Article Sidebar

Download
Full text PDF
Statistic
Read Counter : 311 Download : 103

Downloads

Download data is not yet available.

Main Article Content

Abstract

Since 2014, Indonesia has implemented the Integrity System (IS) policy across ministry and government institution work units to address the ongoing challenge of corruption. Inspectorate auditors play a pivotal role in ensuring the successful implementation of the IS, providing both advisory services and risk management support within these units. This study aims to investigate the moderating role of autonomy in the relationship between advisory services, risk management, and the integrity system. A survey of 103 inspectorate auditors from various ministries and government institutions in Indonesia was conducted to explore these dynamics. Drawing on role theory, our findings reveal two key insights: (1) advisory services and risk management significantly enhance the implementation of the IS, and (2) autonomy strengthens the positive relationship between risk management and the IS. This research addresses the underexplored debate on the primary roles of internal auditors, offering novel insights within the Indonesian context.

Keywords

Advisory services integrity system Indonesia inspectorate auditor risk management

Article Details

License

Copyright (c) 2025 Jurnal Akuntansi dan Auditing Indonesia

Creative Commons License

This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike 4.0 International License.

Authors who publish with this journal agree to the following terms:

  1. Authors retain copyright and grant the journal right of first publication with the work simultaneously licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution License that allows others to share the work with an acknowledgment of the work's authorship and initial publication in this journal.
  2. Authors are able to enter into separate, additional contractual arrangements for the non-exclusive distribution of the journal's published version of the work (e.g., post it to an institutional repository or publish it in a book), with an acknowledgment of its initial publication in this journal.
  3. Authors are permitted and encouraged to post their work online (e.g., in institutional repositories or on their website) prior to and during the submission process, as it can lead to productive exchanges, as well as earlier and greater citation of published work (See The Effect of Open Access).

