Cristin-prosjekt-ID: 303729
Sist endret: 18. november 2019, 16:04

Cristin-prosjekt-ID: 303729
Sist endret: 18. november 2019, 16:04
Prosjekt

Forvaltningsrevisjonens organisering og virkninger i de nordiske land: En komparativ studie

prosjektleder

Åge Johnsen
ved Handelshøyskolen ved OsloMet - storbyuniversitetet

prosjekteier / koordinerende forskningsansvarlig enhet

  • Handelshøyskolen ved OsloMet - storbyuniversitetet

Finansiering

  • TotalbudsjettNOK 3.771.000
  • Egen institusjon
    Prosjektkode: 45510
  • NOS-HS (Nordisk samarbeidsnemnd for humanistisk og samfunnsvitenskapelig forskning)
    Prosjektkode: 219574

Klassifisering

Vitenskapsdisipliner

Statsvitenskap og organisasjonsteori

Emneord

Profesjon • Offentlig revisjon • Forvaltningsrevisjon • Organisasjonsutforming

Kategorier

Prosjektkategori

  • Anvendt forskning

Kontaktinformasjon

Telefon
48106940
Sted
Åge Johnsen

Tidsramme

Avsluttet
Start: 5. september 2008 Slutt: 30. juni 2017

Beskrivelse Beskrivelse

Tittel

Forvaltningsrevisjonens organisering og virkninger i de nordiske land: En komparativ studie

Sammendrag

The modern welfare state is governed by a multitude of structures, processes and tools. The Nordic welfare states are in many respects successful, for instance in balancing economic growth, social equality and inclusion, and innovation and flexibility. However, the relatively high-performing governmental systems are subject to perceived and real problems for many actors in the political and administrative systems. One claim is that many former and ongoing reforms in the public sector have led to a disintegrated governance system. Policy tools that hence are used for informing policy makers, politicians and the society at large include public sector audit and evaluation. These tools are important for informing, challenging and legitimating the claims and knowledge that different actors use in policy making. For example, media systematically use performance and audit information in their monitoring of politics and policies. This project studies how national audit institutions design their organisations in order to better fit different demands when the accounting and audit profession poses new solutions and challenges, i.e. private auditors compete for public sector audits and the international audit standards may be open for different national adaptations. In addition to study how the national audit institutions re-design their formal and informal structures, this project also studies how the performance audits that the national audit institutions conduct for the legislators impact on different users' perception of the audit and usage of the audit. How the national audit institutions adapt to changing environments and how the audits are perceived and influence actors and policy making is important in modern democratic welfare states.

Vitenskapelig sammendrag

State audit have a long tradition in the Nordic countries. Big welfare states and a corporative model of organising society have prompted an important role for public sector control functions. Different from the Anglo-Saxon tradition the state audit have however not always been organised in the form of an independent national audit office (NAO). Sweden, for instance had two national audit offices until 2003, one controlled by the government and the other by the parliament. Recently however, all Nordic countries have established independent national audit offices influenced by the Anglo-Saxon model.

The NAO:s of the Nordic countries nonetheless show some interesting organisational differences between themselves. As an example, the office of the Rigsrevisor (chief audit officer) is in Denmark a lifetime appointment occupied by one person. In Sweden, there are three chief audit officers appointed for a seven-year term that cannot be renewed or extended. All in all, the NAOs in the Nordic countries show substantial variation within the Anglo-Saxon model of state audit. But do these organisational differences matter?

The quality of an audit function is often described in terms of independence and competence. The organisation of a NAO could affect its independence in at least four ways. First, there is the structural independence. Who hires and fires the auditor? To whom does the NAO report? And who initiates an audit? Second, there is the financial independence. How big is the NAO staff? What is the size of its budget? Who decides the budget? And are some or all money earmarked for different audits or other objectives? Third, there is the investigative independence. Is the NAO free to perform the audit in the way it seem suitable? Is it allowed access to the records and interview the people it want? Fourth and finally, does the NAO have the independence to report?

