Search results

In this paper, we investigate whether internal control and whether corporate life cycle would affect firm performance in the emerging markets of China.

We use Chen, Dong, Han, and Zhou’s (2013) internal control index on the effectiveness of internal control and Dickinson’s (2011) definition on firm life cycle. We use multivariate regression analysis.

We find that the internal control improves corporate performance. When dividing firm life cycle into five stages: introduction, growth, mature, shake-out and decline, we find that the impacts of internal control on firm performance vary with different stages. The positive impact of internal control on firm performance is more significant in maturity and shake-out stages than other stages.

Our findings would have implications for the regulators and policy makers with regards to the importance of internal control in corporate governance and the effectiveness of implementing standards and guidelines on internal control in public firms.

In addition, our findings on the various roles of internal control at different stages of firm life cycle would help managers and board of directors find more focus in risk management and board monitoring, respectively.

Although the prior literature have examined the link between internal control, information quality and cost of equity capital (Ashbaugh-Skaife, Collins, Kinney, & LaFond, 2009; Ogneva, Subramanyam, & Raghunandan, 2007), our study would be the first attempt to investigate the link between internal control and firm performance during different stages of firm life cycles.

Purpose – This chapter presents a preliminary conceptualisation of the effects that unequal power relationships have on the integrity of social science research and the safety of researchers.Methodology/approach – We begin by presenting a review of the current literature on risk to research outputs and researcher safety. In this review, we offer a conceptual framework of the factors of safety and autonomy of researchers developed in conjunction with extent stakeholder theory scholarship.Findings – We argue that, in the event of a threat to researchers’ autonomy while complying with university ethics committee requirements, or when faced with uneven power differentials between the researcher and various stakeholders, one of two actions may occur: (1) the researcher may alter the project in order to comply or (2) the researcher may feel so compromised that the research project is abandoned. In both of these instances, research that addresses power/structural inequalities is avoided. In the event of a threat to the researcher’s physical and emotional safety, three actions can result if the researcher is harmed: (1) the incident may not be reported, which in turn may result in further harm to the researcher; (2) counselling may be undertaken to resolve and debrief emotional stress; or (3) a worker’s compensation claim may be lodged.Social implications – As academics, research is the core business of the organisations of which we are members. The issues introduced and discussed in this chapter are serious; however, our conceptualisation requires further research. We outline why this set of issues is significant and deserving of more study than it has previously received.Originality/value of  chapter – Previous research that links research in the area of protection for researchers and research autonomy is very limited in Australia, and therefore our conceptualisation provides value to the research agenda on this topic. We also propose that the issue of researcher safety and autonomy is common to most academic environments and merits further academic study.

Since the mid-1990s, enterprise risk management (ERM) has proliferated in both the private and public sector as a holistic, enterprise-wide approach to risk management. In this chapter, we begin by exploring the economic, regulatory and professional context of ERM practices in Norway. To gain an understanding of the current state of ERM practices among Norwegian entities, we have conducted a survey among members of the Institute of Internal Auditors (IIA) Norway. Based on the survey data, we go on to analyse the perceived maturity of risk management practices of the surveyed organizations, as well as their integration of risk management with governance mechanisms and accounting practices. Four main findings emerged from the survey. We firstly observed that a majority of the respondents perceived that they had implemented ERM. Secondly, the average maturity of risk management practice is at a medium level, with ambitions to improve it further in the future. We further observed that a majority of the organizations have established risk management governance structures regarding the roles of risk management. However, there is still work to be done in relation to risk management functions in order for them to gain more attention and influence in the organizations. Finally, we find that risk management is more integrated with reporting processes than with strategic and performance planning processes, suggesting a more reactive than proactive approach to managing risks.