References

  1. Abu Bakar, H., Omar, S. N. Z., Cob, C. M. S. C., Abidin, N. S. Z., & Roslan, N. S. F. (2022). Good Governance Practices and Employee Integrity: Evidence from Local Government. International Journal of Academic Research in Progressive Education and Development, 11(2), Pages 967-978. https://doi.org/10.6007/IJARPED/v11-i2/13857
  2. Aghghaleh, S. F., Mohamed, Z. M., & Ahmad, A. (2014). The effects of personal and organizational factors on role ambiguity amongst internal auditors. International Journal of Auditing, 18(2), 105–114. https://doi.org/10.1111/ijau.12015
  3. Ahmad, Z., & Taylor, D. (2009). Commitment to independence by internal auditors: The effects of role ambiguity and role conflict. Managerial Auditing Journal, 24(9), 899–925. https://doi.org/10.1108/02686900910994827
  4. Alam, M. M., Said, J., & Abd Aziz, M. A. (2019). Role of integrity system, internal control system and leadership practices on the accountability practices in the public sectors of Malaysia. Social Responsibility Journal, 15(7), 955–976. https://doi.org/10.1108/SRJ-03-2017-0051
  5. Alander, G. E. (2023). Internal auditor independence as a situated practice: Four archetypes. Accounting, Auditing & Accountability Journal, 36(9), 108–134. https://doi.org/10.1108/AAAJ-08-2019-4137
  6. Ayub, Z. A., Wahab, H. A., Yusoff, Z. M., Zan, Z., & Shariffuddin, M. D. K. (2022). Enforcement Agency Integrity Commission: Whither Is It Bound? https://www.researchgate.net/profile/Zainal-Ayub/publication/363454432_Enforcement_Agency_Integrity_Commission_Whither_Is_It_Bound/links/643511a320f25554da23bfd3/Enforcement-Agency-Integrity-Commission-Whither-Is-It-Bound.pdf
  7. Barr-Pulliam, D., Eulerich, M., & Ratzinger-Sakel, N. (2024). The effect of the internal audit function's perceived assurance versus advisory purpose on the external auditor's reliance decision. Managerial Auditing Journal, 39(2), 138–165. https://doi.org/10.1108/MAJ-08-2023-4021
  8. Breiman, L., & Friedman, J. H. (1985). Estimating Optimal Transformations for Multiple Regression and Correlation. Journal of the American Statistical Association, 80(391), 580–598. https://doi.org/10.1080/01621459.1985.10478157
  9. Chambers, A. D., & Odar, M. (2015). A new vision for internal audit. Managerial Auditing Journal, 30(1), 34–55. https://doi.org/10.1108/MAJ-08-2014-1073
  10. Chin, W. W. (1998). The Partial Least Squares Approach to Structural Equation Modeling. In Modern Methods for Business Research (Vol. 2, pp. 295–336). Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
  11. Christ, M. H., Eulerich, M., Krane, R., & Wood, D. A. (2021). New Frontiers for Internal Audit Research*. Accounting Perspectives, 20(4), 449–475. https://doi.org/10.1111/1911-3838.12272
  12. D’Alterio, E. (2017). Integrity of the public sector and controls: A new challenge for global administrative law? International Journal of Constitutional Law, 15(4), 1013–1038. https://doi.org/10.1093/icon/mox077
  13. Dargay, E. (2019). The Implementation and Experience of Integrity Management in Public Administration. Academic and Applied Research in Military and Public Management Science, 18(2), 17–30. https://doi.org/10.32565/aarms.2019.2.2
  14. Eulerich, A., & Eulerich, M. (2020). What is the value of internal auditing? – A literature review on qualitative and quantitative perspectives. Maandblad Voor Accountancy En Bedrijfseconomie, 94(3/4), 83–92. https://doi.org/10.5117/mab.94.50375
  15. Fogarty, T. J., & Kalbers, L. P. (2000). An empirical evaluation of the interpersonal and organizational correlates of professionalism in internal auditing. Accounting and Business Research, 30(2), 125–136. https://doi.org/10.1080/00014788.2000.9728930
  16. Groeneveld, S., Tummers, L., Bronkhorst, B., Ashikali, T., & Van Thiel, S. (2015). Quantitative Methods in Public Administration: Their Use and Development Through Time. International Public Management Journal, 18(1), 61–86. https://doi.org/10.1080/10967494.2014.972484
  17. Hair, J. F., Howard, M. C., & Nitzl, C. (2020). Assessing measurement model quality in PLS-SEM using confirmatory composite analysis. Journal of Business Research, 109, 101–110. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jbusres.2019.11.069
  18. Hair, J. F., Hult, T. M., Ringle, C. M., & Sarstedt, M. (2017). A primer on partial least squares structural equation modeling (PLS-SEM) (2nd, Ed.). Sage Publications.
  19. Hart, E. (2016). Why is corruption risk management so hard?Assessing current practices in development aid. U4 BRIEF, May. https://www.u4.no/publications/why-is-corruption-risk-management-so-hard-assessing-current-practices-in-development-aid
  20. Hoekstra, A., Huberts, L., & Montfort, A. V. (2023). Content and Design of Integrity Systems: Evaluating Integrity Systems in Local Government Content and Design of Integrity Systems: Evaluating Integrity. Public Integrity, 25(2), 137–149. https://doi.org/10.1080/10999922.2021.2014204
