Interoperability of financial management systems in local governments and opportunities for digital transformation

Abstract

Two digital transformation agendas have been implemented in parallel in Brazil, one for disseminating interoperable financial management systems and the other focused on services for citizens, called “digital government.” Although these agendas are interconnected, their joint impact is rarely discussed. This article addresses the adoption agenda for financial management systems in local governments and the potential implications for the digital government agenda. We analyzed the automation, interoperability, and integration of commercial software contracted by 150 municipalities based on the perception of accountants who use these systems. The results indicate a greater development of the core accounting module and less integration and interoperability with non-core modules of the government’s system. Based on a matrix of integration of financial management systems modules and interoperability with digital government systems, we analyzed different scenarios for the digital transformation of local governments.

Keywords:
interoperability; digital transformation; digital government; municipalities; e-government

Resumo

Duas agendas de transformação digital têm sido conduzidas paralelamente no Brasil: uma para disseminação de sistemas de gestão financeira interoperáveis; e outra focada em serviços para cidadãos, chamada de “governo digital”. Apesar dessas agendas serem interconectadas, raramente o reflexo conjunto é discutido. Este artigo trata da agenda de adoção de sistemas de gestão financeira em prefeituras e as potenciais implicações para a agenda de governo digital. Analisamos a automação, interoperabilidade e integração de softwares comerciais contratados por 150 municípios a partir da percepção dos contadores usuários desses sistemas. Os resultados apontam um maior desenvolvimento do módulo central de contabilidade e menor integração e interoperabilidade com módulos acessórios do próprio sistema dos governos. A partir de uma matriz de integração dos módulos de sistemas de gestão financeira e interoperabilidade com sistemas de governo digital, analisamos diferentes cenários para a transformação digital de governos locais.

Palavras-chave:
interoperabilidade; transformação digital; governo digital; municípios; governo eletrônico

Resumen

En Brasil se llevan a cabo en paralelo dos agendas de transformación digital, una para la difusión de sistemas de gestión financiera interoperables y otra centrada en los servicios al ciudadano, denominada ‘gobierno digital’. Aunque estas agendas están interconectadas, rara vez se discute su impacto conjunto. Este artículo aborda la agenda de adopción de sistemas de gestión financiera en los ayuntamientos y las potenciales implicaciones para la agenda de gobierno digital. Analizamos la automatización, interoperabilidad e integración de softwares comerciales contratados por 150 municipios a partir de la percepción de los contadores que utilizan estos sistemas. Los resultados indican un mayor desarrollo del módulo central de contabilidad y una menor integración e interoperabilidad con módulos accesorios del propio sistema del gobierno. A partir de una matriz de integración de módulos de los sistemas de gestión financiera e interoperabilidad con los sistemas de gobierno digital, analizamos diferentes escenarios para la transformación digital de los gobiernos locales.

Palabras clave:
Interoperabilidad; transformación digital; gobierno digital; municipios; gobierno electrónico

1. INTRODUCTION

The adoption of information and communication technologies (ICTs) by public agencies has expanded and been actively encouraged, both for digitizing and automating internal processes and for delivering services and communicating with society (Dunleavy et al., 2006; Twizeyimana & Andersson, 2019; Mergel et al., 2019). Although these two agendas have typically been studied separately, this paper analyzes them in an integrated manner.

In recent decades, Brazil has seen regulatory changes and promotion of digital transformation in government through a variety of initiatives, notably the Program for the Modernization of External Control of Brazilian States and Municipalities (PROMOEX), which, in the 2000s, popularized the use of data collection systems (Aquino et al., 2022); and the e-government policy (Diniz, Barbosa, Junqueira, & Prado, 2009), which defined parameters for digital inclusion, accessibility, integration, and system interoperability. In this context, interoperability refers to the ability of two or more systems to exchange and effectively use shared information (Gottschalk, 2009; Uña et al., 2019).

Examples of digital transformation in Brazil include the nationwide availability of Comprasnet, an online portal for public procurement that can be adopted voluntarily; the use of the System of Fiscal and Information of the Brazilian Public Sector (SICONFI) for municipal fiscal data collection; the GOV.BR electronic signature platform; the establishment of quality standards for digital public services (SGD/ME Ordinance No. 548/2022); and both the federal and national digital government strategies (Brasil, 2024a), positioning Brazil as the second-ranked country in system maturity according to a World Bank assessment of 198 countries (Dener et al., 2021).

Digital transformation in subnational governments is expected to accelerate in the coming years, driven by the Brazilian Digital Transformation Strategy (e-Digital) and the National Digital Government Strategy launched in 2023 (Ministério da Ciência, Tecnologia e Inovação [MCTI], 2023). These strategies will be reinforced by increasing engagement with technology consultancies and trade fairs, the growing accessibility of technologies such as the Internet of Things, cloud computing, and Software as a Service (SaaS), and financing from institutions like the Inter-American Development Bank, the World Bank, and the Brazilian Studies and Projects Financing Agency (FINEP). Additionally, the Legal Framework for Startups (Complementary Law 182/2021) offers opportunities for technological modernization.

The adoption of digital technologies by governments has been examined in different literature streams, including e-government (Kawabata & Camargo, 2023), e-governance (Dawes, 2008; Meijer, 2015), digital governance (Dunleavy et al., 2006; Luna-Reyes, 2017; Grossi & Argento, 2022), and, more recently, digital transformation (Mergel et al., 2019; Volodina & Grossi, 2024). These studies typically address the benefits, risks, and barriers associated with technology adoption, especially in the government-to-citizen (G2C) context. Less attention, however, has been given to the government-to-government (G2G) perspective (Ndou, 2004), which focuses on the digitalization of internal government processes (Twizeyimana & Andersson, 2019); the integration and interoperability of systems, databases, and processes (Pardo & Tayi, 2007); and data security (Frandell & Feeney, 2022). Moreover, existing literature tends to focus on central government or isolated case studies (Cuadrado-Ballesteros et al., 2021), with limited discussion of national digital government strategies or the processes and mechanisms of digital transformation focusing on the subnational level (Mariani & Bianchi, 2023). Although some academic studies explore systems’ interoperability and integration in the areas of accounting and public management—such as Azevedo et al. (2020a; 2020b), Carlsson‐Wall et al. (2022), Cohen et al. (2007), and Irani et al. (2023)—overall, publications on this topic remain normative and are primarily driven by multilateral organizations such as the World Bank, receiving limited attention from empirical research exploring practical implications.

Here we discuss digital transformation as driven by the dissemination of structuring management systems, especially government financial management systems (the so-called Integrated Financial Management Information Systems— IFMIS). These systems are considered central to budget execution and supplier contracting for public services and programs (Dener et al., 2011; Peterson, 2007; Cohen et al., 2007; Dorotinsky & Watkins, 2013; Uña & Pimenta, 2016; Uña et al., 2019; Gourfinkel, 2021; World Bank, 2024). Both the literature on digital transformation and the current National Digital Transformation Strategy in Brazil (MCTI, 2023) have paid little attention to these systems. The consultative nature of guidance to subnational entities also fails to address the challenge of legacy system interoperability with various electronic service applications—often identified as one of the most critical issues in systems management (Bharosa, 2022). Cuadrado-Ballesteros et al. (2021) have already called for the need to analyze these literatures in a more integrated way, as they are usually developed in isolation.

Currently, there are two distinct and parallel digital transformation agendas in Brazilian governments, which have been implemented in a fragmented manner. On the one hand, there is an agenda focused on improving government financial management systems, which emphasizes fiscal control and accountability, supported and coordinated by the National Treasury Secretariat and the courts of accounts. On the other hand, there is a broader digital government agenda, coordinated by the Ministry of Management and Innovation in Public Services, which prioritizes user experience, simplification, and the reduction of administrative burden.

International organizations such as the World Bank and the International Monetary Fund typically emphasize anti-corruption and fiscal control (Uña & Pimenta, 2016; Hashim & Piatti-Fünfkirchen, 2018), advocating for high-performance management systems. These systems rely on the integration of non-core modules with the core accounting module, as well as the automation of processes such as data flow, calculation routines, data retrieval, and data accumulation. Ideally, data should flow through the various phases of the financial cycle (e.g., budget execution, procurement, and supplier payment) with minimal human intervention and limited opportunities for data manipulation or error. These flows should also be integrated with procurement, payroll, and budget planning processes for the following fiscal year (Diamond & Khemani, 2006; Uña & Pimenta, 2016; Hashim & Piatti-Fünfkirchen, 2018).

However, financial management systems often evolve through the addition of functionalities to legacy systems, or through ad hoc system replacements prompted by regulatory changes, without strategic reflection (Irani et al., 2023). This leads to fragmented systems across departments, with little perception of the value of data sharing (Uña et al., 2019). In Brazil, the implementation of IFMIS in municipalities has been driven by increasing external demands for accounting, budgetary, and financial accountability from ministries, courts of accounts, and the National Treasury (Azevedo et al., 2020a, 2020b; Aquino et al., 2022; Lino et al., 2022). As a result, the IFMIS standardization agenda, driven mainly by fiscal concerns, risks being disconnected from the broader digital government agenda.

This research aims to analyze digital transformation through the dissemination of the national IFMIS standard and its potential implications for the broader digital government agenda. We present the current stage of this agenda by examining the characteristics of IFMIS in 150 municipalities that use outsourced solutions from private suppliers, which is the predominant model in the country (Azevedo et al., 2020b). We analyze the automation of accounting practices enabled by IFMIS, as well as the integration and interoperability of its various system modules.

