The present study is intended to scholarly explore auditors’ perceptions regarding joint audits; whether it can improve audit quality. To reach this goal, participants were enrolled from Big 4, non-Big 4, and other stockholders. In addition, the present study examines the perception of the same stakeholders in terms of how audit concentration affects the audit market in the UAE. Being a qualitative study, 12 semi-structured interviews were conducted to collect required data; 4 face to face and 8 through using Google forms. The finding of the study revealed mixed perception regarding joint audits; it may improve audit quality at the cost of high fees and free-rider problems. Findings of the study has practical implication for policymakers of emerging economies around the globe, such as policymakers who can make joint audits as compulsory. Another significance of the present work is that it has allowed for the perception of stakeholders, who are at the center of the controversial subject of joint audits and audit market concentration. The study suggests that there is a need for removing language barriers; it will benefit some firms in the form of directly communicating with auditors either in English or in Urdu.
IntroductionThe primary objective of the current paper is to capture the experiences of a range of stakeholders in relation to the quality of financial reporting of Libyan Commercial Banks (LCBs) by seeking their perceptions regarding the issue of earnings management. This paper investigates stakeholders' understanding and awareness of earnings management as a concept and whether they think earnings management does take place among LCBs; their views on the techniques used to manage LCBs' earnings and on possible motivations behind such a practice are also examined. The paper also seeks views about how earnings management can be prevented or deterred, including perceptions about the role and potential role of accounting standards and corporate governance. Earnings management has continued to be problematic in the financial reporting context throughout recent decades (Heinz et al., 2013) and is an important topic that concerns a wide range of stakeholders including regulators, investors and managers (Achilles et al., 2013). Its importance stems from its negative effects on financial statements' credibility (Man and Wong, 2013) as it involves deliberate management intervention in the financial reporting process to misstate reported earnings in order to achieve certain rewards (Foster and Shastri, 2013). It can be argued that earnings This is the accepted manuscript version of Earnings management in Libyan commercial banks: perceptions of stakeholders,by Yasser Barghathi; David Collison; Louise Crawford, International Journal of Accounting, Auditing and Performance Evaluation (IJAAPE), Vol. 13, No. 2, 2017, DOI: 10.1504/IJAAPE.2017 2 management might be used to make information more informative for outsiders given the deep knowledge that managers would have about their activities. Indeed, Aerts et al. (2013, p.94), do distinguish between "manipulative [opportunistic] and communicative[informative]" earnings management. However, they criticise both practices as leading to uncertainty in the minds of users.In addition, opportunistic earnings management, according to Habbash et al. (2013), reduces the quality of reported income as it produces less reliable reported earnings that do not reveal the true financial performance of the firm. In the words of Ascioglu et al. The existence of earnings management, through its adverse effect on financial reporting quality, also constitutes a serious breach of the accountability process whereby managers should provide useful, unbiased, and reliable information to the firm's stakeholders.The quality of financial reporting represents a core element of accountability between preparers and report users. According to Ijiri (1983), the fundamental objective of the accounting system within the accountability framework is fairness. Fair accounting information, according to Ijiri (1983), can be seen as that accounting information which is objective and verifiable. Being objective means that accounting information presented to an accountee is free from bias while verifiability means that ...
Research Question: Is there a gap between the accounting curriculum and its practice in this era where Big Data analytics is potentially a vital part of accounting? Motivation: The emergence of Big Data has instigated modifications in the professional accounting world. Collecting and analysing Big Data has become a part accounting as it is beneficial. The role of university curriculums is to prepare students for the practice, so it is expected to evolve along with the profession. However, Big Data analytical skills are not included in the accounting curriculum in universities which has resulted in graduates being incompetent at workplaces because the skills they possess are obsolete. Idea: The purpose of this study is to explore the extent to which the accounting curriculum is capable of equipping students with the necessary competencies to become accounting practitioners with the emergence of Big Data in the profession. It seeks to discover the level information asymmetry between the accounting curriculum and the practice. Data: 15 Interviews were conducted with accounting professors and practitioners in a bid to discover the competencies needed and what the potentially curriculum lacks. Additionally, document analysis was also used to examine learning materials provided to accounting students in form of lecture notes, coursework and examinations to support claims made by professors. Tools: interviews and content analysis were used to collect research data. Findings: It was found that the accounting curriculum is lacking adequate knowledge to equip students with the competencies to handle Big Data Analytics and has restricted accounting graduates' capabilities. Contribution: Based on the findings, a framework has been developed which contains the necessary competencies accounting students should possess in order to be able to handle Big Data analytics. The results of this study will potentially be of interest to several stakeholders including accounting academics and professionals.
The purpose of this paper is to explore the prospects of blockchain technology (BCT) on audit practice. Semi-structured interviews were conducted with practitioners from the Big Four and non-Big Four firms; their responses were analysed thematically. The findings are significant regarding the three main themes identified: namely, audit practice, procedures and the challenges associated with the adoption of BCT. The adoption of BCT has the potential to impact audit procedures to a certain extent.The interviewees believed that BCT would transfer Audit 3.0 to Audit 4.0. For instance, external confirmations could be enhanced by the move towards a more automated verification process. In addition, the audit budget time could be decreased with the help of this technology in the long run. The need for physical observation could be diminished because of this technology, as it could track observations on a real-time basis. This technology could also facilitate analytical procedures, as it has the potential to incorporate other analytical tools simultaneously. Furthermore, it could reduce the costs associated with fraud detection to a great extent, as it provides a tamper-proof, immutable audit trail.
scite is a Brooklyn-based organization that helps researchers better discover and understand research articles through Smart Citations–citations that display the context of the citation and describe whether the article provides supporting or contrasting evidence. scite is used by students and researchers from around the world and is funded in part by the National Science Foundation and the National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health.
hi@scite.ai
10624 S. Eastern Ave., Ste. A-614
Henderson, NV 89052, USA
Copyright © 2024 scite LLC. All rights reserved.
Made with 💙 for researchers
Part of the Research Solutions Family.