Abstract
The aim of this article has been to develop a communication strategy that will allow Supreme Audit Institutions (SAIs) to enhance their transparency and accountability to target groups. The study emphasizes the fact that these organizations should base their strategy on three fundamental props—target audience, message, and channels of communication. Defining the target audience and the message and revealing the most common ways of getting the message across have been the backbone of the theory put forward in this article. The analysis highlights the need for SAIs to aim their communication strategy at an increasingly wider audience which will, in turn, receive different messages via both traditional and new media.
Introduction
The International Organization of Supreme Audit Institutions (INTOSAI), at the end of 2009, passed two international regulations, namely, ISSAI 20: Principles of Transparency and Accountability and ISSAI 21: Principles of Transparency—Good Practice. The aim of these regulations is to propose principles and good practice relating to transparency and accountability as a help to Supreme Audit Institutions (SAIs) in promoting among the general public and state services greater understanding of their functions and role in society. Also, they aim to serve as an example to public audited bodies (International Organization of Supreme Audit Institutions [INTOSAI], 2009a, 2009b).
In each of these regulations, the term “transparency” refers to the requirement to inform and make available to the general public their situation, responsibilities, strategy, activities, financial management, operations, and performance, as well as audit results and conclusions.
The term “accountability” refers to the legal and report presentation framework, and to the structure, strategy, procedures, and actions, which help to guarantee that SAIs produce and present the results of their auditing activity through their audit reports and help to guarantee assessment and follow-up of audit activity management and impact.
ISSAI 20 puts forward and explains nine transparency and accountability principles, whereas ISSAI 21 provides examples of SAI good practices related to these principles, which are as follows:
SAI duties should be carried out within a legal framework guaranteeing accountability and transparency.
SAIs should make publicly available their mandate, responsibilities, mission, and strategy.
SAIs should have objective and transparent audit standards, processes, and methods.
SAIs should apply high ethical and integrity standards to all staff at every level.
SAIs should ensure that accountability and transparency principles are maintained when outsourcing their activities.
SAIs should operate economically, effectively, efficiently, according to laws and regulations and should report publicly on their activities.
SAIs should provide public reports on the results and conclusions of their audit activity.
SAIs should provide timely and widespread communication of their activities through the media, websites, and other channels.
SAIs should use external, independent advisors to improve the quality and credibility of their work.
Of the nine principles defined in ISSAI 20, number 7 highlights the fact that SAIs need to report audit results and number 8 points out that the media and the Internet, among others, should be the communication channels used to publish results and provide an overall view of the work they do. These means of communication are also mentioned in ISSAI 20 when it describes the rest of the principles and in ISSAI 21 when it gives examples of good practice as carried out by some SAIs in application of the nine principles.
As far as the media is concerned, INTOSAI has concluded that a large number of SAIs is opening up to society and the media at large by holding postaudit report press conferences and by hiring communication experts to summarize and simplify reports. Only a few, however, offer a centralized press office open to journalists, where press releases, press statements, and speeches by the Auditor General are available. They also have a press officer and offer regular meetings with the press or individual interviews with journalists at press conferences.
As for the Internet, INTOSAI points out that most SAIs have their own websites, most of which contain a section called “Legislation” or “Legal mandate,” which explains the legal framework within which SAIs operate and which allows access to all regulations through various formats. Furthermore, these sections publish information about SAI mandates, responsibilities, operations, and strategies; about audit methodology, including manuals, guides and tools; and they also publish audit reports.
A few SAIs use website surveys or opinion polls among interested parties as an impact measurement tool. Virtually no SAI surveyed offers website information concerning presidential/auditor- general or employee expenses or running costs nor do they say anything about signed contracts worth more than Can $10,000, about audit report updates via e-mail, or about audit-related complaints or suggestions.
Most examples of good practice, as well as those mentioned previously, closely link transparency and accountability to public disclosure of everything that has to do with SAIs: brochures aimed at publicizing the institution in various sectors of society (e.g., parliamentary, state service, general public), and Auditor General appearances before parliamentary groups, and so on. INTOSAI is, therefore, acknowledging in ISSAI 20 and 21 the need for SAIs to have a communication strategy to enhance transparency and accountability.
In this context, the aim of this article is to define a communication strategy that SAIs will be able to develop, using available published material on the subject and empirical evidence provided in academic studies and analyzing good practice procedures, which some SAIs have already adopted in their communication policies.
This article points out that communication strategies can help SAIs to enhance transparency and accountability and that putting them into practice entails having a clear definition of who they are aimed at, the message they want to get across, and a communication plan based on their relationship with traditional and new media.
With this as its aim, the article is structured as follows: section “INTOSAI Communication Policy” looks at INTOSAI’s communication policy within the framework of its overall strategy; section “Communication Strategy” analyzes how a communication strategy can be put into practice—first, arguments justifying the need for such a strategy are put forward to complement those issued by INTOSAI in its ISSAI 20 and 21 regulations, and second, the steps that need to be taken to design an SAI communication strategy are detailed; section “Discussion and Conclusion” deals with conclusions and the most important contributions coming out of the study.
