A COMBINED ASSURANCE MODEL TO PROMOTE 

INTEGRATED REPORTING IN LIMPOPO PROVINCIAL 

TREASURY  
 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Matshidiso Manabalala 

WITS Business School 

 

 

 

 

 

The thesis presented in partial fulfilment for the degree of Master of Business 

Administration to the Faculty of Commerce, Law, and Management, University 

of the Witwatersrand 

April 2021 

 

 



 

 

 

ii 

DECLARATION 
 
 

I, Matshidiso Manabalala, declare that this research report entitled ‘A 

combined assurance model to promote integrated reporting in Limpopo 

Provincial Treasury’ is my own unaided work. I have acknowledged, 

attributed, and referenced all ideas sourced elsewhere. I am hereby 

submitting it in partial fulfilment of the requirements of the degree of 

Master of Business Administration at the University of the Witwatersrand, 

Johannesburg. I have not submitted this report before for any other degree 

or examination to any other institution. 

 

 

Matshidiso Manabalala  

Signed at Johannesburg on 30th April 

2021 

 

 
 

Name of candidate Matshidiso Manabalala 

Student number 2289272 

Telephone numbers 082 504 6235 

Email address 2289272@students.wits.ac.za 

First-year of registration 2019 June intake 

Date of proposal 

submission 
15 January 2021 

Date of report submission 30 April 2021 

Name of supervisor Dr. Jenika Gobind 

 

mailto:2289272@students.wits.ac.za


 

 

 

iii 

ABSTRACT 

Author: Matshidiso 

Manabalala 

Supervisor:Dr.Jenika 

Gobind 

 

Thesis 

title: 

A combined assurance model to promote integrated reporting 

in Limpopo Provincial Treasury 

Organisations expand, and business operations evolve & become more 

multifaceted; the growth leads to the board and ARC requiring more 

assurance providers’ functions to oversee achievements of objectives. The 

multiple uses of assurance providers’ activities in isolation cause the board 

and audit committees to suffer from effort duplication, leading to assurance 

fatigue. The purpose of the study is to explore challenges associated with 

the implementation of the combined assurance model by Limpopo 

Provincial Treasury (LPT) and develop possible solutions in the form of 

recommendations for LPT to improve. The study follows the qualitative 

research method to achieve the research objectives. This research uses 

unstructured and semi-structured individual interviews to collect primary 

data from LPT assurance providers, Auditor General South Africa (AGSA) 

and Departments and Public Entities Chief Financial Officer as LPT’s 

stakeholders. Interview questions have been developed for use during the 

primary data collection to interview individual participants. Permission has 

been requested from the HOD of LPT to interview the research 

participants.  

Findings - The challenges for LPT implementation of combined assurance 

are caused by Ineffective communication, working in silos and lack of 

collaboration results in duplication of efforts, assurance fatigue, and 

contradicting reports. Conclusion- Change in organisation culture and 

promotion of integrated thinking will lead to successfully implementing the 

combined assurance model.       

April 2021                                                            



 

 

 

iv 

 

3. LIST OF ABBREVIATIONS 

ARC   Audit & Risk Committee 

AO   Accounting Officer 

AGSA  Auditor-General South Africa 

CAE   Chief Audit Executive 

CFO   Chief Financial Officer  

CAC                       Central Audit Committee  

EA                          Executive Authorities  

EXCO  Executive Council  

GPG   Gauteng Provincial Treasury  

HOD   Head of Department 

IIA                          Institute of Internal Auditors in Southern Africa 

IoDSA  Institute of Directors in Southern Africa 

LPG   Limpopo Provincial Government 

LPT   Limpopo Provincial Treasury  

MEC   Member of Executive Council 

OTP   Office of the Premier 

PE                          Public Entity 

PFMA  Public Finance Management Act 



 

 

 

v 

PC                          Portfolio Committees 

PT                          Provincial Treasury 

TR                          Treasury Regulation 

SCOPA  Standing Committee on Public Accounts 

WCPG   Western Cape Provincial Government  

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 



 

 

 

vi 

TABLE OF CONTENTS 

 
DECLARATION ........................................................................................................................................ ii 

ABSTRACT iii 

3. LIST OF ABBREVIATIONS ........................................................................................................ iv 

Table of contents ........................................................................................................................................ vi 

List of tables ix 

List of figures x 

List of tables and figures in the appendiceS ........................................................................................... xi 

ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS ................................................................................................................... xii 

Definition of key terms and concepts ................................................................................................... xiii 

1. Introduction to the research ...........................................................................................................16 

1.1. Background and context ......................................................................................................16 

1.1.1. Combined assurance model ..................................................................................16 

1.1.2. Integrated Reporting ..............................................................................................19 

1.1.3. LPT transversal assurance provider structure ...................................................20 

1.1.4. LPT assurance providers mandate ......................................................................21 

1.1.5. Preface to the research report ..............................................................................22 

1.2. Research conceptualisation ..................................................................................................22 

1.2.1. The research problem statement .........................................................................22 

1.2.2. The research purpose (aim and objectives) statement .....................................25 

1.2.3. Research Questions ....................................................................................................25 

1.3. Delimitations and assumptions of the research study .....................................................26 

1.4. Significance of the research study ......................................................................................28 

1.5 Summary ......................................................................................................................................29 

2. Literature review ...............................................................................................................................31 

2.1. Introduction ...............................................................................................................................31 

2.1. Research problem analysis .......................................................................................................33 

2.1.1. Combined Assurance benefits ..................................................................................33 

2.1.2. Mapping of Assurance Providers .............................................................................35 

2.1.3. Combined Assurance Forum ....................................................................................38 

2.1.4. Challenges associated with the implementation of Combined Assurance ........39 

2.1.5. Manage Assurance Providers Conflict of Interest ................................................40 

2.1.6. Combined assurance awareness and buy-in ...........................................................41 

2.1.7. Integrated reporting ...................................................................................................42 

2.1.8. Organisational Structure ............................................................................................43 

2.1.8.1. Provincial Treasuries providing adequate assurance .........................................43 

2.1.8.2. Limpopo Provincial Treasury structure review ..................................................44 

2.1.8.3. LPT assurance providers’ structures in comparison with best performing 
Treasuries. ................................................................................................................53 

2.2. Research knowledge gap analysis ............................................................................................55 

2.3. Framework(s) for interpreting research findings ..................................................................57 

2.4. Summary and conclusion .....................................................................................................58 

3. RESEARCH STRATEGY, DESIGN, PROCEDURE AND METHODS .........................60 



 

 

 

vii 

Introduction .......................................................................................................................................60 

3.1. Research strategy .......................................................................................................................61 

3.2. Research design..........................................................................................................................62 

3.3. Research procedure and methods ...........................................................................................63 

3.3.1. Research data and information collection instrument(s) .................................63 

3.3.2. Research target population and selection of respondents ...............................64 

3.3.4. Research data and information collection process ...........................................66 

3.3.5. Research data and information processing and analysis ..................................66 

3.3.6. Description of the research respondents............................................................68 

3.4. Research strengthens—reliability and validity measures applied ..................................71 

3.5. Research weaknesses—technical and administrative limitations...................................72 

3.6 Summary ......................................................................................................................................72 

4. PRESENTATION OF RESEARCH RESULTS .......................................................................73 

Introduction .......................................................................................................................................73 

4.1. Research Question 1 result ......................................................................................................74 

4.1.1. Integrating and aligning assurance processes .....................................................75 

4.1.2. Stakeholders buy-in and support .........................................................................76 

4.1.3. Effective transversal committee...........................................................................77 

4.2. Research Question 2 result ......................................................................................................80 

4.2.1. Adequacy review of LPT transversal structure ......................................................80 

4.2.2. Effectiveness of transversal financial forums ........................................................81 

4.2.3. Assurance providers’ skills and capacity to execute combined assurance. ........82 

4.3. Research Question 3 result ......................................................................................................86 

4.3.1. Ability to enhance value add and decision making ...........................................86 

4.3.2. Effort duplication and assurance fatigue. ...........................................................88 

4.4. Research Question 4 result ..................................................................................................89 

4.4.1. Integrated thinking .................................................................................................89 

4.4.2. Report rating systems and report formats ..........................................................91 

4.4.3. Review and reporting of AG action plan ...........................................................92 

4.5. Summary ..................................................................................................................93 

5. DISCUSSION OF RESEARCH FINDINGS ............................................................................94 

Introduction .......................................................................................................................................94 

5.1.  Challenges associated with the implementation of Combined Assurance ......................95 

5.1.1. Integrating and aligning assurance processes .....................................................97 

5.1.2. Risk Management .................................................................................................... 100 

5.1.3. Stakeholders buy-in and support ...................................................................... 101 

5.1.4. Effective transversal committee........................................................................ 102 

5.1.5. Transversal Structure .......................................................................................... 103 

5.2. Summary .................................................................................................................................. 107 

6. Summary, conclusions, limitations, and recommendations .................................................... 109 

Introduction .................................................................................................................................... 109 

6.1. Summary .................................................................................................................................. 109 

6.2. Conclusions ......................................................................................................................... 110 

6.2.1. Integrating and aligning assurance processes ...................................................... 110 

6.2.2. Risk Management .................................................................................................... 111 



 

 

 

viii 

6.2.3.  Stakeholders buy-in and support ...................................................................... 111 

6.2.4.  Effective transversal committee........................................................................ 111 

6.2.5.  Transversal Structure and Integrated thinking ............................................... 112 

6.3.  Limitations .............................................................................................................................. 112 

6.4. Suggestions for Further Research.................................................................................... 113 

6.5. Recommendations ............................................................................................................. 113 

REFERENCES 118 

APPENDICES 121 

Appendix 1.1:   Data collection instruments ...................................................................................... 122 

