The application of business risk audit methodology within non-Big-4 firms
Notice bibliographique
Résumé
This research is motivated by interest in recent changes in the audit approaches of audit firms. The business risk audit approach has been adopted based on assertions about its benefits by administrators of large audit firms and academics linked with these firms and, more recently, has been legitimised by the issuance of international auditing standards that give recognition to this approach. Studies investigating the business risk audit approach have relied on the content of audit manuals of large audit firms and pointed to claimed benefits, such as providing consistency of worldwide audit practice, broadening auditors’ awareness of risks, increasing audit effectiveness and efficiency, and creating more value for audit clients. In investigating this recent change in audit approaches, this thesis is concerned with the application of the business risk audit approach within the non-Big-4 audit firms, with a focus on three countries: the United States, the United Kingdom and Canada. The research focuses on the motivation for adopting this approach for non-Big-4 audit firms in the three countries, and the advantages, disadvantages and aftermath of applying this method. These issues are addressed through research methods comprising semi-structured interviews and a questionnaire survey. These methods are deemed appropriate to provide consideration of the contextual factors affecting the non-Big-4 audit firms and audit practice in the three countries examined. The findings show that non-Big-4 audit firms in the three countries adopted the business risk audit; their motivation was primarily to follow the standards in each country and to follow the general trend in the industry. The advantages were consistent with previous research; there was direct benefit to audit effectiveness and risk management. One major disadvantage of applying this method was the cost burden to both the audit firm and their clients. Some of the interviewees claimed that this method is better suited to large firms and large audits. Overall evidence from this research shows that this method helped auditors better understand their clients and assess the risk associated with the audit process. Auditors from non-Big-4 firms expressed their interest that the business risk audit should remain in use with some modification to fit small and medium audits. This study also contributes to the literature on the internationalisation of audit practice and the audit practice of small- and medium-sized audit firms, which is lacking in existing research related to this group.
Récupéré en direct depuis OpenAlex et désinversé. Les résumés ne sont pas conservés dans cette base de données : les index inversés représentent 8,6 Go des 9,3 Go de texte de la base, et le serveur dispose de 13 Go libres.
Comment cette classification a été obtenuedéplier
Prédiction machine sur la base complète
Imitation des enseignantsNi prévalence calibrée, ni vérité terrain. Validation humaine à venir. Le volet Gemma est une étiquette directe du modèle pour chaque travail de la base, lue sur la notice réduite au titre. Le volet Codex est un classifieur appris des 10 348 étiquettes directes de Codex et calibré sur les taux pondérés de l'échantillon; les champs sans appui suffisant ne portent aucun appel Codex. Le mode candidate est l'union des deux volets; le consensus est leur intersection. Ces sorties portent le statut machine_predicted_unvalidated et ne sont pas des étiquettes humaines.
Scores du classifieur distillé par catégorie (deux têtes)
| Catégorie | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Métarecherche | 0,036 | 0,064 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens strict) | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens large) | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Bibliométrie | 0,004 | 0,005 |
| Études des sciences et des technologies | 0,005 | 0,006 |
| Communication savante | 0,010 | 0,005 |
| Science ouverte | 0,002 | 0,008 |
| Intégrité de la recherche | 0,001 | 0,002 |
| Charge utile insuffisante (le modèle a refusé de juger) | 0,002 | 0,000 |
Scores machine (provisoires)
Les deux têtes enseignantes du modèle étudiant, lues sur ce travail. Un score ordonne la base pour la relecture; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie, et le statut de validation accompagne chaque rangée tel quel.
Scores de référence d'un modèle non mature (critères de maturité non atteints, 7 itérations). Un score ordonne; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · tel quel depuis la passe de notation : score_only signifie que le nombre peut ordonner les travaux, et qu'aucune étiquette de catégorie n'en découleClassification
machine, non validéePrédiction automatique; un appel candidat d’une seule source (Gemma direct ou Codex distillé), pas un consensus.
Le détail, modèle par modèle et score par score, se trouve en fin de page sous « Comment cette classification a été obtenue ».