Summary: This paper uses both role theory and audit expectations gap theory to critically evaluate the ability of Value for Money (VfM) audit procedures to improve performance in UK public sector organisations. The paper reports on an empirical study of seventeen auditors and twenty two representatives of VfM client organisations. Specifically, the study has the following objectives; to examine auditors" and clients" expectations and perceptions about the ability of the VfM audit to improve public sector organisations" performance; to examine, from both auditors" and clients" perspectives, the impact of the interplay of personal (the VfM auditors" competence relevance of skills, experience and knowledge of the public bodies" activities), interpersonal (task interdependence between the external VfM auditors and the clients) and external factors (the ambiguity of the VfM audit process) on the VfM audit performance; and to identify the nature of potential role conflicts in the VfM audit environment along with the causes and consequences of such potential conflicts.The results show that the VfM audit was perceived as an important potential means with which to improve institutional performance in the public sector, but had been poorly implemented in the audited bodies. While the majority of the VfM auditors interviewed took an extremely positive view of their own achievements in terms of improving public institutions" performances and delivering VfM services, the majority of the clients that we interviewed were not convinced of their auditors" competence to carry out a VfM audit effectively, and to provide them with valuable recommendations.Our results show that differences in expectations and perceptions of role between the external VfM auditors and the auditees give rise to significant conflict. Three types of role conflict