Institutional Pressure and Organisational Maturity of Internal Government Audit (APIP) in Sorong City, Indonesia: A Maturity Level Characterization Model Analysis

Abstract

This study examines the maturity of the Internal Government Audit Apparatus (APIP) at the Sorong City Inspectorate by analysing how regulative, normative, and cognitive institutional pressures shape organisational maturity. Nationally, more than 60% of APIPs remain at Level 2, while Sorong City formally targets Level 3 but continues to display an administrative-procedural orientation. Using Korsten et al.’s (2025) Maturity Level Characterization Model, this study distinguishes process-based maturity from capability-based maturity through a Dreyfus-adapted skill-progression perspective. A qualitative descriptive design was employed through in-depth interviews with auditors, structural officials, BPKP and BPK representatives, and OPD stakeholders, supported by observation, document analysis, and focus group discussion. Data were analysed thematically using source and method triangulation and member checking. The findings show that institutional pressure has strengthened APIP Sorong’s formal maturity through strategic planning, risk-based audit planning, SPIP, SAKIP, internal audit charters, codes of ethics, BPKP supervision, and BPK follow-up mechanisms. However, these pressures produce process-based maturity more strongly than capability-based maturity, with a mean score of 6.0/10 for process maturity and 3.7/10 for capability maturity. Although APIP Sorong is formally positioned at Level 3, its actual character remains procedural-transitional, marked by reliance on assignment letters, document requests, working papers, formal reports, and administrative coordination. Key bottlenecks include auditor shortages, limited certification, weak audit technology, low OPD responsiveness, underdeveloped data integration, weak follow-up dashboards, and absent public complaint and whistleblowing channels. The study contributes by offering a capability-based diagnostic model of APIP maturity and demonstrates that institutional pressure must be converted into adaptive, risk-based, digital, and learning-oriented audit capability.