Advanced search

Factors affecting the audit process and social theories

Gholamhossein Mahdavi (Department of Accounting, School of Economics, Management and Social Sciences, Shiraz University, Shiraz, Iran)
Abbas Ali Daryaei (Faculty of Social Science, Department of Accounting, Imam Khomeini International University, Qazvin, Iran)

Corporate Governance

ISSN: 1472-0701

Publication date: 7 August 2017

Abstract

Purpose

The purpose of this paper is to apply the concept of social theories to explain auditors’ attitude toward balance time between marketing activities and auditing responsibilities.

Design/methodology/approach

Data were collected through a survey, from which a measure of auditor’s view on the importance of marketing was identified and regressed against balance between audit time and marketing activities. In addition, a measure of balanced attitude of auditors toward the time of the audit and marketing activities was identified and regressed against attitude toward the importance of corporate governance mechanisms.

Findings

The results obtained from the hypothesis test indicated that the audit fee can be a decisive factor in the status of auditors to carry out their function in the social structure which is limited to the stakeholders. The balance time between auditing and marketing is of the same importance to all auditors. Furthermore, entrepreneur auditors find the present corporate governance good for the prosperity and creativity of the forces within the auditing firms. As a result, entrepreneur auditors are very effective in corporate governance mechanisms.

Originality/value

The most significant contribution of the present study is the development of auditing literature to better understand and analyze the behavior of auditors.

Keywords

  • Corporate governance
  • Auditing marketing
  • Parsons’ theory of social action
  • Structure theory of Giddens

Citation

Mahdavi, G. and Daryaei, A. (2017), "Factors affecting the audit process and social theories", Corporate Governance, Vol. 17 No. 4, pp. 770-786. https://doi.org/10.1108/CG-04-2016-0079

Download as .RIS

Publisher

:

Emerald Publishing Limited

Copyright © 2017, Emerald Publishing Limited

Please note you might not have access to this content

You may be able to access this content by login via Shibboleth, Open Athens or with your Emerald account.
Login
To rent this content from Deepdyve, please click the button.
Rent from Deepdyve
If you would like to contact us about accessing this content, click the button and fill out the form.
Contact us
Emerald Publishing
  • Opens in new window
  • Opens in new window
  • Opens in new window
  • Opens in new window
© 2019 Emerald Publishing Limited

Services

  • Authors Opens in new window
  • Editors Opens in new window
  • Librarians Opens in new window
  • Researchers Opens in new window
  • Reviewers Opens in new window

About

  • About Emerald Opens in new window
  • Working for Emerald Opens in new window
  • Contact us Opens in new window
  • Publication Sitemap

Policies and information

  • Legal Opens in new window
  • Editorial policy Opens in new window & originality guidelines Opens in new window
  • Site policies
  • Modern Slavery Act Opens in new window

We’re listening — tell us what you think

  • Something didn’t work…

    Report bugs here

  • All feedback is valuable

    Please share your general feedback

  • Member of Emerald’s Library Advisory Network?

    You can start or join in a discussion here.
    If you’d like to know more about The Network, please email us

Join us on our journey

  • Platform update page

    Visit emeraldpublishing.com/platformupdate to discover the latest news and updates

  • Frequently Asked Questions

    Your questions answered here