Tina Vuko, Sergeja Slapničar, Marko Čular, Matej Drašček
The aim of this paper is to analyse which factors explain the effectiveness of internal audit in providing assurance about cybersecurity risk management. On the basis of neo‐institutional theory, we hypothesize that coercive (cybersecurity regulation), normative (professionalization of internal auditors and Boards) and mimetic forces (outsourcing of cyber security assurance services) positively contribute to cybersecurity audit (CSA) effectiveness. As these forces do not come about in an interest free model, we study the role of and the interaction with other actors who shape the CSA practices—Boards and security experts. We hypothesize that Board's support to CSA and the level of internal auditors' cooperation with the first and the second line of defence positively affect CSA effectiveness. To test our hypothesis, we conducted a survey involving IT auditors and Chief Audit Executives from various industries, organizations of different sizes and countries. We examined the hypothesized relationships in a series of regression analyses. We find that normative forces (professionalization of the internal auditors and Boards' competences), Board's support to CSA and cooperation between the internal audit function (IAF) and the first two line of defence significantly explain the CSA effectiveness. We find no support for the effect of regulation as a coercive force and outsourcing as a mimetic force. We discuss potential reasons for our findings and their implications. The paper is an original analysis that advances our understanding of key drivers of CSA effectiveness and their relationships.
{"title":"Key drivers of cybersecurity audit effectiveness: A neo‐institutional perspective","authors":"Tina Vuko, Sergeja Slapničar, Marko Čular, Matej Drašček","doi":"10.1111/ijau.12365","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1111/ijau.12365","url":null,"abstract":"The aim of this paper is to analyse which factors explain the effectiveness of internal audit in providing assurance about cybersecurity risk management. On the basis of neo‐institutional theory, we hypothesize that coercive (cybersecurity regulation), normative (professionalization of internal auditors and Boards) and mimetic forces (outsourcing of cyber security assurance services) positively contribute to cybersecurity audit (CSA) effectiveness. As these forces do not come about in an interest free model, we study the role of and the interaction with other actors who shape the CSA practices—Boards and security experts. We hypothesize that Board's support to CSA and the level of internal auditors' cooperation with the first and the second line of defence positively affect CSA effectiveness. To test our hypothesis, we conducted a survey involving IT auditors and Chief Audit Executives from various industries, organizations of different sizes and countries. We examined the hypothesized relationships in a series of regression analyses. We find that normative forces (professionalization of the internal auditors and Boards' competences), Board's support to CSA and cooperation between the internal audit function (IAF) and the first two line of defence significantly explain the CSA effectiveness. We find no support for the effect of regulation as a coercive force and outsourcing as a mimetic force. We discuss potential reasons for our findings and their implications. The paper is an original analysis that advances our understanding of key drivers of CSA effectiveness and their relationships.","PeriodicalId":47092,"journal":{"name":"International Journal of Auditing","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":2.0,"publicationDate":"2024-07-23","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"141775725","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"管理学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Many countries worldwide mandate the rotation of audit partners or audit firms to reinforce independence and professional skepticism. The European Union is a rare instance requiring audit firm and audit partner rotation simultaneously. By analysing 6,103 firm‐year observations of non‐financial firms from 29 European countries between 2018 and 2022, this study finds that audit firm rotations are associated with considerable changes in key audit matters, suggesting the existence of a fresh‐look effect. In contrast, audit partner rotations appear to induce only limited variations in the key audit areas. Additional analyses reveal that the results are consistent across mandatory and voluntary rotations. Collectively, the findings suggest that audit firm rotations enable auditors to overcome institutional pressures toward standardisation within audit firms, while practical considerations such as the requirement of gradual rotation mechanisms within audit firms might limit individual audit partners' influence. This study adds to the inconclusive literature on the effects of (mandatory) audit partner and audit firm rotations. Further, the results contribute new insights into the consequences of the EU audit reform that has introduced mandatory audit firm rotation and provide evidence in favour of audit firm rotation requirements for other regulators.
