Search results

Until recently, the formal model for the estimation of audit risk was relatively straightforward. There were two major approaches: the familiar multiplicative planned risk model in the USA and UK; and the Canadian Bayesian posterior risk model. Recent work has substantially changed the framework for estimating audit risk. Aims to evaluate these proposals and to develop a single framework for the measurement of planned and posterior risk.

Risk is closely associated with return of investments and materiality. Investments with considerably higher risk normally attract a higher rate of return. Whereas, higher level of risk needs a higher threshold of materiality. There are occasions in which financial managers, fail to take the materiality effects in the process of risk evaluation. This paper assesses risk in the auditing context. Audit risk models established by researchers reveal that there is a need to look into the effects of materiality. An extension on the existing audit models, to incorporate the effects of materiality is made. With this, 128 permutations were resulted. It is understandable that auditors may not be cost benefit for auditors to evaluate all the 128 possible outcomes before the issuance of audit reports; however, this by no means prevents auditors being sued for negligence due to neglecting one of the possible audit outcomes. This model could seriously be served as a reference to both auditors and financial managers in the light of evaluating risk.

Business risk and inherent risk both bear on the audit; the audit risk model; and the nature, timing, and extent of work performed. Inherent risk and business risk bear an inverse relationship to detec‐tion risk and have a direct effect on the level of work performed. Neither risk can be eliminated totally and neither is controllable by the auditor. Business risk relates to the financial statements and affects overall audit risk; inherent risk applies to an individual audit area. Inherent risk is explicitly included in the professional standards and the audit‐risk model while business risk is not and has only an indirect bearing on the model. Management can take steps to affect the level of inherent risk, but the perceptions of users of the financial statements bear on business risk.

Addresses concerns regarding perceptions and measurement of risk and the resultant confusion relating to understanding of the market for audit services. Examines the theoretical justification for a plural approach to dealing with “risk” in audit fee models. Reviews the relevant literature and undertakes a factor analysis of 229 Western Australian firms in search of evidence of plurality. Argues for recognition of the idea that risk in the audit context is composed of two separate but related concepts: audit risk and business risk.

The purpose of this study is to examine the relationship between explanatory language, audit fees and audit hours to demonstrate that auditors use explanatory language in audit reports to explain perceived audit risk.

The authors construct the sentiment value, a novel audit risk proxy derived from audit reports, using big data analysis. The relationship between sentiment value and explanatory language is then investigated. The authors present the validity of their new metric by examining the relationship between sentiment value and accounting quality, taking audit fees and hours into account.

The authors first find that reporting explanatory language is positively related to audit fees. More importantly, the authors provide an evidence that explanatory language in audit reports is indicative of increased audit risk as it is negatively correlated with sentiment value. As a positive (negative) sentimental value means that the audit risk is low (high), the results indicate that auditors describe explanatory language in a negative manner to convey the inherent audit risk and receive higher audit fees from the risky clients. Furthermore, the relationship is strengthened when the explanatory language is more severe, such as reporting the multiple numbers of explanatory language or going-concern opinion. Finally, the sentiment value is correlated with accounting quality, as measured by the absolute value of discretionary accruals.

Contrary to previous research, the authors’ findings suggest that auditors disclose audit risks of client firms by including explanatory language in audit reports. In addition, the authors demonstrate that their new metric effectively identifies the audit risk outlined qualitatively in audit report. To the best of the authors’ knowledge, this is the first study that establishes a connection between sentiment analysis and audit-related textual data.

Highlights that the multiplicative risk model which forms the basis of auditing standards in both the USA and the UK only considers the risk of incorrect acceptance of an account balance. Points out, however, that when planning audit tests, the auditor also faces a risk of incorrect rejection of the sample under consideration if an unrepresentative sample is obtained. Incorporates the risk of incorrect rejection of the account balance into a theoretical risk model and investigates the relationship between the risks of incorrect acceptance and incorrect rejection using the power function of the test. Concludes that, first, the ability of an audit test to identify the magnitude of the error in the population, and especially its ability to identify material error reliably, is very important and, second, planning of effective audit testing should be undertaken, rather than relying on the extension of testing when results fail to meet expectations.

Recent public policy initiatives seek greater transparency in financial reporting through an honest, balanced and thorough management discussion of company performance in the annual report. Management’s discussion invariably includes key performance indicators, such as financial ratios, relevant to external stakeholders. We model the impact of accounting estimates, assumptions, choices and errors on the risk of misleading financial ratios. This framework is illustrated through good and bad examples of financial reporting practices and by simulation of financial data of public companies. We provide a structured approach to inform policymakers, auditors and other stakeholders of the incremental financial reporting risk that accompanies current regulatory efforts.

