ISO auditing and the construction of trust in auditor independence

Dogui, Kouakou; Boiral, Olivier; Gendron, Yves

doi:10.1108/aaaj-03-2013-1264

Cited by 51 publications

(48 citation statements)

References 74 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…Our findings enrich those of other studies questioning the effectiveness of ISO 14001 audits (Boiral 2007;Boiral 2011;Boiral and Gendron 2011;Dogui et al 2013;Gavronski et al 2008;Guoyou et al 2012;Heras-Saizarbitoria et al 2013), especially in weak institutional environments (Jiang and Bansal 2003 show that even in the absence of auditing mechanisms, firms may implement environmental management standards, such as ISO14001, in a substantive manner.…”

Section: Discussion and Research Implicationssupporting

confidence: 84%

“…In particular: Christmann 2011) or because they have developed commercial relationships with the companies they audit (Boiral 2007). This undermines the rigour, reliability and accountability of these audits (Boiral and Gendron 2011;Dogui et al 2013;Boiral 2011), raising concerns about their predictability and difficulty (Boiral 2012). …”

Section: Conceptual Framework: How the Interplay Between External Andmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

What Drives Substantive Versus Symbolic Implementation of ISO 14001 in a Time of Economic Crisis? Insights from Greek Manufacturing Companies

2016

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

Section: Discussion and Research Implicationssupporting

confidence: 84%

Section: Conceptual Framework: How the Interplay Between External Andmentioning

confidence: 99%

What Drives Substantive Versus Symbolic Implementation of ISO 14001 in a Time of Economic Crisis? Insights from Greek Manufacturing Companies

2016

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Whereas previous studies suggest that auditors may be reluctant to express opinions about performance if they are too dependent on the auditee for financial or other reasons (see, e.g. Jeppesen, ; Kouakou et al., ), this is not the case with an SAI. And if an SAI, the main guardian of ‘good’ performance in central government, cannot express opinions in terms of ‘good’ or ‘poor’ performance on the basis of its own judgement, then who can?…”

Section: Concluding Discussionmentioning

confidence: 86%

The ‘front stage’ of substance auditing: A study of how substance auditing is presented in performance audit reports

Svärdsten¹

2019

Financ Acc Manag

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Performance audit is a practice with a potentially high degree of democratic and political relevance. Supreme Audit Institutions (SAIs) have the authority to determine whether the undertakings in central government ‘are working’; therefore, SAIs tend to be regarded as important guardians of transparency and ‘good’ public sector performance. For this purpose, audits of ‘substance’ are regarded as crucial by both the research community and the INTOSAI. Still, the literature on performance audit concludes that substance audits are rare, although they do exist. One explanation for this is that substance auditing can be a risky endeavour for the auditors, since the lack of generic accounting standards for ‘good’ public sector performance makes the performance audit reports vulnerable to criticism. The aim of this paper is to contribute to our understanding of substance auditing by detailing the ways in which such audits are presented in performance audit reports. Thus, the paper focuses its analysis on the ‘front stage’ of substance auditing and finds that the auditors rarely choose to stand on the front stage alone. Instead, they regularly support their authority by relying on other authorities, and when such authorities are lacking, the auditors are reluctant to present judgements in terms of ‘good’ (or poor) performance. In such cases, this paper suggests that the democratic relevance of the audits can be questioned.

show abstract

“…The notion of sense-making is increasingly influential in the accounting and management literature(Colville, Brown, & Pye, 2012;Gendron & Spira, 2010;Kouakou, Boiral, & Gendron, 2013;Weick, 2012). 8 As maintained byStein (2004), individuals generally tend to make sense of disturbing events by relying on their existing interpretive schemes, without questioning the underlying principles upon which the latter are based.The Construction of Risk Management 7 Downloaded by [University of Sheffield] at 10:45 09 October 2015…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

The Construction of Risk Management Credibility Within Corporate Boardrooms

Gendron¹,

Brivot²,

Guénin-Paracini³

2015

European Accounting Review

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Despite various corporate collapses over the last decades, risk management is increasingly influential across organizations worldwide, as if the apparatus' credibility was impermeable to scandals that, from critical angles, cast doubt on its efficacy. Relying on a cultural perspective of analysis highlighting the range of social processes that protect prevailing institutions' legitimacy from aberrations, we examined the sense-making approaches employed by corporate boardroom actors to maintain their confidence in the credibility of the risk management apparatus despite being exposed to a continuous flow of corporate failures pointing to risk management efficacy limitations. Specifically, we conducted 35 interviews with corporate board stakeholders, mostly board members and corporate consultants. Our analysis indicates that actors involved in risk management processes tend to interpret aberration cases through perspectives that put the blame on some implementation deficiency, thereby ensuring that risk management's core assumptions are not questioned. These perspectives point to a defensive system of thought grounded in the director and consultancy communities, whose main referents are subject to intense work and re-conceptualization in the aftermath of aberrations, thereby providing community members with the means to make sense of the frictions of organizational life in ways that maintain the legitimacy of the risk management apparatus.

show abstract

ISO auditing and the construction of trust in auditor independence

Cited by 51 publications

References 74 publications

What Drives Substantive Versus Symbolic Implementation of ISO 14001 in a Time of Economic Crisis? Insights from Greek Manufacturing Companies

What Drives Substantive Versus Symbolic Implementation of ISO 14001 in a Time of Economic Crisis? Insights from Greek Manufacturing Companies

The ‘front stage’ of substance auditing: A study of how substance auditing is presented in performance audit reports

The Construction of Risk Management Credibility Within Corporate Boardrooms

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About