PERFORMING AUDITORS?: ASSESSING AND REPORTING THE PERFORMANCE OF NATIONAL AUDIT OFFICES—A THREE‐COUNTRY COMPARISON

Abstract

Abstract: This article reviews self‐assessment and reporting strategies of national audit offices in the United Kingdom, Sweden and Australia and develops a framework for the reporting of their performance. There is a common emphasis in the audit office objectives on serving their primary client and on improving the performance of the public sector, but there are differences in emphasis regarding the clients being served. The differing approaches to assessing and reporting their own performance can in part be attributed to differences between their mandates, objectives and identification of the clients being served. The audit offices have developed complementary internal quality assurance processes which generate additional performance information and have been subject to external peer reviews which assess and report on their performance. A framework is developed which clarifies the relationship between audit office objectives and the measures used. It involves a hierarchy of performance parameters, including effectiveness, efficiency and workload and gives priority to meeting the needs of the primary client. The study has revealed that significant progress is being made in particular areas of assessing and reporting audit office performance and this should encourage audit offices to share their experiences internationally to enhance their own accountability to their primary clients and the communities they serve.

Cite this work

No public copy is stored for this record, so only the metadata is cited.

Stored only when both papers are in the corpus — 12 citations exist upstream.

Papers that cite the same references — the relational fallback while embeddings are still backfilling.