Great Expectations: Public Perceptions Of The Auditor's Role

The professional accounting bodies in Australia have undertaken a study of the "expectation gap" in perceptions of the auditing role and concluded that the public's image of the auditing profession will be enhanced if the differences in attitudes can be minimised. This paper analyses the views of auditors and financial report users about what the role of the auditor and the nature of an audit should be. The most significant differences between the auditors and the user groups relate to whether the auditor should be responsible for preventing and detecting fraud, detecting illegal acts, reporting whether the company is a reliable debtor or loan prospect and reporting the degree of confidence he or she has that the correct audit opinion has been issued. Where the differences represent "deficient standards" or "unreasonable expectations", the professional bodies should consider changing auditor responsibilities or attempting to change users' attitudes.     

Locating audit expectations gap within a cultural context: The case of Saudi Arabia

This paper offers an insight into the types of ‘audit expectations gap’ that exist within a cultural context. Specifically, it investigates if the business and social environment affect the perceptions of audit performance of users and auditors. Using a combination of mail questionnaires and semi-structured interviews, the study reveals the existence of a ‘performance gap’ with respect to the roles specified in the statutory pronouncements and those that can reasonably be expected of auditors in Saudi Arabia. The results further indicate the ‘performance gap’ arises from four factors in the environment within which auditing is practiced: licensing policy, recruitment process, the political and legal structure, and dominant societal values. Interview results reveal the influence of institutional and cultural settings on the audit expectations gap and indicate that the inclusion of Islamic principles in auditing standards and the code of ethics would help reduce the expectations gap that exists in Saudi Arabia.     

An Empirical Study of the Audit Expectation-Performance Gap

The critical, litigious environment which characterises auditing today can be traced to the audit expectation-performance gap. Defined as the gap between society's expectations of auditors and auditors perceived performance, it is seen to comprise ‘reasonableness’ and ‘performance’ components, the latter being subdivided into ‘deficient standards’ and ‘deficient performance’. Empirical research was conducted in New Zealand in 1989 to investigate the audit expectation-performance gap. The study enables the duties which constitute the reasonableness, deficient standards and deficient performance components of the gap to be identified. It also provides the means to estimate the relative contribution of the duties to their respective components, and of the components to the overall gap between society's expectations of auditors and auditors' perceived performance. The research provides new insights into the structure, composition and extent of the audit expectation-performance gap but, more importantly, it signals a rational, comprehensive approach towards narrowing the gap. If adopted, this should bring society's expectations of auditors and auditors' performance into closer accord and, as a consequence, reduce the criticism and litigation which auditors face today.     

How individual auditor characteristics impact the likelihood of audit failure: Evidence from China

Audit failure imposes a severe loss on investors and damages market participants' confidence in financial reporting quality. This study investigates the impacts of individual auditor characteristics on the likelihood of audit failure. Chinese regulators mandate listed firms to disclose the engagement auditors' identity. Furthermore, the information regarding individual auditor characteristics in China is also publicly available. Utilizing this unique setting, we examine the relationship between individual auditor characteristics and the likelihood of audit failure in China during the period from 2000 to 2009. We document that individual auditors with more auditing experience are less likely associated with audit failure. We also find a weaker negative relationship between auditor education level and audit failure. Our study has important implications for both auditors and regulators by shedding lights on the determinants of audit failure and by providing guidance to the human resource management in audit firms.     

The audit expectation gap: existence,causes, and the impact of changes

Recent regulatory initiatives targeting the statutory audit regime support the notion that the audit expectation gap is still a driver of change. This study seeks to analyse causes of the gap as well as the impact of proposed changes to the current statutory audit regime using an approach that differs from those used in prior literature. This approach allows us to attribute the audit expectation gap under the current regime to a failure of the public, the standard-setter, or the auditor. Based on a questionnaire survey conducted in 2011 in Germany, we find the public to have exaggerated expectations of auditors' responsibilities under current standards. Other causes of the gap relate to the public's difficulty in assessing the performance of auditors, but also to deficiencies in auditors' performance. In addition, we find that auditors are not fully aware of their responsibilities. Increasing the information content of the audit opinion is expected to narrow the gap. By contrast, recent proposed changes, such as mandatory rotation and a ban on non-audit services, may reduce the gap only to a lesser extent. Overall, it can be shown that the audit expectation gap is by its nature a persistent phenomenon comprising complex social aspects and interactions with changing accounting requirements, such as increased uncertainties in accounting estimates.     

