IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/hal/journl/hal-02432110.html
   My bibliography  Save this paper

Une analyse de l'Audit Expectation Gap dans le contexte français

Author

Listed:
  • David Carassus

    (CREG - Centre de recherche et d'études en gestion - UPPA - Université de Pau et des Pays de l'Adour)

  • Khaled Albouaini
  • Marie Caussimont

    (CREG - Centre de recherche et d'études en gestion - UPPA - Université de Pau et des Pays de l'Adour)

Abstract

diplômée d'expertise-comptable, commissaire aux comptes inscrit Résumé : Menée dans le contexte français, cette étude analyse le décalage pouvant exister entre les attentes et perceptions des parties prenantes à l'audit, et les rôles et pratiques des commissaires aux comptes, effet appelé « Audit expectation gap » (AEG). Son cadre théorique mobilise la théorie des parties prenantes comme une approche complémentaire à la théorie de l'agence. Son objectif est de mettre en évidence un éventuel AEG, d'en identifier les caractéristiques, et de formuler des propositions de réduction de ce décalage. La revue de littérature réalisée révèle que l'indépendance, la compétence, la nature, la responsabilité et la communication de l'auditeur constituent les éléments de caractérisation d'un AEG. Notre enquête auprès de commissaires aux comptes français et d'utilisateurs des rapports d'audit sur l'année 2009 montre que l'AEG s'explique, en France, principalement par la nature de l'audit et la responsabilité de l'auditeur, notamment sur son périmètre d'intervention. Cette étude, par l'appréhension de l'audit comme l'un des mécanismes d'une gouvernance d'entreprise élargie, identifie également des voies d'évolution de l'audit légal.

