Search results

The purpose of this paper is to investigate the jurisdictional expansion of audit into the area of UK financial regulation. The paper draws on the analytical framework of new audit spaces (Andon et al., 2014, 2015), which built on the concept of regulatory space (Hancher and Moran, 1989), and characterises this new audit space as regulatory work.

Through an intensive reading of a variety of publicly available documentary sources, the paper investigates the role of auditors and accountants in the reporting accountants’ and skilled persons’ regimes in the UK under the Banking Act 1987 and the Financial Services and Markets Act 2000.

The paper identifies a new audit space characterised as regulatory work, which is made up of three distinct phases (and suggests the recent emergence of a fourth phase), and considers the extent to which these phases of regulatory work share common themes across new audit spaces identified by Andon et al. (2015) as independence, reporting, accreditation and mediating.

The paper identifies a further jurisdictional expansion of audit into a new audit space, characterised as regulatory work.

This paper examines post‐Enron developments in UK audit and corporate governance regulation. It considers the latest government‐initiated reviews into audit regulation, specifically those conducted by the Co‐ordinating Group on Audit and Accounting Issues and the DTI Review Team, and into corporate governance, specifically those undertaken by Derek Higgs and Sir Robert Smith. The paper notes that the reviews were undertaken in the context of developments initiated both before and after the collapse of Enron, including, respectively, the new system for the regulation of the UK accountancy profession as established by the Accountancy Foundation, and the US Sarbanes‐Oxley Act. The reviews have been welcomed by government and thus should play a large part in setting the agenda for the future regulation of UK audit and corporate governance. The proposals for auditing share a number of characteristics with the recommendations of a pre‐Enron empirical study which investigated the regulation of UK listed company audit, although significant distinctions remain. The proposals for corporate governance continue the ‘comply or explain’ approach and do not recommend passing its regulation from the Financial Reporting Council to another independent body of ‘stature’ such as the Financial Services Authority (FSA). It is concluded that key to successful implementation of recent proposals will be the need, for audit, to demonstrate that there is no cosy relationship between regulators and the auditing profession, especially the ‘Big Four’ firms, and, for corporate governance, a willingness to look outside the ‘one‐size‐fits‐all’ approach.

This paper examines latest thinking and new developments in the regulatory framework for statutory audit at European Union (EU) level. It follows an earlier paper, published in this journal. Since 1999 when the paper was drafted, even more developments have occurred both at an EU level and in the USA, which are likely to have a significant impact on statutory audit in the EU in years to come. Latest developments are reviewed in three areas: profession related issues; company law issues; and, accounting and auditing standards. The paper concludes that significant advances have been made towards completion of the regulatory framework of statutory audit in the EU. What remains of concern is a lack of progress towards adoption of international auditing standards. Unless financial statements are both prepared and audited in the same way, it is difficult to see how financial information in the EU can ever be truly harmonised.

For more than two decades the framework governing the statutory audit of companies within the European Union (EU) has been the subject of debate and reform. Significant progress has been made with the publication of the European Commission (EC) Green Paper (1996), and the subsequent EC Conference (1997) and EC Communication (1998). The objective of this paper is to provide a commentary on the recent reviews of the regulatory framework for statutory audit at EU level in the context of ongoing developments. The paper concludes that the regulatory framework for statutory audit in the EU is far from complete and much remains to be done. The way forward, at least in the short term, relies on the accountancy and auditing profession taking the lead in finding solutions. The different nature of accounting, financial and legal traditions within the EU, and the need to search for consensus, however, makes it difficult to predict when the EC will be in a position to complete an internal market for audit services within the EU. A significant factor worthy of further consideration is that developments at the international level are in danger of outpacing the EU's ability to respond. Because of the size, power and adaptability of US financial markets, it is possible that US Generally Accepted Accounting Practices (US GAAP) and US Generally Accepted Auditing Practices (US GAAS) may become the dc facto global standards for listed companies.

This paper reports the results of a postal questionnaire survey of UK primary stakeholders, members of the Institutional Fund Managers Association, as to the definition of the expectations gap, its constituents, and the extent to which the expectations gap might be narrowed by audit regulation. The study revealed that fund managers were aware of the audit expectations gap and were particularly concerned about the scope and responsibilities of the auditor, and monitoring of auditors’ work. Fund managers agreed that increased regulation offered potential to narrow the expectations gap, especially as regards monitoring and discipline of auditors. The paper concludes that establishment of the Accountancy Foundation should provide greater independence to the investigation and disciplinary processes of the existing regulatory framework, and thus go some way to narrowing the expectations gap. Concerns may remain about its perceived independence of the profession and the lack of a specific obligation to investigate auditors’ work in circumstances of corporate failure.

Presents 35 abstracts from the 2001 Employment Research Unit Annual conference held at Cardiff Business School in September 2001. Attempts to explore the theme of changing politics of employment relations beyond and within the nation state, against a background of concern in the developed economies at the erosion of relatively advanced conditions of work and social welfare through increasing competition and international agitation for more effective global labour standards. Divides this concept into two areas, addressing the erosion of employment standards through processes of restructuring and examining attempts by governments, trade unions and agencies to re‐create effective systems of regulation. Gives case examples from areas such as India, Wales, London, Ireland, South Africa, Europe and Japan. Covers subjects such as the Disability Discrimination Act, minimum wage, training, contract workers and managing change.

Finance is the lifeblood of an economy. Businesses require capital in order to start up, and usually require additional resources to maintain or expand their activities. In some cases, they may simply reinvest their profits. But expansion on a significant scale may require more than this. Thus, businesses may also seek to borrow funds or to solicit investments in return for the investor's share of future profit. One of the basic means by which this latter strategy is pursued in industrial societies is for businesses to solicit investments from the public through the initial public offering of shares, and for subsequent buying and selling of shares by investors who expect the value of the shares in question to rise or fall. Securities markets are thus integral to a nation's economic system.

Placement prominence is a multidimensional concept. Previous studies have defined and operationalized prominence in different ways, and no studies have tried to systematically examine what should and should not be counted as prominence. This study aims to fill this gap.

Using a content analysis of six short films and a survey study on 129 Chinese young adults, this study systematically examined 13 dimensions of placement prominence on the memory of placed brands.

Factor analysis has reduced the 13 dimensions into five factors: contextual, narrative, sensory, exposure and spatial prominence. Fuzzy-set qualitative comparative analysis (QCA) software was used to conduct a contrarian case analysis and test for predictive validity. This was followed by a QCA to identify the optimal configurations of the five factors that may lead to a high recognition of the placed brands. The optimal configurations were also contrasted across two gender and brand familiarity groups. While the optimal configurations of prominence on brand memory for male and female participants were largely the same, the combinations differed between participants with low and high brand familiarity.

Previous studies in product placement usually operationalize prominence with a few dominant dimensions intuitively though several other dimensions, and their interactions could also affect the prominence level. To the best of authors’ knowledge, this is the first study that used multiple dimensions of prominence configurations to identify paths that may lead to low and high brand memory. The empirical results contribute to the theory and understanding of the effect of prominence on brand memory and provide guidance to brand managers in determining which prominence configuration is the most suitable for achieving their promotional objective.

October 27, 1969 Redundancy — Dismissal — Employee loaned to another firm — Employee's insurance and tax documents transferred to other firm without his knowledge — Employee paid by other firm — Whether “dismissal” — Whether employee entitled to terminate contract “by reason of the employer's conduct” — Whether question of law — Redundancy Payments Act, 1965 (c.62), ss. 1, 3 (1) (c).