Search results

This study aims to examine whether national industry expertise in Italy is more dominant than local expertise. Prior studies from Australia, USA and UK show that audit fees for industry experts are priced at a higher premium at the local level than the national level. These countries have voluntary audit firm rotation, while Italy has mandatory audit firm rotation (MAFR). The authors predict that Italy has a stronger national than local level of industry expertise, to better retain and transfer industry expertise.

The authors compare audit fee premiums of national industry experts to local levels, using quantitative (multivariate tests) and qualitative (interviews) methodology.

Using hand-collected audit fees, the authors find that the audit fee premium for industry expertise is greater at the national level than the local level. The authors find corroborating results with audit hours. To provide further support, the authors conduct analysis for a neighboring country that does not have audit firm rotation. Using hand-collected data from Germany, the authors find that audit fee premiums from national industry expertise are no different from local industry expertise.

The present study study has theoretical and practical implications, for European Union countries, which recently adopted MAFR and for countries considering adoption in the future.

The purpose of this paper is to examine external auditors' perceptions of the impact of audit committee financial expertise and industry expertise on the mediating role played by the committee in resolving auditor‐client disagreements.

The study is a 2×2 between subjects experimental design, using 61 Malaysian auditors as participants. The authors manipulate audit committee financial expertise and industry expertise at high and low levels.

It is found that external auditors perceive that audit committees play a greater mediating role and use mediating techniques to a greater extent when committee members' financial and industry expertise is high compared to when expertise is lower.

This is the first paper to examine the importance of audit committee expertise on the mediating role of the audit committee. The major contribution of the paper is the finding that auditors believe the audit committee's role as a mediator is strengthened not only by the committee members' accounting and auditing expertise but also by their industry expertise. The paper's findings have implications for practitioners and regulators who are concerned with the role of the audit committee in enhancing the integrity of the financial reporting and audit process.

This study aims to examine the effect on audit efficiency of outsourced internal audit function (IAF) providers with industry and/or firm-specific expertise. Drawing on relevant studies from external and internal audit literature, the authors assume that such IAF providers are associated with greater audit efficiency as proxied by audit report lag and audit fees.

Based on a sample of firms listed on the Omani capital market during 2005–2019, the pooled regressions are used to test the developed hypotheses. The authors use the market share approach to identify outsourced IAF industry expertise providers and tenure to measure the firm-specific expertise of outsourced IAF providers.

The authors find that industry outsourced IAF providers are not associated with shorter audit report lag and lower audit fees. The authors also find that firm-specific expertise outsourced IAF providers are associated with a greater reduction in audit report lag and audit fees. These conclusions are robust under a battery of analyses. The significant contribution of firm-specific expertise outsourced IAF providers to audit efficiency is incremental when abnormal audit report lag and audit fees analysis is conducted.

The results are the first to attest to the contribution of outsourced IAF with firm-specific expertise. They also show that industry expertise held by outsourced IAF providers does not contribute to audit efficiency.

The purpose of this paper is to explore conceptual issues arising in an empirical study of the emergence of a distinctive new form of expertise – of industry analysts and in particular the leading firm Gartner Group that exercises enormous influence over the Information Technology (IT) market.

The paper critically reviews existing analytical frameworks and especially work from the Sociology of Professions. This has largely focused upon groups which have already succeeded in gaining wide acceptance of the effectiveness of their methods and knowledge. For emerging expert groups a key challenge is to create an audience for whom they are expert (Turner, 2001). The study contributes to a “third wave” of studies that shift the focus of enquiry from the operation of professional institutions to the conduct of expert work – and how knowledge is produced, validated and consumed. The paper draws upon an extended ethnographic study of Gartner Inc., and other industry analysts to characterise some key features of their expertise. Data sources include over 100 hours of participant observation of industry analysts and their interactions with vendors and technology adopters at IT industry conferences; interviews with over 20 industry analysts from Gartner (including a telephone interview with its founder Gideon Gartner) and other analyst organisations; a substantial body of interviews with technology vendors and clients (particularly in relation to the Customer Relationship Management technology sector); together with a review of Gartner documentation and reports.