{"title":"Fresh‐look effect of audit firm and audit partner rotations? Evidence from European key audit matters","authors":"Florian Philipp Federsel","doi":"10.1111/ijau.12364","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1111/ijau.12364","url":null,"abstract":"Many countries worldwide mandate the rotation of audit partners or audit firms to reinforce independence and professional skepticism. The European Union is a rare instance requiring audit firm and audit partner rotation simultaneously. By analysing 6,103 firm‐year observations of non‐financial firms from 29 European countries between 2018 and 2022, this study finds that audit firm rotations are associated with considerable changes in key audit matters, suggesting the existence of a fresh‐look effect. In contrast, audit partner rotations appear to induce only limited variations in the key audit areas. Additional analyses reveal that the results are consistent across mandatory and voluntary rotations. Collectively, the findings suggest that audit firm rotations enable auditors to overcome institutional pressures toward standardisation within audit firms, while practical considerations such as the requirement of gradual rotation mechanisms within audit firms might limit individual audit partners' influence. This study adds to the inconclusive literature on the effects of (mandatory) audit partner and audit firm rotations. Further, the results contribute new insights into the consequences of the EU audit reform that has introduced mandatory audit firm rotation and provide evidence in favour of audit firm rotation requirements for other regulators.","PeriodicalId":47092,"journal":{"name":"International Journal of Auditing","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":2.0,"publicationDate":"2024-07-18","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"141744304","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"管理学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
This study investigates the Big 4 effect for a new‐to‐the‐world audit service. Based on unique data from the Danish COVID‐19 fixed cost support scheme we analyse differences in audit fees and two measures of audit quality across Big 4 and non‐Big 4 engagements. Our findings suggest that firms engaging with Big 4 auditors experience more successful outcomes in the application process and are willing to pay a Big 4 premium for comparable assurance services. Clients of Big 4 auditors are, on average, more likely to receive full compensation, and experience fewer rejections during the application process than clients of non‐Big 4 auditors. This research has implications for policymakers and companies.
{"title":"The Big 4 effect for new audit services: The case of the Danish COVID‐19 fixed‐cost business‐support scheme","authors":"Morten Holm, Thomas Riise Johansen","doi":"10.1111/ijau.12363","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1111/ijau.12363","url":null,"abstract":"This study investigates the Big 4 effect for a new‐to‐the‐world audit service. Based on unique data from the Danish COVID‐19 fixed cost support scheme we analyse differences in audit fees and two measures of audit quality across Big 4 and non‐Big 4 engagements. Our findings suggest that firms engaging with Big 4 auditors experience more successful outcomes in the application process and are willing to pay a Big 4 premium for comparable assurance services. Clients of Big 4 auditors are, on average, more likely to receive full compensation, and experience fewer rejections during the application process than clients of non‐Big 4 auditors. This research has implications for policymakers and companies.","PeriodicalId":47092,"journal":{"name":"International Journal of Auditing","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":2.0,"publicationDate":"2024-07-11","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"141609049","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"管理学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Auditing is a credence good so its quality cannot be determined directly. The gain or loss of large clients is one publicly available signal that can used by other clients to ascertain the quality provided by audit firms. This paper examines whether this quality signal results in firms earning fee premiums and discounts. Empirical examination of a sample of 16,233 firm‐years of listed Australian companies for the period 2011–2021 shows that there is an association between offices and industry groups that gain and lose large clients, in both the current and previous periods, and economically significant fee premiums for both Big‐4 and non‐Big‐4 firms. These results suggest that clients can use auditor portfolio changes as quality signals and that they appear to reward firms that gain large clients and prune their portfolios of poor clients, particularly if these changes are in the same industry as the client.
{"title":"Are there audit fee premiums for client portfolio management?","authors":"Stuart D. Taylor","doi":"10.1111/ijau.12361","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1111/ijau.12361","url":null,"abstract":"Auditing is a credence good so its quality cannot be determined directly. The gain or loss of large clients is one publicly available signal that can used by other clients to ascertain the quality provided by audit firms. This paper examines whether this quality signal results in firms earning fee premiums and discounts. Empirical examination of a sample of 16,233 firm‐years of listed Australian companies for the period 2011–2021 shows that there is an association between offices and industry groups that gain and lose large clients, in both the current and previous periods, and economically significant fee premiums for both Big‐4 and non‐Big‐4 firms. These results suggest that clients can use auditor portfolio changes as quality signals and that they appear to reward firms that gain large clients and prune their portfolios of poor clients, particularly if these changes are in the same industry as the client.","PeriodicalId":47092,"journal":{"name":"International Journal of Auditing","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":2.0,"publicationDate":"2024-07-04","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"141546973","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"管理学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
This study employs the measurement of the cost of compliance with all federal paperwork regulations to examine the association between regulatory intensity and audit fees at the company level. Using a sample of US companies from 2003 to 2019, I find that regulatory intensity is positively associated with audit fees, suggesting that firms facing a heavier burden of regulatory compliance tend to incur higher audit fees. The findings are supported by various robustness tests. I also document a positive association between regulatory intensity and audit report lag. Moreover, I find that the positive relation between regulatory intensity and audit fees is more pronounced among firms in high‐litigation industries, which are typically subject to elevated litigation risks. This study contributes to the existing literature by providing new evidence on the relationship between regulatory intensity and audit fees, utilizing a novel and rigorous measure that captures the intensity of a broad range of regulations.
