Abstract
In recent years, the importance of a credible financial report of high quality, have been highlighted. A high audit quality is ensured by the adoption of common rules and principles for accounting firms. The interest of the audit is different and therefore are there different views on the purpose and what the audit should contain. Interpreting differences allows high quality to be perceived different.
The aim of our study is to explain the “high” audit quality by auditors and audit stakeholders’ perspectives and to identify any differences between the auditors and those stakeholders’ views.
A quantitative approach has been used and based on the theory has six hypotheses been created. The hypotheses investigate whether there are differences between auditors and audit stakeholders on what the high level of audit quality is. Through a web survey, respondents were assessing the extent to which 28 variables leads to higher audit quality.
In our study we found evidence that there are differences in perceptions of the high level of audit quality is achieved between the auditors and stakeholders. Differences were measured for the following categories: auditor independence, auditor characteristics, good communication and external control. We have also been able to distinguish individual key quality variables.
Since the authors of this paper haven’t found any previous study that looked at the differences between the auditors and this study’s three selected stakeholder groups in what leads to high audit quality, the result may help to give light on this area. The results can also be useful to see how auditors and stakeholders should approach each over to achieve a credible audit.
Date of Award | 2012-Aug-20 |
---|---|
Original language | Swedish |
Supervisor | Pernilla Broberg (Supervisor) & Timurs Umans (Examiner) |
Educational program
- Degree of Bachelor of Science in Business and Economics
University credits
- 15 HE credits
Swedish Standard Keywords
- Business Administration (50202)
Keywords
- audit quality
- audit failure
- expectations gap
- value of auditing