Reprint of: Nineteenth century audit reports: Evolution from free-form to standardised wording

IF 5.5 3区 管理学 Q1 BUSINESS, FINANCE
Niamh M. Brennan , Sean Bradley Power
{"title":"Reprint of: Nineteenth century audit reports: Evolution from free-form to standardised wording","authors":"Niamh M. Brennan ,&nbsp;Sean Bradley Power","doi":"10.1016/j.bar.2025.101557","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div><div>The research comprises a case study focussed on the wording of 34 audit reports of the British South Africa Company (BSAC), which Cecil Rhodes established by Royal Charter to colonise Rhodesia from 1889 to 1924. The accounts were audited by Cooper Brothers &amp; Co., now PricewaterhouseCoopers. The research analyses three audit-report characteristics that influenced audit-report wording. Of the 34 audit reports, eight contained qualified (i.e., unfavourable) audit opinions. Based on verbatim annual general meeting minutes and private correspondence, we provide evidence of the effect of the audit qualifications. The research further analyses the evolution of the audit-report wording over the period. Initially, the auditors customised the audit-report wording. Each year, they made micro changes to improve the precision of the wording. Then, in 1911, well in advance of any audit-report regulations, the wording became standardised and remained so until the end of the study period. The paper adds insights into why auditors standardised audit-report wording. We conjecture that years of struggling with customised wording prompted the auditors to adopt standardised wording. We do not know whether this decision applied just to the BSAC audit reports, or whether 1911 heralded standardised audit-report wording for all Cooper Brothers &amp; Co. audit reports.</div></div>","PeriodicalId":47996,"journal":{"name":"British Accounting Review","volume":"57 1","pages":"Article 101557"},"PeriodicalIF":5.5000,"publicationDate":"2025-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"British Accounting Review","FirstCategoryId":"91","ListUrlMain":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0890838925000071","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

The research comprises a case study focussed on the wording of 34 audit reports of the British South Africa Company (BSAC), which Cecil Rhodes established by Royal Charter to colonise Rhodesia from 1889 to 1924. The accounts were audited by Cooper Brothers & Co., now PricewaterhouseCoopers. The research analyses three audit-report characteristics that influenced audit-report wording. Of the 34 audit reports, eight contained qualified (i.e., unfavourable) audit opinions. Based on verbatim annual general meeting minutes and private correspondence, we provide evidence of the effect of the audit qualifications. The research further analyses the evolution of the audit-report wording over the period. Initially, the auditors customised the audit-report wording. Each year, they made micro changes to improve the precision of the wording. Then, in 1911, well in advance of any audit-report regulations, the wording became standardised and remained so until the end of the study period. The paper adds insights into why auditors standardised audit-report wording. We conjecture that years of struggling with customised wording prompted the auditors to adopt standardised wording. We do not know whether this decision applied just to the BSAC audit reports, or whether 1911 heralded standardised audit-report wording for all Cooper Brothers & Co. audit reports.
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
British Accounting Review
British Accounting Review BUSINESS, FINANCE-
CiteScore
8.60
自引率
3.90%
发文量
39
审稿时长
76 days
期刊介绍: The British Accounting Review*is pleased to publish original scholarly papers across the whole spectrum of accounting and finance. The journal is eclectic and pluralistic and contributions are welcomed across a wide range of research methodologies (e.g. analytical, archival, experimental, survey and qualitative case methods) and topics (e.g. financial accounting, management accounting, finance and financial management, auditing, public sector accounting, social and environmental accounting; accounting education and accounting history), evidence from UK and non-UK sources are equally acceptable.
×
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