AN EMPIRICAL INVESTIGATION OF THE AUDIT EXPECTATION GAP: AUSTRALIAN EVIDENCE

This paper examines the existence and nature of the expectation gap in Australia and whether recent changes to the wording of audit reports have affected that gap. A mail questionnaire was completed by auditors, accountants, directors, creditors, shareholders and undergraduate students. There was a gap between auditors and the various user groups under the old report wording prior to the issuance of the revised AUP 3. The modified wording in the revised AUP 3 had a significant impact on beliefs about the nature of an audit and the relative responsibilities of auditors and management. The modified wording eliminated some of the differences, but also created some new differences in beliefs about the messages communicated through audit reports. The auditing profession's fears about an expectation gap appear to be justified.     

Corporate reporting on the Internet and the expectations gap: new face of an old problem

While the practice of Internet financial reporting (IFR) has evolved rapidly, research has questioned the corresponding responsiveness of the auditing profession. This study investigates the existence and nature of an expectations gap that may have arisen in relation to the auditor's role and responsibilities with respect to IFR. Based on a questionnaire survey in New Zealand, results confirm the existence of an expectations gap between auditors and stakeholder groups. Specific responsibilities contributing to deficient performance, deficient standards, and unreasonable expectations components of this gap are identified. The principal pronouncement dealing with auditors’ relevant responsibilities in New Zealand is AGS 1003 Audit Issues Relating to the Electronic Presentation of Financial Statements and Related Auditor's Reports. AGS 1003 discusses, inter alia, the auditor's role and responsibilities in relation to electronic financial statements before and after online publication, and the implications of IFR for the auditor's report and other audit communications. The study argues that the authoritative status of such guidance statements may contribute to a perpetuation of the gap. Furthermore, the profession is urged to avoid ‘standard’ professional responses to the issues, which risk being labelled insufficient and/or strategically motivated. The findings have policy implications for standard-setters internationally.     

On the effort-saving effect of audit committee–auditor interlocking

Using unique data on audit hours from China, this paper investigates the effort-saving effect of the audit committee–auditor interlocking (AClk). We find that AClk is negatively associated with audit effort without any deterioration in audit quality. The results suggest that AClk has an effort-saving effect through information sharing between interlocked audit committee members and auditors. However, auditors retain the effort-saving benefits of AClk without sharing them with their client firms. Further analysis shows that the effort-saving effect of AClk is more pronounced for client firms whose auditors have industry expertise, for client firms that share the same individual auditor, or for client firms that share audit committee members with financial expertise.     

THE EFFECT OF EDUCATION ON THE AUDIT EXPECTATION GAP

This paper examines the effect of education on students' perceptions of the meaning of audit reports and the responsibilities and duties of auditors. A research instrument, utilising semantic differential scales designed to measure the messages communicated through audit reports, was administered to two groups of undergraduate students at the beginning and end of a semester and to auditors. The experimental group consisted of final year undergraduate accounting students enrolled in their first auditing unit. The control group consisted of final year undergraduate marketing students not enrolled in the auditing unit. The results of the study suggest that education may be an effective approach to narrowing or eliminating the audit expectation gap.     

Corporate fraud and the audit expectations gap: A study among business managers

This paper presents the findings of an empirical study on the audit expectations gap concerning the role of the auditor in corporate fraud cases. The purpose of the study is to assess the significance of a reasonableness gap, a deficient performance gap and a deficient standards gap in the specific context of corporate fraud. In order to distinguish all three elements of the expectations gap, respondents need a certain level of expertise on fraud. Therefore, in this research the audit expectations gap is studied primarily from the perspective of three groups of business managers, based on the fact that they typically have a special responsibility in fraud cases. Bankers are used as a control group to assess the potential differences between the views of business managers and ‘society in general’. This study provides clear evidence of a substantial audit expectations gap in the context of fraud, both with respect to the auditor's performance as well as the auditor's formal obligations as laid down in existing standards. However, compared to bankers, business managers are less inclined to judge auditors’ performance of existing duties as inadequate, and see fewer points where auditing standards should be amended.     

