IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/eee/jiaata/v37y2019ics1061951818301484.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Review engagements – structure of audit firm methodology and its situational application in Germany

Author

Listed:
  • Ruhnke, Klaus
  • Schmitz, Stefanie

Abstract

Reviews and audits enhance the degree of confidence of a subject matter. Since the scope of a review is substantially smaller than that of an audit, these assurance engagements are quite distinct. Although reviews are often conducted, no academic research has focused on review practice. To address this issue, we conduct semi-structured interviews and examinations of review approaches of firms that perform review engagements for clients in Germany. Since reviews are less regulated by external standards, we first analyze the structure of audit firm’s review approaches and its determinants. Based hereon, we focus on the situational application of the review approach in practice. In our analysis, we consider the concept of structure as well as contingency and institutional theory. We find that uncertainties about normative requirements, especially regarding the concept of limited assurance, encourage auditors to apply review procedures that are not obligatory, but well known from the audit of annual financial statements. We find evidence for various mechanisms to gain legitimacy. Altogether, we contribute to a better understanding of different forms of assurance engagements. Further, our results indicate that auditors benefit from vague external review standards, which in turn may lessen the risk of litigation and reputational damage.

Suggested Citation

  • Ruhnke, Klaus & Schmitz, Stefanie, 2019. "Review engagements – structure of audit firm methodology and its situational application in Germany," Journal of International Accounting, Auditing and Taxation, Elsevier, vol. 37(C).
    • Handle: RePEc:eee:jiaata:v:37:y:2019:i:c:s1061951818301484
    DOI: 10.1016/j.intaccaudtax.2019.100289
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S1061951818301484
    Download Restriction: Full text for ScienceDirect subscribers only
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1016/j.intaccaudtax.2019.100289?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. Bertrand Malsch & Yves Gendron, 2013. "Re-Theorizing Change: Institutional Experimentation and the Struggle for Domination in the Field of Public Accounting," Journal of Management Studies, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 50(5), pages 870-899, July.
    2. Anderson, John C. & Jennings, Marianne M. & Kaplan, Steven E. & Reckers, Philip M. J., 1995. "The effect of using diagnostic decision aids for analytical procedures on judges' liability judgments," Journal of Accounting and Public Policy, Elsevier, vol. 14(1), pages 33-62.
    3. 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.
    4. Kajüter, Peter & Klassmann, Florian & Nienhaus, Martin, 2016. "Do Reviews by External Auditors Improve the Information Content of Interim Financial Statements?," The International Journal of Accounting, Elsevier, vol. 51(1), pages 23-50.
    5. Mcdaniel, Ls, 1990. "The Effects Of Time Pressure And Audit Program Structure On Audit Performance," Journal of Accounting Research, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 28(2), pages 267-285.
    6. Carpenter, Brian & Dirsmith, Mark, 1993. "Sampling and the abstraction of knowledge in the auditing profession: An extended institutional theory perspective," Accounting, Organizations and Society, Elsevier, vol. 18(1), pages 41-63, January.
    7. Pentland, Brian T., 1993. "Getting comfortable with the numbers: Auditing and the micro-production of macro-order," Accounting, Organizations and Society, Elsevier, vol. 18(7-8), pages 605-620.
    8. Jean Bédard & Lucie Courteau, 2015. "Benefits and Costs of Auditor's Assurance: Evidence from the Review of Quarterly Financial Statements," Contemporary Accounting Research, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 32(1), pages 308-335, March.
    9. Francis, Jere R., 1994. "Auditing, hermeneutics, and subjectivity," Accounting, Organizations and Society, Elsevier, vol. 19(3), pages 235-269, April.
