IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/taf/acctbr/v49y2019i1p1-27.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Processes of auditability in sustainability assurance – the case of materiality construction

Author

Listed:
  • Mary Canning
  • Brendan O’Dwyer
  • George Georgakopoulos

Abstract

This study examines how financial audit-styled concepts such as materiality are transferred to non-financial audit arenas. Drawing on a case study of assurors working within a Big 4 professional services firm, we uncover a number of interrelated features of the materiality determination and assessment process within sustainability assurance (assurance on sustainability reports). We illustrate how assuror flexibility, underpinned by assuror intuition, is central to uncovering assurance technologies deemed capable of addressing the materiality of ambiguous sustainability data. Assurors with no financial audit background retrospectively rationalise their intuition using the assumed authority of structured financial audit methodologies. This facilitates the tentative translation of financial audit knowledge to the sustainability assurance domain. Collaborative, holistic decision-making processes inform the assurors’ continual construction of materiality and are characterised by alliances of (accountant and non-accountant) ‘expert’ assurors merging formal and tacit knowledge. These alliances seek social cohesion within sustainability assurance teams in order to establish a social consensus among assurors around the materiality determination and assessment process. Our analysis develops and extends Power’s theorisation of how new areas are made auditable and advances our understanding of the more practical aspects of non-financial assurance services offered by Big 4 professional services firms.

Suggested Citation

  • Mary Canning & Brendan O’Dwyer & George Georgakopoulos, 2019. "Processes of auditability in sustainability assurance – the case of materiality construction," Accounting and Business Research, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 49(1), pages 1-27, January.
  • Handle: RePEc:taf:acctbr:v:49:y:2019:i:1:p:1-27
    DOI: 10.1080/00014788.2018.1442208
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://hdl.handle.net/10.1080/00014788.2018.1442208
    Download Restriction: Access to full text is restricted to subscribers.

    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1080/00014788.2018.1442208?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 search for a different version of it.

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Xu, Shirley Geyi & Andrew, Brian, 2021. "Competing for the leading role: Trials in categorizing greenhouse and energy auditors," CRITICAL PERSPECTIVES ON ACCOUNTING, Elsevier, vol. 77(C).
    2. Chao Ma & Mazhar Farid Chishti & Muhammad Kashif Durrani & Rizwana Bashir & Sofia Safdar & Rana Tanveer Hussain, 2023. "The Corporate Social Responsibility and Its Impact on Financial Performance: A Case of Developing Countries," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 15(4), pages 1-18, February.
    3. Maria Albertina Barreiro Rodrigues & Ana Isabel Morais, 2021. "How to Challenge University Students to Work on Integrated Reporting and Integrated Reporting Assurance," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 13(19), pages 1-19, September.
    4. Paola Vola & Lorenzo Gelmini, 2022. "Climate change skills for the new CFOs. A preliminary analysis on TCFD by Italian listed companies," MANAGEMENT CONTROL, FrancoAngeli Editore, vol. 2022(2 Suppl.), pages 189-209.
    5. Carolin Baier & Max Göttsche & Andreas Hellmann & Frank Schiemann, 2022. "Too Good To Be True: Influencing Credibility Perceptions with Signaling Reference Explicitness and Assurance Depth," Journal of Business Ethics, Springer, vol. 178(3), pages 695-714, July.

    More about this item

    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:taf:acctbr:v:49:y:2019:i:1:p:1-27. 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.

    We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using 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: Chris Longhurst (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.tandfonline.com/RABR20 .

    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.