research-article

Open access

Continuous monitoring and auditing in municipalities

Authors:

Naoual Ezzamouri,

Joris HulstijnAuthors Info & Claims

dg.o '18: Proceedings of the 19th Annual International Conference on Digital Government Research: Governance in the Data Age

Article No.: 15, Pages 1 - 10

https://doi.org/10.1145/3209281.3209301

Published: 30 May 2018 Publication History

Abstract

Tools and techniques for monitoring and auditing continuous streams of data are increasingly being used. However, adoption has only been investigated in the private sector. In this paper we examine the feasibility of continuous auditing and continuous monitoring in the public sector, specifically for municipalities in the Netherlands. A multiple case study is conducted about the opportunities and needs of continuously monitoring and assessing financial data concerning the social domain: care-related and social services, which have recently been decentralized from the national government to the municipal level. Interviews were held with representatives of six municipalities, administrative bodies, and an accounting firm. The research indicates that continuous monitoring is feasible, and that there is a need for continuous monitoring in the public domain. The ease of adoption depends to a large extent on the choice of whether and how a municipality wants to collaborate in offering social domain services.

References

[1]

M. Alles, G. Brennan, A. Kogan, and M.A. Vasarhelyi. 2006. Continuous monitoring of business process controls: A pilot implementation of a continuous auditing system at Siemens. International Journal of Accounting Information Systems 7 (2006), 137--161.

[2]

M.A. Alles, A. Kogan, and M.A. Vasarhelyi. 2002. Feasibility and economics of continuous assurance. Auditing: A Journal of Practice and Theory 21, 1 (2002), 125 -- 138.

[3]

Michael Alles, Alexander Kogan, and Miklos Vasarhelyi. 2008. Putting Continuous Auditing Theory Into Practice: Lessons from Two Pilot Implementations. Journal of Information Systems 22, 2 (2008), 195--214.

[4]

U. Beck. 1992. Risk society - Towards a new modernity. Sage, London.

[5]

Nitesh Bharosa, Marijn Janssen, Remco van Wijk, Niels de Winne, Haiko van der Voort, Joris Hulstijn, and Yao-hua Tan. 2013. Tapping into existing information flows: The transformation to compliance by design in business-to-government information exchange. Government Information Quarterly 30, 1 (2013), S9 -- S18.

[6]

J.H. Blokdijk. 2004. Tests of control in the audit risk model: effective? Efficient? International Journal of Auditing 8 (2004), 185 -- 194.

[7]

Marc Bovens. 2005. Public Accountability. Oxford, United Kingdom.

[8]

C. E. Brown, J. A. Wong, and A. A. Baldwin. 2007. A review and analysis of the existing research streams in continuous auditing. Journal of Emerging Technologies in Accounting 4, 1 (2007), 1--28.

[9]

J.M. Bryson. 2004. What to do when stakeholders matter. Stakeholder identification and analysis techniques. Public Management Review 6, 1 (2004), 21--53.

[10]

Brigitte Burgemeestre and Joris Hulstijn. 2015. Design for the Values of Accountability and Transparency. Springer Verlag, Berlin, Chapter 15, 303 -- 333.

[11]

David Y. Chan and Miklos A. Vasarhelyi. 2011. Innovation and practice of continuous auditing. International Journal of Accounting Information Systems 12 (2011), 152 -- 160.

[12]

Victoria Chiu, Qi Liu, and Miklos A. Vasarhelyi. 2014. The development and intellectual structure of continuous auditing research. Journal of Accounting Literature 33 (2014), 37 -- 57.

[13]

Rob Christiaanse, Paul Griffioen, and Joris Hulstijn. 2015. Reliability of Electronic Evidence: an application for model-based auditing. ACM, San Diego, June 8--12, 2015, 43--52.

Digital Library

[14]

Rob Christiaanse and Joris Hulstijn. 2013. Control Automation to reduce Costs of Control. International Journal of Information System Modeling and Design 4, 4 (2013), 27 -- 47.

Digital Library

[15]

CICA/AICPA. 1999. Continuous auditing, Research report. Report. The Canadian Institute of Chartered Accountants (CICA).

[16]

D. Coderre. 2005. Continuous Auditing: Implications for Assurance, Monitoring and Risk Assessment, Guide 3. Report. Institute of Internal Auditors (IIA).

[17]

European Commission. 2016. General Data Protection Regulation. EU 2016/679 (2016).