1.1.1. Individual Participant Information Sheet ........................................................................ 122 

1.1.2. Participant Consent Form.................................................................................................. 123 

1.1.3. Individual Interview Questions ......................................................................................... 124 

Appendix 2.1:  One-page bio of the researcher including declaration of interest in the research
 ...................................................................................................................................... 126 

Appendix 2.2:  Ethic documentation .................................................................................................. 127 

Appendix 3.1:  Dully filled in data collection instrument(s) ............................................................ 128 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 



 

 

 

ix 

 

LIST OF TABLES 

Table 1: Combined assurance assurers’ criteria--------------------------40  

Table 2:  List of LPT transversal forums---------------------------------48 

Table 3: Individual research participants----------------------------------69 

Table 4: Research participants responses----------------------------------78  

Table 5: Research participants in agreement (adequate structure, skills, 

and capacity) (yes)--------------------------------------------------------------83 

Table 6: Research participants in disagreement (no)---------------------84 

Table 7: Partially adequate research participants (torn between Yes & 

No)--------------------------------------------------------------------------------84 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

   

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 



 

 

 

x 

LIST OF FIGURES 

Figure 1: The Three Lines of Defence Model (IIA global, 2013)------------18 

Figure 2: Assurance provided by key role players (AGSA, 2017)----------- 38 

Figure 3: Governance model (PWC, 2019)--------------------------------------42 

Figure 4: Limpopo Provincial Treasury Transversal Organisation structure 

(student’s own, 2020)----------------------------------------------------------------47 

Figure 5: Western Cape Provincial Treasury Transversal Organisation 

structure (student’s own, 2020)----------------------------------------------------53 

Figure 6: Northern Cape Treasury Transversal Organisation structure 

(student’s own) (2020)---------------------------------------------------------------54 

Figure 7:  Categorise LPT Assurance providers overall roles and 

responsibilities (student’s own, 2021)------------------------------------------114 

Figure 8: Recommended transversal integrated report structure (student’s 

own, 2021)---------------------------------------------------------------------------114 

Figure 9: Lines of defence(student’s own, 2021)----------------------------- 115  

 

  

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 



 

 

 

xi 

LIST OF TABLES AND FIGURES IN THE APPENDICES 

1.1.1. Individual Participant Information Sheet----------------------122  

1.1.2. Participant Consent Form----------------------------------------123  

1.1.3. Individual Interview Questions----------------------------------124 

2.1. One-page bio of the researcher including declaration of interest in 

the research--------------------------------------------------------------------126    

2.2. Ethics Clearance----------------------------------------------------------127 

Permission to conduct an academic research study at Limpopo 

Provincial Treasury-------------------------------------------------------------128  

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

  



 

 

 

xii 

ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS 

Father God, you are everything to me, and I know I have come this far by 
your grace. You have been the pillar of strength and my refuge throughout 
the MBA journey and my life. 
 
Dr Jenika Gobind, thank you for your support and leadership 
 
To my uncle, Dr Richard Chauke, When I thought I did not have it in me 
to continue with the research proposal, you made me understand and 
appreciate the research process within a day. You brought hope and gave 
me the courage to soldier on in my darkest days. Thank you!  
 
To my mother (Johanna Manabalala), you are a mighty woman of valour. 
You are the reason I keep pushing even when I do not see hope because 
you believe in me and support my dreams. I love and appreciate you, 
mama. 
 
To Emmanuel Mokgetwa Mogofe, thank you for your guidance and 
support in this journey. You were there with me throughout, cheering me 
up and advising me. May the good Lord bless you. Continue being a 
blessing to others like you were to me. 
   
My sister (Moloko Lisbeth Manabalala), Your prayers, understanding and 
encouragement have kept me this far, dear sister. I could not have made it 
without you. I am grateful for every cup of coffee and food you used to 
make for me while I focused on schoolwork. 
 
My brothers (Morris and Zane Manabalala), thank you for your support 
and encouragement. When I felt like giving up, you always reminded me 
that I never give up; I am “diehard”. Zane, you even helped me with 
research for coursework. 
 
Thank you for your support and words of encouragement to my fellow 
supportive MBA students and friends (Tshidi Mashabathakga, Tshidiso 
Mokgatla, Azeemah Mahomed).  
 
To all the academic staff of Wits University (Wits Business School) My 
employer (Limpopo Provincial Treasury) and all people around me, I truly 
and wholeheartedly thank you for your contribution to this journey which 
earned me an MBA.  
 

 



 

 

 

xiii 

DEFINITION OF KEY TERMS AND CONCEPTS 

“Board" or “Accounting Authority” means the Board of Directors of 

the State-Owned Entity, as constituted in terms of the Public Finance 

Management Act under schedule 3 (C and D). 

“Cabinet” also means the Executive council of a province. 

“Executive Authority” means the cabinet member or member of the 

Executive Council of a province in whose portfolio a government 

component, statutory council, public entity, or government enterprise 

falls. 

“MEC” means a member of a Provincial Executive Council. 

 “Parliament” also means a provincial legislature. 

“PFMA” means the Public Finance Management Act,1999. 

"CEO" means the Chief Executive Officer, who is also an Executive 

Director. 

"CFO" means the Chief Financial Officer, who is responsible for the 

finances of the SOE. 

"Chairperson" means a Non-Executive Director appointed by 

Executive Authority / Shareholder (Member of Executive Council) to 

preside Board meetings. 

"Companies Act" means the Companies Act, 2008 (Act 71 of 2008). 

"Companies Act Regulations" means the Companies Act 

Regulations, 2011. 

“Executive Authority”- unless the context indicates otherwise, 

Executive Authority in this document refers to the 

Shareholder/Member of Executive Council responsible for the Public 

Entity. 

"King IV" means the King Report on Governance for South Africa 

2016. 



 

 

 

xiv 

"Members/Directors " means Non-Executive Directors appointed by 

Executive Authority Shareholder to serve on the Board. 

"Non-Executive Directors" (NEDs) means a member of the Board 

who does not engage in the day-to-day management of the state-owned 

entity, but who is involved in policy making and strategic planning 

exercises. 

"Shareholder" means the Provincial Government, represented by the 

Member of the Executive Council. 

“Public Entities” (PE) … means company established by Provincial 

Administration for carrying out a provincial mandate on behalf of a 

particular department. PEs will be listed in Schedule 3B and 3D of the 

Public Finance Management Act, including subsidiaries of Schedule 3D 

entities. 

 “Stakeholder”- A person or group with a direct interest and/or 

involvement in or affected by the work and operations of the entity. 

“Combined assurance model”- A combined assurance model 

incorporates optimises all assurance providers and functions to enable 

effective control environment and support the integrity of information 

used for decision making by management, the board, and its 

committees. 

“Organisation Culture”- The way members of organisations relate to 

each other, their work, and the outside world. 

“Effective or effectively”- The adequate accomplishment of the 

desired objective or a pursuit with the minimum expenditure of time, 

resources, waste, and effort. 

“Independence”- independence generally means the exercise of 

objectives, unfettered judgement. 



 

 

 

xv 

“Information”- includes all data, records, and knowledge in 

electronic or any other format which forms part of intellectual capital 

used, transformed, and produced by an organisation 

“Integrated report”- A concise communication about how an 

organisation’s strategy, governance, performance, and prospects lead to 

the creation of value 

“Clean audit outcome”- “The financial statements are free from 

material misstatements (in other words, a financially unqualified audit 

opinion) and there are no material findings on reporting on 

performance objectives or non-compliance with legislation” (AGSA 

2019).  

 
 
 
  
 



 

 

 

16 

1. INTRODUCTION TO THE RESEARCH 

 

1.1. Background and context 

This research explores challenges associated with implementing the 

combined assurance model: the case of Limpopo Provincial Treasury. 

Before getting to the research conceptualisation (Section 1.2), the study 

introduces the terms and concepts that have been used in conceptualising 

this research in Section 1.1 generally and broadly—while Chapter 2 has a 

more specific and detailed discussion on the research context. The research 

conceptualisation section provides for the research problem statement 

(Section 1.2) and consequently the purpose of this research (Section 1.2.2) 

as well as the research questions (Section 1.2.3). The delimitations and 

assumptions of the research study are in Section 1.3, while the significance 

of the research study is discussed in Section 1.4 and provide a preface to 

the research report in Section 1.5. 

 

1.1.1. Combined assurance model 

The combined Assurance model integrates and coordinates all assurance 

activities by internal and external assurance providers in a company to 

maximise risk, governance oversight, control efficiencies and optimising 

overall assurance to the audit and risk committee (ARC) (IV, 2016). The 

combined Assurance model foster a common language, one voice and 

integrated thinking (Huibers, 2015). “Combine assurance assist organisation 

decision making by integrating and aligning assurance processes so that 

executive management, audit and board committees obtain a 

comprehensive, holistic view of the effectiveness of the entity’s governance, 

risk and controls and mitigate assurance fatigue” (Huibers, 2015, p. 2).  

  



 

 

 

17 

The Combined Assurance Framework aims to detail a set of concepts, 

principles, and a methodology that aims to improve the control 

environment and promote good governance (NT, 2013). The combined 

assurance model provides a collaborative method to how the organisation 

intends to identify critical risks and adequate controls to mitigate risks and 

how possible duplication of audit and assurance processes will be dealt 

with. 

 

In practical terms, combined assurance is about assurance providers 

working more closely together to ensure the right amount of assurance, in 

the right areas, from people with the best and most relevant skills, as cost-

effectively as possible and obtaining the trust of management and the Audit 

& Risk committees (ARC) (Huibers, 2015). The right amount of assurance 

depends on the risk appetite of the company (Govindarajan, 2011). 

