{"title":"Will mandatory audit firm rotation reduce audit market concentration in South Africa?","authors":"N. Wesson","doi":"10.4102/SAJBM.V52I1.2426","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Purpose: Deconcentrating the audit market was one of the stated objectives of the proposed mandatory audit firm rotation (MAFR) ruling in South Africa. With MAFR being a contentious topic, this study aimed to explore the possible effect of MAFR on audit market concentration in South Africa in anticipation of the implementation thereof in 2023. Design/methodology/approach: A sample of 415 South African listed companies was studied for the period 2010–2018. Data were mainly captured from annual reports. Descriptive statistics and significance testing were performed on calculated concentration ratios and identified audit firm rotations. Findings/results: South African audit market concentration mirrored empirical evidence from most developed countries – with Big 4 audit firms dominating the audit market, whilst a monopoly within the Big 4 audit firm grouping was also evident. Based on observed audit firm concentration and audit firm rotation behaviour, it was anticipated that MAFR might further increase audit market concentration. A concerning result was the sheer scale of audit firm rotations to be carried out in anticipation of MAFR in 2023. Practical implications: This study identified the impairment of audit quality and increased costs as possible unintended consequences of MAFR in South Africa. Originality/value: This study contributed to the limited body of knowledge on the possible effect of MAFR in South Africa. This study proposed alternatives to MAFR and recommended areas for future research to support evidence-based decisions on remedies to address audit quality and audit market concentration in South Africa.","PeriodicalId":45649,"journal":{"name":"South African Journal of Business Management","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.9000,"publicationDate":"2021-07-23","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"1","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"South African Journal of Business Management","FirstCategoryId":"91","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.4102/SAJBM.V52I1.2426","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"管理学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q4","JCRName":"BUSINESS","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 1
Abstract
Purpose: Deconcentrating the audit market was one of the stated objectives of the proposed mandatory audit firm rotation (MAFR) ruling in South Africa. With MAFR being a contentious topic, this study aimed to explore the possible effect of MAFR on audit market concentration in South Africa in anticipation of the implementation thereof in 2023. Design/methodology/approach: A sample of 415 South African listed companies was studied for the period 2010–2018. Data were mainly captured from annual reports. Descriptive statistics and significance testing were performed on calculated concentration ratios and identified audit firm rotations. Findings/results: South African audit market concentration mirrored empirical evidence from most developed countries – with Big 4 audit firms dominating the audit market, whilst a monopoly within the Big 4 audit firm grouping was also evident. Based on observed audit firm concentration and audit firm rotation behaviour, it was anticipated that MAFR might further increase audit market concentration. A concerning result was the sheer scale of audit firm rotations to be carried out in anticipation of MAFR in 2023. Practical implications: This study identified the impairment of audit quality and increased costs as possible unintended consequences of MAFR in South Africa. Originality/value: This study contributed to the limited body of knowledge on the possible effect of MAFR in South Africa. This study proposed alternatives to MAFR and recommended areas for future research to support evidence-based decisions on remedies to address audit quality and audit market concentration in South Africa.
期刊介绍:
The South African Journal of Business Management publishes articles that have real significance for management theory and practice. The content of the journal falls into two categories: managerial theory and management practice: -Management theory is devoted to reporting new methodological developments, whether analytical or philosophical. In general, papers should, in addition to developing a new theory, include some discussion of applications, either historical or potential. Both state-of-the-art surveys and papers discussing new developments are appropriate for this category. -Management practice concerns the methodology involved in applying scientific knowledge. It focusses on the problems of developing and converting management theory to practice while considering behavioural and economic realities. Papers should reflect the mutual interest of managers and management scientists in the exercise of the management function. Appropriate papers may include examples of implementations that generalise experience rather than specific incidents and facts, and principles of model development and adaptation that underline successful application of particular aspects of management theory. The relevance of the paper to the professional manager should be highlighted as far as possible.