IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/ers/journl/vxxivy2021i2-part2p145-157.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Principles of Entrepreneurship Auditing: A Framework for Understanding Audit Efficacy

Author

Listed:
  • Zbyslaw Dobrowolski

Abstract

Purpose: This study presents a general framework for analyzing factors associated with entrepreneurship audit efficacy. The framework is intended to sharpen one thinking about improving audit process quality and enriching the audit theory better to understand the multiple drivers of audit planning and execution. While the framework has a broad scope, the research focuses mainly on audit requirements presented in auditing standards. Approach/Methodology/Design: This paper's insights have emerged iteratively by considering both theory and the empirical data based on INTOSAI auditing standards and guidelines and observation of audit organization from the United States, Germany, and the United Kingdom. The abductive reasoning and grounded theory were used during this study. Findings: The universal principles of audit efficacy were formulated. Practical Implications: This study continues developing the audit theory and attempts to enrich it by pointing to the audit efficacy factors. From the practical side, the research allows for the formulation of several directional proposals, improving auditors' work. Originality/Value: This study aims to determine universal factors of audit efficacy and determine whether auditors may create epistemic injustice through their operations.

Suggested Citation

  • Zbyslaw Dobrowolski, 2021. "Principles of Entrepreneurship Auditing: A Framework for Understanding Audit Efficacy," European Research Studies Journal, European Research Studies Journal, vol. 0(2 - Part ), pages 145-157.
    • Handle: RePEc:ers:journl:v:xxiv:y:2021:i:2-part2:p:145-157
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://ersj.eu/journal/2208/download
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Andrew B. Jackson & Michael Moldrich & Peter Roebuck, 2008. "Mandatory audit firm rotation and audit quality," Managerial Auditing Journal, Emerald Group Publishing Limited, vol. 23(5), pages 420-437, May.
    2. Simunic, Da, 1980. "The Pricing Of Audit Services - Theory And Evidence," Journal of Accounting Research, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 18(1), pages 161-190.
    3. Josephine Maltby, 1995. "Environmental audit: theory and practices," Managerial Auditing Journal, Emerald Group Publishing Limited, vol. 10(8), pages 15-26, November.
    4. Lowensohn, Suzanne & Johnson, Laurence E. & Elder, Randal J. & Davies, Stephen P., 2007. "Auditor specialization, perceived audit quality, and audit fees in the local government audit market," Journal of Accounting and Public Policy, Elsevier, vol. 26(6), pages 705-732.
    5. Zbyslaw Dobrowolski, 2021. "Are the Supreme Audit Institutions Agile? A Cognitive Orientation and Agility Measures," European Research Studies Journal, European Research Studies Journal, vol. 0(1), pages 52-62.
    6. Clive Lennox, 1999. "Non-audit fees, disclosure and audit quality," European Accounting Review, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 8(2), pages 239-252.
    7. DeAngelo, Linda Elizabeth, 1981. "Auditor size and audit quality," Journal of Accounting and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 3(3), pages 183-199, 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. repec:ers:journl:v:xxiv:y:2021:i:2b:p:145-157 is not listed on IDEAS
    2. Sang Cheol Lee & Mooweon Rhee & Jongchul Yoon, 2018. "Foreign Monitoring and Audit Quality: Evidence from Korea," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 10(9), pages 1-22, September.
    3. Garcia-Blandon, Josep & Argiles-Bosch, Josep Maria & Castillo-Merino, David & Martinez-Blasco, Monica, 2017. "An Assessment of the Provisions of Regulation (EU) No 537/2014 on Non-audit Services and Audit Firm Tenure: Evidence from Spain," The International Journal of Accounting, Elsevier, vol. 52(3), pages 251-261.
    4. Pinto, Inês & Morais, Ana Isabel & Quick, Reiner, 2020. "The impact of the precision of accounting standards on the expanded auditor’s report in the European Union," Journal of International Accounting, Auditing and Taxation, Elsevier, vol. 40(C).