Guidance on risk appetite is sought from the Board through the Audit & 

Risk Committee (ARC) (Govindarajan, 2011). Assurance is provided by a 

broad range of departments, differentiated by the stakeholders served, for 

example, those who report to management, those who report to the Board 

/ Accounting authority, and those who report to external stakeholders 

(IODSA, 2016). 

 

The institute’s assurance environment components are identified through 

three lines of defence (Institute of Internal Auditors, 2013). The 

identification should be supported by risk mapping, a mixture of applicable 

business model matrices, and defined goals and timelines (IIA, 2013). The 

maturity of the organisation’s risk management that aligns with the 

organisation’s strategic objectives will determine the success of the 

combined assurance model (Barac, 2015). The Three Lines of Defence 

model provides a holistic and effective way to enhance communications in 



 

 

 

18 

organisations on governance, risk management and controls by clarifying 

essential roles and duties (IIA, 2013). 

 

 
Figure 1: The three lines of defence model  
Source,IIA position paper, the three lines of defence model in effective risk 
management and controls ( IIA global ,2013, p. 2)   
  
 

The benefit of effectively implemented combined assurance 
 
According to Huibers (2015), the benefits of aligning and co-ordinating 

assurance processes will improve the control environment and support the 

following organisational objectives: Elimination of assurance fatigue, 

Resources not misused on preventable duplication, reported information to 

governance committees is more precise and insightful, as assurance 

providers view integrates. Facilitation of better decision making through 

assurance activities, generating value adds, relevant data based on 

collaboration 

 

 

 

 



 

 

 

19 

1.1.2. Integrated Reporting   

An integrated report is a report that connects detailed information in other 

reports to give a comprehensive and concise picture of “significant strategic 

matters that affect the organisation’s ability to create value” (IV, 2016, p. 

28). Integrated reporting results from increasing concerns about the 

fragmented traditional business reporting to various stakeholders (Adams, 

2015). Integrated Reporting Council (IIRC) proposed concise, integrated 

reporting to remedy the problem by providing a report that integrates non-

financial and financial value creation information (Cheng, Green, Conradie, 

Konishi, & Romi, 2014). IIRC designed a principle-based conceptual 

framework increasing the scope of a business’s reporting using a “six 

capitals concept” to envision the business model and better understand and 

“communicate value creation proposition over short, medium and a longer 

period” (Simnett & Huggins, 2015, p. 23). Integrated reporting is concise 

and cohesive communication of a company’s short-, medium- and long-

term strategy, governance, and performance (Cheng et al., 2014). Integrated 

thinking and reporting encourage holistic thinking of value creation and 

business models and promote better internal decision-making (Adams, 

2015). 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 



 

 

 

20 

Benefits associated with Integrated Reporting 

Integrated reporting encourages businesses to think combined and 

holistically, leading to the more precise articulation of strategy and business 

model, produce an integrated report that is clear and concise, improve 

identification of risk and opportunities and enhance internal processes 

leading to a better understanding of the business and improved decision-

making process (Roth, 2014). 

 

 

 

1.1.3. LPT transversal assurance provider structure 

The nature of the work of the Provincial Treasury (PT) is to provide 

information, reports and assurance to critical stakeholders and oversight 

bodies such as the Provincial Executive Council (EXCO), the Cluster Audit 

Committees (CAC), Standing Committee on Public Accounts (SCOPA), as 

well as the relevant Portfolio Committees. Since the Chairperson of the 

CAC reports directly to EXCO, a benefit can be derived by providing 

EXCO as well as Executive Authorities (EA) with integrated and 

consolidated reports of assurance services in respect of governance, risk 

management, internal control, and compliance processes. 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 



 

 

 

21 

1.1.4.  LPT assurance providers mandate 

 

Provincially, the Premier (OTP) and PT's Office are the two institutions 

that play a critical role in respect of institutional governance and 

administration in the province. PT acts as the custodian of the PFMA in 

the Province. PT have a constitutional mandate through the Public Finance 

Management Act (PFMA) No. 1 of 1999 as amended to enforce 

implementation of National and Provincial Treasury norms and standards 

in the province, including prescribed procurement systems, standards and 

Generally Recognized Accounting Practice, uniformly classified systems, 

provisioning, banking, cash management and investment frame-work 

policies for both the departments and public entities.   

 

Treasury Regulations (TR) para 3.2.10 requires, “The internal audit function 

to coordinate with other internal and external providers of assurance to 

ensure proper coverage and to minimise duplication of effort”. In addition, 

the TRs requires that entities conduct internal audits in terms of the 

Institute of Internal Auditors (IIA) Standards.  

 

The Institute of Internal Auditors (IIA) Standard 2050 enacted Chief Audit 

Executive (CAE) to share information and coordinate activities with other 

internal and external providers. CAE should develop and implement a 

combined assurance model to prevent management and governance 

oversight structures from being overwhelmed with information, reports 

and succumbing to assurance fatigue. 

 

  

 



 

 

 

22 

1.1.5. Preface to the research report 

To this end, the report has six chapters. Following this introductory 

chapter, Chapter 2 provides a literature review covering the problem, the 

past studies, the explanatory framework, and the conceptual framework. 

Chapter 3 discusses the research strategy, design, procedures, reliability, and 

validity measures as well as limitations. Chapter 4 and Chapter 5 presents 

and discusses the findings, respectively, to interrogating our research 

questions, while Chapter 6 summarises and concludes the research. 

 

1.2. Research conceptualisation 

1.2.1. The research problem statement 

 

The governing bodies or boards of directors of LPG experience the 

challenges of the effectiveness of risk management, compliance 

management and internal control systems for all kinds of risks. In LPT, 

there is a lack of holistic assurance to the boards and governing bodies on 

the effectiveness and efficacy of risk management and internal control 

systems by coordinating assurance activities from various sources of 

assurance. LPT use many assurance providers to help LPG governing 

bodies or boards fulfil monitoring duties and apply effective governance 

practices in supply chain, infrastructure, compliance, banking, governance, 

budget, revenue, assets management and internal audits. Assurance 

providers perform assurance activities in isolation, auditees, management, 

and the board suffer from assurance fatigue and assurance gaps that lead to 

inefficient reporting to governing bodies. They receive multiple opinions, 

and the governing bodies are therefore not able to exercise their oversight 

role appropriately. There is a lack of one taxonomy across all functions and 

governance bodies within the organisations that provides a single source of 

truth. There are minimally coordinated and relevant assurance efforts that 



 

 

 

23 

focus on exposure, shortage of comprehensive and prioritised tracking of 

remedial action on identified improvement opportunities and weaknesses. 

The collection and reporting of assurance information happen in silos. 

There is a gap in the standard view of issues, risks, and controls across the 

organisation and the reporting to the board and committees. There is no 

comprehensive and holistic view of the effectiveness of governance, risk 

management, and controls in the organisation that is provided to the senior 

management, the audit committee, and the board. The availability of such 

information could enable the organisation to make informed decisions by 

analysing, aggregating, and reporting information supplied by various 

assurance providers. 

The lack of a combined assurance view makes it impossible for 

management to release a statement on the efficiency and effectiveness of 

their internal controls as part of their annual report. Reporting is another 

area of concern that needs to be restructured to ensure that the Executive 

Committee, the Audit Committee, the Risk Committee, and the board or 

governing bodies receive the proper assurance at the right time for 

acquainted decision-making. 

 

The Institute of Internal Auditors Standard 2050 enacted Chief Audit 

Executive (CAE) to share information and coordinate activities with other 

internal and external providers to prevent management and governance 

oversight structures from being overwhelmed with information, reports 

and succumbing to assurance fatigue. However, "The global internal audit 

common body of knowledge (CBOK) indicated that Special guidance on 

how best to implement combined assurance is still limited and there are 

different ways of combining assurance" (Huibers,2015, pg.1). Decaux and 

Sarens (as cited in Dzomira, 2016) concluded that organisations are still 



 

 

 

24 

learning through combined assurance implementation because no 

organisation seems to have achieved an established combined assurance 

program. 

 

LPT has been attempting to develop a combined assurance model suitable 

for LPDs and PEs to alleviate assurance fatigue. The plan has been to 

create the model twofold: LPT assurance providers working together to 

provide assurance oversight to LPDs & PEs and provide a framework for 

departments and public entities assurance providers to execute functions 

and report to LPT. However, LPT did not fully succeed in developing the 

combined assurance model.  

 

LPDs and PEs raised concerns about the multiple assurance providers 

from LPT, which are working in silos. As a result, this creates duplication 

of efforts and contradicting reports/recommendation that LPDs and PEs 

must implement. There is no collective effort and commitment to 

implement combined assurance in LPT, which results in high costs from 

LPT, LPDs and PEs.    

 

Consequently, LPT has governance structures as well as assurance 

providers to support both the LPDs and PEs. However, it is uncertain 

whether all the assurance providers are working correctly as per the 

requirements.  

 

 

 

 

 



 

 

 

25 

1.2.2. The research purpose (aim and objectives) statement 

 
The purpose of this study is to explore and determine the challenges 

associated with the implementation of the combined assurance model by 

LPT and develop possible solutions in the form of recommendations for 

LPT to improve. The main criteria to establish the associated challenges are 

to assess LPT assurance providers' structures with other Provinces reported 

to be offering adequate assurance within the Republic of South Africa and 

the National Treasury ideal structure. Lastly, determine if there are 

duplication of efforts, areas creating assurance fatigue and necessity and/or 

relevancy of each assurance provider within LPT. 

 

1.2.3. Research Questions 

1.2.3.1. Question 1: What are the challenges associated with the aligning 

and co-ordinating of assurance providers’ s processes? 

1.2.3.2. Question 2: Does the coordinating and monitoring role of the LPT 

assurance providers enabling effective functioning of the combined 

assurance in Limpopo Province? 