INTOSAI Communication Policy
INTOSAI has developed a global communication policy and strategy which, using the slogan “Mutual Exchange of Information Benefits All,” refers to the advantages gained from the free circulation of information, ideas, experiences, and knowledge among INTOSAI members. The policy points out the benefits provided by having a clear coordinated approach to outside communication to guarantee a general coherence and competence (INTOSAI, 2010a, pp. 3-4).
The basic principle of the communication strategy is to promote the mutual exchange of knowledge and experience within the whole INTOSAI community, as well as with a broad spectrum of interests from outside the community. The aim here is to improve the quality of government auditing throughout the world and to promote transparency and accountability (INTOSAI, 2010a, p. 4).
INTOSAI has taken five steps toward defining their current communication:
Approval of the 2005-2010 Strategic Plan. In 2004, it published and adopted a strategic plan that would provide working guidelines for the coming years. The strategic plan included an updated mission statement, four key goals, and several core values to guide the organization’s efforts. One of the strategies under goal 3 “Knowledge Sharing/Knowledge Services” was to develop a global communication policy and strategy. This policy aims to promote better understanding of different SAI roles and functions in society between the public and the administration (INTOSAI, 2005b, pp. 7, 9, and 16).
Approval of an INTOSAI Communication Policy. It was adopted by the XIX INTOSAI Congress in 2007. This policy defines principles and objectives, some of which affect not only INTOSAI as an organization but also all the SAIs belonging to it. It highlights, among other things, the obligation of all members to share and divulge information about their activities through their websites, journals, newsletters, reports, and other publications. Members are required to create and maintain their websites linked to the INTOSAI website and to post information related to work plans, products publications, and activities. Furthermore, SAI chairpersons are responsible for website content and updating as well as other matters concerning external communication, such as press releases to announce new publications or interaction with outside organizations with similar interests—arranging meetings, seminars, conferences, or discussion panels (INTOSAI, 2006, pp. 5-10).
Setting up of an INTOSAI Communications Strategy Task Force. In 2007, this Task Force produced a document containing the terms of reference for designing the communication strategy.
Approval of the INTOSAI Communication Guideline (INTOSAI, 2010a). Produced by the Task Force, this guideline was approved in 2010. On the basis of INTOSAI communication policy and practice, its aim is to establish internal and external communication principles for both the organization and its individual members, which guarantee efficient, transparent, and reliable communication. This, in turn, should be appropriate and accessible and should, as far as possible, promote among members INTOSAI itself and its vision, mission, and the aims of its strategic plan. Individual SAIs are to decide how to apply the guideline in the context of their own structure and environment.
The mainstay of the guideline are the Lima and Mexico Declarations; it aims to promote the principle of independence established in the former, and from the latter, the right and requirement SAIs have to disclose their work and to freely decide on the content, publication, and availability of their reports.
The guideline also establishes an internal and external communication strategy, which defines recipients, functions, and responsibilities as well as the means of communication that should be used to meet predetermined objectives.
Approval of the 2011-2016 Strategic Plan. This was approved in 2010. As well as maintaining elements from the previous plan (mission, vision, and goals), the new one lays down six strategic priorities, one of which is to increase INTOSAI communication. Having established its communication strategy and policy in its guideline, now INTOSAI aimed to promote active and efficient communication in line with available means such as the INTOSAI website, INTOSAI executive document summaries, a range of individual member websites, executive summaries from the International Journal of Government Auditing and INTOSAI’s own collaboration tool (INTOSAI, 2010c).
Communication Strategy
SAI adoption of communication strategies will enhance transparency and accountability. González, López, and García (2008, pp. 436-437) put forward various reasons that explain why SAIs need to have a communication strategy:
The capacity of public bodies to demonstrate the results of their activity allows them to justify their existence (Waerness, 1999, p. 150). Communication gives credibility to SAIs and, only if they are credible, relevant, and indispensable to their various users will they be capable of successfully facing the future (Barrett, 2000, pp. 2-3).
SAI freedom to define their own communication policy toward the media and the general public is an essential component of their independence and efficiency (European Organisation of Supreme Audit Institutions [EUROSAI], 1999).
Having a communication policy favors the establishment of impact-assessment measures. SAIs regard press coverage as indicative of the value of their work (Lonsdale, 1999, p. 103).
A communication policy can positively influence SAI compliance with freedom of information legislation because it allows for information release through the different channels open to it.
Lack of a communication policy gives the impression of a dull, gloomy institution with little known about it, whose worth is debatable and whose existence could be called into question. Such a situation could give rise to leaked information, half-truths, and misunderstandings due to the lack of a mediator who comes between the work of the institution and the journalist charged with passing the information on to society (Erbiti, 2003, pp. 32-33).
On top of these arguments, it could be added that a communication strategy could help SAIs to fight corruption, especially in developing countries where such bodies use the media to bring society’s attention to corruption cases uncovered during the course of their work (Kayrak, 2008, p. 67).
