Author:
Bedard Jean C.,Johnstone Karla M.,Smith Edward F.
Abstract
SUMMARY: This paper addresses the current status of the recommendation by the Advisory Committee on the Auditing Profession (ACAP) that auditing firms provide periodic reporting on audit quality indicators. We first consider several reasons why public reporting of audit quality indicators in the U.S. is highly controversial. We then report some information on how global network auditing firms are internally measuring audit quality in the post-Sarbanes-Oxley environment.
Publisher
American Accounting Association
Reference38 articles.
1. Advisory Committee on the Auditing Profession (ACAP).
2008. Final Report. Available at:http://www.treas.gov/offices/domestic-finance/acap/docs/final-report.pdf.
2. Fee pressure and the longitudinal dynamics of audit engagement budgeting and reporting;Bedard;Advances in Accounting,2008
3. Audit partner tenure and audit planning and pricing;Bedard;Auditing: A Journal of Practice & Theory,2010
4. KRisksm: A computerized decision aid for client acceptance and continuance risk assessments;Bell;Auditing: A Journal of Practice & Theory,2002
5. Going-concern opinions: The effects of partner compensation plans and client size;Carcello;Auditing: A Journal of Practice & Theory,2000
Cited by
51 articles.
订阅此论文施引文献
订阅此论文施引文献,注册后可以免费订阅5篇论文的施引文献,订阅后可以查看论文全部施引文献