Systems-Thinking in Complex Audit Situations

Brewster, Billy E.; Bucaro, Anthony C.

doi:10.2308/ciia-19-017

Cited by 5 publications

(1 citation statement)

References 12 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…A mindset refers to "a set of judgmental criteria and cognitive processes and procedures that produce a disposition or readiness to respond in a certain manner" (Griffith et al 2015a, p. 54). Mindsets can influence auditors' judgment quality and application of professional skepticism (e.g., Griffith et al 2015a;Brewster and Bucaro 2020;Saiewitz and Wang 2020). Therefore, adopting inappropriate mindsets may diminish the benefits of ADA to audit practice.…”

Section: Auditors' Mindsets When Using Adamentioning

confidence: 99%

Behavioral challenges to professional skepticism in auditors’ data analytics journey

Li¹

2022

MAB

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The aims of this paper are to inform audit practice and academia about the potential behavioral challenges to the application of auditors’ professional skepticism when using audit data analytics (ADA) and to discuss future research opportunities. This is accomplished by reviewing relevant audit research and discussing the potential challenges from five perspectives, including auditors’ attitudes toward ADA, data characteristics, anomalies identified by ADA, auditors’ mindsets, and social contexts and interactions involved in ADA practice. Although applying ADA brings many benefits to audit practice, they simultaneously raise many challenges to the application of appropriate levels of auditor professional skepticism. Being aware of and prepared for those potential behavioral challenges is critical to maximize the benefits of ADA to professional skepticism and ultimately audit quality.

show abstract

Section: Auditors' Mindsets When Using Adamentioning

confidence: 99%

Behavioral challenges to professional skepticism in auditors’ data analytics journey

Li¹

2022

MAB

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

Public accountability and auditing: Why and when do state auditors conduct broad audits?

Natan‐Krup,

Mizrahi

2024

Public Administration

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Public servants who monitor and supervise the administrative and political systems must consider the extent to which they are willing to stretch the boundaries of their role for holding public servants accountable. We develop an analytical framework of the factors that influence the decisions of such officials, focusing on state auditors. Using new institutionalism, we suggest that the social, cultural, and political context figures more prominently in state auditors' strategic calculations than purely professional considerations or individual factors. This bottom‐up perspective sheds new light on the role of such officials in democratic systems, and their dependence on citizens' awareness and active support in promoting accountability. We illustrate the theoretical framework using examples from Israel.

show abstract

Public Accountability and Bureaucratic Discretion: Why do Internal Auditors Stretch the Boundaries of Their Role?

Natan-Krup,

Mizrahi

2024

The American Review of Public Administration

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Our goal is to identify the factors that encourage internal auditors in the public sector to use their discretion when conducting audits. By investigating multiple relationships between principals and agents, we show how complex structural conditions and accountability pressures influence public auditors’ discretion in the choice of audits they decide to conduct. To test our theoretical model and hypotheses, we created a closed-ended questionnaire distributed to a sample group of Israeli auditors. Our findings reveal a conditional effect between the factors related to the internal and external work environments of internal auditors. Our analysis indicates that internal support for internal auditors’ professional authority is significantly related to their inclination to stretch the boundaries of their role when they strongly believe that their direct principals are concerned about the expectations of the public and the audit committee regarding accountability. Nonetheless, individual auditing experience in the public sector was not significantly related to their professional approach. Our bottom-up approach emphasizes the role of citizens’ democratic awareness and their demand to support the broad scope of gatekeepers, rather than just explanations about the role of elites. Moreover, our conclusions emphasize the role of internal support for the auditors’ professional authority and question the role of their perceived independence in the approach they adopt to auditing.

show abstract

Systems-Thinking in Complex Audit Situations

Cited by 5 publications

References 12 publications

Behavioral challenges to professional skepticism in auditors’ data analytics journey

Behavioral challenges to professional skepticism in auditors’ data analytics journey

Public accountability and auditing: Why and when do state auditors conduct broad audits?

Public Accountability and Bureaucratic Discretion: Why do Internal Auditors Stretch the Boundaries of Their Role?

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About