Rational-Legal Bureaucracy and Religious-Relational Logics in Madrasah Administration: A Qualitative Case Study at MTs II Lubuklinggau
Abstract
Educational administration is a critical pillar in ensuring effective governance within Islamic educational institutions. Administrative systems in madrasahs are frequently influenced by personal relationships and traditional organizational culture, challenging the principles of rationality and legality. This study aims to analyze the implementation of Max Weber's rational-legal bureaucracy model in educational administrative governance at Madrasah Tsanawiyah (MTs) II Lubuklinggau, focusing on the application of rationality, legality, and professionalism principles in administrative practice. This study employed a qualitative approach with a case study design. Data were collected through in-depth interviews with six key informants, participant observation across three months, and analysis of official madrasah documents including SOPs, organizational charts, and meeting minutes. Data analysis followed the interactive model of Miles, Huberman, and Saldaña (2014), comprising data reduction, data display, and conclusion drawing/verification. Data validity was ensured through source triangulation, method triangulation, and time triangulation, supplemented by member checking and audit trail procedures. The findings reveal that MTs II Lubuklinggau substantially reflects Weber's rational-legal bureaucracy principles through its hierarchical structure, formal division of labor, documented regulations, and rule-based decision-making. However, implementation remains inconsistent, particularly in inter-unit coordination and periodic performance evaluation. Notably, the study identifies a distinctive adaptive model in which Weberian formality is organically integrated with Islamic values such as ikhlas (sincerity), musyawarah (deliberation), and moral accountability, resulting in what this study terms a "religious-rational bureaucracy" model. This finding contributes a new theoretical perspective on bureaucratic adaptation in Islamic education contexts and has practical implications for madrasah governance reform.
References
Ahmed, S. K. (2024). The pillars of trustworthiness in qualitative research. Journal of Medicine, Surgery, and Public Health, 2, 100051. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.glmedi.2024.100051
Bowen, G. A. (2009). Document analysis as a qualitative research method. Qualitative Research Journal, 9(2), 27-40. https://doi.org/10.3316/QRJ0902027
Ahn, M. J., & Chen, Y.-C. (2022). Digital transformation toward AI-augmented public administration: The perception of government employees and the willingness to use AI in government. Government Information Quarterly, 39(2), 101664. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.giq.2021.101664 (Collaborate UMB)
Allen, A., & Gann, N. (2022). The architecture of school governance: Rebuilding democratic legitimacy within an academized system. Management in Education, 36(1), 11–17. https://doi.org/10.1177/08920206211068132 (Sage Journals)
Anderson-Gough, F., Edgley, C., Robson, K., & Sharma, N. (2022). Organizational responses to multiple logics: Diversity, identity and the professional service firm. Accounting, Organizations and Society, 103, 101336. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.aos.2022.101336 (Orca)
Busch, P. A. (2023). Faced with digital bureaucrats: A scenario-based survey analysis of how clients perceive automation in street-level decision-making. Government Information Quarterly, 40(4), 101872. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.giq.2023.101872 (ScienceDirect)
Carvalho, A. K. M. de, Alves, H., & Leitão, J. (2022). What research tells us about leadership styles, digital transformation and performance in state higher education? International Journal of Educational Management, 36(2), 218–232. https://doi.org/10.1108/IJEM-11-2020-0514 (ScienceDirect)
Chang, A., & Brewer, G. A. (2023). Street-level bureaucracy in public administration: A systematic literature review. Public Management Review, 25(11), 2191–2211. https://doi.org/10.1080/14719037.2022.2065517 (Tandfonline)
Considine, M., McGann, M., Ball, S., & Nguyen, P. (2022). Can robots understand welfare? Exploring machine bureaucracies in welfare-to-work. Journal of Social Policy, 51(3), 519–534. https://doi.org/10.1017/S0047279422000174 (DOI)
de Boer, N., & Raaphorst, N. (2023). Automation and discretion: Explaining the effect of automation on how street-level bureaucrats enforce. Public Management Review, 25(1), 42–62. https://doi.org/10.1080/14719037.2021.1937684 (Utrecht University)
