We can see then than one of clearest ways of measuring efficiency is audit: a systematic and controlled method of verifying externally that all systems within an organisation are operating in most efficient manner. If they are not, then inefficient or financially overburdening elements can be identified and steps taken to correct this. The audit has many peculiarities, with its’ explosion over years, we can see that as extensiveness of these cultural processes increases, patterns of behaviour change with it. However, as Shore and Wright point out, audit is not a voluntary scheme. Therefore we are constructing an idea of an efficient, professional person using coercion (2000). Perhaps one of most damaging aspects of implementing an audit is its’ effect on trust. Although Douglas (1992) implies that bureaucratic systems are employed when, essentially, trust has broken down, Shore and Wright’s argument would suggest that their utilisation actually works to break down trust relationships even further. Therefore it seems that these imposed methods of checking and verification have consequences that are more far-reaching than simply keeping accountant happy. As audit and concepts behind it become commonplace, so cultures change, and new moral codes are created with it.

References

Douglas M. Risk and Blame: Essays in Cultural Theory. 1992; London, Routledge.

Foucault M. Discipline and Punish: The Birth of Prison. 1975; London, Penguin Books Limited.

Illich I. The Right to Useful Unemployment and it’s Professional Enemies. 1978; London, Marion Boyars Publishers Limited.

Power M. The Audit Explosion. 1994; London, Demos.

Power M. The Audit Society: Rituals of Verification. 1997; Oxford, Oxford University Press.

Shore C and Wright S. Coercive Accountability: The Rise of Audit Culture in Higher Education. IN Strathern M (Ed) Audit Cultures. 2000; London, Routledge.

Strathern M. New Accountabilities: Anthropological Studies in Audit, Ethics and Academy. IN Strathern M (Ed) Audit Cultures. 2000; London, Routledge.

I think First Ammendment attorneys could be better utilized if they’d use their skills to defend free speech and freedom of religion for US Armed Forces and their support for Boy Scouts instead of trying to rescue America from their insidious evils of violating First Ammendment.

I thought to myself, certainly every American citizen knows story about America’s founding fathers of faith. I thought everyone knew about first American Thanksgiving—Pilgrims giving thanks to GOD for bounty of land. I thought everyone knew about George Washington petitioning GOD of heaven for victory in battle. I thought everyone knew, as common knowledge, that these “religious forefathers” were same ones who gave us our national heritage—in GOD we TRUST!

Maybe it's time to recommend that ACLU return to US history class 101. A revising of their revisionist history might do everyone some good, especially First Ammendment attorneys.

Terry Dashner (Sources cited are available)

I want to thank you for reading this religiously biased paper. I feel better now, and sour taste in my mouth is improving—slowly.

May God bless United States of America!