LA HERMANDAD

In interviews, it was explained that the auditors did not always use the manual in their daily work; the manual functioned rather as guidance when they were uncertain of the procedures. It is through standardized working papers that the prescriptions in the standards and the manual are transferred into the daily practical work of the auditors. The extent to which standardized procedures are used in the Supreme Audit Institutions is also a criterion in their peer reviews, where a great extent of usage of standardized working papers is considered “good practice”, in line with international standards (AFROSAI-E 2006; 2009) The previous peer review for the OAG in Botswana stated that there was limited implementation of such standardized working papers in the office (AFROSAI-E 2009).

So why has the office not managed to implement a greater usage of standardized procedures in the office? One auditor explained that it could be difficult when you have been used to certain procedures to change: “Now when we are thinking we are comfortable, now we can do this, now they come and bring in such things. You know this fear that you might fail to do that.” 140 _{For the}

auditors, working according to the audit methodology as prescribed in the international standards also implied an increase in their workload. The new methodology involved a part with more careful planning, which takes a longer time to conduct. In addition, documentation of their work was demanded to a much larger extent when they followed the standardized procedures according to the standards than the auditors had done before. An auditor explained that: “It is a lot of paper work now, but we are trying…“141 _{Despite the increased work}

load, the auditors argued that the new methodology enabled them to work better. Due to the more extensive planning, including a greater attention to materiality, they claimed they understand the auditee 140 Interview 27

better and the execution was more focused.142

In addition, the use of standardized work procedures as well as the increased documentation that follows meant more transparency in the work conducted at the office. To auditors in management positions, such increased transparency in work procedures could result in a decrease in their power as well as show possible deficiencies of their work.143 _{One auditor claimed that before the work procedures were}

standardized some managers were keeping important information to themselves, which was more difficult when the standardized procedures were followed and the documentation increased: “With the new methodology everything is open and that will take the power away. The supervisor will lose power, since the work can be done more easily without him or her.”144 _{Furthermore, the auditor argued}

that the higher requirements for planning and documentation would make the work of auditors in all positions more visible, and since the levels of competence were not appropriate in several positions, many auditors shortage in skills would be more obvious. The auditor claimed that this was the reason why many auditors at the office had resisted the changing working methodologies into more standardized procedures.145

In parallel with the implementation of the latest manual, the office had invested in audit software, TeamMate. In TeamMate, the audit manual and all working papers are integrated. Some of the auditors explained that TeamMate has made their work easier, there is less paper work, and it is easier to communicate within the office.146

In TeamMate, all the audit procedures are fixed: “If you want to audit expenditures, just click on expenditures, if you want to audit salaries, just click on salaries.”147 _{The extent to which TeamMatewas used in the}

office varied, somebody mentioned that they were using it but other 142 Interview 36, 33, 29, 21

143 Interview 21, 28 144 Interview 21 145 Interview 21 146 Interview 21, 33, 29

sections were “lagging behind,”148 _{another auditor claimed that they}

only take out working papers from TeamMate and fill them in as they used to, they were not actually using TeamMate.149

A manager expressed frustration about the auditors’ lack of adaptation to TeamMate. He argued that sufficient training by means of workshops had been held in the office. In his opinion, the auditors should make a greater effort, not only agree in the workshops and then stop using the system when they faced problems.150 _{Nevertheless,}

auditors working with TeamMate explained that they did not think they had received enough training on the system, they also argued that there was no technical support and no one to ask if they got stuck.151_{One interviewee claimed that working with TeamMate was}

problematic since no one in the office had any experience of the system. When they did not know how to solve an issue, they asked their manager, but the manager did not know either. Another auditor argued that the office had underestimated the need for training required to understand a new system: “I cannot apply it, I don’t know what to do.” The auditor made a parallel to learning how to drive a car: “You cannot just sit in the car and be shown how to drive, then just given the keys and be told: Here you go, just drive now … it is the same here, it is not working. There is no technical support to guide you.”152

Efforts to try to implement standardized work procedures more in line with the international requirements, as well as the investment in TeamMate as audit software and the training conducted to implement the use of the program, illustrate the office’s ambition to increase the use standardized work procedures, which confirms its aim to comply with the requirements in the international standards. The problems of implementing the software in the office do not appear to be related to any specific African circumstances in their 148 Interview 29

149 Interview 37 150 Interview 21 151 Interview 36

environment, thus do not confirm what would be expected from the arguments put forward by some development scholars.

To some extent it could be argued that resources are significant, the auditors using the system claimed that they had not received sufficient training on the program, as well as claiming that there was no support available when they had problems (c.f. Glenday 1998; Gyimah-Boadi 2004; Turner & Hulme 1997). However, it is difficult to argue that it is a particular problem for developing countries to encounter problems in implementing computer software, of which nobody in the office has any experience. It is reasonable to expect this to be the situation in an industrialized country as well. In addition TeamMate is relatively expensive software, which is not used in all countries, thus resources could not be the main reason for the problems in implementing standardized working procedures. As stated previously with respect to the audit manual, the limited and scattered implementation of the software is probably due to an underestimation of the trainingneeds and the design of the implementation process. Thus, confirming what the World Bank (2005) argued to be a main explanation for the failure in implementing public administration reforms in Africa.

In general, in the interviews it was argued that standardized work procedures were resisted because of the revealing effect these would have on the inadequate levels of competence, particular in management positions. Thus, due to the fear of being exposed and losing power and influence through more transparent procedures, auditors in management positions had resisted the start of the new methodologies, with standardized procedures and more documentation. This may be understood as confirming what development scholars argue to be the problem in African countries, i.e. there is a lack of appropriate competence, which makes implementation of foreign models problematic. This implies that there is a need to design the implementation of the new methodologies accordingly. At the OAG, it appears as if the implementation of standardized procedures would need to have been designed to suit the situation where managers and auditors in particular, with lower

levels of education, probably had need for extra training and to receive extra attention. In addition, working with the standardized procedures according to international standards involves an increased workload for the auditors in the office, where they need to plan more and document more. The auditors did not argue that there was a need to change the methodologies prescribed in the standards to suit their local circumstances, in contrast to what would be expected from the literature on development, instead they claimed that it was natural for people in general to resist when more work is imposed. In addition, in contrast to what some development scholars argue is necessary for public administration reforms in African countries, the OAG has not made any attempts to develop its own form of work procedures, nor do they claim that this is necessary due to its circumstances.

Competence