Implementasi Capacity Building Menuju Daya Saing Global Fakultas Ekonomi Universitas PGRI Adi Buana Surabaya

Abstract

Every organization, institution and or institution including Faculty of Economics University of PGRI Adi Buana Surabaya always do capacity development to achieve the vision that has been formulated in its strategic document. Capacity building in the Faculty of Economics, University of PGRI Adi Buana (Unipa) consists of 3 levels of development, namely; (1) organizational level, (2) system level, and (3) individual level. At the organizational level, the focus under consideration is the Governance of the Faculty of Economics PGRI Adi Buana which emphasizes the principles of good university governance that provide satisfaction guarantee to stakeholders. At the system level, the focus under study is the development of website portal capacity. This website portal has the potential to increase competitiveness internationally. At the individual level, the focus studied is the capacity building in the form of knowledge, skills and attitudes of the lecturers in implementing the tri dharma. This research is a qualitative research, with research object of Faculty of Economics as a whole, as well as other work units related to the implementation of capacity building at Faculty of Economics of Unipa. Methods of data collection using in-depth interviews on selected informants. Data validity using triangulation model. While the data analysis using integrated phenomenology analysis with rubric EMI (Internal Quality Evaluation) Internal Quality Assurance System (SPMI) Dikti. The results of the research inform as follows; (1) Overall, the average score of the Organization Level is 5.03. means capacity building at the Organizational Level has sufficient as expected trend, (2) Mining of individual level capacities in terms of standard of Educator and Teachers with average score of 6. fall into the category of good capacity development (example of good practice), (3) Overall average system level score of 3.43. This score indicates that capacity-level system development has insufficient tendency, minor repairs will make these quality items sufficient (inadequate, but minor improvements will make it adequate). Several suggestions for improvement are presented in the final chapter of this study.