Group audits: Are audit quality and price associated with the Lead auditor’s decision to accept responsibility?

Lead auditors frequently rely on work performed by Other auditors, especially when auditing clients with operations in multiple countries. The PCAOB has expressed concern that the quality of such group audits may differ depending on whether the Lead auditor accepts or declines responsibility for work done by Other auditors. The PCAOB also has been concerned with the venue through which Lead auditors and Other auditors disclose their participation in group audits, including disclosure of whether Lead auditors accept or decline responsibility. To investigate these issues, we employ a sample consisting entirely of group audit engagements. We identify Lead auditors taking responsibility from PCAOB Form 2, filed by Other auditors of U.S. registrants for fiscal years 2009 to 2017. We identify Lead auditors not accepting responsibility from audit report disclosures during the same period. The results suggest that Lead auditors accepting responsibility charge higher audit fees but provide audits of no higher quality, and possibly of even lower quality. These results are robust to various additional analyses. Our research contributes to the ongoing debate over how the participation of Other auditors affects audit quality.     

The influence of judges' attitudes on liability assessments related to failed audits exhibiting significant audit team over-time or significant use of off-shore auditors

This study provides evidence on how audit firms' decisions to use offshore (outsourced) auditors or to assign on-site (local) auditors extensive overtime affect judges' evaluation of auditor legal liability I conduct a behavioral experiment in which actual judges responded to a hypothetical audit lawsuit. The results suggest auditors may be penalized during the litigation process depending on the extent of overtime or off-shoring and judges' attitude toward the public accounting profession. Judges with a positive attitude toward public accounting assessed more liability for an audit firm that used offshore (outsourced) auditors than for the use of extensive overtime for on-site auditors or a control condition. However, judges with a negative attitude toward the auditing profession assessed higher liability for auditors except when on-site auditors bore significant overtime in the final weeks of the audit.     

The association between audit committee effectiveness and audit risk

Audit committees (ACs) are expected to play a key role in improving financial statement integrity and as a consequence reduce audit risk. Companies reporting conformity with regulations can have an AC that appears effective but is not actually effective in substance. We surveyed audit partners and managers to identify their indicators of actual AC effectiveness (auditor‐chosen list). We hypothesize a negative association between AC effectiveness and audit risk, only when an auditor‐chosen list, rather than extent of conformity with regulations, is used to measure effectiveness. Results support our expectations.     

Quis Auditoret Ipsos Auditores? Can Auditors Be Trusted?

This article explores the extent to which the audit profession and its practices promote public trust in audits. Differences between auditors and non‐auditors as to beliefs about the role of a financial report audit have long been discussed under the term ‘expectations gap’. However, this prior debate has tended to focus on non‐auditors’ alleged misunderstanding of audit processes without a corresponding understanding on the part of the profession as to why the public might place its trust in auditors. The study explores the nature of trust in an auditing context and notes that like any profession, auditing faces practical limitations but the inability to directly observe the conduct of audits combined with professional status create an ‘over trust’ expectation in the public. Changes in audit practices and culture have also exposed the profession to criticism. The article seeks to offer one approach by which the auditing profession can restore public confidence; namely, evidence‐based practice, which has proven effective in improving the quality of practice in medicine. Adoption of a reflective evidence‐based approach to audit practice offers the promise of greater audit quality and an improvement in the profession's accountability and public confidence.     

An Empirical Investigation of the Interface Between Internal and External Auditors

Professional standards place specific responsibilities on auditors for the discovery of material mis-statements in reports of corporate financial performance. Certain factors have been shown to increase the likelihood of fraudulent financial reporting. One warning sign is the potentially pervasive effect of a weak internal control environment consistent with a weak internal audit group. This study investigates the impact of internal audit department quality differences on auditors ‘willingness to place reliance on the work performed by internal auditors. The study also gives consideration to auditors’ recent experiences with material errors and irregularities and examines the influence of two previously untested individual auditor differences on audit judgment decisions: (1) conflict management style and (2) perception of internal/external auditor communication barriers. The results indicate that auditors attend to internal audit department quality differences and that individual auditor differences exhibit significant influence over auditor judgments. Implications for audit practice are considered and directions for future research are suggested.     

