Search results

This study aims to investigate the implications of audit industry specialization on auditor’s retention and growth within an emerging economy. Factors such as whether the firm is a Big 4, a firm with international affiliation, a local firm and the type of industry were studied to analyse the reasons behind audit firm retention and growth.

This research is based on a field study related to audit firms providing services to listed companies in an emerging economy. The sample includes the top 100 publicly held companies’ in the Egyptian stock market during 2006-2011 for which their annual reports are analysed to determine the audit firms’ retention and growth. An assessment of the continuity of the auditors and the increase in the number of audit clients were also measured.

The results confirm that industry specialization has an important effect on the auditor’s retention, especially for industries where capital investment is significant such as buildings, construction, financial services, housing and real estate. Big 4 audit firms retained their clients because of their industry specialization and brand name. Evidence was found that good knowledge of accounting and auditing standards resulted in audit firms with international affiliation competing with the Big 4 for clients’ retention and growth.

This study contributes to the existing literature, as it is among the first to provide empirical evidence on auditor retention, growth and auditor’s dominance in an emerging economy such as Egypt.

This paper aims to examine the association between audit firm tenure and audit report lag (ARL) and the impact of auditor industry specialization on the association between audit firm tenure and ARL.

Using Habib and Bhuiyan’s (2011) method of measuring auditor industry specialization, the authors examine the sample of 7,291 firm-year observations from 2008 to 2010.

The authors find that auditor industry specialization (regardless of city-level, national-level and joint city- and national-level industry specialization) weakens the positive association between ARL and short audit firm tenure, suggesting that auditor industry specialization complements the negative effect of short audit firm tenure on ARL.

First, the authors add to the literature by answering the question of whether hiring industry auditor specialists is an effective way to shorten ARL created by short audit tenure. The authors provide some evidence that the concern of short audit tenure leading to longer ARL is reduced by hiring an industry-specialized auditor. Prior research mainly focuses on identifying the determinants of ARL without going further to find out which are the effective ways to reduce the audit delay. Second, their findings can somehow resolve the debate on whether audit firm rotation should be mandatory. A new auditor’s lack of knowledge of clients’ business operations during the early years of audit engagements results in longer ARL, which eventually influences the clients’ financial performance. The authors' result suggests the firms can reduce this adverse consequence by hiring an industry-specialized auditor. Finally, their findings may provide helpful information to firms in selecting external auditors, public accounting firms in selecting a differentiation strategy and regulators in mandating audit firm rotation.

This study examines the effect that client size has on the relation between industry‐specialist auditors and fraudulent financial reporting. Most of the major accounting firms have organized their audit practices along industry lines, reflecting a belief that industry specialization leads to higher quality audits. Furthermore, regulatory bodies and extant research suggests that larger clients have greater bargaining power and are more likely to be able to convince the auditor to acquiesce to aggressive accounting. Also, it may be more difficult for an auditor to possess industry expertise for larger clients who are likely to be more complex and operate in more than one industry. Consistent with previous research, we generally find a significant negative relation between auditor industry specialization and client financial fraud. Also, as expected, the negative relation between auditor industry specialization and financial fraud is weaker for larger clients. This study provides evidence that the positive benefits of auditor industry specialization in deterring financial fraud is affected by client size.

The purpose of this paper is to examine the impact of institutional holdings and corporate debts on audit quality, proxied by auditor industry specialization.

The tests use regression analysis for a sample of 396 company-years from 2003 to 2008 and control for factors known to affect auditor industry specialization.

The results show a positive association between institutional ownership and auditor industry specialization. These results are consistent across most measures of auditor industry specialization and different thresholds of audit firm market share. In addition, a positive link is reported between corporate debt and industry specialization by auditors. This result, however, holds under the composite proxy in terms of total assets only.

The major limitation is the unavailability of data on audit fees and sales (revenues) to measure auditor market share.

Institutional investors and debtholders have preference for auditors who can enhance the credibility of financial reporting and improve the quality of financial information and the results document that the choice of specialist auditors can potentially influence this objective.

The paper provides information to academics, regulators, companies, and auditors concerning the impact of institutional investors and creditors on the choice of industry specialists. Also, it shows the importance of industry specialization on audit quality.

The purpose of this paper is to examine the relation between a company's bid‐ask spread, a proxy for information asymmetry, and auditor tenure and specialization.

