Blockchain is a distributed ledger technology expected to have significant impacts on the accounting and auditing profession. This study, applicable and timely for both accounting and auditing scholars and practitioners, explores blockchain technology and its main implications for the accounting and auditing profession. The research question addressed in this study is: What are the major themes emerging from academic research and professional reports and websites debating blockchain technology in the accounting and auditing context? A literature review of academic literature and professional reports and websites is performed to identify a taxonomy of emerging themes. The study finds that the most discussed themes in scholarly works and professional sources are governance, transparency and trust issues in the blockchain ecosystem, blockchain‐enabled continuous audits, smart contract applications and the paradigmatic shift in accountants' and auditors' roles. Based on these four themes, practical implications for accountants and auditors on how to approach the blockchain development are provided. Moreover, this study offers suggestions for future research on accounting and auditing in the blockchain era.

Purpose In the context of global new public management reform trends and the associated phenomenon of performance auditing (PA), the purpose of this paper is to explore the rise of performance audit in Australia and examines its focus across audit jurisdictions and the role key stakeholders play in driving its practice. Design/methodology/approach The study adopts a multi-jurisdictional analysis of PA in Australia to explore its scale and focus, drawing on the theoretical tools of Goffman. Documentary analysis and interview methods are employed. Findings Performance audit growth has continued but not always consistently over time and across audit jurisdictions. Despite auditor discourse concerning backstage performance audit intentions being strongly focussed on evaluating programme outcomes, published front stage reports retain a strong control focus. While this appears to reflect Auditors-General (AGs) reluctance to critique government policy, nonetheless there are signs of direct and indirectly recursive relationships emerging between AGs and parliamentarians, the media and the public. Research limitations/implications PA merits renewed researcher attention as it is now an established process but with ongoing variability in focus and stakeholder influence. Social implications As an audit technology now well-embedded in the public sector accountability setting, it offers potential insights into matters of local, state and national importance for parliament and the public, but exhibits variable underlying drivers, agendas and styles of presentation that have the capacity to enhance or detract from the public interest. Originality/value Performance audit emerges as a complex practice deployed as a mask by auditors in managing their relationship with key stakeholders.

In the context of contemporary public sector performance audit practice in Australia, this study provides significant insights into performance auditors’ and auditees’ apparent logics and attitudes to performance audits. Employing a documentary analysis and in‐depth semistructured interviews with senior audit leaders from all Australian Auditor‐General jurisdictions, performance auditors’ and auditees’ attitudes toward performance audits and their intentions, strategies, and responses were explored through the lens of institutional logics. Empirical evidence reveals that performance auditors’ logics have gradually moved toward greater stakeholder engagement with auditees, parliamentarians, and the media, while preserving their performance audit prerogatives. Auditees appear to become more receptive to performance auditors’ engagement strategies and consultation attempts if auditors maintain a collaborative attitude. Both parties occasionally apply bridging and buffering strategies in situations where their logics are not aligned with those of the other stakeholder group. This study discovered that competing logics held by performance auditors and auditees are in some respects drawn closer together, while differences nonetheless co‐exist, although often in an uneasy partnership.