Ritual and conflict in the audit profession

Auditor Communication in an Evolving Environment: Going Beyond Sas 600 Auditors’ Reports on Financial Statements

“…In particular, commentators highlighted the failure of auditors to detect major frauds or signal that the auditees were in financial difficulty. These debates crystallized around what is known as the expectations gap, that is, the gap between what auditors perceive are their duties and responsibilities and what the public believes (see Humphrey et al, 1992;Mills & Bettner, 1992;Sikka et al, 1992;McInnes, 1993;Porter, 1993;APB, 1994 andHumphrey, 1997). Some academic critics, for example Sikka et al (1992), have argued that the expectations gap is endemic because auditing is a social activity, and as with all such activities, its precise meaning is likely to be contested and cannot be fixed.…”

Transferring priorities: a three-act play on transfer pricing

“…Ritual (Mills and Bettner, 1992), rather than rationality, is served by the normalization that (Nietzsche, 1881, aphorism 16) categorizes as the "first principle of civilization": that "there is a species of custom, the intent of which appears to be custom as such: fastidious and at bottom useless ordinances. .…”

The consideration of environmental matters in the audit of financial reports

“…Empirical studies presented in the preceding sections raised many questions about audit standards and audit guidance statements: whether the promulgation of audit standards is a significant legitimation strategy (Nue, 1991); whether they are perceived as reflecting ideas that inform audit methodologies and a body of knowledge to justify the claims of professional expertise and audit practices (Curtis & Turley, 2007); whether they are regarded as symbols creating illusions which guide cognition and legitimize acceptance through the business community (Mills & Bettner, 1992;Pentland, 1993); whether their mere issuance "provides the perception of significant change to external parties" even though audit practice did not change (Baker, 1993); whether the practice of auditors is the same as that deduced by those who read and rely upon the audit standards or guidance statements (Chandler, 1997); whether "they are merely codifications of established practices rather than the active pursuit of high professional standards and the protection of the public interest" (Humphrey et al, 1992, p. 148); whether the written content of audit standards and guidance statements "is sufficiently vague and ambiguous to prevent detailed scrutiny" (Lee, 1994, p. 32). These questions may be asked similarly in this research, as they are also relevant to the current research topic.…”

“…They also explained that audit standards served as a body of knowledge designed to justify claims of professional expertise and audit practices. As such, the promulgated standards were regarded by some authors merely as symbols, the product of a ritual, having a role in creating illusions that guide cognition and legitimize acceptance through the business community (Mills & Bettner, 1992;Pentland, 1993). Byington and Sutton (1991, p. 318) added that the mere issuance of published standards could "provide the perception of significant change to external parties", even though audit practice did not change (Baker, 1993).…”

“…This has a role in creating an illusion of guidance and in legitimizing acceptance throughout the business community (Mills & Bettner, 1992;Pentland, 1993).…”