Books by Septiana Dwiputrianti
Foreword
This book aims to enrich the existing literature on public administration, public accoun... more Foreword
This book aims to enrich the existing literature on public administration, public accountability and public sector auditing. The content of the book is based on research that was undertaken through a comprehensive examination of the quality of information in the audit reports of the Indonesian State Audit Institution (Badan Pemeriksa Keuangan or BPK) with comparisons made between pre audit reform (1945-2000) and post audit reform (2001-2009). The book also evaluates the factors influencing the effectiveness and ineffectiveness of BPK audit information. To achieve these purposes, two main research questions were the focus of the book: How is the quality of information in BPK audit reports before and after audit reform? What are the key factors influencing the effectiveness and ineffectiveness of information in BPK audit reports?
Based on the data were collected through triangulation of observations, documentation, questionnaires and personal interviews. Purposive sampling and snowball techniques were applied in this book. The respondents and key informants engaged in this book were:(i) BPK auditors, Board members and managers;(ii) members of both central and regional Parliaments;(iii) public sector officials (auditees) at both the central and local level; and (iv)academics, researchers, and non government organisations (NGO). It was revealed that the Indonesia’s Executive (the President, Governors, Regents and Mayors) has historically neglected the roles and functions of BPK. Since the third amendment of the 1945 Constitution in 2001, the Indonesian government has reformed laws and regulations related to public sector auditing, including setting new rules for strengthening and improving BPK’s roles and functions. In situation where the Indonesian government needs immediate reform, BPK has been attempting to improve its professionalism and independence to provide better quality audit reports.
Independence, professionalism and integrity are among the most important factors that influence public sector audits. However, in the past, BPK auditors lacked independence as the Executive influenced its administration and finances.Auditors also lackedopportunities to increase their professionalism by undertaking additional education and training. Since there was little incentive for auditors not to accept audit fees from auditees, the objectivity and integrity of auditors were reduced significantly.
In response to the audit reform in 2001, the roles and functions of BPK have been strengthened. BPK has been able to give much more attention to education, training and the development of other skills and knowledge. BPK has also implemented improved remuneration and applied a rewards and sanctions system to strengthen auditor professionalism and integrity. This book revealed a significant improvement in the quantity and quality of BPK’s audit resources, including increases in the number of qualified auditors, representative offices, modern equipment, and in the use of Information Technology (IT). However, the improvement inaudit resources have not quite matched with the increasing number of auditees and the authority given to the BPK. In terms of the quality of auditors, BPK has many new auditors, but they lack experience. To execute performance audits, BPK requires more auditors with diverse educational backgrounds in addition to accounting and finance.
The book describes factors have impeded the ‘followup’on information and recommendations in BPK audit reports.For example, Parliament’s lack of willingness to politically oversee the Executive, insufficient serious ‘buy-in’ by government to implement audit recommendations, and an unintegrated approach by authorised investigators to follow up on audit findings that indicate criminality and corruption. To what degree these factors influence the ineffectiveness of public sector auditsremains an open question and an area for further research.
It is clear that there is further space for improvement of public sector auditing’s functions to enhance the quality of public administration and accountability. Towards this, author suggests recommendations relating to four different aspects, namely: legal basis, institutional and resources, effectiveness of audit reports, human resources development.
Papers by Septiana Dwiputrianti
Support from Central and Local Governments to Follow-up Audit Recommendations for State Finance and Performance Accountability
The central government and many regional governments had ‘disclaimer opinion’ on their financial ... more The central government and many regional governments had ‘disclaimer opinion’ on their financial statements which indicate poor public accountability and management of state finances of government agencies. Although the opinion from BPK can influence decision-making of investors to invest in Indonesia, the government has consistently ignored these opinions. The most severe restriction is that since 2004, the Directorate General of Taxation cannot be audited, although tax revenue is the largest state income in the state budget. Effectiveness of audit BPK reports is also influenced by the commitment of the public sector to follow up the recommendations from BPK. This paper evaluates the roles and functions of the central and local Executives in acting on information in Indonesian Supreme Audit Institution (BPK) reports as a factor influencing the effectivenesss of public sector auditing for state finance and performance accountability.
This study examines literatures from international journals of public administration, government auditing and public policy. These literatures underlined that an external audit agency examines the accountability of the Executive’s state finances and performance and reports the finding to public agencies which have responsibility to follow them up. This is mentioned by Wilkins (1995: 429) that one of the measurements for effective audit is the improvement of public sector accountability through audit results and recommendations. Moreover, Taylor (1996:147-56) emphasised that the Executive has a responsibility to follow up the audit results that contain findings and recommendations for better government performance. Recommendations and findings from audit institution then should be followed up by enforcement from executive itself or parliament.
The research method employed a qualitative method. In-depth interviews conducted with auditors of BPK, Members of Parliament and regional Parliament, and auditees from central and local governments. Asking key informants for their opinion on the support of the Executive in both local and central governments for BPK audit recommendations and findings.
Based on the research, it found that the Government of the Republic of Indonesia has not fully implemented the new government accounting standard (SAP 2005) as the basis of providing government financial statements. The efforts of the government to reform the state financial management and auditing were noted in the number of positive responses in the survey results. Since 2003, the government has reformed state finance management system, starting from the Ministry of Finance and followed by all other departments. Data and survey results indicate that the government agencies found it hard to provide support for audit findings and reports of BPK in the short term. Since 2004, the central government has had a ‘disclaimer’ opinion for its financial statement reports. This is due to the rejection for tax revenues office, poor management of state assets, and lack of transparency and accountability of government agencies. Up till now, some government agencies still had no significant changes on their commitment and behavior to reform their organization in performing better public accountability.
Key words: public sector auditing, Executive, Indonesian Supreme Audit Institution (BPK), accountability, performance auditing reports.
Pengaruh Kualitas Pengawasan Terhadap Efektifitas Sitem Pengendalian Internal Satuan Kerja Perangkat Daerah Di Lingkungan Pemerintah Kabupaten Lumajang
Sistem Pengawasan Internal (SPI) atau Internal Control System (ICS) pada pemerintahan daer... more Sistem Pengawasan Internal (SPI) atau Internal Control System (ICS) pada pemerintahan daerah di Kabupaten Lumajang masih belum efektif dalam implementasinya. Kualitas informasi akuntansi (laporan keuangan) pemerintah Kabupaten Lumajang belum menunjukkan kualitas yang memadai, yang diindikasikan dengan opini BPK atas Laporan Keuangan yang belum mencapai Wajar Tanpa Pengecualian (WTP) sejak tahun 2006 s.d 2010, serta terdapat berbagai kelemahan sistem pengendalian internal. Hal tersebut menimbulkan keraguan tentang pengaruh kualitas audit internal dalam meningkatkan efektivitas sistem pengendalian internal, dan juga dipertanyakan tentang efektivitas tindaklanjut atas hasil audit internal yang diselenggarakan. Audit yang berkualitas tidak akan berdampak signifikan dalam meningkatkan efektivitas sistem pengendalian internal, apabila temuan audit tidak direspons atau ditindaklanjuti secara efektif (Keating, 1995).
