Search results

The purpose of this study is to examine the relationship between auditing/non-auditing and accounting timeliness among Swedish private firms.

This paper uses regression analysis to test the relationship between auditing and two measurements of timeliness; lead time and late filing. The sample consists of Swedish private firms.

This paper finds that audited firms, when compared with unaudited firms, are significantly less timely. Moreover, greater profitability was associated with more timeliness but only for audited firms. The results of this paper also show that firms being audited by a big 4 auditor are significantly timelier than firms being audited by a non-big 4 auditor.

The findings in this paper suggests that one aspect of accounting quality, timeliness, does not seem to benefit from auditing in a Swedish context. There is a debate about whether the threshold levels in Sweden should be raised so that more firms voluntarily can opt out of audit. Those opposing a raised threshold level claim that auditing has positive effects on accounting quality and consequently that a raised level would have adverse effects. The findings in this paper do not support such a claim.

Little is known about timeliness in private firms compared to public firms and this paper fills that void. Contrary to prior research, findings show that unaudited firms in a Swedish regulatory setting actually are timelier than their audited counterparts. This questions one of the (presumed) benefits of auditing and should stimulate more research on this issue.

This paper aims to investigate the effect of voluntary non-financial reporting on the evaluation of audit risk from the auditors’ viewpoint in a post-crisis period. Furthermore, this paper analyses whether auditors perceive that voluntary non-financial reporting impacts audit risk differently for old clients as compared with new clients.

This study is conducted on a sample of Italian audit firms through a paper-based questionnaire. Both Big4 and non-Big4 audit firms have been included in the sample.

Results show that integrated reporting is perceived to be the most relevant reporting method and intellectual capital statement the least relevant. Surprisingly, empirical findings over the sample period show that auditors do not perceive statistically significant differences between old and new clients.

Auditors can identify opportunities to adapt their assessment model to include voluntary non-financial report information. Moreover, they can use different assessment models regarding the research variables in the case of new and old clients.

Empirical findings highlight the growing role of voluntary non-financial reporting in the auditors’ perception of their client’s audit risk. All the observed voluntary non-financial reporting forms, except for intellectual capital, are considered as relevant by auditors in the evaluation of their client’s audit risk when compared to an indifference point. In addition, findings reveal that female auditors perceive a reduced gap in the relevance between integrated reports and intellectual capital reports compared to their counterparts.

The present study aims to assess the impact of narcissism, self-confidence and auditor's characteristics on audit report readability for companies listed on the Tehran Stock Exchange.

The study’s statistical population comprises firms listed on the Tehran Stock Exchange. The present research used a systematic elimination method, and 1,162 firm-year observations were obtained for seven years from 2012 to 2018. Three variables including auditor tenure, audit fee and audit specialization are used for measuring auditing features. The Fog index is used as a proxy for measuring audit report readability. In addition, in this paper, four regressions, including fixed effects, random effects, pooled and T+1, are used to estimate reliable coefficients.

The findings show a negative and significant relationship between auditor’s characteristics (tenure, fee and specialization) and audit report readability. Moreover, the variables of the auditor’s narcissism, self-confidence and mandatory auditor change have a positive and significant association with audit report readability. This study lends support to the theories of personality disorder and behavioral decision.

Since narcissism and self-confidence are two characteristics that shape an individual’s character and personality, some involved behavioral factors in auditors’ characteristics contribute to their decisions. The effects of these should be detected to enhance the decision-making process. The said factors significantly impact audit report readability. Hence, this paper attempts to assess the effect of the said factors on audit report readability.

This study aims to examine the relationship between the attributes of audit firms (Big 4, audit fees, busy season, audit firm tenure and audit partner gender) and the impact of these attributes on key audit matters (KAM) readability in Malaysia.

The auditor's reports and financial data were analysed from a sample of FTSE 100 Malaysia-listed companies for the fiscal years 2017–2019, consisting of 258 observations. Panel regression analyses were conducted to evaluate the possible associations between audit firm attributes and KAM readability. The Flesch reading ease score and Coleman–Liau index were applied to measure KAM readability.