The relevance of this research lies in its joint analysis of two digital transformation strategies currently underway in Brazil: one focused on internal government systems (i.e., IFMIS) and the other on e-government. Although complementary, these strategies have so far operated in isolation, as noted by Cuadrado-Ballesteros et al. (2021), Margariti et al. (2022), and Aquino et al. (2022). This discussion is particularly significant in a federation like Brazil, where effective coordination between these agendas is essential for the success of digital reforms.

Our findings highlight the importance of analyzing these agendas together. They have implications for managers across different levels of government and for organizations leading digital transformation efforts, which have often progressed in an uncoordinated and fragmented way. The results indicate that IFMIS development has been driven by municipalities’ external accountability compliance, leading to a strong focus on the core accounting module and limited integration with non-core modules. Based on these findings, we propose a matrix to assess the potential consequences of this accountability-driven trajectory in the dissemination of the IFMIS standard. The successful incorporation of digital government initiatives into financial management systems depends on establishing reliable data flows between core and non-core modules and ensuring interoperability with the various applications designed to deliver digital public services.

Thus, this research contributes to broader reflections on Brazil’s national digital government strategy, as the transformation within core government systems is path-dependent (Vergne & Duran, 2010) on external accountability. We conclude by offering suggestions for future research and policy interventions, particularly for leaders of national digital transformation strategies. These include implementing coordinated digitalization strategies across departments to avoid forming “digital silos,” in which non-interoperable systems undermine the benefits of the two parallel agendas currently in place.

2. DIGITAL TRANSFORMATION IN GOVERNMENTS AND INTEGRATED FINANCIAL MANAGEMENT SYSTEMS

The digital transformation of governments involves not only cultural and organizational changes, but also relational changes among different stakeholders brought about by the use of information and communication technology (Mergel et al., 2019). Therefore, unlike the mere digitization of processes (i.e., converting analog documents into digital formats), digital transformation occurs in a holistic and deeper way, affecting internal processes and services in a continuous and interconnected manner (Heaton & Parlikad, 2019). As such, digital transformation is a broader concept than e-government (González-Zapata & Piccinin-Barbieri, 2021), which typically focuses on government-to-citizen or government-to-government interactions (Ndou, 2004), often neglecting the interoperability of platforms and systems necessary for transmitting large volumes of data, leading to the so-called smart state (Lam, 2005; Heaton & Parlikad, 2019).

Digital transformation is expected to enhance accountability (Kawabata & Camargo, 2023) by facilitating the dissemination of reliable information (Cuadrado-Ballesteros et al., 2021), promote opportunities for public participation (Agostino et al., 2022), improve service delivery and co-production with citizens (Lember et al., 2019), and increase trust in government (Twizeyimana & Andersson, 2019). Barriers to the adoption of new technologies include organizational culture, low digital literacy, and user vulnerability (Ávila et al., 2023; Raihan et al., 2024).

System interoperability is widely regarded as a critical success factor for digital transformation (Margariti et al., 2022; Bharosa, 2022). Interoperability refers to the ability of different systems to securely exchange information (Brasil, 2024b; IEEE Computer Society, 1990), based on standardized information flows between them (Hellberg & Grönlund, 2013). Digital government initiatives require interoperable databases and routines that function across multiple interfaces and applications, following a logic distinct from that of systems designed as rigid, standalone architectures.

The adoption of digital government implies changes in various processes and integration with government-owned databases, sometimes associated with those maintained by private providers such as mobile apps or online dashboards (Pardo & Tayi, 2007). Legacy systems with low interoperability pose significant challenges (Irani et al., 2023; Lam, 2005), as they create hidden data dependencies and isolated routines, forming so-called system “silos” (Bharosa, 2022). Depending on the degree of non-interoperability, replacing legacy systems can result in high costs and potential disruption or instability in public services during the transition (Uña et al., 2019).

The Integrated Financial Management Information Systems (IFMIS) are foundational systems designed to consolidate financial and accounting functions into a single government platform (Rodin-Brown, 2008). These systems are typically structured into core and non-core modules (Hashim & Piatti-Fünfkirchen, 2018). The core accounting module—the general ledger—maintains accounting records of all transactions, while non-core modules may include procurement, contracts, and payroll (Diamond & Khemani, 2006; Rodin-Brown, 2008). The integration and interoperability of IFMIS facilitate data flow, thereby enabling citizen-oriented digital services such as public spending portals, service scheduling, and online payments for fees and taxes.

The prescriptive literature highlights two key characteristics of IFMIS relevant to this analysis: (i) the breadth and scope of the system, and (ii) the integration of system modules. Breadth and scope refer to the range of government processes and functions covered by IFMIS, such as accounting, budgeting, revenue and expenditure management, debt management, human resources and payroll, financial reporting, and auditing (Rodin-Brown, 2008). Breadth requires the integration and interoperability of various IFMIS modules. Interoperability ensures that systems operate independently yet complementarily (loose coupling), avoiding redundancy in data and routines. Integration creates a unified system in which components function in a coordinated, centralized manner (tight coupling), forming a “functioning or unified whole” (Scholl & Klischewski, 2007, p. 895). For example, module integration in a financial management system ensures that budget allocations are verified before expenditures are made and payments executed (Hashim, 2014). Greater integration facilitates real-time data sharing, enabling different government administrative units to make decisions based on synchronized financial information (Peterson, 2007; Uña et al., 2019) and also supports real-time accounting oversight, reducing opportunities for fraud and corruption (Aquino et al., 2016; Carlsson-Wall et al., 2022).

The functionalities of IFMIS also vary depending on the information demands of users across departments, society, or external oversight agencies. To serve control agencies, some automated systems generate and transmit reports in the required formats, while others still rely on manual accounting processes (Azevedo et al., 2020b). By integrating multiple databases (breadth), IFMIS play a vital role in organizing financial and non-financial data, which becomes the foundation for additional digital services and applications. For example, to support digital transformation initiatives such as citizen access to information on public pharmacy inventories, IFMIS must first capture and structure inventory data (e.g., drug availability by unit) accurately and in real time. This enables applications to present relevant and timely information, increasing transparency and accessibility.

Low integration or interoperability of systems is a growing concern in many countries (Del Paso et al., 2023), where governments continue to operate multiple non-integrated modules that increase the risk of data inconsistencies and information security breaches (Gourfinkel, 2021; Fritz et al., 2017; Jeong & Kim, 2023). Contributing to this situation are the lack of long-term planning, limited specialized personnel for digital transformation, unrealistic implementation timelines, and uncertainty regarding system ownership (Guarda et al., 2015; Cohen et al., 2007). In this context, despite the regulatory framework for IFMIS standardization in Brazil since 2009 and its frequent treatment in prescriptive literature, little attention has been given to the role of these systems as platforms for broader digital transformation. We argue that IFMIS serve as a foundation for comprehensive digital transformation—including services to citizens—by providing the critical infrastructure required for more complex and data-intensive government functions.

3. DIGITAL TRANSFORMATION AGENDAS IN GOVERNMENTS IN BRAZIL

We explore two parallel digital transformation agendas under the jurisdiction of subnational governments in Brazil. One agenda focuses on disseminating standards for government financial management systems, emphasizing fiscal control and accountability, and is supported and coordinated by the National Treasury and the courts of accounts. This agenda centers on standardizing IFMIS according to the national model recommended by the National Treasury (Decrees 7185/2009, 10540/2020, and 11644/2023; and Complementary Laws 131/2009 and 156/2016) (Brasil, 2009a; 2009b; 2016; 2020; 2023). States and municipalities are required to adopt this standard between 2023 and 2025. The second digital transformation agenda pertains to the expansion of digital services, or “digital government,” and is currently coordinated by the Ministry of Management and Innovation in Public Services. This agenda is regulated by the Digital Government Law (Brasil, 2021) and various strategies that emphasize user experience, simplification, and the reduction of bureaucracy. Both agendas—the adoption of the national IFMIS standard and the promotion of digital government—address the interoperability and integration of management and data systems. However, they have distinct objectives, are promoted by different communities, and follow parallel, uncoordinated dynamics.

The digital government agenda, especially at the federal level and in some states, has advanced rapidly since the creation of the Electronic Government Executive Committee in the 2000s (Ávila et al., 2023). However, the situation is different at the municipal level. For example, in 2024, only 16% of Brazilian municipalities were part of the National Digital Government Network (Ministério da Gestão e Inovação em Serviços Públicos [MGI], 2024), which is a voluntary collaborative space for disseminating digital transformation initiatives among municipalities. According to the Digital Government Map (Brasil, 2022), digital transformation is concentrated in municipalities with more than 200,000 inhabitants. However, it often occurs without coordination between departments and under precarious conditions for data integration.

Meanwhile, the digitalization of financial management through the adoption of accounting software expanded in the late 1990s (Aquino et al., 2017) and, by 2015, more than 85% of municipalities operated asset management systems (Instituto Brasileiro de Geografia e Estatística [IBGE], 2015). This agenda was driven by the Fiscal Responsibility Law and the modernization of the courts of accounts, which began implementing data collection systems to receive budgetary and accounting information from municipalities (Aquino et al., 2022). To comply with the data submission requirements of the respective court of accounts, each municipality invested in making its accounting systems interoperable with these data collection platforms, adapting to present financial statements more frequently (e.g., monthly in São Paulo) and with greater detail (e.g., including contract numbers in budget execution transactions) (Aquino et al., 2022).

Concurrently, the National Treasury sought to standardize minimum parameters for these systems. Between 2009 and 2010, regulations required all entities of the federation to adopt an IFMIS (Complementary Law 131/2009), introducing the first “minimum quality requirements” for these systems (Federal Decree 7185/2010). A decade later, Decree 10540/2020 introduced new requirements related to information security (e.g., preventing direct access to databases or deletion of records), accounting consistency (e.g., timeliness of records), transparency, and mechanisms for organizing and reporting information, with a central focus on accountability—influenced by the Freedom of Information Law (Ávila et al., 2023). This decree includes a detailed annex listing 58 items to be met as “minimum quality requirements.”