Tujuan penelitian ini untuk mengetahui pengaruh kualitas auditinternal terhadap efektivitas sistem pengendalian internal Satuan Kerja Perangkat Daerah (SKPD), dan kekuatan efektivitas tindaklanjut hasil audit dalam memoderasi hubungan antara kedua variabel tersebut. Manfaat penelitian ini secara praktis adalah untuk memperoleh solusi dalam meningkatkan efektivitas sistem pengendalian internal, sedangkan manfaat secara teoritis adalah sebagai sumbangan pemikiran yang dapat digunakan dalam pengembangan ilmu lebih lanjut tentang sistem pengendalian internal dalam hubungannya dengan kualitas audit internal dan efektivitas tindaklanjut.
Audit internal penting untuk perbaikan dan peningkatan efektivitas sistem pengendalian internal. Agar rekomendasi yang tercantum dalam laporan hasil audit mencapai tujuan, maka auditor harus mengikuti tindaklajut yang dilakukan oleh pejabat yang berwenang (Halim, 2004:311). Tanpa adanya tindaklanjut, maka penyelenggaraan audit tidak memiliki added value. Efektivitas tindaklanjut temuan hasil audit internal menurut Ratliff, Wallace, Sumners, McFarland, and Loebbecke (1996:449), setidaknya tidak terlepas dari beberapa pihak, antara lain dari : a) Peranan Auditor; b) Peranan Auditee; c) Peranan Manajemen Puncak.
Penelitian ini menggunakan metode survei, dengan tingkat eksplanasi asosiatif dengan teknik analisa data kuantitatif/ positivism. Kuesioner disebarkan ke 22 tim pengawas di lingkungan Inspektorat Pemerintahan Daerah Kabupaten Lumajang. Pengolahan data dan analisis menggunakan Component Based Structural Equation Model (CBSEM) dengan Smart-PLS program.
Pengaruh kualitas audit internal terhadap efektivitas sistem pengendalian internal dengan memperhatikan efek moderasi efektivitas tindaklanjut memiliki R-square sebesar 0,939, atau dengan kata lain kualitas audit internal dan efektivitas tindaklanjut mampu menjelaskan Efektivitas Sistem Pengendalian Internal (SPI) sebanyak 93,9%, sedangkan 6,1% sisanya dijelaskan oleh variabel lain yang tidak diteliti dalam model penelitian ini. Lebih lanjut kekuatan efektivitas tindaklanjut dalam memoderasi hubungan antara kualitas audit internal dan efektivitas sistem pengendalian internal sebagaimana nilai perbedaan R-square (f2) sebesar 0,34 (0,939-0,905), mengindikasikan bahwa pengaruh moderating efektivitas tindaklanjut tergolong kuat. Dengan kata lain untuk meningkatkan efektivitas SPI sangat efektif dilakukan melalui peningkatan kualitas audit internal dan efektivitas tindaklanjut.
Keywords : kualitas pengawasan/audit internal, efektivitas tindaklanjut, Sistem Pengendalian Internal (SPI), Pemerintahan Daerah, Kabupaten Lumajang
Political Support Model from the Legislature fo Quality of Information in Public Sector Auditing Reports in Indonesia
This paper examines the roles and functions of the central and local legislature in acting on inf... more This paper examines the roles and functions of the central and local legislature in acting on information in Indonesian Supreme Audit Institution (BPK) reports as a factor influencing the quality of information for public accountability. The original 1945 Constitution mandated BPK to report its findings to the Parliament. Nevertheless, during the New Order Era, the audit reports of BPK were checked by the State Secretary Office before being submitted to the Parliament. Moreover, there was no evidence that the members of Parliament followed up the information in BPK reports as there was no obligation and responsibility of any parties, including the Legislative and Executive to act on BPK reports. This condition was resulted in preventing the implementation of the checks and balances system.
In contrast, after audit reform in 2001, the two major tasks of the members of Parliament, namely (1) approving the government budget; and (2) overseeing the performance and accountability of the government in managing public resources and providing a good quality of public services. BPK reports provide information to support the members of Parliament in conducting their tasks to oversee the performance and accountability of the government. The members of the Legislative are one of the main stakeholders of BPK. The Legislature has the responsibility to hold the government to act accountably in using and managing the state budget and public resources. However, political support from the members of the Legislature (DPR, DPRDs and) to follow up BPK audit reports has not run optimally, although the BPK reports significantly help the members in conducting their control and budget functions. In 2006, a joint agreement between BPK and the Legislature has been signed to improve the follow up of audit findings from the members of the Legislature by communicating and having consultation on the reports.
Parliamentary members have significant roles and functions in improving public administration and holding the Executive to account. Moreover, the role of the legislature in controlling and enforcing the accountability of the bureaucracy is the key element in the relationship of politics and administration. As stated by some academic literatures, Aldons (2001: 34-42) believed that the members of Parliament have political power to hold the Executive accountable to the public. Moreover, the legislature has a significant role in ensuring public satisfaction about the performance of government bureaucracy. Uhr (1982: 31-32) stated that ‘although parliaments cannot and should not be governed, they should call the governors to account, demanding an explanation of how current measures are consistent with general policy guidelines authorized by parliamentary vote’. Uhr statement clearly indicates that parliament has the function of reviewing the processes of government administration. This is also supported by Day and Rudolf (1987: 10-12) who argued that political accountability is employed by the Parliament to hold the governments to account for their actions after reviewing audit reports.
Moreover, Gendron and Cooper (2001: 306) emphasized the close relationship between state auditors and the legislature. Simms (1999: 34) also argued that to ensure the accountability of government, an audit institution examines the accountability of public sector bodies and reports the audit results to the parliament. The reports are reviewed by the parliament to hold the government to accountable to the public for managing and using public resources, and in order to uncover poor administration and corruption (Evans 1999: 87; Simms 1999: 34).
