Government Internal Audits: The Determinants of Quality Supervisory Review of Audit Documentation

Aikins, Stephen K.

doi:10.1080/01900692.2013.791309

Cited by 9 publications

(7 citation statements)

References 25 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…3.2.4.3 Operational effectiveness. This category allows us to understand the factors that influence operational effectiveness (e.g., Magrane and Malthus, 2010;Alzeban and Gwilliam, 2014;Tackie et al, 2016) and the internal auditors' competency in terms of IA quality (e.g., Aikins, 2013;Nurdiono and Gamayuni, 2018). In particular, the most important factors highlighted in the literature are professional proficiency, tenure, independence, supportiveness and enhancement of the relationship with external auditors.…”

Section: Internal Auditing In the Public Sectormentioning

confidence: 99%

Internal auditing in the public sector: a systematic literature review and future research agenda

Nerantzidis

Pazarskis

Drogalas

et al. 2020

JPBAFM

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

PurposeThis study reviews post-2009 literature on public sector internal auditing (IA) and addresses three interrelated research questions (RQ): How is research on the public sector IA being developed? What are the focus and criticisms of the literature on public sector IA? What is the future of public sector IA research?Design/methodology/approachWe adopt a systematic literature review approach and analyze 78 peer-reviewed journal articles published between 2010 and 2019. We evaluate five criteria to identify the development of public sector IA research (RQ1), namely level of government, academic discipline, number of countries, geographic areas and MSCI country classification. Similarly, we use four criteria to present the focus and criticisms of the literature (RQ2), namely, type of organizational respondent, research instrument, theories and research theme examined. Finally, we use two criteria to propose new directions for future research (RQ3), namely, the directions resulted from RQ1 and RQ2 and the directions highlighted by the 10 most cited studies in the IA literature (i.e. out of the 78 papers identified).FindingsWe find an increase of publications up to 2017, most of which are single country–focused, particularly on emerging markets. Moreover, we note that IA has been studied at all government levels, most often at the local government level. Although we identify multiple research themes examined in the literature, most studies emphasize “governance” and “operational effectiveness” using quantitative analysis, without reference to any theory. By analyzing these key features, we critically interpret the challenges as well as the skepticism that may surface by researchers. Finally, considering implications from this stream of research and analyzing the most influential studies, we recommend new avenues for investigation such as comparative studies among countries and different markets that provide further evidence on the international and regional levels and studies on the effect of cultural, institutional and demographical characteristics in IA.Practical implicationsOur results will help researchers, practitioners and consultants to identify the key issues related with IA.Originality/valueThis study is the first to provide a systematic literature review on public sector IA. Furthermore, it develops insights, critical reflections and avenues for future research in this field.

show abstract

Section: Internal Auditing In the Public Sectormentioning

confidence: 99%

Internal auditing in the public sector: a systematic literature review and future research agenda

Nerantzidis

Pazarskis

Drogalas

et al. 2020

JPBAFM

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Performance reporting delays: a literature review Performance reporting delay at the local government has been studied mostly from a financial auditing perspective (e.g. Payne and Jensen, 2002;Cohen and Leventis, 2013;Aikins, 2013). This paper draws on some of these research to explicate the influence of central-local relations and internal technical characteristics on APR reporting delays in Ghana.…”

Section: The Annual Performance Report (Apr)mentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Prior studies (e.g. Payne and Jensen, 2002;Rich and Trotman, 1997;Aikins, 2013) have recognized the importance of staffing capacity, training and professional competence in auditing. Having an adequate audit staff means ample time can be devoted for thorough reviews, thereby reducing any delays.…”

Section: Municipal Monitoring and Evaluation Of Staff Capacitymentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Having an adequate audit staff means ample time can be devoted for thorough reviews, thereby reducing any delays. Adequate professional training also allows staff to exercise the right judgment and provide justifiable conclusions as far as audit reviews are concerned (Aikins, 2013). Nanni (1984) notes that a high professional experience serves as a form of internal accounting control.…”

Section: Municipal Monitoring and Evaluation Of Staff Capacitymentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Performance reporting delay in local government: a global south view

Kaye-Essien

2020

IJPSM

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

PurposeThe object of this paper is to understand how central–local relations and internal technical characteristics contribute to performance reporting delays at the local level in a Global South context.Design/methodology/approachThe paper develops and tests four propositions using a combination of secondary data analyses and semistructured interviews with 30 local government officials.FindingsThe findings indicate that delays in performance reporting are generally high in pre-election years because leadership commitments at the local level largely shift toward national politics (campaigning for re-election of the president). Additional reporting delays were found to be the result of low financial capacity to maintain appropriate data collection and management systems, lack of highly trained monitoring and evaluation experts at the local level and lack of sanctions for noncompliance.Research limitations/implicationsThe fact that some types of Districts (large municipalities and metro areas with access to large financial resources) were excluded from the analysis induces some bias to the findings. The choice of 30 out of a total 260 local governments limits the analyses to only 12% of views and perceptions of local government reporting delay. Additionally sourcing responses from a few monitoring and evaluation (M&E) personnel out of hundreds of mid- to upper-level employees limited the breath of discussions that could have resulted from a broader study.Practical implicationsThe results of this paper suggest that any attempt at imposing sanctions on late reporting may not be very successful since national party politics, which lie outside the control of municipalities, is one of the main factors that drive reporting delay. Rather than imposing sanctions, government should consider incentivizing the reporting process. On the other hand, since internally generated funds (IGF) and the M&E team are factors that lie within the control of the municipality, any attempt to decrease reporting delay should first focus on improving local revenues and strengthening municipal M&E capacity building.Originality/valueThis paper adds to the existing literature by offering directions for approaching performance reporting delay in two ways. First, it emphasizes central–local relations as an important political determinant of performance reporting delay. Second, it explores reporting delay in Ghana's local governments and therefore provides useful insights from a Global South perspective.

show abstract

“…Given the significance of the GNP sector to the U.S. economy as well as the increasing call for accountability (Garven, Beck, and Parsons 2018;Aikins 2013), it is important to consider the sector's response to monitoring demands. One such response is to invest resources into the IAF (Carcello, Hermanson, and Raghunandan 2005a;Vermeer, Raghunandan, and Forgione 2006).…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

An Examination of Internal Audit Function Size: Evidence from U.S. Government and Nonprofit Sectors

Garven

Scarlata

2020

Current Issues in Auditing

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

We examine factors associated with internal audit function (IAF) size in U.S. government and nonprofit (GNP) entities. Our results, based on responses from 345 GNP participants, indicate several factors related to organizational characteristics, IAF characteristics, IAF responsibilities, and information technology (IT) tools and audit activities that are associated with IAF size. Specifically, we find IAF size is positively associated with: (1) mandated IAFs, (2) activity related to audits of general IT risks, (3) use of a rotational staffing model, (4) degree of fraud detection responsibility, (5) conduct of performance audits, (6) extent of sophisticated audit technologies, (7) organization size, (8) opportunity to receive a bonus, and (9) age of the IAF. IAF size is negatively related to (1) extent of access to records and property appropriate for the performance of audits, (2) nonprofit organizations, (3) healthcare institutions, and (4) educational institutions. Additional analysis reveals variation between large and small organizations.

show abstract

Government Internal Audits: The Determinants of Quality Supervisory Review of Audit Documentation

Cited by 9 publications

References 25 publications

Internal auditing in the public sector: a systematic literature review and future research agenda

Internal auditing in the public sector: a systematic literature review and future research agenda

Performance reporting delay in local government: a global south view

An Examination of Internal Audit Function Size: Evidence from U.S. Government and Nonprofit Sectors

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About