Ghio, A., & Verona, R. (2022). Unfolding institutional plurality in hybrid organizations through practices: The case of a cooperative bank. The British Accounting Review, 54(4), 101041. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.bar.2021.101041 (IDEAS/RePEc)
Khatir, N., & Madani, H. (2024). The impact of digital transformation on achieving outstanding performance in educational administration. International Journal of Educational Management, 38(7), 1821–1838. https://doi.org/10.1108/IJEM-06-2023-0289 (Emerald Publishing)
Kuhlmann, S., & Heuberger, M. (2023). Digital transformation going local: Implementation, impacts and constraints from a German perspective. Public Money & Management, 43(2), 147–155. https://doi.org/10.1080/09540962.2021.1939584 (DOI)
Kumi, E., & Saharan, T. (2022). Hybridisation of institutional logics and civil society organisations’ advocacy in Kenya. Public Administration and Development, 42(4), 245–255. https://doi.org/10.1002/pad.1989 (Wiley Online Library)
Marsh, J. A., Allbright, T. N., Bulkley, K. E., Kennedy, K. E., & Dhaliwal, T. K. (2020). Institutional logics in Los Angeles schools: Do multiple models disrupt the grammar of schooling? American Journal of Education, 126(4), 603–651. https://doi.org/10.1086/709516 (RCNi Company Limited)
Milner, A. L., Mattei, P., & Ydesen, C. (2021). Governing education in times of crisis: State interventions and school accountabilities during the COVID-19 pandemic. European Educational Research Journal, 20(4), 520–539. https://doi.org/10.1177/14749041211022198 (Sage Journals)
Parker, L. D., Schmitz, J., & Jacobs, K. (2021). Auditor and auditee engagement with public sector performance audit: An institutional logics perspective. Financial Accountability & Management, 37(2), 142–162. https://doi.org/10.1111/faam.12243 (DOI)
Peeters, R., & Campos, S. A. (2023). Street-level bureaucracy in weak state institutions: A systematic review of the literature. International Review of Administrative Sciences, 89(4), 977–995. https://doi.org/10.1177/00208523221103196 (Sage Journals)
Sætre, H. S. (2023). How hybrid organizations respond to institutional complexity: The case of Norway. VOLUNTAS: International Journal of Voluntary and Nonprofit Organizations, 34(5), 990–1001. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11266-022-00514-2 (Springer)
Shams, F. (2021). A micro-process model of institutional complexity in public hybrid organizations: Construal of identity threats and mitigation strategies. Public Administration, 99(3), 598–615. https://doi.org/10.1111/padm.12704 (Wiley Online Library)
Stafford, A., & Stapleton, P. (2022). The impact of hybridity on PPP governance and related accountability mechanisms: The case of UK education PPPs. Accounting, Auditing & Accountability Journal, 35(3), 950–980. https://doi.org/10.1108/AAAJ-12-2019-4324 (Research Explorer)
Zollo, L., Pellegrini, M. M., Faldetta, G., & Rialti, R. (2023). How to combine multiple identities and gaining stakeholders legitimacy in hybrid organizations? An organizational design response. Journal of Management and Governance, 27(4), 1189–1222. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10997-022-09644-7 (Springer)
B. Five additional publications involving Muhammad Sufian
Koderi, K., Sufian, M., & Erlina, E. (2023). Developing Lampung local wisdom film of Arabic communication skills for Madrasah Tsanawiyah students. International Journal of Information and Education Technology, 13(12), 2004–2013. https://doi.org/10.18178/ijiet.2023.13.12.2015 (Jurnal Teknologi Informasi dan Pendidikan)
Pratama, E. R., Syafe’i, I., Supriadi, N., & Sufian, M. (2024). Shalat berjamaah di sekolah: Pengaruhnya terhadap akhlak dan prestasi siswa. Pendas: Jurnal Ilmiah Pendidikan Dasar, 9(4). https://doi.org/10.23969/jp.v9i04.20797 (Journal Universitas Pasundan)
Rokhman, R., Diana, N., Etek, Y., Koderi, K., & Sufian, M. (2024). The development of a scientific-based academic supervision management model. AL-ISHLAH: Jurnal Pendidikan, 16(2), 1383–1398. https://doi.org/10.35445/alishlah.v16i2.4626 (Al-Ishlah)
Erlina, E., Hijriyah, U., Ghazi, F., Syahril, S., & Sufian, M. (2025). Arabic problem-based learning for religious moderation: Classroom action research in Islamic education. JPI: Jurnal Pustaka Indonesia, 5(3), 111–125. https://doi.org/10.62159/jpi.v5i3.1806 (Siducat)
Rustanto, A. E., Waluyo, S. D., Winanti, Y. K., Onn, C. W., Sufian, M., & Mesina, J. R. O. (2026). Digital governance and user satisfaction in higher education information systems: A PLS-SEM approach on the mediating roles of organizational governance and information quality. Journal of Pedagogical Research. Advance online publication. https://doi.org/10.33902/JPR.202645364 (IJOPR)
Creswell, J. W., & Poth, C. N. (2018). Qualitative inquiry and research design: Choosing among five approaches (4th ed.). SAGE Publications.
