Auditing and the production of legitimacy

Power, Michael

doi:10.1016/s0361-3682(01)00047-2

Cited by 563 publications

(689 citation statements)

References 24 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

647

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…Additionally, Humphrey (2008) agreed with Power's (2003) assertion that auditing in practical settings and its role in producing legitimacy were under-documented and under-researched. This led Humphrey (2008) to strongly encourage research which seeks "to bridge a knowledge gap and enhance the understanding of the practical realities of audit practice" (p. 172); and to investigate "what is being done in the name of audit practice and how such practices relate to, influence and are influenced by, broader social, organisational and regulatory contexts" (p. 185).…”

Section: Justification For the Researchmentioning

confidence: 64%

“…Particularly, the findings of this research will address the audit knowledge gap identified by Power (2003) and Humphrey (2008), regarding the realities of audit practice, and how such practice relates to, influences, and is influenced by, broader social, organisational and regulatory contexts. Most particularly, the research findings will provide a more transparent picture of the current role and practices of auditors on the broad issue of environmental accountability by companies.…”

Section: Justification For the Researchmentioning

confidence: 97%

“…However, Power (2003) and Beattie, Brandt and Fearnley (2001) observed that overall, the study of auditing in action is lacking. Additionally, Humphrey (2008) agreed with Power's (2003) assertion that auditing in practical settings and its role in producing legitimacy were under-documented and under-researched.…”

Section: Justification For the Researchmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 2 more Smart Citations

The consideration of environmental matters in the audit of financial reports

Chiang¹

2010

Journal of Accounting &Amp; Organizational Change

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Section: Justification For the Researchmentioning

confidence: 64%

Section: Justification For the Researchmentioning

confidence: 97%

See 1 more Smart Citation

The consideration of environmental matters in the audit of financial reports

Chiang¹

2010

Journal of Accounting &Amp; Organizational Change

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

“…Trust is shown to be important and coming from existing ties, new working relationships and through the use of intermediaries known to all parties. As Nicholls (2008) points out, demonstrating legitimacy is an important element of building trust with a wide range of stakeholders, and as found in all parts of the economy, the role of audits and other forms of assessment can play a role in creating that perceived legitimacy and trust (Power, 2003).…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Social Innovation

2012

136

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

There is much rhetoric concerning the need for collaboration and partnership both from policy makers and those within the sector who see the social enterprise model as being more collaborative than the private sector. However, there is limited understanding of the processes by which trust is built up and maintained in these contexts. The chapter examines the relationships between commissioners and providers, users/beneficiaries/ customers (vertical relationships) and relationships between providers (horizontal relationships). The chapter will go beyond assumptions concerning how organisations are expected to behave, and will examine the economic and social institutional contexts in which their actions are embedded. In particular attention will be given to how organisations build relationships in 'quasi markets' and in an environment of emerging competition for the delivery of public services. These issues are explored by looking at the case of self employment support provision in the UK.

show abstract

“…In other words, what is really learned from the inspection process, and whether and how the findings change, shape, or shift the audit practices of organizations, remains unfathomable. An explanation for the lack of empirical findings about the processes of inspections and about the organizational learning of audit firms might be the general dominance of quantitative research designs, while other methods, such as field work in audit research, are hardly existent (Humphrey, 2008;Power, 2003). However, qualitative methods, such as participatory observations or qualitative interviews, could explore the interplay of inspectors and the audit firm during an inspection process and the subsequent diffusion of findings and improvements within the audit firms-and provide answers to what is really learnt from the external audit quality controls.…”

Section: Opening the Black Box Through Methodological Pluralismmentioning

confidence: 99%

From peer review to PCAOB inspections: Regulating for audit quality in the U.S.

Löhlein

2016

Journal of Accounting Literature

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

This study reviews the existing literature on the U.S. peer review system and the Public Company Accounting Oversight Board (PCAOB) inspection system to assess our knowledge of audit regulation. The traditional self-regulatory system of the accounting profession came to an end, in 2002, when the PCAOB was established to oversee the audit firms of publicly traded companies. This paper contributes to the controversial debate about self-regulation versus independent regulation by analyzing, categorizing, and comparing the research findings on the peer review system and the PCAOB system along three dimensions: the validity of peer reviews and PCAOB inspections, the recognition of reviews and inspections by decision-makers (e.g. investors, bankers, committees), and the effect of reviews and inspections on audit quality. Synthesizing the research on the regulatory regimes suggests that the notion of external quality control, both through peer reviews and government inspections, is positively linked with an improvement of audit quality. At the same time, the analysis indicates that external users do not seem to recognise peer review and PCAOB reports as very useful instruments for decision-making, which is in line with an identified rather skeptical perception of the audit profession on reviews and inspections. Overall, this study reveals that although the academic literature on peer review and PCAOB inspection is extensive it has not produced definitive conclusions concerning various aspects of audit regulation. This paper shows how this blurred picture is due to conflicting research findings, the dominance of the quantitative research paradigm, and unchallenged assumptions within the literature, and concludes by proposing research opportunities for the future.

show abstract

Auditing and the production of legitimacy

Cited by 563 publications

References 24 publications

The consideration of environmental matters in the audit of financial reports

The consideration of environmental matters in the audit of financial reports

Social Innovation

From peer review to PCAOB inspections: Regulating for audit quality in the U.S.

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About