Audit risk model as a corporate social responsibility implementation of certified public accounting firms (evidence from Indonesia)

Abstract

Purpose

The conduct of this research represents part of an effort to modify audit risk model (ARM) as an implementation of corporate social responsibility (CSR) by certified public accounting (CPA) firms. It is intended to make clear the phenomena about the relationship between audit risk (AR), implementation of business ethics principles (IBEP) and corporate governance risk (CGR).

Design/methodology/approach

The method used was hypothesis testing. Unit of analysis was individual (i.e. Indonesian CPA), and the gathering of data was cross‐sectional. The sample was determined by purposive sampling. Data were collected using questionnaires, and data analysis was conducted by structural equation modeling (SEM).

Findings

According to Indonesian CPAs' perception, the AR is affected by the client's CGR, whereas the client's IBEP does not affect AR, but clients' CGR and IBEP both significantly affect AR. It is suggested: first, that the next researcher should study audit risk related to business ethics. Second, that the management should strengthen the implementation of business ethics in running a business; and finally that the Bapepam (Capital Market Oversight Board) should oversee both public company and public accountant in the implementation of governance.

Research limitations/implications

This research noted some implications, including: nature and intensity of gathering data, restricted respondent (CPA‐CMAF), and restricted variables of corporate governance (BoD, and Audit Committee).

Originality/value

This research suggests the necessity to modify ARM by dividing inherent risk into errors risk and fraud risk as bases for accumulating audit evidence.

Citation

Nuryatno Amin, M. (2011), "Audit risk model as a corporate social responsibility implementation of certified public accounting firms (evidence from Indonesia)", Social Responsibility Journal, Vol. 7 No. 3, pp. 509-522. https://doi.org/10.1108/17471111111154590