The DOI matches its Crossref record; the references it cites are not checked yet.
Penerapan Metode FMEA dalam Penilaian Risiko Sistem Pemerintahan Berbasis Elektronik
Open accessAbstract
Sistem Pemerintahan Berbasis Elektronik (SPBE) adalah penyelenggaraan Pemerintahan yang memanfaatkan Teknologi Informasi dan Komunikasi. Penerapan Teknologi Informasi pada SPBE ini ternyata menimbulkan banyak risiko. Mulai dari risiko sistem hingga keamanan informasi. Risiko sistem dapat berupa kegagalan perangkat keras, kegagalan perangkat lunak hingga pemadaman listrik. Adapun risiko keamanan dapat berupa serangan siber, kebocoran data dan lain sebagainya. Oleh karena itu diperlukan adanya manajemen risiko SPBE berbasis ISO 31000 dan Permen PANRB No. 5 Tahun 2020 guna meminimalisir terjadinya risiko tersebut. Penelitian ini bertujuan untuk menganalisis risiko SPBE pada Dinas Komunikasi dan Informatika Kabupaten Konawe. Metode analisis risiko yang digunakan adalah Failure Mode and Effect Analysis. Hasil identifikasi risiko didapatkan 11 risiko potensial. Dari 11 risiko tersebut kemudian dianalisis menggunakan FMEA dan didapatkan sebanyak 7 risiko menjadi prioritas penanganan karena memiliki dampak yang signifikan. The Electronic Government System refers to the implementation of governance by utilizing Information and Communication Technology. However, the application of Information Technology (IT) within E-Government introduces various risks, ranging from system-related issues to information security concerns. Therefore, E-Government risk management, based on ISO 31000 and the Minister of Administrative and Bureaucratic Reform Regulation (Permen PANRB) No. 5 of 2020, is necessary to mitigate these risks. This study aims to analyze SPBE risks within the Department of Communication and Informatics of Konawe Regency. The risk analysis methods used are Failure Mode and Effect Analysis (FMEA). The risk identification process revealed 11 potential risks. Of these 11 risks, further analysis using FMEA determined that seven were prioritized for handling due to their significant impact.
Overview
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Verification
Claims the paper makes
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Self-check
Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.
The self-check needs the paper’s full text.
Metadata
- Authors
- Hermansyah, H., Musaruddin, M., Mokui, H. T., Nur, M. N. A., & Kadir, A.
- Affiliations
- Universitas Halu Oleo (ID)
- Venue
- SemanTIK : Teknik Informasi
- Publisher
- FKIP Universitas Halu Oleo
- Published
- 2025-12-16
- Volume
- 11
- Issue
- 2
- ISSN
- 2460-1446 (ISSN-L)
- 2502-8928
- OpenAlex
- W4417415528
- Cited by
- 0
- References
- 0
- FWCI
- 0.00
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- id
- Open access
- hybrid
- doi.org
- Licence
- Locations
- SemanTIK Teknik Informasi (publishedVersion, cc-by-sa)
- Topics
- Social Sciences › Political Science and International Relations › E-Government and Public Services
- Physical Sciences › Computer Science › Information Systems › Information and Cyber Security
- Physical Sciences › Engineering › Safety, Risk, Reliability and Quality › Risk and Safety Analysis
- Keywords
- e-government systems, failure mode and effects analysis, system risk, information security risk, cyberattacks, data leakage, hardware and software failures, power outages, ISO 31000, risk prioritization, Konawe Regency
About these checks
Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.
Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.
Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.
What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›
Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review