Over the past 15 years, the complexity and scope of reporting and information requirements from ministries, courts of accounts, and National Treasury have increased, making it essential to integrate the core accounting module of IFMIS (Azevedo et al., 2020b). This has prompted governments to invest in regular updates to financial management software and the development of new modules (Azevedo et al., 2020b; Aquino & Batley, 2022; Lino et al., 2022; Aquino et al., 2022). Due to a lack of internal technical teams, municipalities have increasingly outsourced commercial systems through public procurements, rather than maintaining in-house systems (Azevedo et al., 2020b). Reporting to the various data collection systems of ministries and courts of accounts has become increasingly automated, often using XML and XBRL languages, in line with federal interoperability standards (ePING). Some financial statements, if not submitted according to the current regulations, trigger penalties such as rejection of accounts by the court of accounts, ineligibility for voluntary transfers, and fines for non-compliance. Specifically, in the case of the health sector, failure to submit data to the Public Health Budget Information System (SIOPS) results in a “presumption of non-compliance with the application of constitutional percentages” (Brasil, 2012).

4. METHODOLOGY

We analyzed the IFMIS digital transformation agenda and its potential implications for the broader digital government agenda, using a sample of IFMIS contracted by 150 municipalities. Data were collected between April and June 2024 through an electronic questionnaire answered by accountants employed by local governments. The questionnaire included Likert-scale questions (ranging from 0 to 10) on the following dimensions: (i) the ownership model of the IFMIS, (ii) requirements for system integration and use, (iii) compliance with minimum standards, and (iv) automation related to accounting practices. The items included in the questionnaire were drawn from attributes identified in the IFMIS good practice literature and from the International Public Sector Accounting Standards (IPSAS) Accounting Maturity Questionnaire developed by the European Commission—specifically Section D, “Government IT Systems,” which gathers information on the information technology systems governments operate to support their financial functions (Eurostat, 2020). These items served as the basis for designing the questionnaire used in this study.

Respondents were contacted via email addresses registered in the Public Health Budget Information System (SIOPS), through which municipalities send information to the Ministry of Health, as well as through requests filed under the Freedom of Information Act and a public call published on the website of the Federal Accounting Council (CFC). Before launching the survey, a pre-test was conducted with academics, accountants, consultants, a former Secretary of Finance, and audit professionals to refine the scales and clarify the questions. Ethical approval was obtained prior to data collection.

A total of 424 responses were received. For this study, we analyzed the 150 complete responses from municipalities that contract commercial IFMIS, which is the predominant model among municipalities of varying sizes in the federation (Azevedo et al., 2020b). Incomplete responses were excluded. The respondents were experienced professionals in the public sector, averaging 18.7 years of experience. Most were tenured employees who had passed public service exams (67%) and held degrees in accounting (86%). The survey data were supplemented with secondary data on each municipality, including population size, territorial characteristics, and administrative features. The sample includes municipalities of various population sizes, with a majority classified as medium-sized (average population: 73,000) (Table 1).

The analysis was conducted in three stages. First, we examined the trajectory and focus of the IFMIS digital transformation agenda by identifying the predominant system characteristics across the sample and their frequency. We began by assessing the level of automation in report generation and accounting entries within the accounting module. Next, we compared the means between municipalities with populations below and above 50,000 residents, as population size is a common variable in digital transformation analyses (Ávila et al., 2023). For instance, legislation like the Transparency Law (LC 131/2009) sets extended compliance deadlines for municipalities with fewer than 50,000 inhabitants.

TABLE 1
SAMPLE DESCRIPTION (MUNICIPALITIES RELYING ON OUTSOURCED SYSTEMS)

	N	Mean	Standard Deviation	Min	Max	Source
Municipality
Population (in thousands)	150	73.24	166.3	1.6	1,404.7	(1)
Local government
% of computerized systems (*)	150	61	14.5	20.8	95.8	(2)
Changed IFMIS over the past 5 years	150	0.25	0.43	0	1	(3)
Respondents
Education in accounting (0/1)	150	0.87	0.31	0	1	(3)
Tenured employee (0/1)	150	0.63	0.54	0	1	(3)

• Sources: (1) Brazilian Institute of Geography and Statistics (IBGE) (2021); (2) IBGE (2019); (3) Research data. (*) Computerized systems: This variable was elaborated with data from IBGE Munic (IBGE’s survey gathering basic information at the municipal level). It indicates the percentage of systems from a total of 23 systems.

Next, we analyzed how four possible types of information flow between the core accounting module and eight non-core modules—namely, on paper, digital files, manually executed digital flow, and real-time digital flow—are associated with key government functions: budget execution, procurement, contracts, asset management, warehouse management, taxes, tax expenditures, and human resources. We then conclude the analysis of the IFMIS digital transformation trajectory by examining the security of accounting data, using Federal Decree 10540/2020 as a reference. This decree establishes security requirements, such as restrictions on certain actions, appropriate treatment of accounting records, and compliance with closing deadlines. A test of the difference in means between municipalities of similar population size follows this analysis.

Finally, we illustrate the effect of interoperability through three digital services that rely on data flow from IFMIS: the issuance of (i) electronic invoices, (ii) tax clearance certificates, and (iii) tax payment slips. The presence of these services in the sample municipalities was identified using data from the IBGE (2019). Based on this analysis, we propose a matrix for IFMIS integration and interoperability and its potential effects on digital government services.

5. AUTOMATION, INTEROPERABILITY, AND INTEGRATION OF IFMIS

Table 2 presents the frequency of automation in the accounting module, grouped into two categories of activities: (i) the generation of internal and external reports and (ii) the automation of accounting entries. Both activities reflect, to varying degrees, the implementation of accounting policies. The frequencies observed in the sample suggest that interoperability is valued, particularly in the connection between the accounting module and the data collection systems of the courts of accounts and the National Treasury.

However, we did not observe a virtuous cycle between interoperability and automation (i.e., the more interoperable the systems, the easier it becomes to automate processes; and the more automated the processes, the greater the potential for interoperability). Instead, municipalities automated their accounting module primarily for reporting purposes, without advancing the automation of non-core modules or other accounting routines. This suggests an overemphasis on the accounting module as a reporting tool, with greater importance placed on interoperability between IFMIS and external data collection systems, such as those used by external control agencies, ministries, and fiscal authorities, than on interoperability within the IFMIS.

TABLE 2
AUTOMATION OF ACTIVITIES IN THE ACCOUNTING MODULE

Automation of activities	Overall mean	Standard deviation	Coefficient of variation	Means of large and small municipalities		Difference in means (p-value)
				< 50,000	> 50,000
Automated report generation
Budgetary reports in compliance with Law 4320/64	8.85	2.04	0.231	8.84	8.86	0.9585
Fiscal reports	8.66	2.22	0.257	8.82	8.28	0.1747
Transparency Portal	8.28	2.38	0.288	8.5	7.7	0.0776*
Managerial reports	7.81	2.67	0.343	7.99	7.4	0.2171
Fixed assets accounting	7.85	2.51	0.320	8.15	7.15	0.0256**
Fixed assets depreciation	7.64	2.7	0.353	7.84	7.17	0.165
Accrual-based revenue recognition	7.4	3.11	0.421	7.73	6.62	0.0451**
Revaluation of fixed assets	7.04	2.99	0.426	7.3	6.42	0.0987*
Intangible assets accounting	6.26	3.41	0.546	6.63	5.37	0.0381**
Intangible assets amortization	6.17	3.41	0.553	6.54	5.31	0.0426**
Provisions	6.1	3.46	0.567	6.53	5.08	0.0187**
Recognition of employee benefits	5.46	3.62	0.664	5.67	4.97	0.2815
Impairment	4.48	3.71	0.829	4.65	4.08	0.393

• Notes: (1) Number of observations = 150; (2) Accounting practices are ordered by the general mean; (3) Difference in means: comparing the groups “below 50,000 inhabitants” versus “above 50,000 inhabitants”. Test used: Mann-Whitney nonparametric test; (4) Coefficient of variation calculated according to Graf-Vlachy (2018). (5) The numbers in bold indicate the highest mean observed in the comparison of municipality sizes, in cases where significance was found. Significance: (*) 10%; (**) 5%; (***) 1%.
• Source: Elaborated by the authors.

Automation for generating reports involves retrieving existing data and records from databases and organizing them into files in various digital formats (e.g., PDF, CSV, XML, XBRL). This automation may be influenced by the degree of customization required to prepare the specific report. For instance, respondents reported greater automation in generating reports mandated by federal Laws (as 4320/64 and the Fiscal Responsibility Law), which are intended for submission to the courts of accounts and the National Treasury. These reports have predefined layouts and can be efficiently handled by commercial outsourced solutions, offering standardized automation applicable to all users of the same software. In contrast, transparency reports require customization to integrate with each municipality’s transparency portal. As such, they are more likely to be automated in smaller municipalities, which often outsource the development of their transparency portals to service providers. Management reports, which can be customized internally to meet the specific demands of local administrators, exhibit the lowest levels of automation.

Another type of automated activity in the core accounting module concerns accounting records. Unlike report automation, record automation occurs during the collection and entry of transactional data and event data into databases, the calculation of transaction values, and the accumulation of records in accounting accounts. This type of automation reflects the most complex aspects of implementing accounting policies and can be directly influenced by digital transformation initiatives, which generate new transactions, activities, and database interactions.

