IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/nwe/eajour/y2025i3p693-712.html

Joint Audit and Stakeholder Perceptions: Empirical Study in Bulgaria

Author

Listed:
  • Antoaneta Angelova-Stanimirova

    (University of National and World Economy)

  • Dаniela Petrova

    (University of National and World Economy)

  • Snejana Bаcheva

    (University of National and World Economy)

  • Iavor Bаchev

    (University of National and World Economy)

Abstract

Companies should concentrate on their chances to improve company operations, increase efficiency, and adjust to changes in order to gain a strategic advantage in the current complex business climate. Understanding how the business runs and how the control process is implemented is essential. The audit and its quality are among the most important matters. The provisions and execution of the joint audit are placed on the agenda following the modifications to the legal frameworks of Europe and Bulgaria. In the specialized literature, it is defined as an audit in which two different auditing firms form a joint opinion on the financial statements and are jointly and severally liable for the issued audit opinion. Through three categories of respondents, the purpose of this article is to empirically examine the perceptions of positive and negative aspects of the implementation of joint audit in Bulgaria. The results of the conducted research conclude a strong correlation between each specific positive aspect of the joint audit, regardless of the respondents’ category – Supervisory institutions, Auditors, and Audited entities. So, the respondents acknowledge the advantages of joint audits and believe that enhancing these positive aspects will inevitably result in a rise in other positive aspects. The main recommendation for future research is to carry out an extensive investigation into the causal connections between the positive and negative individual correlations in a joint audit and cross-national research; analysis and proof are required to understand why joint audits work well in some circumstances while failing miserably in others.

