Revisorns skyldighet att dokumentera
: revisorers uppfattningar om faktorer som medför att revisionsdokumentationen brister

  • Emma Keifer

    Student thesis: Bachelor


    Over the years, several company scandals have occurred, which have been linked to flaws in the revision process of the companies. In order to avoid similar scandals, increased requirements for law and standard in terms of revision have been introduced. With the help of regular quality controls done by both FAR & RN among others, the audit will maintain high quality and shortcomings is believed to be detected earlier. Previous research shows that audit documentation is often lacking when RN is conducting quality controls. The purpose of this paper is to investigate auditors’ perceptions of factors, which may cause the audit documentation to fail. In order to fulfill the purpose of the paper, interviews have been conducted with ten auditors working at various audit firms in Skåne. The theoretical frame of reference the paper is based on, considers previous research within the audit process, audit documentation and information concerning laws, standards and good audit ethics, which auditing is about. The conclusion of this study finds that auditors perceive a number of factors that may result in the audit documentation to fail. These primary factors are standardization, auditor's professionalism and professionalism limits. As a proposal for future research, it may be of interest to determine how many assignments or companies are optimal for an auditor to revise per year as regards to the time aspect in relation to the documentation requirements.

    Date of Award2018-Jul-10
    Original languageSwedish
    SupervisorNils-Gunnar Rudenstam (Supervisor) & Marina Jogmark (Examiner)

    Educational program

    • Degree of Bachelor of Science in Business and Economics

    University credits

    • 15 HE credits

    Swedish Standard Keywords

    • Business Administration (50202)


    • essential
    • documentation
    • professional judgement
    • profession
    • flaws
    • audit.

    Cite this