Administrative Efficiency in Official Travel Management: A Literature Review on Bureaucratic Processes and Cost Control in Local Government
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.70062/dynamicssocial.v2i1.266Keywords:
Administrative Efficiency, Bureaucratic Processes, Cost Control, Local Government, Official Travel ManagementAbstract
Official travel constitutes a routine yet strategically significant component of local government administration, closely intertwined with bureaucratic processes, public financial management, and accountability arrangements. Despite its operational importance and fiscal visibility, official travel management has received limited integrative attention in the public administration literature, and existing studies remain fragmented across procedural, financial, and governance perspectives. This article addresses this gap by providing a comprehensive literature review on administrative efficiency in official travel management within local governments, with particular attention to bureaucratic processes and cost control mechanisms. Adopting a narrative–analytical literature review design, the study employs a state-of-the-art and theory-driven synthesis of recent peer-reviewed scholarship in public administration, public financial management, governance, and related fields. The analysis integrates thematic and conceptual synthesis techniques to identify recurring patterns, relationships among key concepts, and unresolved issues in the literature. The findings reveal consistent patterns of procedural inefficiency, including administrative burden, complex approval chains, and process fragmentation, which persist even under formal cost control and accountability systems. The review further demonstrates that compliance-oriented financial controls often secure fiscal conformity without necessarily improving administrative efficiency, particularly when misaligned with bureaucratic workflows and constrained by limited administrative capacity. Governance and accountability mechanisms enhance transparency and oversight but frequently prioritize answerability over performance learning, thereby legitimizing inefficiencies rather than resolving them. By synthesizing insights from Administrative Efficiency Theory, Public Financial Management, Bureaucratic Process Theory, Administrative Capacity Theory, and Governance and Accountability perspectives, this article advances an integrative conceptual framework that explains efficiency outcomes as systemic products of interacting institutional dimensions.
References
Akbar, A. R., & Suprayitno. (2025). Strengthening public expenditure efficiency through system integration: A case study of the official travel system in Indonesia. Jati: Jurnal Akuntansi Terapan Indonesia, 8(1), 77–92. https://doi.org/10.18196/jati.v8i1.25460
Booth, A., Sutton, A., & Papaioannou, D. (2016). Systematic approaches to a successful literature review (2nd ed.). Sage.
Bracci, E., Tallaki Mouhcine, T., Rana, T., & Wickramasinghe, D. (2022). Risk management and management accounting control systems in public sector organizations: A systematic literature review. Public Money & Management, 42(6), 395–402. https://doi.org/10.1080/09540962.2021.1963071
Braun, V., & Clarke, V. (2006). Using thematic analysis in psychology. Qualitative Research in Psychology, 3(2), 77–101. https://doi.org/10.1191/1478088706qp063oa
Cuadrado-Ballesteros, B., & Bisogno, M. (2021). Public sector accounting reforms and the quality of governance. Public Money & Management, 41(2), 107–117. https://doi.org/10.1080/09540962.2020.1724665
Grzebyk, M., Pierścieniak, A., & Stec, M. (2021). Assessment of management efficiency in local administrative offices: A case study of Poland. Lex Localis – Journal of Local Self-Government, 19(2), 329–351. https://doi.org/10.4335/19.2.329-351(2021)
Halling, A., & Bækgaard, M. (2024). Administrative burden in citizen–state interactions: A systematic literature review. Journal of Public Administration Research and Theory, 34(2), 180–195. https://doi.org/10.1093/jopart/muad023
Haque, M. S., Ramesh, M., Puppim de Oliveira, J. A., & Gomide, A. D. A. (2021). Building administrative capacity for development: Limits and prospects. International Review of Administrative Sciences, 87(2), 211–219. https://doi.org/10.1177/00208523211002605
Liu, J., Hu, S., Jin, Y., & Weng, L. (2025). Digital red tape in public organizations: Challenges to sustainable digital transformation. Sustainability, 17(23), 10681. https://doi.org/10.3390/su172310681
McQuestin, D., Noguchi, M., & Drew, J. (2022). The association between budget inaccuracy and technical efficiency in Australian local government. Public Money & Management, 42(4), 251–261. https://doi.org/10.1080/09540962.2021.1893464
Poljašević, J., Vašiček, V., & Dragija Kostić, M. (2021). Public managers’ perception of the usefulness of accounting information in decision-making processes. Public Money & Management, 41(6), 456–465. https://doi.org/10.1080/09540962.2021.1906534
Rajala, T. (2025). New development: Red tape and digital accounting technology in the public sector. Public Money & Management. Advance online publication. https://doi.org/10.1080/09540962.2025.2483259
Snyder, H. (2019). Literature review as a research methodology: An overview and guidelines. Journal of Business Research, 104, 333–339. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jbusres.2019.07.039
Tranfield, D., Denyer, D., & Smart, P. (2003). Towards a methodology for developing evidence-informed management knowledge by means of systematic review. British Journal of Management, 14(3), 207–222. https://doi.org/10.1111/1467-8551.00375
Xiao, Y., & Watson, M. (2019). Guidance on conducting a systematic literature review. Journal of Planning Education and Research, 39(1), 93–112. https://doi.org/10.1177/0739456X17723971

