How do supreme audit institutions manage their autonomy and impact? A comparative analysis
通过比较澳大利亚、新西兰、挪威和瑞典四个高绩效最高审计机构的规则与策略，发现它们在自主性与影响力之间采取了不同的平衡方式，表明高效且自主的审计机构可以有多种组织模式。
Supreme audit institutions (SAIs) are gradually becoming important agents of public management reform; a development raising issues of autonomy and potential capture by auditees as well as by the political system. Drawing on exploratory case studies of the rules and strategies of four high-performing SAIs – those of Australia, New Zealand, Norway and Sweden – the article shows that SAIs have different approaches to the balance between autonomy and impact. These results imply that there is not only one way of organizing an efficient and autonomous SAI, but that different positions can prove viable.