The tests use clustered regression for a sample of 31,689 company‐years from 1992 to 2001 and control for factors known to impact bid‐ask spread in cross‐section.

The findings suggest that the market's perception of disclosure quality is higher and private information search opportunities are fewer for companies engaging industry specialist auditors. In addition, the paper finds that information asymmetry has a U‐shaped relation to auditor tenure. This U‐shaped relation holds for both specialists and non‐specialists; however, the bid‐ask spread for specialists tends to fall below that of non‐specialists at all tenure intervals.

The findings may directly result from auditor tenure and specialization or it may be that those auditor‐related characteristics are a subset of concurrent choices made by the company that impacts disclosure quality.

Companies have incentives to lower information asymmetry and the findings document that the choice of a specialist auditor and the length of the auditor relationship can potentially influence this objective.

The paper provides information to academics, regulators, companies, and auditors concerning the effect of auditor‐client relationships on the level of information asymmetry. In addition, it shows the importance of industry specialization and audit firm tenure on audit quality.

The purpose of this study is to investigate the interaction effect of auditor industry specialization and board governance on earnings management. This study examines whether board independence is more or less effective in constraining earnings management for firms audited by industry specialists than for firms audited by non‐specialists.

The US data were collected from the RiskMetrics Directors database and the Compustat database. Regression analysis was used to test the research proposition.

It was found that earnings management is more negatively associated with board independence for firms audited by industry specialists than for firms audited by non‐specialists, consistent with the notion that there is a complementary relationship between auditor industry specialization and board governance. The findings suggest a positive interaction effect of auditor industry specialization and board governance on accounting quality.

This study contributes to the literature by documenting explicit evidence that high quality boards can be more effective through hiring industry specialist auditors. This study also suggests that it may be worth investigating the interaction effect among different corporate governance mechanisms on accounting quality.

The purpose of this paper is to investigate the association between auditor industry specialization and audit fees surrounding Section 404 implementation.

With a sample of 1,006 industrial firms over the 2003-2005 reporting periods, an ordinary least square regression model was used to regress change in audit fees on auditor specialization measure and other control variables.

It was found that auditor industry specialization is negatively related to the change in audit fees during the first year of Sarbanes–Oxley Act (SOX) compliance (2003-2004). It was also found that there were no significant cost savings associated with auditor industry specialization in the second year of SOX compliance (2004-2005).

These results suggest that industry-specific expertise may enable auditors to adapt more efficiently to new significant audit standards and regulations, but that such efficiencies are likely to be most pronounced during the initial implementation year.

Auditor competition and auditor specialization are at the forefront of today’s ever-changing accounting industry. Analysis of a contemporary auditing issue (auditor specialization) in the context of major legislation (SOX) provides a research setting that gives both academics and practitioners valuable insight toward how future legislation can impact current accounting industry issues such as the increasing need to have more expertise.

This paper investigates the impact of the PricewaterhouseCoopers (PwC) merger in Australia on existing and potential clients of the new merged firm. From prior theory it is expected that some existing clients may have an incentive to switch away from a newly merged firm as the same larger firm now audits close competitors once audited by separate firms. Prior theory also suggests that another group of potential clients should be attracted to the newly merged firm where the merger enhances or creates industry specializations. The expectation is that in both of these instances there will be increased switching activity associated with the newly merged audit firm. Contrary to expectations, a significantly lower level of switching behaviour was observed for the newly merged firm compared with that of the other Big 5 firms, suggesting that an advantage of enhanced specialization may not be the attraction of new clients but the retention of existing clients. When comparing the nature of the switches, some support was found for the view that the switches to the new firm were likely to be in enhanced areas of specialization, but no evidence was found to suggest that close competitors would switch away from this firm. The greater rate of retention of clients compared with other Big 5 firms was not associated with a more competitive audit pricing policy.

Sustainability assurance services are carried out in a competitive market where a wide range of assurance providers operate without the need for any specific professional qualifications, competencies or skills. Assurance providers have heterogeneous professional backgrounds and experiences that lead to substantial diversity in sustainability assurance quality levels. This paper aims to provide an understanding of sustainability assurance quality. From a legitimacy perspective, the authors focus on the choice of assurance providers by exploring why a company voluntarily chooses an incumbent financial auditor to jointly provide audit and sustainability assurance services. The authors argue that to avoid the legitimacy threats undermining stakeholders’ confidence in the sustainability information disclosed, companies should only choose their incumbent financial auditors to provide sustainability assurance services when these auditors possess the professional attributes associated with sustainability assurance quality.