  21. Huberts, L., & van Monforts, A. (2019). Integrity of governance: Toward a systems approach. In Global Corruption and Ethics Management: Translating theory into action (pp. 187–193). Rowman & Littlefield. https://research.vu.nl/en/publications/integrity-of-governance-toward-a-system-approach
  22. Huberts, L. W. J. C. (2018). Integrity: What it is and Why it is Important. Public Integrity, 9922. https://doi.org/10.1080/10999922.2018.1477404
  23. IIA. (2017). Standar Internasional Praktik Profesional Audit Internal. Standar Internasional Praktik Profesional Audit Internal. https://www.theiia.org/globalassets/site/standards/mandatory-guidance/ippf/2017/ippf-standards-2017-indonesian.pdf
  24. Iyer, V. M., Jones, A., & Raghunandan, K. (2018). Factors related to internal auditors' organizational- professional conflict. Accounting Horizons, 32(4), 133–146. https://doi.org/10.2308/acch-52139
  25. Jackson, P. M. (2013). Debate: Fraud risk management in the public sector. Public Money and Management, 33(1), 6–8. https://doi.org/10.1080/09540962.2013.744866
  26. Jermias, J., & Hoi Hu, B. K. (2020). Overconfidence and Resistance to Abandoning Unprofitable Capital Budgeting Projects: The Effects of Autonomy, Internal Audit, and Accountability. Accounting Perspectives, 19(2), 49–71. https://doi.org/10.1111/1911-3838.12222
  27. Johari, R. J., Alam, M. M., & Said, J. (2020). Empirical assessment on factors contributing to integrity practices of Malaysian public sector officers. Business Process Management Journal. https://doi.org/10.1108/BPMJ-06-2020-0297
  28. Juillet, L., Liston-Heyes, C., Mitchell, J. R., & Zusmann, D. (2016). The Internal Auditor As An Agent of Organizational Learning: Enhancing The Value of Internal Auditing in the Public Sector (pp. 4–6). University of Ottawa. https://www.giacc-ccaisp.ca/research-and-thought-leadership/
  29. Kahn, R. L., Wolfe, D. M., Quinn, R. P., & Snoeck, J. D. (1964). Organizational Stress: Studies in Role Conflict and Ambiguity. John Wiley & Sons, Inc.
  30. Katz, D., & Kahn, Robert. L. (1978). The Social Psychology of Organizations. John Wiley and Sons.NY
  31. Khelil, I., & Khlif, H. (2022). Internal auditors’ perceptions of their role as assurance providers: A qualitative study in the Tunisian public sector. Meditari Accountancy Research, 30(1), 121–141. https://doi.org/10.1108/MEDAR-04-2020-0861
  32. Kalbers, L. P., & Cenker, W. J. (2008). The Impact of Excercised Responsibility, Experience, Autonomy, and Role Ambiguity on Job Performance in Public Accounting. Journal of Managerial Series, 20(3), 327–347.
  33. Kiral, H., & Karabacak, H. (2020). Resolution of the Internal Audit-Based Role Conflicts in Risk Management: Evidence from Signaling Game Analysis. Group Decision and Negotiation, 29(5), 823–841. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10726-020-09679-x
  34. Kock, N. (2010). Using WarpPLS in E-collaboration Studies: An Overview of Five Main Analysis Steps. International Journal of E-Collaboration, 6(4), 1–11. https://doi.org/10.4018/jec.2010100101
  35. Kock, N. (2022). Using causality assessment indices in PLS-SEM. Data Analysis Perspectives Journal, 3(June), 1–6.
  36. Langseth, P., Stapenhurst, R., & Pope, J. (1997). The Role of a National Integrity System. Commonwealth Law Bulletin, 23(1–2), 499–528.
  37. Lenz, R., & Hahn, U. (2015). A synthesis of empirical internal audit effectiveness literature pointing to new research opportunities. Managerial Auditing Journal, 30(1), 5–33. https://doi.org/10.1108/MAJ-08-2014-1072
  38. Liston-Heyes, C., & Juillet, L. (2019). Employee isolation and support for change in the public sector: A study of the internal audit profession. Public Management Review, 21(3), 423–445. https://doi.org/10.1080/14719037.2018.1500628
  39. Liston-Heyes, C., & Juillet, L. (2023). Does increasing auditors' independence lead to more forceful public auditing? A study of a Canadian internal audit reform. Public Administration, 1–24. https://doi.org/10.1111/padm.12964
  40. Mahama, H., Elbashir, M., Sutton, S., & Arnold, V. (2020). New development: Enabling enterprise risk management maturity in public sector organizations. Public Money and Management, 0(0), 1–5. https://doi.org/10.1080/09540962.2020.1769314
  41. McLeod, S., Papavassiliou, L., & Clydesdale, R. (2022). Information Use in Integrity Systems: Testing the potential for Automated Content Analysis of Local Government Documents. Public Integrity, 24(2), 126–141. https://doi.org/10.1080/10999922.2021.1878741
  42. MenPANRB. (2021). Peraturan Menteri Pendayagunaan Aparatur Negara dan Reformasi Birokrasi Republik Indonesia No. 90 tahun 2021 Tentang Pembangunan dan Evaluasi Zona Integritas Menuju Wilayah Bebas dari Korupsi dan Wilayah Birokrasi Bersih dan Melayani di Instansi Pemerintah. https://jdih.menpan.go.id/dokumen-hukum/PERMEN/jenis/1488?PERATURAN%20MENTERI
