Structure versus Judgement in the Audit Process: A Test of Kinney's Classification

Smith, Malcolm; Fiedler, Brenton; Kestel, Joanne; Brown, B. M.

doi:10.2139/ssrn.219308

Cited by 8 publications

(14 citation statements)

References 15 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Structure versus judgement is a theoretical perspective used to describe, analyze, and discuss audit practice. The structure-based process is characterized by well-documented procedures and quantitative methods (Smith, Fiedler, Brown, & Kestel, 2001). A frequently used description of a structured audit methodology is that of Cushing and Loebbecke (1986, p. 32; see Broberg, 2013;Francis, 1994;Prawitt, 1995), who described a structured audit methodology as follows:…”

Section: Structure Versus Judgementmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…In the judgement-based audit process, there is latitude for individual judgement (Öhman et al, 2006) and the audit is client dependent (Smith et al, 2001). In ISA 200, professional judgement is defined as "the application of relevant training, knowledge and experience, within the context provided by auditing, accounting and ethical standards, in making informed decisions about the courses of action that are appropriate in the circumstances of the audit engagement" (IAASB, 2009, p. 77).…”

Section: Structure Versus Judgementmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

The auditor : Creating a concept of the auditor through auditors' own perceptions and understandings of their work in relation to boundary-setting forces

Gertsson

2021

FiF-avhandling - Filosofiska Fakulteten – Linköpings Universitet

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The overall purpose of this licentiate dissertation is to advance our understanding of the auditor by creating a concept of the auditor through focusing on auditors' own perceptions and understandings of their work in relation to boundary-setting forces. The audit profession, the audit firm, the client, society, regulations, and the market are all boundary-setting forces that influence the work of auditors and how auditors perceive and understand their work. The concept of the auditor consists of who the auditor is and what the auditor does; this concept is shaped interactively by the boundary-setting forces, that exist in the auditors' environment and by the auditors themselves, through the view auditors have of themselves and their environment. The boundary-setting forces have in recent decades undergone significant and rapid changes; for example, increased commercialization as well as significant regulatory changes, which are expected to have influenced the concept of the auditor. The concept of the auditor therefor needs to be explored to understand who today's auditor is and what today's auditor does.

show abstract

Section: Structure Versus Judgementmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Structure Versus Judgementmentioning

confidence: 99%

The auditor : Creating a concept of the auditor through auditors' own perceptions and understandings of their work in relation to boundary-setting forces

Gertsson

2021

FiF-avhandling - Filosofiska Fakulteten – Linköpings Universitet

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“… Audit risk of material misstatement is higher (called as control risk), due to auditors' 2. Non-statistical technique [18] tendency to use personal judgement regarding to sample size and items selected for test group [20]. Going Concern (SAS No.59) There are two areas for which auditors must consider their opinion: 1.…”

Section: Obsolescence Of Current Financial Auditmentioning

confidence: 99%

Data Mining: a Three-Step of Real-Time Audit Paradigm

Widhoyoko¹,

Sasmoko²,

Biantara³

et al. 2018

IJET

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

One problem in business is the aspect of reporting through the process of financial audit. The problem with conventional audit is highlighted in this research through literature review of Statement of Auditing Standards (SAS) regarding to the issues of (1) risk assessment, (2) sampling methods, and (3) going concern analysis. This research further describes all these issues in the light of efficient audit process. The method used is exploratory, engaging comprehensive literature review from the perspectives of forensic accounting and information system. The output is to build a three-step financial audit paradigm embedding (1) exploratory data analysis and descriptive modelling in risk assessment, (2) predictive and association analysis in sampling, and (3) grounded professional judgement in going concern analysis.

show abstract

“…The literature on governance or control models basically distinguishes between output or product control and behavioural or process control (Power, 1997; Smith et al, 2001; and de Bruijn, 2003; see also, Ouchi, 1979; and Birnberg et al, 1980). In the output model, the relationship between actors is defined as a hierarchy.…”

Section: Theorymentioning

confidence: 99%

A Plea for Dialogue Driven Performance‐based Management Systems: Evidence From the Dutch Public Sector

Bruijn

Helden

2006

Financ Acc Manag

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Structure versus Judgement in the Audit Process: A Test of Kinney's Classification

Cited by 8 publications

References 15 publications

The auditor : Creating a concept of the auditor through auditors' own perceptions and understandings of their work in relation to boundary-setting forces

The auditor : Creating a concept of the auditor through auditors' own perceptions and understandings of their work in relation to boundary-setting forces

Data Mining: a Three-Step of Real-Time Audit Paradigm

A Plea for Dialogue Driven Performance‐based Management Systems: Evidence From the Dutch Public Sector

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About