提高审计师独立性的措施:西班牙非专业投资者和审计师的看法

IF 7.1 3区 管理学 Q1 BUSINESS European Research on Management and Business Economics Pub Date : 2024-05-01 DOI:10.1016/j.iedeen.2024.100250
Reiner Quick , Daniel Sánchez Toledano , Joaquín Sánchez Toledano
{"title":"提高审计师独立性的措施:西班牙非专业投资者和审计师的看法","authors":"Reiner Quick ,&nbsp;Daniel Sánchez Toledano ,&nbsp;Joaquín Sánchez Toledano","doi":"10.1016/j.iedeen.2024.100250","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div><p>Auditors fulfill a crucial societal role by increasing the credibility of financial reports, which requires that appropriate audit quality be provided and auditors are factually independent and perceived as such. So far, regulators and researchers have focused on a few measures for improving independence, namely the prohibition of non-audit services (NAS), audit firm and audit partner rotation, and joint audits. Despite these regulatory initiatives, accounting scandals still happen, and the independence of the auditors involved is questioned. Therefore, this explorative study aims to identify alternative measures that may strengthen auditor independence. Non-professional investors and auditors participated in a survey to identify promising independence-enhancing measures.</p><p>Surprisingly, not only non-professional investors but also auditors support the implementation of many instruments. Non-professional investors rate measures related to oversight, controls, and sanctions as particularly useful. Likewise, auditors perceive measures for oversight and control as helpful but rank most sanctions lower than non-professional investors. They also support a stricter civil liability and rank some direct independence-improving measures as highly useful. Overall, the participants perceive a greater need for improving the independence of public interest entity (PIE) auditors.</p><p>This explorative study widens the research horizon by adding alternative measures for improving independence in appearance. Thus, researchers may identify promising avenues for future research. Also, the paper is of interest to regulators and potentially helps in setting independence standards. Auditors and audit committees can identify opportunities for taking voluntary actions to ensure factual and perceived auditor independence.</p></div>","PeriodicalId":45796,"journal":{"name":"European Research on Management and Business Economics","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":7.1000,"publicationDate":"2024-05-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S244488342400010X/pdfft?md5=c2788218852521f4b59169e0652b75d3&pid=1-s2.0-S244488342400010X-main.pdf","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Measures for enhancing auditor independence: Perceptions of spanish non-professional investors and auditors\",\"authors\":\"Reiner Quick ,&nbsp;Daniel Sánchez Toledano ,&nbsp;Joaquín Sánchez Toledano\",\"doi\":\"10.1016/j.iedeen.2024.100250\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<div><p>Auditors fulfill a crucial societal role by increasing the credibility of financial reports, which requires that appropriate audit quality be provided and auditors are factually independent and perceived as such. So far, regulators and researchers have focused on a few measures for improving independence, namely the prohibition of non-audit services (NAS), audit firm and audit partner rotation, and joint audits. Despite these regulatory initiatives, accounting scandals still happen, and the independence of the auditors involved is questioned. Therefore, this explorative study aims to identify alternative measures that may strengthen auditor independence. Non-professional investors and auditors participated in a survey to identify promising independence-enhancing measures.</p><p>Surprisingly, not only non-professional investors but also auditors support the implementation of many instruments. Non-professional investors rate measures related to oversight, controls, and sanctions as particularly useful. Likewise, auditors perceive measures for oversight and control as helpful but rank most sanctions lower than non-professional investors. They also support a stricter civil liability and rank some direct independence-improving measures as highly useful. Overall, the participants perceive a greater need for improving the independence of public interest entity (PIE) auditors.</p><p>This explorative study widens the research horizon by adding alternative measures for improving independence in appearance. Thus, researchers may identify promising avenues for future research. Also, the paper is of interest to regulators and potentially helps in setting independence standards. Auditors and audit committees can identify opportunities for taking voluntary actions to ensure factual and perceived auditor independence.</p></div>\",\"PeriodicalId\":45796,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"European Research on Management and Business Economics\",\"volume\":null,\"pages\":null},\"PeriodicalIF\":7.1000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-05-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S244488342400010X/pdfft?md5=c2788218852521f4b59169e0652b75d3&pid=1-s2.0-S244488342400010X-main.pdf\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"European Research on Management and Business Economics\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"91\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S244488342400010X\",\"RegionNum\":3,\"RegionCategory\":\"管理学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q1\",\"JCRName\":\"BUSINESS\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"European Research on Management and Business Economics","FirstCategoryId":"91","ListUrlMain":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S244488342400010X","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"管理学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"BUSINESS","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