    10. Quick, Reiner & Turley, Stuart & Willekens, Marleen, 2008. "Auditing, Trust and Governance. Developing regulation in Europe," Publications of Darmstadt Technical University, Institute for Business Studies (BWL) 35700, Darmstadt Technical University, Department of Business Administration, Economics and Law, Institute for Business Studies (BWL).
    11. Chris Carter & Crawford Spence, 2014. "Being a Successful Professional: An Exploration of Who Makes Partner in the Big 4," Contemporary Accounting Research, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 31(4), pages 949-981, December.
    12. Carlos Alves & F. Teixeira Dos Santos, 2008. "Do First and Third Quarter Unaudited Financial Reports Matter? The Portuguese Case," European Accounting Review, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 17(2), pages 361-392.
    13. Kim K. Jeppesen, 2007. "Organizational risk in large audit firms," Managerial Auditing Journal, Emerald Group Publishing, vol. 22(6), pages 590-603, July.
    14. Barrett, Michael & Cooper, David J. & Jamal, Karim, 2005. "Globalization and the coordinating of work in multinational audits," Accounting, Organizations and Society, Elsevier, vol. 30(1), pages 1-24, January.
    15. Greg Trompeter & Arnold Wright, 2010. "The World Has Changed—Have Analytical Procedure Practices?," Contemporary Accounting Research, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 27(2), pages 350-350, June.
    16. Carpenter, Brian W. & Dirsmith, Mark W. & Gupta, Parveen P., 1994. "Materiality judgments and audit firm culture: Social-behavioral and political perspectives," Accounting, Organizations and Society, Elsevier, vol. 19(4-5), pages 355-380.
    17. DeAngelo, Linda Elizabeth, 1981. "Auditor size and audit quality," Journal of Accounting and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 3(3), pages 183-199, December.
    18. Carlin Dowling & Stewart a. Leech, 2014. "A Big 4 Firm's Use of Information Technology to Control the Audit Process: How an Audit Support System is Changing Auditor Behavior," Contemporary Accounting Research, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 31(1), pages 230-252, March.
    19. Greg Trompeter & Arnold Wright, 2010. "The World Has Changed—Have Analytical Procedure Practices?," Contemporary Accounting Research, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 27(2), pages 669-700, June.
    20. Ann Vanstraelen & Caren Schelleman, 2017. "Auditing private companies: what do we know?," Accounting and Business Research, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 47(5), pages 565-584, July.
    21. Peter Ohman & Einar Hackner & Anna-Maria Jansson & Finn Tschudi, 2006. "Swedish auditors' view of auditing: Doing things right versus doing the right things," European Accounting Review, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 15(1), pages 89-114.
    22. Power, Michael K., 2003. "Auditing and the production of legitimacy," Accounting, Organizations and Society, Elsevier, vol. 28(4), pages 379-394, May.
    23. Suddaby, Roy & Gendron, Yves & Lam, Helen, 2009. "The organizational context of professionalism in accounting," Accounting, Organizations and Society, Elsevier, vol. 34(3-4), pages 409-427, April.
    24. Ettredge, ML & Simon, DT & Smith, DB & Stone, MS, 2000. "The effect of the external accountant's review on the timing of adjustments to quarterly earnings," Journal of Accounting Research, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 38(1), pages 195-207.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    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. Guénin-Paracini, Henri & Malsch, Bertrand & Paillé, Anne Marché, 2014. "Fear and risk in the audit process," Accounting, Organizations and Society, Elsevier, vol. 39(4), pages 264-288.
    2. Kohler, Hervé & Pochet, Christine & Gendron, Yves, 2021. "Networks of interpretation: An ethnography of the quest for IFRS consistency in a global accounting firm," Accounting, Organizations and Society, Elsevier, vol. 95(C).
