Volume 5, Issue 2, June 2020, Page: 76-83
The Implementation of Risk Management in Malaysian Public Sector to Sustain Federal Government’s Revenue
Ahmad Shukri Abdul Gani, Tunku Puteri Intan Safinaz School of Accounting, Universiti Utara Malaysia, Sintok, Malaysia
Basariah Salim, Tunku Puteri Intan Safinaz School of Accounting, Universiti Utara Malaysia, Sintok, Malaysia
Noraza Mat Udin, Tunku Puteri Intan Safinaz School of Accounting, Universiti Utara Malaysia, Sintok, Malaysia
Received: Feb. 23, 2020;       Accepted: Mar. 23, 2020;       Published: Apr. 14, 2020
DOI: 10.11648/j.ijafrm.20200502.12      View  87      Downloads  35
Abstract
The purpose of this paper is to examine the implementation of a risk management framework and process in the Malaysian public sector, particularly in the main collector agencies of the Federal Government of Malaysia (FGOM). The sustainability of the government’s financial situation became a concern among the public. The scrapped goods and services tax (GST), the reintroduction of the sales and services tax (SST) and level of national debt triggered various responses. The public expects the government to identify the risks systematically and take action to minimize the impact. Thus, the government should implement risk management to enhance the effectiveness of public sector financial management. The research method involved administering a questionnaire to five main revenue collector agencies of the FGOM. The respondents were staff members holding senior and middle positions in the accounts, finance, and revenue collection department or unit of the agencies. The significant findings on the extent of risk management in the Malaysian public sector were still not practiced systematically. The risk management framework was not sufficient and the risk management processes were not embedded to ensure that staff across the organization collaborate and co-operate to manage risks. In the Malaysian context, written policies should be published to practice risk management systematically in the public sector since it is the critical success factor in implementing any system in the government. The policies should be followed by further guidelines in phases to improve risk management implementation.
Keywords
Federal Government, Malaysia, Public Sector, Risk Management, Revenue Management
To cite this article
Ahmad Shukri Abdul Gani, Basariah Salim, Noraza Mat Udin, The Implementation of Risk Management in Malaysian Public Sector to Sustain Federal Government’s Revenue, International Journal of Accounting, Finance and Risk Management. Vol. 5, No. 2, 2020, pp. 76-83. doi: 10.11648/j.ijafrm.20200502.12
Copyright
Copyright © 2020 Authors retain the copyright of this article.
This article is an open access article distributed under the Creative Commons Attribution License (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/) which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited.
Reference
[1]
Amadeo, K. (2019). US Debt Ceiling and Its Current Status. The Balance, 1–13.
[2]
Abboushi, S. (2011). Analysis and Outlook of the Greek Financial Crisis. Journal of Global Business Management, 7 (1), 1–8.
[3]
Nazim, U. (2016). The Relationship of Goverment Revenue and Government Expenditure: A Case Study of Malaysia. Munich Personal RePEc Archive.
[4]
Pemandu. (2010). Economic Transformation Programme: A Roadmap For Malaysia. Putrajaya, Malaysia.
[5]
Accountant General’s Department of Malaysia. (2019). Federal Government Financial Statements 2018. Putrajaya, Malaysia.
[6]
Ministry of Finance. (2018). National Budget 2019. Ministry of Finance Malaysia, 79. Putrajaya, Malaysia.
[7]
Accountant General’s Department of Malaysia. (2018). Federal Government Financial Statements 2017. Putrajaya, Malaysia.
[8]
Accountant General’s Department of Malaysia. (2017). Federal Government Financial Statements 2016. Putrajaya, Malaysia.
[9]
Accountant General’s Department of Malaysia. (2016). Federal Government Financial Statements 2015. Putrajaya, Malaysia.
[10]
Accountant General’s Department of Malaysia. (2015). Federal Government Financial Statements 2014. Putrajaya, Malaysia.