The highest levels of automation are found in simpler processes, such as the control and registration of fixed assets. In contrast, automation levels are lower for “new” accounting policies that became mandatory from 2016 onward, which require more professional judgment and estimation, such as employee benefits recognition (mean score 5.4) and impairment testing (mean score 4.5). Interestingly, accountants from smaller municipalities report higher automation levels in some of these processes.

In this context, automation within the core accounting module of IFMIS has primarily focused on generating reports required by external oversight agencies, rather than supporting more complex internal activities (e.g., management reporting or nuanced accounting policies). This highlights a significant interoperability gap regarding more dynamic and customized internal information flows.

Over the past 15 years, external accountability has become the primary driver of the accounting module’s functions, overemphasizing automation for reporting purposes while neglecting the automation of data collection, recording, calculation, and accumulation of accounting accounts. During this period, oversight agencies, such as the courts of accounts and the National Treasury, have significantly expanded the scope, detail, and frequency of quarterly and annual accountability reports (Aquino & Batley, 2022; Lino et al., 2022; Aquino et al., 2022).

This hypertrophy of external accountability reporting, coupled with limited automation in other parts of the accounting module, reduces municipalities’ ability to use financial and accounting information to improve public service delivery and policy management. While some less-automated activities (such as impairment testing) are purely accounting and not directly tied to service provision, others are crucial for broader digital transformation. For example, automating inventory/warehouse management affects the availability of essential supplies such as medicines and supports procurement processes responsive to demand fluctuations.

Moreover, within the accountability ecosystem, certain control agencies exert a greater influence over data collection, which in turn drives automation priorities in favor of their requests (Lino et al., 2023). Table 3 presents accountants’ perceptions of the level of automation in IFMIS for different stakeholders, including the courts of accounts (via their Data Collection Systems) and the National Treasury (via the Accounts Balance Matrix), compared to other actors.

TABLE 3
INTEROPERABILITY AND AUTOMATION IN THE GENERATION OF VARIOUS REPORTS PREPARED BY ACCOUNTANTS AT THE MUNICIPAL LEVEL

Main stakeholder	DCS (CoAs)	Accounts Balance Matrix (Treasury)	RREO (Treasury)	RGF (Treasury)	EFD-Reinf (Tax Authority)	SIOPE (M. Education)	SIOPS (M. Health)
Courts of accounts	8.5	8.5 / 8.4	8.5 / 7.8 (***)	8.5 / 7.9 (***)	8.5 / 7.7 (***)	8.5 / 5.9 (***)	8.5 / 6.1 (***)
National Treasury	8.4 / 8.5	8.4	8.4 / 7.8 (***)	8.4 / 7.9 (***)	8.4 / 7.7 (***)	8.4 / 5.9 (***)	8.4 / 6.1 (***)

• Notes: (1) The values ​​presented are the average agreement rates (0 to 10) regarding the automated generation of reports for the systems/stakeholders; (2) Difference in means: comparing the automation for reporting to the Sistema de Coleta de Dados (DCS) (Data Collection Systems) of the courts of accounts (COAs) and the Accounts Balance Matrix of the National Treasury versus the automation for reporting to other data collection systems of the Ministry of Education, Sistema de Informações sobre Orçamentos Públicos em Educação (SIOPE) (Public Education Budget Information System), Ministry of Health, Sistema de Informações sobre Orçamentos Públicos em Saúde (SIOPS) (Public Health Budget Information System), Relatório Resumido da Execução Orçamentária (RREO) (Summary Budget Execution Report), and Relatório de Gestão fiscal (RGF) (Fiscal Management Report), and reports for the Escrituração Fiscal Digital de Retenções e Outras Informações Fiscais (EFD-Reinf) (Digital Tax Recording of Withholdings and Other Tax Information) of the Brazilian Federal Tax Authority. Test used: Nonparametric Wilcoxon test for paired samples. (3) *** indicates a 1% significance of mean tests.
• Source: Elaborated by the authors.

Among the seven reports analyzed, interoperability and automation are more advanced for reporting via the Accounts Balance Matrix (Treasury) and the data collection systems of the courts of accounts (COAs) than for reporting to the ministries of education and health. Consequently, the most significant developments are concentrated in the accounting module, particularly in matters related to budgetary and accounting execution.

When analyzing other IFMIS modules, we observe considerable variation in integration. According to the definition provided in Decree 10540/2020 (Brasil, 2020), integration only occurs when data sharing happens without human intervention. Integration enhances the reliability of government budgetary, financial, and accounting information. Human intervention in the flow of information between modules undermines integration, leads to rework, and increases the risk of errors, fraud, and corruption (Carlsson-Wall et al., 2022). Therefore, due to pressure from tax authorities and oversight agencies—and because IFMIS typically rely on automated accounting modules for accountability reporting—greater emphasis has been placed on the interoperability of the core accounting module, with less investment directed toward the integration and interoperability of non-core modules.

Table 4 presents the various non-core modules of IFMIS, ordered by the frequency of information flow types between each of these modules and the core accounting module. When integration is present, data flow occurs without human intervention. However, other observed flows involve human input—for example, when digital information is triggered by a command from the accountant, which still qualifies as interoperability. In contrast, when data are exchanged through digital files (e.g., exporting from the non-core module and manually importing into the accounting module) or printed and manually re-entered, the systems lack interoperability.

TABLE 4
TYPES OF INFORMATION FLOWS OF NON-CORE MODULES AND THE CORE ACCOUNTING MODULE

IFMIS Modules	Information flow on paper	Information flow via digital files	Information flow initiated by the accountant	Integrated (flow of digital information in real time, without human interference)
Budgetary execution	2.0	9.3	28.7	60.0
Public procurement	8.7	10.7	39.3	41.3
Contracts	20.0	11.3	35.3	33.3
Asset management	17.3	14.0	43.3	25.3
Inventories	26	16.0	34.7	23.3
Tax management	12.7	18.0	46.7	22.7
Tax expenditure	30.7	15.3	34.0	20.0
Human resources	17.3	32.0	38.0	12.7

• Notes: (1) Number of responses = 150. (2) Emphasis added on the main type of each IFMIS module.
• Source: Elaborated by the authors.

Information flows based on paper records indicate low interoperability between non-core modules and the core accounting module. In contrast, fully automated flows without human intervention represent fully integrated cases. Situations where warehouse data (42%) is still shared via paper or digital files (e.g., PDFs or spreadsheets) are unlikely to support successful digital government initiatives.

While the adoption of several modules in a segregated manner is acceptable during the initial stages of transitioning from analog to digital processes (Lino et al., 2022; Del Paso et al., 2023), such arrangements are more prone to limited data sharing and operational failures, as noted by Jeong and Kim (2023) in the case of South Korea. In Brazil, however, the digital transformation agenda for financial management has prolonged this transitional phase, focusing municipal efforts primarily on fiscal and budgetary accountability.

6. INTEROPERABILITY AND DATA SECURITY FOCUSED ON ACCOUNTING

In the case of IFMIS, data security involves both consistency in information recording and the inviolability of data. These parameters are outlined in Decree 10540/2020, which establishes minimum requirements for IFMIS and describes prohibited practices aimed at ensuring information security and the proper closure of transactions. Data security is also a key focus of the digital government agenda (Organization for Economic Co-operation and Development [OECD], 2018), although it is often discussed in terms of cybersecurity and personal data breaches.

The first part of Table 5 presents accountants’ perceptions of the security of the systems in use. To be considered secure and reliable, systems, known as “locked flows,” must record accounting information at the time of the transaction (Uña & Pimenta, 2016), rather than through batch update functionalities executed at a later stage. According to survey respondents, systems that rely on batch updates (which record accounting information only after accounting events are registered) do not guarantee information security. The same applies to systems that permit deletion or modification of past records or allow direct changes to the record database. Perceptions of weaker information security are even more pronounced among accountants in smaller municipalities (with statistically significant p-values).

TABLE 5
COMPLIANCE OF ANALYZED IFMIS WITH DECREE 10540/2020

Occurrence for each requisite or practice	Mean	Standard deviation	Coefficient of variation	Means for large and small municipalities		Difference in means (p-value)
				< 50,000	> 50,000
Prohibited actions and information security requirements
Accounting update by batch (art. 4, § 10)	7.67	3.65	0.475	7.95	7.02	0.1535
Deletion of records (art. 4, § 1)	4.9	4.37	0.892	5.43	3.66	0.0226***
Retroactive movements (art. 4, § 6, IV)	4.66	4.28	0.919	5.35	3.04	0.0023***
Changes to the database (art. 14, § 2; art. 4, § 10)	2.59	3.67	1.417	2.81	2.06	0.2521
Registration and processing of accounting information
Simultaneous accounting of transactions (art. 4, § 10)	8.74	2.41	0.276	8.77	8.66	0.8086
Centralization in the Executive Branch (art. 1, § 1)	8.91	2.33	0.262	8.75	9.28	0.1986
Existence of a single system in the entity (art. 1, § 6)	8.49	2.79	0.329	8.5	8.46	0.9394
Exclusion of duplications in consolidation (art. 4, § 1)	6.9	3.64	0.527	7.06	6.51	0.3936
Compliance with transaction closing deadlines
By January 30 (annual closing) (art. 6, II)	6.24	4.11	0.658	5.88	7.06	0.1072
By March 30 (annual closing) (art. 6, III)	6.04	4.35	0.72	6.28	5.46	0.2925
By the 25th day (monthly closing) (art. 6, I)	6.43	4.02	0.624	6.29	6.75	0.5223

• Notes: (1) Number of responses: 150; (2) Ordered by the overall mean; (3) Difference in means: comparing the groups “under 50,000 inhabitants” versus “over 50,000”. Test used: Mann-Whitney nonparametric test; (4) Coefficient of variation calculated according to Graf-Vlachy (2018). (5) Significance: (*) 10%; (**) 5%; (***) 1%.
• Source: Elaborated by the authors.

