Author
Listed:
- Karim Hegazy
- Anne Stafford
Abstract
Purpose - This paper aims to conduct a comparative study by examining the Audit Committee (AC) set-up, roles, responsibilities and developments in two distinct English public sector settings, namely, foundation trusts (FTs) and local authorities (LAs). Design/methodology/approach - The paper is exploratory and explanatory in nature and uses a qualitative case study approach framed in institutional theory. It is based on semi-structured interviews with AC chairs, external and internal auditors and finance directors triangulated with meeting observations and documentation review. Findings - The study finds that public sector ACs have a large and diverse role which extends beyond challenging/monitoring responsibilities. Influenced by the New Public Management ideology, the AC has developed more rapidly in FTs due to imposed regulation contrasting with the slower progress in LAs due to its still voluntary adoption. Nevertheless, in both environments, there is a developing understanding and growing competence within the AC in terms of their assurance role where the focus has shifted from an emphasis on function and on transacting business through following a manual, to a more strategic-looking approach. Research limitations/implications - Due to the complexity of public sector settings, and by using an approach framed within institutional theory, the study contributes by challenging a simple notion of isomorphism as an explanation of AC roles, responsibilities and development in two distinct public sector environments. Furthermore, the study recognizes that there is a need to ensure ACs are appropriate to their institutional setting and organizational context. Originality/value - Most AC studies have focused on private sector contexts. This paper explores the phenomenon in a different organizational context, namely, as a public sector comparative case study.
Suggested Citation
Karim Hegazy & Anne Stafford, 2016.
"Audit committee roles and responsibilities in two English public sector settings,"
Managerial Auditing Journal, Emerald Group Publishing Limited, vol. 31(8/9), pages 848-870, September.
Handle:
RePEc:eme:majpps:maj-12-2015-1285
DOI: 10.1108/MAJ-12-2015-1285
Download full text from publisher
As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to search for a different version of it.
Corrections
All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:eme:majpps:maj-12-2015-1285. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.
If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.
We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using this form .
If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.
For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Emerald Support (email available below). General contact details of provider: .
Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through
the various RePEc services.