IDEAS home Printed from
MyIDEAS: Log in (now much improved!) to save this article

Travelling audit's fault lines: a new architecture for auditing standards

Listed author(s):
  • David J. Hatherly
Registered author(s):

    Purpose - The purpose of this paper is to challenge the conceptual basis upon which the current auditing standards are based. Design/methodology/approach - The paper critically appraises the Auditors' Code published by the Auditing Practices Board and containing the nine fundamental and enduring principles upon which current auditing standards are based. Findings - It is argued that the nine enduring principles should be replaced by seven enduring tensions – the fault lines of auditing – so as to rethink the conceptual basis of auditing standards. Five of these are drawn from the paper's analysis of the Auditors' Code and two are based upon the author's experience of the issues arising in the preparation of the Code and the ensuing debate. Research limitations/implications - Further research should be carried out to test the robustness of the seven enduring tensions as the basis for standard setting. A first step might be to map the existing standards onto the new conceptual basis. Practical implications - Standard setters can deploy a new architecture for auditing standards and one that addresses the tensions inherent in auditing. Standard setting should be recognised as an activity dominated by ethical choices and concerns. Originality/value - The new conceptual basis should provide us with a much closer reading of what auditing is, and its potential for development without expectation gaps.

    If you experience problems downloading a file, check if you have the proper application to view it first. In case of further problems read the IDEAS help page. Note that these files are not on the IDEAS site. Please be patient as the files may be large.

    File URL:
    Download Restriction: Access to full text is restricted to subscribers

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to look for a different version under "Related research" (further below) or search for a different version of it.

    Article provided by Emerald Group Publishing in its journal Managerial Auditing Journal.

    Volume (Year): 24 (2009)
    Issue (Month): 2 (January)
    Pages: 204-215

    in new window

    Handle: RePEc:eme:majpps:v:24:y:2009:i:2:p:204-215
    Contact details of provider: Web page:

    Order Information: Postal: Emerald Group Publishing, Howard House, Wagon Lane, Bingley, BD16 1WA, UK
    Web: Email:

    No references listed on IDEAS
    You can help add them by filling out this form.

    This item is not listed on Wikipedia, on a reading list or among the top items on IDEAS.

    When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:eme:majpps:v:24:y:2009:i:2:p:204-215. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: (Virginia Chapman)

    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 references are entirely missing, you can add them using this form.

    If the full references list an item that is present in RePEc, but the system did not link 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 profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

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

    This information is provided to you by IDEAS at the Research Division of the Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis using RePEc data.