چالش‌های پیش‌روی الزامی‌شدن حسابرسی عملکرد در دستگاه‌های دولتی ایران

نوع مقاله: مقاله پژوهشی

نویسنده

استادیار حسابداری دانشگاه ارومیه

چکیده

مقدمه: سهم بزرگی از ارزیابی عملکرد و ارائه راهکار و پیشنهادها برای حل مشکلات دستگاه‌های دولتی به‌وسیله حسابرسی عملکرد انجام‌پذیر است. هم‌چنین، انجام این نوع حسابرسی در برنامه 5 ساله پنجم توسعه الزامی شده است. از این رو، بررسی چالش‌های پیش‌روی الزامی‌شدن حسابرسی عملکرد در دستگاه‌های دولتی ایران از اهمیت بالایی برخوردار است.
روش پژوهش: پژوهش حاضر از نظر هدف کاربردی و از نظر نوع پیمایشی است که در آن دیدگاه چهار گروه مربوط شامل استادان دانشگاه، حسابرسان سازمان حسابرسی، حسابرسان دیوان محاسبات و مدیران و حسابرسان دستگاه‌های دولتی در استان‌های تهران و البرز از طریق پرسش‌نامه جمع‌آوری و بررسی شده است. هم‌چنین، دیدگاه آن‌ها با یکدیگر مورد مقایسه قرار گرفته است. برای این منظور با بکارگیری نرم‌افزار SPSS نسخه 18 از آزمون خی‌دو، تحلیل واریانس یک‌طرفه و آزمون فریدمن استفاده شده است.
یافته‌ها: نتایج پژوهش نشان می‌دهد که بین گروه‌های آزمودنی درباره با اهمیت‌ترین چالش توافق وجود ندارد اما با در نظر گرفتن مجموع امتیازات بر اساس دیدگاه آنان «استفاده نکردن از مبنای تعهدی در حسابداری دستگاه‌های دولتی» با اهمیت‌ترین چالش تلقی می‌شود. در زمینه کم اهمیت‌ترین چالش، توافق نسبی وجود دارد؛ به طوری که بیشتر گروه‌ها «نداشتن استقلال فکری و رفتاری حسابرسان عملکرد» را کم اهمیت‌ترین چالش در اجرای حسابرسی عملکرد می‌دانند و بر اساس مجموع امتیازات نیز «نداشتن استقلال فکری و رفتاری حسابرسان عملکرد» کم اهمیت‌ترین چالش از نظر آزمودنی‌ها است.
نتیجه‌گیری: مهم‌ترین چالش‌های پیش‌روی حسابرسی عملکرد در دستگاه‌های دولتی ایران استفاده‌نکردن از مبنای تعهدی، کافی‌نبودن قوانین و مقررات در این حوزه، اصرار مدیران دولتی بر پای‌بندی به روش‌های سنتی، نظام بودجه‌ریزی نامناسب، تضاد اولویت‌ها و ارزش‌ها بین قانون‌گذاران و مجریان امور، نبود فرهنگ پاسخ‌خواهی عمومی، کمبود نیروی متخصص، نبود معیار و استاندارد مناسب برای حسابرسی عملکرد و وجودنداشتن تشکل‌های حرفه‌ای خصوصی قدرتمند و تأثیرگذار است.

کلیدواژه‌ها


عنوان مقاله [English]

The Challenges beyond the Obligation of Performance Audit in the Government Agencies of Iran

نویسنده [English]

  • M. Imani Barandagh
Assistant Professor of Accountiong, Urmia University
چکیده [English]

