Human Competencies: Amplifying Financial Reporting Quality in Indonesian Local Government
Bibliographic record
Abstract
This quantitative study examines the determinants of financial reporting quality in Indonesian local governments, focusing on good governance, regional financial accounting systems, internal control systems, organizational commitment, and information technology utilization, with HR competencies as a moderator. Data were collected via surveys from 170 Local Government Work Units (SKPDs) across South Sulawesi Province, Indonesia. Employing Structural Equation Modeling (SEM), the findings indicate that good governance, regional financial accounting systems, internal control systems, organizational commitment, and information technology utilization all positively influence financial reporting quality. Crucially, human resource competencies were found to significantly moderate the relationship between the internal control system and organizational commitment with financial reporting quality. However, this moderating effect was not significant for the relationships involving good governance, regional financial accounting systems, and information technology utilization. These results highlight the essential role of human resource development and systemic enhancements in fostering greater financial accountability and transparency within the public sector. Therefore, policy recommendations should focus not only on enhancing individual competencies but also on synergistically strengthening systems and governance frameworks to achieve transparent and reliable public financial reporting.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.003 | 0.008 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".