The communication strategy of a public institution can be focused in different ways (Canel, 2007, pp. 79-80):
Communication that serves the strategic aims of the organization: Here, communication comes behind strategy, and communicators’ involvement in decision making is very limited. Communication gets involved once the policy decision has been taken to facilitate its application.
Communication at the center of the organization’s strategy: This entails the person in charge of communication, together with the rest of the directors, deciding on the public policy that best defines the identity of the institution.
Strategic plans in some bodies bring in communication as a value (United Kingdom National Audit Office [UK NAO], 2006), or as a projection of strategy values (Court of Audit of Belgium, 2010), or as a strategy itself (Hungarian State Audit Office, 2011; INTOSAI, 2010c). Others regard it as a tool to develop strategy (National Audit Office of Estonia, 2010) or to enhance the usefulness of their work (Netherlands Court of Audit, 2010).
But who, within the SAI, should be responsible for defining the strategy? How should a communication strategy be developed? SAIs should also bear in mind the need for qualified communication staff who are used to dealing with the media and the need for facilities capable of putting out quality publications adapted to the requirements of different users (UK NAO, 2007).
The department in charge of communication should handle all incoming, outgoing, and internal messages. The effectiveness of this will depend on its direct relationship with the heads of the institution, on its position at the center of the institution’s structure, and on the communication skills of those who belong to it (Erbiti, 2003, p. 30).
Some SAIs have a press office that handles communication. In some of these, the office is just another department (e.g., Austria), whereas in others it is right in the center of the organization (e.g., Germany, Finland, France, Lithuania, and the Netherlands).
In Portugal, all media contact is carried out through the press office, which was restructured and put in the hands of a professional journalist when the Portuguese Court of Auditors (PCA) became aware of the growing interest in audit reports being shown by politicians, the media, and the general public. This office reports to the parliamentary president’s office, and also decides on the timeliness, or otherwise, of report releases (Oliveira, 2006, p. 121).
As for size and activities, SAIs in the European Union (EU) have press offices whose staff numbers vary between 1 and 10 people, the most common being a department made up of 5. Press sections coordinate, register, and do press follow-up in a variety of ways. They handle information that comes into and goes out of the institution (González et al., 2008, p. 443).
Incoming information from the press, radio, and television is generally scrutinized, analyzed, and passed on, whether it be about the SAIs themselves or the entities that have been audited. In terms of outgoing information, most press offices put together material about the institution and send reports to the media, as well as informing them of other matters such as the opening of new premises, appointments and swearing-ins, VIP visits, open days, and so on (González et al., 2008, p. 443).
Press office activity has grown in recent years. In addition to dealing with relationships with the traditional media, with advising SAI heads on all image-related issues; with involvement in acts, reports, and speeches; with public relations (PR) printed publications (brochures, books, and videos), they are also responsible for website content and, more recently, for relationships with the new media—a facet that will be looked at in the following.
Once the communication officer or office has been defined and situated within the SAI structure, the question arises of how to carry out communication strategy.
The starting point involves a review of current strategy (if there is one) so that new strategy objectives can be established. These will determine the audience which will, in turn, determine the message and how to get it across (Bennett & Jessani, 2011, pp. 107-109).
As was pointed out in the previous section, designing a communication strategy involves other factors (budget, timeline, etc.). This article will focus on the target audience, message production, and techniques to convey the message. It will also look at information going out of the SAI, because it is fundamental to a press office (Erbiti, 2003, pp. 31). Incoming and memorandum type information is irrelevant here.
Target Audience
The audience defined by one SAI is not necessarily the same for other SAIs. It will be identified according to communication strategy objectives.
INTOSAI has established five objectives in its strategy. Two of them relate to internal communication among members: raising the knowledge of INTOSAI members to a uniform level by using existing means of communication and supporting INTOSAI members and promoting convergence. The remaining three refer to external communication: conveying the concerns of government audit to decision makers and opinion leaders, strengthening the standing and reputation of SAIs and INTOSAI, and disseminating the benefits of SAIs and INTOSAI among partner organizations (INTOSAI, 2010a, pp. 6-9).
Bearing in mind external communication objectives, INTOSAI has defined two kinds of audience—primary and secondary (INTOSAI, 2010a, pp. 10-11). The first group includes parliaments/legislative political control bodies, governments, law enforcement agencies, audited entities at regional and local level, the media, and citizens. The second contains audit entities at regional and national level, internal audit entities, professional associations, private sector audit entities, INTOSAI partner organizations such as the United Nations (UN), donor communities and associated members, civil society and opinion leaders, political entities at regional and national level, and academic, science and research organizations.
The objectives and audience, which are identified in INTOSAI’s communication strategy are a reference for SAIs when it comes to implanting or reviewing their own strategies.
The German SAI, for instance, has set its communication objectives as “to fulfil its constitutional mandate, satisfy stakeholders’ information needs, guild a reputation for integrity and excellence and enhance audit impact.” Its communication strategy is aimed at three groups—audited bodies, constitutional bodies (including Parliament and the Federal Government), and civil society, media, and citizens (Winter, 2011, pp. 3-12). Apart from civil society, all these sectors are considered by INTOSAI to be major recipients of its communication strategy.
