IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/eee/reacre/v29y2017i1p30-43.html

A survey on firms' implementation of COSO's 2013 Internal Control–Integrated Framework

Author

Listed:
  • Lawson, Bradley P.
  • Muriel, Leah
  • Sanders, Paula R.

Abstract

Many firms began implementing COSO's 2013 Internal Control–Integrated Framework in 2014. This study surveys U.S. accounting professionals, primarily from large publicly-traded firms, to examine views concerning the framework and its impact on key areas related to internal controls. The analyses provide insight into five specific topics important to the framework. First, results indicate that respondents view the 2013 Framework and its 17 principles as an overall improvement to the 1992 Framework. However, benefits and costs from implementing the framework appear mitigated because firms already had effective internal control structures in place. Second, respondents view the 17 principles as a set of rules for achieving effective internal controls, but believe the principles still provide adequate flexibility and allow for sufficient management judgment. Third, most respondents indicate changes in at least one of the five components of internal controls, as well as across information technology-related controls. Fourth, in addition to external financial reporting objectives, firms are applying the framework to non-financial, operational, and compliance objectives. Last, results indicate greater expected external audit effort related to SOX Section 404 testing but not audit fees, perhaps due to external auditors' reliance on internal audit departments' work.

Suggested Citation

  • Lawson, Bradley P. & Muriel, Leah & Sanders, Paula R., 2017. "A survey on firms' implementation of COSO's 2013 Internal Control–Integrated Framework," Research in Accounting Regulation, Elsevier, vol. 29(1), pages 30-43.
    • Handle: RePEc:eee:reacre:v:29:y:2017:i:1:p:30-43
    DOI: 10.1016/j.racreg.2017.04.004
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S1052045717300048
    Download Restriction: Full text for ScienceDirect subscribers only
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1016/j.racreg.2017.04.004?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

    for a different version of it.

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Chris E. Hogan & Michael S. Wilkins, 2008. "Evidence on the Audit Risk Model: Do Auditors Increase Audit Fees in the Presence of Internal Control Deficiencies?," Contemporary Accounting Research, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 25(1), pages 219-242, March.
    2. Hollis Ashbaugh‐Skaife & Daniel W. Collins & William R. Kinney Jr & Ryan Lafond, 2009. "The Effect of SOX Internal Control Deficiencies on Firm Risk and Cost of Equity," Journal of Accounting Research, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 47(1), pages 1-43, March.
    3. Zhang, Ivy Xiying, 2007. "Economic consequences of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002," Journal of Accounting and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 44(1-2), pages 74-115, September.
    4. Li, Chan & Raman, K.K. & Sun, Lili & Wu, Da, 2015. "The SOX 404 internal control audit: Key regulatory events," Research in Accounting Regulation, Elsevier, vol. 27(2), pages 160-164.
    5. Seow, Poh-Sun, 2011. "The effects of decision aid structural restrictiveness on decision-making outcomes," International Journal of Accounting Information Systems, Elsevier, vol. 12(1), pages 40-56.
    6. Graham, John R. & Harvey, Campbell R. & Rajgopal, Shiva, 2005. "The economic implications of corporate financial reporting," Journal of Accounting and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 40(1-3), pages 3-73, December.
    7. Dichev, Ilia D. & Graham, John R. & Harvey, Campbell R. & Rajgopal, Shiva, 2013. "Earnings quality: Evidence from the field," Journal of Accounting and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 56(2), pages 1-33.
    8. Lawrence J. Abbott & Susan Parker & Gary F. Peters, 2012. "Audit Fee Reductions from Internal Audit†Provided Assistance: The Incremental Impact of Internal Audit Characteristics," Contemporary Accounting Research, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 29(1), pages 94-118, March.
    9. Stephen K. Asare & Arnold M. Wright, 2004. "The Effectiveness of Alternative Risk Assessment and Program Planning Tools in a Fraud Setting," Contemporary Accounting Research, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 21(2), pages 325-352, June.
    10. Braun, Gary P. & Haynes, Christine M. & Lewis, Tom D. & Taylor, Mark H., 2015. "Principles-based vs. rules-based accounting standards: The effects of auditee proposed accounting treatment and regulatory enforcement on auditor judgments and confidence," Research in Accounting Regulation, Elsevier, vol. 27(1), pages 45-50.
    11. Carmona, Salvador & Trombetta, Marco, 2008. "On the global acceptance of IAS/IFRS accounting standards: The logic and implications of the principles-based system," Journal of Accounting and Public Policy, Elsevier, vol. 27(6), pages 455-461.
    12. DeFond, Mark & Zhang, Jieying, 2014. "A review of archival auditing research," Journal of Accounting and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 58(2), pages 275-326.
    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. Vu, Quang & Nga, Nguyen Thi Thuy, 2022. "Does the implementation of internal controls promote firm profitability? Evidence from private Vietnamese small- and medium-sized enterprises (SMEs)," Finance Research Letters, Elsevier, vol. 45(C).