They way the NAO is organised could also affect the competence of the NAO in several ways. First, the organising of the NAO affects the human capital within the organisation. What is the educational level of the people employed at the NAO? What types of educational background do the auditors have (i.e., what subjects did they study at school/university)? Is the state audit staff required, or voluntary seek, to be authorised? Second, the organising of the NAO affects its structural capital. Do the NAOs comply with some form of standard of performance (e.g. the IPSASs)? Is there some form of quality control? Do the NAOs have continuous education requirements?

The first objective of this study is to outline the organisational differences between the NAOs in Denmark, Finland, Norway and Sweden. Auditing is however an essentially obscure activity. This makes audit quality difficult to gauge and put a question mark after the importance the way an NAO is organised. Instead, this obscurity highlights the importance of the perception of the audit. If the users of the audit do not trust the auditor, the organisational aspects of the audit make little difference. Hence, the second objective of this study is to analyse the perception of the NAOs in terms of independence and competence.

Metode

Comparative case study; data collection by document studies, semi-structured and interviews and surveys; data analyses include factor analysis and cross country comparisons.

Tittel

The organisational design of the national audit institutions and the influence of performance audits on public administration and policy making: A Nordic comparative study

Sammendrag

The modern welfare state is governed by a multitude of structures, processes and tools. The Nordic welfare states are in many respects successful, for instance in balancing economic growth, social equality and inclusion, and innovation and flexibility. However, the relatively high-performing governmental systems are subject to perceived and real problems for many actors in the political and administrative systems. One claim is that many former and ongoing reforms in the public sector have led to a disintegrated governance system. Policy tools that hence are used for informing policy makers, politicians and the society at large include public sector audit and evaluation. These tools are important for informing, challenging and legitimating the claims and knowledge that different actors use in policy making. For example, media systematically use performance and audit information in their monitoring of politics and policies. This project studies how national audit institutions design their organisations in order to better fit different demands when the accounting and audit profession poses new solutions and challenges, i.e. private auditors compete for public sector audits and the international audit standards may be open for different national adaptations. In addition to study how the national audit institutions re-design their formal and informal structures, this project also studies how the performance audits that the national audit institutions conduct for the legislators impact on different users' perception of the audit and usage of the audit. How the national audit institutions adapt to changing environments and how the audits are perceived and influence actors and policy making is important in modern democratic welfare states.

Vitenskapelig sammendrag

State audit have a long tradition in the Nordic countries. Big welfare states and a corporative model of organising society have prompted an important role for public sector control functions. Different from the Anglo-Saxon tradition the state audit have however not always been organised in the form of an independent national audit office (NAO). Sweden, for instance had two national audit offices until 2003, one controlled by the government and the other by the parliament. Recently however, all Nordic countries have established independent national audit offices influenced by the Anglo-Saxon model. The NAO:s of the Nordic countries nonetheless show some interesting organisational differences between themselves. As an example, the office of the Rigsrevisor (chief audit officer) is in Denmark a lifetime appointment occupied by one person. In Sweden, there are three chief audit officers appointed for a seven-year term that cannot be renewed or extended. All in all, the NAOs in the Nordic countries show substantial variation within the Anglo-Saxon model of state audit. But do these organisational differences matter? The quality of an audit function is often described in terms of independence and competence. The organisation of a NAO could affect its independence in at least four ways. First, there is the structural independence. Who hires and fires the auditor? To whom does the NAO report? And who initiates an audit? Second, there is the financial independence. How big is the NAO staff? What is the size of its budget? Who decides the budget? And are some or all money earmarked for different audits or other objectives? Third, there is the investigative independence. Is the NAO free to perform the audit in the way it seem suitable? Is it allowed access to the records and interview the people it want? Fourth and finally, does the NAO have the independence to report? They way the NAO is organised could also affect the competence of the NAO in several ways. First, the organising of the NAO affects the human capital within the organisation. What is the educational level of the people employed at the NAO? What types of educational background do the auditors have (i.e., what subjects did they study at school/university)? Is the state audit staff required, or voluntary seek, to be authorised? Second, the organising of the NAO affects its structural capital. Do the NAOs comply with some form of standard of performance (e.g. the IPSASs)? Is there some form of quality control? Do the NAOs have continuous education requirements? The first objective of this study is to outline the organisational differences between the NAOs in Denmark, Finland, Norway and Sweden. Auditing is however an essentially obscure activity. This makes audit quality difficult to gauge and put a question mark after the importance the way an NAO is organised. Instead, this obscurity highlights the importance of the perception of the audit. If the users of the audit do not trust the auditor, the organisational aspects of the audit make little difference. Hence, the second objective of this study is to analyse the perception of the NAOs in terms of independence and competence.

