Search results

The purpose of this paper is to improve Kingdon’s (1984, 2011) concept of policy entrepreneurs (PE) with regard to the theoretical development of the definition and identification and level of agency by supplementing it with elements of Schmidt’s (2008, 2010, 2011, 2012) sentient agents. The improved concept of discursive policy entrepreneurs (DPEs) is then applied in an in-depth case study about the agenda setting process of micro and macro whole-of-government accounting in Australia in the late 1990s and early 2000s.

Based on the concept of DPEs, a series of operationalised characteristics and proxies are developed to identify them and describe their behaviour. These are then applied in the case study. The two main data sources are semi-structured in-depth interviews and archival documents.

The findings show that the focus on DPEs’ discursive and coordination activities is critical for identifying and investigating the key actors of the Generally Accepted Accounting Principles (GAAP)/Government Finance Statistics (GFS) harmonisation agenda setting process. The study also finds that the two relevant decision-making bodies, the Financial Reporting Council and the Australian Accounting Standards Board, lost control over their agendas due to the actions of DPEs.

The improved concepts of DPEs will allow researchers to better identify the main agents of policy change and differentiate them from other supporters of policy ideas. Due to the qualitative nature of the study, the findings are not necessarily generalisable.

The findings from this study can help participants of agenda setting processes to gain a better understanding of the actions and behaviours of DPEs. This might allow standard setting bodies to mitigate against undue influences by DPEs.

This study is the first study that uses Schmidt’s concept of the sentient agent to address the limitations of Kingdon’s concept of PE and develops and applies characteristics to identify PEs and their actions. It is also the only study to date that investigates the GAAP/GFS harmonisation agenda setting process.

While recently introduced EU regulation on the statutory audit of public interest entities (PIEs) aims to improve audit competition and quality, its success and impact depends on the definition of a PIE applied across the various EU Member States. In the UK, even though little is known about their auditing choices, these changes will not apply to most private companies despite their importance to the wider economy. The purpose of this paper is to provide an in-depth analysis of the private company audit market and examine the lobbying behaviour of the accounting profession around the definition of a PIE in the UK.

Using a large panel of independent private company audits in the UK and a textual analysis of submitted comment letters to a government consultation on the new regulation, this paper presents a comprehensive analysis of the audit market for private companies by measuring supplier concentration using four different measures of market share, and of the lobbying behaviour of the accounting profession.

There are two main findings. First, the private company audit market is characterised by low auditor switching rates along with a tight oligopoly of the largest independent private company audits maintained by the Big Four audit firms. Second, the lobbying behaviour of accounting and audit firms sought, and succeeded, to limit the scope of the definition of a PIE in the UK, consistent with the theoretical predictions of monopoly capitalism and the theory of professions.

The paper shows that the definition and scope of a PIE needs revisiting both within the UK and across all EU Member States, with a view to including more of these economically important private companies and highlights the policy challenge of increasing competition and choice in a concentrated audit market.

This study aims to evaluate whether the Big-4’s commenting efforts influence the characteristics of Financial Accounting Standards Board’s (FASB’s) Final_Standards using the content of their comment letters. Whether auditors lobby standard-setters to help their clients or to help themselves and whether they are successful are questions highly relevant to issues of auditor independence and audit effectiveness.

Based on components of Mergenthaler (2009), this study develops a rules-based continuum change score to measure how much more (less) rules-based a Final_Standard is compared to its exposure draft to evaluate the influence of the Big-4 on the FASB’s standard-setting for 63 accounting standards.

The findings show that extensive comment letters and increased uncertainty language are associated with increases in the rules-based attributes included in Final_Standards. These results suggest the Big-4 prioritize a reduction in their own litigation risk over the possible preferences of their clients for less rigid standards. Moreover, the results are consistent with their comment letters influencing the FASB’s decision to include more rules-based attributes in Final_Standards.

This study develops a potential proxy for audit risk by assessing the changes in the rules-based characteristics of proposed accounting standards and using the content of the comment letters to evaluate whether the Big-4 accounting firms may influence the FASB’s Final_Standards. Overall, this study provides a unique perspective on the influence of constituents on the FASB’s standard-setting.

The purpose of this paper is to examine how New Zealand financial auditors could be motivated to improve current practices in regards to auditing the effects of environmental matters in financial reports.

This is a qualitative study. The views of 27 New Zealand private and public sector auditors were solicited via semi‐structured interviews. Concepts from new institutional theory, and in particular institutional isomorphism, are used to interpret the research findings.