[18]

COSO. 1992. Internal Control - Integrated Framework. Report. Committee of Sponsoring Organizations of the Treadway Commission.

[19]

Deloitte. 2017. Continuous Monitoring and Continuous Auditing: From idea to Implementation. Report.

[20]

A.F.S.A. Elgammal, O. Türetken, W.J.A.M. van den Heuvel, and M. Papazoglou. 2014. Formalizing and applying compliance patterns for business process compliance. Software and Systems Modeling 15, 1 (2014), 119--146.

Digital Library

[21]

Naoual Ezzamouri. 2017. Continuous monitoring in municipalities. Thesis.

[22]

Stephen Flowerday and Rossouw von Solms. 2005. Real-time information integrity = system integrity + data integrity + continuous assurance. Computers and Security 24 (2005), 604--613.

Digital Library

[23]

A.J. Gossen, T.E. Kinkel, and A.G.A. Pons. 2016. Eindrapport controlebevindingen gemeentelijke jaarstukken 2015 en lessen voor 2016. Report. BMC.

[24]

C. A. Hardy and G. Laslett. 2014. Continuous auditing and monitoring in practice: Lessons from Metcash's Business Assurance Group. Journal of Information Systems 29, 2 (2014), 183--194.

[25]

Alan R. Hevner, Sudha Ram, and Salvatore T. March. 2004. Design Science in Information Systems Research. Management Information Systems Quarterly 28, 1 (2004), 75--105.

Digital Library

[26]

Joris Hulstijn, Rob Christiaanse, Nitesh Bharosa, Friso Schmid, Remco van Wijk, Marijn Janssen, and Yao-Hua Tan. 2011. Continuous Control Monitoring-based Regulation: a case in the meat processing industry. Springer, London, 238--248.

[27]

J. Hunton, E. Mauldin, and P. Wheeler. 2008. Potential Functional and Dysfunctional Effects of Continuous Monitoring. The Accounting Review 83, 6 (2008), 1551--1569.

[28]

IIA. 2013. The Three Lines of Defense in Effective Risk Management and Control. Report. The Institute of Internal Auditors (IIA).

[29]

W. Jongen, M. J. Commers, J. M. G. A. Schols, and H. Brand. 2016. The Dutch Long-Term Care System in Transition: Implications for Municipalities. Gesundheitswesen 78, 8--9 (2016), e53--61.

[30]

Vera Kartseva, Joris Hulstijn, Jaap Gordijn, and Yao-Hua Tan. 2010. Control patterns in a health-care network. European Journal of Information Systems 19 (2010), 320 -- 343.

[31]

Andreas Kiesow, Tim Schomaker, and Oliver Thomas. 2016. Transferring Continuous Auditing to the Digital Age - The Knowledge Base after Three Decades of Research. In Proceedings of the European Conference on Information Systems (ECIS 2016). Number 42.

[32]

W. Knechel, S. Salterio, and B. Ballou. 2007. Auditing: Assurance and Risk (3 ed.). Thomson Learning, Cincinatti.

[33]

Jonne Kocken and Joris Hulstijn. 2017. Providing Continuous Assurance. In Proceedings of the 11th International Workshop on Value Modeling and Business Ontologies (VMBO 2017), H. Weigand (Ed.). LIST, Luxembourg.

[34]

KPMG. 2012. Continuous auditing and continuous monitoring: The current status and the road ahead. Report. KPMG.

[35]

John R. Kuhn and Steve G. Sutton. 2010. Continuous Auditing in ERP System Environments: The Current State and Future Directions. Journal of Information Systems 24, 1 (2010), 91 -- 111.

[36]

Ruopeng Lu, Shazia Sadiq, and Guido Governatori. 2009. Measurement of Compliance Distance in Business Work Practice. Information Systems Management 25, 4 (2009), 344--355.

Digital Library

[37]

J.A.M. Maarse and P.P. Jeurissen. 2016. The policy and politics of the 2015 long-term care reform in the Netherlands. Health Policy 120 (2016), 241--245.

[38]

Adi Masli, Gary F. Peters, Vernon J. Richardson, and Juan Manuel Sanchez. 2010. Examining the Potential Benefits of Internal Control Monitoring Technology. Accounting Review 85, 3 (2010), 1001--1034.

