Search results

An examination of the commonalities and differences between performance management practices in the public and private sector.

A literature review of 100 publications in international academic journals over the last 20 years.

The chapter develops a framework which links the dimensions of the public/private-distinction (ownership, funding, control and type of goals) to the design and use of performance management systems (PMS). This framework subsequently informs a literature review, which can be summarised as follows: Multi-dimensionality of the PMS is core in both public and private sector organisations, but quite many private sector papers point to a financial focus at the top of the PMS, while public sector organisations show a broad variety of performance indicators, including those on societally relevant goals. In addition, a link between the PMS and strategies can be found in the public and the private sector, but the match between different strategies and PMS design is more elaborated in the private sector. These findings are largely in accordance with our expectations. The review also finds support for the assumption that performance information in public sector organisations is primarily used for external accountability reasons, while internal managerial control is the main purpose in private firms. The use of performance information is quite intensive and mostly functional in both sectors, which does not meet our expectations. Overall, the differences between performance management practices in the public and private sector are less stringent than expected.

Due to limited evidence about the importance of performance-related pay systems and no evidence about targeting in both sectors, a more focused literature review on these issues would be desirable.

Mutual learning between both sectors, for example the public sector can learn from the private sector on how to link strategy to the PMS and the private sector can learn from the public sector about serving a multitude of stakeholders in the PMS.

A comprehensive review of performance management practices in the public and private sector.

Increased fraudulent practices have heightened the need for innovation in anti-fraud programs, necessitating the development of analytics techniques for detecting and preventing fraud. The subject of fraud analytics will continue to expand in the future for public-sector organizations; therefore, this research examined the progress of fraud analytics in public-sector transactions and offers suggestions for its future development.

This study systematically reviewed research on fraud analytics development in public-sector transactions. The review was conducted from June 2021 to June 2023 by identifying research objectives and questions, performing literature quality assessment and extraction, data synthesis and research reporting. The research mainly identified 43 relevant articles that were used as references.

This research examined fraud analytics development related to public-sector financial transactions. The results revealed that fraud analytics expansion has not spread equally, as most programs have been implemented by governments and healthcare organizations in developed countries. This research also exposed that the analytics optimization in fraud prevention is higher than for fraud detection. Such analytics help organizations detect fraud, improve business effectiveness and efficiency, and refine administrative systems and work standards.

This research offers comprehensive insights for researchers and public-sector professionals regarding current fraud analytics development in public-sector financial transactions and future trends.

This study presents the first systematic literature review to investigate the development of fraud analytics in public-sector transactions. The findings can aid scholars' and practitioners' future fraud analytics development.

The purpose of this polyphonic paper is to report on interdisciplinary discussions on the state-of-the-art and future of public sector accounting research (PSAR). The authors hope to enliven the debates of the past and future developments in terms of context, themes, theories, methods and impacts in the field of PSAR by the exchanges they include here.

This polyphonic paper adopts an interdisciplinary approach. It brings into conversation ideas, views and approaches of several scholars on the actual and future developments of PSAR in various contexts, and explores potential implications.

This paper has brought together scholars from a plurality of disciplines, research methods and geographical areas, showing at the same time several points of convergence on important future themes (such as accounting as a mean for public, accounting, hybridity and value pluralism) and enabling conditions (accounting capabilities, profession and digitalisation) for PSA scholarship and practice, and the richness of looking at them from a plurality of perspectives.

Exploring these past and future developments opens up the potential for interesting theoretical insights. A much greater theoretical and practical reconsideration of PSAR will be fostered by the exchanges included here.

In setting out a future research agenda, this paper fosters theoretical and methodological pluralism in the interdisciplinary research community interested in PSAR in various contexts. The discussion perspectives presented in this paper constitute not only a basis for further research in this relevant accounting area on the role, status and developments of PSAR but also creative potential for practitioners to be more reflective on their practices and also intended and united outcomes of such practices.

The purpose of this paper is to provide a critical analysis of publications relating to the use of continuous improvement (CI) methodologies, such as Lean, Six Sigma and Lean Six Sigma over a 17-year period, to identify the themes and gaps, while informing the development of a future research agenda.

The systematic literature review identified 121 papers published between 2000 and 2017 from searches of over 1,400 peer-reviewed academic journals and also identified the application of Lean, Six Sigma and Lean Six Sigma across the public sector.

This research compares the scale and breadth of the public sector with the application of CI methodologies and finds that such application is unstructured and, in some areas, sporadic. The research identifies common themes and research gaps including areas such as lack of shared understanding of Lean, gaps in strategy development and leadership and an overfocus on tools alone.

The methodology is focussed on the journals rated in the ABS Journal Guide 2015, which allowed manual searches for accuracy and relevance to the area of investigation. It is recognised that this may exclude some articles which have been published in other journals but allowed for a structured and detailed investigation. The research identifies some very clear gaps which can inform future research agendas.

