Search results

This study aims to provide a better understanding of the role of the Financial Reporting Council (FRC), as the unified regulator of the audit profession in the UK, in restoring public trust in audit profession in the UK. It further analyses the views of partners in the Big 4 audit firms on this role.

The research data were gathered by conducting 17 semi-structured interviews with the top management of FRC’s members and executive partners of the Big 4 firms in the UK. The interviews were complemented by analysing data available on the web pages of the Big 4 firms and published reports related to the FRC’s projects.

This study identified three main strategies followed by the FRC to promote the trust and enhance the choice of auditors in the UK audit market. These strategies are improving the audit quality, increasing the transparency of the big audit firms and reducing the barriers to compete in the big audit market.

An analysis of the FRC’s efforts may help auditors to identify what they are expected to do to improve the reliability of information provided in the capital market. Audit committees can get a better understanding of the criteria that they need to improve the process of auditors’ choice. Auditors will also better understand how and why current audit regulations have been issued. This may improve their satisfaction with regulations and standards, and their efficient implementation. Furthermore, it is believed that audit regulators need to get feedback additional to the formal feedback they receive to improve their performance and current regulations.

This paper contributes to the literature by discussing the auditors’ criticism to the Audit Inspection Unit’s inspectors and the way the inspectors defend themselves. The findings suggest that partners of the Big 4 believe that the FRC’s projects effectively participate in improving the audit quality, as well as providing wider information about the audit firms to the public. However, different actions need to be taken to enhance the choice of auditors and increase the number of big audit firms that compete in the market.

This study aims to examine the effects of the entry of foreign direct investments (FDIs) on the audit markets in developing countries (i.e. Egypt). There is a long-standing debate on the impact of FDIs on developing markets, but little is still known about the effect of FDI on national suppliers, such as audit firms.

This paper reports the results of a study that used qualitative research methods. It involves interviews with senior management teams of the Big 4 audit firms, to find out how these firms deal simultaneously with conflicting global and local influences. The interviews were complemented by the publicly available data on the firms’ websites as well as published reports related to the Egyptian economy and current investment regulations.

Drawing on the institutional theory, the findings suggest that an increased litigious environment, compliance with developed markets’ regulations, auditor regulatory sanctions and improved local accounting and auditing standards are highly significant consequences of foreign investment inflows. The findings indicate that more emphasis has been given to the quality of audit and auditors’ independence when auditing FDIs. Both audit regulators and audit firms in the domestic market pay higher attention to improving the quality of financial reports when FDIs have entered the market. More inspections and reviews for audit firms have been conducted, and local auditing and accounting standards have been revised to be in compliance with international standards.

Our results have important implications for investors, regulatory authorities and governments in relation to the development, implementation and enforcement of international financial reporting and auditing standards.

Policymakers and regulators in Egypt have responded to international pressure by revitalizing their local accounting and auditing standards and adopting international financial reporting and auditing standards. The authors identify strategies that have been adopted by audit firms to face the FDIs’ challenges.

The purpose of this paper is to explore: the actual usage of generalized audit software (GAS) features among Egyptian external auditors, through the technology acceptance model (TAM); how the conceptual complexity of GAS features impact its actual usage; and what factors influencing the GAS use by Egyptian external auditors.

External audit professionals at 12 international audit firms, including the Big 4 and eight medium-sized firms, in Egypt were surveyed.

The results show that the basic features including database queries, ratio analysis, and audit sampling were higher in GAS use, perceived usefulness, and perceived ease of use among Egyptian external auditors than the advanced features: digital analysis, regression/ANOVA, and data mining classification. The structural equation modelling analysis by GAS features suggests that perceived ease of use has a stronger effect on GAS use when the conceptual complexity of GAS features is high. The analysis also support that the use of GAS by Egyptian external auditors is more affected by co-worker, supervisor, or organization through perceived usefulness, but not by job relevance, output quality, and result demonstration.

Although Egyptian external auditors participated in this study may limit the extent to which the findings may be generalized, the responses provide an insight into the actual usage of GAS features by external auditors and the impact of conceptual complexity of GAS features, which is consistent with the literature concerning the relatively low level of utilizing the advanced features of GAS by internal auditors, suggesting that the issues revealed should be of concern.

The results reported in this paper are useful to audit software developers and audit firms in their understanding of factors influencing GAS usage in a different audit context.

The study adds value to prior research by providing context-contingent insight into the application of TAM in an unexplored audit context.