[39]

D. Myers, Michael. 1997. Qualitative Research in Information Systems. MIS Quarterly 21, 2 (1997), 241--242.

Digital Library

[40]

Stolk R. and Voermans W.J.M. 2016. Judicial Organization. (2016), 33--48 pages.

[41]

S. Ramamoorti, P. Cangemi, M., and M. Sinnett, W. 2010. The Benefits of Continuous Monitoring. Report. Rutgers University.

[42]

Rijksoverheid. 2017. Decentralisatie van overheidstaken naar gemeenten. Report. https://www.rijksoverheid.nl/onderwerpen/gemeenten/inhoud/decentralisatie-van-overheidstaken-naar-gemeenten

[43]

P. Rikhardsson and R. Dull. 2016. An exploratory study of the adoption, application and impacts of continuous auditing technologies in small businesses. International Journal of Accounting Information Systems 20 (2016), 26--37.

[44]

M. B. Romney and P. J. Steinbart. 2015. Accounting Information Systems (13th ed.). Pearson Education.

[45]

Robert Simons. 1987. Accounting control systems and business strategy: An empirical analysis. Accounting, Organizations and Society 12, 4 (1987), 357--374.

[46]

K. Singh, P.J. Best, M. Bojilov, and C. Blunt. 2014. Continuous Auditing and Continuous Monitoring in ERP Environments: Case Studies of Application Implementations. Journal of Information Systems 28, 1 (2014), 287 -- 310.

[47]

K. Singh and P. J. Best. 2015. Design and Implementation of Continuous Monitoring and Auditing in SAP Enterprise Resource Planning. International Journal of Auditing 19, 3 (2015), 307--317.

[48]

Christian Sonnenberg and Jan vom Brocke. 2014. The Missing Link Between BPM and Accounting - Using Event Data for Accounting in Process-oriented Organizations. Business Process Management Journal 20, 2 (2014).

[49]

Silvia van de Pligt-Benito Ruano and Joris Hulstijn. 2018. Governance and Collaboration in Regulatory Supervision: a Case in the Customs Domain. International Journal of Electronic Government Research 13, 4 (2018), 34--52.

Digital Library

[50]

M.A. Vasarhelyi, Jr. J. D. Warren, R. A. Teeter, and W.R. Titera. 2014. Embracing the automated audit: How the Audit Data Standards and audit tools can enhance auditor judgment and assurance. Journal of Accountancy April (2014).

[51]

M. A. Vasarhelyi, M. Alles, and A. Kogan. 2004. Principles of analytic monitoring for continuous assurance. Journal of Emerging Technologies in Accounting 1, 1 (2004), 1--21.

[52]

Hans Weigand and Philip Elsas. 2012. Model-based auditing using REA. International Journal of Accounting Information Systems 13 (2012), 287 -- 310.

[53]

Sebastian Weins, Bastian Alm, and Tawei (David) Wang. in press. An Integrated Continuous Auditing Approach. Journal of Emerging Technologies in Accounting (in press).

[54]

Roel. J. Wieringa. 2014. Design science methodology for information systems and software engineering. Springer Verlag, London.

Digital Library

[55]

Maria A. Wimmer. 2002. Integrated Service Modelling for Online One-stop Government. Electronic Markets 12, 3 (2002), 149 -- 156.

[56]

R. K. Yin. 2009. Case Study Research: Design and Methods (4 ed.). Sage Publications Inc, Thousand Oaks.

Cited By

Sanchez-Garcia IRea-Guaman AGilabert TCalvo-Manzano J(2024)Cybersecurity Risk Audit: A Systematic Literature ReviewNew Perspectives in Software Engineering10.1007/978-3-031-50590-4_18(275-301)Online publication date: 21-Feb-2024
https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-031-50590-4_18
Ramutsheli MMusundwa S(2024)Developing a Framework to Address the Slow Implementation of Continuous Auditing by Internal Audit Functions in South Africa.Towards Digitally Transforming Accounting and Business Processes10.1007/978-3-031-46177-4_34(643-659)Online publication date: 12-Jan-2024
https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-031-46177-4_34
Andrade APenha RSilva LBizarrias FKniess C(2023)The adoption of technological tools in continuous audit projectsRevista de Administração da UFSM10.5902/198346597158716:4(e5)Online publication date: 1-Dec-2023
https://doi.org/10.5902/1983465971587
Show More Cited By