    3. Curtis, Emer & Turley, Stuart, 2007. "The business risk audit - A longitudinal case study of an audit engagement," Accounting, Organizations and Society, Elsevier, vol. 32(4-5), pages 439-461.
    4. Dunne, Neil J. & Brennan, Niamh M. & Kirwan, Collette E., 2021. "Impression management and Big Four auditors: Scrutiny at a public inquiry," Accounting, Organizations and Society, Elsevier, vol. 88(C).
    5. Pernilla Broberg & Torbjörn Tagesson & Daniela Argento & Niclas Gyllengahm & Ola Mårtensson, 2017. "Explaining the influence of time budget pressure on audit quality in Sweden," Journal of Management & Governance, Springer;Accademia Italiana di Economia Aziendale (AIDEA), vol. 21(2), pages 331-350, June.
    6. Dermarkar, Simon & Hazgui, Mouna, 2022. "How auditors legitimize commercialism: A micro-discursive analysis," CRITICAL PERSPECTIVES ON ACCOUNTING, Elsevier, vol. 83(C).
    7. Beau, Pauline & Jerman, Lambert, 2022. "Bonding forged in “auditing hell”: The emotional qualities of Big Four auditors," CRITICAL PERSPECTIVES ON ACCOUNTING, Elsevier, vol. 83(C).
    8. Downar, Benedikt & Ernstberger, Jürgen & Koch, Christopher, 2021. "Determinants and consequences of auditor dyad formation at the top level of audit teams," Accounting, Organizations and Society, Elsevier, vol. 89(C).
    9. Power, Michael K., 2003. "Auditing and the production of legitimacy," Accounting, Organizations and Society, Elsevier, vol. 28(4), pages 379-394, May.
    10. Anderson-Gough, Fiona & Edgley, Carla & Robson, Keith & Sharma, Nina, 2022. "Organizational responses to multiple logics: Diversity, identity and the professional service firm," Accounting, Organizations and Society, Elsevier, vol. 103(C).
    11. Knechel, W. Robert, 2007. "The business risk audit: Origins, obstacles and opportunities," Accounting, Organizations and Society, Elsevier, vol. 32(4-5), pages 383-408.
    12. Fabien Cerruti & Christelle Richard, 2008. "Qualité de l'audit et Satisfaction de l'audité : Chronique d'une Innovation Ordinaire," Post-Print halshs-00522438, HAL.
    13. Power, Michael, 1996. "Making things auditable," Accounting, Organizations and Society, Elsevier, vol. 21(2-3), pages 289-315.
    14. Edgley, Carla & Jones, Michael J. & Atkins, Jill, 2015. "The adoption of the materiality concept in social and environmental reporting assurance: A field study approach," The British Accounting Review, Elsevier, vol. 47(1), pages 1-18.
    15. Huh, Bong Gu & Lee, Sunhwa & Kim, Wonsin, 2021. "The impact of the input level of information system audit on the audit quality: Korean evidence," International Journal of Accounting Information Systems, Elsevier, vol. 43(C).
    16. Olivier Herrbach, 2001. "Audit quality, auditor behaviour and the psychological contract," European Accounting Review, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 10(4), pages 787-802.
    17. Namrata Malhotra & Timothy Morris, 2009. "Heterogeneity in Professional Service Firms," Journal of Management Studies, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 46(6), pages 895-922, September.
    18. Bitbol-Saba, Nathalie & Dambrin, Claire, 2019. "“It’s not often we get a visit from a beautiful woman!” The body in client-auditor interactions and the masculinity of accountancy," CRITICAL PERSPECTIVES ON ACCOUNTING, Elsevier, vol. 64(C).
    19. Kohler, Hervé & Pochet, Christine & Le Manh, Anne, 2021. "Auditors as intermediaries in the endogenization of an accounting standard: The case of IFRS 15 within the telecom industry," Accounting, Organizations and Society, Elsevier, vol. 91(C).
    20. repec:dau:papers:123456789/3505 is not listed on IDEAS
    21. Yves Gendron & Laura F. Spira, 2009. "What Went Wrong? The Downfall of Arthur Andersen and the Construction of Controllability Boundaries Surrounding Financial Auditing," Contemporary Accounting Research, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 26(4), pages 987-1027, December.

    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:jiaata:v:37:y:2019:i:c:s1061951818301484. 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/journal-of-international-accounting-auditing-and-taxation .

    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.