Centralization in a single IFMIS under the Executive Branch enhances the perceived reliability of the information produced, potentially leading to greater coordination. This characteristic is valued by authorities from other government levels, particularly for consolidating public accounts, and helps ensure that reporting encompasses the municipality as a whole, without duplication, and with appropriate treatment of intra-entity transactions. However, this confidence does not extend to compliance with reporting deadlines. It is important to note that lower levels of data security may indicate poor information quality and increased opportunities for fraud.

In the IFMIS analyzed, due to the prioritization of budgetary reporting, the core accounting module gains the capacity to automate data generation for reporting purposes, even without automating certain accounting record activities or integrating non-core modules. Nevertheless, this configuration generally fails to mitigate the risks of data breaches or unauthorized record deletion.

The observed emphasis on accountability within IFMIS, particularly in the accounting modules, is especially relevant when considering the effects of path dependency highlighted in the literature (Vergne & Durand, 2010), effects that tend to reduce the likelihood of subsequent changes to systems and information flows. As a result, the current configuration—characterized by limited focus on core accounting functions, inadequate integration with public service delivery, and insufficient attention to information security—is likely to persist. This persistence is driven by the sunk costs of system implementation and the embedded nature of related organizational routines, resulting in an incomplete hybridization of digital artifact reforms, as discussed by Aquino and Batley (2022).

7. DISCUSSION OF IFMIS INTEROPERABILITY IN THE DIGITAL GOVERNMENT AGENDA

Literature on digital government has evolved relatively independently of the IFMIS agenda. However, we argue that there is a strong connection between the two, particularly regarding the importance of system integration and interoperability for the successful advancement of both agendas (Lam, 2005; Gottschalk, 2009; Margariti et al., 2022).

Building on the characteristics of IFMIS—such as automation, integration of core and non-core modules, and interoperability with external accountability systems—described in the previous section, this section analyzes three digital government services with potential interoperability with IFMIS. Since these services involve tax-related operations, the relevant information directly depends on the accounting and budgetary data organized within IFMIS. However, at this stage of development, the digital transformation trajectory of IFMIS does not necessarily align with that of broader digital government initiatives.

Digital government fiscal and tax management solutions often facilitate interoperability with the typically more developed core accounting module. Below, we discuss three such examples: the issuance of (i) electronic invoices, (ii) tax clearance certificates, and (iii) tax payment slips. Although all three involve document issuance, each service interacts with the accounting and tax modules differently.

In the case of electronic invoice issuance (involving data queries and registrations), a company uses its National Registry of Legal Entities (CNPJ - acronym in Portuguese) and service details to issue the invoice directly via the digital government service. This feeds the tax management system, registers the receivable tax on services (called ISS) in the IFMIS, and provides information for future reporting to the Federal Tax Authority when the city government is the recipient of the service. For the issuance of tax payment slips (also involving data queries and registrations), the tax system allows the user to search by CNPJ and reference period and to issue a payment slip with selected installments, which may include interest, fines, and a barcode or identification number for possible cancellation. This routine extracts data from the tax system, generates the payment slip, and feeds the IFMIS with updated interest and fine information. It also enables citizens to issue payment slips for various services—licensing, building permits, and other municipal fees—based on service requests that should automatically trigger a corresponding document. Finally, when issuing a tax clearance certificate (data query only), the e-government service queries the IFMIS to verify whether any debts are associated with the specified individual taxpayer registry (CPF - acronym in Portuguese) or with an entity’s CNPJ.

Table 6 presents the availability of these three digital government services in the 150 analyzed municipalities, regardless of whether their IFMIS is integrated with the non-core tax management module. The lack of integration is not a critical limitation for issuing tax clearance certificates and tax payment slips, as both services only require access to the tax management module. However, for the issuance of electronic invoices, 79.7% of the 69 municipalities with non-integrated modules offer some form of invoice service, likely without automatically transferring the credit to the accounting module.

TABLE 6
AVAILABLE ELECTRONIC SERVICES

Electronic services	Core module with automatic integration with tax anagement* (n = 81) (%)	Core module without automatic integration with tax management (n = 69) (%)
Issuance of electronic invoices	67.9	79.7
Issuance of tax clearance certificates	39.5	56.5
Issuance of tax payment slips	43.3	62.3

• Note: * refers to the exchange of data present on paper or available in Excel spreadsheets.
• Source: Digital government services informed by the Brazilian Institute of Geography and Statistics (IBGE, 2019).

The results indicate that the digital transformation agenda of IFMIS, which has traditionally focused on accountability, has not facilitated interoperability, even for services usually associated with the accounting module, such as those related to taxes. Even in tax-related services provided to citizens through digital government platforms, a consistent pattern of data interoperability is lacking. Transactions do not automatically update accounts receivable balances in IFMIS—they do not reflect fines and interest on late payments, nor do they support data queries across various databases.

In light of this, we propose a framework that relates the integration of core and non-core IFMIS modules to their interoperability with digital government systems (Box 1). As discussed in the previous section, IFMIS were historically developed with a focus on external accountability to control authorities, often neglecting the broader demands of digital government. The potential digital transformation pathways—represented by the framework’s quadrants—help illustrate how different levels of integration can align with interoperability efforts. This approach enables an exploration of how digital service provision for citizens is interconnected with the IFMIS architecture.

In municipalities where IFMIS operates with greater fragmentation (quadrant 1), there is both low integration of internal modules and low interoperability with e-government systems. In these cases, databases and processes are disconnected. Information flows either through paper-based systems or manual data entry, requiring human intervention. Such fragmentation undermines the reliability of government-to-government (G2G) information exchange. Where government-to-citizen (G2C) or government-to-business (G2B) services exist, they typically rely on isolated data that is not reflected in other systems, leading to duplicate efforts, unplanned resource consumption, and the absence of proper budgetary and accounting entries.

This scenario results in low transparency and a lack of unified, trustworthy information, often placing the burden of monitoring processes on the citizen. For example, issuing an electronic invoice does not generate corresponding accounts payable or receivable records in IFMIS, nor does it allow for traceability should reconciliation or audit be required. It also fails to store data from service providers for later submission to the Brazilian Federal Revenue Service, thereby increasing the risk of rework and penalties for inaccurate reporting.

BOX 1
FRAMEWORK OF SYSTEMS INTEGRATION AND INTEROPERABILITY

As the integration of IFMIS modules increases (2), the coherence and consistency of internal accounting and financial management processes also improve. However, this integration occurs in isolation, with limited interoperability with digital government systems. While the IFMIS may function cohesively internally, its data and routines are not leveraged by new digital channels such as mobile applications or online service portals for citizens and businesses. Consequently, information related to demands and the resources consumed or committed through digital services may not be fully captured in IFMIS. For example, the automatic issuance of a tax clearance certificate might still require manual queries by civil servants or result in the issuance of incomplete information, such as reports limited to fiscal debts without checking other databases, like those for environmental fines.

Alternatively, if a municipality advances in digital government initiatives without achieving integration among IFMIS modules (3), interoperability with digital systems will remain hindered by fragmentation. This is because IFMIS plays a key role in preventing financial and non-financial resources from being committed to more than one action. In Brazil, for instance, discrepancies are common between the data shared across systems, such as the National Treasury and state courts of accounts (Teixeira, 2020; Santos et al., 2024), undermining data reliability. The lack of centralized control over shared information also increases security risks and complicates data governance, heightening regulatory compliance challenges and weakening accountability and service delivery. For example, although citizens may be able to generate electronic payment slips and make payments to the public administration, such information would only reach the accounting department at the time of cash receipt. This delay hinders effective management of issued payment slips and complicates accrual accounting, which should recognize transactions when the underlying event occurs, not only when payment is received (cash basis).

Finally, high levels of module integration combined with full interoperability with digital government systems (4) enable digital transformation to reach its full potential. In this scenario, data is shared quickly and securely across platforms. Continuous data flow between service delivery systems and IFMIS allows governments to be more responsive to citizen demands, enhancing service quality. Information is both entered into and retrieved from all relevant databases, whether for financial management or service provision. Citizens no longer need to re-enter data across multiple systems for a single process. For example, when a building project is submitted for approval and licensing, the process is handled automatically across departments, and the corresponding payment slip is generated seamlessly. IFMIS instantly records both the receivable and the actual payment. When the service is finalized, the citizen is not required to present a physical proof of payment, as the system already reflects it. Additionally, the database for issuing clearance certificates is automatically updated.

While the integration of IFMIS modules and their interoperability with digital government systems are distinct attributes of the public sector’s financial information architecture, both significantly influence the success of parallel digital transformation agendas—namely, those aimed at enhancing government financial management systems and those focused on digital service delivery. These attributes affect both the reliability and cost-efficiency of generating and accessing information, as well as the transparency and quality of services provided to citizens.

8. CONCLUSIONS AND IMPLIMENTATIONS

Over the past 15 years, Brazil has witnessed two distinct government digital transformation agendas implemented at different stages of development: (i) one focused on financial management and IFMIS, and (ii) another on digital government. Given that adherence to the national digital government strategy is voluntary (MCTI, 2023), the engagement of local governments remains limited, as evidenced by the low number of municipalities that have joined the GOV.BR Network. In contrast, the digital financial management agenda, driven by significant pressure from the courts of accounts and the National Treasury for regular data submission, has led to the development of core accounting modules; however, it has not achieved broader interoperability with IFMIS non-core modules.

