IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/eee/bracre/v39y2007i1p39-59.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

The attitude of Libyan auditors to inherent control risk assessment

Author

Listed:
  • Ritchie, Bob
  • Khorwatt, Esamaddin

Abstract

Previous empirical evidence contradicts the practices of audit risk assessment recommended by the professional auditing standards. Key differences represent the presumption that auditors can readily distinguish between different categories of risk, how they assess such risks in practice, their application to the different account levels and their capacity to differentiate between what may constitute potentially high or low risks. The paper addresses these differences in the context of the Libyan auditors’ perceptions and practices. The nature and development of the audit profession in Libya makes this a good comparator for the US and UK contexts of audit behaviour. Equally importantly, the religious, political and socio-cultural context combined with Libya's role as an emergent economy is representative of many other economies in the world, thus providing a good comparator for assessing the validity and applicability of the established auditing management principles and procedures. One hundred and sixty four practicing auditors in Libya were investigated, initially by questionnaire and subsequently interview of a smaller sample of 20 auditors. The evidence reinforces prior empirical evidence that inherent and control risks are assessed interdependently, auditors are aware of the risk differentials depending on the level of account and are cognizant of factors normally associated with potentially high and low risk levels.

Suggested Citation

  • Ritchie, Bob & Khorwatt, Esamaddin, 2007. "The attitude of Libyan auditors to inherent control risk assessment," The British Accounting Review, Elsevier, vol. 39(1), pages 39-59.
  • Handle: RePEc:eee:bracre:v:39:y:2007:i:1:p:39-59
    DOI: 10.1016/j.bar.2006.11.001
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0890838906001247
    Download Restriction: Full text for ScienceDirect subscribers only

    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1016/j.bar.2006.11.001?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to search for a different version of it.

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Dirsmith, Mark W. & Haskins, Mark E., 1991. "Inherent risk assessment and audit firm technology: A contrast in world theories," Accounting, Organizations and Society, Elsevier, vol. 16(1), pages 61-90.
    2. Colbert, Janet L., 1988. "Inherent risk: An investigation of auditors' judgments," Accounting, Organizations and Society, Elsevier, vol. 13(2), pages 111-121, March.
    3. Peters, James M. & Lewis, Barry L. & Dhar, Vasant, 1989. "Assessing inherent risk during audit planning: The development of a knowledge based model," Accounting, Organizations and Society, Elsevier, vol. 14(4), pages 359-378, July.
    4. Haskins, Mark E. & Dirsmith, Mark W., 1995. "Control and inherent risk assessments in client engagements: An examination of their interdependencies," Journal of Accounting and Public Policy, Elsevier, vol. 14(1), pages 63-83.
    5. Arnold Wright & Sally Wright, 1996. "The Relationship Between Assessments of Internal Control Strength and Error Occurrence, Impact and Cause," Accounting and Business Research, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 27(1), pages 58-71.
    6. Luc Quadackers & Theodore Mock & Steven Maijoor, 1996. "Audit risk and audit programmes: archival evidence from four Dutch audit firms," European Accounting Review, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 5(2), pages 217-237.
    7. Peters, Jm, 1990. "A Cognitive Computational Model Of Risk Hypothesis Generation," Journal of Accounting Research, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 28, pages 83-103.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Masoud, Najeb, 2017. "An empirical study of audit expectation-performance gap: The case of Libya," Research in International Business and Finance, Elsevier, vol. 41(C), pages 1-15.
    2. Yasser Barghathi & David Collison & Louise Crawford, 2018. "Earnings management and audit quality: stakeholders’ perceptions," Journal of Management & Governance, Springer;Accademia Italiana di Economia Aziendale (AIDEA), vol. 22(3), pages 629-659, September.