Introduction: A great amount of evaluating performance and offering suggestions and solution to solve the problem of the government agencies is possible through performance audit. Moreover, implementing this type of auditing has been obliged in the fifth five-year plan of development. Therefore, investigating the challenges beyond the obligation of performance audit in the government agencies of Iran has a great significance.
Method: The present research is an applied descriptive survey in which the viewpoints of four groups including university professors, the auditors of the Audit Organization, the auditors of the Supreme Court of Audit, and the managers and auditors of the government agencies in Tehran and Alborz provinces have been collected by questionnaire. Hence, the data of the research have been analyzed by SPSS Software Version 18, Chi-squared Test, One-Way Analysis of Variance, and Friedman Test.   
Results: The Results of the research indicate that there is no agreement among the tested groups on the most important challenge, but regarding the sum of the scores based on their viewpoints, “not using accrual basis of accounting in the government agencies” has been considered as the most important challenge. In the case of the least important challenge, there is a relative agreement in such a way that most groups consider “the lack of mental and behavioral independency of the performance auditors” as the least important challenge in implementing the performance audit, and according to the sum of the scores, “the lack of mental and behavioral independency of the performance auditors” is the least important challenge from the viewpoint of the subjects.   
Conclusion: The most important challenges beyond the performance audit in the government agencies of Iran are not using the accrual basis, the inadequacy of rules and regulations in this field, the governmental managers' insistence on adhering to the traditional methods, inappropriate budgeting system, the conflicts of priorities and values between legislators and executives, the lack of public response-claiming culture, the shortage of expert force, the lack of appropriate criteria and standard for performance audit, and the non-existence of powerful and influential private and professional formations.

کلیدواژه‌ها [English]

  • Audit
  • Government Agencies
  • Performance Audit
1      Nokhbeh Fallah, A. (2005). “Investigating the Obstacles in Implementing the Audit of Management Performance in the National Petrochemical Company and Its Subsidiaries from the Viewpoint of the Company's Managers”, Journal of Audit Science, Vol. 4, Nos. 17 and 18, pp. 79-84. [In Persian]

2      Keshavarzi, M.; Valipour, H.; and A. Jamali (2014). “The Feasibility of Implementing Performance-Based Budgeting in the Shiraz University of Medical Sciences”, Journal of Health Accounting, Vol. 7, No. 1, pp. 61-83. [In Persian]

3      Saffar, M. (1997). Operational Audit, Efficiency, Effectiveness, Economy, the Report of Operational Audit Committee and American Institute of Certified Public Accountants, Issue 112, 1st Edition, Tehran:Audit Organization. [In Persian]

4      Dittenhofer, M. (2001). “Performance Auditing in Governments”, Managerial Auditing Journal, Vol. 16, No. 8, pp. 438-442.

5      Mohammadi, J. (2012). “The Quantitative Assessments of the Qualitative Objectives”, The Analytical Weekly Newspaper of the Ministry of Economic Affairs and Finance, Vol. 11, No. 397, pp. 23-24. [17 June 2012] [In Persian]

6      Wang, G. Y. (2004). Accountability and Management Audit, 1st Edition, Beijing: China Modern Economic Publishing House.

7      Ghadimpour, J. and A. Tarighi (2009). “Operational Budgeting and Its Relationship with Operational Audit”, Journal of Audit Science, Vol. 28, No. 35, pp. 59-68.

8      Weets, K. (2008). “How Effective are Performance Audits? A Multiple Case Study Within the Local Audit Office of Rotterdam”, 5th International Conference on Accounting, Auditing and Management in Public Sector Reforms, Amsterdam, 3 to 5 September.

9      Lapsley, I. and C. K. M. Pong (2000). “Modernization Versus Problematization: Value‐for-Money Audit in Public Services”, The European Accounting Review, Vol. 9, No. 4, pp. 541-567.

10  Farzaneh, H. (2007). “Investigating the Executive Obstacles of Operational Audit in the Government Authorities from the Viewpoint of Managers and Experts of the Supreme Audit Court of Iran”, Hesabras, No. 24, pp. 28-42

11  Nurul Athirah, A. (2010). “The Impact of Performance Audit: The New Zealand Experience”, M. A. Thesis of Commerce and Administration in Accounting, Victoria University of Wellington, Available at: http://resea rcharchive.vuw.ac.nz/handle/10063/1376. [Online] [31 May 2015].