The paper compares the empirical findings of industry analysts with accounts from current literature on management consultants and other groups such as journalists and financial analysts. Industry analysts, like consultants, have not sought to follow a classical professional model. Thus the brand reputation of big (industry analyst or consultancy) firms provides an alternative warrant of the quality of expertise to professional institutions. However, Gartner analysts identify differences as well as similarities between their work and management consultants. Gartner’s ability to rank the offerings of IT vendors requires them to adopt formal methodologies and internal review procedures to produce defensible knowledge and demonstrate their independence. Industry analysts need to establish cognitive authority over rapidly changing technological fields. This imparts some “public good” elements to their knowledge.

The paper suggests ways forward for analysing new forms of knowledge intermediary in business and accounting, applying perspectives from the “third wave” of studies, and involving detailed study of the “epistemic systems” through which such knowledge is produced, consumed and validated (Knorr Cetina, 2010).

This study aims to examine the association between fair value accounting and the cost of corporate bonds, proxied by bond yield spread. In addition, this study explores the moderating role of auditor industry expertise at both the national and the city levels.

This study first examines the effect of the use of fair value on yield spread by estimating firm-level regression model, where fair value is the testing variable and yield spread is the dependent variable. To test the differential impact of the three levels of fair value inputs, this paper divides the fair value measures based on the three-level hierarchy, Level 1, Level 2 and Level 3, and replace them as the test variables in the regression model.

This study finds that the application of fair value accounting is generally associated with a higher bond yield spread, primarily driven by Level 3 estimates. The results also show that national-level auditor industry expertise is associated with lower bond yield spreads for Level 1 and Level 3 fair value inputs, whereas the impact of city-level auditor industry expertise on bondholders is mainly on Level 3 fair value inputs.

The paper innovates by exploring the impact of fair value accounting in a setting that extends beyond financial institutions, the traditional area of focus. Moreover, most prior research considers private debt, whereas this study examines public bonds, for which investors are more likely to rely on financial reporting for their information about a firm. Finally, the study differentiates between city- and national-level industry expertise in examining the role of auditors.

This research has several practical implications. First, firms seeking to raise debt capital should consider involving auditors, with either industry expertise or fair value expertise, due to the roles that auditors play in safeguarding the reliability of fair value measures, particularly for Level 3 measurements. Second, from standard-setting and regulatory perspectives, the study’s findings that fair value accounting is associated with higher bond yield spread cast further doubt on the net benefits of applying a full fair value accounting regime. Third, PCAOB may consider enhancing guidance to auditors on Level 2 fair value inputs, to further enhance audit quality. Finally, creditors can be more cautious in interpretating accounting information based on fair value while viewing the employment of auditor experts as a positive signal.

First, the paper extends research on the role of accounting information in public debt contracting. Second, this study adds to the auditing literature about the impact of industry expertise. Finally, and more generally, this study adds to the ongoing controversy on the application of fair value accounting.

This paper aims to examine whether firms retaining industry-specialist auditors receive better price and non-price terms for bank loans.

Based on a sample of companies retaining big N auditors during the 2000-2010 period, this paper constructed six proxies for auditor industry expertise and tested three major loan terms: loan spreads, number of general and financial covenants and requirements for collateral.

It was found that companies retaining industry-specialist auditors receive lower interest rates and fewer covenants. Banks are also less likely to demand secured collateral. These findings are supported by several sensitivity tests.

The findings suggest that auditor industry expertise provides incremental value to creditors and that bank loan cost is one economic benefit for companies hiring specialist auditors.

To the best of the authors’ knowledge, this study is the first to investigate the impact of auditor industry expertise on the cost of private debts.

The purpose of this paper is to examine the effect of audit committee (AC) characteristics (size, independence, the number of meetings and expertise) on compliance with International Financial Reporting Standards (IFRS) for related party disclosures (CRPD) in the South African context.

This paper is based on an analysis of the consolidated financial statements of 120 non-financial firms listed on the Johannesburg Stock Exchange (JSE) for the period 2012 to 2014. Panel regressions have been used.