1.2.3.3. Question 3: Are the assurance activities incorporated to enable 

better and improved decision-making that create value add to LPDs and 

PEs? 

1.2.3.4. Question 4: How does the Integrated Reporting in Limpopo assist 

in identifying weaknesses and/or opportunities in Internal Controls and 

reporting systems, stakeholder management, other independent assurance 

services as well as governance, compliance, risk and monitoring?  

   

   

 

 



 

 

 

26 

 

1.3. Delimitations and assumptions of the research 

study 

There is no internationally adopted definition and guidance regarding 

combined assurance and how to implement it, including the different ways 

of combining assurance and different types of coordination that are 

possible (Huibers, 2015). Organisations are learning through combined 

assurance implementation because no organisation seems to have achieved 

an established combined assurance program (Dzomira, 2016). 

 

In another similar study, the study limits the audit committee's role and 

internal audit role to financial skills (Dzomira,2016), where else King IV 

(2016) specify that the audit committee is responsible for overseeing the 

effective achievement of the internal control environment, supporting the 

integrity of information used for internal decision-making by management, 

the governing body, and its committees. According to IIA standards, an 

internal audit is responsible for evaluating the adequacy and effectiveness of 

governance, risk management and controls in general, not only financial 

controls. Furthermore, Company regulations Chapter 3, in line with 

companies act 94 (5), stipulates that at least one–third of the members of a 

company's audit committee at any time must have academic qualifications, 

or experience, in economics, law, corporate governance, finance, 

accounting, commerce, industry, public affairs or human resource 

management. 

 

Other root causes of implementing a combined assurance model might be a 

lack of support and buy-in from governance structures and management. 

Lack of commitment by all assurance providers. Assurance providers' 



 

 

 

27 

competitions and conflict. Lack of required skill to develop and implement 

the model (Institute of risk management SA, 2014).  

 

Limpopo provincial government has adopted a centralised approach 

regarding establishing the Combined Assurance Model as opposed to a 

decentralised system. The plan is to create the model twofold: LPT 

assurance providers work together to provide assurance oversight to LPDs 

& PEs and provide a framework for departments and public entities 

assurance providers to execute functions and report to LPT (LPT, 2019). 

As a result, the model is complex and require skills and in-depth knowledge 

of government processes and risk. The study will focus only on the LPT 

assurance providers working together. 

 

Matters about independence and objectivity are susceptible within the 

profession; therefore, assurance providers are unwilling to share 

information or depend on each other's work. The Assurance Providers are 

very protective of their independence concerning value add, 

responsibilities, effectiveness to the Organisations. Similarly, Chief 

Financial Officers of departments and entities protect the mandate and 

service delivery models adopted within their respective departments.  

 

As a result, this study assumes that both the Assurance Providers and Chief 

Financial Officers will be biased and protective towards their area of 

responsibility when responding. Consequently, triangulation will be done by 

obtaining data from both the AGSA, Audit Committee Chairperson, 

Provincial Internal Audit, and other Assurance Providers within Limpopo 

Province. 

 



 

 

 

28 

The assumption that LPT transversal assurance providers’ positions/units 

are appointed/created without first reviewing the current organisational 

structure, performance contract, and job descriptions to determine the 

possibility of delegating the required responsibilities to the existing 

positions or units with related duties or positions. Positions/ Units created 

to address audit findings and pursue clean audit or better audit outcomes 

(LPT, 2020).  LPT inadequate transversal organisational structure affecting 

the development and implementation of a combined assurance model. 

Transversal structure bloated and duplicated reporting line, roles and 

responsibilities duplicated. 

 

1.4. Significance of the research study 

The research will help policymakers and combined assurance practitioners 

implement a combined assurance model from both the public and private 

sectors. The study will also contribute towards generating a body of 

knowledge within the field of Governance and Compliance and benefits 

researchers, policymakers, and academics. The study will also help 

policymakers and practitioners understand other assurance providers' roles 

within LPT and collaborate with other assurance providers to add value to 

departments and public entities. In terms of AGSA (2016), Gauteng, the 

Northern Cape and the Western Cape consistently provided adequate 

assurance over the past four years. Where else, all other treasuries provided 

some assurance to provincial departments and public entities.   

 

The multiple uses of assurance providers' activities in isolation cause the 

board and audit committees to suffer from assurance fatigue and assurance 

gaps that lead to inefficient reporting to governing bodies (Sarens, Decaux, 

& Lenz, 2012). As a result, this creates duplication of efforts, contradicting 

reports/recommendations and high cost. When adequately developed and 



 

 

 

29 

effectively implemented, a combined assurance model will prevent 

management and governance oversight structures from being overwhelmed 

with information, reports and succumbing to assurance fatigue. 

 

1.5 Summary 

Provincially, the Premier (OTP) and PT's Office are the two institutions 

that play a critical role in respect of institutional governance and 

administration in the province. PT acts as the custodian of the PFMA in 

the Province. PT have a constitutional mandate through the Public Finance 

Management Act (PFMA) No. 1 of 1999 as amended to enforce 

implementation of National and Provincial Treasury norms and standards 

in the province, including prescribed procurement systems, standards and 

Generally Recognized Accounting Practice, uniformly classified systems, 

provisioning, banking, cash management and investment frame-work 

policies for both the departments and public entities.  

 

The nature of the work of the Provincial Treasury (PT) is to provide 

information, reports and assurance to critical stakeholders and oversight 

bodies such as the Provincial Executive Council, the Cluster Audit 

Committees, Standing Committee on Public Accounts (SCOPA), as well as 

the relevant Portfolio Committees. Since the Chairperson of the Central 

Audit Committee (CAC) reports directly to the Provincial Executive 

Council (EXCO), a benefit can be derived by providing EXCO as well as 

Executive Authorities (EA) with integrated and consolidated reports of 

assurance services in respect of governance, risk management, internal 

control, and compliance processes. 

  

 The purpose of this study is to explore and determine the challenges 

associated with the implementation of the combined assurance model by 



 

 

 

30 

LPT and develop possible solutions in the form of recommendations for 

LPT to improve. The Institute of Internal Auditors Standard 2050 enacted 

Chief Audit Executive (CAE) to share information and coordinate activities 

with other internal and external providers to prevent management and 

governance oversight structures from being overwhelmed with 

information, reports and succumbing to assurance fatigue. For the past five 

years, LPT has been attempting to develop a combined assurance model 

suitable for LPDs and PEs to alleviate assurance fatigue. The plan has been 

to create the model twofold: LPT assurance providers working together to 

provide assurance oversight to LPDs & PEs and provide a framework for 

departments and public entities assurance providers to execute functions 

and report to LPT. However, LPT did not fully succeed in developing the 

combined assurance model.  

 

LPDs and PEs raised concerns about the multiple assurance providers 

from LPT, which are working in silos. As a result, this creates duplication 

of efforts and contradicting reports/recommendations that LPDs and PEs 

must implement. There is no collective effort and commitment to 

implement combined assurance in LPT, which results in high costs from 

LPT, LPDs and PEs.   Consequently, LPT has governance structures as 

well as assurance providers to support both the LPDs and PEs. However, it 

is uncertain whether all the assurance providers are working correctly as per 

the requirements.  

 

The multiple uses of assurance providers' activities in isolation cause the 

board and audit committees to suffer from assurance fatigue and assurance 

gaps that lead to inefficient reporting to governing bodies (Sarens, Decaux, 

& Lenz, 2012). As a result, this creates duplication of efforts, contradicting 

reports/recommendations and high cost. When adequately developed and 



 

 

 

31 

effectively implemented, a combined assurance model will prevent 

management and governance oversight structures from being overwhelmed 

with information, reports and succumbing to assurance fatigue. 

 

 

2. LITERATURE REVIEW 

2.1. Introduction 

This chapter has three broad objectives identify the knowledge gap, and to 

identify the knowledge gap, understand the research problem, identify the 

knowledge gap, and develop a framework for interpreting the research 

findings. Specifically, in Section 2.1, we detail the research problem. Then, 

in Section 2.2, we review the literature on studies that have attempted a 

similar study or research. Finally, with information arising from Section 2.2, 

we identify and detail the framework that we will use to interpret our 

research findings in Section 2.3. 

 

The discussion in this study will focus on combined assurance with 

prominent themes drawn from agency theory. This theory resolves certain 

problems in the formal two-way agreements or relationships between 

principals who entrust or delegate work to their agents ( Rossouw & 

Marais, 2015). The application of agency theory forms the basis of 

explaining and understanding why certain agents act the way they do  

(Rossouw & Marais, 2015). According to the principal-agent relationship, 

theory can be applied to employer-employee, lawyer-client, buyer-supplier 

and other agency relationships (Adams, 1994) . For the study, the principal 

would be the board of directors or management, and the agent would be 

the organisational management. The three problems addressed by agency 

theory relate to goal asymmetry: perceptions about misalignment of goals 

due to personal interests; risk asymmetry refers to perceptions about 



 

 

 

32 

differences in risk perceptions and treatment; and information asymmetry, 

which deals with the perceptions about the sharing and withholding of 

information( Rossouw & Marais, 2015). 

Referring to agency theory, due to perceived differences in the 

interpretation of goals, risks, and information amongst principles and 

agents, the principal would not adequately evaluate the agent’s performance 

(Adams, 1994). It is also that it is perceived that whenever the incentive or 

opportunity (motivation) arises for the agent to diverge in any of the three 

factors (goals, risks, information), agency theory predicts that the agent will 

act and make decisions to maximise its self-interest over that of the 

principal (Adams, 1994). 

 

The agency theory advocates that, because of information asymmetries and 

self-interest, principals are deficient of reasons to trust their agents and will 

pursue to resolve these concerns by putting in place mechanisms to bring 

into line the interests of agents with principals and to reduce the scope for 

information asymmetries and opportunistic behaviour (Adams, 1994). 

