This research investigates the relationship between the variables of public service reform (PSR) and bureaucratic revitalization and the relationship between digital leadership (DL) and bureaucratic revitalization. The research method used in this research is quantitative survey research which aims to determine the relationship between two or more variables. The research method for this research is quantitative associative, the population of this study is senior immigration officers. The data analysis method uses structural equation modeling (SEM) partial least squares (PLS), the respondents for this study were 634 senior immigration office employees who were determined using the simple random sampling method—non probability sampling, the questionnaire was designed to contain statement items using a 7 point Likert scale. A closed questionnaire is a list of questions or statements that are equipped with multiple answer choices expressed in scale form. The Likert scale used in this research is (1) strongly disagree, (2) disagree, (3) quite disagree, (4) neutral, (5) quite agree, (6) agree, (7) strongly agree. Data processing in this research used SmartPLS software. The independent variables of this research are digital leadership and public service reform and the dependent variable is bureaucratic revitalization. The stages of data analysis in this research are the outer model test which includes convergent validity, discriminant validity and composite reliability as well as inner model analysis, namely hypothesis testing. The results of this research show that public service reform has a positive and significant relationship to bureaucratic revitalization and digital leadership has a positive and significant relationship to bureaucratic revitalization. This research implies that leaders focus on engaging, using, and handling the uncertainty of emerging technologies, digital tools, and data, leaders to support bureaucratic revitalization, the immigration department must implement digital leadership, immigration leaders should encourage the use of digital platforms in their organizations, support and facilitate digital transformation. The immigration department should increase the revitalization of the bureaucracy, the immigration department should carry out public service reforms. Public services are to be good if they fulfill several principles of public interest, legal certainty, equal rights, balance of rights and obligations, professionalism, participativeness, equality of treatment/non-discrimination, openness, accountability, facilities and special treatment for vulnerable groups, timeliness, speed, convenience and affordability.

Asbari, M., Wijayanti, L., Hyun, C. C., et al. (2020). The role of knowledge transfer and organizational learning to build innovation capability: Evidence from Indonesian automotive industry. International Journal of Control and Automation, 13(1), 3192–333.

Avidov-Ungar, O., Shamir-Inbal, T., & Blau, I. (2022). Typology of digital leadership roles tasked with integrating new technologies into teaching: Insights from metaphor analysis. Journal of Research on Technology in Education, 54(1), 92–107. https://doi.org/10.1080/15391523.2020.1809035

Bejerot, E., & Hasselbladh, H. (2013). Forms of intervention in public sector organizations: Generic traits in public sector reforms. Organization studies, 34(9), 1357–1380. https://doi.org/10.1177/0170840613477639

Bhuiyan, S. H., & Amagoh, F. (2011). Public sector reform in Kazakhstan: issues and perspectives. International Journal of Public Sector Management, 24(3), 227–249. https://doi.org/10.1108/09513551111121356

Bhuvanij, K., Praneetpolgrang, P., & Sukvaree, T. (2023). Strategic Digital Leadership in the Private Sector for Digital Transformation Towards Enabling Sustainable Digital Economy in Thailand. International Journal of Innovation, Creativity and Change, 17(1).

Bouzas-Lorenzo, R., Buceta, B. B., & da Silva, A. F. Leadership training approaches in European civil service schools. Geopolitical, Social Security and Freedom Journal, 5(1), 52–66. https://doi.org/10.2478/gssfj-2022-0004

Cahyadi, A., & Magda, R. (2021). Digital leadership in the economies of the G20 countries: A secondary research. Economies, 9(1), 32. https://doi.org/10.3390/economies9010032

Chatfield, A. T. (2009). Public service reform through e-government: A case study of ‘e-Tax’in Japan. Asymptotic and Computational Methods in Spatial Statistics, 209.

Chung, C. S., Choi, H., & Cho, Y. (2022). Analysis of digital governance transition in South Korea: Focusing on the leadership of the president for government Innovation. Journal of Open Innovation: Technology, Market, and Complexity, 8(1), 2. https://doi.org/10.3390/joitmc8010002

Desky, H., Mukhtasar, M., Istan, M., et al. (2020). Did trilogy leadership style, organizational citizenship behaviour (OCB) and organizational commitment (OCO) influence financial performance? Evidence from pharmacy industries. Systematic Reviews in Pharmacy, 11(10), 297–305.

