IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/wly/coacre/v34y2017i2p1178-1209.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Enterprise Risk Management and the Financial Reporting Process: The Experiences of Audit Committee Members, CFOs, and External Auditors

Author

Listed:
  • Jeffrey Cohen
  • Ganesh Krishnamoorthy
  • Arnold Wright

Abstract

The recent financial crisis has brought to the forefront the need for companies to effectively manage their risks. In this regard, one approach that has gained prominence is enterprise risk management (ERM). Importantly, little is known about the link between ERM and the financial reporting process. This link is critical, because it is imperative that financial reporting adequately depicts the financial status (e.g., valuations, estimates) and associated risks of a company as revealed by ERM. Additionally, from an auditing perspective, ERM affects the risks of misstatement, which should impact audit planning. Accordingly, the objective of this study is to examine the experiences of audit partners, CFOs, and audit committee (AC) members (“the governance triad†) on the link between ERM and the financial reporting process. To determine whether members of the governance triad focus on monitoring, strategy, or both, we also examine their definition of and experiences with ERM with respect to agency and/or resource dependence theory. To address these issues, we conduct semistructured interviews of experienced individuals that form the governance triads from 11 public companies. There are three major findings from our study. First, importantly, all three types of participants see a strong link between ERM and the financial reporting process. Second, despite recognition of the broad nature of ERM, the predominant experiences of the actual roles played by triad members center on agency theory, while resource dependence may be relatively underemphasized by all triad members. Finally, CFOs and AC members indicate that auditors may be especially underutilizing ERM in the audit process, suggesting an “expectations gap.†La récente crise financière a porté à l'avant†scène la nécessité pour les sociétés de gérer le risque avec efficacité. À cet égard, une méthode a gagné en importance : celle de la gestion du risque d'entreprise (GRE). Il importe de noter que les connaissances sont limitées quant au lien entre la GRE et le processus d'information financière. Or, ce lien est crucial puisqu'il est impératif que l'information financière dépeigne de manière adéquate la situation financière d'une société (évaluations, estimations par exemple) et les risques qui y sont associés, selon les indications de la GRE. De plus, du point de vue de l'audit, la GRE influe sur les risques d'anomalies, ce qui devrait influer sur la planification de l'audit. Les auteurs ont donc pour objectif de se pencher sur les expériences des associés d'audit, des directeurs financiers et des membres du comité d'audit (la « triade de gouvernance ») relativement au lien entre la GRE et le processus d'information financière. Afin de déterminer si les membres de la triade de gouvernance se préoccupent davantage de la surveillance, de la stratégie ou des deux, les auteurs s'intéressent également à la façon dont ils définissent et exercent la GRE dans l'optique de la théorie de la délégation et (ou) de la théorie de la dépendance à l’égard des ressources. Pour analyser ces questions, ils procèdent à des entrevues semi†structurées auprès de personnes d'expérience appartenant à des triades de gouvernance dans 11 sociétés ouvertes. Ils tirent de cet exercices trois principales constatations. En premier lieu, observation importante, les trois catégories de participants voient un lien solide entre la GRE et le processus d'information financière. En deuxième lieu, en dépit du constat relatif à la multiplicité des formes que peut revêtir la GRE, les expériences prédominantes des membres de la triade dans l'exercice de leurs fonctions réelles sont centrées sur la théorie de la délégation, alors que l'importance accordée par tous les membres de la triade à la dépendance à l’égard des ressources semble relativement mitigée. Enfin, selon les directeurs financiers et les membres du comité d'audit, les auditeurs pourraient notablement sous†utiliser la GRE dans le processus d'audit, ce qui permet de croire à l'existence d'un « écart par rapport aux attentes ».

Suggested Citation

  • Jeffrey Cohen & Ganesh Krishnamoorthy & Arnold Wright, 2017. "Enterprise Risk Management and the Financial Reporting Process: The Experiences of Audit Committee Members, CFOs, and External Auditors," Contemporary Accounting Research, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 34(2), pages 1178-1209, June.
  • Handle: RePEc:wly:coacre:v:34:y:2017:i:2:p:1178-1209
    DOI: 10.1111/1911-3846.12294
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://doi.org/10.1111/1911-3846.12294
    Download Restriction: no

