Audit quality plays a decisive role in ensuring the follow-up of audit recommendations issued by Indonesia’s Supreme Audit Institution (BPK), while government internal control systems and information technology have yet to show a meaningful impact. This conclusion comes from a study by Agung Purwandono, Moermahadi Soerja Djanegara, and Firdaus Amyar of the Institut Bisnis dan Informatika Kesatuan, published in the International Journal of Business and Applied Economics (IJBAE), January 2026 edition.
The findings are significant because follow-up actions on BPK audit recommendations are a key indicator of public accountability and sound financial governance. Despite steady improvements in audit opinions—reflected in the growing number of unqualified (WTP) opinions—many audit recommendations remain unresolved for years.
Accountability Gaps Behind Positive Audit Opinions
BPK requires audited entities to follow up audit recommendations within 60 days. However, data from BPK’s Semester Audit Summary Report (IHPS) show that numerous recommendations are either delayed or implemented inconsistently, even as the overall quality of government financial statements improves.
This situation raises a critical question: what factors truly determine whether audit recommendations are effectively followed up?
Research Approach in Plain Terms
To answer this question, the researchers surveyed 114 auditors at BPK RI Headquarters who are directly involved in monitoring audit follow-ups. Using structured questionnaires and quantitative analysis, the study examined the influence of audit quality, government internal control, and information technology, particularly the Audit Recommendation Follow-Up Monitoring System (SIPTL).
Key Findings at a Glance
The results reveal a clear pattern:
- Audit quality has a strong and significant positive effect on the follow-up of BPK audit recommendations
- (coefficient 0.561; p < 0.001).
- Government internal control shows no significant effect on follow-up completion.
- Information technology does not strengthen the influence of audit quality or internal control on audit follow-ups.
In practical terms, well-crafted, clear, and actionable audit recommendations matter far more than the mere existence of formal control systems or digital platforms.
Human Commitment Matters More Than Technology
According to the authors, information technology has not yet functioned as an effective driver of accountability. While SIPTL supports documentation and reporting, it does not automatically accelerate corrective action.
“Technology is only a supporting tool. Without leadership commitment, compliance culture, and high-quality audit recommendations, digital systems alone cannot ensure effective follow-up,” the authors note.
The study reinforces the view that public sector accountability remains heavily dependent on human factors, including auditor professionalism, leadership engagement, and organizational commitment to reform.
Implications for Governance and Public Policy
The findings carry important implications:
- For BPK, strengthening auditor competence and improving the clarity and practicality of recommendations should remain top priorities.
- For ministries and government agencies, leadership commitment and the active role of internal supervisory units (APIP) are more critical than procedural compliance alone.
- For policymakers, digital oversight initiatives must be accompanied by improvements in governance maturity and accountability culture.
Without these elements, information systems risk becoming administrative tools rather than engines of reform.
Author Profiles
- Agung Purwandono, S.E., M.Ak. - Institut Bisnis dan Informatika Kesatuan
- Dr. Moermahadi Soerja Djanegara, S.E., Ak., M.M. - Institut Bisnis dan Informatika Kesatuan
- Dr. Firdaus Amyar, S.E., Ak., M.Si. - Institut Bisnis dan Informatika Kesatuan
Research Source
Purwandono, A., Djanegara, M. S., & Amyar, F. (2026).
The Effect of Audit Quality and Government Internal Control on the Follow-up of BPK Audit Recommendations with Information Technology as a Moderation Variable.
International Journal of Business and Applied Economics, Vol. 5 No. 1, pp. 105–124.
DOI: 10.55927/ijbae.v5i1.545
Official URL: https://nblformosapublisher.org/index.php/ijbae
0 Komentar