Dolbec, P.-Y., Castilhos, R. B., Fonseca, M. J., & Trez, G. (2022). How established organizations combine logics to reconfigure resources and adapt to marketization: A case study of Brazilian religious schools. Journal of Marketing Research, 59(1), 118-135. https://doi.org/10.1177/0022243721999042
Haddade, H., Nur, A., Achruh, A., Rasyid, M. N. A., & Ibrahim, A. (2024). Madrasah management strategies through Madrasah Reform program: An evidence from Indonesia. International Journal of Educational Management, 38(5), 1289-1304. https://doi.org/10.1108/IJEM-05-2023-0236
Jamie, K., & Rathbone, A. P. (2022). Using theory and reflexivity to preserve methodological rigour of data collection in qualitative research. Research Methods in Medicine & Health Sciences, 3(1), 11-21. https://doi.org/10.1177/26320843211061302
Laihonen, H., & Kokko, P. (2023). Knowledge management and hybridity of institutional logics in public sector. Knowledge Management Research & Practice, 21(1), 14-28. https://doi.org/10.1080/14778238.2020.1788429
Lincoln, Y. S., & Guba, E. G. (1985). Naturalistic inquiry. SAGE Publications.
Lipsky, M. (2010). Street-level bureaucracy: Dilemmas of the individual in public service (30th anniversary expanded ed.). Russell Sage Foundation. https://doi.org/10.7758/9781610447713
Mahsusi, Hudaa, S., Fahmi, M., Kusen, Haryanti, N. D., & Wajdi, M. B. N. (2024). Achieving excellence: The role of digital transformation in madrasah management and Islamic culture. Cogent Arts & Humanities, 11(1), 2304407. https://doi.org/10.1080/23311983.2024.2304407
Merriam, S. B., & Tisdell, E. J. (2016). Qualitative research: A guide to design and implementation (4th ed.). Jossey-Bass.
Miles, M. B., Huberman, A. M., & Saldaña, J. (2014). Qualitative data analysis: A methods sourcebook (3rd ed.). SAGE Publications.
Min, B. H. (2022). Hybridization in government-civil society organization relationships: An institutional logic perspective. Nonprofit Management and Leadership, 32(3), 409-428. https://doi.org/10.1002/nml.21484
Olmos-Vega, F. M., Stalmeijer, R. E., Varpio, L., & Kahlke, R. (2023). A practical guide to reflexivity in qualitative research: AMEE Guide No. 149. Medical Teacher, 45(3), 241-251. https://doi.org/10.1080/0142159X.2022.2057287
Parding, K., Gavin, M., Wilson, R., Fitzgerald, S., Jakobsson, M., & McGrath-Champ, S. (2024). Intra-professional collaboration and organization of work among teachers: How entangled institutional logics shape connectivity. Journal of Professions and Organization, 11(1), 83-98. https://doi.org/10.1093/jpo/joae003
Ponte, D., & Pesci, C. (2022). Institutional logics and organizational change: The role of place and time. Journal of Management and Governance, 26(3), 891-924. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10997-021-09578-6
Saldaña, J. (2021). The coding manual for qualitative researchers (4th ed.). SAGE Publications.
Stake, R. E. (1995). The art of case study research. SAGE Publications.
Waters, T. (Ed.). (2015). Weber's rationalism and modern society: New translations on politics, bureaucracy, and social stratification. Palgrave Macmillan. https://doi.org/10.1057/9781137365859
Weber, M. (1978). Economy and society: An outline of interpretive sociology (G. Roth & C. Wittich, Eds.). University of California Press.
Yin, R. K. (2018). Case study research and applications: Design and methods (6th ed.). SAGE Publications.
Copyright (c) 2026 Syaiful Bahri, Murni Yanto, Abdul Sahib
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License.
Authors who publish with JPI: Jurnal Pustaka Indonesia journal agree to the following terms:
- Authors retain copyright and grant the JPI: Jurnal Pustaka Indonesia journal right of first publication with the work simultaneously licensed under Creative Commons Attribution License (CC BY 4.0) that allows others to share the work with an acknowledgment of the work's authorship and initial publication in this journal.
- Authors can enter into separate, additional contractual arrangements for the non-exclusive distribution of the published version of the work (e.g., post it to an institutional repository or edit it in a book), with an acknowledgment of its initial publication in this journal.
- Authors are permitted and encouraged to post their work online (e.g., in institutional repositories or on their website) before and during the submission process, as it can lead to productive exchanges, as well as earlier and greater citation of published work.
1.png)
_(3).png){kind=small}
