IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/wly/coacre/v33y2016i4p1625-1647.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Audit Pricing for Strategic Alliances: An Incomplete Contract Perspective

Author

Listed:
  • Sebahattin Demirkan
  • Nan Zhou

Abstract

We study the pricing of audit services for strategic alliances, a governance structure involving an incomplete contract between separate firms. Since incomplete contracts do not specify all future contingencies, we expect that the nonverifiability of information and potential agency behavior in alliances increase audit complexity, resulting in higher audit fees. Our findings support this prediction. We then separate strategic alliances into joint ventures and contractual alliances, as the latter involve more complexity. We find that our audit fee results are largely driven by contractual alliances. We perform additional tests to rule out the concern that our audit fee results might be attributable to the impact of strategic alliances on distress risk, audit risk, or control risk. Contrary to the distress risk argument, we find that auditors are less likely to issue going†concern modified opinions when there is an increase in strategic alliances. Contrary to the audit risk argument, we find that an increase in strategic alliances is unrelated to the likelihood of financial misstatements. Contrary to the control risk argument, we find that an increase in strategic alliances is unrelated to internal control weakness opinions.Les auteurs étudient l’établissement du coût des services d'audit dans le cas des alliances stratégiques, une structure de gouvernance faisant intervenir un contrat incomplet entre sociétés distinctes. Étant donné que les contrats incomplets ne font pas mention de toutes les éventualités, les auteurs s'attendent à ce que l'impossibilité de vérifier l'information et le comportement potentiel des mandataires dans le contexte de ces alliances accroissent la complexité de l'audit et entraînent donc à la hausse le coût des services d'audit. Leurs observations confirment cette hypothèse. Ils classent ensuite les alliances stratégiques en coentreprises et en alliances contractuelles, ces dernières supposant davantage de complexité. Les résultats qu'ils obtiennent en ce qui a trait aux honoraires d'audit sont largement tributaires des alliances contractuelles, constatent†ils. Les auteurs procèdent à des tests supplémentaires en vue d’éliminer la possibilité que leurs résultats relatifs aux honoraires d'audit puissent être attribuables à l'incidence des alliances stratégiques sur le risque de difficultés financières, le risque d'audit ou le risque de non†contrôle. Contrairement à l'argument relatif au risque de difficultés financières, les auteurs constatent que les auditeurs sont moins susceptibles d’émettre une opinion modifiée quant à la continuité de l'exploitation lorsqu'il y a augmentation des alliances stratégiques. Contrairement à l'argument relatif au risque d'audit, ils constatent qu'une augmentation des alliances stratégiques n'est pas liée à la probabilité d'anomalies financières. Enfin, contrairement à l'argument relatif au risque de non†contrôle, ils constatent que l'augmentation des alliances stratégiques n'est pas liée aux opinions exprimées quant à la faiblesse du contrôle interne.

Suggested Citation

  • Sebahattin Demirkan & Nan Zhou, 2016. "Audit Pricing for Strategic Alliances: An Incomplete Contract Perspective," Contemporary Accounting Research, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 33(4), pages 1625-1647, December.
  • Handle: RePEc:wly:coacre:v:33:y:2016:i:4:p:1625-1647
    DOI: 10.1111/1911-3846.12213
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://doi.org/10.1111/1911-3846.12213
    Download Restriction: no

    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1111/1911-3846.12213?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
    ---><---

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Chen, Wenrui & Hong, Yun & Liu, Xinghe & Xu, Cheng & Gao, Jun, 2024. "More resources are better? Strategic alliance involvement and cost stickiness," Finance Research Letters, Elsevier, vol. 59(C).
    2. Chen, Wenrui & Liu, Xinghe & Hong, Yun, 2023. "Two heads better than one? Strategic alliance and firms excess cash holdings," Finance Research Letters, Elsevier, vol. 52(C).
    3. Rewczuk Karol & Modzelewski Piotr, 2019. "Determinants of audit fees: Evidence from Poland," Central European Economic Journal, Sciendo, vol. 6(53), pages 323-336, January.

    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:33:y:2016:i:4:p:1625-1647. 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.

    We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using 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.