Actorâ€™ Interaction in the Follow-Up on Performance Auditing Issues in Malaysia: Uncovering the Contributing Factors and Constraining Challenges
This paper explores the extent and nature of actorsâ€™ interaction in follow-up on performance auditing issues with the attempt to uncover the contributing factors as well as constraining challenges from the Malaysian public sector audit perspectives. Fifty five (55) semi structured interviews data derived from snowball purposive sampling and governance network theory as underlying theory are employed to analyze the data based on subjective qualitative approach. The overall results indicate that interaction has an impact on key actorsâ€™ involvement in the follow-up practice. The responses gathered from the interviewees demonstrate that involvement of key actors are more important with some other possible factors. Based on the above situation, this paper argued, effective communication and engaging right authority or external actors are important in enhancing the effectiveness of follow-up practice. The findings suggest, audit institution need to make more key actors to involve in order to solve complex audit issues, particularly the regulators such as enforcement agencies. The regulator expects and hope the auditors to share important first-hand information about audit issues as soon as possible. For regulators, early involvement considered more appropriate. Regulators want to secure sufficient evidence so that further investigation and action can be taken so as not to lose important evidence and avoid dealing with outdated issues. Actorsâ€™ involvement by means of interaction are timely and should be enhanced in terms of information sharing and overcoming problem related to actor role and involvement. This is the first study that employed governance network theory to explore the nature and extent of follow-up on performance auditing issues involving various actorsâ€™ interaction in the public sector audit environment.
 McTaggart, D., and O'Flynn, J. (2015). Public sector reform. Australian Journal of Public Administration, 74(1), 13-22.
 Antiroikko, A.V., Bailey, S.J. and Valkama, P. (2011), â€œInnovations in public governance in the Western worldâ€, in Antiroikko, A.V., Bailey, S.J. and Valkama, P. (Eds), Innovations in Public Governance, IOS Press, Amsterdam.
 Williams, A. (2015). A global index of information transparency and accountability. Journal of Comparative Economics, 43(3), 804-824.
 Alwardat, Y.A. (2010). External auditors and clients: an investigation of perceptions of value for money (VfM) audit practices in the UK public sector, Harrow Business School: PhD thesis, University of Westminster.
 Arthur, A., Rydland, L. T., and Amundsen, K. (2012). The User Perspective in Performance Auditing-A Case Study of Norway. American Journal of Evaluation, 33 (1), 44â€“59.
 Justesen, L., and SkÃ¦rbÃ¦k, P. (2010). Performance auditing and the narrating of a new auditee identity. Financial Accountability and Management, 26(3), 325â€“343.
 Van der Knaap, P. (2011). Sense and complexity: Initiatives in responsive performance audits. Evaluation, 17(4), 351-363.
 Loke, C. H., Ismail, S., and Fatima, A. H. (2016). The perception of public sector auditors on performance audit in Malaysia: an exploratory study. Asian Review of Accounting, 24(1).
 Reichborn-kjennerud, K. (2014b). Performance Audit and the Importance of the Public Debate. Evaluation, 20(3), 368â€“385.
 Hui, F. (2012). Government performance auditing demand research based on the neoâ€institutional economics. China Finance Review International, 2(2), 100â€“120.
 Kells, S. (2011). The Seven Deadly Sins of Performance Auditing: Implications for Monitoring Public Audit Institutions. Australian Accounting Review, 21(4), 383â€“396.
 Morin, D. (2008). Auditors general's universe revisited: An exploratory study of the influence they exert on public administration through their value for money audits. Managerial Auditing Journal, 23(7), 697-720.
 Reichborn-kjennerud, K. (2015). Resistance to Control â€” Norwegian Ministries â€™ and Agencies â€™ Reactions to Performance Audit. Public Organization Review, 15, 17â€“32
 Van Loocke, E., and Put, V. (2011). The impact of performance audits: A review of existing evidence. In J. Londsdale, P. Wilkins, and T. Ling (Eds.), and Performance auditing: Contribution to accountability in democratic government. Cheltenham: Edward Elgar.
 Morin, D. (2014). Auditors General â€™ s impact on administrations : a pan-Canadian study ( 2001-2011 ). Managerial Auditing Journal, 29(5), 395â€“426.
 Morin, D. (2016). Democratic Accountability during Performance Audits under Pressure: A Recipe for Institutional Hypocrisy? Financial Accountability and Management, 32(1), 104-124.
 Reichborn-Kjennerud, K. (2014a). Auditee Strategies: An Investigation of Auditeesâ€™ Reactions to the Norwegian State Audit Institutionâ€™s Performance Audits. International Journal of Public Administration, 37, 685â€“694.