    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. DeFond, Mark & Zhang, Jieying, 2014. "A review of archival auditing research," Journal of Accounting and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 58(2), pages 275-326.
    2. Joost Impink & Martien Lubberink & Bart Praag & David Veenman, 2012. "Did accelerated filing requirements and SOX Section 404 affect the timeliness of 10-K filings?," Review of Accounting Studies, Springer, vol. 17(2), pages 227-253, June.
    3. Ji, Xu-dong & Lu, Wei & Qu, Wen, 2018. "Internal control risk and audit fees: Evidence from China," Journal of Contemporary Accounting and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 14(3), pages 266-287.
    4. Knechel, W. Robert & Thomas, Edward & Driskill, Matthew, 2020. "Understanding financial auditing from a service perspective," Accounting, Organizations and Society, Elsevier, vol. 81(C).
    5. Ferramosca, Silvia & Allegrini, Marco, 2021. "Impairment or amortization of goodwill? An analysis of CFO perceptions of goodwill accounting," European Management Journal, Elsevier, vol. 39(6), pages 816-828.
    6. Lenard, Mary Jane & Petruska, Karin A. & Alam, Pervaiz & Yu, Bing, 2016. "Internal control weaknesses and evidence of real activities manipulation," Advances in accounting, Elsevier, vol. 33(C), pages 47-58.
    7. Vakkur, Nicholas V. & McAfee, R. Preston & Kipperman, Fred, 2010. "The unintended effects of the Sarbanes–Oxley Act of 2002," Research in Accounting Regulation, Elsevier, vol. 22(1), pages 18-28.
    8. Li, Tianpei (Constance) & Walton, Stephanie, 2023. "Is there a dark side of competition? Product market competition and auditor-client contracting," Advances in accounting, Elsevier, vol. 62(C).
    9. Lisic, Ling Lei & Pittman, Jeffrey & Seidel, Timothy A. & Zimmerman, Aleksandra “Ally” B., 2022. "You can't get there from here: The influence of an audit partner's prior non-public accounting experience on audit outcomes," Accounting, Organizations and Society, Elsevier, vol. 100(C).
    10. Feng, Mei & Li, Chan & McVay, Sarah, 2009. "Internal control and management guidance," Journal of Accounting and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 48(2-3), pages 190-209, December.
    11. Roychowdhury, Sugata & Shroff, Nemit & Verdi, Rodrigo S., 2019. "The effects of financial reporting and disclosure on corporate investment: A review," Journal of Accounting and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 68(2).
    12. Baolei Qi & Liuchuang Li & Qing Zhou & Jinghui Sun, 2017. "Does internal control over financial reporting really alleviate agency conflicts?," Accounting and Finance, Accounting and Finance Association of Australia and New Zealand, vol. 57(4), pages 1101-1125, December.
    13. Wunhong Su & Liuzhen Zhang & Chao Ge & Shuai Chen, 2022. "Association between Internal Control and Sustainability: A Literature Review Based on the SOX Act Framework," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 14(15), pages 1-30, August.
    14. Libby, Robert & Rennekamp, Kristina M. & Seybert, Nicholas, 2015. "Regulation and the interdependent roles of managers, auditors, and directors in earnings management and accounting choice," Accounting, Organizations and Society, Elsevier, vol. 47(C), pages 25-42.
    15. Ana Albuquerque & Julie Lei Zhu, 2019. "Has Section 404 of the Sarbanes–Oxley Act Discouraged Corporate Investment? New Evidence from a Natural Experiment," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 65(7), pages 3423-3446, July.
    16. Timothy A. Seidel & Chad A. Simon & Nathaniel M. Stephens, 2020. "Management bias across multiple accounting estimates," Review of Accounting Studies, Springer, vol. 25(1), pages 1-53, March.
    17. Cai, Yongbin & Li, Mengzhe, 2022. "CEO-CFO tenure consistency and audit fees," Pacific-Basin Finance Journal, Elsevier, vol. 73(C).
    18. Dan Amiram & Serene Huang & Shiva Rajgopal, 2020. "Does financial reporting misconduct pay off even when discovered?," Review of Accounting Studies, Springer, vol. 25(3), pages 811-854, September.
    19. Ling L. Harris & Scott B. Jackson & Joel Owens & Nicholas Seybert, 2022. "Recruiting Dark Personalities for Earnings Management," Journal of Business Ethics, Springer, vol. 178(1), pages 193-218, June.
    20. Call, Andrew C. & Kedia, Simi & Rajgopal, Shivaram, 2016. "Rank and file employees and the discovery of misreporting: The role of stock options," Journal of Accounting and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 62(2), pages 277-300.

    More about this item

    Keywords

    ;
    ;
    ;
    ;
    ;

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    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:reacre:v:29:y:2017:i:1:p:30-43. 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/research-in-accounting-regulation .

    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.