IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/ibn/ijbmjn/v11y2016i7p292.html

Audit Quality, Joint-Auditors and Game Theory: Empirical Validation in the French Context

Author

Listed:
  • Abdelhakim Ben Ali

Abstract

The objective of our research is to show the role of “game theory” as a scientific discipline permitting better explanation of the nature of complex relationships between the different stakeholders of the company. Motivated by the current discussions on the choice of the composition of the college auditors, we try to study the combination of auditors to ensure a better audit quality; and to demonstrate the gains and losses of the two players in the game studied during the period 2005-2010.The empirical results reveal that the best audit quality is conditioned by the presence of pair heterogeneous auditors (Big4_Non Big4). Added to that, the audit quality is affected by a high level of audit fees, minimizing the debt ratio, a large reflection of the business performance and financial means to enable it to meet the economic crises that surround it.

Suggested Citation

  • Abdelhakim Ben Ali, 2016. "Audit Quality, Joint-Auditors and Game Theory: Empirical Validation in the French Context," International Journal of Business and Management, Canadian Center of Science and Education, vol. 11(7), pages 292-292, June.
    • Handle: RePEc:ibn:ijbmjn:v:11:y:2016:i:7:p:292
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.ccsenet.org/journal/index.php/ijbm/article/download/57113/32568
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: http://www.ccsenet.org/journal/index.php/ijbm/article/view/57113
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Blackwell, DW & Noland, TR & Winters, DB, 1998. "The value of auditor assurance: Evidence from loan pricing," Journal of Accounting Research, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 36(1), pages 57-70.
    2. Ans Kolk & Paolo Perego, 2010. "Determinants of the adoption of sustainability assurance statements: an international investigation," Business Strategy and the Environment, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 19(3), pages 182-198, March.
    3. Nagaoka, Sadao, 2006. "R&D and market value of Japanese firms in the 1990s," Journal of the Japanese and International Economies, Elsevier, vol. 20(2), pages 155-176, June.
    4. Clive Lennox, 2005. "Management Ownership and Audit Firm Size," Contemporary Accounting Research, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 22(1), pages 205-227, March.
    5. DeAngelo, Linda Elizabeth, 1981. "Auditor independence, `low balling', and disclosure regulation," Journal of Accounting and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 3(2), pages 113-127, August.
    6. Craswell, Allen & Stokes, Donald J. & Laughton, Janet, 2002. "Auditor independence and fee dependence," Journal of Accounting and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 33(2), pages 253-275, June.
    7. Richard Fairchild, 2008. "Auditor tenure, managerial fraud and report qualification: a behavioural game-theoretic approach," International Journal of Behavioural Accounting and Finance, Inderscience Enterprises Ltd, vol. 1(1), pages 23-37.
    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. DeFond, Mark & Zhang, Jieying, 2014. "A review of archival auditing research," Journal of Accounting and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 58(2), pages 275-326.
    2. Tobias Svanstr�m, 2013. "Non-audit Services and Audit Quality: Evidence from Private Firms," European Accounting Review, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 22(2), pages 337-366, June.
    3. Steve Fortin & Jeffrey A. Pittman, 2007. "The Role of Auditor Choice in Debt Pricing in Private Firms," Contemporary Accounting Research, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 24(3), pages 859-896, September.
    4. El Ghoul, Sadok & Guedhami, Omrane & Pittman, Jeffrey, 2016. "Cross-country evidence on the importance of Big Four auditors to equity pricing: The mediating role of legal institutions," Accounting, Organizations and Society, Elsevier, vol. 54(C), pages 60-81.
    5. Knechel, W. Robert & Thomas, Edward & Driskill, Matthew, 2020. "Understanding financial auditing from a service perspective," Accounting, Organizations and Society, Elsevier, vol. 81(C).
    6. Clatworthy, Mark A. & Peel, Michael J., 2016. "The timeliness of UK private company financial reporting: Regulatory and economic influences," The British Accounting Review, Elsevier, vol. 48(3), pages 297-315.
    7. Nathan R. Berglund, 2020. "Do Client Bankruptcies Preceded by Clean Audit Opinions Damage Auditor Reputation?," Contemporary Accounting Research, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 37(3), pages 1914-1951, September.
    8. Tobias Gerwing & Peter Kajüter & Maximilian Wirth, 2022. "The role of sustainable corporate governance in mandatory sustainability reporting quality," Journal of Business Economics, Springer, vol. 92(3), pages 517-555, April.
    9. Francesco Paolone & Matteo Pozzoli & Nicola Cucari & Rosario Bianco, 2023. "Longer board tenure and audit committee tenure. How do they impact environmental performance? A European study," Corporate Social Responsibility and Environmental Management, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 30(1), pages 358-368, January.
    10. Fan, Hanlu & Tang, Qingliang & Pan, Lipeng, 2021. "An international study of carbon information asymmetry and independent carbon assurance," The British Accounting Review, Elsevier, vol. 53(1).
    11. Katrin Hummel & Christian Schlick & Matthias Fifka, 2019. "The Role of Sustainability Performance and Accounting Assurors in Sustainability Assurance Engagements," Journal of Business Ethics, Springer, vol. 154(3), pages 733-757, February.
    12. William R. Kinney & Zoe‐Vonna Palmrose & Susan Scholz, 2004. "Auditor Independence, Non‐Audit Services, and Restatements: Was the U.S. Government Right?," Journal of Accounting Research, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 42(3), pages 561-588, June.
    13. Giacomo Manetti & Simone Toccafondi, 2012. "The Role of Stakeholders in Sustainability Reporting Assurance," Journal of Business Ethics, Springer, vol. 107(3), pages 363-377, May.
    14. Maarten Corten & Tensie Steijvers & Nadine Lybaert, 2015. "The demand for auditor services in wholly family-owned private firms: the moderating role of generation," Accounting and Business Research, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 45(1), pages 1-26, January.
    15. Reiner Quick & Niklas Schenk & Florian Schmidt & Thilo Towara, 2018. "The impact of corporate governance on auditor choice: evidence from Germany," Journal of Management & Governance, Springer;Accademia Italiana di Economia Aziendale (AIDEA), vol. 22(2), pages 251-283, June.
    16. Brad Badertscher & Bjorn Jorgensen & Sharon Katz & William Kinney, 2014. "Public Equity and Audit Pricing in the United States," Journal of Accounting Research, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 52(2), pages 303-339, May.
    17. Sophie Audousset-Coulier, 2015. "Audit Fees in a Joint Audit Setting," European Accounting Review, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 24(2), pages 347-377, June.
    18. Dhaliwal, Dan S. & Lamoreaux, Phillip T. & Litov, Lubomir P. & Neyland, Jordan B., 2016. "Shared auditors in mergers and acquisitions," Journal of Accounting and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 61(1), pages 49-76.
    19. Adam Esplin & Karim Jamal & Shyam Sunder, 2018. "Demand for and Assessment of Audit Quality in Private Companies," Abacus, Accounting Foundation, University of Sydney, vol. 54(3), pages 319-352, September.
    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.

    More about this item

    JEL classification:

    • R00 - Urban, Rural, Regional, Real Estate, and Transportation Economics - - General - - - General
    • Z0 - Other Special Topics - - General

    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:ibn:ijbmjn:v:11:y:2016:i:7:p:292. 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: Canadian Center of Science and Education (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://edirc.repec.org/data/cepflch.html .

    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.