IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/sae/ijcgvn/v13y2020i1p85-98.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Corporate Governance and Performance of Audit Committee and Internal Audit Functions in an Emerging Economy’s Public Sector

Author

Listed:
  • Shewangu Dzomira

Abstract

This article seeks to examine corporate governance and the performance of audit committee and internal audit functions in an emerging economy’s public sector. These two functions form a part of imperative corporate governance aspects, and their effective performance ensures better service delivery by public sector agencies. The study is premised on stakeholder theory, which has turned out to be the central point of public sector discourses. The study is based on qualitative content analysis, which aspires to present information about corporate governance and effectiveness of audit committees and internal audit units in South Africa’s public sector. The findings suggest that there is good corporate governance in terms of the existence of audit committees and internal audit functions in the public sector. However, the results suggest that the audit committees and internal audit units in South Africa’s public sector are not effective. Absence of advice, implementation of recommendations and inadequacy of resources have undermined the performance of audit committees and internal audit units in South Africa’s public sector. The leadership and other assurance bringers ought to consider the findings elevated by the audit committees and internal audit and execute their commendation. Their findings should be urbanised into action plans that are implemented by management. Audit committees must improve their oversight on internal audit functions so that both units would effectively perform. The subsistence of successful audit committee and internal audit components in the public sector certifies proficient and effectual exploitation of resources for the gain of all stakeholders.

Suggested Citation

  • Shewangu Dzomira, 2020. "Corporate Governance and Performance of Audit Committee and Internal Audit Functions in an Emerging Economy’s Public Sector," Indian Journal of Corporate Governance, , vol. 13(1), pages 85-98, June.
  • Handle: RePEc:sae:ijcgvn:v:13:y:2020:i:1:p:85-98
    DOI: 10.1177/0974686220923789
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://journals.sagepub.com/doi/10.1177/0974686220923789
    Download Restriction: no

    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1177/0974686220923789?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Marlene Davies, 2009. "Effective working relationships between audit committees and internal audit—the cornerstone of corporate governance in local authorities, a Welsh perspective," Journal of Management & Governance, Springer;Accademia Italiana di Economia Aziendale (AIDEA), vol. 13(1), pages 41-73, May.
    2. Michael C. Jensen, 2010. "Value Maximization, Stakeholder Theory, and the Corporate Objective Function," Journal of Applied Corporate Finance, Morgan Stanley, vol. 22(1), pages 32-42, January.
    3. repec:dau:papers:123456789/406 is not listed on IDEAS
    4. Edward Freeman, R. & Phillips, Robert A., 2002. "Stakeholder Theory: A Libertarian Defense," Business Ethics Quarterly, Cambridge University Press, vol. 12(3), pages 331-349, July.
    5. Johnathan Magrane & Sue Malthus, 2010. "Audit committee effectiveness: a public sector case study," Managerial Auditing Journal, Emerald Group Publishing, vol. 25(5), pages 427-443, May.
    6. Aaron Cohen & Gabriel Sayag, 2010. "The Effectiveness of Internal Auditing: An Empirical Examination of its Determinants in Israeli Organisations," Australian Accounting Review, CPA Australia, vol. 20(3), pages 296-307, September.
    7. Phillips, Robert & Freeman, R. Edward & Wicks, Andrew C., 2003. "What Stakeholder Theory is Not," Business Ethics Quarterly, Cambridge University Press, vol. 13(4), pages 479-502, October.
    8. Salma Damak-Ayadi & Yvon Pesqueux, 2005. "stakeholder theory in perspective," Post-Print halshs-00154129, HAL.
    9. John M Bryson, 2004. "What to do when Stakeholders matter," Public Management Review, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 6(1), pages 21-53, March.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Benedict Valentine Arulanandam & Christo Selvan & Goh Xin Tong, 2023. "Critical Factors Influencing Firms' Risk-Taking Behaviour: CEO Characteristics and the Moderating Role of the Audit Committee," Central European Business Review, Prague University of Economics and Business, vol. 2023(5), pages 1-41.
    2. Leo Moses Twum-Barima & Ernest Frempong, 2023. "Corporate Governance in the Public Sector of Ghana: The Role of Audit Committees in the Covered Entities," International Journal of Research and Innovation in Social Science, International Journal of Research and Innovation in Social Science (IJRISS), vol. 7(8), pages 190-202, August.