  43. Moschidis, S., Drogalas, G., Chatzipetrou, E., & Lois, P. (2024). An investigation of risk-based auditing (RBA) relationships from the stakeholders' perspective using PLS-SEM. EuroMed Journal of Business. https://doi.org/10.1108/EMJB-12-2022-0211
  44. Neuman, W. L. (2014). Social Research Methods: Qualitative and Quantitative Approaches. In Teaching Sociology (Vol. 30, Issue 3). Pearson Education Limited. www.pearsoned.co.uk
  45. Nicaise, G. (2022). Strengthening the ethics framework within aid organizations. Good practices from the compliance approach and the values-based approach (U4 Issue 8). CHR. Michelsen Institute. https://open.cmi.no/cmi-xmlui/handle/11250/3038927
  46. Tadida, E. Z. N. (2023). Public auditing: What impact does the quality of the institutional framework have on the level of corruption? International Review of Administrative Sciences, 89(4), 1131–1146. https://doi.org/10.1177/00208523231155385
  47. Peerthum, S., Gunputh, R. P., & Luckho, T. (2020). Assessing the effectiveness of the fight against public-sector corruption in Mauritius: Perception v reality. International Journal of Law, Crime and Justice, 63, 100419. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijlcj.2020.100419
  48. Peltier-Rivest, D. (2018). A model for preventing corruption. Journal of Financial Crime, 25(2), 545–561. https://doi.org/10.1108/JFC-11-2014-0048
  49. Potaka, L., & Cochrane, S. (2004). Developing Bilingual Questionnaires: Experiences from New Zealand in the Development of the 2001 Mäori Language Survey. Journal of Official Statistics, 20(2), 289–300.
  50. Putra, I. P. M. J. S., & Sihombing, R. P. (2023). The potential of corruption based on Hofstede cultural dimensions and institutional quality: An international evidence. Journal of Financial Crime. https://doi.org/10.1108/JFC-02-2023-0039
  51. Quick, R., & Gauch, K. (2021). Is assurance on risk management systems relevant for bankers' decisions? Advances in Accounting, 55, 100564. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.adiac.2021.100564
  52. Raga, R. A., Suharman, H., & Sari, P. Y. (2020). The Role Internal Supervision Unit Auditor and Organizational Commitments Toward Good University Governance in Public Service Agency State Universities. Jurnal Organisasi Dan Manajemen, 16(1), 48–59. https://doi.org/10.33830/jom.v16i1.708.2020
  53. Said, J., Alam, M. M., & Khalid, M. A. (2016). Relationship between good governance and integrity system: Empirical study on the public sector of Malaysia. Humanomics, 32(2), 151–171. https://doi.org/10.1108/H-02-2016-0008
  54. Sajari, A., Haron, H., Ganesan, Y., & Khalid, A. A. (2023). Factors influencing the level of ethics and integrity in Malaysian public sector. Journal of Islamic Accounting and Business Research, 14(1), 141–158. https://doi.org/10.1108/JIABR-09-2021-0256
  55. Samagaio, A., & Felício, T. (2023). The determinants of internal audit quality. European Journal of Management and Business Economics, 32(4), 417–435. https://doi.org/10.1108/EJMBE-06-2022-0193
  56. Schillemans, T., & Van Twist, M. (2016). Coping with Complexity: Internal Audit and Complex Governance. Public Performance & Management Review, 40(2), 257–280. https://doi.org/10.1080/15309576.2016.1197133
  57. Sihombing, R. P., Agustia, D., & Soewarno, N. (2023). The mediating effect of data analytics on the relationship between organizational psychological safety and advisory services. Managerial Auditing Journal. https://doi.org/10.1108/MAJ-04-2022-3521
  58. Sihombing, R. P., Soewarno, N., & Agustia, D. (2023). The mediating effect of fraud awareness on the relationship between risk management and integrity system. Journal of Financial Crime, 30(3), 618–634. https://doi.org/10.1108/JFC-02-2022-0058
  59. Six, F., & Lawton, A. (2013). Towards a theory of integrity systems: A configurational approach. International Review of Administrative Sciences, 79(4), 639–658. https://doi.org/10.1177/0020852313501124
  60. Tiwisia, V., Setiawan, A. W., & Triono, A. (2020). Bureaucratic Reform of Indonesia Attorney: Building Integrity of Law Enforcement and Improving Public Trust. International Journal of Humanities and Social Science, 10(6), 125–131. https://doi.org/10.30845/ijhss.v10n6p15
  61. Volodina, T., Grossi, G., & Vakulenko, V. (2023). The changing roles of internal auditors in the Ukrainian central government. Journal of Accounting & Organizational Change, 19(6), 1–23. https://doi.org/10.1108/JAOC-04-2021-0057
  62. Zahari, A. I., Said, J., & Arshad, R. (2021). Examining the Components of Integrity. Integrative Psychological and Behavioral Science. https://doi.org/10.1007/s12124-021-09626-8