in Table 2.

Table 2. Average Variance Extracted (AVE)

Based on the results presented in the previous table, all variables exhibit an Average Variance Extracted (AVE) value greater than 0.5, indicating that Participatory Commitment, Competence, and Performance Accountability are valid. Since the item validity test demonstrates that all items are valid, the overall variable validity test further confirms that all variables meet the required criteria with AVE values exceeding 0.5. Therefore, all variables are suitable for hypothesis testing using inferential statistical methods.

Hypothesis testing was conducted using inferential statistics, including the assessment of discriminant validity via Cross-Loading. The Cross-Loading value reflects the correlation between each construct and its associated indicators, as well as the correlation with indicators from other constructs. A measurement model is considered to have good discriminant validity if the correlation between a construct and its indicators is higher than the correlation between the construct and indicators from other constructs.

Table 3: Discriminant Validity Cross Loading

The results obtained are presented in Table 3: Discriminant Validity Cross Loading. The Cross-Loading analysis shows that the correlation coefficients between each construct and its own indicators are greater than the correlations with indicators from other constructs. This confirms that all constructs or latent variables possess high discriminant validity, as indicated by the dominance of each construct’s indicator block over other indicator blocks.

In this study, the reliability of the constructs was assessed using Composite Reliability and Cronbach’s Alpha. The results of these calculations are presented in Table 4.

Table 4: Composite Reliability dan Cronbach’s Alpha

The Composite Reliability results indicate that all constructs have values greater than 0.7, confirming that each construct is reliable. Similarly, the Cronbach’s Alpha values for all constructs exceed 0.7, further demonstrating the reliability of the measurement instruments.

Bootstrapping analysis conducted using SmartPLS produced coefficient values for each hypothesized relationship. The highest values were observed in the path from Participatory Commitment to Performance Accountability, with a coefficient of 0.229, and from Competence to Performance Accountability, with a coefficient of 0.704. The complete results of the path: coefficients, including Mean, Standard Deviation (STDEV), T-Statistics, and P-Values, are summarized in Table 5.

Table 5: Mean, STDEV, T-Statistics, dan P-Values

The coefficient of determination (R-squared) was calculated to assess the extent to which the independentvariables influence the dependent variable. The results are presented in Table 6.

Table 6: Coefficient of Determination (R)

As shown in Table 6, the R-squared value is 0.839. This indicates that 83.9% of the variation in Performance Accountability can be explained by the independent variables, namely Participatory Commitment and Archival Competence. The remaining 16.1% is influenced by other factors not included in this study.

3.2 Structural Model Test (Hypothesis)

The Inner Model Test (Structural Model) is used to evaluate the research hypotheses, including path coefficients, parameter coefficients, and t-statistics. Hypothesis acceptance or rejection is determined by assessing the significance of the relationships between constructs, using t-statistics and p-values. In this study, statistics greater than 1.65, a p-value of 0.05 (5%), and a positive beta coefficient were used as the criteria for significance. Table 7 presents the results of hypothesis testing, while Figure 2 illustrates the research model.

Based on the table above, here is a discussion of the hypotheses tested:

a.      The first hypothesis examines the direct effect of Participatory Commitment on Performance Accountability. The results show a path coefficient of 0.229, a t-statistic of 2.757 (>1.65), and a p-value of 0.006 (<0.05). Therefore, Ho1 rejected, and Ha1 is accepted, indicating a significant direct effect of participatory commitment on performance accountability.

b.     The second hypothesis tests the direct effect of Archivist Competence on Performance Accountability. The results show a path coefficient of 0.708, a t-statistic of 8.614 (>1.65), and a p-value of 0.000 (<0.05). Therefore, Ho2 is rejected, and Ha2 is accepted indicating a significant direct effect of archivist competence on performance accountability.

4. Discussion

The competence of archivists or record managers has a positive and significant effect on performance accountability. High competence in archiving is reflected in extensive knowledge of archiving, a solid understanding of archival science, practical archiving skills executed efficiently, strong work values such as discipline and diligence, and a responsive attitude toward archival tasks. These qualities significantly enhance archival performance accountability. The impact on accountability is manifested in precise decision-making during archival tasks, timely and accurate completion of archival activities, meticulous archival information management, clarity of objectives in archival work, feasibility and consistency in completing tasks, and effective monitoring aligned with archival performance targets. In this study, the influence of competence on accountability is measured at 77.3%.