{"title":"Regulatory intensity and audit fees","authors":"Hongkang Xu","doi":"10.1111/ijau.12362","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1111/ijau.12362","url":null,"abstract":"This study employs the measurement of the cost of compliance with all federal paperwork regulations to examine the association between regulatory intensity and audit fees at the company level. Using a sample of US companies from 2003 to 2019, I find that regulatory intensity is positively associated with audit fees, suggesting that firms facing a heavier burden of regulatory compliance tend to incur higher audit fees. The findings are supported by various robustness tests. I also document a positive association between regulatory intensity and audit report lag. Moreover, I find that the positive relation between regulatory intensity and audit fees is more pronounced among firms in high‐litigation industries, which are typically subject to elevated litigation risks. This study contributes to the existing literature by providing new evidence on the relationship between regulatory intensity and audit fees, utilizing a novel and rigorous measure that captures the intensity of a broad range of regulations.","PeriodicalId":47092,"journal":{"name":"International Journal of Auditing","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":2.0,"publicationDate":"2024-06-29","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"141501658","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"管理学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Less complex entities (LCEs) make a critical contribution to the public, private and voluntary sectors in England and internationally and account for the great majority of all local public audits. Recently, the role and objectives of financial reporting and external auditing in England have been subject to unprecedented criticism through a number of independent national reports. This paper discusses the auditing arrangements for LCEs in the public sector in England by examining the evidence generated by the local public audit review by Sir Tony Redmond. It discusses implications for the local public audit regime and considers whether the existing and proposed accountability and transparency arrangements are compatible with the new International Standard on Auditing (ISA) for LCEs. It contributes to the limited research on the new ISA for LCEs by investigating the differences and similarities between the new ISA for LCEs and the emerging auditing standards for English LCEs.
{"title":"External auditing arrangements of smaller authorities in England","authors":"Katarzyna Lakoma, Peter Murphy, Angela Toothill","doi":"10.1111/ijau.12360","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1111/ijau.12360","url":null,"abstract":"Less complex entities (LCEs) make a critical contribution to the public, private and voluntary sectors in England and internationally and account for the great majority of all local public audits. Recently, the role and objectives of financial reporting and external auditing in England have been subject to unprecedented criticism through a number of independent national reports. This paper discusses the auditing arrangements for LCEs in the public sector in England by examining the evidence generated by the local public audit review by Sir Tony Redmond. It discusses implications for the local public audit regime and considers whether the existing and proposed accountability and transparency arrangements are compatible with the new International Standard on Auditing (ISA) for LCEs. It contributes to the limited research on the new ISA for LCEs by investigating the differences and similarities between the new ISA for LCEs and the emerging auditing standards for English LCEs.","PeriodicalId":47092,"journal":{"name":"International Journal of Auditing","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":2.0,"publicationDate":"2024-06-29","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"141501657","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"管理学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
This study investigates the work of actually writing auditing standards in France, a country that has not adopted the International Standards on Auditing (ISAs). Based on interviews, participant observation, and documentary study, I highlight the adaptation work carried out to develop French standards, with a transposition mechanism that goes far beyond simply translating ISAs. I emphasise the significant impact of legalism and the principle of hierarchy of norms. I also illustrate the writing conventions used to set standards that are clear and understandable for a wide range of stakeholders. My results show that every word counts in standard‐setting work, which makes it an iterative process involving experts in standard‐setting technique. This study opens the black box of standard‐setters' work and offers a new perspective for analysis of standard setting by considering it as a writing process.
