An exploratory study of the peer review process: Perceptions held by federal audit executives compared to perceptions held by private sector audit executives

This study focused on the perceptions held by federal audit executives of the peer review process. It documented the perceptions of these executives and compared them to the perceptions of private sector audit executives. McCabe, Luzi, and Brennan's Managing Partners' Perception of Peer Review article served as the study's basis. A public administration literature search did not locate a similar study of the perceptions of federal sector audit executives. The peer review process in the federal sector is framed by the Guide for Conducting External Quality Control Reviews of the Audit Operations of Offices of Inspector General which precisely directs, through the use of questions and checklists, the conduct of peer reviews. A comparable document, issued by the American Institute of Certified Public Accountants, direct public accounting and auditing firms. The mandated reviews for both federal and private auditing entities occur every three years and the results are presented to the heads of the federal offices of inspector general and the heads of the private auditing entities, respectively.;After deconstructing interview narratives using grounded theory methodology, the study concluded that federal sector audit executives, specifically audit executives from interviewed offices of inspectors general, held some, but not all, of the perceptions held by private sector audit executives on the peer review process. The study also concluded that federal sector audit executives did not use their organizational peer review reports in the same way private sector audit executives used their reports. The study attempted to determine if the smaller federal offices of inspector general perceived that they experienced more difficulty in performing peer reviews than the larger federal offices of inspector general. The hypothesis was not supported.;The federal audit peer review process should: (1) pay more attention to the attitudinal qualities of peer review team members; (2) provide team members better training; (3) move away from checklists for some areas that are examined; and (4) add an efficiency and effectiveness aspect to the reviews. More study is needed to identify the reasons why public and private sector audit executives perceived differently a very similar process and used the results differently.