Regulatory agencies, through data collection systems and the enforcement of Decree 10540/2020, have promoted the development of IFMIS, primarily focusing on accounting modules. This has resulted in limited automation of accounting practices (Aquino et al., 2022; Lino et al., 2022) and underdeveloped non-core modules, leading to weak interoperability with systems that support public service delivery. During this period, the IFMIS agenda has been implemented under significant pressure on municipalities, which has, in turn, stimulated a market for consulting and financial management software specialized in automated accounting (Azevedo et al., 2020b; Lino et al., 2022).

This study provides new empirical evidence on the implications of integrating accounting systems, as proposed in the normative literature (Uña & Pimenta, 2016; Uña et al., 2019). Moreover, it contributes to the debate on IFMIS interoperability in the context of digital transformation in public services, suggesting that the fiscal digital transformation agenda has driven IFMIS functionalities more toward accountability demands than toward core accounting functions or public service digitalization requirements. These findings emphasize the need to approach digital transformation as a structural and integrated change, as proposed by Mergel et al. (2019) and Lam (2005), considering the various ongoing agendas as part of a unified process.

We offer two main contributions to the literature on digital transformation and digital government. First, simultaneous yet uncoordinated digital transformation agendas within a federal system can lead to the development of core systems with low interoperability, thereby undermining data traceability and the full implementation of digital infrastructure-based public policies. In the case under analysis, interoperability between the IFMIS core accounting module and the courts of accounts and National Treasury data collection systems has been prioritized, primarily to ensure external compliance. However, the integration of other non-core modules and the development of specialized systems for sectors such as education and health have occurred less frequently among the municipalities studied. The lack of interoperability between IFMIS non-core modules and their weak integration with the core accounting module may constitute a barrier to future interoperability with emerging digital government systems, ultimately affecting comprehensive tax management and the adoption of accrual-based accounting information.

Second, by analyzing the varying levels of integration and interoperability within IFMIS, we contribute to the literature on digital government by emphasizing the need for alignment between financial management systems and digital public service platforms. This discussion sheds light on how integration between IFMIS core and non-core modules, and their interoperability with digital government systems, can either accelerate or delay public sector digital transformation. Our approach considers not only the operational aspects of IFMIS but also the broader experience of end-users and the responsiveness of government institutions.

Although the structural implications of interoperability for the adoption of new technologies fall beyond the scope of this study, their importance is worth noting. Examples include migration to cloud computing, the use of artificial intelligence, and the adoption of blockchain in budget management and smart contracts for procurement and payments. When new technologies can be implemented within specialized modules while maintaining interoperability with the core accounting module, their adoption becomes more feasible.

For future research, it would be valuable to map the interoperability failures between accounting systems and e-government platforms, examining in greater detail why such failures persist and their consequences. The integration and interoperability framework proposed in this study could be used for this analysis. Future work might also explore how public managers, digital transformation specialists, auditors, and software developers perceive and tolerate such failures through comparative studies of municipalities with low versus high levels of interoperability. Such findings could offer best practices or cautionary insights for governments, consultants, software vendors, inter-municipal consortia, and courts of accounts.

This study also presents practical implications for national digital transformation leaders, local administrators, and frontline public servants. The Ministry of Management and Innovation in Public Services, along with the community that coordinates the subnational digital government strategy—such as the GOV.BR Network—should integrate IFMIS into the interoperability discussion. Ideally, this would involve coordinated actions with the National Treasury and the courts of accounts to promote systems that not only support fiscal reporting but also align with digital government principles. Major IFMIS suppliers could engage with the GOV.BR Network to offer software versions better adapted for interoperability with third-party mobile applications. At the local level, state governments and municipal consortia could launch GovTech and smart city challenges involving IFMIS providers. Public managers responsible for digital strategies should remain alert to potential “digital silos” across departments, where non-interoperable systems hinder the integrated benefits of multiple digital transformation efforts.

Finally, this research offers valuable insights for stakeholder initiatives, such as the Digital Government Map and the Municipal Management Effectiveness Index led by the courts of accounts. These initiatives could incorporate new dimensions that assess IFMIS interoperability with digital government systems and place greater emphasis on analyzing the specific characteristics of integration among foundational systems, an area that has received limited attention to date.

ACKNOWLEDGMENTS

We thank all the anonymous participants who generously contributed to the development of this research by completing the questionnaires. We also extend our gratitude to the reviewers of the Brazilian Journal of Public Administration (RAP) for their valuable insights and suggestions, which significantly enhanced the quality of this article. This work was supported by the National Council for Scientific and Technological Development(CNPq), under Project No. 406884-2021-8, coordinated by Ricardo Rocha de Azevedo.