12  Mohammadi, J. (2014). “The Effective Factors on the Quality Improvement of the Performance Audit Reporting”, Hesabras, No. 71, pp. 110-116. [In Persian]

13  McCrae, M. and H. Vada (1997). “Performance Audit Scope and the Independence of the Australian Commonwealth Auditor-General”, Journal of Financial Accountability and Management, Vol. 13, No. 3, pp. 203-223.

14  Funnel, W. and K. Cooper (1998). Public Sector Accounting and Accountability in Australia, 2nd Edition, Sydney: UNSW Publications.

15  Guthrie, J. E. and L. D. Parker (1999). “A Quarter of a Century of Performance Auditing in the Australian Federal Public Sector: A Malleable Masque”, Abacus, Vol. 35, No. 3, pp. 302-332.

16  Waring, C. and S. Morgan (2007). Performance Accountability and Combating Corruption, 1st Edition, Washington DC: The World Bank, Available at: http://siteresources. worldbank.org/PSGLP/Resources/PerformanceAccountabilityandCombatinCorruption.pdf. [Online] [31 May 2015].

17  Mackevicius, J. (2001). Auditing: Theory, Practice, Future (Auditas: Teorija, Praktika, Perspektyvos), 1st Edition, Vilnius: Lietuvos Mokslas.

18  Puskorius, S. (2004). Performance Audit, 1st Edition, Vilnius: MRU.

19  Lakis, V. (2007). Auditing System: Problems and Development. (Audito Sistema: Raida ir Problemos, 1st Edition, Vilnius: Vilniaus Universiteto leidykla.

20  Pollitt, Ch.; Girre, X.; Lonsdale, J.; Mul, R.; Summa, H.; and M. Waerness (1999). Performance Audit and Public Management in Five Countries and Public Management Reform: A Comparative Analysis, Oxford: Oxford University Publications.

21  Pollitt, C. and H. Summa (1997). “Performance Audit and Public Management Reform”, University of Vermont, Available at: http://wenku. baidu.com/view/929994d3240c844769 eaeef8.html. [Online] [31 May 2015].

22  Bani Fatemeh Kashi, M. (2003). “Familiarity with Some Audit Concepts”, Hesabras, No. 21, pp. 64-67. [In Persian]

23  Jones, R. and M. Pendlebury (2000). Public Sector Accounting, 6th Edition, London: Pearson Education Ltd.

24  Vallance, S. J. (2000). “The Influence of Culture Upon Administrative Practice in Singapore, Thailand and the Philippines with Particular Reference to Performance Appraisal and Performance Auditing”, Ph. D. Thesis, Department of Government and Public Administration, Faculty of Arts, University of Sydney, Available at: https://books.google.com/books? id=l6oEU80PWwsC&printsec=frontcover. [Online] [31 May 2015].

25  Schwandt, T. A. (2008). Fundamental Issues in Evaluation: The Relevance of Practical Knowledge Traditions to Evaluation Practice, 1st Edition, New York: Guildford Publications.

26  Hurteau, M.; Houle, S.; and S. Mongiat (2009). “How Legitimate and Justified are Judgments in Program Evaluation?”, Evaluation, Vol. 15, No. 3, pp. 307-319.

27  Scriven, M. (1980). The Logic of Evaluation, 1st Edition, Inverness, CA: Edgepress.

28  Rahimian, N. (2011). “Operational Audit or Performance Audit”, Hesabras, No. 52, pp. 66-73. [In Persian]

29  Fachi, H. (2005). “A Review of the Characteristics and Structure of the Performance Audit Reports”, Journal of Audit Science, Vol. 5, No. 15, pp. 14-26. [In Persian]

30  Kasiri, H. (1996). “An Attitude toward Performance Audit of Management in Ireland, and Its Relationship with Its Cotrol System”, Proceedings of Hesabras, No. 4, pp. 31-59. [In Persian]

31  Nazaripoor, M. and M. Abdi (2011). “Value Creation through Develpoing Interaction between Operational Audit and Value Engineering”, The National Conference of New Ideas in Accounting and Auditing, February 28th and 29th, Islamic Azad University, Khorasgan Branch. [In Persian]