Suggested Citation

  • David Carassus & Khaled Albouaini & Marie Caussimont, 2013. "Une analyse de l'Audit Expectation Gap dans le contexte français," Post-Print hal-02432110, HAL.
  • Handle: RePEc:hal:journl:hal-02432110
    Note: View the original document on HAL open archive server: https://univ-pau.hal.science/hal-02432110
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://univ-pau.hal.science/hal-02432110/document
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Fama, Eugene F & Jensen, Michael C, 1983. "Agency Problems and Residual Claims," Journal of Law and Economics, University of Chicago Press, vol. 26(2), pages 327-349, June.
    2. Charles Piot, 2004. "The existence and independence of audit committees in France," Accounting and Business Research, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 34(3), pages 223-246.
    3. Geneviève Causse & Viet Ha Tran Vu, 2012. "Les dimensions de la performance des cabinets d'audit légal – Le point de vue des auditeurs," Comptabilité - Contrôle - Audit, Association francophone de comptabilité, vol. 18(3), pages 97-143.
    4. Goodpaster, Kenneth E., 1991. "Business Ethics and Stakeholder Analysis," Business Ethics Quarterly, Cambridge University Press, vol. 1(1), pages 53-73, January.
    5. Christine Noël Lemaitre & Sandrine Frémeaux, 2009. "Le co-commissariat aux comptes sous le prisme de la sociologie du droit," Post-Print hal-00760846, HAL.
    6. Edward Freeman, R. & Evan, William M., 1990. "Corporate governance: A stakeholder interpretation," Journal of Behavioral Economics, Elsevier, vol. 19(4), pages 337-359.
    7. Bent Warming-Rasmussen & Lars Jensen, 1998. "Quality dimensions in external audit services- an external user perspective," European Accounting Review, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 7(1), pages 65-82.
    8. Hassink, Harold F.D. & Bollen, Laury H. & Meuwissen, Roger H.G. & de Vries, Meinderd J., 2009. "Corporate fraud and the audit expectations gap: A study among business managers," Journal of International Accounting, Auditing and Taxation, Elsevier, vol. 18(2), pages 85-100.
    9. Ian P. Dewing & Peter O. Russell, 2004. "Accounting, Auditing and Corporate Governance of European Listed Countries: EU Policy Developments Before and After Enron," Journal of Common Market Studies, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 42(2), pages 289-319, June.
    10. Imen Jedidi & Chrystelle Richard, 2009. "The Social Construction of the Audit Expectation Gap: The Market of Excuses," Post-Print halshs-00460146, HAL.
    11. Milena Parent & David Deephouse, 2007. "A Case Study of Stakeholder Identification and Prioritization by Managers," Journal of Business Ethics, Springer, vol. 75(1), pages 1-23, September.
    12. Geneviève Causse & Viet Ha Tran Vu, 2012. "Les dimensions de la performance des cabinets d'audit légal – Le point de vue des auditeurs," ACCRA, Association francophone de comptabilité, vol. 18(3), pages 97-143.
    13. Mairi Maclean, 1999. "Corporate Governance in France and the UK: Long-Term Perspectives on Contemporary Institutional Arrangements," Business History, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 41(1), pages 88-116.
    14. Jensen, Michael C. & Meckling, William H., 1976. "Theory of the firm: Managerial behavior, agency costs and ownership structure," Journal of Financial Economics, Elsevier, vol. 3(4), pages 305-360, October.
    15. Langtry, Bruce, 1994. "Stakeholders and the Moral Responsibilities of Business," Business Ethics Quarterly, Cambridge University Press, vol. 4(4), pages 431-443, October.
    16. Chiraz Ben Ali, 2008. "Disclosure quality and corporate governance: Evidence from the French Stock Market," Post-Print halshs-00522350, HAL.
    17. Amel Ben Rhouma, 2008. "La Divulgation Environnementale Des Grandes Entreprises Francaises : Etude Des Determinants," Post-Print halshs-00522373, HAL.
    18. Mehdi Nekhili & Moêz Cherif, 2009. "Transactions avec les parties liées, caractéristiques de propriété et de gouvernance et performance des entreprises françaises," ACCRA, Association francophone de comptabilité, vol. 15(3), pages 55-89.
    19. repec:dau:papers:123456789/3906 is not listed on IDEAS
    20. Robert Dixon & Gehan A. Mousa & Anne D. Woodhead, 2004. "The necessary characteristics of environmental auditors: a review of the contribution of the financial auditing profession," Accounting Forum, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 28(2), pages 119-138, June.
    21. Peter Schelluch & Grant Gay, 2006. "Assurance provided by auditors’ reports on prospective financial information: implications for the expectation gap," Accounting and Finance, Accounting and Finance Association of Australia and New Zealand, vol. 46(4), pages 653-676, December.
    22. Nathalie Gonthier-Besacier, 2000. "Une Mesure De L'Impact De La Re-Formulation Du Rapport General Des Commissaires Aux Comptes," Post-Print halshs-00587464, HAL.
