No abstract

Purpose -This paper aims to examine the relationship between firm characteristics and incentives for the voluntary formation of audit committees by non-top 500 firms listed on the Australian Stock Exchange (ASX). Design/methodology/approach -Data are obtained from a random sample of 224 non-top 500 firms listed on the ASX for the year 2005. Logistic regression analysis is used to examine the characteristics of non-top 500 firms who have voluntarily established audit committees. Findings -The results are consistent with the hypothesis that incentives to voluntarily form audit committees increase with agency costs of debt. The results show a significant and positive association between cost of debt, firm size, number of directors on the board, the proportion of independent directors, independent board chair and the voluntary formation of audit committees. Research limitations/implications -Results indicate that firm size is not necessarily the primary influence in voluntary formation of audit committees. Board size and the proportion of independent directors and having an independent board chair also have a significant influence on the decision. These results suggest that audit committees will be established in high agency cost of debt situations, where there are economies of scale and are reflective of a desire to reduce information asymmetries and the liability exposure of outside directors. Originality/value -This study provides useful insights and direction in examining voluntary formation in an Australian context using non-top 500 firms. The results have implications for regulators in considering making audit committees mandatory for all listed companies.

Corporate collapses and audit failures have threatened the credibility of the audit function, with audit quality once again being a major issue. Motivated by the significance of auditing and perceptions of audit quality in enhancing the reliability and credibility of financial statements, this article investigates the relative importance of audit team and audit firm attributes in perceptions of audit quality by users of audit services. Data are gathered from 81 users of audit services and analysed using adaptive conjoint analysis in order to measure the relative importance of audit team and audit firm attributes in perceptions of audit quality. The results show that, in general, users of audit services perceive audit team attributes as being relatively more important than audit firm attributes in perceptions of audit quality. The findings of the study have implications for regulators and the accounting profession concerned with improving confidence in corporate governance and the effectiveness and integrity of the audit process, and for audit firms in monitoring and promoting the quality of their audit services.

Purpose – This paper aims to investigate the relative importance of audit-team and audit-firm attributes in perceptions of audit quality by two groups of users of audit services: audit committee chairs/members (“insiders”) and financial analysts/fund managers (“outsiders”). Design/methodology/approach – Using a survey questionnaire, data are gathered from 39 audit committee chairs/members and 42 financial analysts/fund managers and analysed using adaptive conjoint analysis. Findings – The findings reveal that both groups perceive audit-team attributes as relatively more important than audit-firm attributes. This is consistent with expectations for “insiders”, but inconsistent with expectations for “outsiders”. Differences are also found in the internal ratings of some of the attributes, with “insiders” and “outsiders” placing different relative importance on some attributes. Research limitations/implications – The usual set of limitations that are present in a survey method also apply in this study, i.e. surveys rely on reports of behaviours rather than observations and are therefore susceptible to measurement error. A further limitation is that, in using adaptive conjoint analysis, the number of attributes that may be included in the survey is restricted and, consequently, the attributes selected may not be comprehensive or fully representative. Originality/value – The study extends the scope of prior studies by examining the relative importance of audit-team and audit-firm attributes in perceptions of audit quality. In using conjoint analysis, the study makes a unique and innovative contribution by providing direct evidence on the relative importance of attributes in perceptions of audit quality for different users of audit services. The findings have implications for regulators and the accounting profession concerned with improving confidence in corporates and for audit firms in monitoring and promoting the quality of their audit services.

China is conducting an open market policy and Chinese firms are seeking independent audit services. As a result, the Chinese accounting profession is expanding at a tremendous speed, and has played an important role in economic reform. However, Chinese auditing operates in a very different environment from those experienced in Western countries. Consequently, there is considerable concern about auditor independence in China. The purpose of this paper is to examine some reasons for a lack of independence in the Chinese audit profession. We critically review empirical evidence regarding auditor practice in China. We then make some suggestions that might improve auditor independence.

No abstract

Manuscript Type: EmpiricalResearch Question/Issue: The method introduced to the corporate governance literature by this paper captures the construct of corporate governance in a small number of attributes, using responses made by directors and shareholders to an adaptive conjoint analysis questionnaire.Research Findings/Insights: We demonstrate how to identify the key attributes of corporate governance from directors' and shareholders' relative preferences among a set of corporate governance attributes. The dominance of CEO duality as a relatively more important attribute is a key finding.Theoretical/Academic Implications: Adaptive conjoint analysis is a useful technique for research into governance issues characterized by constrained choice. For future researchers seeking to capture governance in a limited number of measures, we have identified four attributes considered by directors and shareholders to comprise effective corporate governance, with the single measure of CEO duality being the most important.Practitioner/Policy Implications: This parsimonious set of attributes can guide the design of future corporate governance regulations, to avoid costly over-regulation. We do not suggest that restrictions on multiple directorships or an appropriate board size should be added to current requirements, and the surprisingly low perceptions of audit partner tenure and audit committee size as important to good corporate governance suggest that these attributes could be excluded from future regulations.

PurposeThe purpose of this paper is to investigate the effectiveness of recommendations made by the Australian Stock Exchange (ASX) relating to audit committees in Australia, and whether they have improved financial reporting quality for low‐ and mid‐cap listed firms.Design/methodology/approachThe authors examine the relation between characteristics of the audit committee and financial reporting quality for listed companies not mandated to comply with these requirements, i.e. low‐ and mid‐cap firms. For a sample of 288 firms, the authors regress measures of audit committee independence, expertise and activity and size on alternative measures of earnings management.FindingsA significant association is found between all three characteristics and lower earnings management. The significant measure for independence is the proportion of independent directors on the audit committee; for expertise, it is that at least one member of the audit committee has an accounting qualification; and for activity and size, it is the frequency of audit committee meetings.Practical implicationsThe results provide support for the mandatory establishment of audit committees for the top 500 (high‐ and mid‐cap) firms introduced by the ASX and suggest those audit committee characteristics which could improve financial reporting quality for low‐ and mid‐cap firms.Originality/valueThe paper examines low‐ and mid‐cap firms in order to complement previous similar studies done for high‐cap firms. It identifies the effects on financial reporting quality of voluntarily choosing to have an audit committee and of the choice of audit committee characteristics, in the period after substantial corporate governance reform. It includes a new measure among audit committee characteristics, industry expertise, which is required in Australia and is new to the literature.