The findings of this paper reveal that CRPD is positively influenced by AC independence. However, AC size and the number of AC meetings do not affect CRPD. Regarding expertise, the authors find that there is a positive and significant relationship between CRPD and have combined industry expertise with accounting and financial expertise. However, while accounting expertise by itself is associated with CPRD, industry expertise by itself is not associated with CRPD.

To the best of the authors’ knowledge, there are no empirical studies that have addressed the effect of AC characteristics on compliance with IFRS for CRPD.

At the level of a cognitive schema, a business model is a mental map of a firm’s value-creating, value-delivering, and value-capturing activities and the linkages between them. An important question in the study of business models as cognitive schemas is whether and how schemas differ across industry actors and whether the differences are connected to the variation observed in actual business models in the industry. This chapter examines, in particular, the ways in which business model schemas of industry insiders differ from those of industry outsiders. Using data from interviews with chief executive officers (CEOs) of 30 legal-tech firms, we graphically construct and analyze the CEOs’ schemas of important causal interdependencies between their firms’ activities. The analysis shows systematic differences between insiders and outsider CEOs’ schemas. We theorize that these differences underlie insider and outsider CEOs’ distinct approaches to opportunity recognition, expertise perception, and value framing, and have consequences for actual business model evolution in the industry.

The purpose of this paper is to examine the effect of specific Islamic banks’ (IBs) corporate governance (CG) mechanisms on compliance with the Accounting and Auditing Organization for Islamic Financial Institutions’ (AAOIFI) governance standards (GSs) disclosure requirements.

Using an unweighted governance compliance index, the authors measure the extent of IBs’ compliance with 7 AAOIFI GSs’ disclosure requirements over the period 2009–2015 (372 bank-year observations). In addition, a multivariate regression analysis was used to test the four hypotheses.

This study’s results report substantial non-compliance (the mean of compliance level with AAOIFI’s GSs over the covered years for the entire sampled IBs is 52.1%). The findings reveal that the Shariah Supervisory Board’s (SSB) remuneration, SSB’s members with only industry expertise, SSB’s members with the combined industry expertise and accounting and financial expertise, the existence of internal Shariah Auditing Department and the level of investment accounts holders’ funds are positively associated with the level of compliance with AAOIFI’s GSs.

The existing studies focusing on the determinants of compliance with AAOIFI’s standards are in the early research stage, as to the best of the authors’ knowledge, there is a paucity of empirical research testing this issue. The authors extend these studies by examining all the AAOIFI’s GSs and focusing on the specific IBs’ CG mechanisms. Furthermore, a major contribution of this study is the examination of the relationship between some SSB’s characteristics and compliance level. To the best of the authors’ knowledge, this is the first research that has examined the effect of the SSB’s remuneration and expertise on compliance level.

This study aims to explore the relationship between audit partner and firm industry specialization and board of director independence on the decision by Taiwanese firms to use International Financial Reporting Standards (IFRS) flexibility concerning reporting interest income and expense and dividends received in different sections of the statement of cash flows. This flexibility existed in Taiwan for the first time in 2013, the year that Taiwan switched from its own generally accepted accounting principle to IFRS.

Using 2013 data for a sample of 1,227 firms, 354 of whom changed their reporting classification, this study examined the interaction effect of board independence and partner-level and firm-level auditor industry specialization on the cash flow reporting decision using logistic regression.

The results show there is a substitute relationship between board independence and partner-level industry specialization on the change in cash flow reporting classification, but a complementary relationship between board independence and firm-level auditor specialization. Further, both partner-level and firm-level auditor industry specializations have a complementary (but negative) relationship with board independence as to whether the firm is likely to report interest expense paid in the operating or financing activities sections.

An important implication is that knowing the levels of audit firm and partner specialization and how independent the board is, is useful for researchers and regulators in investigating auditor-client relationships and understanding the influences of variables investigated here on the outcome(s) of accounting policy and regulatory changes.

This study improved the field’s understanding of the impacts of audit partner and firm specialization, board independence and relevant interactions on cash flow reporting choices.