The DOI matches its Crossref record.
The Audit Society
Abstract
Since the early 1980s there has been an explosion of auditing activity in the United Kingdom and North America. In addition to financial audits there are now medical audits, technology audits, value for money audits, environmental audits, quality audits, teaching audits, and many others. Why has this happened? What does it mean when a society invests so heavily in an industry of checking and when more and more individuals find themselves subject to formal scrutiny? This book argues that the rise of auditing has its roots in political demands for accountability and control. At the heart of a new administrative style, internal control systems have begun to play an important public role and individual and organizational performance has been increasingly formalized and made auditable. The author argues that the new demands and expectations of audits live uneasily with their operational capabilities. Not only is the manner in which they produce assurance and accountability open to question but also, by imposing their own values, audits often have unintended and dysfunctional consequences for the audited organization.
Overview
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Verification
Claims the paper makes
Claims other papers make about this one
Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?
In the citing paper
“Across various industries, the common accountability practice of auditing has long relied on rituals, organizational processes and tools in order to make consistent, inter-operable and reliable judgments [113], as well as provide broader access to a larger range of stakeholder participants in the audit process [92].”
From Towards AI Accountability Infrastructure: Gaps and Opportunities in AI Audit Tooling (2025) · cites this paper as [113]
Citations
Cited by
Sorted by citations
The Case of Sustainability Assurance: Constructing a New Assurance Service *
O’Dwyer, B. (2011) · Contemporary Accounting Research · doi:10.1111/j.1911-3846.2011.01108.x · Cited by 321
Digital by default? A qualitative study of exclusion in digitalised welfare
Schou, J., & Pors, A. S. (2019) · Social Policy & Administration · doi:10.1111/spol.12470 · Cited by 229
Bornmann, L. (2017) · Higher Education · doi:10.1007/s10734-016-9995-x · Cited by 117
Towards AI Accountability Infrastructure: Gaps and Opportunities in AI Audit Tooling
Ojewale, V., Steed, R., Vecchione, B., Birhane, A., & Raji, I. D. (2025) · Proceedings of the 2025 CHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems · doi:10.1145/3706598.3713301 · Cited by 81
Defining Bureaucratic Autonomy
Bersch, K., & Fukuyama, F. (2023) · Annual Review of Political Science · doi:10.1146/annurev-polisci-051921-102914 · Cited by 58
Metadata
- Authors
- Power, M.
- Corresponding author
- Power, Michael
- ORCID
- Power, Michael
- Venue
- Oxford University Press eBooks
- Publisher
- Oxford University Press
- Published
- 1999-08-19
- OpenAlex
- W4253738980
- Cited by
- 992
- References
- 0
- Citations by year
- 2026: 113 · 2025: 37 · 2024: 58 · 2023: 35 · 2022: 30 · 2021: 34 · 2020: 48 · 2019: 49 · 2018: 48 · 2017: 50 · 2016: 82 · 2015: 54 · 2014: 59 · 2013: 55 · 2012: 34
- FWCI
- 5.10
- Type
- book
- Language
- en
- Open access
- closed
- Locations
- Oxford University Press eBooks (publishedVersion)
- Topics
- Social Sciences › Public Administration › Public Policy and Administration Research
- Social Sciences › Business, Management and Accounting › Accounting › Auditing, Earnings Management, Governance
- Social Sciences › Business, Management and Accounting › Accounting › Accounting and Organizational Management
- Keywords
- auditing, audit society, accountability, internal control, performance measurement, performance audit, clinical audit, environmental auditing, quality audit, administrative style, assurance, political control
About these checks
Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.
Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.
Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.
What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›
Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review
How to cite
Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.
- This page
- CoChat. (2026). Citation check: The Audit Society. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1093/acprof:oso/9780198296034.001.0001
- The paper
- Power, M. (1999). The Audit Society. Oxford University Press eBooks. https://doi.org/10.1093/acprof%3Aoso/9780198296034.001.0001