Abstract

Performance audit is widespread but contested. The “audit society” proposition holds that audits are rituals producing comfort, whereas the “mandatory audit” proposition in public policy presumes that audits have positive impacts. Common to both propositions is the lack of empirical evidence of audit impact. This article analyzes survey data of the auditees’ tendency to make changes as a consequence of Supreme Audit Institutions’ performance audits. Civil servants who had experienced performance audits responded that ministries and agencies tend to make changes, but instrumental, institutional, and political factors have an effect on the institution’s propensity to make changes.

Full Text
Published version (Free)

Talk to us

Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have

Schedule a call