IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/blg/journl/v6y2011i1p5-18.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Some Arguments That Justify The Audit Trinity’S Approach In The Context Of Corporate Governance

Author

Listed:
  • Cristina Bota-Avram

    (Babes Bolyai University)

Abstract

The purpose of this paper is to develop a synthesis of the main arguments that could justify the necessity of audit trinity’s approach (internal audit, external audit, audit committee) in assuring good corporate governance. The aim of the paper is also to synthesize relevant theoretical and empirical latest literature that argues the significance of audit functions as an important mechanism in the effective functioning of corporate governance system. From methodological point of view, the construction of this paper has adopted a normative approach, the research being primarily, based on a examination of relevant literature, with a focus on developments that have more or less implications over the progress of corporate governance issues, especially in these difficult economic context that requires urgently the adopting of effective solutions. By presenting on overview over the latest literature ad discussing the shifting demands with respect to the audit’s contribution to ensuring good corporate governance, the author of this paper hopes to stimulate further research and constructive debates in the field.

Suggested Citation

  • Cristina Bota-Avram, 2011. "Some Arguments That Justify The Audit Trinity’S Approach In The Context Of Corporate Governance," Studies in Business and Economics, Lucian Blaga University of Sibiu, Faculty of Economic Sciences, vol. 6(1), pages 5-18, April.
    • Handle: RePEc:blg:journl:v:6:y:2011:i:1:p:5-18
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://eccsf.ulbsibiu.ro/RePEc/blg/journl/611Bota-Avram.pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Benston, George J. & Hartgraves, Al L., 2002. "Enron: what happened and what we can learn from it," Journal of Accounting and Public Policy, Elsevier, vol. 21(2), pages 105-127.
    2. Ian Fraser & Chris Pong, 2009. "The future of the external audit function," Managerial Auditing Journal, Emerald Group Publishing, vol. 24(2), pages 104-113, January.
    3. 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.
    4. Gillan, Stuart L. & Martin, John D., 2007. "Corporate governance post-Enron: Effective reforms, or closing the stable door?," Journal of Corporate Finance, Elsevier, vol. 13(5), pages 929-958, December.
    5. Daniela Zăpodeanu & Marcel Boloş & Lucia Kolozsi, 2009. "The Corporate Governance Of Public Entities In Romania," Annales Universitatis Apulensis Series Oeconomica, Faculty of Sciences, "1 Decembrie 1918" University, Alba Iulia, vol. 1(11), pages 1-58.
    6. Brenda A. Porter, 2009. "The audit trinity: the key to securing corporate accountability," Managerial Auditing Journal, Emerald Group Publishing, vol. 24(2), pages 156-182, January.
    7. Fama, Eugene F, 1980. "Agency Problems and the Theory of the Firm," Journal of Political Economy, University of Chicago Press, vol. 88(2), pages 288-307, April.
    8. Niamh M. Brennan & Jill Solomon, 2008. "Corporate governance, accountability and mechanisms of accountability: an overview," Accounting, Auditing & Accountability Journal, Emerald Group Publishing Limited, vol. 21(7), pages 885-906, September.
    9. Stuart Turley & Mahbub Zaman, 2004. "The Corporate Governance Effects of Audit Committees," Journal of Management & Governance, Springer;Accademia Italiana di Economia Aziendale (AIDEA), vol. 8(3), pages 305-332, June.
    10. Prem Sikka & Steven Filling & Pik Liew, 2009. "The audit crunch: reforming auditing," Managerial Auditing Journal, Emerald Group Publishing, vol. 24(2), pages 135-155, January.
    11. Gillan, Stuart L., 2006. "Recent Developments in Corporate Governance: An Overview," Journal of Corporate Finance, Elsevier, vol. 12(3), pages 381-402, June.
    12. G. Sarens & I. De Beelde, 2006. "Interaction between internal auditors and the audit committee: An analysis of expectations and perceptions," Working Papers of Faculty of Economics and Business Administration, Ghent University, Belgium 06/357, Ghent University, Faculty of Economics and Business Administration.
    13. Jenny Goodwin‐Stewart & Pamela Kent, 2006. "Relation between external audit fees, audit committee characteristics and internal audit," Accounting and Finance, Accounting and Finance Association of Australia and New Zealand, vol. 46(3), pages 387-404, September.
    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. Cristina Boţa-Avram, 2012. "Perceptions Over the Audit Committee Practices in the Context of Corporate Governance: Evidence From Romania," Journal of Knowledge Management, Economics and Information Technology, ScientificPapers.org, vol. 2(5), pages 1-11, October.
