Lean Six Sigm and improving Accountability in decisions of the court of accounts of the State of Goiás

Authors

DOI:

https://doi.org/10.14488/1676-1901.v24i4.5320

Keywords:

Social Accountability, Courts of Auditors, Lean-Six Sigma, Business Process Management

Abstract

The Brazilian Courts of Auditors are entities structured to oversee the application of public resources, report their findings to society, hold those involved accountable and contribute to correcting improprieties through the decisions they issue. This study analyzed the process of formatting, storing and consulting the decisions of the Court of Auditors of the State of Goiás, with the aim of assessing whether the Court achieves a quality standard capable of promoting the effectiveness of its decisions, in the sense of favoring internal efficiency in monitoring the provisions handed down and instrumentalizing their monitoring by society. To this end, we used the Lean Six Sigma methodology, combining statistical models for measuring variability with business process management techniques. The results show low performance in relation to the compliance expected by the institution itself, above all due to the preparation of procedural documents and the registration of data without the support of automation that induces the fulfillment of quality requirements, a circumstance also observed in other Courts of Auditors in the country, indicating that the procedures used in the diagnosis and improvement proposal presented can contribute to the improvement of other members of the Brazilian external control system.

Downloads

Download data is not yet available.

Author Biographies

Leonardo de Guimaraes Santiago, Universidade Federal de Goiás (UFG), Goiânia, GO, Brasil.

Mestre em Administração Pública (UFG), especialista em Auditoria Governamental e Economia do Setor Público (Unileya) e Bacharel em Administração (PUC-GO). Integrante da carreira de Gestão Governamental de Goiás desde 2004, atuou em cargos de direção e chefia de vários órgãos da administração estadual. Atualmente é Chefe de Gabinete de Conselheiro no Tribunal de Contas do Estado de Goiás.

André da Silva Goes, Universidade Federal de Goiás (UFG), Goiânia, GO, Brasil.

Mestre em Administração Pública (UFG), especialista em Auditoria e Gestão Governamental (PUC-GO) e Bacharel em Ciência da Computação (PUC-GO). Integrante da carreira de Gestão Governamental de Goiás desde 2002, foi Superintendente e Subchefe da Controladoria Geral do Estado. Atualmente é Assessor Técnico Especial de Conselheiro no Tribunal de Contas do Estado de Goiás.

Josimas Eugênio Silva, Universidade Federal de Goiás (UFG), Goiânia, GO, Brasil.

Mestre em Administração Pública (UFG), especialista em Controle Externo e Governança Pública (IDP) e Bacharel em Administração (PUC-GO) e Direito (UNICAMBURY). Integrante da carreira de Técnico de Controle Externo desde 2010, atualmente é Chefe do Serviço de Arquivamento do Tribunal de Contas do Estado de Goiás.

Solon Bevilacqua, Universidade Federal de Goiás (UFG), Goiânia, GO, Brasil.

Doutor em Psicologia, pós doutorado em Gestão e Graduação em Administração. Professor da Universidade Federal de Goiás, Coordenador de Projetos de extensão junto à Receita Federal, Marinha do Brasil e Tribunal de Justiça de Goiás.

References

ABDULKADER, B. et al. Aligning firm’s value system and open innovation: a new framework of business process management beyond the business model innovation. Business Process Management Journal, v. 26, n. 5, p. 999–1020, 2020.

ABEYGUNASEKERA, A. et al. How to make it stick? Institutionalising process improvement initiatives. Business Process Management Journal, v. 28, n. 3, p. 807–833, 2022.

ACKER, W. VAN; BOUCKAERT, G. The impact of supreme audit institutions and ombudsmen in Belgium and The Netherlands. Financial Accountability & Management, v. 35, n. 1, p. 55–71, fev. 2019.

ALNAJEM, M.; GARZA-REYES, J. A.; ANTONY, J. Lean readiness within emergency departments: a conceptual framework. Benchmarking: An International Journal, v. 26, n. 6, p. 1874–1904, 31 jul. 2019.

AMARAL, T. G. DO et al. Dynamic method to identify and analyze waste by making-do in construction sites. Gestão & Produção, v. 28, n. 3, 2021.

ANDERSSON, R.; ERIKSSON, H.; TORSTENSSON, H. Similarities and differences between TQM, six sigma and lean. The TQM Magazine, v. 18, n. 3, p. 282–296, 1 maio 2006.