The Lithuanian SAI’s objectives, however, are to create a positive image and long-term improvement of the impact of its work. They are aimed at a wider audience than the German one, including additional sectors such as “non-governmental institutions, local governments, foreign embassies residing in Lithuania and international partners” (Jakimauskienė, 2011, pp. 4, 7).
The Spanish SAI’s communication policy’s main objectives are the defense of its institutional image, impartiality in the presentation and communication of results, transparency in the activity of the institution, and the transmission of information to society as clearly, objectively, and immediately as possible. Its audience comprises the Parliament, the Government, interested public managers, the media, and society in general (Fernández-Pirla, 2011, p. 7).
The target audience, as defined by the three SAIs mentioned previously, highlights their interest in reaching a widening audience by moving away from the kind of audience described in the Lima Declaration (INTOSAI, 1977, p. 10), which was restricted to parliaments and the general public. The media, civil society, citizens, or the government are currently SAI communication strategy objectives and recipients of their messages.
Message
An institution’s message is both an abstract and specific definition of what the institution is. Through the message, an idea is transmitted about the institution, who runs it, and the public activity it carries out. Public institutions in general, and SAIs in particular, should put out a message that causes its recipient to trust in the institution, that justifies its existence and that transmits the good work it does (Canel, 2007, pp. 238-239).
Pollitt and Summa (1997, pp. 322-323) talk about ethos, a concept used in the theory of Aristotle, to describe the face SAIs want to show their audience. Their ethos is identified through the definition they make of themselves and their role, their description of aims, and their interest to those they serve, the qualities they ascribe to themselves and to their work when they project a public image as experts in their field. Clearly, a SAI message should reply to questions such as: Who are we? What is our mission? What qualities do we have?
The answer is not always the same. Walker (2007, pp. 4-5, 8) relates SAI missions to Dr. Abraham Maslow’s hierarchy of needs. He puts forward a pyramid in which each of its six levels describes a mission:
First level or pyramid base: Combating corruption.
Second level: Promoting transparency.
Third level: Ensuring accountability.
Fourth level: Enhancing economy, efficiency, ethics, equity, and effectiveness.
Fifth level: Increasing insight.
Sixth level: Facilitating foresight.
A SAI’s mission will affect its message, which will vary according to the level they sit at on Maslow’s pyramid. The main function of the Indonesian SAI, for instance, is to fight corruption and fraud (Agung Rai, 2008), whereas the U.S. SAI has the mission to provide the government with keys to explain its programs and policies and to forecast challenges and trends for the future (Walker, 2007, pp. 3-4). The message for both countries will, therefore, be clearly different.
Likewise, the drawing up of strategic plans by SAIs is helping them to define themselves and send out a clear message of just what they are. Strategic plans 1 define their mission, vision, and the principles or values that are going to orientate their conduct in both internal and external relations and also help define the message or messages they wish to put across.
The National Audit Office in Great Britain (UK NAO, 2009), for example, regards its raison d’etre as being “to promote the highest standards in financial management and reporting, the proper conduct of public business and beneficial change in the provision of public services.” It aspires to “help the nation spend wisely,” an expression which, as well as defining its strategic plan, is also the slogan that appears in all its publications and on its website. Its values are the following: a cooperative spirit, integrity, looking outward, making a difference, open communications, professional excellence, and valuing individuals.
The Australian National Audit Office (ANAO; Australian National Audit Office [ANAO], 2007, pp. 4-6) defines its mission in a similar way: “The ANAO is a specialist public sector agency providing a full range of audit services to the parliament, Australian government public sector entities and statutory bodies, as well as government corporations.” Its vision is that of “an international leader in the provision of independent public sector audit and related services” and its values are “respect, integrity and excellence.”
How is the Message Got Across?
SAIs can use various communication channels to ensure their message reaches the right recipients—the media, the Internet, conferences, open days, PR publications such as brochures and books as well as videos and specialized publications, relations with other institutions, and sponsorship.
The choice of one channel over another or the use of several channels will depend on the kind of message, its content, available resources, and how the audience likes to receive the information (Bennett & Jessani, 2011, p. 113).
The media and the Internet will be the two main channels through which SAIs will send their message to different audiences and be in touch with them. González et al. (2008, p. 456), point out that SAI communication plans depend, to a large extent, on the media and a website to publish results of their activity and to provide users with an overall view of their work.
The previous statement does not contradict the fact that SAIs have protocols that regulate their relationship and way of communicating with different audiences or that the regulations they approve include specific sections on communication.
The Government Accountability Office (GAO; 2004), for instance, has drawn up a protocol that governs its work with executive branch agencies. This protocol specifically establishes how communication should be carried out between the GAO and agencies, and the type of information it should provide the media with when it concerns work done by the Office of Special Investigations.
Likewise, some auditing guidelines and guidance for good governance put out, or in the process of being drawn up, by INTOSAI (e.g., ISSAI 1260: Communication with those charged with governance and INTOSAI GOV 9150: Co-operation and Co-ordination between Internal Auditors and SAIs in the Public Sector) contain specific references to how communication should be in relation to those aspects under regulation in said guidelines (INTOSAI, 2007; 2010b).
