Quantification Methods of Construction Claims in the Audit Process: Evidence from Indonesia

Ricki Prasetyo, E. Fatima
{"title":"Quantification Methods of Construction Claims in the Audit Process: Evidence from Indonesia","authors":"Ricki Prasetyo, E. Fatima","doi":"10.15294/jda.v14i1.34441","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Purpose: This study aims to evaluate the quantification method of construction claims (QMCC) used in the audit process based on the damage theory framework. An accurate quantification of claims is essentially needed to avoid construction disputes. However, earlier studies are still vague in shed light on applying the most appropriate QMCC to quantify the claims that arise from a vari- ation order (VO).Method: We conduct a case study using a mixed-methods approach. Surveys were given to 39 audi- tors at various levels (team, supervisor, and coordinator) to obtain auditors’ perceptions about the relevance of the assessment criteria according to the damage theory. We analyzed the data quantita- tively using non-parametric test Kruskal-Wallis/Mann-Whitney. Furthermore, in-depth interviews were conducted to 6 auditors and 2 related parties to identify the QMCC that conforms with the damage theory. Transcripts were analyzed qualitatively using theme analysis.Finding: There is similarities in the auditors’ perception in accepting the assessment criteria accord- ing to the damage theory. Quantification of claims in the audit process requires supporting evidence and causal link. In this study, we proposed three methods that can be applied using an estimated value approach.Novelty: The QMCCs proposed have novelty in terms of contractual aspects, causality, and support- ing evidence as a basis for analysis to eliminate opportunistic behavior from the parties.","PeriodicalId":30817,"journal":{"name":"Jurnal Dinamika Akuntansi","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2022-03-17","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Jurnal Dinamika Akuntansi","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.15294/jda.v14i1.34441","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Purpose: This study aims to evaluate the quantification method of construction claims (QMCC) used in the audit process based on the damage theory framework. An accurate quantification of claims is essentially needed to avoid construction disputes. However, earlier studies are still vague in shed light on applying the most appropriate QMCC to quantify the claims that arise from a vari- ation order (VO).Method: We conduct a case study using a mixed-methods approach. Surveys were given to 39 audi- tors at various levels (team, supervisor, and coordinator) to obtain auditors’ perceptions about the relevance of the assessment criteria according to the damage theory. We analyzed the data quantita- tively using non-parametric test Kruskal-Wallis/Mann-Whitney. Furthermore, in-depth interviews were conducted to 6 auditors and 2 related parties to identify the QMCC that conforms with the damage theory. Transcripts were analyzed qualitatively using theme analysis.Finding: There is similarities in the auditors’ perception in accepting the assessment criteria accord- ing to the damage theory. Quantification of claims in the audit process requires supporting evidence and causal link. In this study, we proposed three methods that can be applied using an estimated value approach.Novelty: The QMCCs proposed have novelty in terms of contractual aspects, causality, and support- ing evidence as a basis for analysis to eliminate opportunistic behavior from the parties.
审计过程中工程索赔的量化方法:来自印度尼西亚的证据
目的:本研究旨在评估基于损害理论框架的审计过程中使用的施工索赔量化方法。为了避免建筑纠纷,基本上需要对索赔进行准确的量化。然而,早期的研究在应用最合适的QMCC来量化由变化顺序(VO)引起的索赔方面仍然模糊不清。方法:我们采用混合方法进行案例研究。根据损害理论,对39名不同级别的审计人员(团队、主管和协调员)进行了调查,以获得审计人员对评估标准相关性的看法。我们使用非参数检验Kruskal-Wallis/Mann Whitney对数据进行了定量分析。此外,对6名审计师和2名相关方进行了深入访谈,以确定符合损害理论的QMCC。使用主题分析对转录本进行定性分析。调查结果:审计师在接受符合损害理论的评估标准方面有相似之处。审计过程中索赔的量化需要支持证据和因果关系。在这项研究中,我们提出了三种可以使用估计值方法应用的方法。新颖性:所提出的QMCC在合同方面、因果关系和支持证据方面具有新颖性,作为分析的基础,以消除当事人的机会主义行为。
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
自引率
0.00%
发文量
8
审稿时长
2 weeks
×
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:604180095
Book学术官方微信
小红书