An agency relationship ascends when one or more principals engage 

another person as their agent perform the service on behalf of the 

principal. The performance of these services will result in the delegation of 

the decision-making authority to the appointed agents ( Rossouw & Marais, 

2015). The delegated responsibility by the principal and the resultant 

division of labour aid to promote an efficient and productive economy. 

However, the delegation also means that the principal desires to trust an 

agent to act in the principal’s best interests. So what happens when 

concerns arise over agents' motives and cause principals to question the 

trust they place in them? (Adams, 1994). 

  

 



 

 

 

33 

 

 

Combined assurance serves a fundamental purpose in promoting 

confidence and reinforcing trust in financial information (Decaux & 

Sarens,2015).As depicted in agency theory, the principal-agent relationship 

is significant in understanding how the combined assurance has developed.  

Agency theory is a sound economic theory of accountability, which helps 

explain the combined assurance’s development. However, along with this, 

it is evident that other stakeholders, such as regulators interested in the 

audit and agency theory, do not provide a complete or straightforward 

explanation of their expectations.  

 

2.1. Research problem analysis 

2.1.1. Combined Assurance benefits  

 
Institutions expand, and business operations evolve and become more 

multifaceted; the growth leads to the board and ARC requiring more 

assurance providers’ functions to oversee the achievement of objectives 

and mitigate risks (Huibers, 2015). However, according to Dmitrenko 

(2017), institutions have always used different assurance providers to help 

boards and ARC oversee the effectiveness of risks, control, and 

governance. The multiple uses of assurance providers’ activities in isolation 

cause the board and audit committees to suffer from assurance fatigue and 

assurance gaps that lead to inefficient reporting to governing bodies 

(Sarens, Decaux, & Lenz, 2012). Adequate implementation of combined 

assurance eradicates redundant and unnecessary assurance in organisations, 

provided the board, and its committees appreciate the subject matter. 

 

 



 

 

 

34 

 

Combined assurance is a process to incorporate and optimise all assurance 

services and functions so that, “taken as a whole, these should enable an 

effective control environment. As a result, it enhances the integrity of 

information used for internal decision-making by management, the 

governing body, and its committees (Dmitrenko, 2017). According to Forte 

& Barac (2015), combined assurance in most organisations constitutes 

financial risks processes and activities, regulators, operational and strategic 

risks. However, Decaux & Sarens (2015) concluded that organisations are 

still learning through combined assurance implementation because no 

organisation seems to have achieved an established combined assurance 

program. In a similar study, Vera-Muñoz (as cited in Dzomira, 2016) 

concludes that the influential audit committee and the internal audit must 

be informed and observant of the financial reporting process whose 

members should have financial literacy. 

 
Internal Audit Function (IAF) is responsible for adding value to the 

Organisations through providing independent assurance and consulting 

services on the control environment, risk management and governance by 

evaluating its adequacy and effectiveness (Dmitrenko, 2017). The maturity 

of the organisation’s Enterprise Risk Management (ERM) process is the 

precursor to a combined assurance model (Dmitrenko, 2017). Controls are 

designed to mitigate risks that might hinder the organisation’s objectives; 

therefore, combined assurance and risk management are linked (Decaux & 

Sarens, 2015). According to Decaux &Sarens (2015), risks are everywhere 

in organisations; therefore, there is a need for a holistic value-add assurance 

approach to mitigate the risks and foster decision-making.  

 

 

 



 

 

 

35 

According to Masegare (2018), the benefits of aligning and co-ordinating 

assurance processes will improve the control environment and support the 

following organisational objectives: Elimination of assurance fatigue. 

Resources are not misused on preventable duplication. Assist with 

prioritising high-risk assurance efforts, promoting an identical view of risks 

and approaches across the organisation. Reported information to 

governance committees is more precise and insightful, facilitating better 

decision-making through assurance activities, generating value add, and 

relevant data based on collaboration. The use of one language helps to 

enable value-added deliberations. 

 

2.1.2. Mapping of Assurance Providers  

The institute’s assurance environment components are identified through 

three lines of defence (Decaux & Sarens, 2015). The identification should 

be supported through risk mapping, a mixture of applicable business model 

matrices, and defined goals and timelines (Decaux & Sarens, 2015). 

However, Dmitrenko (2017) argues that the organisation should depend on 

its operations in choosing the appropriate model for the entity. 

Organisations can use the defence model or assurance model. The defence 

model is the three lines of defences. The assurance model is implementable 

by ensuring that assurance providers are part of a single team on the 

structure. 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 



 

 

 

36 

Lines of defence:  

 
Management is the first line of defence as the process owners and is 

responsible and accountable for monitoring and controlling operations. 

Management is responsible for risk identification and mitigating controls 

within their operation line (Dmitrenko, 2017). Management ‘s role is to 

implement remedial actions by implementing prescribed procedures to 

address control deficiencies daily (Decaux & Sarens, 2015). 

 

The second line of defence is dedicated functions designed to support 

management in its monitoring activities by assisting with developing, 

facilitating, and reviewing management processes (Dmitrenko, 2017). The 

second line of defence functions is established to enhance the first line of 

defence and assure that the first line of defence operates as intended 

(Decaux & Sarens, 2015). The second line of defence possesses some level 

of independence since there is a management function that sometimes 

contributes to the development and implementation of processes 

(Dmitrenko, 2017). 

 

Internal Audit is the third line of defence that provides independence 

assurance on the first and second defence activities line (Dmitrenko, 2017). 

Internal audit activity is responsible for providing the Board/ Executive 

authorities and senior management with a comprehensive independent 

assurance on the adequacy and effectiveness of governance, risk, and 

control within the organization (Dmitrenko, 2017).  

 

Sometimes the fourth line of defence is used for external assurance 

providers such as external auditors, regulators, and external bodies 

(Masegare, 2018). “External auditors, regulators, and other external bodies 

reside outside the organization’s structure, but they can have an important 



 

 

 

37 

role in the organization’s overall risk, governance and control structure” 

(IIA, 2013, page 6). Regulators set requirements anticipated to reinforce the 

control environment in an organization and, on other occurrences, perform 

an independent function to review compliance of first, second, or third line 

of defence concerning the set requirements. According to the Institute of 

Internal Auditor (2013), “external auditors, regulators, and other groups 

outside the organization can be considered as additional lines of defence, 

assuring the organization’s shareholders, including the governing body and 

senior management’(IIA, 2013, page 6).  

 

 

The public sector three lines of defence identified by AGSA (2017) include 

senior management, HOD, and MEC as the first line of defence.  Internal 

Audit, Audit Committee and Monitoring & Coordination departments as 

the second line of defence. Lastly, SCOPA and Portfolio Committee as the 

third line of defence. AGSA (2017) argues that MECs monitor and provide 

oversight tasks in their portfolios and therefore play a direct role at 

departments and have particular oversight responsibilities towards their 

departments in terms of the PFMA. PT play a coordinating and monitoring 

role at the provincial level as mandated in section 18 of the PFMA and 

forms part of the overall assurance providers. 

 



 

 

 

38 

 

Figure 2: Assurance provided by key role players  
Source: General report on the national and provincial audit outcomes of 2016-17 
(AGSA, 2017,p.144) 

 

2.1.3. Combined Assurance Forum   

Combined Assurance Forum execute and “embed the combined assurance 

framework principles as approved by the Audit Committee" (Masegare, 

2018, page 139). The Combined Assurance Forum's main objective is to 

facilitate the implementation of the Board / Accounting Authority desired 

level of assurance prerequisite in each space (Decaux & Sarens, 2015). 

Furthermore, quarterly evaluate proper execution of the planned assurance 

activities and "ensure coordination, reporting and communication to 

stakeholders; Lastly, develop a common view of the risk themes" and 

conduct awareness of the expected Board desired level of assurance 

(Masegare, 2018, page 139).  

 

 



 

 

 

39 

2.1.4. Challenges associated with the implementation of 

Combined Assurance 

 
The root cause for the delay in implementing the combined assurance 

might be a lack of buy-in from governance structures and management. 

Other times, lack of commitment by all assurance providers. Assurance 

providers’ competitions and conflict. Lack of required skill to develop and 

implement the model lacks collaborations (Decaux & Sarens, 2015). Not 

evaluating the combined assurance model continually, identify an area of 

improvement and process to execute the improvement. (Huibers, 2015). 

Assurance providers do not utilise common focus to understand their 

organisations and fail to develop an integrated assurance model (NT, 2013). 

Organisational structure and culture not supporting integrated reporting 

and integrated thinking (IV, 2016). “Assurance providers working in silos, 

duplicate functions and issue multiple reports to both the Departments and 

Public Entities” (Huibers, 2015, page 1). Assurance providers use different 

methodologies, Lack or inactive combined assurance forums, Lack of 

software solution, and a burdensome manual process to organise assurance 

activities (Lindeque, 2014). 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 



 

 

 

40 

2.1.5. Manage Assurance Providers Conflict of Interest 

According to Masegare (2018), independence and objectivity are susceptible 

within the assurance providers’ profession, resulting in assurance providers 

unwilling to share information or depend on each other’s work to protect 

quality requirements set by their professional bodies. Therefore, 

possibilities of conflicts of interest should be managed in order to remain 

significant and achieving quality requirements as assurance providers; the 

following measurements in Table 1 should be observed: 

 

 
Table 1: Combined Assurance assurers’ criteria 

 
          Source: Masegare (2018, page. 139) 

  

  

 

 

 

 

 



 

 

 

41 

 

 

2.1.6. Combined assurance awareness and buy-in 

 
According to Decaux & Sarens (2015), the first imperative component is 

that combined assurance is a comprehensive concept that requires tone at 

the top and organisational culture to be implementable. Therefore, buy-in 

and support of top management are vital as executives will commit 

resources to the initiative. Combined assurance is efficient when steered 

from the highest level of authority within an organisation. The second 

imperative component in setting the groundwork for execution is 

enlightening stakeholders and creating mindfulness of combined assurance. 