    2. Cristina Boţa-Avram, 2012. "Investigation of External Audit’s Good Practices in the Context of Corporate Governance - Evidence from Romania," Journal of Knowledge Management, Economics and Information Technology, ScientificPapers.org, vol. 2(1), pages 1-7, February.
    3. Khlif, Wafa & Clarke, Thomas & Karoui, Lotfi & Seny Kan, Konan A. & Ingley, Coral, 2019. "Governing complexity to challenge neoliberalism? Embedded firms and the prospects of understanding new realities," European Management Journal, Elsevier, vol. 37(5), pages 601-610.
    4. Thomas Keil & Markku Maula & Evangelos Syrigos, 2017. "CEO Entrepreneurial Orientation, Entrenchment, and Firm Value Creation," Entrepreneurship Theory and Practice, , vol. 41(4), pages 475-504, July.
    5. ATM Adnan & Nisar Ahmed, 2019. "The Transformation Of The Corporate Governance Model: A Literature Review," Copernican Journal of Finance & Accounting, Uniwersytet Mikolaja Kopernika, vol. 8(3), pages 7-47.
    6. Khaled Ahmad Kharashgah & Noor Afza Binti Amran & Rokiah Binti Ishak, 2019. "The Impact of Audit Committee Characteristics on Real Earnings Management: Evidence from Jordan," International Journal of Academic Research in Accounting, Finance and Management Sciences, Human Resource Management Academic Research Society, International Journal of Academic Research in Accounting, Finance and Management Sciences, vol. 9(4), pages 84-97, October.
    7. Kwansagool Tengamnuay & Pamela Stapleton, 2009. "The role of the audit committee in Thailand: a mature monitoring mechanism or an evolving process?," Journal of Management & Governance, Springer;Accademia Italiana di Economia Aziendale (AIDEA), vol. 13(3), pages 131-161, August.
    8. Christopher, Joe, 2010. "Corporate governance—A multi-theoretical approach to recognizing the wider influencing forces impacting on organizations," CRITICAL PERSPECTIVES ON ACCOUNTING, Elsevier, vol. 21(8), pages 683-695.
    9. Ahmed Bouteska, 2020. "Do Board Characteristics Affect Bank Performance? Evidence from the Eurozone," Journal of Asset Management, Palgrave Macmillan, vol. 21(6), pages 535-548, October.
    10. Luigi Lepore & Loris Landriani & Sabrina Pisano & Gabriella D’Amore & Stefano Pozzoli, 2023. "Corporate governance in the digital age: the role of social media and board independence in CSR disclosure. Evidence from Italian listed companies," Journal of Management & Governance, Springer;Accademia Italiana di Economia Aziendale (AIDEA), vol. 27(3), pages 749-785, September.
    11. Pérez-Cornejo, Clara & de Quevedo-Puente, Esther & Delgado-García, Juan Bautista, 2019. "How to manage corporate reputation? The effect of enterprise risk management systems and audit committees on corporate reputation," European Management Journal, Elsevier, vol. 37(4), pages 505-515.
    12. Muniandy, Balachandran & Hillier, John, 2015. "Board independence, investment opportunity set and performance of South African firms," Pacific-Basin Finance Journal, Elsevier, vol. 35(PA), pages 108-124.
    13. Alhababsah, Salem & Yekini, Sina, 2021. "Audit committee and audit quality: An empirical analysis considering industry expertise, legal expertise and gender diversity," Journal of International Accounting, Auditing and Taxation, Elsevier, vol. 42(C).
    14. Melinda Timea FÜLÖP & Mirela-Oana PINTEA, 2014. "Effects Of The New Regulation And Corporate Governance Of The Audit Profession," SEA - Practical Application of Science, Romanian Foundation for Business Intelligence, Editorial Department, issue 4, pages 545-554, July.
    15. 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.
    16. 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.
    17. William S. Schulze & Michael H. Lubatkin & Richard N. Dino, 2002. "Altruism, agency, and the competitiveness of family firms," Managerial and Decision Economics, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 23(4-5), pages 247-259.
    18. Laura Bini & Francesco Giunta & Rebecca Miccini & Lorenzo Simoni, 2023. "Corporate governance quality and non-financial KPI disclosure comparability: UK evidence," Journal of Management & Governance, Springer;Accademia Italiana di Economia Aziendale (AIDEA), vol. 27(1), pages 43-74, March.
    19. Agnès Labye & Christine Lagoutte & Françoise Renversez, 2002. "Banques mutualistes et systèmes financiers : une analyse comparative Allemagne, Grande-Bretagne, France," Revue d'Économie Financière, Programme National Persée, vol. 67(3), pages 85-109.
    20. Bremert, Michael & Schulten, Axel, 2008. "The impact of supervisory board characteristics on form performance," Papers 08-33, Sonderforschungsbreich 504.

    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:blg:journl:v:6:y:2011:i:1:p:5-18. 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: Mihaela Herciu (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://edirc.repec.org/data/feulbro.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.