This study develops regression models for an international sample for 2007–2016, where the authors analyze why a company voluntarily chooses an incumbent auditor to jointly provide audit and sustainability assurance services from a legitimacy theory perspective.

Evidence confirms that the choice of incumbent auditors as assurance providers is more likely when these providers are more specialized in the industry. The authors also find that independence does not play a significant role in this decision. Therefore, an assurance provider’s industry specialization can be understood as an attribute that is associated with sustainability assurance quality and one which limits the legitimacy threats caused by a lack of sufficient sustainability knowledge.

Given that companies have complete freedom when choosing their assurance providers, the selection of a high-quality incumbent auditor is an indirect measure of social commitment and a mechanism to improve public trust. The results confirm that it is fundamental for firms to understand the situations when choosing an incumbent financial auditor to provide sustainability assurance services is the best way to ensure firm legitimacy while obtaining higher sustainability assurance quality due to the spillover effect. This paper provides useful evidence for firms and managers who can become aware that the legitimacy threat associated with the auditing profession’s questionable competence to conduct efficient sustainability assurance engagements can be reduced if they hire an incumbent financial auditor with greater industry specialization. For assurance providers, the results are especially useful, as they should know that companies will be more likely to choose their incumbent financial auditor when that auditor possesses certain professional attributes, like industry specialization. The ability to assimilate and exploit the knowledge gained through auditing activities can be improved even more by specialization, which enhances sustainability assurance quality.

From a social perspective, stakeholders perceive industry specialization as an indicator of the professional skills necessary to increase both the real and perceived quality of sustainability assurance services, thereby limiting the legitimacy threat arising from a lack of sustainability knowledge. The evidence also provides valuable results for regulatory bodies, as it shows that firms are not able to address the legitimacy gap caused by stakeholders’ perceptions that incumbent financial auditors can easily be controlled by companies. Thus, doubts arise as to whether this joint provision undermines auditor independence. Precisely, these doubts about assurance provider independence can erode public confidence in assurance and devalue the quality of the service. The results of this paper highlight the need to strengthen regulation on sustainability reporting and assurance. The advances and relevance of sustainable development in recent years and in future agendas require a firm commitment to sustainability reporting and assurance of quality, reliability, integrity and confidence.

First, this study contributes to recent empirical studies that focus on the role of sustainability assurance services in the legitimation process of corporate sustainability reporting. However, while that research analyzes how the legitimacy theory explains the voluntary adoption of sustainability assurance, this paper adds to the literature by presenting evidence about why certain incumbent auditors are appointed to carry out sustainability assurance services. Second, this paper contributes to the sustainability assurance quality literature. Third, unlike previous studies that have regressed various client-specific and institutional factors that influence firms’ decisions to choose assurance providers, this study contributes to the research by providing knowledge about a set of professional features that may explain the decision model of assurance providers selection from a legitimacy perspective.

This study aims to examine the relationship between the individual auditor’s industry specialization and the audit report lag (hereafter ARD). Further, it explores whether changing in the audit reporting requirement (i.e. the adoption of ISA701) influences the auditor’s industry specialization effect on the ARD.

A large data set of companies listed on the NASDAQ OMX Stockholm over the period 2010–2019 has been analyzed. Least squares regressions have been estimated to provide empirical evidence for the researched hypotheses.

The research findings indicate that the ARD is shorter for client firms audited by an industry specialist audit partner. Testing for the moderating role of changing in the auditing reporting regulation on the relation between the audit partner’s industry specialization and the ARD, the authors reveal that all client firms (except client firms with industry specialist audit partners) experienced an increase in the ARD. Overall, the baseline regression findings are found to be robust to the endogenous auditor choice and multiple measures of both the ARD and the auditor’s industry specialization.

This paper provides novel evidence on the relationship between the audit reporting lag and industry specialization from the individual auditor perspective, an issue that has hitherto been unexplored. The regression results further contribute to the upsurge debate about the consequences of changing in the audit reporting model by providing consistent support for the importance of industry specialization of the audit partner in minimizing costs derived from the former requirement.