The paper details the implications and challenges to the public sector, generally, and to executive leadership, specifically, and, in particular, covers the common issues and concerns, which in turn will assist public sector organisations in implementing, reviewing or refreshing their CI initiatives.

No similar work has been conducted and while some individual areas such as health and education have been the subject of more focus, this research explores the public sector as a whole and considers the patterns of research in that context.

The purpose of this paper is to provide an evaluation of public sector research in the 1998–2018 period.

The paper uses the extant literature of this era to study the theorisation of, and the findings of, public sector research.

This is a vibrant field of a study in a wide range of study settings and with many interdisciplinary studies. The influence of new public management is pervasive over this period. There are numerous instances of innovations in study settings, in key findings and the approach taken by investigators.

This is not a comprehensive review of all literature in this period.

This study also explored the relevance of academic research of this era to policymaking by governments.

This paper offers a distinctive critique of theorisation of public sector accounting research. It reveals the dominant theoretical reference points in use during this period and observes the increasing tendency for theoretical pluralism to investigate complex study settings.

The purpose of this paper is to present an overview of the articles presented in this special issue. The Special Issue is inspired by our recent review of the intellectual capital (IC) literature in Guthrie et al. (2012, p. 74), in which the authors found that the public sector is one of the least addressed areas of IC research.

The paper is based on a literature and published document review, experiential reflections and argument.

The paper reveals that interest in public sector and IC is alive and well and the major difference between public sector and mainstream IC research is a complete lack of normative research. The papers in this Journal of Intellectual Capital (JIC) Special Issue continue that tradition.

The authors call on public sector IC researchers to continue the third stage and fourth stage IC research tradition encouraging them to explore emerging issues alongside the changes in the social, political and economic realities impacting public sector IC in the future. Doing so will ensure that public sector IC research is timely, relevant, impactful and contributes to future practice, research, policy and above all, benefits the citizens who need and consume public services.

The paper presents a précise of current public sector research and encourages public sector researchers to continue developing research into how IC works.

Accounting researchers have performed many studies related to public sector budgeting and financial management. Public sector accounting research seeks to explain the role of accounting and auditing in the public sector. For example, researchers examine issues such as (1) the use of accounting information by elected officials, (2) the demand for auditing, and (3) the determination of bond ratings. This review of the public sector accounting literature describes some of the theoretical foundations utilized in public sector accounting research and reviews a sample of selected empirical studies.

This paper aims to review and critique the public sector knowledge management (KM) literature, offers an overview of the state of public sector KM research and outlines a future research agenda.

Articles published in KM journals are analyzed using a structured literature review methodology. The paper analyzes 180 papers published within ten journals specializing in the field of KM.

Public sector KM is a research area of growing importance. Findings show that few authors specialize in the field and there are several obstacles to developing a cohesive body of literature. Low levels of international cooperation among authors and international comparisons mean that the literature is fragmented. Some research topics and some geographical areas within the public sector theme are over-analyzed, while others are under-investigated. Additionally, academic researchers should re-think their methodological approach if they wish to make significant contributions to the literature and work toward developing research which impacts practice in conjunction with practitioners.

The paper presents a comprehensive structured literature review of the articles published in KM journals. The paper’s findings can offer insights into future research needs.

The point of exit in this research is that there should be an internal audit department in a national government department in South Africa to render a top‐class internal auditing service that is cost‐effective and affordable, preferred by clients, continuously complies with the standards of professional practice of internal auditing and best practice and have a positive impact on the national government department’s bottom line. The empirical research has highlighted several factors, including the ignorance of key role players and lack of professional proficiency on the part of internal auditors, as factors that impede the establishment and operation of an internal auditing function in the public sector in South Africa. It is recommended, that audit committees in the public sector should launch a joint marketing action, directed at key role players, to promote the potential value of a top‐class internal auditing service in the public sector, as well as the factors that impede it.

The purpose of this paper is to encourage research implicating public sector accounting practitioners. It overviews articles in the AAAJ Forum arising from the Comparative International Governmental Accounting Research (CIGAR) Network conference in 2015 in which practitioners’ doings were themes across numerous papers. The paper’s central objective is to scope out an agenda for future research in the area.

Using the CIGAR presentations and papers reviewed for this AAAJ Forum, a desk-based study informed by these sources and others has been conducted.

Aspects of public sector accounting practitioners’ doings hold promise in themselves whilst also being likely to complement and enrich other themes of public sector accounting research. Those aspects give rise to analytical frames, which may overlap and/or reinforce other aspects. Those analytical frames are: first, examining networking between practitioners; second, identifying implications of the professionalisation project for public sector accounting practitioners; third, analysing public sector accounting practitioners’ responses to the rise of external experts; and, fourth, exploring how public sector accounting practitioners interact with forces that shape the accounting craft. The four articles published here variously address several parts of these themes.

In scoping out a future research agenda, this paper justifies greater attention being paid to the four themes noted in its findings. In each of these research fields, an interdisciplinary approach is important.