 Siddiquee, N. A. (2014). Programme in Malaysia : A Shining Example of Performance Management in the Public Sector ? The Government Transformation Programme in Malaysia : A Shining Example of
 Siddiquee, N. A. (2010). Managing for results: lessons from public management reform in Malaysia. International Journal of Public Sector Management, 23(1), 38â€“53.
 Pettas, N., and Giannikos, I. (2014). Evaluating the delivery performance of public spending programs from an efficiency perspective. Evaluation and program planning, 45, 140-150.
 ISSAI 3000, (2004). â€˜Implementation guidelines for Performance Auditingâ€™, XVIII Congress of the International Congress of Supreme Audit Institutions, INTOSAI, Budapest.
 INTOSAI (2010), How to Increase the Use and Impact of Audit Reports â€“ A Guide for Supreme Audit Institutions, INTOSAI, Vienna, p. 32.
 O'Flynn, J. (2007). From new public management to public value: Paradigmatic change and managerial implications. Australian journal of public administration, 66(3), 353-366.
 Rosa, C. P., Morote, R. P., and Prowle, M. J. (2014). Developing performance audit in Spanish local government: an empirical study of a way forward. Public Money and Management, 34(3), 189-196.
 Gheorghe, S. (2012). Statutory audit and performance audit. Annals-Economy Series, 2, 202- 206.
 INTOSAI Auditing Standards Committee. (2004). Implementation Guidelines for Performance Auditing. Standards and guidelines for performance auditing based on INTOSAIâ€™s auditing standards and practical experience.
 Power, M. (1997). The audit society: Rituals of verification. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
 Alwardat, Y. A., and Benamraoui, A. (2014). Value for Money and Audit Practice: Lessons and Facts from the Literature. Life Science Journal, 11(2), 86-98.
 Siti-Nabiha, A. K., and Salleh, D. (2012). Public Transformation in Malaysia: Improving Local Governance. Public Sector Transformation Processes and Internet Public Procurement: Decision Support Systems: Decision Support Systems, 276.
 Said, J., Alam, M. M., & Khalid, M. A. (2016). Relationship between good governance and integrity system: Empirical study on the public sector of Malaysia. Humanomics, 32(2), 151-171.
 Ahmad, N., Othman, R., Othman, R., and Jusoff, K. (2009). The effectiveness of internal audit in Malaysian public sector. Journal of Modern Accounting and Auditing, 5(9), 53.
 Asare, T. (2009). Internal auditing in the public sector: Promoting good governance and performance improvement. International Journal on Governmental Financial Management, 9(1), 15-28.
 Badara, M. A. S., and Saidin, S. Z. (2013). Impact of the effective internal control system on the internal audit effectiveness at local government level. Journal of Social and Development Sciences, 4(1), 16-23.
 Baharud-din, Z., Shokiyah, A., & Ibrahim, M. S. (2014). Factors that contribute to the effectiveness of internal audit in public sector. International Proceedings of Economics Development and Research, 70, 126.
 Kaur, J., Bahri, A. H. S., & Malaysia, M. A. R. A. (2014). Implementation of Information Technology Governance in the Malaysian Public Sector Practice. In PACIS (p. 119).
 Sabel, C., and Jordan, L. (2015). Doing, Learning, Being: Some Lessons Learned from Malaysiaâ€™s National Transformation Program. Documento de programa sobre Industrias Competitivas e InnovaciÃ³n, Banco Mundial, Washington, DC.
 Said, J., Alam, M. M., and Aziz, M. A. B. A. (2015). Public Accountability System: Empirical Assessment of Public Sector of Malaysia. Asian Journal of Scientific Research, 8(2), 225-236.
 National Audit Department of Malaysia. (2014). Malaysia Public Sector Auditing- At A glance.
 Klijn, E. H., & Koppenjan, J. (2012). Governance network theory: past, present and future. Policy & Politics, 40(4), 587-606.
 SÃ¸rensen, E., and Torfing, J. (2007). Introduction Governance Network Research: Towards a Second Generation. In Theories of democratic network governance (pp. 1-21). Palgrave Macmillan UK.
 Isett, K. R., Mergel, I. A., LeRoux, K., Mischen, P. A., and Rethemeyer, R. K. (2011). Networks in public administration scholarship: Understanding where we are and where we need to go. Journal of Public Administration Research and Theory, 21.57-173.
 Osborne, S. P. (Ed.). (2010). The new public governance?. New York: Routledge
 Kooiman, J. (Ed.). (1993). Modern governance: new government-society interactions. Sage.
 Marsh, D. (1998). The development of the policy network approach. Comparing policy networks, 3-17.
 Rhodes, R. A., and Marsh, D. (1992). New directions in the study of policy networks. European journal of political research, 21(1â€2), 181-205.
