IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/wly/coacre/v14y1997i3p481-499.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Resource Allocation Decisions in Audit Engagements

Author

Listed:
  • KARL HACKENBRACK
  • W. ROBERT KNECHEL

Abstract

. We examine the empirical relationship between auditors' resource allocations and selected engagement characteristics. Our measure of resources is hours of grades of labor (partner, manager, etc.) “charged†to audit activities (planning, internal control evaluation, etc.). Engagement characteristics examined are client size, industry affiliation, client complexity, risk, auditor provision of management advisory services to the auditee, and degree of control reliance. The data were obtained from publicly available sources and a survey developed and administered by an international public accounting firm. We find the cross†sectional variation in the labor charged to various audit activities can be explained by engagement characteristics found to be important in prior studies on audit fees, total labor inputs, and the mix of labor inputs. Measures of client size, industry, complexity, risk, and services provided are associated with changes in the allocation of labor among audit activities. We find no substitution of internal control review/testing for substantive testing on reliance audits. Task assignments vary by rank. Measures of client size, complexity, risk, and services provided are associated with activity†specific changes in the labor mix.

Suggested Citation

  • Karl Hackenbrack & W. Robert Knechel, 1997. "Resource Allocation Decisions in Audit Engagements," Contemporary Accounting Research, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 14(3), pages 481-499, September.
    • Handle: RePEc:wly:coacre:v:14:y:1997:i:3:p:481-499
    DOI: 10.1111/j.1911-3846.1997.tb00537.x
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1911-3846.1997.tb00537.x
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1111/j.1911-3846.1997.tb00537.x?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
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Tim Pearson & Greg Trompeter, 1994. "Competition in the Market for Audit Services: The Effect of Supplier Concentration on Audit Fees," Contemporary Accounting Research, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 11(1), pages 115-135, June.
    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. Davidson, RA & Gist, WE, 1996. "Empirical evidence on the functional relation between audit planning and total audit effort," Journal of Accounting Research, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 34(1), pages 111-124.
    4. Colbert, Janet L., 1988. "Inherent risk: An investigation of auditors' judgments," Accounting, Organizations and Society, Elsevier, vol. 13(2), pages 111-121, March.
    5. Gaumnitz, Br & Nunamaker, Tr & Surdick, Jj & Thomas, Mf, 1982. "Auditor Consensus In Internal Control Evaluation And Audit Program-Planning," Journal of Accounting Research, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 20(2), pages 745-755.
    6. Okeefe, Tb & Simunic, Da & Stein, Mt, 1994. "The Production Of Audit Services - Evidence From A Major Public Accounting Firm," Journal of Accounting Research, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 32(2), pages 241-261.
    7. Francis, Jr & Stokes, Dj, 1986. "Audit Prices, Product Differentiation, And Scale Economies - Further Evidence From The Australian Market," Journal of Accounting Research, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 24(2), pages 383-393.
    8. White, Halbert, 1980. "A Heteroskedasticity-Consistent Covariance Matrix Estimator and a Direct Test for Heteroskedasticity," Econometrica, Econometric Society, vol. 48(4), pages 817-838, May.
    9. Francis, Jere R., 1984. "The effect of audit firm size on audit prices : A study of the Australian Market," Journal of Accounting and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 6(2), pages 133-151, August.
    10. Simunic, Da, 1984. "Auditing, Consulting, And Auditor Independence," Journal of Accounting Research, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 22(2), pages 679-702.
    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. Craswell, Allen T. & Francis, Jere R. & Taylor, Stephen L., 1995. "Auditor brand name reputations and industry specializations," Journal of Accounting and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 20(3), pages 297-322, December.
    2. Timothy B. Bell & Rajib Doogar & Ira Solomon, 2008. "Audit Labor Usage and Fees under Business Risk Auditing," Journal of Accounting Research, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 46(4), pages 729-760, September.