A well-defined model and mutual understanding will drive the success of 

the model execution. The third vital component is to elect a Combined 

assurance champion to coordination the combined assurance process. A 

lack of a dedicated champion causes Thirty-four per cent of combined 

assurance implementation failure in organisations to coordinate assurance 

activities. CAE/IAF could effectively fulfil this role because IAF is the only 

independent assurance provider responsible for the overall assurance of 

governance, risk, and controls. 

 

 



 

 

 

42 

 
Figure 3: Governance model (2019) 
Source: Combined assurance (including governance) (PWC,2019,p8)   

 
 

2.1.7. Integrated reporting  

Integrated reporting required various assurance practitioners skills and 

expertise, a broad understanding of value creation transversely, and 

appreciation of integrated thinking (Simnett, Zhou, & Hoang, 2016). The 

assurance providers function is responsible for assuring the Board of 

directors of the reliability, accuracy and completeness of reporting 

depending on the area of speciality (Maroun & Prinsloo, 2020). The IR 

Framework (Reporting, 2013, p. 10) identifies "internal control and 

reporting systems, stakeholder management and internal audit and other 

independent assurance services as mechanisms to enhance the reliability of 

an integrated report". According to Adams (2015, p. 2), proper 

implementation of the integrated reporting requires “new accounting and 

management processes”. Implementing integrated reporting depends on 

the change in management's thinking pattern and the organisation at large 

to integrated thinking (Adams,2015).   

 



 

 

 

43 

2.1.8. Organisational Structure  

 

2.1.8.1. Provincial Treasuries providing adequate assurance 

PFMA no 29 of 1999 instructs every provincial treasury to be headed by 

MEC. PFMA further outline the functions and powers of the Provincial 

Treasury (PT) as follows: Preparations of the provincial administration 

budget; exercise control over the implementation of the provincial budget, 

promotion and enforcement of transparency in the spending of budget, 

revenue collection, assets management in departments and public entities, 

ensuring that fiscal policies do not materially and unreasonably prejudice 

national economic policies and monitoring of the implementation of 

national and provincial norms and standards (Rambiyana, 2016). PT have 

the constitutional mandate through PFMA No. 1 of 1999 as amended to 

support both the Departments and Public Entities governance, risk, and 

controls. As a result, multiple assurances providers’ units support and 

monitor provincial departments and public entities’ governance, risk and 

control processes and structures. 

 

Masegare (2018) argues that government entities' difficulty to achieve clean 

audit results from the boards and ARC's inability to manage risks effectively 

and efficiently; a combined assurance model could assist in this regard. 

According to AGSA (2017), Gauteng, Northern Cape, and Western Cape 

PTs consistently provided adequate assurance over the past four years. 

Where else, all other treasuries provided some assurance to provincial 

departments and public entities. AGSA (2019) National and Provincial 

Audit Outcomes reported that Gauteng and Western Cape have the highest 

numbers of clean audits and good financial health, with Northern Cape 

achieving average rate.    

 



 

 

 

44 

 

PT transversal assurance providers during the financial year contribute to 

the credibility of financial, performance information and compliance with 

legislation by monitoring the implementation of internal controls (AGSA, 

2017). HODs and MECs use the annual report to report on an 

organisation's spending and performance against predetermined financial 

year targets (AGSA, 2017). SCOPA and PC depend on the assurance 

providers to ensure that the annual report's information is creditable 

(AGSA, 2017). 

 

 

2.1.8.2. Limpopo Provincial Treasury structure review 

Limpopo Provincial Treasury (LPT) has multiple assurances providers’ 

classified as Branches, Chief Directorates and Directorates responsible for 

monitoring and evaluating Limpopo provincial departments and public 

entities’ governance, risk, and control processes. Assurance providers are 

composed of the following four branches: Sustainable Resources 

Management (SRM); Assets, Liabilities and Supply Chain Management 

(AL&SCM); Financial Governance & Systems (FGS) and Shared Internal 

Audit Services (SIAS). All four branches have sections and sub-sections 

that report independently to eleven LPDs and five PEs from other sections 

and sub-sections.  

 

 

 

 

 

 



 

 

 

45 

LTP assurance providers primarily issue reports to PE and LPD’s CFOs 

and ARC through DDGs for respective branches in the department. In 

PEs, not all reports serve at ARC and the Board; the following reports are 

discussed at PE audit committees SCM, Risk management, and GMC 

compliance reports. Treasury official represented at the ARC and Board 

only present Governance Monitoring & Compliance (GMC) compliance 

report.  LPT assurance providers advise and support LPDs and PEs by 

evaluating Auditor General Action plan reports. LPT analyses root causes, 

strengthen controls, and monitors AG action plan implementation. 

 

LPT have fourteen transversal forums from different transversal units to 

monitor and support departments and PEs. LPT uses institutional 

arrangements to manage LPTs activities efficiently and effectively through 

the various governance structures to fulfil the department’s mandates, 

vision and strategic objectives. The institutional arrangements are 

monitored and evaluated quarterly, with various Chairpersons reporting to 

the EXCOM to ensure that the intended outcomes of these structures are 

realized. Most of the forum’s reports to respective DDG’s, the Provincial 

technical committee on finance (PTCF) and LPT HOD. 

 

Most of the assurance providers in LPT evaluate Auditor General action 

plan reports and findings to advice and support department and public 

entities in root cause identification, strengthening controls and monitoring 

implementation of AG action plan within their area of speciality; however, 

the results of the evaluation are reported by each unit without integrating 

the report which sometimes leads to contradicting advice or analysis given 

by LPT different units. The following units’ analysis auditor general reports 

GMC PFMA, GMC Public entities, SCM, Financial reporting, financial 

training, Assets Management, Banking, Revenue and Budget. 



 

 

 

46 

 



 

 

 

47 

 

 

 Figure 4:  Limpopo Provincial Treasury Transversal Organisation structure (student’s own,2020) 

 



 

 

 

48 

  

Table 2:  LPT Transversal forums 

Transversal 

Forums 

Frequency 

of 

meetings 

per annum 

(quarterly, 

monthly 

etc) 

Office 

expected to 

be part of the 

meetings 

Role of the committee Forum reporting line 

Provincial 

technical 

committee on 

finance (PTCF) 

2 meetings 

per quarter 

CFO -To ensure that all new initiatives around good financial management of the 

province’s finances are communicated and discussed technically before being 

presented to the Heads of --Departments (HOD) Forum. 

-To share best practice on good financial management in the province 

-To ensure that the PFMA, MFMA and their regulations are being implemented 

as required. 

The Committee will report to HOD’s Forum via 

HOD LPT with recommendations for consideration 

for approval by the HOD’s Forum.  

 

A report will also be presented at EXCOM. 

PFMA 

Coordinators 

Forum 

quarterly (4 

times per 

annum) 

CFO -Standardization and improvement of internal control and compliance practices 

-Knowledge and information sharing on best practices on internal control and 

compliance 

-Coordination and monitoring of internal control and compliance activities. 
 

The Committee will report to DDG: FG with 

recommendations for consideration for approval by 

the PTCF.  

 

The Forum is accountable to the Head of 

Department of Provincial Treasury. 

 
 



 

 

 

49 

Infrastructure 

Technical 

Management 

Committee 

Monthly (12 

times per 

annum) 

Infrastructure -Monitoring and evaluation of the effectiveness of IDMS-related and 

consolidated reporting to the Infrastructure Cluster.  
 

 The Committee will report to PTCF via Chief 

Director: Infrastructure with recommendations for 

consideration for approval by the PTCF. A report 

will also be presented at the Executive Management 

Meeting. 
 

Financial 

Accounting and 

Reporting Forum 

Quarterly (4 

times per 

annum) 

CFO  -To ensure effective implementation of accounting and reporting principles, 

and compliance with prescripts on financial accounting and reporting 

requirements. 

 
 

The forum will submit a report to the PTCF quarterly 

through the Chairperson. 

 

The Forum is accountable to the Head of 
Department of Provincial Treasury.  

Provincial 

Financial Training 

Forum 

Quarterly (4 

times per 

annum) 

CFO -To discuss and address training issues/challenges relating to transversal systems 

and financial management. 

-To promote uniformity in training procedures and processes within 
Departments and Public Entities. 

The forum will submit a report to the PTCF 

quarterly. 

 

The Forum is accountable to the Head of 

Department of Provincial Treasury. 

 
 

PERSAL Forum Quarterly (4 

times per 

annum) 

Human 

Resource 

-Standardisation in the utilisation of transversal financial systems. 

-Sharing of information and best practices from National System Forum. 

-Identify and find solutions to common systems related challenges. 

-A central forum where external stakeholders can present and clarify systems 

related issues (National Treasury, SARS, Provincial Banker, Auditor-General, 

etc.), 

-Achieve common understanding to new initiatives related to systems 

enhancements.  
 

The forums will report to Provincial Accountant 

General through CD: Financial Systems with 

recommendations for consideration for approval by 

the PTCF. 

  

The Forum is accountable to the Head of 

Department of Provincial Treasury 
 



 

 

 

50 

LOGIS Forum Bi- monthly 

(6 times per 

annum) 

CFO - Standardization in the utilization of transversal financial systems. 

-Sharing of information and best practices from National System Forum. 

-Identify and find solutions to common systems related challenges. 