ANTONUCCI, Y. L.; FORTUNE, A.; KIRCHMER, M. An examination of associations between business process management capabilities and the benefits of digitalization: all capabilities are not equal. Business Process Management Journal, v. 27, n. 1, p. 124–144, 2021.

ASSEN, M. VAN. Process orientation and the impact on operational performance and customer-focused performance. Business Process Management Journal, v. 24, n. 2, p. 446–458, 3 abr. 2018.

BAIER, M. S. et al. Success factors of process digitalization projects - insights from an exploratory study. Business Process Management Journal, v. 28, n. 2, p. 325–347, 2022.

BITKOWSKA, A. The relationship between Business Process Management and Knowledge Management - selected aspects from a study of companies in Poland. Journal of Enterpreneurship Management and Innovation, v. 16, n. 1, p. 169–193, 2020.

BONOLLO, E. Measuring supreme audit institutions’ outcomes: current literature and future insights. Public Money & Management, v. 39, n. 7, p. 468–477, 3 out. 2019.

BOSTAN, I. et al. Supreme Audit Institutions and Sustainability of Public Finance. Links and Evidence along the Economic Cycles. Sustainability, v. 13, n. 17, 2021.

Bovens, M., Goodin, R. E., & Schillemans, T. (2014). The Oxford Handbook of Public Accountability. Oxford University Press. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1093/oxfordhb/9780199641253.001.0001

BUSUIOC, M.; LODGE, M. Reputation and Accountability Relationships: Managing Accountability Expectations through Reputation. Public administration review, v. 77, n. 1, p. 91–100, 2017.

CARVALHO, F. L. D.; RODRIGUES, R. S. The court of accounts in Brazil and its European counterparts: a comparative study. A&C- Revista de Direito Administrativo & Constitucional, v. 18, n. 71, p. 225–248, 2018.

CASTRO, B; DRESCH, A.; VEIT, D. R. Key critical success factors of BPM implementation: a theoretical and practical view. Business Process Management Journal, v. 26, n. 1, p. 239–256. 2019.

CHEGE, S. M.; WANG, D.; SUNTU, S. L. Impact of information technology innovation on firm performance in Kenya. Information Technology for Development, v. 26, n. 2, p. 316–345, 2020.

CHESBROUGH, H.; BOGERS, M. Explicating Open Innovation. In: NEW FRONTIERS IN OPEN INNOVATION, pp. 3–28. Oxford University Press. 2014

ENTRINGER, T. C.; SILVA FERREIRA, A. DA; OLIVEIRA NASCIMENTO, D. C. DE. Comparative analysis of the main business process modeling methods: A bibliometric study. Gestão & Produção, v. 8, n. 2, 2021.

FERRARIS, A.; SANTORO, G.; BRESCIANI, S. Open innovation in multinational companies’ subsidiaries: the role of internal and external knowledge. European J. of International Management, v. 11, n. 4, p. 452, 2017.

FISCHER, M. et al. Strategy archetypes for digital transformation: Defining meta objectives using business process management. Information & Management, v. 57, n. 5, 2020.

FOX, A. Social Accountability: What Does the Evidence Really Say? World Development, 72, p. 346–361, 2015.

FREITAG, A.; SANTOS, J.; REIS, A. Lean office and digital transformation: a case study in a services company. Brazilian Journal of Operations & Production Management, v. 15, n. 4, p. 588–594. 2018.

FREITAS, R. C.; FREITAS, M. DO C. D. Information management in lean office deployment contexts. International Journal of Lean Six Sigma, v. 11, n. 6, p. 1175–1206, 2020.

GALVÃO, M. C. B.; RICARTE, I. L. M. Revisão sistemática da literatura: conceituação, produção e publicação. Logeion: Filosofia da Informação, v. 6, n. 1, p. 57–73, 15 set. 2019.

GOETZ, M.; JENKINS, R. Hybrid Forms Of Accountability: Citizen engagement in institutions of public-sector oversight in India. Public Management Review, v. 3, n. 3, p. 363–383. 2001.

GUDELJ, M.; DELIC, M.; KUZMANOVIC, B.; TESIC, Z.; TASIC, N. Business Process Management model as an approach to process orientation. International Journal of Simulation Modelling, v. 20, n. 2, p. 255–266. 2021.