This study employed a qualitative method with in depth interviews with the Head of the Analysis and Budget Implementation for State and Regional Budget Bureau of the Secretariat General of Parliament, the Members of Board and auditors of BPK, Members of Parliament and regional Parliament, and auditees. Besides, a survey to the respondents (auditors, auditees and members of parliament) also conducted for asking their opinion on the support of the members of the Legislature for BPK reports
This paper examines how the coordination and relationship of the functions of BPK as auditors and the Parliament (central and local levels) as controller in state finances in Indonesia. BPK conducts consultations with the members to give some explanations about the audit findings, to answer any other questions from the members relating to information and data in audit reports. Since then, the members of Parliament, regional Parliament and senate have obtained guidance and clarification from BPK in consultation forums to help the members to understand the problems and the audit results. Besides, the consultations also provide guidance on procedures in following up and monitoring follows up of audit reports by government entities. These efforts have led to a positive response from the members of DPR and DPRDs who are starting to review the BPK reports more seriously and to force the government to follow up audit findings and recommendations. The members ask, remind, and pressure the government. As the members have rights to control the accountability of government and to approve the state or regional government budgets, the Parliament can push the government to follow up BPK’s audit findings and recommendations in line with its responsibility to be accountable in public administration.
To conclude, this study found that the members of the Legislature only control the budget planning of the central and local government entities through budget committees. However, it has not run optimally, because lack of members’ ability and support from experts in budget analysis. The control function of the members of the Legislature as ex-ante oversight has not been yet fully extended to the post-budget actions of the government entities. The recommendation to form Public Accountability Committee (PAC) to control financial performance of the executive after the implementation programs (post budget) has not been approved.
Key words: public sector auditing, legislature, supreme audit institution, accountability, auditing report, political support
Impact of Media and Publicattion of Public Sector Auditing Reports on Improving Transparency and Public Accountability in Indonesia
Prior to audit reform, BPK reports were not made public as they were designated as state confiden... more Prior to audit reform, BPK reports were not made public as they were designated as state confidential documents. The media had no freedom to disclose news that could threaten Indonesia’s political stability. This resulted in little information for the public on the roles and functions of BPK in auditing public sector to support bureaucratic reform. As democracy has emerged in Indonesia, the public is demanding accountability and transparency in the administrative system. Since the Reformation Era, the public and media have freedom to access information on public sector agencies to ensure their accountability. BPK reports are published to provide the public with information on the transparency, performance and accountability of the government and all agencies that use public finances. The media have played important roles in influencing the effectiveness of information in BPK reports.
This paper examines the reforms that have been conducted to improve the transparency and public accountability of the government through media publication of public sector audit reports, with particular emphasis on those aspects where clear differences have emerged in the practice of audit between the pre- and post-reform periods. The paper then briefly lists a number of recommendations that arise out of the research, before suggesting lines for further research.
The research process included a theoretical conceptual stage and the field research stage. The theoretical conceptual included a literature review that provided a background for study and disclosed the room for improvement in public sector auditing in Indonesia. Moreover, historical analysis of the Indonesia public sector auditing on the crucial time to provide insights into the process of development and change of public sector audits across the time in Indonesia. The field research explored primary and secondary data. In depth interviews conducted with auditors, the members of Parliament (central and local levels), and auditees (public sector employees).
This study revealed that since reform, the media have been enthusiastic to draw public attention to audit report findings. As a result, the public has started to become aware about the importance of public sector auditing as means of saving public finances from inefficiency, ineffectiveness, fraud, money laundering and corruption. Besides, in terms of acting on the information in audit reports, this study also revealed significant changes in BPK’s publication of reports through the media and on the BPK website. Transparency builds public trust that resources are managing accountably. However, this study found ddissatisfied responses regarding publication indicated a lack of auditees’ accountability and transparency and evidence. BPK audit findings which are not reported with security and confidential reasons, and missing audit reports after arriving at BPK high levels of officials, are unacceptable to auditors and the public.
Keywords: Media publication, transparency, public accountability, Indonesia.
Abstract
The research was undertaken through a comprehensive examination of scope of auditing on... more Abstract
The research was undertaken through a comprehensive examination of scope of auditing on the quality of content information and the factors influencing to the quality of external public sector auditing reports that are provided by the Indonesian State Audit Institution (BPK). This study also made comparison between pre and post audit reform and applied qualitative method.
The study revealed that the Indonesia’s Executive has historically neglected the roles and functions of BPK. The Indonesian government has reformed laws related to public sector auditing. In situation where the Indonesian government needs immediate reform, BPK has been attempting to improve its audit performance to provide better scope of auditing for the quality of public administration. Towards this, the study suggests recommendations for the BPK to propose judicial reviews in terms of legal aspect for auditing taxes revenues and to pay more attention on the implemention of performance auditing for better public administration.
Key Words: public sector, quality of content audit reports, financial and performance audits.
Tulisan ini diharapkan dapat memberikan wawasan dan pemikiran bagi para mahasiswa, dosen, penelit... more Tulisan ini diharapkan dapat memberikan wawasan dan pemikiran bagi para mahasiswa, dosen, peneliti, praktisi serta para pengamat bidang ilmu administrasi publik mengenai pentingnya berpartisipasi dalam pengembangan dan kegiatan organisasi profesi administrasi publik yang ada di negara kita. Adapun asosiasi profesi administrasi publik dan bisnis yang saat ini dikembangkan di tingkat pusat dan daerah, antara lain adalah Indonesian Association of Public Administration (IAPA), Ikatan Administrasi Bisnis Indonesia (IABI), serta Persadi (Persatuan Sarjana Administrasi Indonesia) yang kemudian namanya diubah menjadi Asosiasi Sarjana dan Praktisi Administrasi Indonesia (ASPA-Indonesia).
Artikel ini bertujuan untuk mengevaluasi kebijakan yang telah diterapkan oleh pemerintah dalam up... more Artikel ini bertujuan untuk mengevaluasi kebijakan yang telah diterapkan oleh pemerintah dalam upaya peningkatan mutu sumber daya aparatur sebagai manusia modal (human capital) di sektor publik. Artikel ini menganalisis dari aspek kebijakan yang diterapkan di sektor publik untuk peningkatkan mutu human capital. Di samping itu, artikel ini memberikan data dan informasi untuk analisis dengan menggunakan studi perbandingan kebijakan berkaitan dengan sistem pengelolaan sumber daya aparatur di Australia, mulai dari sistem seleksinya sampai dengan pensiun untuk meningkatkan mutunya.