The findings show that female audit partners significantly impact KAM readability; further analysis also revealed that companies audited by Big 4 audit firms and higher audit fees tend to report a more readable KAM disclosure in the FTSE 100 in Malaysia.

The regression results provide empirical evidence of the influence of audit firm attributes on KAM readability. This study also examined important corporate governance players, such as external auditors and those charged with governance, who form the audit committee's qualities when analysing the determinants of KAM reporting variations in Malaysia.

This rich descriptive study examines auditors' client risk assessment (i.e. “key audit matters”/critical audit matters) disclosures in expanded audit reports of 328 Financial Times Stock Exchange (FTSE) 350 companies. The study compares auditor-identified client risks with corporate risk disclosures identified in audit committee reports, in terms of number and type of risks. The research also compares variation in auditor-identified client risks between individual Big 4 audit firms. In addition, the study examines auditor ranking of their client risks disclosed.

The study manually content analyses disclosures in audit reports and audit committee reports of a sample of 328 FTSE-350 companies with 2015 year-ends.

Audit committees identify more risks than auditors (23% more risks). However, auditor-identified client risks and audit-committee-identified risks are similar (80% similar), as are auditor-identified client risks between the individual Big 4 audit firms. Only ten (3%) audit reports rank the importance of auditor-identified client risks.

Sample is restricted to one year, one jurisdiction, large-listed companies and companies audited by Big 4 auditors.

The study provides important insights for regulators, auditors and users of financial statements by identifying influences on disclosure of auditor-identified client risks.

The paper mobilises institutional theory to interpret the findings. The findings suggest that auditor-identified client risks in expanded audit reports may demonstrate mimetic behaviour in terms of similarity with audit-committee-identified risks and similarity between individual Big 4 audit firms. The study provides important insights for regulators, auditors and users of financial statements by identifying influences on disclosure of auditor-identified client risks.

This study investigates the association between interim audits and final audits. The authors focus on whether interim audits affect the audit time lag and the risk of restatement associated with final audits.

Two regression models are established to empirically test if an interim audit helps to reduce the audit time lag and the restatement risk on annual reports based on a sample of Chinese listed firms.

The authors find that performing interim audits helps to reduce the audit time lag. This result suggests that final audits can be completed more efficiently when interim audits are performed during the same period. The authors also find that the decision to audit interim reports is associated with a lower risk of restating annual reports. The lower risk of restatement in turn suggests more effective final audit results.

Together, the results from this study demonstrate that interim audits could benefit final audits, which highlight the value and importance of the continuous auditing.

The purpose of this paper is to examine and analyze the factors that affect an auditor’s efficiency in completing the audit process proxied by audit report lag. The factors used in this study are selected by looking at the characteristics of the company and the characteristics of an auditor.

Company characteristics were proxied by the audit committee effectiveness, financial condition, accounting complexity and profitability, whereas auditor characteristics were proxied with auditor reputation, audit tenure and auditors industry specialization. Populations of this study were all manufacturing companies listed in Indonesian Stock Exchange in 2014–2016. Based on the purposive sampling method, the number of samples obtained from 231 companies was 77. Multiple linear regression method was used to analyze this study. Hypothesis testing was done by statistical t-test (partial).

The results showed that partially variables of the audit committee effectiveness and profitability had a significant negative effect on audit report lag while the variable financial condition had a significant positive effect on audit report lag. Meanwhile, variables of the accounting complexity, auditor reputation, audit tenure and auditors’ industry specialization did not show significant influence on audit report lag.

This study tests both company’s and auditor’s characteristic on audit report lag that as far as authors know never been tested simultaneously.

This paper examines the organizational resilience of audit firms during the early stages of COVID-19. The unexpected restrictions placed on travel and on-site working created unanticipated barriers for auditors in Hong Kong. The authors expect that auditors with greater organizational resilience can respond to unexpected situations and restore expected performance levels relatively quickly.

The authors utilize a sample of 1,008 companies listed on Hong Kong Stock Exchange (HKEX) with a financial year-end of December 31. The authors identify five proxies contributing to organizational resilience: auditor size, industry specialization, diversity, geographic proximity to the client and auditing a new client. The authors use audit report timeliness as this study's main dependent variable.