{"title":"Setting auditing standards: Analysis of a writing process","authors":"Isabelle Fabioux","doi":"10.1111/ijau.12355","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1111/ijau.12355","url":null,"abstract":"This study investigates the work of actually writing auditing standards in France, a country that has not adopted the International Standards on Auditing (ISAs). Based on interviews, participant observation, and documentary study, I highlight the adaptation work carried out to develop French standards, with a transposition mechanism that goes far beyond simply translating ISAs. I emphasise the significant impact of legalism and the principle of hierarchy of norms. I also illustrate the writing conventions used to set standards that are clear and understandable for a wide range of stakeholders. My results show that every word counts in standard‐setting work, which makes it an iterative process involving experts in standard‐setting technique. This study opens the black box of standard‐setters' work and offers a new perspective for analysis of standard setting by considering it as a writing process.","PeriodicalId":47092,"journal":{"name":"International Journal of Auditing","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":2.0,"publicationDate":"2024-06-07","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"141374489","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"管理学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
This paper investigates the audit team outcomes of team diversity. Diversity theory suggests that diversity can benefit a team's work quality if the variety of team characteristics improves decision‐making and performance. However, team diversity can have harmful affective outcomes if team members separate into different categories, and thus they feel stressed, intend to leave the profession or experience conflict between team members. We investigated this paradox in team diversity in an audit context at a Big 4 audit firm in Sweden, which provided proprietary team data. In addition, 335 individuals from 185 different audit teams responded to a questionnaire. Each participant responded to a survey about their experience with one specific engagement. Results indicated that team diversity benefits the audit team's affective outcomes of role stress, satisfaction and turnover intentions. However, diverse teams also reduce some audit teams' work quality outcomes, such as dysfunctional behaviour, performance, effort and perceptions of audit quality.
{"title":"Audit team diversity, work quality and affective state outcomes","authors":"Alice Annelin, Tobias Svanström","doi":"10.1111/ijau.12354","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1111/ijau.12354","url":null,"abstract":"This paper investigates the audit team outcomes of team diversity. Diversity theory suggests that diversity can benefit a team's work quality if the variety of team characteristics improves decision‐making and performance. However, team diversity can have harmful affective outcomes if team members separate into different categories, and thus they feel stressed, intend to leave the profession or experience conflict between team members. We investigated this paradox in team diversity in an audit context at a Big 4 audit firm in Sweden, which provided proprietary team data. In addition, 335 individuals from 185 different audit teams responded to a questionnaire. Each participant responded to a survey about their experience with one specific engagement. Results indicated that team diversity benefits the audit team's affective outcomes of role stress, satisfaction and turnover intentions. However, diverse teams also reduce some audit teams' work quality outcomes, such as dysfunctional behaviour, performance, effort and perceptions of audit quality.","PeriodicalId":47092,"journal":{"name":"International Journal of Auditing","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":2.0,"publicationDate":"2024-05-27","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"141192922","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"管理学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
This study examines the relationship between country‐level corruption and audit pricing decisions across EU27 countries. Using a sample of 29,607 firm‐year observations for the period 2011–2021, I find that firms headquartered in more corrupt countries pay higher audit fees and have longer reporting lags. I also show that this relationship is stronger after the EU audit reform came into force in 2016. The results suggest that auditors respond to corruption risk stemming from the broader macroeconomic environment by increasing audit fees and audit effort. In additional analyses, I show how the association between audit fees and corruption varies across firm industries, and I document that female engagement partners tend to be more sensitive to corruption risk than their male counterparts. Ultimately, I find unexpected evidence indicating that financial reporting quality, proxied by discretionary accruals, is not adversely affected by corruption. This study addresses prior calls for a more granular understanding of external factors in audit research and provides the first European evidence of the association between corruption and auditor responses. The implications of this study should be particularly relevant for researchers, market participants and regulators.