Metode penelitian yang digunakan adalah metode kualitatif. Data dikumpulkan dari studi kepustaan dan dokumentasi, serta wawancara. Adapun informan kunci terdiri dari: anggota dewan perwakilan, berbagai lembaga yang berperan dalam pengembangan human capital di sektor publik (seperti Lembaga Administrasi Negara (LAN), Badan Kepegawaian Negara (BKN), Kementrian Pendayagunaan Aparatur Negara dan Reformasi Birokrasi), pimpinan dan pegawai yang bekerja di sektor publik, serta masyarakat umum.
Hasil studi menunjukkan bahwa dalam masyarakat terdapat berbagai harapan sekaligus keluhan tentang pelayanan dari aparatur penyelenggara negara akibat dari masih dibawah standarnya kualitas pegawai negeri. Di samping itu, hal yang paling berat adalah lemahnya mekanisme seleksi dan rekrutmen pegawai negeri yang dilakukan oleh pemerintahan daerah. Banyak calon pegawai yang diterima tidak sesuai dengan kualifikasi dan spesifikasi tugas yang dibutuhkan. Di sisi lain, studi juga menunjukkan lemahnya kesadaran pegawai negeri (berkisar 4,8 juta) maupun masyarakat Indonesia (kurang lebih 220 juta) terhadap hak dan kewajiban masing-masing pihak.
Artikel ini memberikan kritik dan rekonstruksi bagi peningkatan mutu sumber daya aparatur sebagai human capital di sektor publik berdasarkan prinsip tata kelola pemerintahan yang bersih, transparan dan terbuka. Selain itu, artikel ini memberikan masukan bagi perbaikan sistem manajemen sumber daya aparatur dengan diperkaya oleh analisis perbandingan dengan sistem yang ada di negara maju (dalam hal ini adalah Australia).
Kata-kata Kunci: human capital, mutu, sumber daya aparatur, sektor publik, evaluasi kebijakan, Indonesia, Australia.
Regarding with inequality of auditors’ competencies/professionalism and audit resources inside an... more Regarding with inequality of auditors’ competencies/professionalism and audit resources inside and outside Java, there is little information and studies that can be found regarding to the specific results or failures of the Indonesian government activities on how well the government uses the public money and maintained its state resources in public administration and accountability perspective. The effectiveness of the external audit in evaluating the government financing and performance is very important as an indicator of public accountability and one element that controls in the field of the government financing and accountability from fraud and inefficiency for good governance.
This paper reviews literature from public sector management, public policy and administration, auditing and accountability and aims to assess rigorously the performance of the external and internal audit institution in examining the transparency and accountability of public sector in managing public resources before and after the audit reformation. The effective role and function of auditors have significant role in reforming the Indonesian public administration. In more detail, this paper describes the (1) effectiveness/ineffectiveness of the financial audit reports for the transparency and accountability of public sector agencies, (2) effectiveness/ineffectiveness of the recommendation of performance audit reports in reforming the Indonesian public administration, and (3) factors influencing the effectiveness/ineffectiveness of public sector auditing for public accountability and transparency of the Indonesians’s public sector agencies?
Based on the data and information that was collected from the survey, personal interview, and government/public documentations and media, the key factors influencing ineffectiveness of internal auditing are the lack of competency and skills of auditors, lack of public accountability and transparency of public sector agencies. Whereas for external auditing are the independence (structural and functional), auditor’s professionalism and integrity, and follow–up of audit findings from the legislative, the executive, and the executor (the police, the attorney and the Corruption Eradication Commission) for findings with indication of criminals/corruption. The key informants came from internal and external auditors, auditees, members of parliament, non government organization, academics and researchers from both central and local levels.
For external auditing, this study revealed that although since the reformation era the independence of external public sector has been strengthened, there is still a significant room for improvement for BPK’s independence. Besides, BPK had been mandated to audit all of the public sector bodies; however, in fact, the tax office and government loan could not be audited. For internal auditing, this study revealed the lack of transparency and accountability of public sector agencies was still strong, especially in the regional level. Moreover, the lack of competency auditors in carrying out their duties is also the key factor that influencing ineffectiveness of internal auditing.
The paper provides three recommendations related to internal and external public sector auditing to improve fiscal transparency and public accountability in public sector. The first recommendation is strengthening the independence of external audit institution (BPK) in getting access data and information from taxation office to be audited. The second recommendation is reforming internal audit organizations to improve the management, human resources competency and skills, information and technology resources. The last recommendations is creating effective communication between the members of parliament, auditees and auditors to discuss further about the recommendations and follow up of audit reports to improve the public sector performance.
Key words: public sector performance, public financial accountability, internal and external public sector auditing, inequality audit resources and auditor’s competency, Indonesia.
Since the third amendment of the 1945 Constitution (2001), the roles and functions of BPK as the ... more Since the third amendment of the 1945 Constitution (2001), the roles and functions of BPK as the only external audit institution has strengthened to give greater power to examine the public accountability of public sector agencies under the Audit Law (2004). Since then, BPK has reformed its organization. How effective is the new audit legislations in delivering promised outcomes for improving the Indonesian public administration is still a big question.
This paper examines the reforms that have been conducted to improve the transparency of public financial and the accountability of the government in providing public services and furthermore to highlight some of the main features of the analysis, with particular emphasis on those aspects where clear differences have emerged in the practice of audit between the pre- and post-reform periods. The paper then briefly lists a number of recommendations that arise out of the research, before suggesting lines for further research.
The research process included a theoretical conceptual stage and the field research stage. The theoretical conceptual included a literature review that provided a background for study and disclosed the room for improvement in public sector auditing in Indonesia. Moreover, historical analysis of the Indonesia public sector auditing on the crucial time to provide insights into the process of development and change of public sector audits across the time in Indonesia. The field research explored primary and secondary data. In depth interviews conducted with auditors, the members of Parliement (central and local levels), and auditees (public sector employees).
Keywords: public sector auditing, financial transparency, accountability, performance, public sector reform, Indonesia.
The research was undertaken through a comprehensive examination of the quality of information in ... more The research was undertaken through a comprehensive examination of the quality of information in the audit reports of the Indonesian State Audit Institution (BPK) with comparisons made between pre and post audit reform. The study also evaluates the factors influencing the ineffectiveness of audit information.
The respondents and key informants engaged in this study were:(i) BPK auditors, Board members and managers;(ii) members of both central and regional Parliaments;(iii) public sector officials (auditees) at both the central and local level; and (iv) academics, researchers, and non government organisations (NGO).
