Author
Listed:
- Ennio Lugli
- Federico Bertacchini
Abstract
Purpose - The differences between Big audit firms (BigN) and non BigN (nBigN) have been discussed at the international level from various points of view, focusing in particular on issues regarding the different quality of the services offered. This study aims to analyze the impact of digitalization on audit firms in the Italian context, seeking to understand how this phenomenon has influenced the quality differences already studied in the scientific literature. Design/methodology/approach - The research adopts a qualitative approach, using semi-structured interviews. A total of 16 professionals working in the legal audit world were interviewed. The firms involved were PricewaterhouseCoopers, KPMG, Ernst and Young and Deloitte in the BigN category and BDO Italia Spa, MooreAxis Srl and Analisi Spa in the non Big class. The data collected via the interviews underwent thematic analysis. This analysis allowed the identification of three topics, on which the presentation of the results concentrated. Findings - The findings of this research reveal that the digitalization of companies has widened the quality gap between Big and non BigN. BigN have been better able to exploit the benefits of the new digital technologies due to their greater investment capacity. At the same time, stakeholders’ expectations of the audit process in terms of quality have increased sharply, also in relation to nBigN. Originality/value - This study’s main contribution is its analysis of the impact of digitalization on the audit quality of BigN and nBigN. This paper contributes to the existing literature by studying the consequences of digitalization on nBigN, a topic previously unexplored in the scientific literature (Manitaet al., 2020), and the impact of new technologies in the context of audit firms in general.
Suggested Citation
Ennio Lugli & Federico Bertacchini, 2022.
"Audit quality and digitalization: some insights from theItalian context,"
Meditari Accountancy Research, Emerald Group Publishing Limited, vol. 31(4), pages 841-860, March.
Handle:
RePEc:eme:medarp:medar-08-2021-1399
DOI: 10.1108/MEDAR-08-2021-1399
Download full text from publisher
As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to search for a different version of it.
Corrections
All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:eme:medarp:medar-08-2021-1399. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.
If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.
We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using this form .
If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.
For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Emerald Support (email available below). General contact details of provider: .
Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through
the various RePEc services.