The media
When we talk about the media we are referring to traditional media such as radio, the press, and television—the mass media.
The media has been the main channel of communication between SAIs and their audience and, in recent years, it has been the focus of communication strategies. For some SAIs, like the National Audit Office of Estonia, the media is the only way they have of reporting work and results to those target groups with whom direct communication is impossible (National Audit Office of Estonia, 2009).
The media can enhance the role of SAIs by carrying out several functions, such as inculcating in society the notion of public ownership; in-depth investigation of corruption, waste, and inefficiency; and guaranteeing transparency and accountability in government work by modifying society’s behavior in terms of its right to be informed reporting advantages of freedom of information legislation. The media also acts as a defender of the legal framework by informing the general public of its rights as citizens, taxpayers, and voters, by keeping a check on the secret service and police and reporting any incident entailing civil rights abuse. It also keeps political parties to their electoral promises (Anam, 2007, pp. 106-107).
SAIs pay special attention to the media because the information they handle is technical and so employing an interlocutor to deal with the media will avoid misconstrued information and misunderstandings. Moreover, permanent communication with the media prevents SAIs being newsworthy only when some report or work containing shock value conclusions is leaked out (Erbiti, 2003, pp. 33-37).
Dye (2009) reveals several key factors SAIs should bear in mind when dealing with the media if they wish to maximize the impact of their work. First, they should be accessible, prompt, honest, helpful, and reliable; second, they should understand the culture of the media community; and finally, they should be aware of the different types of journalists around—sensationalist, ideologist, well-informed pack followers, columnists, or commentators and community journalists. Their handling of news will obviously be different.
Audit reports constitute one of the most newsworthy SAI releases (UK NAO, 2005, p. 15). Due to their relative importance, the annual report or the Opinion on the General State Account creates great expectation in the media. In these cases, SAI press offices should call a press conference to report on findings, observations, and recommendations coming out of the audits.
The Austrian SAI, for example, holds a press conference when releasing its annual report and also puts out an abbreviated version for the media (UK NAO, 2005, p. 25). Similarly, the Latvian State Audit Office (2007) invites journalists to the release of its report, arranges press conferences, and provides information on its activities to the press, radio, and television.
The press office should assess the importance of the information given in its reports and should not necessarily call in the press every time it puts out a report, although it is always useful to draw up a press release. The SAI press office in the U.K. issues a press release with all reports, and its director is available to journalists to discuss them (Waerness, 1999). The Estonian SAI also releases press statements for every report it publishes and, when appropriate, offers information directly to the press. SAIs in Finland and Italy issue press releases every time they publish reports (UK NAO, 2005, pp. 84, 150), as does the Malta National Audit Office (MNAO; Malta National Audit Office [MNAO], 2010, p. 29).
These communication practices highlight the fact that SAIs are aware of the fact that just sending reports to the media is not enough—they need to be backed up by press conferences and releases that simplify, summarize, and offer understandable information on the reports (González et al., 2008, p. 440).
The PCA (2009) illustrates its relationship with the media by pointing out that the more than 100 reports published in 2008 gave rise to 9,947 news items—3,895 in the press; 2,345 on the radio and television; and 3,707 on the Internet, all of which involved a monthly average of 828 reports-related news items.
Media relationships are not just limited to information on audit report results. SAIs also offer information on other matters such as appointments and swearing-ins, presentations of annual work schedules, staff participation in congresses or meetings, visits by VIPs, and so on (Erbiti, 2003, pp. 40-41). In these cases of limited interest, it may be advisable to simply issue a press release and not call for a press conference.
The Latvian SAI regularly uses press releases, which it divides up into three categories, depending on the kind of information they provide: those reporting on audit results, those that report on matters deemed newsworthy, and those regarded as miscellaneous (Tjarve, 2007).
SAIs generally allow journalist access to parliamentary commissions (MNAO, 2010, p. 29; OECD, 2002, p. 19) and agree to interviews—in 2008, the president of the PCA was interviewed 16 times (PCA, 2009, p. 47) —and award prizes; since 2002, the Bulgarian National Audit Office has been giving an award to those in the media that report on its activity professionally and accurately. Since it started, the award has been given to both local and national newspapers.
It should also be pointed out that media relations also take place through SAI websites. Several SAIs have designed their websites so that part of the available space is devoted to the media. In Better Access, Better Information, Better News: The Ten Essential Elements of an Online Newsroom, Bransford (2001, p. 3) points out that the best way to guarantee that journalists get the right message is to set up an online newsroom with direct access via a website.
Canada’s SAI has a media room that contains information about new releases, media statements associated with the reports, statements to House of Commons committees, statements to senate committees, statements to territorial legislative assembly committees, and speeches. The Italian SAI has a system known as “comunicazione,” which allows journalists to register and receive press statements and newsletters by e-mail. The Cour de Comptes has a media space called “presse,” which offers press dossiers, statements, speeches, summaries of reports, articles, and miscellaneous publications. The Norwegian SAI website has a press statement file, while the Czech Republic provides the media with its logo in a jpg format. Other SAIs that also have media space on their websites are those from Estonia, Mexico, Sweden, and the United States.