-A central forum where external stakeholders can present and clarify systems 

related issues (National Treasury, SARS, Provincial Banker, Auditor-General, 

etc., 

-Achieve common understanding to new initiatives related to systems 

enhancements 
 

The forums will report to Provincial Accountant 

General through CD: Financial Systems with 

recommendations for consideration for approval by 

the PTCF.  

 

The Forum is accountable to the Head of 

Department of Provincial Treasury 
 

BAS Forum Bi- monthly 

(6 times per 

annum) 

CFO - Standardization in the utilization of transversal financial systems. 

-Sharing of information and best practices from National System Forum. 

-Identify and find solutions to common systems related challenges. 

-A central forum where external stakeholders can present and clarify systems 

related issues (National Treasury, SARS, Provincial Banker, Auditor-General, 

etc., 
 

The forums will report to Provincial Accountant 

General through CD: Financial Systems with 

recommendations for consideration for approval by 

the PTCF.  

The Forum is accountable to the Head of 

Department of Provincial Treasury. 

  

Provincial Risk 

Management 

Forum 

Quarterly (4 

times per 

annum) 

CFO -Standardization and improvement of risk management practices 

-Knowledge and information sharing on best practices on risk management 

-Coordination and monitoring of risk management  

 
 

-The Committee will report to DDG: FG with 

recommendations for consideration for approval by 

the PTCF. 

The Forum is accountable to the Head of 

Department of Provincial Treasury. 

-The Forum shall report on a quarterly basis to the 

Audit Committee (based in the LPT) and to the 

National Treasury on its activities.  

-The Heads of Departments, the Audit Committee 



 

 

 

51 

and the National Treasury shall provide the Forum 

with feedback on its effectiveness on an annual basis. 
 

Provincial 

Revenue 

Management, 

Budget, and 

Expenditure 

Forum 

Quarterly (4 

times per 

annum) 

CFO -Identify risk areas in budget, expenditure, and revenue collection, and ensure 

departments institute corrective measures.  

-Facilitate and co-ordinate sound financial management information systems in 

departments and take steps to ensure that departments play an active role in 

development of such system 

The Forum reports to the PTCF 

Cash 

Management 

Forum 

Quarterly (4 

times per 

annum) 

CFO -Forecasting cash requirements of the departments over long, medium, and 

short-term. 

-Analysis and interpretation of the provincial cash flows vs Actual Expenditure. 

-Monitoring compliance with financial prescripts. 

-Sharing/benchmarking best practices to enhance provincial cash management. 

-Resolving/recommending solutions for technical banking challenges.  

Reporting to the PTCF 

Provincial Supply 

Chain 

Management 

Forum 

Quarterly (4 

times per 

annum) 

CFO -To capacitate SCM officials within the province 

-Sharing best practices and generating a pool of knowledge on SCM issues for 

the province. 

-Ability for Treasury to develop realistic and user-friendly policies which are 

best understood and easy to implement while addressing relevant issues and 

concerns. 

-Effective implementation of Supply Chain Management in all the Departments 

and Public Entities. 

The Forum reports to the PTCF on all SCM related 

matters 



 

 

 

52 

Inventory 

Management 

Forum  

Quarterly (4 

times per 

annum) 

CFO Monitor’s performance of asset management units in the departments and 

public entities 

The Committee will submit report to the PTCF 

monthly. 

Asset 

Management 

Forum 

Monthly 

from April 

to 

November 

(8 times per 

annum) 

CFO Monitor’s performance of asset management units in the departments and 

public entities 
 

The Committee will submit report to the PTCF 

monthly. 

 



 

 

 

53 

 

2.1.8.3. LPT assurance providers’ structures in comparison with 

best performing Treasuries. 

a. Comparison of Western Cape (WCPT), Gauteng, Northern 
Cape, and Limpopo provincial treasuries 

 
WCPT structure is more of a liner structure, especially at the Senior 

Management Services level (SMS) with only two transversal branches the 

Office of the Premier. NCPT and GPPT organisational structures are like 

LPT structure; the difference is that the NCPT structure shared audit 

committee falls under shared internal audit, and on GPPT, municipal 

financial governance is a branch on its own. Just like LPT Departments and 

Public Entities are monitored and supported by four transversal branches.  

 

Figure 5:  Western Cape Treasury Transversal Organisation structure (student’s 

own,2020)   

  

 

 



 

 

 

54 

 Northern Cape Cape Treasury Transversal Organisation structure 

  

 
              Figure 6:  Northern Cape Treasury Transversal Organisation structure (student’s own,2020) 

 



 

 

 

55 

 

2.2. Research knowledge gap analysis  

 
Dzomira (2016) has discussed combined assurance in the public sector, 

specifically focusing on scrutinising the combined assurance model's 

support in South Africa's public sector. The study beach on the stewardship 

theory developed by Donaldson and Davis (as cited in Dzomira, 2016). The 

research study followed a qualitative research approach in analysing 

qualitatively based data (Maree, 2013) from Auditor general provincial audit 

outcomes for 2014-2015. Decaux & Sarens (as cited in Dzomira, 2016) 

concluded that organisations are still learning through combined assurance 

implementation because no organisation seems to have achieved an 

established combined assurance program. In a similar study, Vera-Muñoz 

(as cited in Dzomira, 2016) concludes that the influential ARC and the 

internal audit must be informed and observant of the financial reporting 

process whose members should have financial literacy. However, the study 

limits the ARC's role and IAF's role to financial skills, where else King IV 

(2016) specify that the audit committee is responsible for overseeing the 

effective achievement of the internal control environment, supporting the 

integrity of information used for internal decision-making by management, 

the governing body, and its committees. According to IIA standards, an 

internal audit is responsible for evaluating the adequacy and effectiveness of 

governance, risk management and controls in general, not only financial 

controls. Furthermore, Company regulations Chapter 3, in line with 

companies act 94 (5), stipulates that at least one–third of the members of a 

company's audit committee at any time must have academic qualifications, 

or experience, in economics, law, corporate governance, finance, 

accounting, commerce, industry, public affairs or human resource 

management. 



 

 

 

56 

 

According to Dzomira (2016), the first level of defence assurance providers 

consists of senior management, accounting officers and MECs of the 

Departments. Second-level assurance consists of IAF, ARC and monitoring 

and coordinating departments. The third-level assurance providers are 

public accounts committees, portfolio committees and Auditor General, 

providing combined assurance in most public sector institutions in South 

Africa. As a result, the model is not implementable as it is too high level 

and omit functions designed to support management in its monitoring 

activities by assisting with developing, facilitating, and reviewing 

management processes. The study analyses AG reports and governance 

structures not necessarily how the different governance structures' 

assurance processes integrate and align so that senior management, ARC, 

and supervisory committees obtain a comprehensive, holistic view of the 

effectiveness of their organization's governance, risks, and controls to 

enable them to set priorities and take any necessary actions (Huibers, 2015).   

 

King III introduced the combined assurance model, and King IV illustrated 

that the model incorporates all assurance services and functions to enable 

an effective control environment and support the integrity of information 

used for decision making; however, King IV only recommend the model 

but do not prescribe the design of the model. Exceptional guidance on how 

best to implement combined assurance is still limited. Although there is no 

specific standard in the IPPF on how combined assurance should be 

provided, IIA standard 2050 by Internal Audit enact CAEs to coordinate 

and facilitate the work of other internal and external assurance providers 

Huibers (, 2015). Huibers (2015) further outlined that awareness and 

implementation of combined assurance seem low according to the survey 

results. There is no internationally adopted definition and guidance 



 

 

 

57 

regarding combined assurance and how to implement it, including the 

different ways of combining assurance and different types of coordination 

that are possible (Huibers, 2015). Decaux & Sarens (2015) concluded that 

organizations are still learning through combined assurance implementation 

because no organization seems to have achieved an established combined 

assurance program. According to the global internal audit common body of 

knowledge (CBOK) 2015 survey, there is only 59% of reflected awareness 

of the combined assurance model (Huibers, 2015). 

 

2.3. Framework(s) for interpreting research findings 

 

A framework is a set of wide conceptions that guide the study (Anfara Jr & 

Mertz, 2014).  Qualitative research commences with research questions, the 

main purpose of research questions is to learn about the subject matter and 

discover new ideas and perception or produce fresh theories. The 

researcher informs questions by collecting relevant data. ,When arranged 

and analysed, data becomes information, which, when applied, turns out to 

be knowledge (Rossman & Rallis, 2003).  

         

Qualitative research is generally based on interpretative, biased, and 

contextual data. In interpretation and analysis, the researcher brings 

intellectual philosophies and experiences, consequently, the researcher 

should retain the set of scales between order and intuition (Rossman & 

Rallis, 2003). The researcher should make certain that the study's outcomes 

are reliable and valid to achieve the study and answer questions 

accompanying research findings. The relationship between the researcher’s 

perspective and multiple other contexts is imperative (Croker, 2009). As a 

result, the researcher will triangulate the results of the research findings 

with other reliable sources of information such as the National Treasury, 



 

 

 

58 

Institute of Internal Auditors, and IOD, AGSA audit reports and the 

available academic articles and journals. Furthermore, triangulation will be 

done by obtaining data from both the AGSA, Audit Committee 

Chairperson, Provincial Internal Audit, and other Assurance Providers 

within Limpopo Province. 

   

2.4. Summary and conclusion 

Huibers (2015) argues that the efficiency level of the governance structure 

of the organisations will determine the complexity of the design of the 

combined assurance model. Therefore, the governance structure needs to 

support the alignment of different assurance providers’ activities, 

classifications, and rating systems. IIA Implementation guide 2050 guides 

Internal Audit to coordinates assurance efforts with the second line of 

defence functions by synchronizing the nature, scope, and scheduling of 

work, and ensure a shared appreciation of assurance systems, methods, and 

terminology and relying on one another’s work to minimize duplication of 

effort. 

