How do lead auditor instructions influence component auditors' evidence collection decisions? The joint influence of construal interpretations and responsibility

IF 3.2 3区 管理学 Q1 BUSINESS, FINANCE
Skye Zhu, Soon-Yeow Phang
{"title":"How do lead auditor instructions influence component auditors' evidence collection decisions? The joint influence of construal interpretations and responsibility","authors":"Skye Zhu,&nbsp;Soon-Yeow Phang","doi":"10.1111/1911-3846.12911","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p>Regulators have raised concerns about the quality of component auditors' work. Of particular concern is that component auditors often do not adequately perform procedures and gather enough quality evidence. This failure is likely caused by component auditors' different interpretations of lead auditor instructions and by their lack of responsibility. Our interview findings suggest that component auditors tend to interpret lead auditor instructions concretely because they often receive detailed instructions from lead auditors. We propose that a responsibility prompt reminding component auditors to be aware of their obligations to the group audit engagement can improve their evidence collection. In two experiments, we find that our proposed responsibility prompt can effectively improve component auditors' evidence collection decisions and that this finding holds across different cultural settings. Our third experiment provides evidence that a responsibility prompt improves component auditors' evidence collection when provided to auditors who receive instructions that prime low-level (but not high-level) construals. Overall, our findings suggest that prompting component auditors to internalize the responsibility of a group audit engagement is a viable way to improve the quality of group audits.</p>","PeriodicalId":10595,"journal":{"name":"Contemporary Accounting Research","volume":"41 1","pages":"591-619"},"PeriodicalIF":3.2000,"publicationDate":"2023-10-14","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/epdf/10.1111/1911-3846.12911","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Contemporary Accounting Research","FirstCategoryId":"91","ListUrlMain":"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1111/1911-3846.12911","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"管理学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"BUSINESS, FINANCE","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Regulators have raised concerns about the quality of component auditors' work. Of particular concern is that component auditors often do not adequately perform procedures and gather enough quality evidence. This failure is likely caused by component auditors' different interpretations of lead auditor instructions and by their lack of responsibility. Our interview findings suggest that component auditors tend to interpret lead auditor instructions concretely because they often receive detailed instructions from lead auditors. We propose that a responsibility prompt reminding component auditors to be aware of their obligations to the group audit engagement can improve their evidence collection. In two experiments, we find that our proposed responsibility prompt can effectively improve component auditors' evidence collection decisions and that this finding holds across different cultural settings. Our third experiment provides evidence that a responsibility prompt improves component auditors' evidence collection when provided to auditors who receive instructions that prime low-level (but not high-level) construals. Overall, our findings suggest that prompting component auditors to internalize the responsibility of a group audit engagement is a viable way to improve the quality of group audits.

Abstract Image

首席审计师的指示如何影响组成部分审计师的证据收集决策?解释性说明和责任的共同影响
监管机构对组件审计师的工作质量表示担忧。尤其令人担忧的是,组成部分审计师往往没有充分执行程序和收集足够的高质量证据。这种失误很可能是由于组成审计师对主要审计师指示的不同解释以及缺乏责任感造成的。我们的访谈结果表明,组件审计师倾向于具体解释主审审计师的指示,因为他们经常收到主审审计师的详细指示。我们建议,通过责任提示提醒组成审计师注意其对集团审计工作的义务,可以改善他们的证据收集工作。在两个实验中,我们发现我们提出的责任提示能有效改善审计人员收集证据的决策,而且这一结论在不同的文化背景下都适用。我们的第三个实验提供的证据表明,当责任提示提供给接受低层次(而非高层次)构想指导的审计人员时,能改善审计人员收集证据的能力。总之,我们的研究结果表明,促使审计人员将集团审计工作的责任内化是提高集团审计质量的一种可行方法。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
CiteScore
6.20
自引率
11.10%
发文量
97
期刊介绍: Contemporary Accounting Research (CAR) is the premiere research journal of the Canadian Academic Accounting Association, which publishes leading- edge research that contributes to our understanding of all aspects of accounting"s role within organizations, markets or society. Canadian based, increasingly global in scope, CAR seeks to reflect the geographical and intellectual diversity in accounting research. To accomplish this, CAR will continue to publish in its traditional areas of excellence, while seeking to more fully represent other research streams in its pages, so as to continue and expand its tradition of excellence.
×
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
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
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 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信