External auditors' willingness to rely on the work of internal auditors: The influence of work style and barriers to cooperation

被引:12
作者
Brody, Richard G. [1 ]
机构
[1] Univ New Mexico, Anderson Sch Management, Dept Accounting, MSC05 3090, Albuquerque, NM 87131 USA
关键词
Internal audit reliance; Commitment; Communication barriers; Work styles;
D O I
10.1016/j.adiac.2012.02.005
中图分类号
F8 [财政、金融];
学科分类号
0202 ;
摘要
The extent to which external auditors rely on the work of internal auditors is an important judgment. Recently, the Public Company Accounting Oversight Board has recommended that external auditors "rely (more) on the work of others" to reduce the greater-than-expected costs associated with compliance with Section 404 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act. Reliance decisions, however, are complex decision tasks that require professional judgment and may be influenced by a number of factors, both external (environmental) and internal (cognitive and affective), including the auditors' working style and pervious experiences related to barriers to external/internal auditor cooperation (e.g., previously experienced low versus high internal auditor objectivity and/or competence). We experimentally examine these influences in our research reported herein. Consistent with expectations, external auditors' work styles significantly influenced the extent of planned audit testing, internal auditor reliance judgments, and interpretation of analytical procedures results. Auditors' perceptions about internal auditors' competence and objectivity, developed over years of interaction, also influenced these judgments, and interacted with work styles. Inconsistent with expectations, auditor rank (senior versus manager) did not influence judgments. (C) 2012 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.
引用
收藏
页码:11 / 21
页数:11
相关论文
共 43 条
[31]  
Putnam L. L., 1982, ANN INT COMMUNICATIO, V6, P629
[32]  
RECKERS PMJ, 1993, BEHAVIORAL RES ACCOU, V5, P124
[33]  
Robinson M., 2009, THESIS MONASH U
[34]   Evidence of choice avoidance in capital-investment judgements [J].
Sawers, KM .
CONTEMPORARY ACCOUNTING RESEARCH, 2005, 22 (04) :1063-1092
[35]   GROUP APPROACHES FOR IMPROVING STRATEGIC DECISION-MAKING - A COMPARATIVE-ANALYSIS OF DIALECTICAL INQUIRY, DEVILS ADVOCACY, AND CONSENSUS [J].
SCHWEIGER, DM ;
SANDBERG, WR ;
RAGAN, JW .
ACADEMY OF MANAGEMENT JOURNAL, 1986, 29 (01) :51-71
[36]   EFFECTS OF DEVILS ADVOCACY AND DIALECTICAL INQUIRY ON DECISION-MAKING - A METAANALYSIS [J].
SCHWENK, CR .
ORGANIZATIONAL BEHAVIOR AND HUMAN DECISION PROCESSES, 1990, 47 (01) :161-176
[37]  
Slovic P, 2002, HEURISTICS BIASES PS
[38]  
Ting-Toomey S., 1986, CURRENT RES INTERETH, P75
[39]   IMPLICATIONS OF CONTROVERSY RESEARCH FOR MANAGEMENT [J].
TJOSVOLD, D .
JOURNAL OF MANAGEMENT, 1985, 11 (03) :21-37
[40]  
WHITTINGTON R, 1989, J ACCOUNTANCY, V167, P123