 Lecy, J. D., Mergel, I. A., and Schmitz, H. P. (2014). Networks in public administration: current scholarship in review. Public Management Review, 16(5), 643-665.
 Provan, K. G., and Kenis, P. (2008). Modes of network governance: Structure, management, and effectiveness. Journal of public administration research and theory, 18(2), 229-252.
 SÃ¸rensen, E., and Torfing, J. (2016). Metagoverning Collaborative Innovation in Governance Networks. The American Review of Public Administration, 0275074016643181.
 Klijn, E. H., and Koppenjan, J. (2016). The Shift toward Network Governance. Theory and Practice of Public Sector Reform, 158.
 Odia, J. O. (2014). "Performance Auditing and Public Sector Accountability in Nigeria: The Roles of Supreme Audit Institutions (SAIs)." Asian Journal of Management Sciences and Education, 3 (2).
 Barrett, P. (2011). Commentary: Where You Sit Is What You See: The Seven Deadly Sins of Performance Auditing. Implications for Monitoring Public Audit Institutions. Australian Accounting Review, 21(4), 397â€“405.
 Dwiputrianti, S. (2011). Scope of auditing on the quality of content in the Indonesian external public sector auditing reports. International Review of Public Administration, 16(3), 133-149.
 Fernandes, H. (2013). Performance auditing by the Portuguese Court of Auditors. TÃ‰KHNE - Review of Applied Management Studies, 11(1), 41â€“49.
 Hossain, S. (2010). From Project Audit to Performance Audit : Evolution of Performance Auditing in Australia, IX(3), 20â€“47.
 Funnell, W. (2011), â€˜Keeping secrets? Or what government performance auditors might not need to knowâ€™, Critical Perspectives on Accounting, vol. 22, pp. 714â€“721.
 Funnell, W. (2015). Performance Auditing and Adjudicating Political Disputes. Financial Accountability and Management, 31(1), 92-111.
 Funnell, W., and Wade, M. (2012). Negotiating the credibility of performance auditing. Critical Perspectives on Accounting, 23(6), 434â€“450.
 Funnell, W., Wade, M., and Jupe, R. (2016). Stakeholder perceptions of performance audit credibility. Accounting and Business Research, 1-19.
 Kells, S. (2010). A look inside the performance auditing box : Victoria â€™ s new ticketing system tender. Accounting, Accountability and Performance, 16(1 and 2), 85 â€“ 110.
 Bryman, A., and Bell, E. (2011). Business research methods. 3. MalmÃ¶: Liber AB.
 Saunders, M., Lewis, P. and Thornhill, A. (2009), Research Methods for Business Students, Pearson Education, London.
 Wahyuni D. (2012).The Research Design Maze. Understanding Paradigms, Cases, Methods and Methodologies. JAMAR. 10(1). 69-80.
 Flick, U. (2002). Qualitative research-state of the art. Social science information, 41(1), 5-24.
 Parker, L.D. (2003), â€œQualitative research in accounting and management: The emerging agendaâ€. Journal of Accounting and Finance. 2, p. 15-30.
 Chua, W. F. (1986). Radical developments in accounting thought. Accounting review, 601-632.
 Creswell, J.W. (2014). Qualitative Research and Research Project-: Choosing between Five Approaches. I think Publisher.
 Denzin, N. K., and Lincoln, Y. S. (Eds.). (2011). The Sage handbook of qualitative research. Sage.
 Leedy, P. D., and Ormrod, J. E. (2010). Practical research, planning and design, ninth edition. Pearson Education, Inc., publishing.
 Creswell, J. W. (2012). Collecting qualitative data. Educational Research: Planning, Conducting, and Evaluating Quantitative and Qualitative Research. Fourth ed. Boston: Pearson, 204-35.
 Flick, U. (2009). An introduction to qualitative research. Sage.
 Klijn, E. H., Edelenbos, J. and Steijn, B. (2010). The impact of network management on outcomes in governance networks. Public administration, 88(4), 1063-1082.
View Full Article:
How to Cite
LicenseAuthors who publish with this journal agree to the following terms:
- Authors retain copyright and grant the journal right of first publication with the work simultaneously licensed under aÂ Creative Commons Attribution Licensethat allows others to share the work with an acknowledgement of the work''s authorship and initial publication in this journal.
- Authors are able to enter into separate, additional contractual arrangements for the non-exclusive distribution of the journal''s published version of the work (e.g., post it to an institutional repository or publish it in a book), with an acknowledgement of its initial publication in this journal.
- Authors are permitted and encouraged to post their work online (e.g., in institutional repositories or on their website) prior to and during the submission process, as it can lead to productive exchanges, as well as earlier and greater citation of published work (SeeÂ The Effect of Open Access).