References

• Agostino, D., Saliterer, I., & Steccolini, I. (2022). Digitalization, accounting and accountability: A literature review and reflections on future research in public services. Financial Accountability & Management, 38(2), 152-176. https://doi.org/10.1111/faam.12301
  » https://doi.org/10.1111/faam.12301
• Aquino, A. C. B., Azevedo, R . R., Lino, A. F., & Cardoso, R. L. (2017). O efeito dos Tribunais de Contas nos sistemas de informação de municípios XVIIInternational Conference in Accounting. https://congressousp.fipecafi.org/anais/17uspinternational/artigosdownload/528.pdf
  » https://congressousp.fipecafi.org/anais/17uspinternational/artigosdownload/528.pdf
• Aquino, A. C. B., & Batley, R. A. (2022). Pathways to hybridization: assimilation and accommodation of public financial reforms in Brazil. Accounting, Organizations and Society, 98(101297). https://doi.org/10.1016/j.aos.2021.101297
  » https://doi.org/10.1016/j.aos.2021.101297
• Aquino, A. C. B., Lino, A. F., & Azevedo, R. R. (2022). Enraizamento de infraestruturas digitais de coleta de dados pelos Tribunais de Contas. Revista Contabilidade & Finanças, 33(88), 46-62. https://doi.org/10.1590/1808-057x202111600
  » https://doi.org/10.1590/1808-057x202111600
• Ávila, T., Lanza, B., & Valotto, D. (2023). Transformação digital, tecnologia e inovação nos estados brasileiros. Os caminhos propostos para o período de 2023-2026 Rede Acadêmica de Governo Aberto. https://www.transformacaodigital.org/
  » https://www.transformacaodigital.org/
• Azevedo, R. R., Aquino, A. C. B., Neves, F. R., & Silva, C. M. (2020a). Deadlines and software: disentangling local government accounting reforms in Brazil. Public Money & Management, 40(7), 509-518. https://doi.org/10.1080/09540962.2020.1766203
  » https://doi.org/10.1080/09540962.2020.1766203
• Azevedo, R. R., Lino, A. F., Aquino, A. C. B., & Machado-Martins, T. C. P. (2020b). Financial Management Information Systems and accounting policies retention in Brazil. International Journal of Public Sector Management, 33(2/3), 207-227. https://doi.org/10.1108/IJPSM-01-2019-0027
  » https://doi.org/10.1108/IJPSM-01-2019-0027
• Bharosa, N. (2022). The rise of GovTech: Trojan horse or blessing in disguise? A research agenda. Government Information Quarterly, 39(3), 101692. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.giq.2022.101692
  » https://doi.org/10.1016/j.giq.2022.101692
• Brasil. (2009a). Decreto nº 7.185, de 27 de maio de 2010 Dispõe sobre o padrão mínimo de qualidade do sistema integrado de administração financeira e controle. Diário Oficial da União. https://www.planalto.gov.br/ccivil_03/_ato2007-2010/2010/decreto/d7185.htm
  » https://www.planalto.gov.br/ccivil_03/_ato2007-2010/2010/decreto/d7185.htm
• Brasil. (2009b). Lei Complementar nº 131, de 27 de maio de 2009 Acrescenta dispositivos à Lei Complementar nº 101/2000, para determinar a transparência da gestão fiscal. Diário Oficial da União. https://www.planalto.gov.br/ccivil_03/leis/LCP/Lcp131.htm
  » https://www.planalto.gov.br/ccivil_03/leis/LCP/Lcp131.htm
• Brasil. (2012). Decreto nº 7.827, de 16 de outubro de 2012 Diário Oficial da União https://www.planalto.gov.br/ccivil_03/_Ato2011-2014/2012/Decreto/D7827.htm
  » https://www.planalto.gov.br/ccivil_03/_Ato2011-2014/2012/Decreto/D7827.htm
• Brasil. (2016). Lei Complementar nº 156, de 28 de dezembro de 2016 https://www.planalto.gov.br/ccivil_03/leis/LCP/Lcp156.htm
  » https://www.planalto.gov.br/ccivil_03/leis/LCP/Lcp156.htm
• Brasil. (2020). Decreto nº 10.540, de 5 de novembro de 2020 Diário Oficial da União. https://www.planalto.gov.br/ccivil_03/_ato2019-2022/2020/decreto/D10540.htm
  » https://www.planalto.gov.br/ccivil_03/_ato2019-2022/2020/decreto/D10540.htm
• Brasil. (2021). Lei nº 14.129, de 29 de março de 2021 Diário Oficial da União https://www.planalto.gov.br/ccivil_03/_ato2019-2022/2021/lei/l14129.htm
  » https://www.planalto.gov.br/ccivil_03/_ato2019-2022/2021/lei/l14129.htm
• Brasil. (2022). Mapa de Governo Digital no país Ministério da Gestão e da Inovação em Serviços Públicos. https://www.gov.br/governodigital/pt-br/estrategias-e-governanca-digital/rede-nacional-de-governo-digital/mapa
  » https://www.gov.br/governodigital/pt-br/estrategias-e-governanca-digital/rede-nacional-de-governo-digital/mapa
• Brasil. (2023). Decreto nº 11.644, de 12 de julho de 2023 Diário Oficial da União. https://www.planalto.gov.br/ccivil_03/_Ato2023-2026/2023/Decreto/D11644.htm
  » https://www.planalto.gov.br/ccivil_03/_Ato2023-2026/2023/Decreto/D11644.htm
• Brasil. (2024a). Linha do tempo. Do eletrônico ao digital Ministério da Gestão e da Inovação em Serviços Públicos. https://www.gov.br/governodigital/pt-br/estrategia-de-governanca-digital/do-eletronico-ao-digital
  » https://www.gov.br/governodigital/pt-br/estrategia-de-governanca-digital/do-eletronico-ao-digital
• Brasil. (2024b). Interoperabilidade Ministério da Gestão e da Inovação em Serviços Públicos. https://www.gov.br/governodigital/pt-br/IND/interoperabilidade
  » https://www.gov.br/governodigital/pt-br/IND/interoperabilidade
• Carlsson‐Wall, M., Goretzki, L., Hofstedt, J., Kraus, K., & Nilsson, C. (2022). Exploring the implications of cloud‐based enterprise resource planning systems for public sector management accountants. Financial Accountability & Management, 38(2), 177-201. https://doi.org/10.1111/faam.12300
  » https://doi.org/10.1111/faam.12300
• Cohen, S., Kaimenaki, E., & Zorgios, Y. (2007). Assessing IT as a key success factor for accrual accounting implementation in Greek municipalities. Financial Accountability and Management, 23(1), 91-111. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1468-0408.2007.00421.x
  » https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1468-0408.2007.00421.x
• Cuadrado-Ballesteros, B., Santis, S., & Bisogno, M. (2021). Public-sector Financial Management and E-government: The Role Played by Accounting Systems. International Journal of Public Administration, 45(8), 605-619. https://doi.org/10.1080/01900692.2020.1868506
  » https://doi.org/10.1080/01900692.2020.1868506
• Dawes, S. S. (2008). The evolution and continuing challenges of e‐governance. Public Administration Review, 68, S86-S102. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1540-6210.2008.00981.x
  » https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1540-6210.2008.00981.x
• Del Paso, L., Pattanayak, S., Uña, G., & Tourpe, H. (2023). Digital Solutions Guidelines for Public Financial Management Technical Notes and Manuals. International Monetary Fund. https://www.imf.org/en/Publications/TNM/Issues/2023/10/06/Digital-Solutions-Guidelines-for-Public-Financial-Management-537781
  » https://www.imf.org/en/Publications/TNM/Issues/2023/10/06/Digital-Solutions-Guidelines-for-Public-Financial-Management-537781
• Dener, C., Watkins, J., & Dorotinsky, W. L. (2011). Financial Management Information Systems: 25 years of World Bank experience on what works and what doesn’t World Bank. https://documents.worldbank.org/en/publication/documents-reports/documentdetail/485641468139212120/financial-management-information-systems-25-years-of-world-bank-experience-on-what-works-and-what-doesnt
  » https://documents.worldbank.org/en/publication/documents-reports/documentdetail/485641468139212120/financial-management-information-systems-25-years-of-world-bank-experience-on-what-works-and-what-doesnt
• Diamond, J., & Khemani, P. (2006). Introducing financial management information systems in developing countries. OECD Journal on Budgeting, 5(3), 97-132. https://doi.org/10.1787/budget-v5-art20-en
  » https://doi.org/10.1787/budget-v5-art20-en
• Diniz, E. H., Barbosa, A. F., Junqueira, A. R. B., & Prado, O. (2009). O governo eletrônico no Brasil: perspectiva histórica a partir de um modelo estruturado de análise.Revista de Administração Pública,43(1), 23-48. https://doi.org/10.1590/S0034-76122009000100003
  » https://doi.org/10.1590/S0034-76122009000100003
• Dorotinsky, W., Watkins, J. (2013). Government Financial Management Information Systems. In R. Allen, R. Hemming, & B. H. Potter. (Eds.). The International Handbook of Public Financial Management Palgrave Macmillan. https://doi.org/10.1057/9781137315304_37
  » https://doi.org/10.1057/9781137315304_37
• Dunleavy, P., Margetts, H., Bastow, S. & Tinkler, J. (2006). New Public Management is dead - long live digital-era governance. Journal of Public Administration Research and Theory, 16(3), 467-494. https://doi.org/10.1093/jopart/mui057
  » https://doi.org/10.1093/jopart/mui057
• Eurostat. (2020). Updated accounting maturities of EU governments and EPSAS implementation cost European Commission, PwC. https://ec.europa.eu/eurostat/documents/9101903/9700113/Updated-accounting-maturities-and-EPSAS-implementation-cost-June+2020.pdf
  » https://ec.europa.eu/eurostat/documents/9101903/9700113/Updated-accounting-maturities-and-EPSAS-implementation-cost-June+2020.pdf
• Frandell, A., & Feeney, M. (2022). Cybersecurity Threats in Local Government: A Sociotechnical Perspective. The American Review of Public Administration, 52(8), 558-572. https://doi.org/10.1177/02750740221125432
  » https://doi.org/10.1177/02750740221125432
• Fritz, V., Verhoeven, M., & Avenia, A. (2017). Political Economy of Public Financial Management Reforms - experiences and implications for dialogue and operational engagement World Bank Group. https://www.pefa.org/sites/pefa/files/resources/downloads/121436-15-11-2017-18-52-15-NTDofPFMReformsReportWeb.pdf
  » https://www.pefa.org/sites/pefa/files/resources/downloads/121436-15-11-2017-18-52-15-NTDofPFMReformsReportWeb.pdf
• González-Zapata, F., & Piccinin-Barbieri, M. (2021). Making the leap from e-government to digital government. In Development Co-operation Report 2021: Shaping a Just Digital Transformation OECD Publishing. https://doi.org/10.1787/1e7a17e2-en
  » https://doi.org/10.1787/1e7a17e2-en
• Gottschalk, P. (2009). Maturity levels for interoperability in digital government. Government Information Quarterly, 26(1), 75-81. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.giq.2008.03.003
  » https://doi.org/10.1016/j.giq.2008.03.003
• Gourfinkel, D. (2021). The Main Challenges of Public Sector Accounting Reforms and World Bank’s Public Sector Accounting and Reporting (PULSAR) Program. Journal of Public Budgeting, Accounting & Financial Management, 34(2). https://doi.org/10.1108/JPBAFM-05-2021-0079
  » https://doi.org/10.1108/JPBAFM-05-2021-0079
• Graf-Vlachy, L. (2018). CV2: Stata module to calculate the coefficient of variation for variables. Statistical Software Components S458511 Boston College Department of Economics. https://EconPapers.repec.org/RePEc:boc:bocode:s458511
  » https://EconPapers.repec.org/RePEc:boc:bocode:s458511
• Grossi, G., & Argento, D. (2022). The fate of accounting for public governance development. Accounting, Auditing & Accountability Journal, 35(9), 272-303. https://doi.org/10.1108/AAAJ-11-2020-5001
  » https://doi.org/10.1108/AAAJ-11-2020-5001
• Guarda, G. F., Oliveira, E. C., & Sousa, R. T. D. (2015). Analisys of IT outsourcing contracts at the TCU (Federal Court of Accounts) and of the legislation that governs these contracts in the Brazilian Federal Public Administration. Journal of Information Systems and Technology Management, 12(1), 81-106. https://doi.org/10.4301/S1807-17752015000100005
  » https://doi.org/10.4301/S1807-17752015000100005
• Hashim, A. (2014). A Handbook on Financial Management Information Systems for Government World Bank. https://documents1.worldbank.org/curated/en/147241467987856662/pdf/A-handbook-on-financial-management-information-systems-for-government-a-practitioners-guide-for-setting-reform-priorities-systems-design-and-implementation.pdf
