Design for Assessing the Quality of Internet-Based Governance of Cooperative Legal Entities

Corporate governance is a crucial factor in preventing corruption while simultaneously enhancing organisational performance and sustainability. In the context of cooperatives as member-based economic entities, implementing good governance continues to encounter various challenges, particularly those related to the limitations of measurement models that are both comprehensive and adaptable to the development of digital technology. This study aims to identify and design a more comprehensive internet-based cooperative governance quality measurement model by employing a qualitative approach through documentation techniques, unstructured interviews, and focus group discussions (FGDs) involving stakeholders such as regulators, cooperative practitioners, and academics. The findings indicate that existing governance measurement models have not yet fully accommodated the complexity of cooperative characteristics and the demands of digitalisation. Consequently, this study develops a new model by integrating five principal aspects, namely stakeholders, transparency, responsibility, accountability, and technical accessibility, which are further elaborated into 167 indicators. The novelty of this research lies in the utilisation of the internet as a governance measurement medium, as well as the incorporation of stakeholder and technical accessibility dimensions as the main components of governance evaluation. The resulting model is expected to serve as a more systematic, adaptive, and relevant instrument for assessing the quality of cooperative governance, while simultaneously supporting greater transparency, accountability, and public trust. Nevertheless, this study still has limitations regarding the number of informants and the absence of extensive empirical testing; therefore, future research is recommended to examine the validity and implementation of the model across various cooperative contexts in Indonesia.

Cooperative governance, good corporate governance, digitalisation, stakeholders, transparency, accountability.

1. Agustina, D., Adam, M., & Andriana, I. (2022). Implementation of good corporate governance in cooperatives in Indonesia. Budapest International Research and Critics Institute-Journal (BIRCI-Journal). [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

2. Arda, D. P., Murwaningsari, E., & Juniati Gunawan. (2021). Development Of Quality Measurement Of Cooperative Governance Implementation. International Journal of Science, Technology & Management, 2(5), 1625–1634. https://doi.org/10.46729/ijstm.v2i5.291 [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

3. Apristiana, A. A., & Utomo, D. C. (2024). Corporate governance and fraud: A systematic review. Owner: Riset dan Jurnal Akuntansi, 9(2). https://doi.org/10.33395/owner.v9i2.2643 [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

4. Awa, H. O., Etim, W., & Ogbonda, E. (2024). Stakeholders, stakeholder theory and Corporate Social Responsibility (CSR). International Journal of Corporate Social Responsibility, 9(1), 11. https://doi.org/10.1186/s40991-024-00094-y [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

5. Babiak, K., & Kihl, L. A. (2018). A Case Study of Stakeholder Dialogue in Professional Sport: An Example of CSR Engagement. Business and Society Review, 123(1), 119-149. https://doi.org/10.1111/basr.12137 [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

6. Błach, J., Gorzeń-Mitka, I., & Lipowicz, M. (2025). Scientific mapping of environmental, social, and governance (ESG) research from the perspective of stakeholders: A content analysis study. Journal of Entrepreneurship, Management and Innovation, 21(4), 76-102. https://doi.org/10.7341/20252144 [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

7. Bridoux, F., & Stoelhorst, J. W. (2022). Stakeholder theory, strategy, and organization: Past, present, and future. Strategic Organization, 20(4), 797–809. https://doi.org/10.1177/14761270221127628 [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

8. Carrillo, M. I. A., De La Cruz, A. M. P., & Chicharro, M. N. (2019). The impact of corporate governance on corruption disclosure in European Listed Firms through the implementation of directive 2014/95/EU. Sustainability (Switzerland), 11(22), 1–21. https://doi.org/10.3390/ su11226479 [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

9. Grzybkowski, M., & Wojcik, D. (2011). Internet and Corporate Governance. SSRN Electronic Journal, 1–21. https://doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.914520 [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