GOIÁS. Tribunal de Contas do Estado. Resolução Administrativa n. 07/16. Dispõe acerca da padronização e expedição de conteúdo dos itens decisórios no âmbito do Tribunal de Contas do Estado de Goiás. Disponível em: https://portal.tce.go.gov.br/documents/20181/77431/Resolução Administrativa - 007-2016/c7b887d9-abff-47cf-935d-f33c8bec5972

GOIÁS, Tribunal de Contas do Estado. Resolução Administrativa no 19/22. Dispõe sobre a estrutura organizacional e competências dos órgãos e unidades organizacionais do Tribunal de Contas do Estado de Goiás. Disponível em: https://gnoi.tce.go.gov.br/atoNormativo/Publicado?id=15480

GUSTAVSON, M.; SUNDSTRÖM, A. Organizing the Audit Society: Does Good Auditing Generate Less Public Sector Corruption? Administration & Society, v. 50, n. 10, p. 1508–1532, 16 nov. 2018.

IMPROTA, G. et al. Reducing the risk of healthcare-associated infections through Lean Six Sigma: The case of the medicine areas at the Federico II University Hospital in Naples (Italy). Journal of Evaluation in Clinical Practice, v. 24, n. 2, p. 338–346, 2018.

JAMOVI [software de computador]. Version 2.3.28 The Jamovi Project, 2022. Disponível em: https://www.jamovi.org

JESTON, J. Business Process Management. [s.l.] Routledge, 2018.

KLUVERS, R.; TIPPETT, J. Mechanisms of Accountability in Local Government: An Exploratory Study. International Journal of Business and Management, v. 5, n. 7, p. 46–53, 2010.

KOSKELA, A. Making do-the eighth category of waste Koskela, LJ Title Making do-the eighth category of waste. [s.l: s.n.]. Disponível em: http://usir.salford.ac.uk/id/eprint/9386/

KUJANSIVU, P.; LÖNNQVIST, A. Business process management as a tool for intellectual capital management. Knowledge and Process Management, v. 15, n. 3, p. 159–169, 2008.

LOOY, A. VAN. Capabilities for managing business processes: a measurement instrument. Business Process Management Journal, v. 26, n. 1, p. 287–311, 2019.

MARTIN-NAVARRO, A.; SANCHO, M. P. L.; MEDINA-GARRIDO, J. A. Testing an instrument to measure the BPMS-KM Support model. Expert Systems with Applications, v. 178, 2021.

MARTINEZ, F. Process excellence the key for digitalisation. Business Process Management Journal, v. 25, n. 7, p. 1716–1733, 2019.

MASSUQUETO, K.; FREITAS DUARTE, M. Gerenciamento do fluxo de informação: estratégia convergindo com a prática do Lean Office. Revista Intersaberes, v. 10, n. 21, 2015.

MONCRIEFFE, J. Relational accountability: complexities of structural injustice. Zed Books Ltd, Ed.; 1st ed. 2011.

MOURA, D. A. DE; BONADIO, V. C. Service Value Stream Management (SVSM) - a case study. Independent Journal of Management & Production, v. 12, n. 4, p. 832–855, 2021.

MUENSTERMANN, B. et al. The performance impact of business process standardization: HR case study insights. Management Research Review, v. 33, n. 9, p. 924–939, 2010.

NACIFE, M. et al. Development of a web application for the optimization of administrative processes: application of the Lean methodology for priority classification. Independent Journal of Management & Production, v. 13, n. 5, p. 1300–1322, 2022.

NOTO, G.; COSENZ, F. Introducing a strategic perspective in lean thinking applications through system dynamics modelling: the dynamic Value Stream Map. Business Process Management Journal, v. 27, n. 1, p. 306–327, 2021.

NOVAK, R.; JANEŠ, A. Business process orientation in the Slovenian power supply. Business Process Management Journal, v. 25, n. 4, p. 780–798, 18 jun. 2019.

O ’DONNELL, G. Accountability horizontal e novas poliarquias. Lua Nova: Revista de Cultura e Política, v. 44, n. 44, p. 27–54, 1998.

OHNO, T.; BODEK, N. Toyota Production System. [s.l.] Productivity Press, 2019.

OTIA, J. E.; BRACCI, E. Digital transformation and the public sector auditing: The SAI’s perspective. Financial Accountability & Management, v. 38, n. 2, p. 252–280, 2022.

ONGENA, G.; RAVESTEYN, P. Business process management maturity and performance. Business Process Management Journal, v. 26, n. 1, p. 132–149, 6 jun. 2019.

PASCHEK, D.; IVASCU, L.; DRAGHICI, A. Knowledge Management – The Foundation for a Successful Business Process Management. Procedia - Social and Behavioral Sciences, v. 238, p. 182–191, 2018.

