Analisis Faktor-Faktor Penyebab Temuan Berulang (Studi Pada Pemerintah Kabupaten Manggarai Provinsi NTT)
Yohana Veliska Lambo(1*), Irwan Taufiq Ritonga(2)
(1) Universitas Gadjah Mada
(2) Departemen Akuntansi, Fakultas Ekonomika dan Bisnis, Universitas Gadjah Mada, Yogyakarta
(*) Corresponding Author
Abstract
Pelaksanaan tindak lanjut rekomendasi audit pada pemerintah daerah belum dilaksanakan secara memadai. Hal ini terlihat dari masih adanya rekomendasi audit yang terlambat ditindaklanjuti serta penyelesaian tindak lanjut yang belum sesuai dengan rekomendasi yang diberikan. Tidak adanya tindakan korektif yang memadai terhadap rekomendasi yang diberikan oleh auditor menyebabkan temuan tersebut kembali berulang pada audit tahun berikutnya. Tujuan penelitian ini adalah untuk mengidentifikasi faktor-faktor yang menjadi tantangan dan hambatan dalam pelaksanaan tindak lanjut rekomendasi audit. Perspektif logika institusional digunakan untuk menginvestigasi masalah apa yang dihadapi dalam penyelesaian tindak lanjut serta respon dan tindakan apa yang dilakukan oleh pemerintah. Wawancara dilakukan kepada para aktor yang berperan dalam proses penyelesaian tindak lanjut. Selain itu dilakukan analisis dokumen yang terkait dengan penyelesaian tindak lanjut. Hasil penelitian mengidentifikasi hambatan dalam penyelesaian tindak lanjut yaitu faktor eksternal/lingkungan dan faktor internal/organisasi. Strategi yang diambil oleh para aktor belum dapat menyelesaikan tindak lanjut secara memadai. Adanya persepsi bahwa tindak lanjut bukan merupakan kegiatan yang penting untuk dilakukan memengaruhi respon dan logika dari para aktor ketika menyelesaikan tindak lanjut. Logika ini mendorong adanya pengabaian terhadap rekomendasi tindak lanjut dan menjadi motif gagalnya penerapan strategi yang efektif. Pengabaian terhadap rekomendasi tindak lanjut juga terlihat dari implementasi pelaksanaan tindak lanjut yang tidak memadai mulai dari proses perencanaan, pelaksanaan, pemantauan dan evaluasi.
Keywords
Full Text:
PDFReferences
Aikins, S. (2012). Determinants of Auditee Adoption of Audit Recomendations: Local Government Auditors’ Perspectives. Public Budgeting, Accounting & Financial Management, 24(2), 195–220.
Badan Pemeriksa Keuangan. (2017). Peraturan Badan Pemeriksa Keuangan Nomor 2 Tahun 2017 tentang Pemantauan Pelaksanaan Tindak Lanjut Rekomendasi Hasil Pemeriksaan Badan Pemeriksa Keuangan.
Badan Pemeriksa Keuangan. (2021). Ikhtisar Hasil Pemeriksaan Semester I Tahun 2021.
Barrett, P. (2011). Commentary: Where You Sit Is What You See: The Seven Deadly Sins of Performance Auditing. Implications for Monitoring Public Audit Institutions. Australian Accounting Review, 21(4), 397–405. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1835-2561.2011.00154.x
Brooks, R. C., & Pariser, D. B. (1995). Audit Recommendation Follow-Up System: A Survey of the States. Public Budgeting & Finance.
Bupati Manggarai. (2017). Peraturan Bupati Manggarai Nomor 52 Tahun 2017 Tentang Perubahan atas Peraturan Bupati Nomor 26a Tahun 2016 Tentang Penetapan Indikator Kinerja Utama Pemerintah Kabupaten Manggarai Tahun 2016-2021.
Chenhall, R. H. (2007). The contingent design of performance measures. Contemporary Issues in Management Accounting, 28, 127–168. https://doi.org/10.1093/acprof:oso/9780199283361.003.0005
Creswell, W. J., & Creswell, J. D. (2018). Research Design: Qualitative, Quantitative and Mixed Methods Approaches (5 ed.). SAGE Publications, Inc.
Dain, N., & Rahmat, M. M. (2017). Factors Influencing Public Sector Auditees on Implementing Audit Recommendations. Jurnal Pengurusan, 51.
Din, M., Munawarah, Ghozali, I., & Achmad, T. (2017). The Follow Up of Auditing Results, Accountability of Financial Reporting and Mediating Effect of Financial Loss Rate: An Empirical Sudy in Indonesian Local Governments. European Research Studies Journal, XX(4 A), 443–459.
Eckersley, P., Ferry, L., & Zakaria, Z. (2014). A “panoptical” or “synoptical” approach to monitoring performance? Local public services in England and the widening accountability gap. Critical Perspectives on Accounting, 25(6), 529–538. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cpa.2013.03.003
Friedland, R., & Alford, R. R. (1991). Bringing Society Back In: Symbols, Practices and Institutional Contradictions In The New Institutionalism in Organizational Analysis. In The New Institutionalism in Organizational Analysis, June, 232–263.