    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1111/1911-3846.12294?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. Mojca Marc & Marika Arena & Darja Peljhan, 2023. "The role of interactive style of use in improving risk management effectiveness," Risk Management, Palgrave Macmillan, vol. 25(2), pages 1-21, June.
    2. Peter Blokland & Genserik Reniers, 2019. "An Ontological and Semantic Foundation for Safety and Security Science," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 11(21), pages 1-25, October.
    3. Bojan Obrenovic & Jianguo Du & Danijela Godinic & Diana Tsoy & Muhammad Aamir Shafique Khan & Ilimdorjon Jakhongirov, 2020. "Sustaining Enterprise Operations and Productivity during the COVID-19 Pandemic: “Enterprise Effectiveness and Sustainability Model”," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 12(15), pages 1-27, July.
    4. Bryan K. Church & Narisa Tianjing Dai & Xi (Jason) Kuang & Xuejiao Liu, 2020. "The Role of Auditor Narcissism in Auditor–Client Negotiations: Evidence from China," Contemporary Accounting Research, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 37(3), pages 1756-1787, September.
    5. Mohamed Gaber & Samy Garas & Edward Lusk, 2020. "Audit risk calibration: Extending the Non-GAAP SEC-Filter," International Journal of Research in Business and Social Science (2147-4478), Center for the Strategic Studies in Business and Finance, vol. 9(4), pages 182-195, July.
    6. Raden Roro Widya Ningtyas Soeprajitno & Sri Ningsih & Iman Harymawan & Bablu Kumar Dhar & Suham Cahyono, 2023. "The School-ties Between Top Management Executive and Audit Partner: Exploring From Earnings Management in Indonesia," SAGE Open, , vol. 13(4), pages 21582440231, December.
    7. Ben Kajwang, 2022. "Theoretical review of enterprise risk management culture drivers for insurance firms in Kenya," International Journal of Research in Business and Social Science (2147-4478), Center for the Strategic Studies in Business and Finance, vol. 11(5), pages 210-217, July.
    8. Dan Dacian Cuzdriorean, 2018. "Auditing Research: A Review Of Recent Research Advances," Eurasian Journal of Economics and Finance, Eurasian Publications, vol. 6(4), pages 14-26.
    9. Sorin Gabriel Anton & Anca Elena Afloarei Nucu, 2020. "Enterprise Risk Management: A Literature Review and Agenda for Future Research," JRFM, MDPI, vol. 13(11), pages 1-22, November.
    10. Ahmet Onay, 2020. "The Role of Internal Audit from New Enterprise Risk Management Frameworks Perspective: Research in Turkey," Istanbul Business Research, Istanbul University Business School, vol. 49(2), pages 177-200, November.
    11. Francesca Manes-Rossi & Giuseppe Nicolo & Rebecca Levy Orelli, 2017. "Reshaping Risk Disclosure through Integrated Reporting: Evidence from Italian Early Adopters," International Journal of Business and Management, Canadian Center of Science and Education, vol. 12(10), pages 1-11, September.
    12. Jianxiong Chen & Chung-Cheng Yang, 2021. "Competitive Revenue Strategies in the Medical Consumables Industry: Evidence from Human Resources, Research and Development Expenses and Industry Life Cycle," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 18(6), pages 1-20, March.
    13. Nguyen, Quang Khai, 2022. "Determinants of bank risk governance structure: A cross-country analysis," Research in International Business and Finance, Elsevier, vol. 60(C).
    14. Kenneth L. Bills & Christie Hayne & Sarah E. Stein & Richard C. Hatfield, 2021. "Collaborating with Competitors: How Do Small Firm Accounting Associations and Networks Successfully Manage Coopetitive Tensions?," Contemporary Accounting Research, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 38(1), pages 545-585, March.
    15. Green, Wendy J. & Cheng, Mandy M., 2019. "Materiality judgments in an integrated reporting setting: The effect of strategic relevance and strategy map," Accounting, Organizations and Society, Elsevier, vol. 73(C), pages 1-14.
    16. Minfeng Yu & Yi Si & Gaoliang Tian & Lei Zhang, 2023. "Climate risk and audit fees: An international study," Accounting and Finance, Accounting and Finance Association of Australia and New Zealand, vol. 63(5), pages 4989-5025, December.
    17. Johnston, Joseph & Soileau, Jared, 2020. "Enterprise risk management and accruals estimation error," Journal of Contemporary Accounting and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 16(3).
    18. Su, Kun & Zhang, Miaomiao & Liu, Chengyun, 2022. "Financial derivatives, analyst forecasts, and stock price synchronicity: Evidence from an emerging market," Journal of International Financial Markets, Institutions and Money, Elsevier, vol. 81(C).
    19. Steven DeSimone & Giuseppe D’Onza & Gerrit Sarens, 2018. "Correlates of Sustainability Audits by Internal Auditors," Working Papers 1803, College of the Holy Cross, Department of Economics.
    20. Grygoriy Shamborovskyi & Yuliia Nehoda & Nataliya Demidova & Volodymyr Tarashchenko & Svitlana Breus, 2021. "Modeling Study on Risk Identification in the Process of Anti-Crisis Enterprise Management," JRFM, MDPI, vol. 14(2), pages 1-14, February.

    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:34:y:2017:i:2:p:1178-1209. 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.