ABSTRACT

This study evaluates the collaboration between the Research and Community Service Institute (LPPM) of

Universitas Jenderal Soedirman and the Secretariat of the Regional House of Representatives (DPRD) of Cilacap

Regency in developing Academic Manuscripts for Regional Regulation Drafts (Raperda) in 2024. Employing a

descriptive-evaluative qualitative approach within a Collaborative Governance framework, this research

analyzes the subst antive quality of outputs, the alignment of research team competencies, and the dynamics of

in problems remaining undetected until the final stages. The study recommends an ideal cooperation model

founded on five pillars: paradigm transformation toward collaborative partnership, competency-based team

formation with active partner participation, implementation of multi-layered quality assurance, strengthening of

deliberative communication, and development of continuous learning systems. This transformation requires

institutional commitment to positioning partnership, quality, participation, and continuous learning as core

values in academic-local government collaborations, with success evaluation based not solely on administrative

efficiency but also on output quality and tangible contributions to regional regulation improvement.

Keywords: Collaborative Governance, University-Government Cooperation, Academic Manuscript for

Regional Regulation Draft, Quality Assurance, Research Team Competency

between academics and various external stakeholders, including the business world, the industrial sector (DUDI),

and regional government agencies. This collaboration is expected to produce quality outputs that will have

tangible impacts on regional development and institutional capacity strengthening.

Collaboration between universities and regional governments has become a focal point in contemporary public

governance literature. Ansell and Gash (2008a) assert that collaborative governance constitutes an approach

involving various actors in decision-making processes to produce more responsive and sustainable policies. This

collaborative model demands intensive communication, clear distribution of responsibilities, and mutual

commitment to achieving agreed-upon objectives. In the Indonesian context, Nawawi et al. (2025) identify that

collaborative governance strategies in regional planning and development still face various challenges, including

weak coordination and unclear role delineation among parties. Situmorang et al. (2018) also demonstrate that

cannot be equated with evidence-based medical practice, as policy involves higher levels of political, social, and

economic complexity. Therefore, universities involved in formulating policy documents, such as Academic

Manuscripts for Regional Regulation Drafts (Raperda), must ensure that studies conducted are based on current

data and regulations and supported by researcher competencies aligned with the field of study. Anas et al. (2023)

found that information system quality and financial information quality in Indonesian regional government

organizations still require improvement to support better decision-making. This demonstrates that the substantive

quality of every product generated through collaboration must be a top priority, not merely fulfilling

administrative and procedural aspects.

Nevertheless, various studies indicate that collaboration between universities and external stakeholders

frequently encounters obstacles regarding competency alignment and depth of analysis. Perkmann et al. (2021)

government funding. In the context of university-regional government cooperation, similar challenges emerge

when research teams lack expertise appropriate to the field of study being addressed, potentially resulting in

outputs inadequate in substance.

The cooperation between LPPM Universitas Jenderal Soedirman (Unsoed) and regional government agencies,

particularly the Secretariat of the Regional House of Representatives (DPRD) of Cilacap, represents one form

of academic-government collaboration implementation in supporting regional regulation formulation. This

cooperation focuses on developing Academic Manuscripts for Raperda that serve as the foundation for

formulating Regional Regulations (Perda) responsive to community needs. Unsoed, as a state university with a

solid reputation in the Central Java region, is expected to make significant contributions through quality

academic studies based on current research. Fu et al. (2024) note that scientific production by Indonesian

collaboration implementation. Yaxin and Adnan (2025) affirm that organizational structure and stakeholder

engagement have a significant influence on organizational performance, thus a comprehensive evaluation of

both aspects is essential. In the context of Academic Manuscript development for Raperda, evaluation

encompasses not only administrative efficiency aspects but also the substantive quality of studies produced,

alignment of research team competencies, and the impact of such cooperation on regional legislative processes.

Yatun et al. (2021) demonstrate that Indonesian regional government commitment to education sector quality

remains varied, indicating the need for strengthening accountability and transparency in all forms of cooperation

with academic institutions. Natário et al. (2012) in their study on the triple helix model emphasize that innovation

dynamics in collaboration among universities, industry, and government heavily depend on the quality of

interaction and synchronization of interests among these three actors.

Based on the above exposition, this study aims to evaluate the implementation of cooperation between LPPM

Unsoed and regional government agencies, particularly in the context of Academic Manuscript development for

2024). Universities, through the Research and Community Service Institute (LPPM), have a mandate to

implement the Tri Dharma of Higher Education, particularly in applied research and community service.

According to Khomsi et al. (2024), collaborative knowledge models can enhance collaboration between

researchers and policymakers, leading to evidence-based policies that effectively meet community needs.

Meanwhile, regional governments require scientific foundations in policy formulation to ensure that legal

products and public policies produced possess academic legitimacy, empirical relevance, and implementation

effectiveness. This aligns with research by Rideng et al. (2024), which states that collaboration between

universities and regional governments in developing Academic Manuscripts for Raperda has proven to improve

regulations and socioeconomic impact.

