MÉTODOS DE LABORATORIO 64

The OAG in Namibia is a member of AFROSAI-E as well as INTOSAI. This membership was significant in the interviews, where the auditors regarded the membership as implying that they should follow the regulation issued within the organization. One auditor expressed the view that they have no choice but to follow the standards since they were members of these organizations.175

However, the main approach among the auditors was to highlight the advantages they saw in using the same audit methodology within the international as well as regional cooperation. The auditor who expressed the view that following the standards was not voluntary also went on to argue about all the advantages of using similar methodologies among the SAIs in the world.176

One advantage of using the same audit methodology within the region and internationally, is argued by the auditors to be peer reviews. As discussed in chapter three, peer reviews are carried out within the regional organization AFROSAI-E on a regular basis. In the peer reviews,“good practices” at the office, in line with the international requirements, are recognized and areas for improvements are highlighted. Based on the peer reviews, the SAIs in the region are then ranked on how well they fulfill the requirements in the international audit standards.177 _{Although the importance}

of the SAI’s position in terms of the ranking was highlighted in the interviews, the auditors argued to a greater extent that peer reviews 175 Interview 57

were an assurance for the quality of their work. One auditor argued that if all SAIs conducted audits structured in different ways, it would be difficult conduct peer reviews and if there were no peer reviews there would be no one to say whether they conducted audit in an appropriate way and were heading in the right direction.178

The auditors’ focus on the importance of learning and helping each other as auditors, and how a similar methodology can then be an advantage, is very significant, not only with regard to peer reviews.179

One auditor gave an example of how the office purchased new audit software. Through AFROSAI-E, they met auditors from Uganda who had long experience with the same software and they had been able to learn from the mistakes the auditors in Uganda had made with the system. In this case, the Ugandan auditors also visited the OAG in Namibia and auditors at the OAG planned a trip to visit the OAG in Uganda to learn how they used the software.180 _{In the same way}

as the auditors at the OAG have received help from the experience of other countries, they have also helped other SAIs. For instance, the office has sent auditors to the SAI in Ghana to help them out with some difficulties they were experiencing with their auditing. The auditor who gave the example argued that such cooperation would not be possible if the SAIs did not work according to the same methodology.181 _{In addition, using similar methodologies around the}

world means that the auditors at the OAG in Namibia were able to work, not only in Ghana but also in other countries outside Africa, as well as in international organizations such as the UN. The UN appoints auditors for international assignments; hence, if auditors in Namibia were to use a different methodology they would not be able to participate in such missions.182

The main opinion among auditors at the OAG in Namibia was that there were no disadvantages in using the same audit methodology 178 Interview 49

179 Interview 45, 46, 49, 58, 52, 48 180 Interview 58

around the world. One exception was when an auditor argued that one risk in harmonizing methodologies around the world would be if certain countries were too narrowly focused. He claimed that the risk in such situations would be that good ideas from other countries might not be recognized. However, the auditor did not claim that this was the case with the current standards and work methodologies. The example he gave was a situation that arose in a regional workshop, where he thought some people dominated the discussion at the cost of others.183 _{Another difficulty with harmonizing work procedures could}

be a lack of resources. Auditors mentioned that they sometimes found it difficult to keep up with the requirements in the standards due to limitations in resources. When they argued that the lack of resources impeded their possibilities to follow the standards, they did not only claim it was a current problem for the office, they also argued that limited resources were a problem for the auditees.184 _{For instance, in}

the standards, there might be requirements of a separation of duties between officials in a government office, however the resources available for the auditee may only allow one person to be employed, hence they are unable to fulfill the requirements in the standards.185

The membership in the professional organizations appeared as an important aspect for why the auditors at the OAG viewed following and implementing the standards as appropriate to their organization, thus confirming the importance of professional networks and

associations for adhering to certain organizational models (DiMaggio & Powell 1983; Gibbons 2004; Greenwood, Suddaby & Hinings 2002; Wedlin 2007). Following the professional standards was also regarded as making it possible to improve their work by letting their peers from other countries review their work and, as the quotation above illustrates, advise them on whether they are “on the right track”. This also confirms their focus on using legitimate practices as defined by their professional peers in other countries, in contrast to using practices defined as appropriate out of local circumstances in 183 Interview 58

their country. Moreover, there was also a practical dimension to the use of international standards, where the auditors argued that the use of similar methodologies around the world means they could receive help, as well as help others SAIs,in overcoming difficulties. In addition, it opens up opportunities for individuals to work in other places than the OAG in Namibia. This practical dimension also contributes to confirming the auditors at the OAG as a part of a professional community, which does not have any national borders.

Confirming what development scholars argue is an important aspect of the transferability of models between Western countries and developing countries, the auditors claimed that it was sometimes difficult to fulfill the requirements in the standards since the OAG and the entities they audit do not have enough resources (Gyimah-Boadi 2004). Nevertheless, the auditors’ solution to this situation was not to argue about the importance of making adjustments to the standards to suit their local circumstances, rather they claimed that they were taking it step by step and were gradually meeting the requirements in the standards, which confirmed their professional ambitions to comply with the standards as far as possible, as outlined by the organization literature.