审计师通过提高财务报告的可信度发挥着至关重要的社会作用,这就要求提供适当的审计质量,审计师在事实上是独立的,并且被认为是独立的。迄今为止,监管机构和研究人员主要集中在几项提高独立性的措施上,即禁止非审计服务(NAS)、审计公司和审计合伙人轮换以及联合审计。尽管采取了这些监管措施,但会计丑闻仍时有发生,相关审计师的独立性也受到质疑。因此,本探索性研究旨在找出可加强审计师独立性的替代措施。非专业投资者和审计师参与了一项调查,以确定有希望加强独立性的措施。令人惊讶的是,不仅非专业投资者,审计师也支持实施许多工具。非专业投资者认为与监督、控制和制裁有关的措施特别有用。同样,审计师也认为监督和控制措施很有帮助,但对大多数制裁措施的评价低于非专业投资者。他们还支持更严格的民事责任,并认为一些直接提高独立性的措施非常有用。总体而言,参与者认为更有必要提高公益实体(PIE)审计师的独立性。这项探索性研究通过增加提高外观独立性的替代措施,拓宽了研究视野。因此,研究人员可以为今后的研究找到有前途的途径。此外,本文对监管机构也很有意义,可能有助于制定独立性标准。审计师和审计委员会可以发现采取自愿行动的机会,以确保审计师在事实和感知上的独立性。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
Measures for enhancing auditor independence: Perceptions of spanish non-professional investors and auditors

Auditors fulfill a crucial societal role by increasing the credibility of financial reports, which requires that appropriate audit quality be provided and auditors are factually independent and perceived as such. So far, regulators and researchers have focused on a few measures for improving independence, namely the prohibition of non-audit services (NAS), audit firm and audit partner rotation, and joint audits. Despite these regulatory initiatives, accounting scandals still happen, and the independence of the auditors involved is questioned. Therefore, this explorative study aims to identify alternative measures that may strengthen auditor independence. Non-professional investors and auditors participated in a survey to identify promising independence-enhancing measures.

Surprisingly, not only non-professional investors but also auditors support the implementation of many instruments. Non-professional investors rate measures related to oversight, controls, and sanctions as particularly useful. Likewise, auditors perceive measures for oversight and control as helpful but rank most sanctions lower than non-professional investors. They also support a stricter civil liability and rank some direct independence-improving measures as highly useful. Overall, the participants perceive a greater need for improving the independence of public interest entity (PIE) auditors.

This explorative study widens the research horizon by adding alternative measures for improving independence in appearance. Thus, researchers may identify promising avenues for future research. Also, the paper is of interest to regulators and potentially helps in setting independence standards. Auditors and audit committees can identify opportunities for taking voluntary actions to ensure factual and perceived auditor independence.

求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
CiteScore
11.70
自引率
3.40%
发文量
30
审稿时长
50 weeks
期刊介绍: European Research on Management and Business Economics (ERMBE) was born in 1995 as Investigaciones Europeas de Dirección y Economía de la Empresa (IEDEE). The journal is published by the European Academy of Management and Business Economics (AEDEM) under this new title since 2016, it was indexed in SCOPUS in 2012 and in Thomson Reuters Emerging Sources Citation Index in 2015. From the beginning, the aim of the Journal is to foster academic research by publishing original research articles that meet the highest analytical standards, and provide new insights that contribute and spread the business management knowledge
期刊最新文献
Understanding the moderating role of chronotypes for online mobile gaming in-app purchase intention The luxury goods market: Understanding the psychology of Chinese consumers Determinants of interconnected corporate information. Evidence of the connectivity principle in integrated reporting The relationship between ethnocentric behaviour and workforce localisation success: The mediating role of knowledge sharing tendency Resistance or compatibility: Clan culture and corporate social responsibility
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1