In this context, the cooperation between LPPM Unsoed and the Cilacap Regency Government reflects the

the practical world of governance, oriented toward improving public policy quality and community welfare.

Inter-Organizational Collaboration

The concept of inter-organizational collaboration explains how two or more institutions with different interests

work together to achieve common goals that cannot be accomplished individually (Hedges et al., 2021). Gray

(1989) defines collaboration as an interactive process that demands active participation, open communication,

and trust-building among parties (Gazley, 2017). In the context of the relationship between LPPM Unsoed and

the Cilacap Regency Government, this collaboration involves the exchange of resources in the form of academic

knowledge, empirical data, as well as administrative and policy support. Such cooperation requires good

coordination, shared vision, and clear working mechanisms to ensure that the process of developing Academic

Manuscripts for Raperda runs effectively and produces quality outputs.

Inter-organizational collaboration also emphasizes the importance of trust-building, transparency, and two-way

government cooperation and formulating an ideal partnership model for the future.

Collaborative Governance Theory

The Collaborative Governance theory developed by Ansell and Gash (2008) provides a strong theoretical

foundation for understanding cooperation mechanisms between universities and regional governments in the

context of public policy formulation. This theory views collaboration not merely as administrative cooperation

but as a governance process involving various actors from the public, academic, and community sectors in

participatory, deliberative, and consensus-based decision-making (Emerson et al., 2012). In this model, four

important elements determine collaboration success: starting conditions, institutional design, facilitative

leadership, and collaborative process (Purdy, 2012).

Starting conditions encompass the level of trust, history of previous cooperation, and power balance among

parties. In the context of LPPM Unsoed and the Cilacap Regency Government, this can be observed through

The analysis process was focused on identifying cooperation patterns, revealing challenges encountered in

implementation, and formulating lessons learned from the ongoing cooperation as the foundation for future

given that the budget had been expended but outputs produced could not be utilized in the legislative process.

This condition indicates that problems are systemic and recurring in corporate management, thus requiring a

more applicative and academic analysis that must be theoretically grounded. Nsanzumuhire and Groot (2020)

emphasize the importance of contextual understanding in university-industry collaboration processes, where

misalignment of perspectives between practical needs and academic approaches can hinder achievement of

common goals. In the context of LPPM-DPRD cooperation, this gap is not merely linguistic but also

epistemological—differences in ways of viewing and approaching policy problems. Budiman (2021) explains

that the Regional Regulation formulation according to Law Number 12 of 2011 demands a balance between

academic legitimacy and responsiveness to community needs. When academic outputs cannot be translated into

applicable policy language, the added value of collaboration becomes minimal and fails to deliver expected

impacts.

The implication of this gap is the need to redefine quality standards that integrate academic rigor with practical

fulfilling administrative tri dharma obligations. Therefore, an ideal cooperation model must include multi-

layered quality control mechanisms involving academic peer review and policy practitioner validation to ensure

that outputs meet dual standards: academic rigor and practical relevance, thus contributing tangibly to improving

regional regulation quality and community welfare.

Research Team Competency Gaps and Their Implications for Knowledge Currency

Analysis of research team competency alignment reveals significant gaps between possessed expertise and study

requirements that must be completed in the cooperation between LPPM Unsoed and the DPRD Secretariat of

Cilacap. Team composition that tends to remain fixed without considering expertise alignment with study themes

constitutes a structural problem in cooperation management, where teams formed do not always possess

educational backgrounds relevant to the study objects addressed. Particularly in developing Academic

misalignment confirms Perkmann et al.'s (2021) argument that the gap between external partner expectations

and academic capacity constitutes a structural barrier to academic engagement. Situmorang et al. (2018) in their

study on university-government cooperation models for teacher competency improvement in North Sumatra

found that collaboration success heavily depends on team expertise alignment with specific program needs.

Competency misalignment directly impacts the inability to detect fundamental study problems, as seen in the

produced lacked adequate juridical validity. This condition demonstrates that competency alignment is not

merely about academic formalities but has direct implications for the quality and utility of outputs produced in

between project needs and expertise available at the institution. Team formation mechanisms remain top-down

and do not involve systematic competency needs analysis, such that the principle of placing the right people in

the right place has not been fully implemented. Nsanzumuhire and Groot (2020) assert that university-industry

collaboration often fails due to lack of contextual understanding and partners' specific needs. Yaxin and Adnan

(2025) add that organizational structure and stakeholder engagement have a significant influence on

organizational performance, thus recruitment mechanisms and human resource allocation must be responsive to

external needs dynamics.

Limitations in team diversification and the tendency to repeatedly use the same names constitute obstacles in

ensuring cooperation output quality. Team determination is largely conducted by top leadership or based on

established decisions without considering input from partners who have direct interests in study results.

Considerations of cost efficiency and communication ease often override competency alignment aspects, such

that teams formed are not optimal in handling the study complexities required. Partners' limited authority in

determining research team composition reflects power relations imbalances in the collaboration, where existing

determining collaboration success. Purdy (2012) explains that power imbalances in collaborative governance

processes can be overcome through institutional design providing space for all parties to participate in key

decisions.

