Search results

The purpose of this paper is to examine the reason for the failure of implementing performance-based budgeting (PBB) at Iranian public universities and research institutes (PURI). This examination focuses on the actors participating in the budget processes and their perceptions.

The study uses grounded theory and employs deep semi-structured interviews of budget preparers at Iranian PURI.

The results indicate a loose coupling between perceived and regulated budgeting process. This leads to budgetary slack as a barrier for authentic information flow and indeed PBB implementation. In the analysis of the results, the authors suggest some ways to improve the current situation of the budgeting processes at Iranian PURI.

Public organizations that desire to transform their budgeting system need to consider their actors’ perceptions regarding the budgeting process. By explicitly considering their perceptions the organization may be able to solve any loose coupling as a result of internal, external and behavioral conditions.

This research examines issues that arise in the transformation of organizational processes. The focus on budget processes is critical for organizations which receive most, if not all, of their operational funds from a central authority. This research highlights the role of budget actors’ perceptions in transforming the budgeting process. An important result of this analysis is documenting the existence of loose coupling in the current budgeting process at Iranian PURI. This loose coupling results in slack creation and restricts the implementation of a PBB system. Additionally, this loose coupling limits the flow of authentic information.

This study aims to examine the public budgeting process in the higher education and research sectors of Iran. It focuses on the actors’ budgetary roles and uses their perspectives to identify deficiencies in the budgeting process that cause delays in the transition to a performance-based system.

This study uses an interpretive research paradigm. It applies the grounded theory methodology to analyze the interviews conducted with those responsible for budgeting at Iranian public universities and research institutes (PURI). The results are interpreted using Wildavsky’s (1964) budgetary roles paradigm.

Using Wildavsky’s (1964) paradigm, “spenders” and “guardians” are identified and their perceptions about the public budgeting process are described. The results suggest a decoupling between the actors’ perceptions based on their budgetary roles. Spenders consider budgeting as a negotiation-based process, while guardians’ decisions are largely based on “outputs” and “information.” This study demonstrates that the disagreement over the perceived budget process was due to different budgetary roles. This disagreement leads to delays in the transformation of the budget process in Iranian PURI.

While efforts are made to obtain a sample of individuals with different roles and responsibilities, the selection is limited by subjects’ willingness and availability. Therefore, sample size and diversity are potential limitations of this study.

When organizations attempt to transition to performance-based budgeting (PBB), it is critical to understand the current budgeting process to identify potential impediments. Understanding these impediments allows for alternate approaches to be considered. This is particularly important for universities that are mostly funded by the government (such as those in Iran). The results of this study show that the contradictory perceptions among budget actors have a significant impact on budgeting transition and require attention to understand budgeting decisions.

This study contributes to the budgeting literature in three ways. First, it examines the impact of endogenized shared values among budget participants on the budgeting transition process. Second, by focusing on budgetary roles, it contributes to the literature by examining disagreement on the perceived budgeting process and its implications for transforming the process into PBB. Finally, to the authors’ knowledge, this is the first study to examine the public budgeting process in a developing country – Iran.

The purpose of this study is to understand the efforts of key social actors in influencing the reform of Iranian public universities budgeting system, from incremental to performance-based budgeting (PBB), the tensions that arose as competing efforts of institutional change were undertaken, and ultimately the impact of these efforts on the extent to which the Iranian government transitioned to a system of PBB in public universities.

Data comprises of semi-structured interviews with managers and experts involved in the budget setting process and an analysis of budgetary policy documents, reports and archival material such as legislation. An institutional work lens is employed to interpret the findings.

While actors advocating the change were engaged in institutional work directed at disrupting the old budgetary rules by disassociating the rules moral foundations and creating new budgetary rules (through new legislation), universities undertook subtle resistance by engaging in extended evaluation of the new proposed PBB rules thereby maintaining the old budgetary rules. The reforms undertaken to introduce PBB in Iranian universities achieved minimal success whereby incremental budgeting continued to constitute by far a larger percentage of the budget allocation formula for university budgets. This finding illustrates change and continuity in university budgetary systems resulting from institutional work of actors competing to control the basis of resource allocation under the proposed PBB system by proposing contradicting models.

The findings highlight the importance of understanding the interplay of institutional work undertaken by competing social actors as they seek to advance their goals in shaping budgetary reforms in the public-sector. Such an understanding may inform policy makers who intend to introduce major reforms in public-sector budgeting approaches.

Unlike prior studies that largely focused on how organization-level budgeting practices responded to changes in public budgeting rules (i.e. at the site of implementation of the rules), this paper highlights how strategies of change and resistance are played out at the site of setting budgetary norms.

This paper aims to review the auditing procedures and structure in an emerging economy's public sector by explaining the recent changes and developments in the auditing process, its structure and the responsibilities of its underlying actors.

This paper traces the development of Iran's public sector financial monitoring by examining the country's legal and governmental documents as well as the auditing standards and procedures.

The Supreme Audit Court of Iran (SACI) is the main actor in public auditing and uses various tools and involves several organizations to cover diverse scopes of public auditing; this paper also discusses the structure and the financial (in)dependence of the SACI.

This is the first piece of work that explains the public auditing procedures and structure in Iran's public sector by focusing on recent changes and developments in its objectives and scopes.