Volume 34, Issue 3 (Autumn 2021)
JMDP 2021, 34(3): 143-167 |
Back to browse issues page
Download citation:
BibTeX | RIS | EndNote | Medlars | ProCite | Reference Manager | RefWorks
Send citation to:
BibTeX | RIS | EndNote | Medlars | ProCite | Reference Manager | RefWorks
Send citation to:
karnama I, Dadashi I, Yahyazadefar M, Gholamnia Roshan H. (2021). Ranking the Factors Affecting Corporate Governance in Public Sector Agencies Based on Fuzzy Approach. JMDP. 34(3), 143-167. doi:10.52547/jmdp.34.3.143
URL: http://jmdp.ir/article-1-4041-en.html
URL: http://jmdp.ir/article-1-4041-en.html
Ranking the Factors Affecting Corporate Governance in Public Sector Agencies Based on Fuzzy Approach
1- Ph. D. Student of Accounting, Babbol Branch,Islamic Azad University, Babbol, Iran.
2- Assitant Professor, Department of Accounting, Babbol Branch, Islamic Azad University, Babbol, Iran. ,idadashi@baboliau.ac.ir
3- Professor, Department of Management, Faculty of Economics and Administration, Mazandran University, Iran.
4- Assistant Professor, Department of Accounting, Babbol Branch, Islamic Azad University, Babbol, Iran.
2- Assitant Professor, Department of Accounting, Babbol Branch, Islamic Azad University, Babbol, Iran. ,
3- Professor, Department of Management, Faculty of Economics and Administration, Mazandran University, Iran.
4- Assistant Professor, Department of Accounting, Babbol Branch, Islamic Azad University, Babbol, Iran.
Abstract: (2415 Views)
Purpose: The present study identifies the factors affecting organizational governance in public sector agencies and ranks them according to their importance.
Methodology: The study was exploratory, and the data collection method included interviews and questionnaires. The sources of questions were audit reports and budget deductions of the state agencies from 2014 to 2019. Based on the interviews with 40 experts, such items as transparency, accountability, efficiency, effectiveness, and openness were selected as influential components of public sector governance in Iran. The statistical sample who answered the questionnaires consisted of managers of the agencies. Also, the analytic hierarchy process (AHP) method was used to analyze the data.
Findings: Results indicate that out of the selected components, accountability, efficiency and effectiveness have the highest degree of priority in organizational governance in the public sector of Iran.
Value: In addition to explaining a new model for corporate governance in the public sector, this research prioritizes the components of corporate governance.
Methodology: The study was exploratory, and the data collection method included interviews and questionnaires. The sources of questions were audit reports and budget deductions of the state agencies from 2014 to 2019. Based on the interviews with 40 experts, such items as transparency, accountability, efficiency, effectiveness, and openness were selected as influential components of public sector governance in Iran. The statistical sample who answered the questionnaires consisted of managers of the agencies. Also, the analytic hierarchy process (AHP) method was used to analyze the data.
Findings: Results indicate that out of the selected components, accountability, efficiency and effectiveness have the highest degree of priority in organizational governance in the public sector of Iran.
Value: In addition to explaining a new model for corporate governance in the public sector, this research prioritizes the components of corporate governance.
Keywords: Public Sector Governance, Accountability, Effectiveness, Efficiency, Transparency, Openness.
Type of Study: Research |
Subject:
Public Administration
Received: Nov 15 2020 | Accepted: Dec 01 2021 | ePublished: Mar 16 2022
Received: Nov 15 2020 | Accepted: Dec 01 2021 | ePublished: Mar 16 2022
References
1. Australian National Audit Office (1997). Applying Principles and Practice of Corporate Governance in Budget Funded Agencies. Canberra: Commonwealth of Australia.
2. Barrett, P. (2002). Achieving Better Practice Corporate Governance in the Public Sector. Australian National Audit Office.