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Allen Kaufman & Ernie Englander, 2011. "Behavioral Economics, Federalism, and the Triumph of Stakeholder Theory," Journal of Business Ethics, Springer, vol. 102(3), pages 421-438, September.
    2. David Rönnegard & N. Craig Smith, 2024. "A Rawlsian Rule for Corporate Governance," Journal of Business Ethics, Springer, vol. 190(2), pages 295-308, March.
    3. Y. Fassin, 2008. "The Stakeholder Model Refined," Working Papers of Faculty of Economics and Business Administration, Ghent University, Belgium 08/529, Ghent University, Faculty of Economics and Business Administration.
    4. Ericka Costa & Tommaso Ramus, 2012. "The Italian Economia Aziendale and Catholic Social Teaching: How to Apply the Common Good Principle at the Managerial Level," Journal of Business Ethics, Springer, vol. 106(1), pages 103-116, March.
    5. Tae Wan Kim & Alan Scheller-Wolf, 2019. "Technological Unemployment, Meaning in Life, Purpose of Business, and the Future of Stakeholders," Journal of Business Ethics, Springer, vol. 160(2), pages 319-337, December.
    6. Jose Lopez-De-Pedro & Eva Rimbau-Gilabert, 2012. "Stakeholder Approach: What Effects Should We Take into Account in Contemporary Societies?," Journal of Business Ethics, Springer, vol. 107(2), pages 147-158, May.
    7. Najeb Masoud, 2017. "How to win the battle of ideas in corporate social responsibility: the International Pyramid Model of CSR," International Journal of Corporate Social Responsibility, Springer, vol. 2(1), pages 1-22, December.
    8. Mara Del Baldo, 2012. "Corporate social responsibility and corporate governance in Italian SMEs: the experience of some “spirited businesses”," Journal of Management & Governance, Springer;Accademia Italiana di Economia Aziendale (AIDEA), vol. 16(1), pages 1-36, February.
    9. Yuan Ding & Thomas Jeanjean & Hervé Stolowy, 2013. "Accounting for Stakeholders or Shareholders? The Case of R&D Reporting," Post-Print hal-01002936, HAL.
    10. Pies, Ingo & Hielscher, Stefan & Beckmann, Markus, 2008. "Corporate citizenship as stakeholder management: An ordonomic approach to business ethics," Discussion Papers 2008-4, Martin Luther University of Halle-Wittenberg, Chair of Economic Ethics.
    11. Fracarolli Nunes, Mauro & Lee Park, Camila & Shin, Hyunju, 2021. "Corporate social and environmental irresponsibilities in supply chains, contamination, and damage of intangible resources: A behavioural approach," International Journal of Production Economics, Elsevier, vol. 241(C).
    12. Valentinov, Vladislav, 2023. "Stakeholder theory: Toward a classical institutional economics perspective," EconStor Open Access Articles and Book Chapters, ZBW - Leibniz Information Centre for Economics, vol. 188(1), pages 75-88.
    13. Danny Zhao‐Xiang Huang, 2022. "An integrated theory of the firm approach to environmental, social and governance performance," Accounting and Finance, Accounting and Finance Association of Australia and New Zealand, vol. 62(S1), pages 1567-1598, April.
    14. Francesco Perrini & Angeloantonio Russo & Antonio Tencati & Clodia Vurro, 2011. "Deconstructing the Relationship Between Corporate Social and Financial Performance," Journal of Business Ethics, Springer, vol. 102(1), pages 59-76, March.
    15. Anagnostopoulou, Seraina C. & Tsekrekos, Andrianos E. & Voulgaris, Georgios, 2021. "Accounting conservatism and corporate social responsibility," The British Accounting Review, Elsevier, vol. 53(4).
    16. Razana Juhaida Johari & Md. Mahmudul Alam & Jamaliah Said, 2020. "Empirical assessment on factors contributing to integrity practices of Malaysian public sector officers," Post-Print hal-03538155, HAL.
    17. Jose-Luis Godos-Díez & Roberto Fernández-Gago & Laura Cabeza-García, 2015. "Business Education and Idealism as Determinants of Stakeholder Orientation," Journal of Business Ethics, Springer, vol. 131(2), pages 439-452, October.
    18. Yves Fassin, 2010. "A Dynamic Perspective in Freeman’s Stakeholder Model," Journal of Business Ethics, Springer, vol. 96(1), pages 39-49, August.
    19. Amad Rashid & Basariah Salim & Halimah Nasibah Ahmad, 2021. "Internal Audit Effectiveness and Audit Committee Characteristics:Empirical Evidence from Pakistan," iRASD Journal of Management, International Research Alliance for Sustainable Development (iRASD), vol. 3(1), pages 1-13, june.
    20. Jukka Mäkinen & Eero Kasanen, 2016. "Boundaries Between Business and Politics: A Study on the Division of Moral Labor," Journal of Business Ethics, Springer, vol. 134(1), pages 103-116, March.

    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:sae:ijcgvn:v:13:y:2020:i:1:p:85-98. 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.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with 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: SAGE Publications (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.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.