All of them have direct media room access from the main page, which suggests that the media are regarded as a primary audience (Callison, 2003, p. 40) as well as being one of the major communication channels together with the Internet.
The Internet
The future of the mass media is linked to new technology (Klopfenstein, 1996, p. 21). The Internet, despite being part of the mass media, stands out because of its diversity, ranging from World Wide Web (WWW) pages to Usenet groups to e-mail messages. Furthermore, the messages it transmits may have been created by one person at a specific time or by several people over a long period of time; message recipients or audiences can range from one to millions of people who, in turn, may also be message producers (Morris & Ogan, 1996, p. 3).
When it first started, Internet use was focused on the dissemination of content, products, and services (Kietzmann, Hermkens, McCarthy, & Silvestre, 2011, p. 241). Most websites were created by a small group of publishers, and users were simply content consumers. Over the last decade, however, users have been more involved in creating content than in consuming it. The new media involves blogs, web forums, social bookmarking sites, photo and video sharing communities, and social networking platforms, which offer multiple combinations of all of these and emphasize relationships among users of the community (Agichtein, Castillo, Donato, Gionis, & Mishne, 2008, p. 1).
SAIs acknowledge that websites and social media are two tools that should be implanted in their communication plans to guarantee external communication success (INTOSAI, 2010a, pp. 11-12). Society’s awareness of SAIs will depend, to a large extent, on these channels of communication, especially bearing in mind that 56.0% of homes in the EU now have internet access. The percentage for Japan is 60.0%; for Australia, 62.0%; the United States, 63.5%; and Korea, 95.0%. 2
Websites
The WWW is a useful tool to evaluate public organizations’ openness and to improve their transparency and accountability (Drüke, 2007; La Porte, Demchack, & De Jong, 2002). In the current communicational context, information and communication technology (ICT) has provided SAIs with the opportunity to promote public spending accountability and transparency, to foster efficiency in government operations, and to offer electronic services by posting audit reports on the website and by using it to transmit its mandate, mission, operations, performance, cost, and impact, as well as other aspects of its work (INTOSAI, 2005a).
At the moment, SAIs have websites at their disposal. Nevertheless, 64 of the 188 SAI INTOSAI members do not have a website. In all, 51% are in Africa, 17.18% in South/Central America, 15.63% in Oceania, 9.3% in Asia, and 6.25% in Europe.
Those that do have websites offer diverse types of information in easily accessible formats. Users can get nonfinancial information that answers questions such as the following: Who are we? What do we do and how do we do it? What are our products? Other kinds of information available are audit reports, annual reports, official publications, details of seminars and conferences they organize and/or take part in, and information directed at the media (González et al., 2008, pp. 455-456).
Nonfinancial information about the institution’s message is generally found in the section called “About us.” Here one can find information on the mission, vision, and values defined in the SAIs’ strategic plan. Also available is information about fiscal activity, international activity such as participation in workgroups organized by international bodies such as the International Federation of Automatic Control (IFAC) and Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development (OECD), and its membership of INTOSAI or regional groups like European Organisation of Supreme Audit Institutions (EUROSAI) or African Organization of Supreme Audit Institutions (AFROSAI). There is, as well, information referring to legislation, history, structure, and head offices. Some SAIs, like Bulgaria, explain the meaning of their seal, whereas others, like the United States, have a video showing the agency’s mission and work commitment.
The “Frequently Asked Questions” (FAQs) section also helps audiences to understand SAI messages, although only a few SAIs like Australia and Canada have them.
SAI financial information fundamentally refers to audit and annual activity reports. Most websites have a specific section devoted to reports on organizations which have been audited. The reports are published in their entirety along with summaries and related press statements. Some websites (SAIs in the U.S.A., Australia, Canada, Spain, Norway, New Zealand, and the U.K.) have a report search engine that allows users, some more easily than others, to search for reports according to date, topic, or portfolio. Estonia and Finland distinguish between different types of audits whereas others have a dropdown menu containing reports year by year, but not classified (Bulgaria, China, Denmark, and Iceland), or, in the case of Hungary, according to dates.
It is important for SAIs to do more than just publish audit reports on their websites. Nicoll (2005, pp. 215-216) believes they should come up with new formulae to report and communicate opinions on their audits in collaboration with their representatives, the legislature and the government.
It is commonplace for SAIs to report on the methodology of their work. Some, as is the case in Australia, report on audits which due to be tabled, offering data concerning the agencies involved and the audit objective. As for the annual report, SAIs tend to include those ranging over several years and locate them in the “Publications” or “About us” sections.
