Audit process ineffectiveness: evidence from audit report errors

Abstract

PurposeThe process performed during a financial statement audit is critical but is unobservable to external stakeholders. This can create challenges in assessing the quality of individual audit engagements. This study’s objective is to introduce and investigate an archival measure based on publicly available information that proxies for audit process ineffectiveness.Design/methodology/approachWe proxy for audit process ineffectiveness using errors in the audit report. We examine audit reports to identify errors because the audit report represents the auditor’s primary communication with financial statement users and is subject to rigorous preparation and review. We first examine if typical factors influencing audit process ineffectiveness are associated with audit report errors. We then examine whether audit reports containing errors are associated with audit quality measures.FindingsWe find that errors are more likely to be present in audit reports when time pressure exists and less likely when auditors exert more effort and when audit engagement risk is higher. Results also show that errors in audit reports are positively associated with financial reporting misstatements, measured by subsequently disclosed Big R restatements and out-of-period adjustments.Originality/valueCollectively, our evidence suggests that an audit report containing an error is a suitable proxy for audit process ineffectiveness. This proxy has audit quality implications because inattentiveness in one area of the audit process could indicate inattentiveness in another area.