IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/eme/jaocpp/18325911011075204.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

A reflective analysis of the “new audit” and the public interest

Author

Listed:
  • Timothy J. Fogarty
  • John T. Rigsby

Abstract

Purpose - Prior to the sudden collapse of large companies following the turn of the century and the implication that the auditing of these enterprises had failed, the large public accounting firms sought to re‐engineer the audit. A comprehension attempt to convert that which had been designed as a social good into one more aligned with a commercial logic was halted by the legislative response to this departure from classic professionalism. Recent developments suggest that change in this direction is regrouping. The purpose of this paper is to provide a reflective analysis of the thoughts of the authors on the early development of the new audit approach. Design/methodology/approach - Most of the information in the piece was garnered from conversations with public accounting partners during the era in question. Logical argumentation derived from the academic and theoretical literature is the primary method. Findings - Attributes of the firms' strategies during this period are outlined. Features of the new audit are developed, especially as they vary from the traditional audit. These techniques and approaches are analyzed in terms of their ability to serve the public interest. This paper argues that motivating factors of the new audit will continue to be a force even in the more hostile regulatory environment of today. Practical implications - An appreciation of the findings of the study is useful in maintaining a level of skepticism about changes to the audit that are advocated by audit firms. Users of audit services, regulators, and legislators would benefit from an appreciation of the recent past. The motivating factors underlying these changes to audit environment continue to operate over time as the social purposes of the audit are less likely to be converted by the firms to ones that can be commercially exploited. Originality/value - The study contributes insights into the origins of the new business audit approach and related strengths and limitations. These factors should be considered as the approach is developed and moves forward into the future in order for the audit approach to be effective in performing its social functions.

Suggested Citation

  • Timothy J. Fogarty & John T. Rigsby, 2010. "A reflective analysis of the “new audit” and the public interest," Journal of Accounting & Organizational Change, Emerald Group Publishing Limited, vol. 6(3), pages 300-329, September.
  • Handle: RePEc:eme:jaocpp:18325911011075204
    DOI: 10.1108/18325911011075204
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.emerald.com/insight/content/doi/10.1108/18325911011075204/full/html?utm_source=repec&utm_medium=feed&utm_campaign=repec
    Download Restriction: Access to full text is restricted to subscribers

    File URL: https://www.emerald.com/insight/content/doi/10.1108/18325911011075204/full/pdf?utm_source=repec&utm_medium=feed&utm_campaign=repec
    Download Restriction: Access to full text is restricted to subscribers

    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1108/18325911011075204?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.

    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:jaocpp:18325911011075204. 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.

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