    5. Smith, Deborah Drummond & Gleason, Kimberly C. & Kannan, Yezen H., 2021. "Auditor liability and excess cash holdings: Evidence from audit fees of foreign incorporated firms," International Review of Financial Analysis, Elsevier, vol. 78(C).
    6. Kitto, Andrew R., 2024. "The effects of non-Big 4 mergers on audit efficiency and audit market competition☆," Journal of Accounting and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 77(1).
    7. Nurul Nazlia Jamil, 2020. "The Power of Political Connections: Review on the Impacts of Audit Committee and Corporate Governance," Journal of Public Administration and Governance, Macrothink Institute, vol. 10(1), pages 333347-3333, December.
    8. Hye‐Jeong Nam, 2018. "The Impact of Mandatory IFRS Transition on Audit Effort and Audit Fees: Evidence from Korea," Australian Accounting Review, CPA Australia, vol. 28(4), pages 512-524, December.
    9. Habib, Ahsan, 2011. "Audit firm industry specialization and audit outcomes: Insights from academic literature," Research in Accounting Regulation, Elsevier, vol. 23(2), pages 114-129.
    10. Adam Esplin & Karim Jamal & Shyam Sunder, 2018. "Demand for and Assessment of Audit Quality in Private Companies," Abacus, Accounting Foundation, University of Sydney, vol. 54(3), pages 319-352, September.
    11. Paul A. Griffin & David H. Lont & Yuan Sun, 2009. "Governance regulatory changes, International Financial Reporting Standards adoption, and New Zealand audit and non‐audit fees: empirical evidence," Accounting and Finance, Accounting and Finance Association of Australia and New Zealand, vol. 49(4), pages 697-724, December.
    12. George Drogalas & Michail Nerantzidis & Dimitrios Mitskinis & Ioannis Tampakoudis, 2021. "The relationship between audit fees and audit committee characteristics: evidence from the Athens Stock Exchange," International Journal of Disclosure and Governance, Palgrave Macmillan, vol. 18(1), pages 24-41, March.
    13. Sarhan, Ahmed A. & Ntim, Collins G. & Al-Najjar, Basil, 2019. "Antecedents of audit quality in MENA countries: The effect of firm- and country-level governance quality," Journal of International Accounting, Auditing and Taxation, Elsevier, vol. 35(C), pages 85-107.
    14. Cao, June & Ee, Mong Shan & Hasan, Iftekhar & Huang, He, 2024. "Asymmetric reactions of abnormal audit fees jump to credit rating changes," The British Accounting Review, Elsevier, vol. 56(2).
    15. Ray Ball, 2009. "Market and Political/Regulatory Perspectives on the Recent Accounting Scandals," Journal of Accounting Research, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 47(2), pages 277-323, May.
    16. Arrunada, Benito & Paz-Ares, Candido, 1997. "Mandatory rotation of company auditors: A critical examination," International Review of Law and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 17(1), pages 31-61, March.
    17. Veronica Tibiletti & Stefano Azzali & Tatiana Mazza, 2023. "Gender Diversity in Audit Partners and Audit Efforts," International Journal of Business and Management, Canadian Center of Science and Education, vol. 16(4), pages 1-96, February.
    18. Shivaram Rajgopal & Suraj Srinivasan & Xin Zheng, 2021. "Measuring audit quality," Review of Accounting Studies, Springer, vol. 26(2), pages 559-619, June.
    19. Derek Matthews & Michael Peel, 2003. "Audit fee determinants and the large auditor premium in 1900," Accounting and Business Research, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 33(2), pages 137-155.
    20. Le Wang & Xiaoyan Chen & Xing Li & Gaoliang Tian, 2021. "MD&A readability, auditor characteristics, and audit fees," Accounting and Finance, Accounting and Finance Association of Australia and New Zealand, vol. 61(4), pages 5025-5050, December.
    21. Najihah Yaacob & Ayoib Che-Ahmad, 2012. "Audit Fees after IFRS Adoption: Evidence from Malaysia," Eurasian Business Review, Springer;Eurasia Business and Economics Society, vol. 2(1), pages 31-46, June.

    More about this item

    Keywords

    Auditing; management; efficacy; epistemic injustice; entrepreneurship.;
    All these keywords.

    JEL classification:

    • M4 - Business Administration and Business Economics; Marketing; Accounting; Personnel Economics - - Accounting

    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:ers:journl:v:xxiv:y:2021:i:2-part2:p:145-157. 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: Marios Agiomavritis (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://ersj.eu/ .

    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.