Metode

Comparative case study; data collection by document studies, semi-structured and interviews and surveys; data analyses include factor analysis and cross country comparisons.

prosjektdeltakere

prosjektleder
Aktiv cristin-person

Åge Johnsen

  • Tilknyttet:
    Prosjektleder
    ved Handelshøyskolen ved OsloMet - storbyuniversitetet

Taro Külli

  • Tilknyttet:
    Prosjektdeltaker
    ved Tallinna Tehnikaülikool
  • Tilknyttet:
    Prosjektdeltaker
    ved Estland

Kristin Reichborn-Kjennerud

  • Tilknyttet:
    Prosjektdeltaker
    ved Handelshøyskolen ved OsloMet - storbyuniversitetet

Jarmo Vakkuri

  • Tilknyttet:
    Prosjektdeltaker
    ved Tampereen yliopisto / Tammerfors universitet

Kim Klarskov Jeppesen

  • Tilknyttet:
    Prosjektdeltaker
    ved Copenhagen Business School - Handelshøjskolen
1 - 5 av 7 | Neste | Siste »

Resultater Resultater

Sais Work Against Corruption In Scandinavian, South-European And African Countries: An Institutional Analysis.

Reichborn-Kjennerud, Kristin; Gonzales-Diaz, Beleb; Enrico, Bracci; Carrington, Thomas; Hathaway, James Carl; Jeppesen, Kim Klarskov; Steccolini, Ileana. 2019, The British Accounting Review. UdO, NLA, SU, CBS, OSLOMET, UoE, UNIFEVitenskapelig artikkel

Public sector audit in contemporary society: A short review and introduction.

Johnsen, Åge. 2019, Financial Accountability and Management. OSLOMETVitenskapelig artikkel

Supreme audit institutions in a high-impact context: A comparative analysis of performance audit in four Nordic countries.

Johnsen, Åge; Reichborn-Kjennerud, Kristin; Carrington, Thomas; Jeppesen, Kim Klarskov; Taro, Külli; Vakkuri, Jarmo. 2019, Financial Accountability and Management. SU, CBS, TY, OSLOMET, TALTECHVitenskapelig artikkel

Impacts of Supreme Audit institutions' performance audits on public administration: A comparative analysis of Denmark, Estonia, Finland, Norway and Sweden.

Johnsen, Åge. 2017, Seminar for internal auditors in the ministries, and the Department of Political Science. OSLOMETFaglig foredrag

Civil servants’ assessment of Supreme Audit Institutions’ legitimacy: A comparison of the Nordic countries and Estonia.

Johnsen, Åge; Reichborn-Kjennerud, Kristin; Carrington, Thomas; Jeppesen, Kim Klarskov; Taro, Külli; Vakkuri, Jarmo. 2016, The New Public Sector Seminar ‘Transparency and Trust in Public Services’. SU, CBS, TY, OSLOMET, TALTECHVitenskapelig foredrag
1 - 5 av 43 | Neste | Siste »