Further information aimed at different audiences appears on SAI websites—publications such as manuals, working directives, tools, guidebooks, ethical codes, and so on. There is also information concerning job opportunities within the organization (New Zealand and the United Kingdom), peer review results where one SAI has audited another (Greece and Denmark), forms or other official channels through which the general public can send complaints and suggestions concerning audits (the U.K. and Canada), multimedia section containing classified audio interviews and videos (U.S.A. and Italy), virtual visits (Portugal), staff travel allowances, contracts worth more than Can $10,000, and approved subsidies and donations worth more than Can$25,000 (Canada), as well as other information such as work impact-assessment recommendations and indicators.
Websites include information concerning their creation, visits, design, and accessibility (options related to choosing letter size or accessibility statements). In Belgium, Canada, and the United Kingdom, it is also possible to e-mail the website designer to make suggestions or point out errors.
Websites offer SAIs the chance to target individual members of its overall audience and communicate with them depending on their information needs. When referring to the media, it was pointed out previously that SAIs communicate with it by means of press releases and press conferences and make content such as audit and annual reports available. All this information is also available on their websites, usually in a space specifically aimed at the media.
The websites of some SAIs have been designed according to different target groups and their information requirements. The Estonian SAI offers audited entities and the media a space in which the information differs: The former get information concerning SAI rights and obligations, audit schedules, and regulations as well as a range of publications concerning its work; the media are provided with news and videos.
The Italian SAI makes a distinction between citizens, Parliament, and the media; in Mexico there is a space for children—a multimedia video to explain SAI’s role and the meaning of accountability; the U.K. SAI provides a space for Parliament containing audit reports, highlighting the most recent ones, and also information about work in progress.
The GAO classifies its audience into five types: the Congress, the media, the auditing and accounting community, federal agencies, and researchers. It offers each group different resources, according to its requirements. The federal agencies, for instance, are provided with links to access reports and testimonies in different ways, either by agency or topic. They can also use links to check the status of open recommendations and to access bid protests. The auditing and accounting community are offered the GAO’s main products, such as reports and testimonies; legal decisions and special auditing publications; and also the strategic plan, protocol series, and peer reviews, among others.
As has been pointed out previously, it is very common for SAIs to have a specific audit report section on their websites, regardless of the audience. This makes sense given that audit reports are what their work is basically about and will be of interest to all target groups.
Web 2.0 and social media
Any institution can improve its website by implementing Web 2.0 (Jiang, Raghupathi, & Raghupathi, 2009, p. 13), which features the use of “collective intelligence, providing network-enabled interactive services and giving users control over their own data” (Madden & Fox, 2006).
Kaplan and Haenlein (2010, p. 61) regard Web 2.0 as “the platform for the evolution of Social Media” and social media as “a group of Internet-based applications that guild on the ideological and technological foundations of Web 2.0 and that allow the creation and exchange of user generated content.”
One fundamental feature of social media that sets them apart from the mass media is that the communication is two-way, allowing interactive dialogue and participative decision making, thus reinforcing public confidence when communication takes place between the government and the public. Their use provides further advantages: (a) they complement the communication system, dependent up to now on the mass media; (b) they are low cost; (c) space and time obstacles are practically nonexistent; and (d) they are easily accessible (Park & Cho, 2009).
Social media can be classified into collaborative projects (Wikis such as Wikipedia and social bookmarking applications such as Delicious), blogs, content communities (Bookcrossing, Flickr, Youtube, and SlideShare), social networking sites (Facebook and MySpace) and others, such as virtual game and virtual social worlds (Kaplan & Haenlein, 2010, pp. 62-64).
Nowadays, SAIs are improving their websites with Web 2.0 technology and have started to use social media, regarding them in some cases as a strategic element. The GAO has designed a strategic plan over the years 2010-2015, which factors in trends in the U.S. society as well as the country’s role in the world and in business (GAO, 2010, p. 7). One of these trends is the fast growth of social media usage, which allows individuals to share information and build relationships that promote learning, cooperation, and the exchange of knowledge wherever in the world they might be. Social media influences what citizens think and expect of their government (GAO, 2010, pp. 42-43). In this context, the GAO has set itself the goal of improving “efficiency and effectiveness in performing GAO’s mission and delivering quality products and services to the Congress and the American people.”
To do so, the GAO has a Facebook page, a Twitter account, a Youtube channel and a Flickr page where its work is shared with Congress and the public alike—Facebook and Twitter for news reports, testimonies, and podcasts and Youtube and Flickr for videos and report graphics, respectively.
The GAO also uses some Web 2.0 technologies so that its audience can keep up with its work. To be precise, it offers the following: e-mail updates that inform subscribed interest groups of the existence of new information on the Internet, feeds sent to subscribers about new web content (summaries of reports and testimonies, summaries of Comptroller General decisions and opinions, press releases, etc.), as well as sharing facilities that allow any user to share the GAO video gallery with other users via the social networks and search engines like Google and Yahoo.
GAO usage of social media and Web 2.0 technologies may be considered an example of good practice that other SAIs, which hardly use them, would do well to emulate. In September 2011, we carried out a brief check on Web 2.0 and social media use by the 36 OECD member-country SAIs. Their websites revealed that only Australia and Estonia are present in the social networks via Twitter and Facebook, two SAIs—Australia and the U.K. —have e-mail notification, and a grand total of nine use feeds to send press releases or photos to subscribers (Australia, Austria, Chile, Estonia, Italy, Iceland, New Zealand, Poland, and the Republic of Slovakia).