The study revealed that the Indonesia’s Executive has historically neglected the roles and functions of BPK. The Indonesian government has reformed laws related to public sector auditing. In situation where the Indonesian government needs immediate reform, BPK has been attempting to improve its audit performance to provide better quality of public administration. Towards this, the study suggests recommendations to the BPK.
This article focuses on evaluating the reform of public external auditing functions on the qualit... more This article focuses on evaluating the reform of public external auditing functions on the quality and content of communication information services for its stakeholders. This paper also evaluates the reasons behind its ineffectiveness and addresses comparisons between pre and post audit reform in Indonesia. The scope of this research is limited to the communication information of external audit reports. The reason is that this study concerns for reforming the communication information services for improvement of the government of Indonesia’s performance and accountability to the public.
This research employed concepts and theories from public administration, public policy and public auditing literatures. The framework of the research formulates from both theories and practices. Qualitative research method applied in this study. Data were collected through triangulation of observations, documentations, questionnaires, and personal interviews. Purposive sampling and snowball techniques were employed. Respondents and key informants engaged in this study were (1) auditors and Board Members of the Indonesian Supreme Audit Institution (BPK); (2) Members of Parliament; (3) public sector officials (auditees) in central and local levels; and (4) academics, researchers, practices.
This study revealed that BPK has made significant improvement service to the content of information in audit reports. The content of reports provides information that is open to the public regarding the public sector’s accountability in managing public resources and complying with the rules. However, there was significant evidence that BPK has lack in communicating its audit results and scope. External auditors still cannot audit the tax revenues, as BPK was not allowed to access data and information from the Directorate General of Taxation Office. This condition indicates the lack of quality and content information services for the public about how the government accountable in managing tax revenues.
In addition, this study found dissatisfaction responses from respondents indicating the lack of strong audit evidence, objectivity and credibility in reports that potentially reduced optimism about the quality of the information in BPK reports. The empirical evidence showed that auditors were still afraid to communicate their findings in written or orally for uncovering sensitive cases of audit findings objectively and credibly. This is because auditors did not feel safe and well protected by their audit institution.
Communication of information services in audit reports mainly had positive comments, relating to understandable information, precise and informative format, and timely reporting. A degree of optimism was seen as a result of better formatting with summaries of audit reports for the members of Parliament and auditees, and a timeframe for auditing and submission of the reports. However, this study still revealed a degree of disappointment about the lack of clarity of communication services in some technical auditing and financial terms in audit reports. Moreover, in terms of audit report’s format, respondents found that the reports are not concise.
To improve the quality in communication services, this paper recommended for providing building capacity of auditors and improving the capability or power of information in audit reports in providing an objective and credible report for getting greater trust from stakeholders.
Key words: audit reports’ publication, audit information, communication services, public accountability, Indonesia.
iias-iisa.org
Since the audit reform in 2001, the roles and functions of the Indonesian public sector audit has... more Since the audit reform in 2001, the roles and functions of the Indonesian public sector audit has been strengthened in examining the transparency and accountability of public administration. Many scholars argue that the performance auditing has significantly influenced to the improvement of public sector accountability in spending public funds and providing better services to the public. This paper enriches the existing public administration, development, accountability and auditing literature through comprehensive examination of the quality of information in the audit reports of the Badan Pemeriksa Keuangan (BPK); Indonesian State Audit Board preceding and following audit reform (2001) to reform the Indonesian public administration. Data were collected through triangulation of observations, documentations, questionnaires, and personal interviews with key informants from auditors and managers of BPK, members of Parliament, auditees from public sector, academics, researchers, practices and NGO. The study revealed that the Indonesian government had amended its Constituion that impacted on reforming the audit laws and regulations. To fulfill the mandate of Constitution, laws and regulations in auditing the Indonesian public sector, the audit board (BPK) has made strong efforts to reform its organisation and to improve its integrity and professionalism. The study found ineffectiveness of audit findings and recommendations that caused by the lack of seriousness from the government to follow-up audit reports and the lack of ability from aparatus to implement auditors’ recommendations. On the other hand, as BPK recruited many new and young auditors, they have insufficient experiences in auditing public sector agencies. This resulting on difficulty to provide constructive effective recommendations for better public administration that are applicable to be followed-up and implemented by public sector agencies.
Keywords: public administration, public accountability, transparency, public sector accountability, performance auditing.
Efektivitas Laporan Hasil Temuan Pemeriksaan dalam Mewujudkan Reformasi Transparansi Fiskal dan Akuntabilitas Sektor Publik (2001-2008) di Indonesia
Teaching Documents by Septiana Dwiputrianti
Uploads
Books by Septiana Dwiputrianti
This book aims to enrich the existing literature on public administration, public accountability and public sector auditing. The content of the book is based on research that was undertaken through a comprehensive examination of the quality of information in the audit reports of the Indonesian State Audit Institution (Badan Pemeriksa Keuangan or BPK) with comparisons made between pre audit reform (1945-2000) and post audit reform (2001-2009). The book also evaluates the factors influencing the effectiveness and ineffectiveness of BPK audit information. To achieve these purposes, two main research questions were the focus of the book: How is the quality of information in BPK audit reports before and after audit reform? What are the key factors influencing the effectiveness and ineffectiveness of information in BPK audit reports?
Based on the data were collected through triangulation of observations, documentation, questionnaires and personal interviews. Purposive sampling and snowball techniques were applied in this book. The respondents and key informants engaged in this book were:(i) BPK auditors, Board members and managers;(ii) members of both central and regional Parliaments;(iii) public sector officials (auditees) at both the central and local level; and (iv)academics, researchers, and non government organisations (NGO). It was revealed that the Indonesia’s Executive (the President, Governors, Regents and Mayors) has historically neglected the roles and functions of BPK. Since the third amendment of the 1945 Constitution in 2001, the Indonesian government has reformed laws and regulations related to public sector auditing, including setting new rules for strengthening and improving BPK’s roles and functions. In situation where the Indonesian government needs immediate reform, BPK has been attempting to improve its professionalism and independence to provide better quality audit reports.
Independence, professionalism and integrity are among the most important factors that influence public sector audits. However, in the past, BPK auditors lacked independence as the Executive influenced its administration and finances.Auditors also lackedopportunities to increase their professionalism by undertaking additional education and training. Since there was little incentive for auditors not to accept audit fees from auditees, the objectivity and integrity of auditors were reduced significantly.