10. Hartono, U., & Musdholifah, M. (2018). Developing Corporate Governance Quality Measurement and its Impact on Firm Value . Handbook on Economics , Finance and Management Outlook by Musdholif ah Musdholif ah, 3. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

11. Hartono, U., & Musdholifah, M. (2021). Corporate Governance Quality Assessment Based on Internet: Study of state-owned enterprises and regional owned enterprises in Indonesia. 1st International Conference on Economics, Business, Entrepreneurship, and Finance (ICEBEF 2018), 65(Icebef 2018), 280–286. https://doi.org/10.2991/ icebef-18.2019.63 [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

12. International Finance Corporation & Otoritas Jasa Keuangan. (2018). Indonesia corporate governance manual (2nd ed.). [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

13. Jamaluddin, F., Saleh, N. M., Abdullah, A., Hassan, M. S., Hamzah, N., Jaffar, R., Aziz, S. A. A. G., & Embong, Z. (2023). Cooperative governance and cooperative performance: A systematic literature review. SAGE Open, 13(3), 1–21. https://doi.org/10.1177/21582440231192944 [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

14. Kholmi, M. (2020). Good governance principles analysis of the village business are reviewed from transparency, accountability, responsibility, independence, and fairness. In Advances in Social Science, Education and Humanities Research (Vol. 477, pp. 1–6). Atlantis Press. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

15. Mahajan, R., Lim, W. M., Sareen, M., Kumar, S., & Panwar, R. (2023). Stakeholder theory. Journal of Business Research, 166, 114104. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jbusres.2023.114104 [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

16. Mayasari, D., & Lokantara, I. G. W. (2025). Modern cooperative governance in Indonesia: Policy insights from Koperasi Usaha Mandiri, Belitung. Journal of Tourism Economics and Policy, 5(2), 298–308. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

17. Moleong, L. J. (2021). Metodologi Penelitian Kualitatif (Edisi Revisi). Bandung: PT Remaja Rosdakarya. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

18. OECD. (2023). G20/OECD principles of corporate governance 2023. OECD Publishing. https://doi.org/10.1787/ed750b30-en [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

19. Prasad, R. K. (2021). Principles of cooperative business: Sustainability through good governance. Wutan Huatan Jisuan Jishu, (ISSN 1001-1749). [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

20. Rizqi, A., Nova, M., Nurdin, N. P., & Kurniawan, A. (2024). Koperasi multipihak model koperasi modern dengan konsep ekonomi kolaboratif. Neraca: Jurnal Ekonomi, Manajemen dan Akuntansi, 3(2), 864–873. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

21. Setyorini, C. T., Maghfiroh, S., Firmansyah, I., Artati, D., & Yuniarto, A. S. (2023). Unveiling the global corporate governance landscape in family firms: A comprehensive bibliometric analysis. European Journal of Family Business, 13(2), 234–254. https://doi.org/10.24310/ejfb.13.2.2023.16498 [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

22. Schlenker, L. R., Moreira, V. R., & Silva, F. F. (2026). The environmental, social, and governance approach in cooperatives: A systematic literature review. SAGE Open, 16(1), 1–16. https://doi.org/10.1177/21582440251406278 [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

23. Scmitter, P. C., Guilhot, N., & Imco, B. (2019). Defining, Explaining, and Using the Concept of Governance. 1–56. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

24. Signori, S., & Fassin, Y. (2023). Family members’ salience in family business: An identity-based stakeholder approach. Journal of Business Ethics, 183(1), 191-211. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10551-021-04998-8 [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

25. Solihin, S. A. (2023). Peran koperasi bagi anggota dan harapan anggota terhadap koperasi. Eco-Iqtishodi: Jurnal Ilmiah Ekonomi dan Keuangan Syariah, 4(2), 129. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

26. Sonjaya, Y. (2024). The influence of corporate culture on audit practices and ethics. Golden Ratio of Auditing Research, 4(2), 107-124. http://dx.doi.org/10.52970/grar.v4i2.394 [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