 
Most assurance providers in LPT evaluate Auditor General action plan 

reports and findings to advice and support department and public entities 

in root cause identification, strengthening controls and monitoring 

implementation of AG action plan within their area of speciality however 

the results of the evaluation are reported by each unit without integrating 

the report which sometimes leads to contradicting advice or analysis given 

by LPT different units. For example, the following units’ analysis auditor 

general reports GMC PFMA, GMC Public entities, SCM, Financial 

reporting, financial training, Assets Management. 

 
 



 

 

 

59 

Western Cape reporting line seems to be straightforward with fewer 

reporting lines; it might be easier for the department to issue an integrated 

report to the client department and public entities (Annual Performance 

Plan, 2020) with a linear structure. 

 

 
 

 

 

 

 

 
 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

  



 

 

 

60 

3. RESEARCH STRATEGY, DESIGN, PROCEDURE 
AND METHODS 

 

Introduction 

The qualitative research method was followed to achieve the research 

objectives. This study used unstructured and semi-structured individual 

interviews to collect primary data. Academic articles and journals, 

government literature, books, and LPT transversal organisational structure 

and Departmental annual reports were regarded as secondary data used for 

literature review. The University Library and google scholar have been used 

to access secondary data such as academic journals and articles. Interview 

questions were developed for use during the primary data collection to 

interview individual participants. Permission was granted from the HOD of 

LPT to interview the research participants. 

 

According to Leedy and Ormrod (2001, p. 14), research methodology is the 

step-by-step plan of action the researcher takes in carrying out the research 

project". A research methodology is fundamental in guiding the researcher 

to achieve the research's desired objectives by systematically conducting 

research and producing quality and detailed reports. The purpose of this 

study was to explore and determine the challenges associated with the 

implementation of the combined assurance model by LPT and develop 

possible solutions in the form of recommendations for LPT to improve 

implementation of combined assurance by using Limpopo Province as a 

case study. The research aims to establish whether assurance providers are 

working correctly as per the requirements of the PFMA to support both 

the Departments and Public Entities. Most assurance providers work in 

silos, same functions, and issue multiple reports to both the Departments 

and Public Entities. As a result, this study's research methodology enables 



 

 

 

61 

the researcher to accomplish the research objectives. Moreover, this 

chapter will further clarify different methods applied to certify the validity 

and reliability of the research findings (Neuman, 2006). 

 

3.1. Research strategy 

The qualitative research method was followed to achieve the research 

objectives. Bryman (2012, p. 37) defines qualitative research as a "research 

strategy that usually emphasises words rather than quantification in the 

collection and analysis of data". Qualitative research focuses on 

engendering new theory than testing the existing theory. As a result, the 

aims of the qualitative research are aligned to this study as it seeks to 

investigate challenges associated with the implementation of combined 

assurance model in Limpopo Provincial Treasury' and develop possible 

solutions in the form of recommendations for LPT to improve 

implementation of combined assurance by using Limpopo Province as a 

case study. Neuman (2006, p. 151), argues, "qualitative researchers depend 

primarily on interpretative or critical social science wherein they apply logic 

in practice and follow a nonlinear research path". This explains why 

researchers using the qualitative approach frequently adopt case studies in 

their research to thoroughly evaluate and explore the cases to produce a 

new theory. This study mainly generate data to investigate challenges 

associated with implementing the combined assurance model in the 

Limpopo Provincial Treasury. Williams (2007, p. 67) argues that "qualitative 

research is conducted within a poststructuralist paradigm with five areas 

underpinning this approach namely: case study, ethnography study, 

phenomenological study, grounded theory study, and content analysis". The 

qualitative research approach aims to decisively define, clarify, and interpret 

the collected data from the above. As a result, qualitative research is less 

structured as it formulates and builds on new theories. In qualitative, the 



 

 

 

62 

researcher naturally interacts with the respondents, which is why the 

researcher interacted with LPT Assurance providers, Audit committee 

chairperson, AG and Provincial departments, and Public Entities CFOs 

(Williams, 2007). 

 

The researcher collected the data for this study using a qualitative approach 

that adopted a case study and a nonlinear path. Due to this study's nature, 

nonlinear is more appropriate as it enables the researcher to move in 

numerous directions, sideways and backward, which is more appropriate to 

achieve the objective of this study (Neuman, 2006). 

  

3.2. Research design 

Bryman (2012, p. 66) argued, "the basic case study involves 

comprehensiveness and thorough examination of a single case". A case 

study best achieves this research design, with Limpopo Provincial Treasury 

(LPT) being a case in subject for the study. Williams (2007, p. 68) defines a 

case study as a process whereby the "researcher explores in depth a 

program, an event, an activity, a process, or one or more individuals". 

Hence, a case study can take a solo event or a case restricted to a period 

and a specific place. A case study permits a wide range of data collection 

from diverse sources, including interviews, corporal articles, records, 

observations, and audio-visual resources. As a result, the researcher 

invested more time directly interacting with individuals being studied to 

allow the research report to integrate lessons learned and patterns exposed 

that connects with the theories. Briefly, the above argument aligns with this 

study's objectives in that direct interaction through an interview with the 

assurance providers is critical for this study (Bryman 2012). There are 

different types of cases, but this study representative or typical case will be 

adopted as the most appropriate for this study for conciseness. 



 

 

 

63 

Representative or typical cases encompass a demonstrative role in a 

specified broader classification where its membership originates. This 

study's results may not be generalised to other cases, but this will lay a 

foundation for scholars, policymakers, and potential researchers to learn or 

improve. LPT was selected as a case study out of concern of the 

department struggling with developing and implementing a combined 

assurance model. Since LPT have the constitutional mandate through the 

Public Finance Management Act (PFMA), No. 1 of 1999 as amended to 

support both the Departments and Public Entities governance, risk, and 

controls. The case study helped the researcher directly interact with the 

research participants and collect the required data.   

 

3.3. Research procedure and methods 

This section documents the actual procedure and the methods employed in 

this research to collect, collate, process, and analyse empirical evidence.  

 

3.3.1. Research data and information collection instrument(s) 

According to Bryman (2012), data collection is the most crucial research 

process stage. Bryman (2012) further indicated that the most extensively 

used data collection methods are interviews and questionnaires. As a result, 

this study used unstructured and semi-structured focus groups and 

individual interviews to collect primary data. Academic articles and journals, 

books, AGSA audit reports, LPT transversal organisational structure, and 

Departmental annual reports have been regarded as secondary data used 

for literature review. The University Library and google scholar were used 

to access secondary data such as academic journals and articles. Interview 

questions have been developed for use during the primary data collection 

to interview individual participants. Permission have been requested from 



 

 

 

64 

the HOD of LPT to interview the research participants. Moreover, research 

participants were not pressured to participate after obtaining approval to 

interview them; each respondent was approached individually to request 

their consent to participate in the research process. Purposive and 

haphazard sampling was used to identify interviewees (Bryman, 2012). 

 

3.3.2. Research target population and selection of respondents 

3.3.2.1. Research target population 

LPT is a case study for this research from the foundation for the 

population in this study. The population represents all the individuals in 

transversal branches as the complete division of interest for the study. LPT 

has the constitutional mandate through the Public Finance Management 

Act (PFMA) No. 1 of 1999 as amended to support both the Departments 

and Public Entities governance, risk and controls and the custodian of the 

shared provincial internal audit service and shared audit committee. 

(Hanlon & Larget, 2011). 

 
 

3.3.2.2. Sampling or selecting respondents from the target 

population 

Hanlon and Larget (2011, p. 7) define a sample as a "subset of the 

individuals in a population". A sample should be selected carefully for the 

study to ensure that the sample represents the overall population of the 

data collected to accomplish the study's objectives. Sampling aims to collect 

precise actions and cases, which expand understanding of the collective life. 

According to Neuman (2006, p. 61), "qualitative researchers focus less on a 

sample's representativeness than on how the sample or small collection of 

cases, units, or activities illuminates social life". This study used non-



 

 

 

65 

probability sampling wherein representativeness is unnecessary but focuses 

mainly on the sample that is much relevant for this research. 

 

The quantitative researcher's approach does not always examine the 

population; instead, uses non-random samples that do not focus on the 

research population. As a result, purposive sampling was used for this 

study, which is found to be more relevant for case studies. According to 

Bryman (2012, p. 94), purposive sampling can be defined as a "non-

probability sampling". Purposive sampling enables a researcher to sample 

participants appropriate to the research question and is mainly suitable for 

the research participants who are knowledgeable about the research area 

Neuman (, 2006). 

 

3.3.3. Ethical considerations when collecting research data 

The data collection procedure includes an audiotape recorder for the 

respondents that have concurred with its usage to collect adequate data. 

Respondents have been afforded a chance to consent for the use of an 

audiotape recorder. In circumstances where the respondents do not 

consent to using an audio tape recorder. Permission have been requested 

from the HOD of LPT to interview the research participants. Moreover, 

research participants were not pressured to participate after obtaining 

approval to interview them; each respondent was approached individually 

to request their consent to participate in the research process. The 

researcher has not interfered with the respondents' views and permit a 

sensible extent of independence to the respondents to express their views 

on the subject matter.  

 



 

 

 

66 

3.3.4. Research data and information collection process 

Individual interviews have been conducted to collect the required data in 

addressing the two main objectives of this study. The first research 

objectives seek to determine challenges associated with implementing the 

combined assurance model by LPT within the Departments and Public 

Entities. Lastly, this study aims to establish if the LPT transversal structure 

is appropriate to enable all the assurance providers to carry out their 

combined assurance mandate smoothly and adequately within the 

Departments and Public Entities. The two research objectives will be 

accomplished using unstructured interviews to collect the req