Integration of Indonesia's government research and development institutions into single agency: Neo‐Weberian State or not?

Abstract This article analyses the trajectory and reform model in the integration of all Indonesian government R&D institutions into a single agency, the National Research and Innovation Agency of the Republic of Indonesia (BRIN). Based on the two ideal types of Weberian–entrepreneurial bureaucracy models, the BRIN case shows a ‘maintain’ trajectory in the aspects of formal structure and Weberian organisational model and a ‘modernise’ trajectory in the aspects of administrative procedures and processes. This hybrid approach fits the Neo‐Weberian State (NWS) model. However, merging all research organisations into a single agency contradicts current literature on innovation in bureaucracies, which defines NWS as a configuration of multiple organisations fostering agile stability. By integrating five types of innovation in bureaucracy, the reform reverts to a stability‐focused Weber I model. Efforts to create an agile bureaucracy are confined to internal procedures and services. To align with the NWS definition in the literature, BRIN's public managers play a key role as public value carriers, devising strategies for thematic‐led missions and building charismatic networks to promote the agencification of other innovation bureaucracies. This aims to fulfil BRIN's mission as an enabler of Indonesia's research and innovation ecosystem. Points for practitioners The Neo Weberian State (NWS) is a post‐New Public Management (NPM) reform model, evolving from the Weberian bureaucratic model and the entrepreneurial bureaucracy model. Public sector management reforms adhere to two ideal bureaucratic types, focusing on formal structures, civil service organisation, and internal procedures and processes. Reform trajectories can hybridise due to ideological influences, politico‐administrative systems, and practical contingencies, influencing the choice of mechanisms tailored to specific conditions. In the science, technology, and innovation sectors, NWS is perceived as a configuration of multiple organisations with differing bureaucratic characteristics (creators, doers, funders, facilitators, and regulators), aiming for agile stability. The integration of all Indonesian government research and development agencies into a single entity highlights the dominant role of public sector reformers or managers as public value carriers in the NWS reform model. Policy innovations in internal procedures and functions serve as breakthroughs used by public managers to address structural rigidity in the reform agenda. The integration of five types of bureaucratic innovation in the merger of all Indonesian government research agencies into a single entity connotes the need for BRIN public managers to adopt a ‘Moore’ style, employing more thematic‐led missions that foster broader growth and development of innovative bureaucratic agencies. This approach builds charismatic networks with other innovation ecosystem elements to fulfil BRIN's mission as an enabler of Indonesia's research and innovation ecosystem.