The purpose of this paper is to examine whether country (Australia or Japan) and client type (public sector or private sector) impact the auditor's client risk assessments, subsequent audit planning decisions (planned audit hours) and audit planning responsiveness to client risk assessments.

The study is based on previously developed audit planning models and uses working paper‐sourced data of planned auditor effort and nine client risk assessments. The study samples are taken from public and private sector audit engagements of two major audit firms in Australia and Japan, respectively.

Evidence is found that country and client type do have an impact on the auditor's client risk assessments and planned total audit hours, but they do not moderate audit planning responsiveness to client risk assessments.

The test variable is confounded by the country and client type characteristics inherent in the study's samples. If the differences are caused by country, this suggests that audit planning decisions vary across countries, even when the same auditing standards are adopted. However, if they are caused by client type, this suggests that the same audit approach (i.e. the audit risk model) is applied differently depending on client characteristics.

These findings are useful to international standard setters, audit practice quality control and training, and audit research.

No prior study has examined the role of country and client type on the auditor's client risk assessments and audit planning decisions. Further, no prior study has examined whether the relationship between the auditor's client risk assessments and audit planning decisions is moderated by country and client type.

Traditional methods of assurance outlined by current professional standards are risk-based models where the emphasis is on the veracity of published data rather than on the rigour of the interpretation or analysis of information provided to users. As such, they are not well suited for expressing an opinion on qualitative, subjective or forward-looking assessments typically included in integrated reports. In this context, the purpose of this paper is to describe an alternate approach to assurance and identifies the initial elements of an “interpretive assurance model”.

The research is exploratory/interpretive. It relies on detailed interviews with experienced auditors and preparers to develop an initial approach for providing some level of assurance over an integrated report.

The research identifies elements of an interpretive assurance model which focusses on providing assurance on the interpretation and analysis of information included in an integrated report rather than on underlying data. These include an examination of the completeness of the explanation of the value creation process provided in an integrated report; the methods used to support management discussion and analysis; and the reasonability of the review process used to ensure the reliability of qualitative, subjective and forward-looking representations contained in an integrated report.

The study is conducted in a South African setting. While limiting the study to a single jurisdiction may be seen as a limitation, local preparers and auditors have had at least five years of experience with the application of an integrated reporting framework and are in a strong position to provide detailed insights.

An interpretive assurance model shifts the focus from objective verification of data using defined test procedures to evaluation of the interpretation and analysis process used to prepare an integrated report. Application of the proposed model will require practitioners and auditing students to be trained extensively in qualitative analytical techniques. The inherent complexity of contemporary business models and the multi-dimensional focus of integrated reports will also result in changes in the composition of audit teams which are currently dominated by experts in financial reporting rather than integrated or strategic business management.

The paper is the first to offer a practical approach for providing assurance over an integrated report. It responds to calls form the International Integrated Reporting Council and International Auditing and Assurance Standards Board for more innovative assurance models for addressing the reporting needs of contemporary organisations.

The purpose of this paper is to investigate whether firms with high environmental disclosure have a low possibility of non-standard audit opinions and audit fees and whether this trend is more obvious after than prior to the Measures for the Disclosure of Environmental Information (Measure) implemented in 2008.

Based on the Measures implemented in 2008, the authors select data for the listed manufacturing firms from 2004 to 2006 (Pre-Measure) and from 2009 to 2011 (Post-Measure) as research samples to investigate the relationships between environmental disclosures, audit opinions and audit fees with difference in difference models. In addition, we also consider the influence of media attention, the polluting industry and internal control on the audit effect of environmental disclosure.

The results show that the level of environmental disclosure is significantly negatively correlated with the possibility of issuing non-standard audit opinions and audit fees after measure is implemented, especially hard environmental information. Further evidence indicates that the auditing effect of environmental disclosures is stronger on firms that receive less media attention, in firms with better internal controls, and in firms belonging to industries with heavy pollution.

In the Chinese setting, a high level of environmental information disclosures can effectively reduce the audit risk and lead to a high possibility of standard audit opinions and low audit fees. This effect is pronounced after issuing Measure. The conclusions suggest that measure and increasing environmental disclosure have an obvious positive audit effect and that firms should be forced or encouraged to disclose more environmental information from the perspective of auditors in China.