El Haddad, P., Auffret, J. P., & Grishina, O. (2020). Public administration reform in Lebanon from the leadership perspective. Recherches en Sciences de Gestion, (3), 341–369. https://doi.org/10.3917/resg.138.0341

Fishenden, J., & Thompson, M. (2013). Digital government, open architecture, and innovation: why public sector IT will never be the same again. Journal of public administration research and theory, 23(4), 977–1004. https://doi.org/10.1093/jopart/mus022

Gil-Garcia, J. R., Dawes, S. S., & Pardo, T. A. (2018). Digital government and public management research: finding the crossroads. Public Management Review, 20(5), 633–646. https://doi.org/10.1080/14719037.2017.1327181

Grönroos, C. (2019). Reforming public services: does service logic have anything to offer? Public Management Review, 21(5), 775–788. https://doi.org/10.1080/14719037.2018.1529879

Karakose, T., Kocabas, I., Yirci, R., et al. (2022). The development and evolution of digital leadership: A bibliometric mapping approach-based study. Sustainability, 14(23), 16171. https://doi.org/10.3390/su142316171

Khoeroni, R., Suryadi, S., & Gunawan, A. (2022). Implementation of digital leadership in the development digital competence in public services. The Management Journal of Binaniaga, 7(2), 141–156. https://doi.org/10.33062/mjb.v7i2.6

Mardiana, D. (2020). The application of digital leadership of subdistrict head on public service performance with the delegation of regent/mayor authorities as the moderating variable. Airlangga Development Journal, 4(2), 154–164. https://doi.org/10.20473/adj.v4i2.23107

Nuryadin, R., Sobandi, A., & Santoso, B. (2023). Digital Leadership in the Public Sector-Systematic Literature Review: Systematic literature review. Jurnal Ilmu Administrasi: Media Pengembangan Ilmu dan Praktek Administrasi, 20(1), 90–106. https://doi.org/10.31113/jia.v20i1.934

Pariso, P., & Marino, A. (2020). From digital divide to e-government: re-engineering process and bureaucracy in public service delivery. Electronic Government, an International Journal, 16(3), 314–325. https://doi.org/10.1504/eg.2020.108495

Pham, H. Q., & Vu, P. K. (2022). Unravelling the Potential of Digital Servitization in Sustainability-Oriented Organizational Performance—Does Digital Leadership Make It Different? Economies, 10(8), 185. https://doi.org/10.3390/economies10080185

Promsuwan, P., Wichitputchraporn, W., Niyamabha, A., et al. (2019). A Model of digital leadership development for principals of small size schools under the Office of the Basic Education Commission. Asian Political Science Review, 3(2).

Purwanto, A., Purba, J., Bernarto, I., & Sijabat, R. (2023). Investigating the role digital transformation and human resource management on the performance of the universities. International Journal of Data and Network Science, 7(4), 2013–2028. https://doi.org/10.5267/j.ijdns.2023.6.011

Ringson, J., & Matshabaphala, M. J. (2023). Leadership, Service Delivery and Managing Human Capital in the Digital Age in the Public Sector. African Journal of Governance and Development, 12(1), 62–79. https://doi.org/10.36369/2616-9045/2023/v12i1a4

Sagarik, D., Chansukree, P., Cho, W., & Berman, E. (2018). E-government 4.0 in Thailand: The role of central agencies. Information Polity, 23(3), 343–353. https://doi.org/10.3233/ip-180006

Susilawati, D. M., Suryanto, & Windijarto. (2021). Transforming the digital leadership to improve public service performance in the COVID-19 outbreak. Economic Annals-ХХI, 188(3–4), 31–38. https://doi.org/10.21003/ea.v188-04

Ushaka Adie, B., Tate, M., & Valentine, E. (2024). Digital leadership in the public sector: a scoping review and outlook. International Review of Public Administration, 29(1), 42–58. https://doi.org/10.1080/12294659.2024.2323847

Utomo, H. J. N., Irwantoro, I., Wasesa, S., et al. (2023). Investigating The Role of Innovative Work Behavior, Organizational Trust, Perceived Organizational Support: An Empirical Study on SMEs Performance. Journal of Law and Sustainable Development, 11(2), e417–e417. https://doi.org/10.55908/sdgs.v11i2.417

Yunarsih, N., Rahayu, S., Sustiyono, A., Anwar, T., Sri, N., & Purwanto, A. (2020). Develop leadership style model for nurse in Indonesian hospital. Systematic Reviews in Pharmacy, 11(8).23–34

Yusuf, M., Satia, H., Bernardianto, R., et al. (2023). Exploring the role of digital leadership and digital transformation on the performance of the public sector organizations. International Journal of Data and Network Science, 7(4), 1983–1990. https://doi.org/10.5267/j.ijdns.2023.6.014