27. Sukardi, D., Hafizd, J. Z., Muamar, A., Hamamah, F., Royani, E., & Sobirov, B. (2024). Digital transformation of cooperative legal entities in Indonesia. Al-Risalah: Forum Kajian Hukum dan Sosial Kemasyarakatan, 24(2), 68–86. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

28. Suwandi. (2024). Trend analysis of the development of Indonesian cooperatives (Empirical study for the period 2012-2021). International Journal of Research and Innovation in Social Science (IJRISS), VIII(I), 1171–1177. https://dx.doi.org/10.47772/IJRISS.2024.801086 [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

29. Tumewu, J., Ardini, L., & Rachmawati, R. (2024). Corporate governance and internet financial reporting: Evidence from public companies in Indonesia. International Journal of Industrial Engineering, Technology & Operations Management, 2(1), 12–18. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

30. Ulum, I., & Ahmad, N. (2018). Metodologi Penelitian Akuntansi: Teori dan Aplikasi. Malang: Aditya Media Publishing. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

31. Valentinov, E., & Chia, R. (2022). Stakeholder theory: A process-ontological perspective. Business Ethics, the Environment & Responsibility, 31, 762–776. https://doi.org/10.1111/beer.12441 [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

32. Velte, P. (2023). The link between corporate governance and corporate financial misconduct: A review of archival studies and implications for future research. Management Review Quarterly, 73, 353–411 [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

33. Wahyuni, S., & Hayati, N. (2022). Analisis good corporate governance, pengendalian internal, dan whistleblowing system dan fraud. Journal of Business & Banking, 12(1), 125–141. https://doi.org/10.14414/jbb.v12i1.3260 [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

34. Wuryani, E., & Yanthi, M. D. (2020). Determining Factors of Corporate Governance in Women Corporative of East Java Indonesia. AKRUAL: Jurnal Akuntansi, 11(2), 136. https://doi.org/10.26740/jaj.v11n2.p136-148 [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

35. Regulations and Laws Applied: [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

36. Minister of Cooperatives and SMEs Regulation No. 13 of 2015 concerning Accounting Guidelines for Savings and Loan Businesses by Cooperatives [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

37. Minister of Cooperatives and SMEs Regulation No. 17 of 2015 concerning Cooperative Supervision [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

38. Minister of Cooperatives and SMEs Regulation No. 19 of 2015 concerning the Implementation of Cooperative Members’ Meetings [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

39. Minister of Cooperatives and SMEs Regulation No. 20 of 2015 concerning the Implementation of Cooperative Accountability [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

40. Minister of Cooperatives and SMEs Regulation No. 21 of 2015 concerning Cooperative Rating Systems [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

41. Minister of Cooperatives and SMEs Regulation No. 9 of 2018 concerning the Implementation and Development of Cooperatives [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

42. Deputy Regulation No. 4 of 2018 concerning Criteria and Indicators for Cooperative Rating Assessments [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

43. Minister of Cooperatives and SMEs Regulation No. 9 of 2020 concerning Cooperative Supervision [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

44. Technical Guidelines of the Deputy for Cooperatives No. 15 of 2021 concerning Guidelines for Cooperative Health Examination Working Papers (KKPKK) [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

• Block-Based Programming for Education: A Comprehensive Analysis of Visual Programming Environments in K-12 Learning
• Management of Academic Libraries and Client Satisfaction Towards Digital Utilization: Basis for Monitoring Library Operations in SOCCSKSARGEN Region.
• Revenue Leakages in TPA Insurance Claims and Corporate Claims: An Institutional Overview of Aster Prime Hospital, Hyderabad
• Technology and Innovation in Hospitality and Tourism: A Management Perspective
• Geospatial Distribution of Tarok Sacred Grove of Langtang North and Langtang South Local Government Areas