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.

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.

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.