The impact of competency misalignment is not only technical but also affects institutional credibility and

collaboration effectiveness in producing evidence-based policies. Flexibility and responsiveness in team

including competency-based team selection procedures and continuous performance evaluation. Competency-

based team formation mechanisms involving partners' active participation become urgent needs to improve

Knowledge currency refers to the value and currency of knowledge transferred in collaboration, determining

whether outputs produced possess competitive advantage and can be applied in practical contexts. The finding

that teams used regulations no longer in force demonstrates that knowledge currency in this cooperation was low

because knowledge transferred was not up-to-date and not relevant to current developments in law and policy

fields. Natário et al. (2012), in their study on the triple helix model, emphasize that innovation dynamics in

collaboration among universities, industry, and government heavily depend on interaction quality and interest

synchronization of these three actors, including academics' ability to provide current knowledge that can be

applied. Fu et al. (2024) note that although scientific production by Indonesian universities has increased

significantly, the quality and impact of such scientific production still require critical evaluation, indicating that

quantity does not guarantee quality and relevance.

intensive knowledge sharing. Gazley (2017) emphasizes that effective inter-organizational collaboration requires

trust-building, transparency, and two-way communication to overcome expectation gaps. Therefore, team

competency profile transparency mechanisms, expertise-based selection procedures, and partner involvement in

strategic decision-making become important steps to increase knowledge currency and ensure that collaboration

produces high-quality outputs with tangible impacts on improving regional regulation quality.

Collaboration Process Dynamics within the Collaborative Governance Framework

Analysis of starting conditions indicates that cooperation between LPPM Unsoed and the DPRD Secretariat of

Cilacap was built on a fairly solid foundation regarding trust and cooperation history aspects, but still faces

challenges in power balance and expectation clarity. The selection of LPPM Unsoed as a partner was based on

the institution's reputation as a state university with a good brand and already quite well-known in the Purwokerto

maintained over the long term.

Despite a positive initial trust foundation, negative experiences with poor-quality outputs can rapidly erode that

trust and impact future cooperation sustainability. Power imbalances reflected in partners' limited authority to

determine research team composition become factors hindering creation of collaborative advantage. Good

institutional reputation provides initial trust capital, but this trust is more interpersonal in nature and has not yet

been institutionalized into formal mechanisms that can consistently guarantee output quality. This condition

indicates that although starting conditions are fairly good, they need to be strengthened with more participatory

and balanced governance mechanisms. Emerson et al. (2012) in their integrative collaborative governance

framework emphasize the importance of institutional design including role clarity, ground rules, and shared

accountability mechanisms to ensure collaboration sustainability.

substantive aspects and coordination mechanisms. Administrative efficiency is reflected in responsiveness in

correspondence processing and time flexibility in service delivery, as well as good and non-rigid communication

Facilitative leadership in this cooperation demonstrates roles not yet optimal in managing expectations and

ensuring quality of outputs produced. Leadership orientation focuses more on administrative efficiency and

quantitative target achievement rather than substantive quality, where criticism exists toward approaches that

merely ensure projects proceed and funds are absorbed without attention to output quality. Criticism of leadership

remain engaged in processes. Saleh et al. (2021) assert that collaborative leadership requires the ability to

facilitate dialogue, build consensus, and encourage joint learning. The absence of substantive dialogue forums

between research teams and partners during the study development phases indicates weak leadership roles in

facilitating deliberative and participatory collaborative processes.

The collaborative process demonstrates good communication at operational levels but weak substantive dialogue

aspects regarding study content and methodology. Administrative staff responsiveness indicates efforts to build

positive working relationships in administrative coordination contexts and correspondence processing. However,

in academic dialogue aspects and study substance discussion, significant gaps still exist because studies were

not thoroughly discussed and lacked deliberative processes in the Academic Manuscript development phases.

Partners' limited involvement from the beginning of the study development process caused outputs produced to

not be fully responsive to practical needs in the field. Ansell and Gash (2008b) identify that collaborative

processes include several key elements: face-to-face dialogue enabling trust-building and mutual respect; shared

understanding regarding goals and means to achieve them; commitment to processes showing willingness to

cooperate despite differences; and intermediate outcomes providing small successes to maintain collaboration

understanding gap reflects the importance of honesty and openness in collaboration, where academic institutions

must be transparent regarding capacities and limitations possessed. The absence of intermediate outcomes that

can be monitored and evaluated periodically caused problems to remain undetected until the final project stages.

Emerson et al. (2012) explain that effective collaborative processes require monitoring mechanisms and

feedback loops enabling adaptive management when deviations from targets are found. Lahat et al. (2021) assert

that collaborative governance is not an event but a process requiring iteration, learning, and continuous

adaptation to achieve common goals and produce quality outputs.

Multidimensional Challenges in Academic-Government Cooperation

Technical challenges faced in cooperation primarily relate to data and regulatory currency serving as study

foundations, as well as limited work time not allowing in-depth studies. The main problem is outdated regulatory

references impacting the validity and utility of Academic Manuscripts produced in regional legislative processes.