Suggested Citation

  • Antoaneta Angelova-Stanimirova & Dаniela Petrova & Snejana Bаcheva & Iavor Bаchev, 2025. "Joint Audit and Stakeholder Perceptions: Empirical Study in Bulgaria," Economic Alternatives, University of National and World Economy, Sofia, Bulgaria, issue 3, pages 693-712, September.
  • Handle: RePEc:nwe:eajour:y:2025:i:3:p:693-712
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.unwe.bg/doi/eajournal/2025.3/EA.2025.3.04.pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Nicole V. S. Ratzinger-Sakel & Sophie Audousset-Coulier & Jaana Kettunen & Cédric Lesage, 2013. "Joint Audit: Issues and Challenges for Researchers and Policy-Makers," Accounting in Europe, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 10(2), pages 175-199, November.
    2. Pietro A. Bianchi, 2018. "Auditors’ Joint Engagements and Audit Quality: Evidence from Italian Private Companies," Contemporary Accounting Research, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 35(3), pages 1533-1577, September.
    3. Nicole V. S. Ratzinger-Sakel & Sophie Audousset-Coulier & Jaana Kettunen & Cédric Lesage, 2013. "Joint Audit: Issues and Challenges for Researchers and Policy-Makers," Post-Print hal-01099633, HAL.
    4. Mikko Zerni & Elina Haapamäki & Tuukka Järvinen & Lasse Niemi, 2012. "Do Joint Audits Improve Audit Quality? Evidence from Voluntary Joint Audits," European Accounting Review, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 21(4), pages 731-765, December.
    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. Mohamed M. El-Dyasty & Ahmed A. Elamer, 2022. "Multiple audit mechanism, audit quality and cost of debt: empirical evidence from a developing country," International Journal of Disclosure and Governance, Palgrave Macmillan, vol. 19(3), pages 264-281, September.
    2. Mehdi Nekhili & Fahim Javed & Haithem Nagati, 2022. "Audit Partner Gender, Leadership and Ethics: The Case of Earnings Management," Journal of Business Ethics, Springer, vol. 177(2), pages 233-260, May.
    3. Sabine Graschitz & Marcel Steller, 2025. "Audit fees and audit quality in Austria—a replicatory study in the wake of the EU audit reform," Journal of Business Economics, Springer, vol. 95(2), pages 295-332, April.
    4. Florian Hoos & Jorien Louise Pruijssers & Michel W. Lander, 2019. "Who’s Watching? Accountability in Different Audit Regimes and the Effects on Auditors’ Professional Skepticism," Journal of Business Ethics, Springer, vol. 156(2), pages 563-575, May.
    5. Quick, Reiner & Schmidt, Florian, 2018. "Do audit firm rotation, auditor retention, and joint audits matter? – An experimental investigation of bank directors' and institutional investors' perceptions," Journal of Accounting Literature, Elsevier, vol. 41(C), pages 1-21.
    6. Claus Holm & Frank Thinggaard, 2018. "From joint to single audits – audit quality differences and auditor pairings," Accounting and Business Research, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 48(3), pages 321-344, April.
    7. Marcel Haak & Michelle Muraz & Roland Zieseniß, 2018. "Joint Audits: Does the Allocation of Audit Work Affect Audit Quality and Audit Fees?," Accounting in Europe, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 15(1), pages 55-80, January.
    8. Sophie Audousset-Coulier, 2015. "Audit Fees in a Joint Audit Setting," European Accounting Review, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 24(2), pages 347-377, June.
    9. Qiang Guo & Christopher Koch & Aiyong Zhu, 2017. "Joint audit, audit market structure, and consumer surplus," Review of Accounting Studies, Springer, vol. 22(4), pages 1595-1627, December.
    10. Kovermann, Jost & Velte, Patrick, 2019. "The impact of corporate governance on corporate tax avoidance—A literature review," Journal of International Accounting, Auditing and Taxation, Elsevier, vol. 36(C), pages 1-1.
    11. Zhu, Jingqi & Spence, Crawford & Ezzamel, Mahmoud, 2021. "Thinking like the state: Doxa and symbolic power in the accounting field in China," Accounting, Organizations and Society, Elsevier, vol. 93(C).
    12. Alastair Marais, 2024. "Audit Quality and Financial Statement Manipulation: The Moderating Effect of Tone at the Top," International Journal of Economics and Financial Issues, Econjournals, vol. 14(5), pages 220-232, September.
    13. Zhigang Qin & Wen Liu & Maonan Chen, 2022. "Corporate Tax Avoidance and Firm Diversification: Evidence from Chinese Listed Firms," Asian Economic Journal, East Asian Economic Association, vol. 36(1), pages 3-21, March.
    14. Marius Gros & Daniel Worret, 2016. "Lobbying and Audit Regulation in the EU," Accounting in Europe, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 13(3), pages 381-403, September.
    15. Kristina Peštović & Nikola Milicevic & Nenad Djokic & Ines Djokic, 2021. "Audit Service Quality Perceived by Customers: Formative Modelling Measurement Approach," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 13(21), pages 1-16, October.
    16. Kim Ittonen & Karla Johnstone & Emma-Riikka Myllym�ki, 2015. "Audit Partner Public-Client Specialisation and Client Abnormal Accruals," European Accounting Review, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 24(3), pages 607-633, September.
    17. Puschmann, Lina Carine, 2019. "Die Rotation des verantwortlichen Prüfungspartners als Instrument zur Steigerung der Prüfungsqualität," Junior Management Science (JUMS), Junior Management Science e. V., vol. 4(4), pages 553-565.
    18. C. Okaro Sunday & Gloria O. Okafor & Grace N. Ofoegbu, 2018. "Mandating Joint Audits in Nigeria: Perspectives and Issues," International Journal of Academic Research in Business and Social Sciences, Human Resource Management Academic Research Society, International Journal of Academic Research in Business and Social Sciences, vol. 8(3), pages 316-338, March.
    19. Gérald Lobo & Luc Paugam & Lana Zhang & Jean-François Casta, 2013. "Effect Of Joint Auditor Pair On Conserv A Tism: Evidence From Impairment Tests," Post-Print hal-00993007, HAL.
    20. Christopher Bleibtreu & Ulrike Stefani, 2021. "Audit Regulations, Audit Market Structure, and Financial Reporting Quality," Foundations and Trends(R) in Accounting, now publishers, vol. 16(1-2), pages 1-183, November.

    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:nwe:eajour:y:2025:i:3:p:693-712. 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: Vanya Lazarova (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://edirc.repec.org/data/unweebg.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.