In response to the audit reform in 2001, the roles and functions of BPK have been strengthened. BPK has been able to give much more attention to education, training and the development of other skills and knowledge. BPK has also implemented improved remuneration and applied a rewards and sanctions system to strengthen auditor professionalism and integrity. This book revealed a significant improvement in the quantity and quality of BPK’s audit resources, including increases in the number of qualified auditors, representative offices, modern equipment, and in the use of Information Technology (IT). However, the improvement inaudit resources have not quite matched with the increasing number of auditees and the authority given to the BPK. In terms of the quality of auditors, BPK has many new auditors, but they lack experience. To execute performance audits, BPK requires more auditors with diverse educational backgrounds in addition to accounting and finance.
The book describes factors have impeded the ‘followup’on information and recommendations in BPK audit reports.For example, Parliament’s lack of willingness to politically oversee the Executive, insufficient serious ‘buy-in’ by government to implement audit recommendations, and an unintegrated approach by authorised investigators to follow up on audit findings that indicate criminality and corruption. To what degree these factors influence the ineffectiveness of public sector auditsremains an open question and an area for further research.
It is clear that there is further space for improvement of public sector auditing’s functions to enhance the quality of public administration and accountability. Towards this, author suggests recommendations relating to four different aspects, namely: legal basis, institutional and resources, effectiveness of audit reports, human resources development.
Papers by Septiana Dwiputrianti
This study examines literatures from international journals of public administration, government auditing and public policy. These literatures underlined that an external audit agency examines the accountability of the Executive’s state finances and performance and reports the finding to public agencies which have responsibility to follow them up. This is mentioned by Wilkins (1995: 429) that one of the measurements for effective audit is the improvement of public sector accountability through audit results and recommendations. Moreover, Taylor (1996:147-56) emphasised that the Executive has a responsibility to follow up the audit results that contain findings and recommendations for better government performance. Recommendations and findings from audit institution then should be followed up by enforcement from executive itself or parliament.
The research method employed a qualitative method. In-depth interviews conducted with auditors of BPK, Members of Parliament and regional Parliament, and auditees from central and local governments. Asking key informants for their opinion on the support of the Executive in both local and central governments for BPK audit recommendations and findings.
Based on the research, it found that the Government of the Republic of Indonesia has not fully implemented the new government accounting standard (SAP 2005) as the basis of providing government financial statements. The efforts of the government to reform the state financial management and auditing were noted in the number of positive responses in the survey results. Since 2003, the government has reformed state finance management system, starting from the Ministry of Finance and followed by all other departments. Data and survey results indicate that the government agencies found it hard to provide support for audit findings and reports of BPK in the short term. Since 2004, the central government has had a ‘disclaimer’ opinion for its financial statement reports. This is due to the rejection for tax revenues office, poor management of state assets, and lack of transparency and accountability of government agencies. Up till now, some government agencies still had no significant changes on their commitment and behavior to reform their organization in performing better public accountability.
Key words: public sector auditing, Executive, Indonesian Supreme Audit Institution (BPK), accountability, performance auditing reports.
Tujuan penelitian ini untuk mengetahui pengaruh kualitas auditinternal terhadap efektivitas sistem pengendalian internal Satuan Kerja Perangkat Daerah (SKPD), dan kekuatan efektivitas tindaklanjut hasil audit dalam memoderasi hubungan antara kedua variabel tersebut. Manfaat penelitian ini secara praktis adalah untuk memperoleh solusi dalam meningkatkan efektivitas sistem pengendalian internal, sedangkan manfaat secara teoritis adalah sebagai sumbangan pemikiran yang dapat digunakan dalam pengembangan ilmu lebih lanjut tentang sistem pengendalian internal dalam hubungannya dengan kualitas audit internal dan efektivitas tindaklanjut.
Audit internal penting untuk perbaikan dan peningkatan efektivitas sistem pengendalian internal. Agar rekomendasi yang tercantum dalam laporan hasil audit mencapai tujuan, maka auditor harus mengikuti tindaklajut yang dilakukan oleh pejabat yang berwenang (Halim, 2004:311). Tanpa adanya tindaklanjut, maka penyelenggaraan audit tidak memiliki added value. Efektivitas tindaklanjut temuan hasil audit internal menurut Ratliff, Wallace, Sumners, McFarland, and Loebbecke (1996:449), setidaknya tidak terlepas dari beberapa pihak, antara lain dari : a) Peranan Auditor; b) Peranan Auditee; c) Peranan Manajemen Puncak.
Penelitian ini menggunakan metode survei, dengan tingkat eksplanasi asosiatif dengan teknik analisa data kuantitatif/ positivism. Kuesioner disebarkan ke 22 tim pengawas di lingkungan Inspektorat Pemerintahan Daerah Kabupaten Lumajang. Pengolahan data dan analisis menggunakan Component Based Structural Equation Model (CBSEM) dengan Smart-PLS program.
Pengaruh kualitas audit internal terhadap efektivitas sistem pengendalian internal dengan memperhatikan efek moderasi efektivitas tindaklanjut memiliki R-square sebesar 0,939, atau dengan kata lain kualitas audit internal dan efektivitas tindaklanjut mampu menjelaskan Efektivitas Sistem Pengendalian Internal (SPI) sebanyak 93,9%, sedangkan 6,1% sisanya dijelaskan oleh variabel lain yang tidak diteliti dalam model penelitian ini. Lebih lanjut kekuatan efektivitas tindaklanjut dalam memoderasi hubungan antara kualitas audit internal dan efektivitas sistem pengendalian internal sebagaimana nilai perbedaan R-square (f2) sebesar 0,34 (0,939-0,905), mengindikasikan bahwa pengaruh moderating efektivitas tindaklanjut tergolong kuat. Dengan kata lain untuk meningkatkan efektivitas SPI sangat efektif dilakukan melalui peningkatan kualitas audit internal dan efektivitas tindaklanjut.
Keywords : kualitas pengawasan/audit internal, efektivitas tindaklanjut, Sistem Pengendalian Internal (SPI), Pemerintahan Daerah, Kabupaten Lumajang
In contrast, after audit reform in 2001, the two major tasks of the members of Parliament, namely (1) approving the government budget; and (2) overseeing the performance and accountability of the government in managing public resources and providing a good quality of public services. BPK reports provide information to support the members of Parliament in conducting their tasks to oversee the performance and accountability of the government. The members of the Legislative are one of the main stakeholders of BPK. The Legislature has the responsibility to hold the government to act accountably in using and managing the state budget and public resources. However, political support from the members of the Legislature (DPR, DPRDs and) to follow up BPK audit reports has not run optimally, although the BPK reports significantly help the members in conducting their control and budget functions. In 2006, a joint agreement between BPK and the Legislature has been signed to improve the follow up of audit findings from the members of the Legislature by communicating and having consultation on the reports.