{"title":"Corruption and audit fees: New evidence from EU27 countries","authors":"Markus Mottinger","doi":"10.1111/ijau.12349","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1111/ijau.12349","url":null,"abstract":"This study examines the relationship between country‐level corruption and audit pricing decisions across EU27 countries. Using a sample of 29,607 firm‐year observations for the period 2011–2021, I find that firms headquartered in more corrupt countries pay higher audit fees and have longer reporting lags. I also show that this relationship is stronger after the EU audit reform came into force in 2016. The results suggest that auditors respond to corruption risk stemming from the broader macroeconomic environment by increasing audit fees and audit effort. In additional analyses, I show how the association between audit fees and corruption varies across firm industries, and I document that female engagement partners tend to be more sensitive to corruption risk than their male counterparts. Ultimately, I find unexpected evidence indicating that financial reporting quality, proxied by discretionary accruals, is not adversely affected by corruption. This study addresses prior calls for a more granular understanding of external factors in audit research and provides the first European evidence of the association between corruption and auditor responses. The implications of this study should be particularly relevant for researchers, market participants and regulators.","PeriodicalId":47092,"journal":{"name":"International Journal of Auditing","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":2.0,"publicationDate":"2024-05-15","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"140973110","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"管理学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Jumi Kim, Meehyun Kim, Yangin Yoon, Won Gyun No, Miklos A. Vasarhelyi
This study examines the effects of COVID‐19 and the enhanced internal control requirements (Korea Sarbanes‐Oxley or K‐SOX) on audit effort in Korea. The results show that both COVID‐19 and K‐SOX led to increases in audit effort. Regarding the comparative magnitude of these two shocks, COVID‐19 is associated with greater total audit effort, whereas K‐SOX is linked to greater IT audit effort. This study also finds that Big 4 firms negatively moderate the increase in total audit effort and IT audit effort caused by COVID‐19. Additionally, Big 4 firms moderate the effect of K‐SOX on mid‐sized clients. Specifically, Big 4 firms positively moderate the increase in total audit effort, whereas they negatively moderate the increase in IT audit effort caused by K‐SOX. This study also investigates the effects of COVID‐19 and K‐SOX on various ranks of auditors and the effects of these exogenous events observed across different industry sectors. Our findings provide insights into the impact of an unpredicted global health crisis and predicted stringent regulations on audit effort when they occur simultaneously, an area that has never been addressed due to its unprecedented nature.
本研究探讨了 COVID-19 和强化内部控制要求（韩国萨班斯法案或 K-SOX）对韩国审计工作的影响。结果表明，COVID-19 和 K-SOX 都导致了审计工作的增加。就这两种冲击的相对幅度而言，COVID-19 与更大的总审计工作相关，而 K-SOX 则与更大的 IT 审计工作相关。本研究还发现，四大会计师事务所对 COVID-19 所导致的总审计工作量和 IT 审计工作量的增加起负向调节作用。此外，四大会计师事务所还减缓了 K-SOX 对中型客户的影响。具体来说，四大会计师事务所对 K-SOX 导致的总审计工作量的增加具有正向调节作用，而对 IT 审计工作量的增加则具有负向调节作用。本研究还调查了 COVID-19 和 K-SOX 对不同级别审计师的影响，以及在不同行业领域观察到的这些外生事件的影响。我们的研究结果为我们提供了洞察力，使我们能够了解未曾预料的全球健康危机和预料中的严格法规同时发生时对审计工作的影响。
{"title":"Assessing audit effort in response to exogenous shocks: Evidence from Korea on the impact of enhanced audit standards and COVID‐19","authors":"Jumi Kim, Meehyun Kim, Yangin Yoon, Won Gyun No, Miklos A. Vasarhelyi","doi":"10.1111/ijau.12353","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1111/ijau.12353","url":null,"abstract":"This study examines the effects of COVID‐19 and the enhanced internal control requirements (Korea Sarbanes‐Oxley or K‐SOX) on audit effort in Korea. The results show that both COVID‐19 and K‐SOX led to increases in audit effort. Regarding the comparative magnitude of these two shocks, COVID‐19 is associated with greater total audit effort, whereas K‐SOX is linked to greater IT audit effort. This study also finds that Big 4 firms negatively moderate the increase in total audit effort and IT audit effort caused by COVID‐19. Additionally, Big 4 firms moderate the effect of K‐SOX on mid‐sized clients. Specifically, Big 4 firms positively moderate the increase in total audit effort, whereas they negatively moderate the increase in IT audit effort caused by K‐SOX. This study also investigates the effects of COVID‐19 and K‐SOX on various ranks of auditors and the effects of these exogenous events observed across different industry sectors. Our findings provide insights into the impact of an unpredicted global health crisis and predicted stringent regulations on audit effort when they occur simultaneously, an area that has never been addressed due to its unprecedented nature.","PeriodicalId":47092,"journal":{"name":"International Journal of Auditing","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":2.0,"publicationDate":"2024-05-13","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"140984218","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"管理学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
京公网安备 11010802042870号
京ICP备2023020795号-1
扫码关注我们
求助内容：
应助结果提醒方式：