WOP: PDAM Tirta Raharja & PDAM Tirta Kepri

WOP: PDAM Tirta Raharja & PDAM Tirta Kepri

Kristin HeskeKristin Heske   February 09, 2016  

wop asia

PDAM Tirta Raharja was invited by PERPAMSI to participate in the evaluation meeting for the WOP program that took place in July 2012 in Batam. The purpose of this meeting was to evaluate the WOPs developed during the first WOP program of the association, as well as to showcase some of the good results to prospective PDAMs. For that reason, prospective mentor utilities were invited to Batam to present their company profile highlighting their set of best practices.. Prospective recipient PDAMs were also invited to participate if they were interested in participating in such a program. At that point Tirta Raharja and Tirta Kepri had never collaborated officially together. The Director of Tirta Kepri already knew that Tirta Rahaja was well known in Indonesia for their advanced IT systems. From the company profile presentation Tirta Kepri became interested in the NRW reduction practices that Tirta Raharja had developed. At the end of this meeting Tirta Kepri send a request to PEPAMSI to partner with the utility of Tirta Raharja. The director of Tanjung Pinang mentions that he had been working together in the past with West Javanese people and he had enjoyed the cooperation, as they are known for being honest people.  Tirta Raharja was neither familiar with the operations of Tirta Kepri, nor its management, but decided to accept the match proposed by PERPAMSI.


Was the code of conduct followed?
Don't know link
Did the operators sign a formal partnership agreement?
Mentor motivations
  • New opportunities/challenges for employees
  • Other
WOPs facilitator


PDAM Tirta Kepri - Recipient


Other supporting organizations


  • Non Revenue Water (NRW) management
  • Other

Please specify other theme(s)
Non Revenue Water (NRW) management & Improvement of IT services

In the Memorandum of Agreement (MoA) both utilities agreed to develop two programs, one on NRW reduction and one on the development of the information technology systems of Tirta Kepri.

This WOP was focused therefore on two different improvement tracks:

1. NRW reduction: set up of one DMA (pilot) for NRW reduction
a. Identify potential pilot areas;
b. Calculate water balance;
c. Meter all households in DMA;
d. Introduce pro-active leakage detection programs (at night).

2. IT system: Improvement of IT services
a. Billing system;
b. Payment point (developed only after the WOP);
c. Billing efficiency: improve meter reading data accuracy.


What types of activities were carried out to help develop operator capacity?
  • Joint planning or work
  • On the job training
  • Site visits
  • Other

Describe WOPs activities
The diagnostic visit was developed in Tanjung Pinang and it was the first time that the management of both utilities sat together. The management of Tirta Raharja (Technical Director, Legal Manager and General Director) travelled to Tanjung Pinang to assess the infrastructure of the utility and the needs initially indicated by Tirta Kepri and to decide on a work plan for the WOP. The visit was assisted by staff from PERPAMSI.

For the IT improvement track, the two IT managers exchanged information about what the ideal work plan would look like and what the possibilities of the recipient utility were. Based on that, they developed jointly a new work plan.

The relationship among the staff of both utilities has improved during the development of the WOP. After the visits and exchanges of information, the communication among operational staff increased and it was conducted in both formal and, increasingly, informal ways (mainly on phone conversations).


Describe the overall results
There are mixed interpretations of the results of this WOP. According to the mentee organization they consider they have, in spite of some delays, achieved major improvements that reflect in an improved position in the national benchmarking exercise (from poor to less healthy performance) due to the knowledge acquired and developed during the WOP. From Tirta Raharja the evaluations are somewhat different. They believe that Tirta Kepri was passive and not always willing to cooperate with them. In terms of the IT improvement track, the mentor believes that the actual implementation did not follow the instructions as proposed by them, instructions that had proven to work elsewhere (i.e. Tirta Raharja). They also point out to the resistance of Tirta Kepri's management to introduce changes or the willingness to allocate financial resources to the pilots. For these reasons they conclude that the knowledge transfer exercise was not very successful. The different perspectives on success and evaluation deem a general consensus on evaluation difficult.

Which factors impeded the success of your WOP?
  • Lack of financing for WOPs
  • Lack of follow up financing