    3. DeFond, Mark & Zhang, Jieying, 2014. "A review of archival auditing research," Journal of Accounting and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 58(2), pages 275-326.
    4. Laurence Kranich & Andrés Perea & Hans Peters, 2005. "Core Concepts For Dynamic Tu Games," International Game Theory Review (IGTR), World Scientific Publishing Co. Pte. Ltd., vol. 7(01), pages 43-61.
    5. Herings, P.J.J. & Kubler, F., 2000. "Computing equilibria in finance economies," Research Memorandum 022, Maastricht University, Maastricht Research School of Economics of Technology and Organization (METEOR).
    6. Vivien Beattie & Alan Goodacre & Ken Pratt & Joanna Stevenson, 2001. "The determinants of audit fees—evidence from the voluntary sector," Accounting and Business Research, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 31(4), pages 243-274.
    7. David C. Hay & W. Robert Knechel & Norman Wong, 2006. "Audit Fees: A Meta†analysis of the Effect of Supply and Demand Attributes," Contemporary Accounting Research, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 23(1), pages 141-191, March.
    8. Schelleman, C.C.M., 2001. "Determinants of the profitability of audit engagements : an empirical study," Research Memorandum 037, Maastricht University, Maastricht Research School of Economics of Technology and Organization (METEOR).
    9. Schelleman, C.C.M. & Maijoor, S.J., 2000. "Benchmarking the production of audit services: an efficiency frontier approach," Research Memorandum 055, Maastricht University, Maastricht Research School of Economics of Technology and Organization (METEOR).
    10. Christopher Pong, 2004. "A descriptive analysis of audit price changes in the UK 1991-95," European Accounting Review, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 13(1), pages 161-178.
    11. Bliss, Mark A. & Gul, Ferdinand A. & Majid, Abdul, 2011. "Do political connections affect the role of independent audit committees and CEO Duality? Some evidence from Malaysian audit pricing," Journal of Contemporary Accounting and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 7(2), pages 82-98.
    12. A. Rashad Abdel†Khalik, 1990. "The jointness of audit fees and demand for MAS: A self†selection analysis," Contemporary Accounting Research, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 6(2), pages 295-322, March.
    13. Yi-Fang Yang & Lee-Wen Yang & Min-Ning Lee, 2015. "Service Quality, Size, And Performance Of Audit Firms: Consideration Of Market Segments And Business Strategies," The International Journal of Business and Finance Research, The Institute for Business and Finance Research, vol. 9(4), pages 51-66.
    14. Chang, Hsihui & Choy, Hiu Lam & Cooper, William W. & Parker, Barnett R. & Ruefli, Timothy W., 2009. "Measuring productivity growth, technical progress, and efficiency changes of CPA firms prior to, and following the Sarbanes-Oxley Act," Socio-Economic Planning Sciences, Elsevier, vol. 43(4), pages 221-228, December.
    15. Chen, Charles J.P. & Su, Xijia & Wu, Xi, 2007. "Market competitiveness and Big 5 pricing: Evidence from China's binary market," The International Journal of Accounting, Elsevier, vol. 42(1), pages 1-24.
    16. Sang Cheol Lee & Jaewan Park & Mooweon Rhee & Yunkeun Lee, 2018. "Moderating Effects of Agency Problems and Monitoring Systems on the Relationship between Executive Stock Option and Audit Fees: Evidence from Korea," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 10(11), pages 1-24, November.
    17. Fleischer, Rouven & Goettsche, Max, 2012. "Size effects and audit pricing: Evidence from Germany," Journal of International Accounting, Auditing and Taxation, Elsevier, vol. 21(2), pages 156-168.
    18. Scott Whisenant & Srinivasan Sankaraguruswamy & K. Raghunandan, 2003. "Evidence on the Joint Determination of Audit and Non‐Audit Fees," Journal of Accounting Research, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 41(4), pages 721-744, September.
    19. Shan, Yuan George & Troshani, Indrit & Richardson, Grant, 2015. "An empirical comparison of the effect of XBRL on audit fees in the US and Japan," Journal of Contemporary Accounting and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 11(2), pages 89-103.
    20. Andrew Ferguson & Donald Stokes, 2002. "Brand Name Audit Pricing, Industry Specialization, and Leadership Premiums post†Big 8 and Big 6 Mergers," Contemporary Accounting Research, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 19(1), pages 77-110, March.

    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:wly:coacre:v:14:y:1997:i:3:p:481-499. 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: Wiley Content Delivery (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://doi.org/10.1111/(ISSN)1911-3846 .

    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.