Funnell, W., & Wade, M. (2012). Negotiating the credibility of performance auditing. Critical Perspectives on Accounting, 23(6), 434–450. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cpa.2012.04.005
Furqan, A. C., Wardhani, R., Martani, D., & Setyaningrum, D. (2020). The effect of audit findings and audit recommendation follow-up on the financial report and public service quality in Indonesia. International Journal of Public Sector Management, 33(5), 535–559. https://doi.org/10.1108/IJPSM-06-2019-0173
Goh, S. C., Elliott, C., & Richards, G. (2015). Performance management in canadian public organizations: Findings of a multi-case study. International Journal of Productivity and Performance Management, 64(2), 157–174. https://doi.org/10.1108/IJPPM-10-2013-0170
Greenwood, R., Raynard, M., Kodeih, F., Micelotta, E. R., & Lounsbury, M. (2011). Institutional complexity and organizational responses. Academy of Management Annals, 5(1), 317–371. https://doi.org/10.1080/19416520.2011.590299
Hanis, M. H., Trigunarsyah, B., & Susilawati, C. (2011). The application of public asset management in Indonesian local government: A case study in South Sulawesi province. Journal of Corporate Real Estate, 13(1), 36–47. https://doi.org/10.1108/14630011111120332
Holland, W. G. (1999). Audit Advisory 1999. 1–4.
Kurniati, E., Asmony, T., & Santoso, B. (2017). Kemelut Penatausahaan Aset Tetap (Dulu Hingga Kini). Jurnal Akuntansi Multiparadigma, 8(3), 540–558. https://doi.org/10.18202/jamal.2017.12.7072
Lepoutre, J. M. W. N., & Valente, M. (2012). Fools breaking out: The role of symbolic and material immunity in explaining institutional nonconformity. Academy of Management Journal, 55(2), 285–313. https://doi.org/10.5465/amj.2008.0340
Mardiasmo. (2018). Akuntansi Sektor Publik. Penerbit Andi.
Masdar, R., & Furqan, A. C. (2021). The Role of Transparency and Professional Assistance in Regional Financial Management in the Indonesian Regional Governments. Journal of Public Affairs. https://doi.org/10.1002/pa.2666
Morin, D. (2014). Auditors General’s impact on administrations: A pan-Canadian study (2001-2011). Managerial Auditing Journal, 29(5), 395–426. https://doi.org/10.1108/MAJ-10-2013-0948
Mzenzi, S. I., & Gaspar, A. F. (2015). External auditing and accountability in the Tanzanian local government authorities. Managerial Auditing Journal, 30, 681–702. https://doi.org/10.1108/MAJ-04-2014-1028
Parker, L. D., Schmitz, J., & Jacobs, K. (2021). Auditor and auditee engagement with public sector performance audit: An institutional logics perspective. Financial Accountability and Management, 37(2), 142–162. https://doi.org/10.1111/faam.12243
Probohudono, A. N., Hartanto, R., & Putra, R. P. (2018). Determinants of Settlement Audit Recommendation of the Audit Board of the Republic of Indonesia. International Journal of Public Sector Performance Management, 4(2), 169–189. https://doi.org/10.1504/IJPSPM.2018.090736
Reichborn-Kjennerud, K. (2014). Auditee strategies: An investigation of auditees’ reactions to the norwegian state audit institution’s performance audits. International Journal of Public Administration, 37(10), 685–694. https://doi.org/10.1080/01900692.2014.907309
Republik Indonesia. (2004). Undang-Undang Republik Indonesia Nomor 15 Tahun 2004 tentang Pemeriksaan Pengelolaan dan Tanggung Jawab Keuangan Negara. 1–25.
Setiawan, A. R., Irianto, G., & Achsin, M. (2013). System-Driven (Un) Fraud: Tafsir Aparatur Terhadap “Sisi Gelap” Pengelolaan Keuangan Daerah. Jurnal Akuntansi Multiparadigma JAMAL, 4(April).
Setyaningrum, D., Gani, L., Martani, D., & Kuntadi, C. (2015). The Effect of Auditor Quality on the Follow-Up of Audit Recommendation. International Research Journal of Business Studies, 6(2), 89–104. https://doi.org/10.21632/irjbs.6.2.89-104
Thornton, P. H., & Ocasio, W. (1999). Institutional Logics and the Historical Contingency of Power in Organizations : Executive Succession in the Higher Education Publishing Industry , 1958 –. American Journal of Sociology, 105(3), 801–843.
Thornton, P. H., Ocasio, W., & Lounsbury, M. (2012). The Institutional Logics Perspektive: A New Approach to Culture, Structure, and Process. In Oxford University Press.
Umor, S., Zakaria, Z., & Sulaiman, N. A. (2020). Effectiveness of Follow-Up on Performance Auditing Issues in Practice: A Governance Network Perspective. Asian Journal of Accounting Perspectives, 13(1), 1–25. https://doi.org/10.22452/ajap.vol13no1.1
van Helden, G. J., & Reichard, C. (2013). A meta-review of public sector performance management research. Tékhne, 11(1), 10–20. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tekhne.2013.03.001
Wadongo, B. and M. A.-K. (2014). Contingency theory, performance management and organisational effectiveness in the third sector A. Managerial Auditing Journal, 63(6), 680–703.
Wulandari, I., & Bandi, B. (2015). Pengaruh E-Government, Kapabilitas Apip Dan Persentasi Penyelesaian Tindak Lanjut Terhadap Opini Audit Laporan Keuangan Pemerintah Daerah Di Indonesia. Jurnal Akuntansi dan Bisnis, 15(2), 148. https://doi.org/10.20961/jab.v15i2.184
Yin, R. K. (2009). Case Study Research Design and Methods. SAGE Publications.
Zilber, T. B. (2016). How institutional logics matter: A bottom-up exploration. Research in the Sociology of Organizations, 48A, 137–155. https://doi.org/10.1108/S0733-558X201600048A005
DOI: https://doi.org/10.22146/abis.v11i2.84920
Article Metrics
Abstract views : 2065 | views : 2312Refbacks
- There are currently no refbacks.
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License.
______________________________________________________________________________________________________
2302 - 1500