3. Benz, M., & Frey, B. S. (2007). Corporate Governance: What Can We Learn from Public Governance? Academy of Management Review, 32(1), 92-104. [DOI:10.5465/amr.2007.23463860]
4. Cadbury, A. (1992). Report of the Committee on the Financial Aspect of Corporate Governance, London, UK: Gee & Co.
5. Gholipoor, R., Mashayekhi, B., & Naseri, A. (2016). Corporate Governance in Public Sector and Its Role in Economy of Resistance. Journal of Fiscal and Economic Policies, 4(14), 107-130. [http://qjfep.ir/article-1-450-fa.html]
6. Goppelt, W. (2002). International Federation of Accountants (IFAC). Ballwieser, W./Coenenberg, AG/Wysocki, K. v.(Hrsg.): Handwörterbuch der Rechnungslegung und Prüfung, 3, 1200-1206.
7. Gunawan, I. (2019). Effective Corporate Governance to Prevent Fraud in Public Sector in Indonesia. Asia Pacific Fraud Journal, 4(1), 96-100.
8. Hodges, R., Wright, M., & Keasey, K. (1996). Corporate Governance in the Public Services: Concepts and Issues. Public Money & Management, 16(2), 7-13. [DOI:10.1080/09540969609387915]
9. International Monetary Fund (2007). Guide on Resource Revenue Transparency (2007). [DOI:10.5089/9781498333573.007]
10. Lynn Jr, L. E., Heinrich, C. J., & Hill, C. J. (2000). Studying Governance and Public Management: Challenges and Prospects. Journal of Public Administration Research and Theory, 10(2), 233-262. [DOI:10.1093/oxfordjournals.jpart.a024269]
11. Mulyadi, M., Anwar, Y., & Ikbal, M. (2012). The Importance of Corporate Governance in Public Sector. Global Business and Economics, 1(1), 25-31.
12. Papachristou, G. K., & Papachristou, M. K. (2014). The Worthiness of Corporate Governance in Public Sector the Case of Public Healthcare Sector in Greece. Corporate Ownership & Control, 12(1), 490-501. [DOI:10.22495/cocv12i1c5p4]
13. Ryan, C., & Ng, C. (2000). Public Sector Corporate Governance Disclosures: An Examination of Annual Reporting Practices in Queensland. Australian Journal of Public Administration, 59(2), 11-23. [DOI:10.1111/1467-8500.00148]
14. Sabbagh Kermani, M., & Basakha, M. (2010). Good Governance and Efficacy of Public Spending: Case of OIC Healthcare and Education Expenditures. Journal of Economic Research (Tahghighat-E-Eghtesadi), 44(1), 109-130. [https://jte.ut.ac.ir/article_19977.html]
15. Sargazi, Z., & Rahnavard Ahan, F. (2021). The Impact of Social Capital, Information and Communication Technology Development, and Globalization on Good Urban Governance Based on the Participation Culture and Local Authorities' Inclination Approach. Journal for Management and Development Process, 34(1), 3-26. [DOI:10.52547/jmdp.34.1.3]
16. Sukmadilaga, C., Pratama, A., & Mulyani, S. (2015). Good Governance Implementation in Public Sector: Exploratory Analysis of Government Financial Statements Disclosures across ASEAN Countries. Procedia-Social and Behavioral Sciences, 211(1), 513-518. [DOI:10.1016/j.sbspro.2015.11.068]
17. Toosi, A., Ahmadi, A., & Hashemi Touloun, M. R. S. (2021). An Optimal Corporate Governance Framework for Internationalization: A Case Study. Journal for Management and Development Process, 33(4), 29-70. [DOI:10.52547/jmdp.33.4.29]
18. Tricker, R. (1994). Corporate Governance: Practices, Procedures and Powers in British Companies and Their Boards of Directors: A Study of Corporate Governance in Five Countries, 4,248.
| Rights and permissions | |
 |
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License. |
