U.K. Auditors' Attitudes to Effectiveness Auditing

Performance Audit Scope and the Independence of the Australian Commonwealth Auditor‐General

“…Audits of operational and administrative effectiveness are seen by many as close to intrusion into policy-related areas. The possibility has always been a Efficiency III Recommendations Accepted vexatious issue in Australia and overseas (Pendlebury and Schreim, 1990;and Hamburger, 1989). The spectre of auditors pronouncing judgments on the outcomes of politically sensitive programs is at the heart of much of the opposition to further extension of the performance auditing function.…”

“…But the desirability and practicality of effectiveness audits in the public sector remains a contentious issue (Pendlebury and Schreim, 1991). The inherent ambiguity in policy objectives, the qualitative nature of outputs for many public sector organisations and the subjective judgments caused by these factors cast doubt on the practicality of implementing effectiveness audits in any objective fashion (Parker, 1992;Guthrie, 1992;and Pendlebury and Schreim, 1990). A second concern is the political acceptability of accounting and auditing where trained professionals usurp judgments in politically sensitive areas such as the degree of achievement of program or policy goals.…”

VfM audit and the UK public sector: A critical review of the VfM reports

“…These researchers point to the continuous change in the shape of the VfM audit and attribute this to the influence of audit bodies, the introduction of new VfM measures, and other social factors. Among the key recommendations put forward to improve the VfM audit practice is for the audit teams involved in the VfM audit process to include people not only from auditing backgrounds but also from other disciplines (Pendlebury & Shreim, 1990, 1991. However, this idea was not implemented in the UK VfM audit process in the last century.…”

“…The value for money (VfM) audit in the United Kingdom has received the attention of many scholars who have explored the area from different perspectives (e.g., Alwardat et al, 2015;Lapsley & Pong, 2000;Pendlebury & Shreim, 1990, 1991Prowley et al, 2016;Sharma, 2007). These researchers point to the continuous change in the shape of the VfM audit and attribute this to the influence of audit bodies, the introduction of new VfM measures, and other social factors.…”

The National Audit Office and the Audit Commission: Co-Operation in Areas Where Their VFM Responsibilities Interface

“…Much of the debate which has taken place has focused on the characteristics of VFM or performance audit (Hatherly and Parker, 1988;Guthrie and Parker, 1991;and Glynn, 1985). Pendlebury andShreim (1990 and studied auditors' and auditees' attitudes to effectiveness auditing. Grimwood and Tomkins (1986), Anand (1988) and McSweeney (1988) examined the auditors' approahes to VFM auditing.…”