Index Terms

Continuous monitoring and auditing in municipalities
1. Applied computing
  1. Computers in other domains
    1. Computing in government
      1. E-government

Recommendations

Financial Transparency in Mexican Municipalities: An Empirical Research
dg.o '16: Proceedings of the 17th International Digital Government Research Conference on Digital Government Research

Transparency has become a critical issue in the context of the adoption of new technologies in the public sector. In particular, the disclosure of financial information represents a key modality of transparency in which governments have the opportunity ...
Financing digital government in municipalities: An economic perspective
dg.o '16: Proceedings of the 17th International Digital Government Research Conference on Digital Government Research

The purpose of local governments is to facilitate the well-being of communities and regions. Through the provision of different public goods and services local governments have the mission to provide security and stable conditions for individuals and ...
Municipalities e-Participation initiatives through Facebook: citizens perspective
ICEGOV '20: Proceedings of the 13th International Conference on Theory and Practice of Electronic Governance

This study provides a general overview of citizens' perceptions toward e-Participation initiatives through Facebook that are sponsored by municipalities. Through a survey of 400 Facebook users in Jordan, the results provided evidence that Jordanian ...

Comments

Information & Contributors

Information

Published In

cover image ACM Other conferences

dg.o '18: Proceedings of the 19th Annual International Conference on Digital Government Research: Governance in the Data Age

May 2018

889 pages

ISBN:9781450365260

DOI:10.1145/3209281

Conference Chairs:
Marijn Janssen
Delft University of Technology, Netherlands
,
Soon Ae Chun
City University of New York (CUNY), USA
,
Vishanth Weerakkody
Bradford University, UK
,
Editors:
Anneke Zuiderwijk
Delft University of Technology, Netherlands
,
Charles C. Hinnant
Florida State University, USA

Copyright © 2018 Owner/Author.

Permission to make digital or hard copies of part or all of this work for personal or classroom use is granted without fee provided that copies are not made or distributed for profit or commercial advantage and that copies bear this notice and the full citation on the first page. Copyrights for third-party components of this work must be honored. For all other uses, contact the Owner/Author.

Publisher

Association for Computing Machinery

New York, NY, United States

Publication History

Published: 30 May 2018

Check for updates

Author Tags

Qualifiers

Research-article

Conference

dg.o '18

dg.o '18: 19th Annual International Conference on Digital Government Research

May 30 - June 1, 2018

Delft, The Netherlands

Acceptance Rates

Overall Acceptance Rate 150 of 271 submissions, 55%

Contributors

Other Metrics

View Article Metrics

Bibliometrics & Citations

Bibliometrics

Article Metrics

4
Total Citations
View Citations
1,473
Total Downloads

Downloads (Last 12 months)210
Downloads (Last 6 weeks)24

Reflects downloads up to 21 Sep 2024

Other Metrics

View Author Metrics

Citations

Cited By

Sanchez-Garcia IRea-Guaman AGilabert TCalvo-Manzano J(2024)Cybersecurity Risk Audit: A Systematic Literature ReviewNew Perspectives in Software Engineering10.1007/978-3-031-50590-4_18(275-301)Online publication date: 21-Feb-2024
https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-031-50590-4_18
Ramutsheli MMusundwa S(2024)Developing a Framework to Address the Slow Implementation of Continuous Auditing by Internal Audit Functions in South Africa.Towards Digitally Transforming Accounting and Business Processes10.1007/978-3-031-46177-4_34(643-659)Online publication date: 12-Jan-2024
https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-031-46177-4_34
Andrade APenha RSilva LBizarrias FKniess C(2023)The adoption of technological tools in continuous audit projectsRevista de Administração da UFSM10.5902/198346597158716:4(e5)Online publication date: 1-Dec-2023
https://doi.org/10.5902/1983465971587
Schaefer CStelter ARessing CNiehaves B(2021)Dynamic and Integrated Monitoring Concept for German Municipalities to Strengthen Resilience in Future Smart CitiesProceedings of the 22nd Annual International Conference on Digital Government Research10.1145/3463677.3463688(536-537)Online publication date: 9-Jun-2021
https://dl.acm.org/doi/10.1145/3463677.3463688

View Options

View options

PDF

View or Download as a PDF file.

eReader

View online with eReader.

Get Access

Login options

Check if you have access through your login credentials or your institution to get full access on this article.

Full Access

Get this Publication

Media

Figures

Other

Tables

View Table of Contents