Audit partner’s length of audit experience and audit quality: evidence from Korea

Sonu, Catherine Heyjung; Choi, Ahrum; Lee, Joonil; Ha, Wonsuk

doi:10.1080/16081625.2016.1242428

Cited by 17 publications

(19 citation statements)

References 53 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…Besides, the few papers that have concluded that specialised knowledge contributes more to expertise than generic knowledge (Chi & Chin, 2011;Chin & Chi, 2009;Goodwin & Wu, 2014;Nagy, 2014;Zerni, 2012) do not explain whether generic knowledge still contributes to expertise. Nevertheless, the results of Wang et al (2015) for Sonu et al (2016) for Korea and Chi et al (2017) for Taiwan can shed some light on this issue. While these articles report a positive and significant relationship between the length of a partner's audit experience and audit quality, 2 none of them differentiate between industryspecific and generic audit experience.…”

Section: Generic Audit Experiencementioning

confidence: 92%

“…The form of measuring the experience of the auditor constitutes a main difference between this study and previous works (Chi et al, 2017;Sonu et al, 2016;Wang et al, 2015). Wang et al (2015) and Chi et al (2017) define the audit experience by the number of years between the first audit report signed by the partner and the current year, and Sonu et al (2016) by the number of years between the first year of the auditor registered as a certified public accountant (CPA) and the current year. In our view, both definitions are potentially problematic.…”

Section: Control Variablesmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Learning by Doing? Partners Audit Experience and the Quality of Audit Services

García-Blandón¹,

Argilés‐Bosch²,

Ravenda³

2020

RC-SAR

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

A pesar de la evidencia que sugiere que el conocimiento especializado debería resultar más relevante que el genérico para explicar diferentes niveles de calidad de auditoría asociados a los auditores individuales, ningún estudio hasta la fecha ha abordado el posible impacto diferencial de la experiencia genérica y específica en la calidad de los servicios de auditoría. Nuestro estudio investiga esta cuestión en el mercado de auditoría español. Aproximamos la calidad de la auditoría a partir de los ajustes de devengo discrecionales y la opinión del informe de auditoría; diferenciando entre experiencia específica con el propio cliente, experiencia sectorial y experiencia de auditoría genérica. Como se esperaba, los resultados muestran una mayor calidad de auditoría cuando el cliente es auditado por un socio con mayor experiencia en el sector de actividad del cliente. También observamos que ni la experiencia específica con el propio cliente, ni la experiencia genérica de auditoría del socio auditor son determinantes significativos de la calidad de los servicios de auditoría. Por otro lado, mientras que algunos estudios previos señalan que el conocimiento especializado resulta más relevante que el genérico para explicar la calidad de los servicios de auditoría, este trabajo sugiere que el conocimiento especializado es, de hecho, el único tipo de conocimiento que resulta relevante. Estos resultados pueden tener implicaciones interesantes para las firmas de auditoría. Despite evidence suggesting that specialised knowledge should be more relevant than generic knowledge to explain different levels of audit quality across individual auditors, no study to date has addressed the respective impacts of the industry-specific and the generic audit experience of audit partners on the quality of audit services. Our study investigates this issue in the Spanish audit market. We proxy audit quality by discretionary accruals and by the opinion of the audit report, and differentiate among client-specific experience, industry-specific experience and generic audit experience of individual auditors. As expected, our results show significantly higher audit quality when the client is audited by a partner with stronger industry-specific audit experience. Furthermore, we observe that neither client-specific experience nor generic audit experience of audit partners are significant determinants of the quality of audit services provided by these auditors. These results may have some interesting implications for audit firms. Therefore, whereas some prior studies on the related issue of industry specialization point out that specialised knowledge is more relevant than generic knowledge to explain the quality of audit services, our findings suggest that specialised knowledge is, in fact, the only type of knowledge that seems to matter.

show abstract

Section: Generic Audit Experiencementioning

confidence: 92%

Section: Control Variablesmentioning

confidence: 99%

Learning by Doing? Partners Audit Experience and the Quality of Audit Services

García-Blandón¹,

Argilés‐Bosch²,

Ravenda³

2020

RC-SAR

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…The studies regarding auditor experience show us that experienced auditors have more knowledge about audit procedures, and they have more skills related to the audit process. When faced with complex audit tasks, they may easily and successfully overcome them (Abdolmohammadi and Wright, 1987;Wang et al, 2015;Sonu et al, 2016;Zimmerman and Nagy, 2016). They have the ability to detect particular errors and material misstatement, and they are less likely to miss many kinds of mistakes (Libby and Frederick, 1990;Bedard and Biggs, 1991;Tubbs, 1992;Hammersley, 2006;Che et al, 2017;Liu et al, 2017).…”

Section: Generic Experiencementioning

confidence: 99%

“…Recent studies regarding auditor experience generally focus on auditor overall experience in accounting, auditing, finance and related fields (Hardies et al, 2014), auditor sector and domain experience (Bedard and Biggs, 1991;Hammersley, 2006), auditor experience as CPA (Ye et al, 2014;Sonu et al, 2016) or big N experience (Chi and Huang, 2005;Gul et al, 2013;Zimmerman, 2016) or auditors' international working experience . Abdolmohammadi and Wright (1987) stated that the auditor benefits from experience as the complexity of the audit task increases.…”

Section: Generic Experiencementioning

confidence: 99%

“…Experienced auditors perform audit tasks better than others, and they are less likely to be forced an authority into failures. Wang et al (2015) and Sonu et al (2016) stated that more experienced auditors provide more qualified audit services because of their audit-related knowledge. Experienced auditors gain this knowledge through experience.…”

Section: Generic Experiencementioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Understanding the Mechanism of Workload Distribution Among Auditors in BPK RI in Relation to Gender: An Exploratory Study

Suhud¹

2019

ASSRJ

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The purpose of this study is to provide a relevant conceptual model of the mechanism of workload distribution among auditors in BPK RI in relation to gender. The exploratory research was conducted to achieve its research objectives with six respondents are chosen for this study. Thematic analysis with coding technique, document analysis, and observation are used to collect and analyze the data. The result shows that there is no regulation which explains explicitly in detail about the working mechanism of the auditor when carrying out the auditing task. Also, the researcher did not find an explanation of how the procedure for distributing workload to the auditor after the audit team was determined. It means that the mechanism of workload distribution among auditors implements in the field with the non-technical guideline. Another finding shows that BPK RI does not differentiate treatment of auditors based on gender. Male and female employees have the same rights and obligations as auditors. However, in practice in the field, there are still differences in treatment between male and female auditors, especially related to the distribution of workload when conducting the audit tasks. However, the difference in treatment does not affect the amount of compensation they receive and does not affect their career development opportunities. Finally, the researcher offers a conceptual model to answer the objective of this research.

show abstract