Performance auditing and public sector management in Brunei Darussalam

Abstract

Purpose -The paper seeks to explore the argument for performance auditing and its place in financial management in the Brunei public sector. Design/methodology/approach -The paper draws on the literature on financial management, the author's own experience teaching public sector financial management in Brunei, and interviews with audit staff in Brunei. Findings -Although performance auditing is envisaged in the legislation, the main thrust of auditing is still on financial and procedural compliance; the paper discusses why this is so and in what circumstances it might change. Practical implications -Examining the experience of performance auditing in Brunei case shows the nature of the contextual factors which underlie the performance-oriented approach which is assumed in the new public management, and the implications for its application outside the western liberal democratic world. Originality/value -The value of the paper lies in clearly delineating the nature of the change which the implementation of performance auditing would mean in Brunei public sector and the implications for non-western countries, particularly oil economies.

Budgetary Mismanagement: A Qualitative Study of the Malaysian Public Sector

“…Based on this theoretical framework, the prevalence of budgeting mismanagement issues in the public sector is caused by various weaknesses (Rahaman, 2009;Zan & Xue, 2011). These weaknesses not only originate from the structural or mechanical failures such as the absence of specific budget law (Zan & Xue, 2011), the lacklustre role of auditing (Al Athmay, 2008;Rahaman, 2009) and the deficiency in incorporating management tools (Hoque, 2008;Kulshreshtha, 2008;Verbeeten, 2011) but also from the behaviour of public officials (Dittenhofer, 2001;Ehrenhard, Muntslag, & Wilderom, 2012;Rahaman, 2009). This explanation may provide initial clues to the question of why budgeting mismanagement issues persistently prevail in the Malaysian public sector despite numerous preventive and proactive initiatives taken to rectify them.…”

“…The questions posed in the focus group discussions and personal interviews are specifically designed to answer all the objectives prescribed above, and are also structured to reflect important themes, i.e. budgetary reform (Ibrahim 2011;McGill, 2011;Zan & Xue 2011); the role of auditing (Al Athmay, 2008;Rahaman, 2009); management instrument (Real, 2008;Vakkuri, 2010;Verbeeten, 2011); resistance to change (Ehrenhard, Munstlag, & Wilderom, 2012;Norhayati & Nabiha, 2009;Rahaman, 2009); and managing change (Oakland & Tanner, 2007;Sayles & Strauss, 1966).…”