P. PANDE; R. NEUMAN; R. CAVANAGH. The Six Sigma way team fieldbook: An implementation guide for process improvement teams. [s.l.] McGraw Hill, 2001.

RAUCH, E. et al. Lean Hospitality - Application of Lean Management Methods in the Hotel Sector. Procedia CIRP, v. 41, p. 614–619, 2016.

REICHBORN-KJENNERUD, K.; VABO, S. I. Performance audit as a contribution to change and improvement in public administration. Evaluation (London, England. 1995), 2017.

RENTES, C. et al. Implementation of a strategic planning process oriented towards promoting business process management (BPM) at a clinical research centre (CRC). Business Process Management Journal, v. 25, n. 4, p. 707–737. 2019.

REVILLA-LEÓN, M. et al. Influence of ambient temperature changes on intraoral scanning accuracy. The Journal of Prosthetic Dentistry, 2022.

ROCHA, D. G. DA; ZUCCOLOTTO, R.; TEIXEIRA, M. A. C. Insulados e não democráticos: a (im)possibilidade do exercício da social accountability nos Tribunais de Contas brasileiros. Revista de administração pública, v. 54, n. 2, p. 201–219, 2020.

SANTOS, N. DE M.; SOUZA, E. C. L. DE. Evolution and trend of studies on e-government: Mapping the area- from 1992 to 2018. Revista de Administracao Publica, v. 55, n. 5, p. 1124–1148, 2021.

SCHÖNREITER, I. M. Methodologies for process harmonization in the post-merger integration phase. Business Process Management Journal, v. 24, n. 2, p. 330–356, 3 abr. 2018.

STRAVINSKIENE, I.; SERAFINAS, D. The Link between Business Process Management and Quality Management. Journal of Risk and Financial Management, v. 13, n. 10, 2020.

THOMAS, A. Developing an integrated quality network for lean operations systems. Business Process Management Journal, v. 24, n. 6, p. 1367–1380, 11 out. 2018.

TORRES, L.; YETANO, A.; PINA, V. Are Performance Audits Useful? A Comparison of EU Practices. Administration & Society , v. 51, n. 3, p. 431–462, 2019.

UBAID, A. M.; DWEIRI, F. T. Business process management (BPM): terminologies and methodologies unified. International Journal of System Assurance Engineering and Management, v. 11, n. 6, p. 1046–1064, 2020.

Ubarana, R. et al. Lean waste analysis in light of principles of public administration: A study of an IFES academic project submission process. Gestão & Produção, v. 28, n. 3, 2021.

URBINATI, N. O que torna a representação democrática? Lua Nova: Revista de Cultura e Política, n. 67, p. 191–228, 2006.

VIEGAS, R. R. et al. A comunicação dos Tribunais de Contas e Ministérios Públicos nas redes sociais: os desafios da accountability na democracia digital. Revista de Administração Pública, v. 56, n. 3, p. 324–348, jun. 2022.

VILLASENOR ALVA, J. A.; ESTRADA, E. G. A generalization of Shapiro-Wilk’s test for multivariate normality. Communications in Statistics - Theory and Methods, v. 38, n. 11, p. 1870–1883, 2009.

VIZZON, J. S. et al. Business process redesign: An action research. Gestão & Produção, v. 27, n. 2, 2020.

ZUHAIRA, B.; AHMAD, N. Business process modeling, implementation, analysis, and management: the case of business process management tools. Business Process Management Journal, v. 27, n. 1, p. 145–183, 2021.

Downloads

Published

2024-12-12

How to Cite

Santiago, L. de G., Goes, A. da S., Silva, J. E., & Bevilacqua, S. . (2024). Lean Six Sigm and improving Accountability in decisions of the court of accounts of the State of Goiás. Revista Produção Online, 24(4), 5320 . https://doi.org/10.14488/1676-1901.v24i4.5320

Issue

Vol. 24 No. 4 (2024): fluxo contínuo

Section

Papers

License

Copyright (c) 2024 Revista Produção Online

Creative Commons License

This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License.

The Journal reserves the right to make spelling and grammatical changes, aiming to keep a default language, respecting, however, the style of the authors.

The published work is responsibility of the (s) author (s), while the Revista Produção Online is only responsible for the evaluation of the paper. The Revista Produção Online is not responsible for any violations of Law No. 9.610 / 1998, the Copyright Act.

The journal allows the authors to keep the copyright of accepted articles, without restrictions


 
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons License .