Parliamentary members have significant roles and functions in improving public administration and holding the Executive to account. Moreover, the role of the legislature in controlling and enforcing the accountability of the bureaucracy is the key element in the relationship of politics and administration. As stated by some academic literatures, Aldons (2001: 34-42) believed that the members of Parliament have political power to hold the Executive accountable to the public. Moreover, the legislature has a significant role in ensuring public satisfaction about the performance of government bureaucracy. Uhr (1982: 31-32) stated that ‘although parliaments cannot and should not be governed, they should call the governors to account, demanding an explanation of how current measures are consistent with general policy guidelines authorized by parliamentary vote’. Uhr statement clearly indicates that parliament has the function of reviewing the processes of government administration. This is also supported by Day and Rudolf (1987: 10-12) who argued that political accountability is employed by the Parliament to hold the governments to account for their actions after reviewing audit reports.
Moreover, Gendron and Cooper (2001: 306) emphasized the close relationship between state auditors and the legislature. Simms (1999: 34) also argued that to ensure the accountability of government, an audit institution examines the accountability of public sector bodies and reports the audit results to the parliament. The reports are reviewed by the parliament to hold the government to accountable to the public for managing and using public resources, and in order to uncover poor administration and corruption (Evans 1999: 87; Simms 1999: 34).
This study employed a qualitative method with in depth interviews with the Head of the Analysis and Budget Implementation for State and Regional Budget Bureau of the Secretariat General of Parliament, the Members of Board and auditors of BPK, Members of Parliament and regional Parliament, and auditees. Besides, a survey to the respondents (auditors, auditees and members of parliament) also conducted for asking their opinion on the support of the members of the Legislature for BPK reports
This paper examines how the coordination and relationship of the functions of BPK as auditors and the Parliament (central and local levels) as controller in state finances in Indonesia. BPK conducts consultations with the members to give some explanations about the audit findings, to answer any other questions from the members relating to information and data in audit reports. Since then, the members of Parliament, regional Parliament and senate have obtained guidance and clarification from BPK in consultation forums to help the members to understand the problems and the audit results. Besides, the consultations also provide guidance on procedures in following up and monitoring follows up of audit reports by government entities. These efforts have led to a positive response from the members of DPR and DPRDs who are starting to review the BPK reports more seriously and to force the government to follow up audit findings and recommendations. The members ask, remind, and pressure the government. As the members have rights to control the accountability of government and to approve the state or regional government budgets, the Parliament can push the government to follow up BPK’s audit findings and recommendations in line with its responsibility to be accountable in public administration.
To conclude, this study found that the members of the Legislature only control the budget planning of the central and local government entities through budget committees. However, it has not run optimally, because lack of members’ ability and support from experts in budget analysis. The control function of the members of the Legislature as ex-ante oversight has not been yet fully extended to the post-budget actions of the government entities. The recommendation to form Public Accountability Committee (PAC) to control financial performance of the executive after the implementation programs (post budget) has not been approved.
Key words: public sector auditing, legislature, supreme audit institution, accountability, auditing report, political support
This paper examines the reforms that have been conducted to improve the transparency and public accountability of the government through media publication of public sector audit reports, with particular emphasis on those aspects where clear differences have emerged in the practice of audit between the pre- and post-reform periods. The paper then briefly lists a number of recommendations that arise out of the research, before suggesting lines for further research.
The research process included a theoretical conceptual stage and the field research stage. The theoretical conceptual included a literature review that provided a background for study and disclosed the room for improvement in public sector auditing in Indonesia. Moreover, historical analysis of the Indonesia public sector auditing on the crucial time to provide insights into the process of development and change of public sector audits across the time in Indonesia. The field research explored primary and secondary data. In depth interviews conducted with auditors, the members of Parliament (central and local levels), and auditees (public sector employees).
This study revealed that since reform, the media have been enthusiastic to draw public attention to audit report findings. As a result, the public has started to become aware about the importance of public sector auditing as means of saving public finances from inefficiency, ineffectiveness, fraud, money laundering and corruption. Besides, in terms of acting on the information in audit reports, this study also revealed significant changes in BPK’s publication of reports through the media and on the BPK website. Transparency builds public trust that resources are managing accountably. However, this study found ddissatisfied responses regarding publication indicated a lack of auditees’ accountability and transparency and evidence. BPK audit findings which are not reported with security and confidential reasons, and missing audit reports after arriving at BPK high levels of officials, are unacceptable to auditors and the public.
Keywords: Media publication, transparency, public accountability, Indonesia.
The research was undertaken through a comprehensive examination of scope of auditing on the quality of content information and the factors influencing to the quality of external public sector auditing reports that are provided by the Indonesian State Audit Institution (BPK). This study also made comparison between pre and post audit reform and applied qualitative method.
The study revealed that the Indonesia’s Executive has historically neglected the roles and functions of BPK. The Indonesian government has reformed laws related to public sector auditing. In situation where the Indonesian government needs immediate reform, BPK has been attempting to improve its audit performance to provide better scope of auditing for the quality of public administration. Towards this, the study suggests recommendations for the BPK to propose judicial reviews in terms of legal aspect for auditing taxes revenues and to pay more attention on the implemention of performance auditing for better public administration.
Key Words: public sector, quality of content audit reports, financial and performance audits.
Metode penelitian yang digunakan adalah metode kualitatif. Data dikumpulkan dari studi kepustaan dan dokumentasi, serta wawancara. Adapun informan kunci terdiri dari: anggota dewan perwakilan, berbagai lembaga yang berperan dalam pengembangan human capital di sektor publik (seperti Lembaga Administrasi Negara (LAN), Badan Kepegawaian Negara (BKN), Kementrian Pendayagunaan Aparatur Negara dan Reformasi Birokrasi), pimpinan dan pegawai yang bekerja di sektor publik, serta masyarakat umum.
Hasil studi menunjukkan bahwa dalam masyarakat terdapat berbagai harapan sekaligus keluhan tentang pelayanan dari aparatur penyelenggara negara akibat dari masih dibawah standarnya kualitas pegawai negeri. Di samping itu, hal yang paling berat adalah lemahnya mekanisme seleksi dan rekrutmen pegawai negeri yang dilakukan oleh pemerintahan daerah. Banyak calon pegawai yang diterima tidak sesuai dengan kualifikasi dan spesifikasi tugas yang dibutuhkan. Di sisi lain, studi juga menunjukkan lemahnya kesadaran pegawai negeri (berkisar 4,8 juta) maupun masyarakat Indonesia (kurang lebih 220 juta) terhadap hak dan kewajiban masing-masing pihak.