The interview evidence indicates that a combination of normative, coercive and mimetic forces would be necessary to advance current practices in auditing environmental matters. A crucial driver of change would be a mindset shift within the profession about the importance of environmental accountability, reporting and auditing – i.e. increased normative pressures for change. Coercive forces of negative media publicity, the “fear factor” and government intervention can serve to reinforce the audit profession's normative obligations. Since public sector auditors have already developed effective audit practices around environmental matters, emulating their approach within the private sector would drive improvements in practice.

By identifying the potential drivers for improving auditors' practices, this paper can inform the discussions and strategies of professional bodies, regulators and government on improving the audit of environmental matters in financial reports.

Few prior studies have solicited financial auditors' views on the factors they perceive as motivating change in their professional practice, and none have done so in regard to the important and emerging area of environmental matters. This New Zealand study offers a timely contribution, as well as geographical diversity, to the international literature on audit theory and practice.

The purpose of this paper is to enrich extant understanding of the role of both agency and context in the uptake of sustainability assurance. To this end, the authors examine auditors' attempts to promote sustainability assurance and establish it as a practice requiring the professional involvement of auditors.

Applying institutional work (Lawrence and Suddaby, 2006) and institutional logics (Thornton, 2002; Thornton et al., 2012) as the method theories, the authors examine interview data and a variety of documentary evidence collected in Finland, a small society characterized by social and environmental values, beliefs in functioning institutions and public trust in companies behaving responsibly.

With this study, the authors make two main contributions to extant literature. First, the authors illustrate the limits that society-level logics related to corporate social responsibility, together with the undermining or rejected institutional work of other agents, place especially on the political and cultural work undertaken by auditors. Second, the study responds to Power's (2003) call for country-specific studies by exploring a rather unique context, Finland, where societal trust in companies is arguably stronger than in many other countries and this trust appears to affect how actors perceive the need for sustainability assurance.

This is one of the few accounting studies that combines institutional logics and institutional work to study the uptake of a management fashion, in this case sustainability assurance.

This paper examines the career progression of women auditors working in auditing firms in Tanzania and the strategies employed by women auditors to cope with the masculine nature of audit firms.

Data were collected through semi-structured, in-depth interviews with current and former female and male auditors in two auditing firms. A thematic approach to the analysis is adopted.

The study reveals that career progression of women auditors studied is constrained by gender-related barriers such as motherhood, pregnancy, maternity leave and limited coaching and networking, as well as household and caring responsibilities. These barriers are facilitated by the patriarchal system, which regards women as wives and mothers rather than professional workers. As a result, women auditors balanced work and family responsibilities by employing various coping strategies including establishing informal network organization, hiring nannies, living with family members, enrolling children to boarding schools and lobbying in the allocation of audit assignments. Despite employing these strategies, very few women reach top positions in audit firms in Tanzania.

The findings reveal a need for wider engagement on the role of women and men in society, particularly to address the gender-related barriers faced by women in the accountancy profession.

Most previous studies of gender in the accountancy profession have focused on Western contexts. This is one of few to examine the phenomenon in an African context.

The purpose of this exploratory study is to better understand the interactions between external auditors, their audit clients and audit regulators when considering the supply of and demand for high-level audit technology. The authors examine the developed markets of Australia, New Zealand and the UK to better understand: how high-level audit technology has started to become embedded into existing audit spaces and any emerging issues this technology has created for the audit profession.

Through the theoretical lens of the socio-technical (ST) systems of innovation theory, the present study involved semi-structured interviews with 25 stakeholders in Australia and New Zealand from 2019 to 2020 and 21 stakeholders in the UK from 2016 to 2018.

Advancements are revitalizing the technologies of not only the external auditors and their firms but also of their audit clients. Although the audit model is changing, external auditors are reported to be reluctant to fully engage with new audit technologies. In this setting, the authors find audit rules are yet to become embedded in the objects or practices of ST systems and that keeping up with the pace of change for regulators and standard setters is a major challenge.

The findings of this study raise call for regulators to be more up to speed with these new technological changes, as audit standards need to be amended accordingly. Although the International Auditing and Assurance Standards Board deliberates, both clients and auditors need to lobby for specific audit data analytics regulations.

The present study provides perspectives about new audit practices that emerge due to high-level technological advancements and then embed themselves into existing audit spaces. The authors draw on several different stakeholder groups, not just the Big Four firms. The ST systems theoretical lens we adopt better helps us understand how audit firms at the organisational level are adapting to these new technological changes in existing audit spaces.