[11]
Auditor-General. (2019). Report of the Auditor-General 2018: Financial Statements of Federal Government and Financial Management of Ministry / Department / Federal Statutory Bodies. Putrajaya, Malaysia.
[12]
Auditor-General. (2016). Report of the Auditor-General 2016: Financial Statements of Federal Government and Financial Management of Ministry / Department / Federal Statutory Bodies. Putrajaya, Malaysia.
[13]
Chapman, R. J. (2011). Simple Tools and Techniques For Enterprise Risk Management (2nd ed.). John Wiley & Sons.
[14]
Hinna, A., Scarozza, D., & Rotundi, F. (2018). Implementing Risk Management in the Italian Public Sector: Hybridization between Old and New Practices. International Journal of Public Administration, 41 (2), 110–128.
[15]
Audit Commission. (2001). Worth the Risk : Improving Risk Management in Local Government. London.
[16]
ISO. (2009). ISO 31000: Risk Management - Principles and Guidelines (Vol. 2009).
[17]
Ow, P. (2008). Outperform by Linking Performance and Risk Management. Accountants Today, (February), 26–28.
[18]
National Audit Office. (2000). Supporting Innovation : Managing Risk in Government Departments. London.
[19]
Cadbury Committee. (1992). Report of the Committee on the Financial Aspects of Corporate Governance. London.
[20]
The Institute of Chartered Accountants in England & Wales, (ICAEW). (1999). Internal Control: Guidance for Directors on the Combined Code. London.
[21]
Broadbent, J., & Guthrie, J. (2008). Public sector to public services: 20 years of “contextual” accounting research. Accounting, Auditing & Accountability Journal, 21 (2), 129–169.
[22]
Woods, M. (2009). A Contingency Theory Perspective on The Risk Management Control System Within Birmingham City Council. Management Accounting Research, 20 (1), 69–81.
[23]
Vincent, J. (1996). Managing Risk In Public Services : A Review of The International Literature. International Journal of Public Sector Management, 9 (2), 57–64.
[24]
Cuganesan, S., Dunford, R., & Palmer, I. (2012). Strategic Management Accounting and Strategy Practices Within a Public Sector Agency. Management Accounting Research, 23 (4), 245–260.
[25]
Hood, J., & Smith, T. (2013). Perceptions of Quantifiable Benefits of Local Authority Risk Management. International Journal of Public Sector Management, 26 (4), 309–319.
[26]
Chen, C., & Bozeman, B. (2012). Organizational Risk Aversion: Comparing the Public and Non-Profit Sectors. Public Management Review, 14 (3), 377–403.
[27]
Collier, P. M., & Woods, M. (2011). A Comparison of the Local Authority Adoption of Risk Management in England and Australia. Australian Accounting Review, 21 (2), 111–123.
[28]
Crawford, M., & Stein, W. (2004). Risk Management in UK Local Authorities : The Effectivness of Current Guidance and Practice. International Journal of Public Sector Management, 17 (6), 498–512.
[29]
Bakar, N. B. A., & Saleh, Z. (2011). Public Sector Accounting Research In Malaysia: Identifying Gaps and Opportunities. IPN Journal of Research and Practice in Public Sector Accounting and Management, 1, 23–42.
[30]
Prime Minister’s Department. (2009). An Initiative To Consolidate The Integrity Management System Of Malaysian Government Administration. Putrajaya, Malaysia.
[31]
Auditor-General. (2013). Report of the Auditor-General 2012: Activities of Ministries / Departments and Companies Management of Federal Government. Putrajaya, Malaysia.
[32]
Miccolis, J. (2003). Implementing Enterprise Risk Management: Getting the Fundamentals Right. International Risk Management Institute, Inc.
[33]
Ashby, S., Bryce, C., & Ring, P. (2019). Risk and performance : Embedding Risk Management. The Association of Chartered Certified Accountants. London.
Browse journals by subject