<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?>
<mods xmlns:xsi="http://www.w3.org/2001/XMLSchema-instance" xmlns="http://www.loc.gov/mods/v3" version="3.1" xsi:schemaLocation="http://www.loc.gov/mods/v3 http://www.loc.gov/standards/mods/v3/mods-3-1.xsd">
  <titleInfo>
    <title>Auditors-General: cuckoos in the managerialist nest?</title>
  </titleInfo>
  <name type="personal">
    <namePart>Mulgan, Richard</namePart>
    <role>
      <roleTerm authority="marcrelator" type="text">creator</roleTerm>
    </role>
  </name>
  <typeOfResource>text</typeOfResource>
  <originInfo>
    <place>
      <placeTerm type="code" authority="marccountry">xu|</placeTerm>
    </place>
    <dateIssued>2001</dateIssued>
    <issuance>continuing</issuance>
  </originInfo>
  <language>
    <languageTerm authority="iso639-2b" type="code">ng </languageTerm>
  </language>
  <physicalDescription>
    <extent>p.24-34</extent>
  </physicalDescription>
  <abstract>The role of Auditors-General has expanded in recent decades, particularly with the development of performance auditing.  Performance auditing originated in the managerialist concern for monitoring results, but in some respects Auditors-General have found themselves at odds with managerialism, particularly where outsourcing and privatisation have reduced the level of public accountability.  Performance auditing has also increased the potential for Auditors-General to clash openly with elected governments, though for the most part they confine their scrutiny to the activities of public servants.  Auditors-General have more authority to confront governments over matters of propriety than over efficiency and effectiveness issues. - Reproduced</abstract>
  <subject>
    <topic>Audit</topic>
  </subject>
  <relatedItem type="host">
    <name>
      <namePart>Australian Journal of Public Administration</namePart>
    </name>
  </relatedItem>
  <recordInfo>
    <recordCreationDate encoding="marc">180718</recordCreationDate>
  </recordInfo>
</mods>
