IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/hal/journl/halshs-00587756.html
   My bibliography  Save this paper

La négociation de la réalité financière entre les auditeurs et les dirigeants : une synthèse de la littérature

Author

Listed:
  • Ahmed Faidoli

    (CREFIGE - CENTRE DE RECHERCHE EUROPEEN EN FINANCE ET GESTION - Université Paris Dauphine-PSL - PSL - Université Paris sciences et lettres)

Abstract

L'audit remplit une fonction institutionnelle de contrôle et de production de confiance, sur le fondement de l'image fidèle, dans un domaine où se heurtent les intérêts conflictuels d'ayant droits à la création de valeur de la firme, et de groupes de pression divers. Mais pour les pratiques comptables dépourvues d'un encadrement législatif suffisamment rigide, on suppose que le jugement des auditeurs est surtout le fruit d'un processus de négociation impliquant des compromis économiques, car "l'image fidèle" n'existe pas indépendamment d'intérêts politiques spécifiques. Ce qui met en perspective le problème de l'indépendance des auditeurs dans ces situations comptables. Pour comprendre le processus de négociation de la réalité entre les auditeurs et les dirigeants, on rappelle d'abord les orientations politiques irréductibles des pratiques, et la construction de leur vérifiabilité par les auditeurs. On pourra ensuite s'intéresser au processus de négociation sousjacent, selon deux angles d'analyse. Le premier vise une investigation en profondeur du processus de négociation, en étudiant les dimensions cognitives et sociologiques du phénomène. Il montre que les apports de la sociologie de la loi peuvent expliquer une partie de la dimension économique du processus, mais ils ne permettent pas d'identifier les variables critiques associées au succès ou à l'échec de la négociation. Ce qui est l'objet du second type d'analyse, issu de la théorie microéconomique de l'agence, qui apporte des éclaircissements intéressants pour la compréhension des facteurs clés liés à la réussite de la négociation, mais présente l'inconvénient de réduire le processus même à une " boite noire ".

Suggested Citation

  • Ahmed Faidoli, 1999. "La négociation de la réalité financière entre les auditeurs et les dirigeants : une synthèse de la littérature," Post-Print halshs-00587756, HAL.
    • Handle: RePEc:hal:journl:halshs-00587756
    Note: View the original document on HAL open archive server: https://shs.hal.science/halshs-00587756
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://shs.hal.science/halshs-00587756/document
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Power, Michael, 1996. "Making things auditable," Accounting, Organizations and Society, Elsevier, vol. 21(2-3), pages 289-315.
    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. Suzuki, Tomo, 2003. "The accounting figuration of business statistics as a foundation for the spread of economic ideas," Accounting, Organizations and Society, Elsevier, vol. 28(1), pages 65-95, January.
    2. Mohammad Hudaib & Roszaini Haniffa, 2009. "Exploring auditor independence: an interpretive approach," Accounting, Auditing & Accountability Journal, Emerald Group Publishing Limited, vol. 22(2), pages 221-246, January.
    3. Macve Richard, 2013. "“Trading Places”: A UK (and IFRS) Comment," Accounting, Economics, and Law: A Convivium, De Gruyter, vol. 4(1), pages 27-40, April.
    4. Amanda Ball & David L. Owen & Rob Gray, 2000. "External transparency or internal capture? The role of third‐party statements in adding value to corporate environmental reports1," Business Strategy and the Environment, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 9(1), pages 1-23, January.
    5. Patrick Velte & Martin Stawinoga, 2017. "Empirical research on corporate social responsibility assurance (CSRA): A literature review," Journal of Business Economics, Springer, vol. 87(8), pages 1017-1066, November.
    6. Power, Michael, 2015. "How accounting begins: Object formation and the accretion of infrastructure," Accounting, Organizations and Society, Elsevier, vol. 47(C), pages 43-55.
    7. Mia Kaspersen & Thomas Riise Johansen, 2016. "Changing Social and Environmental Reporting Systems," Journal of Business Ethics, Springer, vol. 135(4), pages 731-749, June.
    8. Martin Mueller & Virginia dos Santos & Stefan Seuring, 2009. "The Contribution of Environmental and Social Standards Towards Ensuring Legitimacy in Supply Chain Governance," Journal of Business Ethics, Springer, vol. 89(4), pages 509-523, November.
    9. Franck Aggeri & Aurélien Acquier, 2005. "La théorie des stakeholders permet-elle de rendre compte des pratiques d'entreprise en matière de RSE ?," Post-Print halshs-00645708, HAL.
    10. Power, Michael K., 2003. "Auditing and the production of legitimacy," Accounting, Organizations and Society, Elsevier, vol. 28(4), pages 379-394, May.
    11. Franck Aggeri & Julie Labatut, 2010. "La gestion au prisme de ses instruments. Une analyse généalogique des approches théoriques fondées sur les instruments de gestion," Revue Finance Contrôle Stratégie, revues.org, vol. 13(3), pages 5-37., September.
    12. 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).
    13. Piotr Zientara & Paulina Bohdanowicz-Godfrey & Claire Whitely & Grzegorz Maciejewski, 2020. "A Case Study of LightStay (2010–2017)—Hilton’s Corporate Responsibility Management System," Energies, MDPI, vol. 13(9), pages 1-22, May.
    14. Faulconbridge, James R. & Muzio, Daniel, 2021. "Valuation devices and the dynamic legitimacy-performativity nexus: The case of PEP in the English legal profession," Accounting, Organizations and Society, Elsevier, vol. 91(C).
    15. Funnell, Warwick & Wade, Margaret, 2012. "Negotiating the credibility of performance auditing," CRITICAL PERSPECTIVES ON ACCOUNTING, Elsevier, vol. 23(6), pages 434-450.
    16. Richard Macve, 2010. "Conceptual frameworks of accounting: Some brief reflections on theory and practice," Accounting and Business Research, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 40(3), pages 303-308.
    17. Downer, John, 2011. "On audits and airplanes: Redundancy and reliability-assessment in high technologies," Accounting, Organizations and Society, Elsevier, vol. 36(4), pages 269-283.
    18. Michael Power, 2010. "Fair value accounting, financial economics and the transformation of reliability," Accounting and Business Research, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 40(3), pages 197-210.
    19. Gendron, Yves & Cooper, David J. & Townley, Barbara, 2007. "The construction of auditing expertise in measuring government performance," Accounting, Organizations and Society, Elsevier, vol. 32(1-2), pages 101-129.
    20. Macve, R.H., 2015. "Fair value vs conservatism? Aspects of the history of accounting, auditing, business and finance from ancient Mesopotamia to modern China," The British Accounting Review, Elsevier, vol. 47(2), pages 124-141.

    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:halshs-00587756. 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.