Discussion and Conclusion
INTOSAI, as the international umbrella organization for all SAIs, has proposed that communication should be regarded as a strategic element in auditing (INTOSAI, 2010a, p. 2).
In 2004, when INTOSAI approved its first strategic plan, it did not have a communication policy and, as a result, neither did most of its SAI members. In the 1990s, only a few had started to divulge their work and explain its worth, probably influenced by public management reform (Pollitt, 1999, p. 200) and, specifically, by one aspect of this reform—the trend toward output (Waerness, 1999, pp. 151-152).
Over the 5 years during which the plan was in force, INTOSAI managed to design a communication policy which has resulted in approval of the INTOSAI Communication Guideline and will be reinforced by the new strategic plan, which is operational until 2016. Approval of ISSAI 20 and 21 has also boosted communication by acknowledging that it is necessary to promote transparency and accountability.
Communication policy has led to a communication strategy that includes essential elements any organization wishing to develop such a strategy should factor in—objectives, audience, products, and channels of communication. It does not, however, refer to other matters that are also important and that SAIs should bear in mind: reviewing current strategy (if it exists), available communication tools, strategy budget, the strategy timeline, instruments to ensure the right message is got across, and tools to measure internal and external communication (Bennett & Jessani, 2011, p. 107). The INTOSAI Communication Guideline does actually mention the question of communication measurement and says that quality indicators should be used to measure communication strategy (INTOSAI, 2010a, p. 13).
This article has attempted to put forward ways that SAIs can formulate a communication strategy to enhance transparency and accountability. By turning to academic publications on communication in general, and that related to SAIs in particular, a strategy has been built around three basic concepts—the target audience, the message, and communication channels.
The aims defined in the communication strategy will affect the type of audience, which is no longer just Parliament and the general public but has grown to include government, audited bodies, donor communities, the media, professional associations, private sector auditors investors, creditors, civil society, political parties, and research organizations.
This audience will be the recipient of a message, which is not necessarily the same for all. The study highlights the fact that, on one hand, SAI strategic plans are helping them to define themselves by specifying their mission, vision, and values, and on the other hand, the mission is going to affect the message, which will reach its target audience via the media and websites.
The media is able to deal differently with information produced by SAI activity. This information can help them fortify their role but it can also weaken it if there is no permanent communication with journalists that will prevent leaks and scandals, especially related to information about audit reports, the main area of activity.
SAIs should hold press conferences when the results of an audit are especially relevant and, in other cases, produce press releases and summaries. Their relationship with the media should not just be limited to reporting on audit results. They need to weigh up the importance of the information to decide whether or not to call a press conference or simply issue a press statement.
Over the last decade, new technology has had a major impact in the field of public auditing. websites are used by all SAI target groups because they contain general information, usually in a section called “About us,” which includes their strategic plan, the nature of their activities, mandate, history, organization, and so on; financial information as audit and annual reports; and extra information, which may be of interest to different target audiences: from audit manuals, job opportunities, and staff travel expenses to information on peer review results and recommendation follow-up.
More recently, SAI websites have started to improve their presentation and to offer services to target groups by implementing Web 2.0 technology which, in turn, has served as a springboard for the development of social media. They are still hardly used at the moment and are basically restricted to the use of feeds so that subscribers can get press releases online. SAI presence in the social network, such as Facebook or Twitter, is virtually nonexistent except in a few cases, like the GAO and the Australian and Estonian SAIs.
These new technologies, nevertheless, will bring about, in the near future, a change in communication between SAIs and their target groups, who will go from being mere consumers of information to becoming information producers and at the same time active participants in the decision-making process.
One last aspect to consider in the use of different channels of communication is the need to integrate both traditional and social media (Kaplan & Haenlein, 2010, p. 65) into an ecosystem whereby everybody works together to achieve a common goal (Hanna, Rohm, & Crittenden, 2011, p. 273) which, as far as SAIs are concerned, would be the enhancement of transparency and accountability.
Finally, it should be pointed out that these conclusions are based on a review of existing communicational literature on the subject, and empirical proof has come out of work undertaken by academics and communication policies put into practice by several SAIs. The aim has been to put forward a general communication strategy and not refer to just one SAI in particular. The object of any strategy of this type is to direct it toward a common transparency and accountability goal.
There is, nevertheless, no doubt there are major differences among the SAIs belonging to INTOSAI. The way in which a SAI designs its communication strategy as a means of enhancing its transparency and accountability may be affected by various factors: media systems (Mediterranean or polarized pluralist, Northern European or democratic corporatist, or North Atlantic liberal models) and types of SAI structure (Anglo Saxon or Westminster, Napoleonic or judicial, and the board or collegiate models).
Footnotes
Declaration of Conflicting Interests
The author(s) declared no potential conflicts of interest with respect to the research, authorship, and/or publication of this article.
Funding
The author(s) received no financial support for the research, authorship, and/or publication of this article.