No abstract

No abstract

Strong systems of internal control over financial reporting (ICFR) are critical to the production of reliable financial statements. Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC) regulations require that companies design, maintain, and regularly evaluate their systems of ICFR, and Auditing Standard No. 5 requires that auditors evaluate companies' systems of ICFR. Therefore, it is necessary for accountants to be able to (1) describe and classify internal controls and (2) determine deficiencies in internal control. Recent reports suggest that accountants may lack sufficient training and guidance in these respects (e.g., Rapoport 2012). This activity provides an opportunity for students to practice these skills while learning more about the Committee of Sponsoring Organizations of the Treadway Commission's (COSO) 2013 Framework. Provided are a summary discussion of ICFR and the COSO 2013 Framework, an outside-of-class reading assignment, and an activity that requires students (independently or in groups, either in or outside of class) to employ critical-thinking skills to: (1) classify (i.e., map) a listing of controls as being aligned with one (or more) of the COSO 2013 Framework's five components and 17 principles that comprise a well-designed system of internal control, and (2) identify any deficiencies (gaps) in design due to missing or inadequate internal controls.

No abstract

Purpose – The purpose of the study is to examine how awareness of the prior year fraud detection testing strategy impacts auditor judgments at differing levels of engagement risk. Design/methodology/approach – A 2 × 2 between-subject experiment was conducted using 64 practicing auditors as participants. The independent variables are manipulated at two levels – awareness of prior-year testing strategy (aware versus unaware) and engagement risk (high versus low). The dependent measures are identified risk factors, targeted areas of auditors’ risk assessments, proposed audit procedures and the desire to consult with a forensic specialist. Findings – Although continuing auditors anchor on prior-year audit strategies, new auditors (who are unaware of prior-year testing strategies) focus on generally known high-risk areas and firm standard procedures while planning the audit. Practical implications – This paper contributes to the ongoing debate regarding how auditor tenure impacts auditors’ decision-making at a time when the profession and US regulators are focused on enhancing audit quality. The findings further suggest that auditors should take steps to enhance their judgments and avoid potential biases, particularly when planning continuing engagements. Originality/value – Although the extant literature document anchoring by continuing auditors, this paper is the first to examine successor auditors’ fraud testing strategies. The findings suggest auditors on high-risk engagements who are unaware of the prior-year testing strategy may process information at a deeper level, as they are more likely to seek consultation with a forensic specialist rather than relying on simple heuristics.