This finding aligns with Damalita (2009), who emphasizes that universities should establish archival management units, recruit competent archival personnel, promptly inventory high-value records, institutional historical archives, scientific works, and research archives, and implement leadership policies that support archival activities. Similarly, Bukhori & Laksmi (2019) found that the overall competence of archivists encompassing knowledge, skills, and attitudes accounts for 56.4% of performance at ANRI.

Moreover, Faturohmah & Mayesti (2021) argue that the archivist profession is still not widely recognized in Indonesian society, creating a need for ongoing development of archivists’ competencies and acquisition of new skills to keep pace with advancements in knowledge, information, and communication technology. Handayani & Sari (2018) further state that fulfilling human resource needs in archiving requires careful planning and selection of individuals who are genuinely competent in their field, rather than relying on personnel considered as a last resort.

Integrated participatory commitment has a significant effect on the accountability of archival performance. This indicates that the stronger an archivist or record manager’s integrated participatory commitment, the greater the impact on their archival performance accountability. Integrated participatory commitment consists of affective commitment (actively engaging in work and feeling a sense of belonging to the institution or unit), normative commitment (a sense of moral obligation and responsibility to advance the institution), continuance commitment (reluctance to leave the institution and experiencing a sense of loss if departing), and participatory commitment (actively contributing to work and assisting in completing tasks).

Indicators of integrated participatory commitment show that archivists and record managers generally fall into the “excellent” category. This is evident in their work attitudes and performance: they are highly active in carrying out duties, demonstrate strong organizational identification, fulfill their responsibilities diligently, feel a sense of loss at the prospect of leaving the institution, and complete archival tasks thoroughly and efficiently.

The influence of integrated participatory commitment on archival performance accountability manifests in multiple ways: precise decision-making in archival tasks, timely and accurate completion of work, detailed and systematic management of archival information, clear objectives in performing archival duties, feasibility and consistency in task execution, and effective monitoring of results aligned with archival performance targets. In this study, the effect of integrated participatory commitment on archival performance accountability is measured at 78.5%.

Aboramadan and Dahleez (2020) state that transformational and transactional leadership positively influence affective commitment and organizational citizenship behavior, with work engagement serving as a significant positive mediator in these relationships. In the context of archiving in higher education institutions. Commitment functions as an intervening variable that affects performance accountability. In this study, the form of commitment examined is integrated participatory commitment, which goes beyond mere individual commitment. This aligns with Adams (2011, who emphasizes that participation alone is insufficient; staff involvement must be supported and reinforced by institutional structures and leadership to be truly effective.

The implementation of the Integrated Participatory Commitment Model in higher education archival institutions has demonstrated significant improvements inperformance accountability. The model highlights the importance of active participation from all stakeholders, including management and administrative staff, at every stage of the archival process. Such inclusive participation not only strengthens individual engagement in maintaining the archival system but also fosters a sense of ownership and responsibility for the system as a whole (Desai et al., 2024; Roeschley, 2023). This is evident in heightened awareness of orderly and accountable archiving practices, as well as increased compliance with institutional archival procedures.

Further analysis indicates that integrating information technology within this model is critical for modernizing archival processes. Digital tools enable more efficient, accurate, and traceable managementof archives. For instance, digital archival systems allow faster and more secure data access compared to traditional methods (Cushing, 2018; DeLyser, 2014). Moreover, these technological systems enhance transparency in archival reporting, facilitating both internal and external audits while improving data security to protect archives from potential loss or damage.

Furthermore, the implementation of standardized archiving procedures is sa critical component of the Integrated Participatory Commitment Model. Standardized procedures provide clear and uniform guidelines for all parties involved, thereby minimizing errors and inconsistencies in archive management. When standards are consistently applied, archival institutions can ensure that each stage of the archival process aligns with established rules, which ultimately enhances the reliability of archives as accurate and dependable sources of information. Standardization also facilitates auditing and evaluation, which are essential elements of institutional performance accountability (Chrysanthopoulos et al., 2023; Li et al., 2018).

