IDEAS home Printed from
   My bibliography  Save this article

Audit committees: voluntary formation by ASX non-top 500


  • Li (Glenda) Chen
  • Alan Kilgore
  • Renee Radich


Purpose - This paper aims to examine the relationship between firm characteristics and incentives for the voluntary formation of audit committees by non-top 500 firms listed on the Australian Stock Exchange (ASX). Design/methodology/approach - Data are obtained from a random sample of 224 non-top 500 firms listed on the ASX for the year 2005. Logistic regression analysis is used to examine the characteristics of non-top 500 firms who have voluntarily established audit committees. Findings - The results are consistent with the hypothesis that incentives to voluntarily form audit committees increase with agency costs of debt. The results show a significant and positive association between cost of debt, firm size, number of directors on the board, the proportion of independent directors, independent board chair and the voluntary formation of audit committees. Research limitations/implications - Results indicate that firm size is not necessarily the primary influence in voluntary formation of audit committees. Board size and the proportion of independent directors and having an independent board chair also have a significant influence on the decision. These results suggest that audit committees will be established in high agency cost of debt situations, where there are economies of scale and are reflective of a desire to reduce information asymmetries and the liability exposure of outside directors. Originality/value - This study provides useful insights and direction in examining voluntary formation in an Australian context using non-top 500 firms. The results have implications for regulators in considering making audit committees mandatory for all listed companies.

Suggested Citation

  • Li (Glenda) Chen & Alan Kilgore & Renee Radich, 2009. "Audit committees: voluntary formation by ASX non-top 500," Managerial Auditing Journal, Emerald Group Publishing, vol. 24(5), pages 475-493, May.
  • Handle: RePEc:eme:majpps:v:24:y:2009:i:5:p:475-493

    Download full text from publisher

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

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

    References listed on IDEAS

    1. Shleifer, Andrei & Vishny, Robert W, 1986. "Large Shareholders and Corporate Control," Journal of Political Economy, University of Chicago Press, vol. 94(3), pages 461-488, June.
    2. Yermack, David, 1996. "Higher market valuation of companies with a small board of directors," Journal of Financial Economics, Elsevier, vol. 40(2), pages 185-211, February.
    3. Pincus, Karen & Rusbarsky, Mark & Wong, Jilnaught, 1989. "Voluntary formation of corporate audit committees among NASDAQ firms," Journal of Accounting and Public Policy, Elsevier, vol. 8(4), pages 239-265.
    4. Anderson, Don & Francis, Jere R. & Stokes, Donald J., 1993. "Auditing, directorships and the demand for monitoring," Journal of Accounting and Public Policy, Elsevier, vol. 12(4), pages 353-375.
    5. Holthausen, Robert W. & Leftwich, Richard W., 1983. "The economic consequences of accounting choice implications of costly contracting and monitoring," Journal of Accounting and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 5(1), pages 77-117, April.
    6. Garvey, Gerald T. & Swan, Peter L., 1994. "The economics of corporate governance: Beyond the Marshallian firm," Journal of Corporate Finance, Elsevier, vol. 1(2), pages 139-174, August.
    7. Harris, Milton & Raviv, Artur, 1991. " The Theory of Capital Structure," Journal of Finance, American Finance Association, vol. 46(1), pages 297-355, March.
    8. Menon, Krishnagopal & Deahl Williams, Joanne, 1994. "The use of audit committees for monitoring," Journal of Accounting and Public Policy, Elsevier, vol. 13(2), pages 121-139.
    9. Eichenseher, John W. & Shields, David, 1985. "Corporate director liability and monitoring preferences," Journal of Accounting and Public Policy, Elsevier, vol. 4(1), pages 13-31.
    10. Bradbury, Michael E., 1990. "The incentives for voluntary audit committee formation," Journal of Accounting and Public Policy, Elsevier, vol. 9(1), pages 19-36.
    11. Julie Cotter & Mark Silvester, 2003. "Board and Monitoring Committee Independence," Abacus, Accounting Foundation, University of Sydney, vol. 39(2), pages 211-232.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)


    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:majpps:v:24:y:2009:i:5:p:475-493. 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). General contact details of provider: .

    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 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.

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

    IDEAS is a RePEc service hosted by the Research Division of the Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis . RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.