Artikel ini memberikan kritik dan rekonstruksi bagi peningkatan mutu sumber daya aparatur sebagai human capital di sektor publik berdasarkan prinsip tata kelola pemerintahan yang bersih, transparan dan terbuka. Selain itu, artikel ini memberikan masukan bagi perbaikan sistem manajemen sumber daya aparatur dengan diperkaya oleh analisis perbandingan dengan sistem yang ada di negara maju (dalam hal ini adalah Australia).
Kata-kata Kunci: human capital, mutu, sumber daya aparatur, sektor publik, evaluasi kebijakan, Indonesia, Australia.
This paper reviews literature from public sector management, public policy and administration, auditing and accountability and aims to assess rigorously the performance of the external and internal audit institution in examining the transparency and accountability of public sector in managing public resources before and after the audit reformation. The effective role and function of auditors have significant role in reforming the Indonesian public administration. In more detail, this paper describes the (1) effectiveness/ineffectiveness of the financial audit reports for the transparency and accountability of public sector agencies, (2) effectiveness/ineffectiveness of the recommendation of performance audit reports in reforming the Indonesian public administration, and (3) factors influencing the effectiveness/ineffectiveness of public sector auditing for public accountability and transparency of the Indonesians’s public sector agencies?
Based on the data and information that was collected from the survey, personal interview, and government/public documentations and media, the key factors influencing ineffectiveness of internal auditing are the lack of competency and skills of auditors, lack of public accountability and transparency of public sector agencies. Whereas for external auditing are the independence (structural and functional), auditor’s professionalism and integrity, and follow–up of audit findings from the legislative, the executive, and the executor (the police, the attorney and the Corruption Eradication Commission) for findings with indication of criminals/corruption. The key informants came from internal and external auditors, auditees, members of parliament, non government organization, academics and researchers from both central and local levels.
For external auditing, this study revealed that although since the reformation era the independence of external public sector has been strengthened, there is still a significant room for improvement for BPK’s independence. Besides, BPK had been mandated to audit all of the public sector bodies; however, in fact, the tax office and government loan could not be audited. For internal auditing, this study revealed the lack of transparency and accountability of public sector agencies was still strong, especially in the regional level. Moreover, the lack of competency auditors in carrying out their duties is also the key factor that influencing ineffectiveness of internal auditing.
The paper provides three recommendations related to internal and external public sector auditing to improve fiscal transparency and public accountability in public sector. The first recommendation is strengthening the independence of external audit institution (BPK) in getting access data and information from taxation office to be audited. The second recommendation is reforming internal audit organizations to improve the management, human resources competency and skills, information and technology resources. The last recommendations is creating effective communication between the members of parliament, auditees and auditors to discuss further about the recommendations and follow up of audit reports to improve the public sector performance.
Key words: public sector performance, public financial accountability, internal and external public sector auditing, inequality audit resources and auditor’s competency, Indonesia.
This paper examines the reforms that have been conducted to improve the transparency of public financial and the accountability of the government in providing public services and furthermore to highlight some of the main features of the analysis, with particular emphasis on those aspects where clear differences have emerged in the practice of audit between the pre- and post-reform periods. The paper then briefly lists a number of recommendations that arise out of the research, before suggesting lines for further research.
The research process included a theoretical conceptual stage and the field research stage. The theoretical conceptual included a literature review that provided a background for study and disclosed the room for improvement in public sector auditing in Indonesia. Moreover, historical analysis of the Indonesia public sector auditing on the crucial time to provide insights into the process of development and change of public sector audits across the time in Indonesia. The field research explored primary and secondary data. In depth interviews conducted with auditors, the members of Parliement (central and local levels), and auditees (public sector employees).
Keywords: public sector auditing, financial transparency, accountability, performance, public sector reform, Indonesia.
The respondents and key informants engaged in this study were:(i) BPK auditors, Board members and managers;(ii) members of both central and regional Parliaments;(iii) public sector officials (auditees) at both the central and local level; and (iv) academics, researchers, and non government organisations (NGO).
The study revealed that the Indonesia’s Executive has historically neglected the roles and functions of BPK. The Indonesian government has reformed laws related to public sector auditing. In situation where the Indonesian government needs immediate reform, BPK has been attempting to improve its audit performance to provide better quality of public administration. Towards this, the study suggests recommendations to the BPK.
This research employed concepts and theories from public administration, public policy and public auditing literatures. The framework of the research formulates from both theories and practices. Qualitative research method applied in this study. Data were collected through triangulation of observations, documentations, questionnaires, and personal interviews. Purposive sampling and snowball techniques were employed. Respondents and key informants engaged in this study were (1) auditors and Board Members of the Indonesian Supreme Audit Institution (BPK); (2) Members of Parliament; (3) public sector officials (auditees) in central and local levels; and (4) academics, researchers, practices.
This study revealed that BPK has made significant improvement service to the content of information in audit reports. The content of reports provides information that is open to the public regarding the public sector’s accountability in managing public resources and complying with the rules. However, there was significant evidence that BPK has lack in communicating its audit results and scope. External auditors still cannot audit the tax revenues, as BPK was not allowed to access data and information from the Directorate General of Taxation Office. This condition indicates the lack of quality and content information services for the public about how the government accountable in managing tax revenues.
In addition, this study found dissatisfaction responses from respondents indicating the lack of strong audit evidence, objectivity and credibility in reports that potentially reduced optimism about the quality of the information in BPK reports. The empirical evidence showed that auditors were still afraid to communicate their findings in written or orally for uncovering sensitive cases of audit findings objectively and credibly. This is because auditors did not feel safe and well protected by their audit institution.
Communication of information services in audit reports mainly had positive comments, relating to understandable information, precise and informative format, and timely reporting. A degree of optimism was seen as a result of better formatting with summaries of audit reports for the members of Parliament and auditees, and a timeframe for auditing and submission of the reports. However, this study still revealed a degree of disappointment about the lack of clarity of communication services in some technical auditing and financial terms in audit reports. Moreover, in terms of audit report’s format, respondents found that the reports are not concise.
To improve the quality in communication services, this paper recommended for providing building capacity of auditors and improving the capability or power of information in audit reports in providing an objective and credible report for getting greater trust from stakeholders.
Key words: audit reports’ publication, audit information, communication services, public accountability, Indonesia.
Keywords: public administration, public accountability, transparency, public sector accountability, performance auditing.
Teaching Documents by Septiana Dwiputrianti