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Gary S. Monroe & Juliana K. L. Ng & David R. Woodliff, 1993. "The Importance Of Inherent Risk Factors: Auditors‘ Perceptions," Australian Accounting Review, CPA Australia, vol. 3(6), pages 34-46, November.
    2. Philip A Collier & Stewart A Leech & Nicole Clark, 1999. "A validated expert system for decision making in corporate recovery," Intelligent Systems in Accounting, Finance and Management, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 8(2), pages 75-88, June.
    3. Steven Salterio, 1994. "Researching for Accounting Precedents: Learning, Efficiency, and Effectiveness," Contemporary Accounting Research, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 11(1), pages 515-542, June.
    4. Hung Chan, K. & Mo, Phyllis L. L., 1998. "Ownership effects on audit-detected error characteristics: An empirical study in an emerging economy," The International Journal of Accounting, Elsevier, vol. 33(2), pages 235-261.
    5. Skerratt, L.C.L. & Woodhead, A., 1992. "Modelling audit risk," The British Accounting Review, Elsevier, vol. 24(2), pages 119-137.
    6. Alan Kilgore & Renee Radich & Graeme Harrison, 2011. "The Relative Importance of Audit Quality Attributes," Australian Accounting Review, CPA Australia, vol. 21(3), pages 253-265, September.
    7. Bikki Jaggi & Judy Tsui, 1999. "Determinants of audit report lag: further evidence from Hong Kong," Accounting and Business Research, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 30(1), pages 17-28.
    8. Lineke Sneller & Ries Bode & Arnoud Klerkx, 2017. "Do IT matters matter? IT-related key audit matters in Dutch annual reports," International Journal of Disclosure and Governance, Palgrave Macmillan, vol. 14(2), pages 139-151, May.
    9. Amelia A. Baldwin & Carol E. Brown & Brad S. Trinkle, 2006. "Opportunities for artificial intelligence development in the accounting domain: the case for auditing," Intelligent Systems in Accounting, Finance and Management, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 14(3), pages 77-86, July.
    10. Alia Miledi & Benoit Pigé, 2013. "Le Jugement Professionnel En Audit : Enquete Aupres Des Associes Signataires," Post-Print hal-01002359, HAL.
    11. Rajni Mala & Parmod Chand, 2015. "Judgment and Decision‐Making Research in Auditing and Accounting: Future Research Implications of Person, Task, and Environment Perspective," Accounting Perspectives, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 14(1), pages 1-50, March.
    12. Maureen Francis Mascha & Cathleen L. Miller, 2010. "The effects of task complexity and skill on over/under-estimation of internal control," Managerial Auditing Journal, Emerald Group Publishing, vol. 25(8), pages 734-755, September.
    13. Michael De Martinis & Hironori Fukukawa & Theodore J. Mock, 2011. "Exploring the role of country and client type on the auditor's client risk assessments and audit planning decisions," Managerial Auditing Journal, Emerald Group Publishing, vol. 26(7), pages 543-565, July.
    14. Steven Maijoor & Roger Meuwissen & Luc Quadackers, 2000. "The effects of national institutions on audit research: evidence from Europe and North America," European Accounting Review, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 9(4), pages 569-587.
    15. Thierry Bergès, 2002. "Les Nouvelles Technologies De L'Information Et De La Communication : Un Nouveau Paradigme Technologique Pour Les Auditeurs Financiers ?," Post-Print halshs-00584435, HAL.
    16. Sammy Xiaoyan Ying & Chris Patel, 2015. "The Influence of Partners? Views on Chinese Auditors? Judgments Related to Professional Scepticism," Proceedings of Business and Management Conferences 2304228, International Institute of Social and Economic Sciences.
    17. Empson, Laura, 2004. "Organizational identity change: managerial regulation and member identification in an accounting firm acquisition," Accounting, Organizations and Society, Elsevier, vol. 29(8), pages 759-781, November.
    18. Jeff Delisio & Maureen McGowan & Walter Hamscher, 1994. "PLANET: An Expert System for Audit Risk Assessment and Planning," Intelligent Systems in Accounting, Finance and Management, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 3(1), pages 65-77, January.
    19. Fischer, Michael J., 1996. ""Real-izing" the benefits of new technologies as a source of audit evidence: An interpretive field study," Accounting, Organizations and Society, Elsevier, vol. 21(2-3), pages 219-242.
    20. Mohammad Hudaib & Roszaini Haniffa, 2009. "Exploring auditor independence: an interpretive approach," Accounting, Auditing & Accountability Journal, Emerald Group Publishing Limited, vol. 22(2), pages 221-246, January.

    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:eee:bracre:v:39:y:2007:i:1:p:39-59. 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.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with 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: Catherine Liu (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://www.journals.elsevier.com/the-british-accounting-review .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.