32  Sayyari, H. (2004). “Investigating the Evaluation of the Role of Operational Audit in Managers' Decision-Making Improvement of National Iranian Gas Company and Its Subsidiaries”, M. A. Thesis in Accounting, Islamic Azad University, Central Tehran Branch. [In Persian]

33  Mohaymeni, M. and M. Abdollahpour (Translators) (2002). A Comprehensive Guide for Operational Audit, 3ed Edition, Issue. 149, Tehran:Audit Organization. [In Persian]

34  AGA CPAG Research Series (2006). “Challenges in Performance Auditing: How a State Auditor with Intriguing New Performance Auditing Authority is Meeting Them”, Report No. 5, Available at: https://www.agacgfm .org/AGA/ResearchPubli cations/Docu ments/CPResearchNo5perf.pdf. [Online] [31 May 2015].

35  Ferdousi, N. (2012). “Challenges of Performance Audit in the Implementation Phase: Bangladesh Perspective”, M. A. Thesis in Public Policy and Governance Program, Department of General and Continuing Education North South University, Bangladesh.

36  Ronald, C.; Foster, T.; and F. O’ Connor )2014). “Emerging Strategies for Performance Auditing Insights from City Auditors in Major Cities in the U.S. and Canada”, The Institute of Internal Auditors Research Foundation (IIARF), Available at: http://www.thei ia.org/bookstore/product/emerging-str ategies-for-performance-auditing-insig hts-from-city-auditors-in-major-cities-in-the-us-and-canada-1873.cfm. [Online] [31 May 2015].

37  Nasrzadeh, N. (2005). “Investigating the Executive Obstacles of Operational Audit from the Viewpoint of the Audit Institutes as the Members of Iranian Association of Certified Public Accountants”, M. A. Thesis in Accounting, Islamic Azad University, Tehran Branch. [In Persian]

38  Jafari, M. (2004). “Investigating the Executive Obstacles of Operational Audit in the Insurance Industry (Property Insurance)”, M. A. Thesis in Accounting, Islamic Azad University, Tehran Branch. [In Persian]

39  Mohammadi, M. (2009). “Some Challenges of Operational Audit in Iran's Public Sector”, Journal of Audit Science, Vol. 8, Nos. 25 and 26, pp. 47-53. [In Persian]

40  Imani Barandagh, M. and R. Jahangiri (2010). “Investigating the Executive Obstacles of Operational Audit in the Governmental Companies from the Viewpoint of the Independent Auditors”, The 4th International Conference on Operational Budgeting, 6 August, Tehran: The International Razi Conferences Center. [In Persian]

41  Heidarinejad, Gh. and S. Shokrbeigi (2012). “Operational Audit: Necessities, Challenges and Solutions”, The National Conference on Accounting and Auditing, 5 December, University of Sistan and Baluchestan. [In Persian]

42  Azar, A. and M. Momeni (2009). Statistics and Its Application in Management, 13th Edition, Tehran: SAMT Publications. [In Persian]

43  Khaki, Gh. (2004). Research Methodology with an Approach to Writing Dissertations, 1st Edition, Tehran: Baztab Publications. [In Persian]

44  Sabzi Mir-Azizi, A. (2004). “Operational Audit of Management”, Journal of Audit Science, Vol. 4, No. 12, pp. 49-58. [In Persian]

45  Vakilifard, H. and F. Nazari (2012). “The Effective Factors on the Implementation of Accrual Accounting System in the Institutions Affiliated to the Ministry of Health and Medical Education”, Journal of Health Accounting, Vol. 1, No. 1, pp. 111-125. [In Persian]

46  Mahdavi, Gh. and M. Ghol Mohammadi (2012). “An Investigation into the Amount of Familiarity of Chief Financial Officers of the Fars Province Authorities with the New Methods of Budgeting”, Journal of Health Accounting, Vol. 1, No. 1, pp. 85-110. [In Persian]