Accounting standards are issued only after a comprehensive due process, which includes opportunities for external constituents to participate via public hearings and comment letters. The purpose of this paper is to identify stakeholders unique to government and evaluate the extent to which they respond to 13 due process documents issued by the Governmental Accounting Standards Board (GASB). The results provide insight into the comment letter element of due process – who participates, in what way do they participate, and why do they participate?

Comment letters received by the GASB in response to eleven exposure drafts and three preliminary views (PV) documents from 2010-2013 were examined, and respondents were categorized according to Cheng’s (1994) model as modified by Kidwell and Lowensohn (2011), resulting in the following 16 participant types: academics, budget officers, bureaucratic managers, state auditors/controllers, citizens, financial markets, elected officials, external auditors/CPA firms, finance officers, government accountants, government auditors, interest groups, media, professional associations, standard setters, and other governments. The authors next examined responses in favor of and opposed to for each document by group and responses by stakeholder group over time.

The authors find that participants came from various stakeholder groups. Consistent with findings in different standard-setting environments, the primary financial statement preparers – finance officers – were the most frequent individual respondents; however, there was participation from a wide variety of stakeholders. Responses are generally constructive and relatively consistent in their balance of favorable and unfavorable feedback over time, with a few exceptions. Closer examination of comment letters in response to the financial projections PV document reveals both conceptual and practical considerations underlying respondent participation.

Motivations for participation were discerned from the letter content, but direct data on motivation was not measured, limiting the conclusions to apparent motivation. Future research might examine the extent to which comment letter content is incorporated into the basis of conclusions section of issued standards to assess the direct impact of comment letters on the governmental accounting standard-setting process. It would also be relevant to trace specific projects that advanced from a PV stage to the exposure draft stage to assess whether the proportional participation of these stakeholder groups is different throughout due process.

The GASB has long been receptive to constituent feedback (Lowensohn, 2000) and can glean useful input from comment letters. By closely examining arguments impounded within comment letters, including conceptual and practical considerations, and by utilizing a more delineated understanding of the stakeholders in governmental accounting standard setting, the Board can better forge into the future.

Much of the extant research documents that stakeholder participation is relatively low, given the number of parties affected by accounting standards. Prior research into both public and private sector accounting standard setting in the USA and abroad has not used all unique actors specific to the public sector. Using a comprehensive stakeholder model designed for the governmental environment, the authors examine who participates in the GASB comment letter process, assess the nature of GASB comment letter participant responses, determine whether relative participation by stakeholder group is relatively constant over time, and consider why the participants respond.

The lack of user response in written submissions on accounting standards has been noted in previous research. That lack of user response has limited empirical investigations with the result that lobbying by users has to be understood largely from theoretical literature in the political and social arena. Aims to add empirical data to the understanding of the user perspective, taking as a focus for the investigation the lobbying of the UK Accounting Standards Board in respect of the Operating and Financial Review. Four issues are chosen for analysis: usefulness to users, effectiveness of voluntary compliance, confidentiality and provision of forward‐looking information. Shows that the ASB’s responses on these four major issues are rational in terms of the relative intensity of lobbying. Using interview methods to obtain user responses shows that a different perception of lobbying intensity may be derived from a comparison of preparer and user responses, such that preparers’ views may have given too negative an impression to the ASB. The relative persuasive power of different arguments is shown to depend on how the comparison is undertaken. Uses the quantitative analysis of responses as a base from which to explore the potential for strategic lobbying to disguise self‐interested motivation and provides some insight on the lack of user response.

The time period from the mid-1980s through 2002 is described in this series of research as a “pre-SOX” era of rapid deprofessionalization in U.S. pubic accountancy resulting in the loss of professional status. This was a period, however, when all professions were suffering some deprofessionalization. During the pre-SOX period it appears that leadership in public accountancy responded to a nearly perfect storm of changes confronting the profession with a corporate mentality of management by objectives, commercialization, and profit maximization resulting in constant and substantial net deprofessionalization greater than that of other professions. Starting in the late-1970s and continuing through 2001, some critics of public accountancy have asserted that leaders in the profession either lost or forgot what was required for public accountancy to be recognized as a profession. The conclusion stated in this paper is that public accountancy has lost its professional status in or before 2002. The reasons and events leading to this conclusion are presented and discussed. In the United States it appears as though once professional status is lost, regaining the elite status is more difficult. The question is if public accountancy can learn from history going into the substantial changes to be confronted in the post-SOX era of public accountancy and regain or at least make progress toward regaining professional status.