The model incorporates ongoing evaluation as a control mechanism, ensuring that archival processes continue to meet predetermined goals and standards. Periodic evaluations allow institutions to identify and resolve problems or weaknesses in the archival system before they scalate (Bressey, 2014). Continuous feedback from these evaluations enables necessary adjustments that improve the quality, efficiency, and effectiveness of archival work. Moreover, evaluations ensure that the archiving system remains relevant and adaptive to evolving needs and technological advancements.

The Integrated Participatory Commitment Model also positively influences organizational culture within archival institutions. Greater participation in archival activities fosters a collaborative culture among stakeholders (Matusiak, 2022; Opgenhaffen, 2022). This culture is characterized by open communication, enhanced cooperation, and shared responsibility in maintaining archival quality. Such a collaborative environment not only improves operational efficiency but also nurtures a more positive and productive workplace, where individuals feel valued and recognized for their contributions to archival operations.

The implementation of the Integrated Participatory Commitment Model in higher education archival institutions has successfully enhanced performance accountabilityin archival management. By integrating stakeholder participation, information technology, standardized procedures, and continuous evaluation, this model fosters a more efficient, secure, and accountable archival system (Khandelwal et al., 2022). The findings of this study contribute significantly to the development of archival systems in universities and can serve as a reference for other institutions seeking to improve performance accountability through optimized archiving practices.

This model also underscores the importance of capacity and skills development among stakeholders. The study found that improved performance accountability was influenced by training and development programs designed to enhance understanding of archival management and the effective use of emerging technologies (Cameron, 2014). Through continuous professional development, archival staff and other stakeholders gain greater competence and confidence in executing their responsibilities. This enhanced competence is crucial for maintaining high-quality standards in archive management and ensuring that processes are executed smoothly, efficiently, and effectively.

Moreover, the Integrated Participatory Commitment Model has the potential to be adapted beyond the university context. Government agencies, non-profit organizations, and private companies can adopt this approach to strengthen their archival performance. The model’s flexibility allows it to be tailored to the specific needs and contexts of different organizations, making it a versatile framework for enhancing archival accountability (Abdul Aziz et al., 2024). Therefore, this model not only benefits higher education institutions but also offers broader advantages for various organizations that prioritize transparency, efficiency, and accountability in their archival practices.

5. Conclusion

The Integrated Participatory Commitment Model in organizing archives within higher education archival institutions emphasizes collaboration among all institutional elements, including lecturers, administrative staff, and students, to ensure proper management and maintenance of archives. This commitment is demonstrated through the active participation of each work unitc in the processes of recording, storing, and distributing documents in an orderly and structured manner. The model fosters shared awareness that archives are not merely collections of documents but serve as crucial sources of information that support institutional accountability. Consequently, its implementation provides a strong foundation for transparent and accountable administrative governance.

Moreover, the model incorporates digital archival technology to facilitate efficient document management and access. Digital systems accelerate administrative processes, reduce the risk of loss or damage to archives, and enable effective monitoring and evaluation of institutional performance. In higher education, participatory digital archival systems enhance efficiency across academic and non-academic operations, including student data management, lecture administration, and scientific research and publications. This integration ensures that all institutional stakeholders actively contribute to maintaining high-quality archives.

Through the application of integrated participatory commitment, university archival institutions can significantly strengthen performance accountability. The involvement of all institutional elements in archival processes enhances transparency and reinforces internal and external trust in institutional management. Additionally, the model encourages continuous improvement through regular evaluation and enhancement of staff competencies in archive management. Ultimately, this approach is essential for universities to establish a sustainable archival system that supports the achievement of their strategic goals.

Author Contributions: All authors contributed to this research.

Funding: Not applicable.

Conflict of Interest: The authors declare no conflict of interest.

Informed Consent Statement/Ethics Approval: Not applicable.

Declaration of Generative AI and AI-assisted Technologies: This study has not used any generative AI tools or technologies in the preparation of this manuscript.