Contesting Claims on Measuring Performance in the Public Sector Using Performance Audits: Evidence from the Literature

Abstract

Based on desk study, this article adduces theoretical and empirical evidence to analyze the claims of advocates and critics of performance audit (PA). The paper establishes that the application of PA in some developed countries has led to improvement in aspects of public sector performance albeit sometimes short of the often highlighted effects of economy, efficiency and effectiveness. The article further provides evidence to support the claim that despite its touted contribution to performance, PA could rather lead to anti-innovation, nit-picking, expectations gap, lapdog, headline hunting, unnecessary systems and hollow ritual. The paper questions the quality of reported PA systems in the literature and advocates a PA regime that strikes a delicate balance between compliance and performance.