    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. Velamuri, Rama & Venkataraman, Sankaran, 2005. "Why stakeholder and stockholder theories are not necessarily contradictory: A knightian insight," IESE Research Papers D/591, IESE Business School.
    2. Bazlur RAHMAN, & Idris ALI, & Alexandru Mircea NEDELEA, 2017. "Greenwashing In Canadian Firms: An Assessment Of Environmental Claimsgreenwashing In Canadian Firms: An Assessment Of Environmental Claims," EcoForum, "Stefan cel Mare" University of Suceava, Romania, Faculty of Economics and Public Administration - Economy, Business Administration and Tourism Department., vol. 6(2), pages 1-8, july.
    3. Samantha Miles, 2017. "Stakeholder Theory Classification: A Theoretical and Empirical Evaluation of Definitions," Journal of Business Ethics, Springer, vol. 142(3), pages 437-459, May.
    4. Simona Galletta & Sebastiano Mazzù & Valeria Naciti, 2021. "Banks' business strategy and environmental effectiveness: The monitoring role of the board of directors and the managerial incentives," Business Strategy and the Environment, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 30(5), pages 2656-2670, July.
    5. Puławska Karolina & Dobija Dorota & Piotrowska Katarzyna & Kravchenko Grygorii, 2021. "Audit Committee Formation: The Case of Poland," Journal of Management and Business Administration. Central Europe, Sciendo, vol. 29(2), pages 169-212, June.
    6. Joseph Heath, 2011. "Business Ethics and the ‘End of History’ in Corporate Law," Journal of Business Ethics, Springer, vol. 102(1), pages 5-20, March.
    7. Andrew Crane & Trish Ruebottom, 2011. "Stakeholder Theory and Social Identity: Rethinking Stakeholder Identification," Journal of Business Ethics, Springer, vol. 102(1), pages 77-87, March.
    8. Y. Fassin, 2008. "The Stakeholder Model Refined," Working Papers of Faculty of Economics and Business Administration, Ghent University, Belgium 08/529, Ghent University, Faculty of Economics and Business Administration.
    9. Cristina Gianfelici & Andrea Casadei & Federica Cembali, 2018. "The Relevance of Nationality and Industry for Stakeholder Salience: An Investigation Through Integrated Reports," Journal of Business Ethics, Springer, vol. 150(2), pages 541-558, June.
    10. Silke Machold & Pervaiz Ahmed & Stuart Farquhar, 2008. "Corporate Governance and Ethics: A Feminist Perspective," Journal of Business Ethics, Springer, vol. 81(3), pages 665-678, September.
    11. Ulf Richter, 2010. "Liberal Thought in Reasoning on CSR," Journal of Business Ethics, Springer, vol. 97(4), pages 625-649, December.
    12. Ninghua Zhong & Shujing Wang & Rudai Yang, 2017. "Does Corporate Governance Enhance Common Interests of Shareholders and Primary Stakeholders?," Journal of Business Ethics, Springer, vol. 141(2), pages 411-431, March.
    13. Giovanni Ferri & Angelo Leogrande, 2015. "Was the Crisis due to a shift from stakeholder to shareholder finance? Surveying the debate," Mo.Fi.R. Working Papers 108, Money and Finance Research group (Mo.Fi.R.) - Univ. Politecnica Marche - Dept. Economic and Social Sciences.
    14. Boatright, John R., 2002. "Contractors as stakeholders: Reconciling stakeholder theory with the nexus-of-contracts firm," Journal of Banking & Finance, Elsevier, vol. 26(9), pages 1837-1852, September.
    15. Chenglong Zheng & Roy Kouwenberg, 2019. "A Bibliometric Review of Global Research on Corporate Governance and Board Attributes," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 11(12), pages 1-25, June.
    16. Baarda, James R., 2003. "Current Law & Economics Debates: Tools for Assessing Fundamental Cooperative Changes?," 2003 Annual Meeting, October 29 31802, NCERA-194 Research on Cooperatives.
    17. Preet Singh & Chitra Singla, 2016. "Executive Stock Options: Will it Work as a Good Governance Mechanism in all Scenarios?," Working Papers id:10985, eSocialSciences.
    18. Tarek Roshdy Gebba & Mohamed Gamal Aboelmaged, 2016. "Corporate Governance of UAE Financial Institutions: A Comparative Study between Conventional and Islamic Banks," Journal of Applied Finance & Banking, SCIENPRESS Ltd, vol. 6(5), pages 1-7.
    19. Evans, Lewis & Meade, Richard, 2005. "The Role and Significance of Cooperatives in New Zealand Agriculture, A Comparative Institutional Analysis," Working Paper Series 3847, Victoria University of Wellington, The New Zealand Institute for the Study of Competition and Regulation.
    20. J. David Cummins & Mary A. Weiss & Hongmin Zi, 1998. "Organizational Form and Efficiency: An Analysis of Stock and Mutual Property-Liability Insurers," Center for Financial Institutions Working Papers 97-02, Wharton School Center for Financial Institutions, University of Pennsylvania.

    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:hal:journl:hal-02432110. 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: CCSD (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://hal.archives-ouvertes.fr/ .

    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.