This chapter examines whether the European Union or the United States set the parameters in the field of consumer protection and environmental regulations. The analysis points out that there is no straightforward answer because leadership rotates or fluctuates depending on the extent to which societies and decision makers feel strongly about a particular issue. Examples are tobacco control and regulations with regards to genetically modified crops and food. The US identified the risks related to the wide availability of cigarettes before the EU, while the EU highlighted the risks related to the introduction of GM crops/products in the absence of similar American concerns. Both cultural and institutional developments account for this divergence. A unique combination of factors heightened the salience of anti-smoking measures in the US, while an equally distinctive matrix of developments highlighted the social, economic, health, and safety challenges of genetically modified organism (GMO). However, in spite of different constellations of institutional and cultural factors, the EU has embraced tobacco control and the American private sector is slightly more cautious about pushing GM crops onto the market.

The global Islamic financial landscape is changing with rapid advances in technology. The increasingly tech-savvy demography is presenting both opportunities and challenges to the industry. With the advances in e-finance and mobile technologies, financial technology (Fintech) innovations emerged by combining the e-finance, Internet, social networking services, social media, artificial intelligence (AI) and big data analytics. Fintech promises to reshape the Islamic financial landscape by improving processes’ efficiencies, cost-effectiveness, increased distribution, Sharīʿah compliance and financial inclusion. As far as the Islamic fund management industry is concerned, AI seems to be the keyword. Islamic fund managers have recently started to incorporate AI and big data analytics into their strategy in the process of making accurate decisions based on facts and figures, which eliminates any biases and personal intuition. This disruption in status quo is raising new issues, new concerns and new exciting opportunities. While disruption may carry negative connotations, the industry players have been embracing the innovation and potential revolution the technology could offer. Thus, the objective of this chapter is to discuss legal aspects of Fintech and its impact on the Islamic fund management industry in Malaysia. This chapter introduces a historical overview of Fintech and its evolution in the Islamic fund management industry. This chapter further provides an overview of the legal and regulatory aspects of Fintech with regards to the industry. Finally, legal issues and challenges are identified and discussed. Being a legal research, this chapter adopts a qualitative method by analysing the relevant literatures on the subject. This chapter is expected to provide an insight into the application of Fintech and its impact on the Islamic fund management industry in Malaysia.

Commentators express concern that when auditors investigate for but fail to detect fraud, jurors might effectively penalize the auditors for having investigated for the fraud (AICPA, 2004; Coffee, 2004; Golden, Skalak, & Clayton, 2006). Consistent with these concerns, Reffett (2010) finds that, in a between-participants setting, evaluators in cases of undetected fraud are more likely to hold auditors liable for damages when the auditors identified the perpetrated fraud as a fraud risk and then investigated for the fraud, relative to when the auditors did neither. What remains unclear, however, is the extent to which identifying versus investigating fraud risks increases evaluators’ between-participants assessments of auditor liability. That is, when auditors investigate for, but fail to detect fraud, is the increase in evaluators’ liability assessments due to the fact that the auditors identified (i.e., were aware of) the fraud risk but did not detect the fraud, or that the auditors unsuccessfully investigated for the fraud (or both)? This study addresses these questions by reporting evidence that both identifying and investigating fraud risks can each, in isolation, increase evaluators’ perceptions of auditor negligence. The processes by which identifying and investigating fraud risks increase evaluators’ negligence verdicts, however, appear to differ.

Part V analyzes the details of how to assess materiality. It first tackles qualitative versus quantitative criteria and the role of professional judgment. It then analyzes the selection of quantitative threshold, to expand to the choice of benchmarks. It contrasts the whole financial statements with subaggregates, line items, and components.

Specific sections contrast IASB, FASB, SEC, and other guidance on materiality applied to comparative information, interim reporting, and segment reporting.

The section on estimates mingles complex guidance coming from accounting, auditing, and internal control over financial reporting to explain how the management can improve its assessment of materiality concerning estimates.

After explaining the techniques to move from individual to cumulative misstatements, the part tackles verification ex post, and finally summarizes the intricacies of whether immaterial misstatements are permissible and their consequences.