This study's full-sample results suggest that larger auditors, industry specialists and auditors with closer relationships to clients issued more timely audit reports during the pandemic. The analysis of a subsample of companies that initially published unaudited financial statements reveals that industry expertise and longer auditor-client relationships significantly reduced the need for year-end audit adjustments. Finally, the authors find that larger auditors were more likely to offload clients, whereas industry specialists were more likely to retain clients.

The results of the paper suggests that audit firm characteristics associated cognitive abilities, behavioral characteristics and contextual conditions are associated with audit firm organizational resilience and, consequently, helps auditors respond unexpected changes in the audit environment.

The findings of the paper are informative for those involved in audit firm management or auditor hiring and retention decisions.

This study is the first to link organizational resilience to the performance of audit firms in a time of unexpected events. The authors connect three auditor and two auditor-client dimensions to the organizational resilience of the audit firms.

While existing research explores the impact of audit market competition on audit fees and audit quality, there is limited investigation into how competition in the audit market influences auditors' writing style. This study examines the relationship between audit market competition and the readability of audit reports in Iran, where competition is particularly intense, especially among private audit firms.

The sample comprises 1,050 firm-year observations in Iran from 2012 to 2018. Readability measures, including the Fog index, Flesch-Reading-Ease (FRE) and Simple Measure of Gobbledygook (SMOG), are employed to assess the readability of auditors' reports. The Herfindahl–Hirschman Index (HHI) is utilized to measure audit market competition, with lower index values indicating higher auditor competition. The concentration measure is multiplied by −1 to obtain the competition measure (AudComp). Alternative readability measures, such as the Flesch–Kincaid (FK) and Automated Readability Index (ARI) are used in additional robustness tests. Data on textual features of audit reports, auditor characteristics and other control variables are manually collected from annual reports of firms listed on the Tehran Stock Exchange (TSE).

The regression analysis results indicate a significant and positive association between audit market competition and audit report readability. Furthermore, a stronger positive and significant association is observed among private audit firms, where competition is more intense compared to state audit firms. These findings remain robust when using alternative readability measures and other sensitivity checks. Additional analysis reveals that the positive effect of competition on audit report readability is more pronounced in situations where the auditor remains unchanged and the audit market size is small.

This paper expands the existing literature by examining the impact of audit market competition on audit report readability. It focuses on a unique audit market (Iran), where competition among audit firms is more intense than in developed countries due to the liberalization of the Iranian audit market in 2001 and the establishment of numerous private audit firms.

The purpose of this paper is to investigate the extent of voluntary disclosures in UK higher education institutions’ (HEIs) annual reports and examine whether internal governance structures influence disclosure in the period following major reform and funding constraints.

The authors adopt a modified version of Coy and Dixon’s (2004) public accountability index, referred to in this paper as a public accountability and transparency index (PATI), to measure the extent of voluntary disclosures in 130 UK HEIs’ annual reports. Informed by a multi-theoretical framework drawn from public accountability, legitimacy, resource dependence and stakeholder perspectives, the authors propose that the characteristics of governing and executive structures in UK universities influence the extent of their voluntary disclosures.

The authors find a large degree of variability in the level of voluntary disclosures by universities and an overall relatively low level of PATI (44 per cent), particularly with regards to the disclosure of teaching/research outcomes. The authors also find that audit committee quality, governing board diversity, governor independence and the presence of a governance committee are associated with the level of disclosure. Finally, the authors find that the interaction between executive team characteristics and governance variables enhances the level of voluntary disclosures, thereby providing support for the continued relevance of a “shared” leadership in the HEIs’ sector towards enhancing accountability and transparency in HEIs.

In spite of significant funding cuts, regulatory reforms and competitive challenges, the level of voluntary disclosure by UK HEIs remains low. Whilst the role of selected governance mechanisms and “shared leadership” in improving disclosure, is asserted, the varying level and selective basis of the disclosures across the surveyed HEIs suggest that the public accountability motive is weaker relative to the other motives underpinned by stakeholder, legitimacy and resource dependence perspectives.

This is the first study which explores the association between HEI governance structures, managerial characteristics and the level of disclosure in UK HEIs.