  » https://documents1.worldbank.org/curated/en/147241467987856662/pdf/A-handbook-on-financial-management-information-systems-for-government-a-practitioners-guide-for-setting-reform-priorities-systems-design-and-implementation.pdf
• Hashim, A., & Piatti-Fünfkirchen, M. (2018). Lessons from Reforming Financial Management Information Systems: A Review of the Evidence World Bank Group. https://doi.org/10.1596/1813-9450-8312
  » https://doi.org/10.1596/1813-9450-8312
• Heaton, J., & Parlikad, A. K. (2019), A conceptual framework for the alignment of infrastructure assets to citizen requirements within a Smart Cities framework. Cities, 90, 32-41. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cities.2019.01.041
  » https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cities.2019.01.041
• Hellberg, A. S., & Grönlund, Å. (2013). Conflicts in implementing interoperability: Re-operationalizing basic values. Government Information Quarterly, 30(2), 154-162. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.giq.2012.10.006
  » https://doi.org/10.1016/j.giq.2012.10.006
• IEEE Computer Society. (1990). IEEE Standard Computer Dictionary A compilation of IEEE standard computer glossaries. ISBN 1-55937-079-3.
• Instituto Brasileiro de Geografia e Estatística. (2019). Perfil dos Municípios Brasileiros ftp://ftp.ibge.gov.br/Perfil_Municipios/2019
  » ftp://ftp.ibge.gov.br/Perfil_Municipios/2019
• Instituto Brasileiro de Geografia e Estatística. (2021). Perfil dos Municípios Brasileiros ftp://ftp.ibge.gov.br/Perfil_Municipios/2021
  » ftp://ftp.ibge.gov.br/Perfil_Municipios/2021
• Irani, Z., Abril, R. M., Weerakkody, V., Omar, A., & Sivarajah, U. (2023). The impact of legacy systems on digital transformation in European public administration: Lesson learned from a multi-case analysis. Government Information Quarterly, 40(1), 101784. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.giq.2022.101784
  » https://doi.org/10.1016/j.giq.2022.101784
• Jeong, S., & Kim, Y. (2023). A recipient country-centered approach to framing digital financial management information systems. Public Administration and Development, 43(4), 323-327. https://doi.org/10.1002/pad.2028
  » https://doi.org/10.1002/pad.2028
• Kawabata, M. K., & Camargo, A. S. (2023). E-Government Innovation Initiatives in Public Administration: A Systematic Literature Review and a Research Agenda. Administration & Society, 55(9), 1758-1790. https://doi.org/10.1177/00953997231185847
  » https://doi.org/10.1177/00953997231185847
• Lam, W. (2005). Barriers to e‐government integration. Journal of Enterprise Information Management, 18(5), 511-530. https://doi.org/10.1108/17410390510623981
  » https://doi.org/10.1108/17410390510623981
• Lember, V., Brandsen, T., & Tõnurist, P. (2019). The potential impacts of digital technologies on co-production and co-creation. Public Management Review, 21(11), 1665-1686. https://doi.org/10.1080/14719037.2019.1619807
  » https://doi.org/10.1080/14719037.2019.1619807
• Lino, A. F., Aquino, A. C. B., & Neves, F. R. (2022). Accountants’ postures under compulsory digital transformation imposed by government oversight authorities. Financial Accountability & Management, 38(2), 202-222. https://doi.org/10.1111/faam.12313
  » https://doi.org/10.1111/faam.12313
• Lino, A. F., Azevedo, R. R. D., & Belote, G. S. (2023). The influence of public sector audit digitalisation on local government budget planning: evidence from Brazil. Journal of Public Budgeting, Accounting & Financial Management, 35(2), 198-218. https://doi.org/10.1108/JPBAFM-05-2022-0090
  » https://doi.org/10.1108/JPBAFM-05-2022-0090
• Luna-Reyes, L. F. (2017). Opportunities and challenges for digital governance in a world of digital participation. Information polity, 22(2/3), 197-205. https://doi.org/10.3233/IP-170408
  » https://doi.org/10.3233/IP-170408
• Margariti, V., Stamati, T., Anagnostopoulos, D., Nikolaidou, M., & Papastilianou, A. (2022). A holistic model for assessing organizational interoperability in public administration. Government Information Quarterly, 39(3), 101712. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.giq.2022.101712
  » https://doi.org/10.1016/j.giq.2022.101712
• Mariani, I., & Bianchi, I. (2023). Conceptualising Digital Transformation in Cities: A Multi-Dimensional Framework for the Analysis of Public Sector Innovation. Sustainability, 15(11), 8741. https://doi.org/10.3390/su15118741
  » https://doi.org/10.3390/su15118741
• Meijer, A. (2015). E-governance innovation: Barriers and strategies. Government Information Quarterly, 32(2), 198-206. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.giq.2015.01.001
  » https://doi.org/10.1016/j.giq.2015.01.001
• Mergel, I., Edelmann, N., & Haug, N. (2019). Defining digital transformation: Results from expert interviews. Government Information Quarterly, 36(4), 101385. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.giq.2019.06.002
  » https://doi.org/10.1016/j.giq.2019.06.002
• Ministério da Ciência, Tecnologia e Inovação. (2023). Estratégia Nacional de Governo Digital https://www.gov.br/governodigital/pt-br/estrategias-e-governanca-digital/estrategianacional
  » https://www.gov.br/governodigital/pt-br/estrategias-e-governanca-digital/estrategianacional
• Ministério da Gestão e Inovação em Serviços Públicos. (2024). Rede Nacional de Governo Digital https://www.gov.br/governodigital/pt-br/estrategias-e-governanca-digital/rede-nacional-de-governo-digital
  » https://www.gov.br/governodigital/pt-br/estrategias-e-governanca-digital/rede-nacional-de-governo-digital
• Ndou, V. (2004). E-Government for Developing Countries: Opportunities and Challenges. Electronic Journal of Information Systems in Developing Countries, 18(1), 1-24. https://doi.org/10.1002/j.1681-4835.2004.tb00117.x
  » https://doi.org/10.1002/j.1681-4835.2004.tb00117.x
• Organization for Economic Co-operation and Development. (2018). Digital Government Review of Brazil: Towards the digital transformation of the public sector OECD Publishing. https://www.oecd.org/en/publications/digital-government-review-of-brazil_9789264307636-en.html
  » https://www.oecd.org/en/publications/digital-government-review-of-brazil_9789264307636-en.html
• Pardo, T. A., & Tayi, G. K. (2007). Interorganizational information integration: A key enabler for digital government. Government Information Quarterly, 24(4), 691-715. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.giq.2007.08.004
  » https://doi.org/10.1016/j.giq.2007.08.004
• Peterson, S. (2007). Imperfect Systems: IFMISs in Africa. InWorld Bank and CABRO Conference on Budget Management and Public Financial Accountability: Pretoria, South Africa https://www.hks.harvard.edu/publications/imperfect-systems-ifmiss-africa
  » https://www.hks.harvard.edu/publications/imperfect-systems-ifmiss-africa
• Raihan, M. M., Subroto, S., Chowdhury, N., Koch, K., Ruttan, E., & Turin, T. C. (2024). Dimensions and barriers for digital (in) equity and digital divide: A systematic integrative review. Digital Transformation and Society https://doi.org/10.1108/DTS-04-2024-0054
  » https://doi.org/10.1108/DTS-04-2024-0054
• Rodin-Brown, E. (2008). Integrated financial management information systems: A practical guide United States Agency for International Development or the United States Government.
• Santos, L. O., Cardoso, R. L., Buchbinder, F., & Vasarhelyi, M. A. (2024). Doublethink in governamental accounting: development of an RPA to identify inconsistencies in financial reporting. The International Journal of Digital Accounting Research,24, 1-22. http://www.ijdar.org/10.4192/1577-8517-v24_1.pdf
  » https://doi.org/10.4192/1577-8517-v24_1.pdf
• Scholl, H. J., & Klischewski, R. (2007). E-Government Integration and Interoperability: Framing the Research Agenda. International Journal of Public Administration, 30(8/9), 889-920. https://doi.org/10.1080/01900690701402668
  » https://doi.org/10.1080/01900690701402668
• Teixeira, M. D. S. (2020). Divergências metodológicas dos Tribunais de Contas e seus efeitos sobre as regras de despesa com pessoal. Revista de Administração Pública, 54(6), 1747-1759. https://doi.org/10.1590/0034-761220190310
  » https://doi.org/10.1590/0034-761220190310
• Twizeyimana, J. D., & Andersson, A. (2019). The public value of E-Government - A literature review. Government Information Quarterly, 36(2), 167-178. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.giq.2019.01.001
  » https://doi.org/10.1016/j.giq.2019.01.001
• Uña, G., Allen, R. I., & Botton, N. M. (2019). How to Design a Financial Management Information System: A Modular Approach International Monetary Fund. https://www.imf.org/en/Publications/Fiscal-Affairs-Department-How-To-Notes/Issues/2019/05/15/How-to-Design-a-Financial-Management-Information-System-A-Modular-Approach-46818
  » https://www.imf.org/en/Publications/Fiscal-Affairs-Department-How-To-Notes/Issues/2019/05/15/How-to-Design-a-Financial-Management-Information-System-A-Modular-Approach-46818
• Uña, G., & Pimenta, C. (2016). Integrated financial management information systems in Latin America: Strategic Aspects and challenges. InPublic Financial Management in Latin America Inter-American Development Bank. https://www.elibrary.imf.org/downloadpdf/display/book/9781597822268/ch07.pdf
  » https://www.elibrary.imf.org/downloadpdf/display/book/9781597822268/ch07.pdf
• Volodina, T., & Grossi, G. (2024). Digital transformation in public sector auditing: Between hope and fear. Public Management Review, 1-25. https://doi.org/10.1080/14719037.2024.2402346
  » https://doi.org/10.1080/14719037.2024.2402346
• Vergne, J. P. & Durand, R. (2010). The missing link between the theory and empirical of path dependence: conceptual clarification, testability issue, and methodological implications. Journal of Management Studies, 47(4), 736-759. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-6486.2009.00913.x
  » https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-6486.2009.00913.x
• World Bank. (2024). Public Sector Accounting Assessment (PULSE) Framework Handbook https://cfrr.worldbank.org/publications/public-sector-accounting-assessment-pulse-framework-handbook
  » https://cfrr.worldbank.org/publications/public-sector-accounting-assessment-pulse-framework-handbook

• DATA AVAILABILITY
  The dataset that supports the findings is published in the article. The complete dataset is not publicly available because it is derived from anonymous responses to a questionnaire applied during the research development.

• Reviewers:
  Alexandre Costa Quintana (Universidade Federal do Rio Grande, Rio Grande / RS - Brazil)
• Reviewers:
  Two reviewers did not authorize the disclosure of their identities.
• Peer review report:
  Peer review report: the peer review report is available at this https://periodicos.fgv.br/rap/article/view/93503/87514

Edited by

• Editor-in-chief:
  Alketa Peci (Fundação Getulio Vargas, Rio de Janeiro / RJ - Brazil)

• Associate editor:
  Sandro Cabral (Insper Instituto de Ensino e Pesquisa, São Paulo / SP - Brazil)

Data availability

The dataset that supports the findings is published in the article. The complete dataset is not publicly available because it is derived from anonymous responses to a questionnaire applied during the research development.

Publication Dates

• Publication in this collection
  28 July 2025
• Date of issue
  2025

History

• Received
  30 July 2024
• Accepted
  19 Apr 2025