Assurance provided by auditors' reports on prospective financial information: implications for the expectation gap

The results of this study indicate significant differences in beliefs between auditors, users and preparers of prospective financial information, concerning forecast reliability and the role and responsibilities of auditors and management. Contrary to the usual published studies on expectation gap, it was found that auditors believe that forecasts are more reliable than users or preparers. Auditors also believe that they have a higher level of responsibility and accountability than is attributed to them by users or preparers. Beliefs were affected by the type of report issued by the auditor and subjects were able to discriminate between the level of assurance provided by positive and negative assurance opinions. However, based on the responses of shareholders, it appears that the negative assurance opinion on assumptions for an audit might confuse users and might not meet the demands of the market.     

Do UK audit committees really engage with auditors on audit planning and performance?

In the wake of the financial crisis, regulators intend to increase the responsibilities of audit committees (ACs), yet little is known about how ACs discharge their existing responsibilities and interact with auditors and management. This study investigates the involvement of the AC, the AC chair (ACC), the audit partner (AP) and the chief financial officer (CFO) in relation to a range of audit-related matters in UK-listed companies in the 2007 regulatory environment, which remains fundamentally unchanged. The level of AC and ACC engagement in seven AC responsibilities set by the Combined Code is high (over 80%). However, only 50% of 16 audit planning, performance and finalisation matters are routinely discussed. The ACC acts without the full AC in 11% of discussions, while 25% involve only the CFO and AP without either the ACC or the AC. The extent of discussion and/or ACC involvement is influenced by background characteristics (company size, auditor size and ACC experience and qualifications). This evidence of less than full AC engagement with audit-related issues suggests that regulators may risk creating an AC expectations gap if AC duties under the extant model are significantly increased without structural change.     

Public and private sector auditors and accruals quality in English NHS hospital Trusts

To promote auditor independence and audit quality in English NHS Trusts the Audit Commission regulates auditor rotation, fees and the appointment of its own and private sector auditors. NHS sanctioned departures from GAAP, some of which allow the financial breakeven target to be achieved, have been criticised by the Audit Commission as detrimental to financial discipline. In this paper, we investigate the association between abnormal accruals and the achievement of financial breakeven in NHS hospital Trusts over the period 1998–2005. We also investigate the association between abnormal accruals, audit fees and the Trusts audited by public and private sector auditors. We find evidence that abnormal accruals are used to achieve financial breakeven and they differ across different types of auditor. We also identify a negative relationship between abnormal accruals and NHS Trust star ratings. These findings raise questions about the ‘quality’ of NHS audit where compliance with NHS-specific regulations overrides the wider GAAP-based requirement for financial statements to show a true and fair view and they warrant reconsideration of the nature of audit in NHS Trusts.     

Business risk auditing: A regressive evolution?—A research note

Business risk auditing (BRA) has been much publicised as revolutionary. The essence of the phenomenon, and the actual impact on practice, however, are unclear. This note revisits some pre-BRA interview evidence investigating auditor engagement with business risk. The evidence suggests that, pre-BRA, big-six auditors were already familiar with concepts of business risk although they were uncertain as to how precisely business risk informed the audit process. This suggests that BRA was evolutionary, rather than revolutionary, change and that the engagement of recent international standards with business risk is not significantly different from that of big-six auditors pre-BRA. The BRA era in audit methodology might be conceptualized as one of regressive evolution.     

An Empirical Investigation Into the Audit Engagement Letter: Use, Content and Effectiveness

The Engagement Letter documents the scope of the audit and the responsibilities of both auditor and client, and thus is both contractual and informative in nature. A survey of 600 auditors and 300 listed public company managers investigated the use and effectiveness of a broad range of Engagement Letter items. Findings show that public company managers regard Engagement Letter items as significantly less important than do auditors. Differences between auditors and their clients in their assessment of the importance of these items might suggest misunderstanding. Consistent with the expectation gap literature, it is likely that auditors can improve their communication, perhaps through expanding on and clarifying the importance of particular items to clients.