Brooks, T and Gunning, J (2022) Walking a fine line: Examining the position of the construction quality auditor through the lens of financial audit literature. In: Tutesigensi, A and Neilson, C J (eds.) Proceedings of 38th Annual ARCOM Conference, 5-7 September 2022, Glasgow Caledonian University, Glasgow, UK.
Abstract
Internal and external quality auditors must perform a complex balancing act requiring good judgement, interpretation, emotional intelligence, and empathy to achieve several, often conflicting, objectives. The position of the auditor in the financial sector has been examined in the literature in detail; however, in the construction sector this area has been largely unexplored, a gap in knowledge that this paper aims to help fill. This review considers Power's theory of 'The Audit Society' and the rich financial auditing literature to examine the position and actions of internal and external construction quality auditors. The findings show that the audit is a complex construction of performance and judgement and that the 'facticity' of the audit should not be taken for granted. Auditor independence and competence can be difficult to achieve within the current construction quality regulatory system. Construction quality auditing takes place behind closed doors - greater exposure is needed of auditing practice.
| Item Type: | Conference Paper (Paper) |
|---|---|
| Uncontrolled Keywords: | auditing; quality management; financial regulation; ISO 9001 |
| Index terms: | competence, emotional intelligence, regulation, quality management, construction sector, exposure, construction quality, ISO, regulatory system, society, audit |
| Subjects: | political science, quality assurance, industry analysis, communities and social development, personnel development, public and environmental health, performance measurement, standards development, psychology |
| Topics: | Health and Safety, Research Practice, Stakeholder Management, Governance, Quality Management, Human Resources |
| Descriptive scope: | 3 PCT |
N.B. Descriptive scope is a count of how many of the five facets of empirical research are indicated by the words used in title, abstract and keywords. It is not intended as a judgement on the research; merely a count of the kind of word we would expect to indicate Phenomenon, Concepts, Theoretical framing, Empirical techniques, Analytical techniques. If all five are present, then a code of “5 PCTEA” will indicate this. If you feel the coding for this record is questionable, we welcome discussion around the terms we matched or the way we categorized them. The facet you would expect may not be coded, or a facet may be coded inappropriately. This can also bear on a larger question, of which facets should be treated as defining in construction management research. Please get in touch, and we will look at it. More details here